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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: parts of the specification refer to bolts instead of nuts – see par. 0022, 0042, and 0043 of publication.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 6-7 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.
Claim 6 recites “wherein the holding system is a threaded rod provided with at least two bolts.”, which renders the claim indefinite because it recites “bolts” instead of “nuts” as described in the specification (par. 0045-0046) and shown in the Drawings.
For the purposes of examination below, Examiner has interpreted claim 6 as reading “wherein the holding system is a threaded rod provided with at least two nuts.”
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wood (US 2300142 A).
As to claim 1, Wood discloses: Device (Fig. 1-4, when installed in a circuit) for suppling electrical power, comprising:
a power source (inherently required for circuit and circuit interruption; p. 2, left col., lines 53-72),
a system to be supplied with power (inherently required for circuit and circuit interruption; p. 2, left col., lines 53-72),
a first busbar 22 connected to the system to be supplied with power,
a second busbar 22 connected to the power source,
an elastic element 28 (p. 2, left col., line 53 - right col., line 28),
a heat-sensitive element 30 (p. 3, left col., lines 32-52) configured to melt at a predefined temperature, and
a holding system 10 allowing the two busbars and the heat-sensitive element to be held in contact,
the two busbars making electrical contact (through 30, as in Fig. 1 and Fig. 5),
the elastic element being at least one Belleville washer, a helical spring 28 or a wave spring,
the elastic element being configured to move the two busbars away from each other (as in Fig. 3) and to break the electrical contact (embodiment of Fig. 5 has an insulating cup 32; p. 2, left col., line 53 - right col., line 28), when the heat-sensitive element melts.
As to claim 2, Wood discloses: wherein the elastic element 28 (Fig. 5) is disposed in a cavity 26, 32.
As to claim 3, Wood discloses: wherein the cavity is formed by a perforated plate (end of lower busbar 22 is a perforated plate) fastened to a busbar 22 or by hollowing out a part 26 of a busbar 22.
As to claim 4, Wood discloses: wherein the busbar is a braid or has a multi-strip structure or a high length/cross-section aspect ratio (busbar’s 22 have a high length/cross-section aspect ratio; see length and thickness in Fig. 1-5).
As to claim 5, Wood discloses: wherein the heat-sensitive element 30 is made of wax, of paraffin or of metal alloy (low melting temperature solder; p. 2, left col., line 32-52).
As to claim 9, Wood discloses: wherein the holding system 10 comprises the heat-sensitive element 30 (is within 10) so as to break when the temperature exceeds the predefined temperature (the heat-sensitive element 30 melts and breaks).
As to claim 10, Wood discloses: comprising a retention tank 10, 18 configured so as to retain (for some amount of time) the heat-sensitive element after it has melted.
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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood (US 2300142 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Galla (US 20190214208 A1).
As to claim 8, Wood does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the holding system is made of plastic resistant to high temperature or of ceramic.
However, Galla discloses:
wherein the holding system 12 (Fig. 1) is made of plastic resistant to high temperature or of ceramic (par. 0017);
in order to provide an insulating housing (par. 0017).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wood as suggested by Galla, e.g., providing:
wherein the holding system is made of plastic resistant to high temperature or of ceramic;
in order to provide an insulating housing.
It has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Additionally, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined/modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination/modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood (US 2300142 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yu (US 20080117016 A1).
As to claim 11, Wood does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the heat-sensitive element is disposed under the busbars so as to not form a thermal or electrical bridge when it melts.
However, Yu discloses:
wherein the heat-sensitive element 15 (Fig. 9-10) is disposed under the busbars 11, 12 (at least bottom portion 15) so as to not form a thermal or electrical bridge when it melts (see Fig. 10);
in order to separate and disconnect at the set temperature (par. 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wood as suggested by Yu, e.g., providing:
wherein the heat-sensitive element is disposed under the busbars so as to not form a thermal or electrical bridge when it melts;
in order to separate and disconnect at the set temperature.
Additionally, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined/modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination/modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood (US 2300142 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Holley (US 9407083 B1).
As to claim 12, Wood does not explicitly disclose:
Aircraft comprising a device for suppling electrical power according to claim 1.
However, Holley discloses:
Aircraft (col. 2, lines 11-21) comprising a device (fusible link) for suppling electrical power;
in order to provide backup protection for protective and power control devices in aircraft power systems.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Wood as suggested by Holley, e.g., providing an aircraft with the device of claim 1:
Aircraft comprising a device for suppling electrical power according to claim 1;
in order to provide backup protection for protective and power control devices in aircraft power systems.
Additionally, all claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined/modified the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination/modification would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.___, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claims 6-7 (as best understood), the allowability resides in the overall structure and functionality of the apparatus as recited in the dependent claim 6, including all of the limitations of their base claims and intervening claims, and at least in part, because it recites the following limitations:
“wherein the holding system is a threaded rod provided with at least two nuts.”
Baran (US 3198914 A), Yang (US 20180062374 A1), and Wang (US 20160372878 A1) disclose conventional thermal disconnects.
None of the prior art, either alone or in combination, can be reasonably construed as adequately teaching the above claimed elements, in combination with the remaining claim limitations.
Further, Examiner has not identified any double patenting issues.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB R CRUM whose telephone number is (571)270-7665. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached at (571) 272-3740. 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.
/JACOB R CRUM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2835