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 .
This action is in response to the filing of 9/6/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 9-20 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 written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 9 recites “a first mount extending along a first longitudinal axis; a first antenna positioned in the first mount and extending at an oblique angle relative to the first longitudinal axis; a second mount extending along a second longitudinal axis; and a second antenna positioned in the second mount and extending at an oblique angle relative to the second longitudinal axis”.
These limitations of claim 9 fails to comply with written description requirement; The limitation(s),
“a first mount extending along a first longitudinal axis; a first antenna positioned in the first mount and extending at an oblique angle relative to the first longitudinal axis; a second mount extending along a second longitudinal axis; and a second antenna positioned in the second mount and extending at an oblique angle relative to the second longitudinal axis”; are not described in the specification or at least the examiner is unable to find support for the claimed subject matter.
Therefore, this subject matter was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 10-15 are rejected for their dependencies on claim 9.
Claim 16 recites; “a first antenna having a first free end and a first connecting end configured to receive a first cable, wherein the first free end extends toward the upper portion of the housing; and a second antenna having a second free end and a second connecting end configured to receive a second cable, wherein the second free end extends toward the lower portion of the housing”.
These limitations of claim 16 fails to comply with written description requirement; The limitation(s), “a first antenna having a first free end and a first connecting end configured to receive a first cable, wherein the first free end extends toward the upper portion of the housing; and a second antenna having a second free end and a second connecting end configured to receive a second cable, wherein the second free end extends toward the lower portion of the housing” are not described in the specification or at least the examiner is unable to find support for the claimed subject matter.
Therefore, this subject matter was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 17-20 are rejected for their dependencies on claim 16.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9,12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,009,922. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because present claims is/are broader and generic to all that is recited in claims of the US patent 11,009,922. For instance, present claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1+7 of the patent no. 11,009,922. Claims 2-6,7,8 are anticipated by claims 2-6,9,12 respectively of the patent.
U.S. Patent No. 11,009,922 claims
Present application claims
1. An intelligent electronic device for monitoring power usage of an electrical circuit comprising: a housing; at least one sensor coupled to the electric circuit, the at least one sensor measures at least one parameter of the electrical circuit and generates at least one analog signal indicative of the at least one parameter; at least one analog to digital converter coupled to the at least one sensor, the at least one analog to digital converter receives the at least one analog signal and converts the at least one analog signal to at least one digital signal; at least one processor that receives the at least one digital signal and calculates at least one power parameter of the electrical circuit; a first antenna having a first length and disposed at a first position of the housing; a second antenna having a second length and disposed at a second position of the housing, such that the second antenna is disposed a predetermined distance apart from the first antenna, the first antenna and the second antenna being positioned in parallel planes along their respective lengths and at a predetermined angle relative to each other; and a communication device that receives the calculated at least one power parameter and wirelessly transmits the calculated at least one power parameter to a remote computing device via the first antenna and/or the second antenna.
4. The intelligent electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first antenna is disposed on an inner surface of the housing at the first position and the second antenna is disposed on the inner surface of the housing at the second position.
6. The intelligent electronic device of claim 4, wherein the first antenna mount includes a first slot for receiving the first antenna and the second antenna mount includes a second slot for receiving the second antenna, the first slot and the second slot configured such that the first antenna extends lengthwise at the predetermined angle relative to the second antenna.
7. The intelligent electronic device of claim 6, wherein the predetermined angle is about 90 degrees.
1. An intelligent electronic device for monitoring power usage of an electrical circuit comprising: a housing; at least one sensor connected to the housing and configured to be coupled to an electric circuit, the at least one sensor configured to measure at least one parameter of the electrical circuit and generate at least one analog signal indicative of the at least one parameter; at least one analog to digital converter coupled to the at least one sensor, the at least one analog to digital converter receives the at least one analog signal and converts the at least one analog signal to at least one digital signal; at least one processor that receives the at least one digital signal and calculates at least one power parameter of the electrical circuit; a first antenna disposed at a first position of the housing and extending in a first plane; and a second antenna disposed at a second position of the housing and extending in a second plane parallel to the first plan, wherein the second antenna is oriented substantially 90 degrees to the first antenna.
Claims 1-4,7-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10,21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,641,052. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because present claims is/are broader and generic to all that is recited in claims of the US patent 11,641,052. For instance, present claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1+9 of the patent no. 11,641,052. Present Claims 2,3,4,7,8 are anticipated by claims 1,21,19,8,10 respectively of the patent.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1,4,5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2015/0192625) in view of Kagan (US 2007/0096765).
Regarding claim 1:
Sato discloses an intelligent electronic device for monitoring power usage of an electrical circuit (abstract; figures) comprising:
a housing (as shown in figures; see fig 1, [outer and inner cases 2, 3]; and device shown in figure 6; para 20, 22,45);
at least one sensor connected to the housing and configured to be coupled to an electric circuit, the at least one sensor configured to measure at least one parameter of the electrical circuit and generate at least one analog signal indicative of the at least one parameter (para 15, partially reproduced with emphasis {…including a power measuring unit configured to measure an amount of the power} [here power measuring unit is interpreted as sensor, that measures the parameter]; 4 in figures 1-3,6; 10 in fig 4);
a first antenna disposed at a first position of the housing and extending in a first plane (see 21 in figure 6); and
a second antenna disposed at a second position of the housing and extending in a second plane parallel to the first plan, wherein the second antenna is oriented substantially 90 degrees to the first antenna (antenna 24 in figure 6; para 47 {…a first antenna section 21, a second feeding point 23 and a second antenna section 24…}; para 49,52; see antennas 21, 24 in figure 6, [the first and second antennas 21, 24 are at an angle or perpendicular to each other, for instance as substantially 90 degrees is same lengthwise, that is the angle remains same for the length of antennas measured from anywhere lengthwise]; and see throughout the disclosure).
Sato discloses all of the subject matter as described above, except for specifically teaching that at least one analog to digital converter coupled to the at least one sensor, the at least one analog to digital converter receives the at least one analog signal and converts the at least one analog signal to at least one digital signal; at least one processor that receives the at least one digital signal and calculates at least one power parameter of the electrical circuit.
However, Kagan in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for an intelligent electronic device where the device comprises at least one analog to digital converter coupled to the at least one sensor, the at least one analog to digital converter receives the at least one analog signal and converts the at least one analog signal to at least one digital signal (14 in figure 1, coupled to 12; para 24); at least one processor that receives the at least one digital signal and calculates at least one power parameter of the electrical circuit (16,18 in figure 1; para 24-25; and see throughout).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use teachings of Kagan in order to provide intelligent electronic device for converting analog signals to digital signal for further processing and transmitting wirelessly the consumption data without physical contact [10,15] (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Regarding claim 4:
Sato discloses all of the subject matter as described above and further discloses that the first antenna is disposed on an inner surface of the housing at the first position and the second antenna is disposed on the inner surface of the housing at the second position (as shown in figure 6, antennas 21 and 24; and see throughout the disclosure).
Regarding claim 5:
Sato discloses all of the subject matter as described above and discloses the antenna mounted internally (para 4,35), Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that Sato would obviously provide a first antenna mount and a second antenna mount, the first antenna mount configured to mount the first antenna to the inner surface of the housing at the first position and the second antenna mount configured to mount the second antenna to the inner surface of the housing at the second position, for antennas to be mounted on the inner surface of the meter.
Claims 2,7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2015/0192625) in view of Kagan (US 2007/0096765) as above, and further in view of Lagnado et al. (US 2011/0151811).
Regarding claim 2:
Sato discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching that wherein the first antenna is configured as a main antenna and the second antenna is configured as a diversity antenna.
However, Lagnado in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for a device with selectable antennas wherein the first antenna is configured as a main antenna and the second antenna is configured as a diversity antenna (para 3, 13; para 16,20 {first antenna is selected as the primary antenna and the second antenna serves as the diversity antenna}; figures; and see throughout the disclosure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use teachings of Lagnado in order to provide antennas as main and diversity antenna to cover the frequency bands and improve performance of the device [5,16] (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Regarding claim 7:
Sato discloses all of the subject matter as described above, except for specifically teaching that the second antenna is spaced from the first antenna by a distance corresponding to about 0.25 of the wavelength of the antennas.
However, Lagnado in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for a device with selectable antennas where the second antenna is spaced from the first antenna by a distance corresponding to about 0.25 of the wavelength of the antennas (para 3, 13 [1/frequency]; and throughout). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use teachings of Lagnado in order to provide antennas with corresponding distance is determined by a wavelength of the signal (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2015/0192625) in view of Kagan (US 2007/0096765) as above, and further in view of Sato (US 2017/0085969) [Sato ‘969 hereinafter].
Regarding claim 3:
Sato discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching that wherein the first position is opposite to the second position.
However, Sato ‘969 in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for a device where the first position is opposite to the second position (figure 4 [antenna 224 position is opposite to antenna 225]; para 35,38; and throughout).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use teachings of Sato ‘969 in order to provide first and second antennas along opposite sides with insulation from other components to prevent performance degradation and correlation [48,53] (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2015/0192625) in view of Kagan (US 2007/0096765) as above, and further in view of Podduturi (US 2011/0063172).
Regarding claim 6:
Sato discloses all of the subject matter as described above and that antennas are configured such that the first antenna extends lengthwise at the predetermined angle relative to the second antenna (as in figure 6; para 47); except for specifically teaching that the first antenna mount includes a first slot for receiving the first antenna and the second antenna mount includes a second slot for receive the second antenna.
However, Podduturi in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for meter antennas where the first antenna mount includes a first slot for receiving the first antenna and the second antenna mount includes a second slot for receive the second antenna (para 97, 127,128; and throughout disclosure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use teachings of Podduturi to provide optimized conformal antennas to meter (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Claim 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato (US 2015/0192625) in view of Kagan (US 2007/0096765) as above, and further in view of Feldman et al. (US 8,177,580).
Regarding claim 8:
Sato discloses all of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching that wherein the housing is a socket type meter housing.
However, Feldman in the same field of endeavor discloses a system and method for meters wherein housing is a socket type meter housing (figure 7; column 4 lines 24-30; and throughout disclosure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use teachings of Feldman in Sato to providing a meter adapter that may be easily installed to keep the meter powered, and easy to remove by coupling a utility meter to a socket (KSR: Combining Prior Art Elements According to Known Methods to Yield Predictable Results).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HIRDEPAL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1688. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F.
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, Hannah S Wang can be reached on (571) 272-9018. 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.
/HIRDEPAL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights