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 .
Claims 1, 3, 7-10, 14-18 and 20-28 are pending in this application. Claims 1, 3, 8, 10, 14 and 16 are currently amended. Claims 2, 4-6, 11-13 and 19 are cancelled. Claims 7, 17-18 and 20 were previously presented. Claims 9 and 15 are original. Claims 21-28 are new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-8 of Remarks filed 09/10/2026, applicant argues
Krauss's Fig. 4 states only that switching contact CB interrupts the circuit "by way of the circuit breaker, not illustrated in more specific detail," disclosing no link between CB and the induced voltage of SW. Krauss does not disclose at least "a circuit interrupting device configured to open the first circuit in response to a change in the magnetic field," as in claims 1, 10, and 16, because Krauss is understood to disclose only that SW powers the ETU while a separate sensor supplies the trip signal.
Examiner disagrees respectfully. Referring to prior art Krauss (US 20200013574 A1) specification paragraphs [0018]-[0021] and claim 1 which recites “A circuit breaker for interrupting an electrical circuit in an event of at least one of current and current-time period limit values being exceeded … a secondary side of the energy converter being configured to provide an energy supply for at least one control unit of the circuit breaker;” The above recitation is understood to open a circuit breaker by a control unit of the circuit breaker, whose energy is provided by a secondary side, and opening happens when a threshold is exceeded.
On page 8 of Remarks filed 09/10/2026, applicant argues
Second, and independently, claims 1, 10, and 16, as amended, further require that the second circuit comprises "a partial ferromagnetic core disposed in a position adjacent to the first circuit such that the partial ferromagnetic core is disposed in a portion of the magnetic field," with the coil disposed about that partial core. Krauss does not disclose at least these features.
Prior art Krauss teaches a ferromagnetic core ([0012], magnetic dimensioning of the ferromagnetic core in the energy converter). Krauss also teaches that the core is adjacent to first circuit ([0063], A conductor of this circuit forms the primary side PS of an energy converter CT). It is necessarily true that the magnetic field affects the primary side, ferromagnetic core and the secondary winding of figs.4-5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 8-10, 14-18 and 21-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Krauss (US 20200013574 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Krauss teaches a circuit interruption system (abstract, a power switch for breaking an electrical circuit) for use with a first circuit (e.g. circuit comprising AC source, figs.1-2, 4-5) conveying a current from a power source to a load ([0063], AC source AC serving as energy source supplies an energy consumer Load), the circuit interruption system comprising:
a second circuit (e.g. circuit comprising secondary winding SW, figs.1-2, 4-5) disposed in a magnetic field generated by the current passing through the first circuit (abstract, the primary side is connected to the electrical circuit, and on the secondary side provides an energy supply), the second circuit comprising a coil and a partial ferromagnetic core ([0064], the core KCT of the energy converter CT furthermore has a secondary side SW formed by one or more turns of a secondary winding or coil) ([0012], magnetic dimensioning of the ferromagnetic core in the energy converter), wherein the partial ferromagnetic core is disposed in a position adjacent to the first circuit such that the partial ferromagnetic core is disposed in a portion of the magnetic field (e.g. first circuit comprising AC source is adjacent to SW and it is necessarily true that magnetic field generated in PS by AC source is affecting the ferromagnetic core KCT, figs.4-5), the coil is disposed about the partial ferromagnetic core ([0064], a secondary side SW formed by one or more turns of a secondary winding or coil), and the magnetic field induces an induced voltage in the wherein the magnetic field induces an induced voltage in the second circuit ([0070], primary current Iprim in amperes [Arms] of the primary side PS of the energy converter CT is illustrated on the horizontal X-axis. The secondary current Isec in milliamperes [mArms]); and
a circuit interrupting device (i.e. switching contact CB, fig.4) configured to open the first circuit in response to a change in the induced voltage caused by a change in the magnetic field (abstract, a power switch for breaking an electrical circuit when current and/or current time span threshold values are exceeded) (claim 1, A circuit breaker for interrupting an electrical circuit in an event of at least one of current and current-time period limit values being exceeded … a secondary side of the energy converter being configured to provide an energy supply for at least one control unit of the circuit breaker).
Regarding claim 3, Krauss teaches the circuit interruption system of claim 2, further comprising an insulator disposed between the first circuit and the coil ([0103], produced from a material that is not electrically conductive, e.g. an insulating film or a plastic part).
Regarding claim 8, Krauss teaches the circuit interruption system of claim 1, wherein the second circuit comprises at least one intermediate member (e.g. inductor L, low pass filter LPF, figs. 4-5) between the coil and a load associated with the circuit interrupting device (e.g. L and LPF are between SW and ETU, figs. 4-5).
Regarding claim 9, Krauss teaches the circuit interruption system of claim 8, wherein the at least one intermediate member comprises at least one of a filtering circuit (e.g. low pass filter LPF, figs.4-5).
Regarding claim 10, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 8.
Regarding claim 15, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 9.
Regarding claim 16, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 8.
Regarding claim 18, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 9.
Regarding claim 21, Krauss teaches the circuit interruption system of claim 1, wherein the partial ferromagnetic core comprises iron or a ferrous alloy ([0012], magnetic dimensioning of the ferromagnetic core in the energy converter).
Regarding claim 22, Krauss teaches the circuit interruption system of claim 1, wherein the first circuit does not extend through an opening in the partial ferromagnetic core ([0063], only the conductor (without a turn) to be led … past a core KCT of the energy converter CT).
Regarding claim 23, Krauss teaches the circuit interruption system of claim 1, wherein a gap is defined between the partial ferromagnetic core and the first circuit ([0063], only the conductor (without a turn) to be led precisely through or past a core KCT of the energy converter CT) (it is necessarily true that a gap exists when conductor is led past a core KCT).
Regarding claim 24, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 21.
Regarding claim 25, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 22.
Regarding claim 26, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 23.
Regarding claim 27, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 22.
Regarding claim 28, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated above for claim 23.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krauss (US 20200013574 A1), and further in view of Kube (DE 102019204033 B3).
Regarding claim 7, Krauss teaches the circuit interruption system of claim 1.
Krauss does not teach, wherein the circuit interrupting device comprises a pyrotechnic device.
Kube teaches in a similar field of endeavor of electrical fuses, a circuit interrupting device (i.e. electrical fuse 1, fig.1) comprises a pyrotechnic device (i.e. electro-pyrotechnic detonator 2, fig.1).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optionally included the circuit interrupting device comprises a pyrotechnic device in Krauss, as taught by Kube, as it provides the advantage of severing contacts without contact welding issues in presence of high fault current.
Regarding claim 20, Krauss teaches the electrical system of claim 16.
Krauss does not teach, wherein the primary coil comprises a busbar.
Kube teaches in a similar field of endeavor of electrical fuses, a primary coil (e.g. high-voltage line 20, fig.1) comprises a busbar (e.g. busbar 4, fig.1).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optionally included the primary coil comprises a busbar in Krauss, as taught by Kube, as it provides the advantage of connecting to a power supply and other parts of a circuit in a conventional manner.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SREEYA SREEVATSA whose telephone number is (571)272-8304. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm ET.
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, Thienvu V Tran can be reached at (571) 270-1276. 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.
/SREEYA SREEVATSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838 10/05/2026
