Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice to Applicant
This action serves to replace and correct the positions and rejections identified in the Non-Final Rejection of 10/30/2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 47 is directed to “A non-transitory computer program comprising computer executable instructions…” which may be reasonably interpreted as a software program per se. The term “non-transitory” does not imply any structural recitations. In computer-readable medium (CRM) claims, adding the term “non-transitory” to an ineligible claim may help solve the issue of ineligibility. This is because CRM claims recite a medium (or media, memory, etc.) and the addition of “non-transitory” precludes the medium from being reasonably interpreted as a signal per se. In this instance the claim is not directed to a memory medium and is merely a program per se. Therefore, the claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter and rejected under 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 28, 39 and 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to claim 28 the claim recites “that it is possible” it is unclear if this is a required operation or merely a possible operation.
With respect to claim 39 the claim recites configuring a device such that contact can be opened, but not closed by said controller. However, the disclosure presents a configuration of the device which may be manual or controlled by the control unit SE (paragraph 0218). It is therefore unclear what configuration is being claimed or what elements are required or not required in said configuration particular to claim 39. The disclosure does not define two distinct configurations of the device.
Claim 47 recites a computer program for a circuit breaker, while the program is claimed as a non-transitory computer program it is unclear if the claim if fact requires a non-transitory physical memory.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 25-38, 41-42 and 44-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kennedy (US 20170256934).
With respect to claim 25, 45 and 47-48 Kennedy teaches a circuit breaker device, the circuit breaker device comprising:
a housing (see Fig. 7) having network-side (left side) and load-side (right side) connections for conductors of the electrical low-voltage circuit;
a voltage sensor (see Vin Fig. 3) for determining a level of a voltage (paragraph 0034) of the electrical low-voltage circuit;
a fault current sensor (see Isense Fig. 3) for determining a level of a differential current (see paragraph 0029-30) of the conductors of the electrical low-voltage circuit;
a mechanical isolating contact unit (308) having contacts being switchable, with a result that an opening of said contacts avoids a current flow and a closing of said contacts allows the current flow in the electrical low-voltage circuit;
an electronic interruption unit (306) connected in series (see series connection for example in Fig. 3) with said mechanical isolating contact unit on a circuit side (see upper side connecting with circuitry interfacing 302) and being switched, by means of semiconductor-based switching elements, to a high-impedance state (306 in a non-conducting state paragraph 0027) of said semiconductor-based switching elements to avoid the current flow or a low- Page 4 of 14 impedance state of said semiconductor-based switching elements for the current flow in the electrical low-voltage circuit;
a controller (302/304) connected to said voltage sensor, said fault current sensor (see Fig. 3), said mechanical isolating contact unit and said electronic interruption unit, wherein avoidance of the current flow in the electrical low-voltage circuit is switched in if a differential current limit value is exceeded (paragraph 0029); and
the circuit breaker device is configured such that, when said contacts of the circuit breaker device (308 closed) are closed and said electronic interruption unit has the low- impedance state, said electronic interruption unit comes to have the high- impedance state (paragraph 0044) when a voltage-reduced state of the electrical low-voltage circuit occurs, and that, after leaving the voltage-reduced state, said electronic interruption unit comes to have the low-impedance state again (paragraph 0061-62).
With respect to claim 26-27 Kennedy teaches the voltage-reduced state is a voltage-free or approximately voltage-free state of the electrical low-voltage circuit (see voltage condition formed with air gap).
With respect to claim 28 Kennedy teaches the circuit breaker device is configured such that it is possible to determine the level of the differential current (paragraph 0029-32) of the conductors of the electrical low-voltage circuit, only when voltage is applied to the electrical low-voltage circuit.
With respect to claim 29 and 46 Kennedy teaches a behavior of the circuit breaker device after leaving the voltage-reduced state is configured (paragraph 0061).
With respect to claim 30 Kennedy teaches if the voltage-reduced state of the electrical low-voltage circuit occurs, said electronic interruption unit comes to have the high-impedance state before (see Fig. 15 sensing occurs after switch is OFF) a determination of the differential current stops, and in that, after leaving the voltage- reduced state, said electronic interruption unit comes to have the low-impedance state again only when the determination of the differential current has started (see determination that fault is cleared).
With respect to claim 31 Kennedy teaches an information display for displaying information on (paragraph 0039, 34) the circuit breaker device and said information display is connected to said controller.
With respect to claim 32 Kennedy teaches said electronic interruption unit comes to have the low-impedance state after leaving the voltage-reduced state if a checking function (see 1506) allows the low-impedance state of said semiconductor-based switching elements.
With respect to claim 33 Kennedy teaches the checking function includes a self-test of a functionality of the circuit breaker device (paragraph 0034-35), in which at least one component of a unit of the circuit breaker device is checked, and, in an event of the functionality of the at least one component of the unit, the low-impedance state is allowed.
With respect to claim 34 Kennedy teaches the functionality of said electronic interruption unit is checked to determine whether said semiconductor-based switching elements are functional (see operational status).
With respect to claim 35 Kennedy teaches the voltage sensor is checked with regard to its functionality for determining the level of the voltage; and/or said fault current sensor is checked with regard to its functionality for determining the level of the differential current (paragraph 0035).
With respect to claim 36 Kennedy teaches the checking function checks at least one of a following parameters: checking whether the differential current limit value is exceeded (determination of fault being cleared); checking whether a first overvoltage value and/or a second overvoltage value and/or a third overvoltage value is/are exceeded; checking whether a first undervoltage value is undershot; checking whether a first temperature limit value and/or a second temperature limit value and/or a third temperature limit value is/are exceeded; and checking parameters of at least one of the load-side connections (fault conditions cleared such as current level associated with load terminals).
With respect to claim 37 the claim further limits the optional limitation of claim 36 related to overvoltage and temperature.
With respect to claim 38 Kennedy teaches if said mechanical isolating contact unit is closed and said electronic interruption unit has the low impedance state (impedance condition during closed state), and: if the differential current that exceeds a first differential current threshold value is determined, said electronic interruption unit comes to have the high- impedance state (off state) and said mechanical isolating contact unit remains closed; and if the differential current that exceeds a second differential current threshold value (see varied or reprogramed parameter paragraph 0049) is determined, said electronic interruption unit comes to have the high- impedance and said mechanical isolating contact unit is opened.
With respect to claim 41 Kennedy teaches a communication unit (paragraph 0039) connected to said controller and emits a message relating (see load, voltage, current information) to said electronic interruption unit coming to have the low-impedance state after a voltage has been applied again.
With respect to claim 42 Kennedy teaches said circuit breaker device is configured such that position information relating to said contacts is determined and is transmitted to said controller (see status/operation and performance of device paragraph 0034-0035).
With respect to claim 44 Kennedy teaches the circuit breaker device is configured such that said electronic interruption unit comes to have the low-impedance state again (see paragraph 0061 reset condition) after leaving the voltage-reduced state only when said contacts are closed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 40 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kennedy (US 20170256934).
With respect to claim 40 and 43 Kennedy teaches said isolating contact unit has a mechanical interface (see button Fig. 6 for example) which is used to operate said mechanical isolating contact unit such that opening or closing of said contacts is possible. Kennedy does not teach the button comprises a handle. Handles for mechanically interfacing switch operations are well known of which the Examiner takes Official Notice. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Kennedy to try the known alternative of a handle for the benefit of simple mechanical operation.
Claims 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kennedy (US 20170256934) in view of Tanis (US 20050243491).
With respect to claim 39 Kennedy teaches the circuit breaker device is configured such that said contacts of said mechanical isolating contact unit can be opened, by said controller. Kennedy does not teach the requiring of a manual reset. Tanis teaches the known of alternative of an automatic or manual reset (paragraph 0052). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Kennedy to try the known alternative of a manual rest for the predictable result of increasing safety and reducing repetitive switching operations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Fin whose telephone number is (571)272-5921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7429. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
MICHAEL FIN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/MICHAEL R. FIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836