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 § 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-5, 9-14, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maierbacher et al (US 11,101,888; art cited by applicant) in view of Faulkner et al (US 2006/0165023; art cited by applicant).
Regarding independent claim 1, Maierbacher teaches an optical wireless communication ("OWC") system for circuit breaker relays wherein the optical wireless communication comprises modulated unguided visible, infrared ("IR"), or ultraviolet ("UV") light, each configured to carry a signal, the OWC system (col. 18, lines 18-21 and col. 19, lines 1-32. Furthermore, light not visible to human beings in the infrared range (near, medium or far infrared) and ultraviolet light can also be utilized for transmitting information) comprising: an OWC transceiver operatively coupled to, and associated with, a circuit breaker relay (col. 25, lines 28-34. In this case, the optical waveguide WL is configured such that it radiates the light of the transceiver unit); a single or multiple OWC access points located to allow bidirectional line- of-sight and reflected communication with a single or multiple circuit breaker relay OWC transceivers (col. 3, lines 12-17 and col. 19, lines 1-32. The transmitter and also the receiver are in each case structurally identical transceiver units that advantageously ensure bidirectional communication); and a controller operatively connected to the single or multiple OWC access points (col. 11, lines 50-54. The light-based communication system is divided into a hardware part fitted to the machine or to an external controller).
Maierbacher fails to teach the use of protection relay. However, Faulkner teaches “Subnetwork 35 includes a plurality of network protectors 45 as described above (including at least a circuit breaker and a control relay)”. See [0015]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Maierbacher by employing the use of a protection relay as taught by FAULKNER so as to ensure that identifying where a command has been sent to shut off the circuit breaker.
Regarding independent claims 9 and 18, the claims recite similar subject matter to claim 1. Therefore, similar rationale is applied as for claim 1.
Regarding dependent claims 2 and 11, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner further teaches wherein the connection between the single or multiple OWC access points and the controller is an Ethernet wired connection. See Maierbacher, col 5 lines 13-16, The transceiver unit of the DIN rail includes a communication connection such as e.g. an Ethernet connection. However, the communication connection can also be a serial connection.
Regarding dependent claims 3 and 12, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner further teaches wherein the controller comprises multiple operatively interconnected controllers. Maierbacher fails to specifically disclose wherein the controller comprises multiple operatively interconnected controllers. Faulkner teaches a number of wireless gateway/controllers 55, each being connected to one or more subnetworks 35, may be included in a system within the scope of the present invention ([0022]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the invention of Maierbacher to specifically include the use of a controller comprises multiple operatively interconnected controllers as taught by Faulkner to ensure that the system is protected and the power to the circuit breaker is controlled.
Regarding dependent claims 4 and 13, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner further teaches wherein the controller controls the communication between the single or multiple OWC access points and the single or multiple circuit breaker protection relay OWC transceivers using a master and slave protocol. Faulkner teaches monitoring and control system 30 is a master/slave system ([0018]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the invention of Maierbacher to specifically include the use of a master and slave protocol as taught by Faulkner to ensure there is a response to data initiated by the controller.
Regarding dependent claims 5 and 14, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner further teaches wherein the controller is configured to gather data from a single or multiple circuit breaker protection relays via the OWC system, wherein the data includes at least one of phase currents, neutral current, GF current, phase voltages, power data, harmonic data, protection relay settings, alarms, waveforms, serial number, protection relay address, circuit breaker open closed status, circuit breaker springs charged status, date time stamp, or message integrity code verification. Faulkner teaches the remote station 25 receives protector measurement data of interest from and sends circuit breaker open and/or close commands to one or more of the network protectors 10 ([0007). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the invention of Maierbacher to specifically include the use of a circuit breaker open closed status as taught by Faulkner to ensure there is a response to data received to prevent damage to the circuit.
Regarding dependent claim 10, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner further teaches wherein the connection between the single or multiple combination optical and RF hybrid OWC access points and the controller is an Ethernet wired connection. Maierbacher further teaches wherein the connection between the single or multiple combination optical and RF hybrid OWC access points (In principle, it is also possible, of course, to use light-based data communication only for the outgoing channel, and to resort to some other data transmission for the return channel. This can be for example radio-based data transmission in accordance with one of the established standards (col. 19, lines 25-30); and the controller is an Ethernet wired connection (col. 5, lines 13-16, The transceiver unit of the DIN rail includes a communication connection such as e.g. an Ethernet connection. However, the communication connection can also be a serial connection).
Regarding dependent claim 17, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner further teaches the controller is configured to transfer data and commands to the single or multiple circuit breaker protection relays, wherein the data and commands include at least one of protection relay setting values, breaker open or close commands, breaker racking settings, breaker racking commands, or time synchronizing data. Faulkner teaches (The wireless gateway/controller may also selectively provide control commands, such as breaker trip commands and breaker re-close commands, to the network protectors; see [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Maierbacher to specifically include controller is configured to transfer data and commands to the single or
multiple circuit breaker protection relays, wherein the data and commands include breaker open or close commands as taught by Faulkner in order to ensure the circuit is protected.
Claims 6-8 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maierbacher et al (US 11,101,888; art cited by applicant) in view of Faulkner et al (US 2006/0165023; art cited by applicant) and further in view of Liptak et al (US 2014/0071569; art cited by applicant).
Regarding dependent claims 6 and 15, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner teaches all subject matter claimed except to further teach wherein the system-based electrical protection includes at least one of differential protection, ZSI protection, MTM GF protection, or breaker failure protection. However, Faulkner teaches wherein the data from the single or multiple circuit breaker protection relays is used by the controller to provide system-based electrical protection by analyzing the data and determining if action is required by any of the system-based protection schemes, and if action is required, downloading a trip (open) command to an appropriate protection relay or relays (The remote station 25 receives protector measurement data of interest from and sends circuit breaker open and/or close commands to one or more of the network protectors 10; see fig. 1 and [0007]). In addition, Liptak teaches (the trip signal 26 may be generated externally of the monitored downstream circuit breaker 20. As used herein, a ZSI signal is one example of a trip signal, which includes, in general, any signal generated by a downstream circuit breaker 20 which indicates a pending or current tripping of the breaker 20; see [0020]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner by employing the teachings as taught by Liptak so as to specifically include the system-based electrical protection includes at
least one of differential protection, ZSI protection, MTM GF protection, or breaker failure protection as taught by LIPTAK in order to prevent nuisance tripping of the upstream breaker.
Regarding dependent claims 7 and 16, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner further teaches wherein the data from the single or multiple circuit breaker protection relays is used for operator information and data logging. However, Faulkner teaches (the circuit breaker status (open or closed), and a stored log or buffer of recent breaker events, that is collected by the microcontroller-based control relay of each network protector 45; [0016]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Maierbacher to specifically include the data from the single or multiple circuit breaker protection relays is used for operator information and data logging as taught by Faulkner in order to provide another level of protection to the circuit.
Regarding dependent claim 8, Maierbacher as modified by Faulkner further teaches the controller is configured to transfer data and commands to the single or multiple circuit breaker protection relays, wherein the data and commands include at least one of protection relay setting values, breaker open or close commands, breaker racking settings, breaker racking commands, or time synchronizing data. Faulkner teaches (The wireless gateway/controller may also selectively provide control commands, such as breaker trip commands and breaker re-close commands, to the network protectors; see [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the method of Maierbacher to specifically include controller is configured to transfer data and commands to the single or
multiple circuit breaker protection relays, wherein the data and commands include breaker open or close commands as taught by Faulkner in order to ensure the circuit is protected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-24 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.
Conclusion
Examiner's note: Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. References Neuhouser (US 5,077,628), Lovato et al (US 2004/0175090), Vicente et al (US 2008/0142486) and Kevelos et al (US 2025/0365581) are cited because they are pertinent to the method and apparatus for optical wireless communication system. However, none of the cited references teaches or suggests the further arrangements as recited in the dependent claims 19-24.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DON NGUYEN VO whose telephone number is (571) 272-3018. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 9:00 to 6:30PM.
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kenneth N Vanderpuye, can be reached on 571-272-3078. 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.
/DON N VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2634
