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 .
Drawings
Figure 4 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 22-30, 32-40 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 22, lines 1-2 recites, “The method of Claim 21 wherein the circuit coupled to the power transformer”, which should be corrected to, “The method of Claim 21, wherein the circuit coupled to the power transformer “. Claims 23-30 and 32-40 have similar recitations and requires similar correction. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 21-27, 30-37, 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Faxvog et al. (US 2013/0308229, IDS Document).
Regarding Claim 21, Faxvog discloses a method of protecting a power transformer in a power supply distribution grid (Figures 1-15, method of protecting HV transformer 100, Figure1, 10, 12, Figures 2-3), the method comprising:
monitoring low frequency electrical signals in a circuit coupled to the power transformer to provide a first detection signal (comprising current sensor 206, 314, Figure 3);
monitoring electromagnetic radiation to provide a second detection signal (comprising detector 352 providing a detection signal to 322, Figure 3, 412 with output to 404, Figure 4);
in the event that the first detection signal exceeds a first threshold, operating a protection switch connected to the transformer to break the circuit and to reconnect the circuit in response to the first detection signal dropping below the first threshold (Paragraph 51, “…..the current sensing circuit 314 measures neutral DC or quasi DC current caused by a geomagnetic storm across shunt resistor 206, and sends the result of that measurement to the sensing and control module 312 to trigger the relay control circuit 316 as necessary”);
in the event that the second detection signal exceeds a second threshold, operating the protection switch to break the circuit at least until the first detection signal has dropped below the first threshold (Paragraph 54, “…The detector 352 resides outside of the enclosure 320, and would allow the detection of either the EMP E1 or E2 pulse or an IEMI pulse which in turn would be used to open the switch assembly 202, including switches 204, 208 and hence switch in the necessary transformer protection…”).
Regarding Claim 22, Faxvog discloses the method of Claim 21, wherein the first detector is configured to monitor the low frequency electrical signals in a power distribution line of the power distribution grid (206 connected in a neutral line 10 of transformer 12, Figures 2-3).
Regarding Claim 23, Faxvog discloses the method of Claim 22, wherein the power distribution line is connected between the transformer and the power supply distribution grid (Figures 1-3, Paragraphs 11, 12, 16, 33).
Regarding Claim 24, Faxvog discloses the method of Claim 22, wherein the power distribution line is an AC neutral line of the transformer (transformer neutral 10, Figures 2-3, Paragraphs 41-42).
Regarding Claim 25, Faxvog discloses the grid protection apparatus of Claim 31, wherein monitoring low frequency signals comprises sensing current with a current sensor (206 connected in a neutral line 10 of transformer 12, Figures 2-3, Paragraphs 41-42, 51).
Regarding Claim 26, Faxvog discloses the method of Claim 25, wherein the current comprises a current between an AC neutral line of the power distribution grid and a ground voltage (206 senses current between AC neutral line 10 of transformer 12 and ground 14, Figures 2-3, Paragraphs 41-42, 51).
Regarding Claim 27, Faxvog discloses the method of Claim 21 wherein the low frequency signals comprise frequencies less than 0.5Hz, for example less than 0.1Hz (Faxvog’s disclosed quasi-DC current (see Paragraphs 13, 33, 41-42), having very low/near zero frequencies, meeting the recited limitations).
Regarding Claim 30, Faxvog discloses the method of Claim 21, wherein the protection switch comprises a relay switch (206 shown as a relay switch, Figures 2-3).
Regarding Claim 31, Faxvog discloses a grid protection apparatus configured to protect power distribution infrastructure of a power distribution grid from damage due to electromagnetic pulse, EMP, events (Figures 1-15, protection apparatus for HV transformer 100, Figure1, 10, 12, Figures 2-3), the apparatus comprising:
a first detector configured to monitor low frequency electrical signals of the power distribution grid to provide a first detection signal (comprising 206, 314, Figure 3);
a second detector configured to monitor electromagnetic radiation to provide a second detection signal (comprising 352 providing a detection signal to 322, Figure 3, 412 with output to 404, Figure 4);
a controller (210, 310, 410, Figure 2-4 respectively) configured to:
operate a protection switch in the event that the first detection signal exceeds a first threshold, thereby to break a circuit to protect the power distribution infrastructure and subsequently to reconnect the circuit in response to the first detection signal dropping below the first threshold (Paragraph 51, “…..the current sensing circuit 314 measures neutral DC or quasi DC current caused by a geomagnetic storm across shunt resistor 206, and sends the result of that measurement to the sensing and control module 312 to trigger the relay control circuit 316 as necessary”); and
to operate the protection switch in the event that the second detection signal exceeds a second threshold and so that the circuit remains broken at least until the first detection signal has dropped below the first threshold (Paragraph 54, “…The detector 352 resides outside of the enclosure 320, and would allow the detection of either the EMP E1 or E2 pulse or an IEMI pulse which in turn would be used to open the switch assembly 202, including switches 204, 208 and hence switch in the necessary transformer protection…”).
Regarding Claim 32, Faxvog discloses the grid protection apparatus of Claim 31, wherein the first detector is configured to monitor the low frequency electrical signals in a power distribution line of the power distribution grid (206 connected in a neutral line 10 of transformer 12, Figures 2-3).
Regarding Claim 33, Faxvog discloses the grid protection apparatus of Claim 32, wherein the power distribution line is connected between the transformer and the power supply distribution grid (Figures 1-3, Paragraphs 11, 12, 16, 33).
Regarding Claim 34, Faxvog discloses the grid protection apparatus of Claim 32, wherein the power distribution line is an AC neutral line of the transformer (transformer neutral 10, Figures 2-3, Paragraphs 41-42).
Regarding Claim 35, Faxvog discloses the grid protection apparatus of Claim 31, wherein monitoring low frequency signals comprises sensing current with a current sensor (206 connected in a neutral line 10 of transformer 12, Figures 2-3, Paragraphs 41-42, 51).
Regarding Claim 36, Faxvog discloses the grid protection apparatus of Claim 35 wherein the current comprises a current between an AC neutral line of the power distribution grid and a ground voltage (206 senses current between AC neutral line 10 of transformer 12 and ground 14, Figures 2-3, Paragraphs 41-42, 51).
Regarding Claim 37, Faxvog discloses the grid protection apparatus of Claim 31 wherein the low frequency signals comprise frequencies less than 0.5Hz, for example less than 0.1Hz (Faxvog’s disclosed quasi-DC current (see Paragraphs 13, 33, 41-42), having very low/near zero frequencies, meeting the recited limitations).
Regarding Claim 40, Faxvog discloses the grid protection apparatus of Claim 31 wherein the protection switch comprises a relay switch (206 shown as a relay switch, Figures 2-3).
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.
Claims 29, 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faxvog et al. (US 2013/0308229, IDS Document).
Regarding Claim 29, Faxvog does not specifically disclose the method of Claim 21, wherein the monitoring detects whether the electromagnetic radiation exceeds the second threshold in a response time of less than 1 microsecond, for example less than 100 nanoseconds, for example less than 50 nanoseconds. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select in the method of Faxvog, fast and sensitive detection elements to obtain the desired response time for the detection.
Claim 39 recites the same limitations as that of Claim 29, except that Claim 31 is recited. Therefore, Claim 39 is rejected similarly to Claim 29.
Claims 28, 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faxvog et al. (US 2013/0308229, IDS Document) in view of Trost et al. (US 2021/0190973, IDS Document).
Regarding Claim 28, Faxvog does not specifically disclose the method of Claim 21, wherein monitoring electromagnetic radiation comprises detecting a change in conduction state of a PIN diode.
Trost discloses a method of monitoring electromagnetic radiation that comprises detecting a change in conduction state of a PIN diode (Dosimeter comprising event counting sensor 307 and charge sensor 309, Figure 3, charge sensor 309 including PIN diode D2, Paragraphs 40-41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide in the method of Faxvog, a PIN diode as taught by Trost, having the advantage of availability, small size, low cost, low noise sensing element.
Claim 38 recites the same limitations as that of Claim 28, except that Claim 31 is recited. Therefore, Claim 38 is rejected similarly to Claim 28.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ali (US 2016/0181786) discloses in Paragraph 4 that GICs (geomagnetically induced current) are often called quasi-DC currents because of their generally low frequency (0.1 mHz to 0.1 Hz), and thus the network response is essential resistive. Cox (US 9,562,938) discloses a system and method in Figures 1-12, to protect critical infrastructure assets from an electromagnetic pulse event (see Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCY M THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-6002. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:30 am - 5:30 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, Crystal L Hammond can be reached at (571)270-1682. 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.
/LUCY M THOMAS/Examiner, Art Unit 2838, 9/10/2026
/CRYSTAL L HAMMOND/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights