DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
As to claim 8, providing a single warning signal due to multiple (i.e. a plurality of) "differences" (line 2 from last) amount 2 different differences of conditions is problematic. There is no single example on how 2 temperature differences are collectively employed to provide one warning, no reference provides for such, no suggestion as to how one might experiment and arrive at such.
(As to second paragraph of p. 8 of REMARKS: This claim calls for providing one signal as a function of multiple “differences” among 3 conditions. The argument expresses that the claim is directed to comparing 2 conditions, but the claim calls for 3 conditions. The claim calls for obtaining that one signal from a plurality of differences. There is no suggestions as to what algorithm provides for such in the instant application.)
As to claim 10, providing a single warning signal due to multiple (i.e. a plurality of) "differences" (line 2 from last) among 2 different differences of conditions is problematic. There is no single example on how 2 temperature differences are collectively employed to provide one warning, no reference provides for such, no suggestion as to how one might experiment and arrive at such.
(As to third paragraph of p. 8 of REMARKS, consider: This claim calls for providing one signal as a function of multiple “differences” among 3 conditions. The argument expresses that the claim is directed to comparing 2 conditions, but the claim calls for 3 conditions. The claim calls for obtaining that one signal from a plurality of differences. There is no suggestions as to what algorithm provides for such in the instant application.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 1,2,3,5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as anticipated by Wang et al CN 209248304 (listed 1449).
As to claims 1,2, Wang et al CN et al teach a method for monitoring a plurality of heaters and/or determining water ingress in at least one substation, the method comprising:
receiving, by a controller 5, from a first (inside temperature) sensor 1, a first at least one
environmental condition of a first section (inside transformer shell) of the at least one substation;
receiving, by the controller, from a second (shell temperature) sensor 11, a second at least one environmental condition of a second section (external of shell of transformer) of the at least one substation,
wherein the first section (which the sensor 1 within the transformer shell) and/or the second section of the at least one substation is a
cabinet or a cubicle (i.e. inside the transformer),
wherein a type of the first sensor is same as a type of the second sensor (i.e. both are temperature sensors), wherein the first sensor 1 comprises a temperature sensor and/or a humidity sensor,
wherein a type of the first at least one environmental condition is same as a type of the second 11 at least one environmental condition (as each has heated region employing temperature sensors), wherein the at least one environmental condition includes a temperature and/or a humidity,
wherein the first sensor 1 is located on or in a vicinity of at least one of the plurality of heaters located inside (the shell) of the first section, and
wherein the second sensor 11 is located on or in a vicinity of at least one of the plurality of heaters located inside the second section (i.e. the section area immediately defining/surrounding the transformer area); and
providing a warning signal, by the controller, according to a difference between the first at least one environmental condition and the second at least one environmental condition per:
"when the temperature difference between the first temperature sensor and the second
temperature sensor monitoring exceeds a predetermined value,
module is a single chip provides a constant power supply." (Quoted from p. 2 of translation, with
crossing out of irrelevant material; about 5th paragraph of “BACKGROUND”)
As to claim 3, the warning is of an “over-high temperature abnormality”, indicative of a heater failure.
As to claim 5, a substation is component that transforms voltage. One a first is a transformer component, another is larger unit that includes the first component. Each substations of an even larger assembly.
(As to REMARKs, consider: As to the second full paragraph of p. 10; the claimed first and second sections are as much first and second sections as claimed. Claim 1 is not limited such that it calls for different devices as seemingly argued per the “are not on the same device”. In that sense, the argument is narrower than the claim. Claim 1 calls for “one” substation with 2 sections. The claim does not express that the sensors are on different devices/systems. )
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Wang et al CN 209248304.
The specification of the Reference does not explicitly refer any physical constraints related to shape, length, width, or height", and does not refer to a reference point.
As to claim 12, electrical power stations are constructed via advanced planning that employ structures that have shapes, lengths, widths and vertexes of structural components, and plaining the includes locating and positioning such by employing references (points) and angles.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 13,14,15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as anticipated by Wang et al CN 209248304.
As to claim 13,14, Wang teaches a controller 5 for monitoring a plurality of heaters and/or determining water ingress in at least one substation, the controller being configured to:
receive from a first sensor (inside temperature) 1 first at least one environmental condition of a first section of the at least one substation;
receive from a second sensor (shell temperature) 11 a second at least one environmental condition of a second section of the at least one substation,
wherein the first section and/or the second section of the at least one substation is a cabinet or a cubical,
wherein a type of the first sensor is same as a type of the second sensor (both are temperature
sensors),
wherein the first sensor 1 comprises a temperature sensor and/or a humidity sensor,
wherein a type of the first at least one environmental condition is same as a type of the second at least one environmental condition (as each have heated region),
wherein the at least one environmental condition includes a temperature and/or a humidity,
wherein the first sensor 1 is located on or in the vicinity of at least one of the plurality of heaters is located inside (the shell) the first section, and
wherein the second sensor 11 is located on or in the vicinity of at least one of the plurality of heaters located inside the second section (i.e. the sectional area immediately defining/surrounding the transformer area); and
provide a warning signal according to a difference between the first at least one environmental condition and the second at least one environmental condition per
"when the temperature difference between the first temperature sensor and the second
temperature sensor monitoring exceeds a predetermined value,
module is a single chip provides a constant power supply." (Quoted from p. 2 of translation, with
crossing out of irrelevant material, and underlining added.)
As to claim 15, the warning is of an "over-high temperature abnormality", indicative of a heater failure.
"the embodiment can intelligently for intelligent control and monitoring the substation
device, prevent the substation device caused by over-high temperature abnormality and send
warning to make corresponding countermeasures'
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al CN 209248304.
As to claim 18, it would have been obvious to employ the controller with a system including a plurality of heaters because multiple transformers are commonly employed at the same site/location, and as such, Wang suggests testing for abnormalities of each to provide for an efficient system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6,7,16,17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT R RAEVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2204. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8am to 4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina DeHerrera, can be reached at telephone number 303-297-4237. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/ROBERT R RAEVIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights