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 .
Preliminary Amendment
Claims 29-48 are currently pending. Claims 1-28 have been canceled. Claims 29-48 have been added. Entry of this amendment is accepted and made of record.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
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 29-48 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.
Regarding claim 29, the term “a plurality of at least three heat sensors” is unclear. It is not clear if the term refers to the sensor assembly comprising at least three sensors or a plurality of sets, each set comprising at least three sensors. Please clarify.
The term “the other heat sensor” in claim 29 is unclear, this term was not previously recited in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “the other heat sensor” in claim 29 renders the claim unclear since the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. It is not clear to which sensor is “the other heat sensor” referring to. Please clarify.
Claims 30-47 depend on claim 29, the claims are rejected at least for the same reasons as to claim 29.
The term “all of the other temperature signals” in claim 33 is unclear, this term was not previously recited in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “all of the other temperature signals” in claim 33 renders the claim unclear since the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. It is not clear to which sensor is “the other heat sensor” referring to. Please clarify.
The term “preferably” in claim 34 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “optionally” in claim 36 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “preferably” in claim 37 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 37 recites the broad recitation “the interval between the heat sensors is between 2 and 4 meters”, and the claim also recites “preferably approximately 3 meters” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “approximately” in claim 37 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 43, the term “the respective controllers” lack antecedent basis, this term has not been previously recited in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 43 is unclear, the claim recites “respective controllers” in plural, however, only one controller has been recited in claim 29 from which claim 43 depends upon. Please clarify.
Claim 44 depends on claim 43, the claim is rejected at least for the same reasons as to claim 43.
The term “preferably” in claim 45 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “preferably” in claim 47 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “optionally” in claim 47 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “preferably” in claim 48 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “optionally” in claim 48 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “the other heat sensors” in claim 48 is unclear, this term was not previously recited in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “the other heat sensors” in claim 48 renders the claim unclear since the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. It is not clear to which sensor is “the other heat sensors” referring to. Please clarify.
For examination on the merits the claims will be interpreted as best understood.
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 48 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 20160041725 (hereinafter KR).
Regarding claim 48, KR teaches a method of monitoring for faulty connections in a power distribution system comprising one or more busbar segments (20) containing conductors (22) for distributing power in use, comprising: providing a plurality of at least three heat sensors (200), each heat sensor (200) being positioned adjacent a joint (100) in the power distribution system (see Figs. 1-2 and paragraphs 0090-0092), preferably a joint (100) between busbar segments (20); monitoring a temperature signal output by each of the plurality of heat sensors (200) (see paragraph 0023-0024, 0038 and 0103); comparing the temperature signals against one another to determine whether the temperature sensed by any one of the heat sensors differs from that sensed by the other heat sensors by more than a predetermined threshold (ATALARM), and if so generating an alarm signal (see paragraphs 0022, 0089-0090, 0098, 0107-0111).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 29-36, 38-39 and 41-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (KR 20160041725) in view of Thomas et al. (US 2019/0170804) (hereinafter Thomas).
Regarding claim 29, KR teaches a heat sensor assembly for a power distribution system, comprising: a cable (70), containing a plurality of at least three heat sensors (200) arranged along the length of the cable (70) (see Figure 10 and paragraphs 0022, 0037, 0051, 0088) each of the heat sensors (200) being spaced from the next by an interval (see Fig. 10); and a controller (320) configured to receive the temperature signal from each terminal pair and to compare the temperature signals against one another to determine whether the temperature sensed by any one of the heat sensors (200) differs from that sensed by the other heat sensors (200) by more than a predetermined threshold (ATALARM), and if so to generate an alarm signal (see paragraphs 0022, 0089-0090, 0098, 0107-0111).
However, KR does not explicitly teach an end module at a first end of the cable, the end module having a corresponding plurality of terminal pairs, each terminal pair being dedicated to one of the heat sensors; circuitry inside the cable, connecting each of the heat sensors across a corresponding one of the terminal pairs such that each terminal pair outputs a temperature signal indicative of the temperature sensed by the corresponding heat sensor.
Thomas teaches an end module (20) at a first end of the cable (13), the end module having a corresponding plurality of terminal pairs (22b), each terminal pair (22b) being dedicated to one of the heat sensors (12) (each sensor having two lead wires (13); see Fig. 9(a)-9(b)); circuitry inside the cable (lead wires (13), sensor side end connections and connector side end connection constitute circuitry), connecting each of the heat sensors (12) across a corresponding one of the terminal pairs such that each terminal pair (22b) outputs a temperature signal indicative of the temperature sensed by the corresponding heat sensor (12) (see Figs. 8(a)-8(b) and 9(a)-9(b) and paragraphs 0138-0146).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat sensor assembly as taught by KR with an end module at a first end of the cable, the end module having a corresponding plurality of terminal pairs, each terminal pair being dedicated to one of the heat sensors; circuitry inside the cable, connecting each of the heat sensors across a corresponding one of the terminal pairs such that each terminal pair outputs a temperature signal indicative of the temperature sensed by the corresponding heat sensor as taught by Thomas. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to enable the installer to select e.g. different sensor cable lengths for each of the sensors, provide shortened installation time and reduced skills required by installer; and to provide improved quality of the connections from the sensors to the processor. Additionally, it allows for straightforward in-service replacement of any damaged sensors.
Regarding claim 30, KR in view of Thomas teaches all the limitations of claim 29.
However, KR as modified by Thomas does not explicitly teach the circuitry comprises a corresponding plurality of measurement lines and a common return line, each of the measurement lines connecting one of the heat sensors to a first terminal of the respective terminal pair in the end module, and the common return line connecting each of the heat sensors to a second terminal of the respective terminal pair in the end module.
Thomas further teaches the circuitry comprises a corresponding plurality of measurement lines (“first, second and third power lines L.sub.1, L.sub.2, L.sub.3 at three different respective phases”) and a common return line (“return line L.sub.n”) (see Thomas; paragraph 0111), each of the measurement lines connecting one of the heat sensors (12) to a first terminal of the respective terminal pair in the end module (20), and the common return line connecting each of the heat sensors (12) to a second terminal of the respective terminal pair in the end module (20) (see Thomas; Figs. 3, 8(a)-8(b) and 9(a)-9(b) and paragraphs 0111-0112 and paragraphs 0138-0146).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat sensor assembly as taught by the prior combination with the circuitry comprises a corresponding plurality of measurement lines and a common return line, each of the measurement lines connecting one of the heat sensors to a first terminal of the respective terminal pair in the end module, and the common return line connecting each of the heat sensors to a second terminal of the respective terminal pair in the end module as taught by Thomas. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide improved quality of the connections from the sensors to the processor.
Regarding claim 31, the prior combination teaches all the limitations of claim 29.
However, KR as modified by Thomas does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is configured to compare the temperature signals by: for each of the temperature signals, calculating the difference between that temperature signal and each other temperature signal; and comparing each of the calculated differences against the predetermined threshold (ATALARM).
Thomas teaches the controller (11) is configured to compare the temperature signals by: for each of the temperature signals, calculating the difference between that temperature signal and each other temperature signal; and comparing each of the calculated differences against the predetermined threshold (ATALARM) (see paragraph 0091 and 0101).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller as taught by KR to be configured to compare the temperature signals by: for each of the temperature signals, calculating the difference between that temperature signal and each other temperature signal; and comparing each of the calculated differences against the predetermined threshold (ATALARM) as taught by Thomas. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide an alternative way of accurately determine a fault or phase imbalance between power lines.
Regarding claim 32, KR further teaches wherein the controller (320) is configured to compare the temperature signals by: calculating an average of all of the temperature signals; for each of the temperature signals, calculating the difference between that temperature signal and the calculated average; and comparing each of the calculated differences against the predetermined threshold (ATALARM) (see paragraphs 0092 and 0107-0108).
Regarding claim 33, KR further teaches wherein the controller is configured to compare the temperature signals by: for each of the temperature signals, calculating an average of all of the other temperature signals and then calculating the difference between the temperature signal and the calculated average; and comparing each of the calculated differences against the predetermined threshold (ATALARM) (see paragraphs 0107-0109).
Regarding claim 34, KR further teaches wherein the alarm signal includes identification of which heat sensor has triggered the alarm signal (see paragraphs 0001, 0022, 0024-0025, 0104-0106).
Regarding claim 35, KR further teaches wherein the cable (70) comprises two or more cable segments (see Figures 1, 9 and 10), the cable (70) segments being detachably joined to one another by connectors (208), the connectors (208) preferably including keying features such that they couple in a single relative orientation (see Figures 1, 9 and 10; and paragraph 0051).
Regarding claim 36, KR further teaches each cable (70) segment comprises a heat sensor cable sub-section (202) and a linking cable sub-section (terminals from both sides of the cable (70)), optionally detachably joined to one another by a connector (208), the heat sensor cable sub-section comprising at least one of the heat sensors (200 )(see Figs. 1, 5 and 9 and paragraph 0051).
Regarding claim 38, KR further teaches wherein each of the plurality of heat sensors comprises a thermistor, a thermocouple, a resistance temperature detector (RTD) or a semiconductor based sensor (see paragraph 0037).
Regarding claim 39, KR further teaches wherein the controller (320) is further configured to compare each temperature signal against a pre-set critical temperature threshold (TCRIT) and to generate an alarm signal if any of the temperature signals is greater than the pre-set critical temperature threshold (TCRIT) (see paragraphs 0108-0111).
Regarding claim 41, KR further teaches comprising a communications module (330) for outputting the temperature signals and/or any alarm signal from the controller (320) to an external device (touch pad mobile device) (see paragraphs 0092 and 0095).
Regarding claim 42, KR further teaches a power module (310) for supplying power to the controller (320) from a local power source (see paragraph 0092 and 0096).
Regarding claim 43, further teaches wherein the respective controllers (320) are each supplied with power from a common power source (310) (see Fig. 10 and paragraphs 0092 and 0096).
However, KR does not explicitly teach the controller being respective controllers being each supplied with power from a common power source.
Thomas teaches the respective controllers (10) are each supplied with power from a common power source (PS) (see paragraphs 0095-0096, 0111-0112).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat sensor system as taught by KR with respective controllers each supplied with power from a common power source as taught by Thomas. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide a cost efficient system by providing a reduced number of equipment.
Regarding claim 44, KR in view of Thomas teaches all the limitations of claim 43, and further teaches wherein the controllers (10) are grouped into two or more sets (see Figure 10), each set comprising at least two of the controllers (10), each set of controllers (10) being provided with an input power connection for receiving power from the common power source and an output power connector (17) for supplying power to another of the sets (see Thomas; Figs. 3 and 10; and paragraphs 0095-0096 and 0111-0113).
Regarding claim 45, KR in view of Thomas teaches all the limitations of claim 43, and further teaches comprising a central controller (11’), the respective controllers (10) being configured to communicate with the central controller (11’), wherein the controllers (10) are preferably grouped into two or more sets (see Fig. 10), each set comprising at least two of the controllers (10), each set of controllers (10) being provided with data connections (17) for exchanging data with the central controller (11’) and with another of the sets (10) (see Thomas; Fig. 10 and paragraphs 0152-0153).
Regarding claim 46, KR teaches a set of busbar segments (20) for a power distribution system, each busbar segment (20) comprising an elongate housing (10) containing conductors (22) for distributing power in use (see Figs. 1-2 and 8-10; and paragraphs 0034, 0054 and 0055), the conductors (22) extending along the elongate length of the housing (10) between connection points (100) at each end for joining to another one of the busbar segments (20) (see Figs. 1-9 and paragraphs 0033-0034, 0055-0056, 0060 and 0082-0084), and each busbar segment further comprising a heat sensor (200) assembly segment comprising a cable (70) segment including at least one heat sensor (200) and connectors (communication cable (70) terminals from both sides) at each end of the cable segment (see Figures 1, 9 and 10), configured such that when the set of busbar segments (20) is connected, the joined cable segments form a cable (70) containing a plurality of at least three heat sensors (200) arranged along the length of the cable (70), each of the heat sensors (200 being spaced from the next by an interval (see Figure 10 and paragraphs 0022, 0037, 0051, 0088 and 0090-0092).
However, KR does not explicitly teach circuitry inside the cable, connecting each of the heat sensors across one of a corresponding plurality of terminal pairs such that each terminal pair outputs a temperature signal indicative of the temperature sensed by the corresponding heat sensor.
Thomas teaches circuitry inside the cable (lead wires (13), sensor side end connections and connector side end connection constitute circuitry), connecting each of the heat sensors (12) across one of a corresponding plurality terminal pairs such that each terminal pair (22b) outputs a temperature signal indicative of the temperature sensed by the corresponding heat sensor (12) (see Figs. 8(a)-8(b) and 9(a)-9(b) and paragraphs 0138-0146).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the heat sensor assembly as taught by KR with circuitry inside the cable, connecting each of the heat sensors across one of a corresponding plurality of terminal pairs such that each terminal pair outputs a temperature signal indicative of the temperature sensed by the corresponding heat sensor as taught by Thomas. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to enable the installer to select e.g. different sensor cable lengths for each of the sensors, provide shortened installation time and reduced skills required by installer; and to provide improved quality of the connections from the sensors to the processor. Additionally, it allows for straightforward in-service replacement of any damaged sensors.
Regarding claim 47, KR further teaches power distribution system comprising one or more busbar segments containing conductors for distributing power in use, and a heat sensor assembly according to claim 29, arranged such that each heat sensor (200) is positioned adjacent a joint (100) in the power distribution system, preferably a joint (100) between busbar segments (see Figs. 1-2 and paragraphs 0090-0092).
Claims 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR in view of Thomas in further view of Patel et al. (US 2019/0120890) (hereinafter Patel).
Regarding claim 40, the prior combination teaches all the limitations of claim 29.
However, KR as modified by Thomas does not explicitly teach comprising an ambient temperature sensor and wherein the controller is further configured to, for each temperature signal, calculate the difference between the temperature signal and the ambient temperature, to compare the difference against a pre-set critical temperature difference threshold (ATCRIT) and to generate an alarm signal if the difference is greater than the pre-set critical temperature difference threshold (ATCRIT).
Patel teaches an ambient temperature sensor (140) and wherein the controller (106) is further configured to, for each temperature signal, calculate the difference between the temperature signal and the ambient temperature (difference between first sensor 136 and second sensor 140), to compare the difference against a pre-set critical temperature difference threshold (ATCRIT) (user-defined temperature differential stored in system controller 106) and to generate an alarm signal if the difference is greater than the pre-set critical temperature difference threshold (ATCRIT) (see paragraphs 0026 and 0036).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller as taught by the prior combination to be configured to for each temperature signal, calculate the difference between the temperature signal and the ambient temperature (difference between first sensor 136 and second sensor 140), to compare the difference against a pre-set critical temperature difference threshold (ATCRIT) (user-defined temperature differential stored in system controller 106) and to generate an alarm signal if the difference is greater than the pre-set critical temperature difference threshold (ATCRIT) as taught by Patel. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide an efficient and effective method for detecting busway joint abnormalities as known in the art.
Claims 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR in view of Thomas in further view of Jian et al. CN 106768414 (hereinafter Jiang).
Regarding claim 37, the prior combination teaches all the limitations of claim 29.
However, KR as modified by Thomas does not explicitly teach a heat sensor assembly according to claim 29, wherein the interval between the heat sensors is between 2 and 4 meters, preferably approximately 3 meters.
It is very well known in the art to provide a desired interval between the heat sensors including the interval being between 2 and 4 meters (2 meters) as evidenced by Jiang (see page 6, lines 14-16).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the interval between the heat sensors as taught by the prior combination to be between 2 and 4 meters as taught by Jiang. One would be motivated to make this combination in order to provide accurate temperature measurements by providing the heat sensors at the desired locations without being influenced by surrounding heat of the other heat sensors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE M SOTO whose telephone number is (571)270-7707. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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.
/JANICE M SOTO/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights