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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application on 10/05/2026 after final rejection of 05/07/2026. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on 10/05/2026 has been entered. The Office action on currently pending claims 1-10, 12-17, and 19-23 follows.
Double Patenting
As requested by Applicant (see Applicant’s Remarks of 03/06/2026), the double patenting rejection made in the non-final Office action of 12/01/2025 will be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is discovered.
See next page→
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 1-2, 4-10, 13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beswick (GB 1167583) (of record, cited in the IDS- see IDS of 02/24/2022 in 17/679,961) in view of Miller (US 4084145) in further view Ross (US 4417224) and in further view of Yan (CN 108364838).
Regarding claim 1, Beswick discloses (Fig.1):
A fuse comprising: a housing (1) having opposing first and second ends (See Figure Below: the ends of 1 where 2 are located will define "opposing first and second ends"); a first fusible element (5) positioned inside (See Fig.1) the housing (1); and first and second ferrules (2), wherein the first and second ferrules (2) are electrically connected to the first fusible element (5) (Fig.1, Pg.1 Lns.42-44, Pg.1 Lns.86-90, and Pg. 2 Lns.1-2: 2 and 5 have to be electrically connected so that current can flow from one 2 to the opposite 2), each of the first and second ferrules (2) comprising: a side wall (See Figure Below); and an end wall (See Figure Below) extending from the side wall and closing the first or second end of the housing (1) (End Wall Closing First or Second End of the Housing: See Fig.1), wherein the end wall includes a boss (3) extending toward an interior (See Figure Below) of the housing (1), wherein the side wall and the end wall define an interior receptacle (Pg.1 Lns.59-61: each 2 has an interior cavity/receptacle that is sized and press-fitted over 1) that is sized to receive the first or second end of the housing (1).
PNG
media_image1.png
725
921
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Beswick does not disclose:
A first fusible element and a second fusible element positioned inside the housing; and first and second ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy, wherein the first and second ferrules are electrically connected to the first and second fusible elements; wherein a spacing between the first and second fusible elements varies along a longitudinal axis of the housing.
Miller, however, teaches (Fig.8):
A first fusible element (any one of the 12') and a second fusible element (any other one of the 12' that is not the "first fusible element") positioned inside (See Fig.8) the housing (42); wherein the first and second ferrules (44) are electrically connected (Fig.8: 44 has to be electrically connected to 12' in order to allow current to flow from one 44 to the other 44) to the first and second fusible elements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to modify the device of Beswick such that it has a first and second fusible element that is positioned inside the housing and are electrically connected to the first and second ferrules (i.e., duplicate the first fusible element of Beswick so that there are two fusible element and connect them in parallel as taught by Miller), as claimed, in order to optimize the rated current due to the increased number of fusible elements as taught by Miller (Col.1 Lns.33-36: teaches that multiple fuses in parallel increases the rated current).
However, the above modification would still fail to teach:
First and second ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy; wherein a spacing between the first and second fusible elements varies along a longitudinal axis of the housing.
Ross however teaches (Fig.1):
Wherein a spacing between the first (20a) and second (20b) fusible elements varies along a longitudinal axis (See Figure Below) of the housing (12) (Spacing between First and Second Fusible Elements Varying Along Longitudinal Axis: See Figure Below).
PNG
media_image2.png
528
880
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Ross to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the spacing between the first and second fusible elements varies along a longitudinal axis of the housing, as claimed, in order to better ensure that fusing of the first and second fusible elements are localized and thus improve the overall breaking capabilities (i.e., the varied spacing will better ensure that fusing of the first fusible element does not accidentally break the second fusible element when the first fusible element fuses, and vice-versa).
However, the above combination still fails to teach:
First and second ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy.
Yan, however, teaches (Fig.1):
First and second ferrules (1) fabricated from aluminum alloy (See Pg.4 Par.5 of Translation: “the structure of the conductive end cap 1 can is lug boss structure, a cap structure, and the material thereof may be aluminium, aluminium alloy of the metal material, such as copper, stainless steel and so on”) (emphasis added).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Yan to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the first and second ferrules are made from aluminum alloy, as claimed, in order to achieve the efficient means of connecting the fuse device since it is known in the art that aluminum and its alloys are an excellent electrical conductor while also providing a more rigid and durable ferrule design (i.e., utilizing an aluminum alloy can provide a more rigid structure and thus providing a longer useable life for the ferrules).
Regarding claim 2, Beswick further discloses:
Wherein the first and second ferrules (2) are fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the housing (1) as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of: i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events (See Pg.1 Lns.15-30, 59-69 and Pg.2 Lns.1-5: the end caps/ferrules are firmly secured and made to stay on 1 such that it can withstand high pressure and will also stay in place after repeated temperature and pressure changes caused by current flowing through the fusible element 5 and to stay in place as a result of arcing due to the firm connection created between 5 and 1).
However, Beswick does not disclose:
The first and second aluminum alloy ferrules.
However, as mapped in claim 1 above, Yan teaches:
The first and second aluminum alloy ferrules (1) (See Pg.4 Par.5 of Translation: “the structure of the conductive end cap 1 can is lug boss structure, a cap structure, and the material thereof may be aluminium, aluminium alloy of the metal material, such as copper, stainless steel and so on”) (emphasis added).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Yan to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that when the first and second ferrules are fabricated from aluminum alloy, as modified in claim 1 above, the first and second aluminum alloy ferrules are fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of: i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events, as claimed, in order to achieve the efficient connection means and the improved ferrule structure as outlined in claim 1 above.
Examiner Note: the limitations “wherein the first and second aluminum alloy ferrules are fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of: i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events” are functional limitations and are rendered obvious should the prior art(s) teach all of the structural limitations of the claim. "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
In the instant case, the combination of Beswick, Miller, Ross, and Yan teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim, and will thus be capable of performing the function of withstanding “pressure generated inside the housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of: i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events” as claimed, since Applicant has not introduced any other structural limitation/limitations that would be necessary to achieve the aforementioned limitations.
Regarding claim 4, Beswick further discloses:
Wherein the first fusible element (5) comprises a first fusible wire (Fig.1: 5 is a fusible wire, and thus a "first fusible wire") having a first end (See Figure of Claim 1) and a second end (See Figure of Claim 1), wherein the first end of the first fusible wire (5) is configured to be in contact with the first ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1), and wherein the second end of the first fusible wire (5) is configured to be in contact with the second ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1).
Regarding claim 5, Miller further teaches:
Wherein the second fusible element (any other one of the 12' that is not the "first fusible element") comprises a second fusible wire (each 12' is a fusible wire, and thus the second fusible element will be a "second fusible wire") having a first end (end of the second fusible wire in contact with the left 44) and a second end (end of the second fusible wire in contact with the right 44), wherein the first end of the second fusible wire is configured to be in contact with the first ferrule (left 44), and wherein the second end of the second fusible wire is configured to be in contact with the second ferrule (right 44) (Fig.8: the first and second ends of the second fusible element, and thus also the second fusible wire, are respectively in contact with the first and second ferrules).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that when the second fusible element is incorporated into the device of Beswick, as modified in claim 1 above, the second fusible element comprises a second fusible wire having a first end and second end that are respectively configured to be in contact with the first ferrule and second ferrule, as claimed, in order to achieve the optimized rated current fuse as outlined in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 6, Beswick further discloses:
Wherein, for the end wall (See Figure of Claim 1) of the first ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1), the respective boss (3- the one affiliated with the first ferrule) defines a first interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1), and for the end wall (See Figure of Claim 1) of the second ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1), the respective boss (3) defines a second interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1), the fuse further comprising a first eyelet (4- See Figure of Claim 1) extending adjacent (See Figure of Claim 1: the first eyelet extends adjacent to the "first interior surface") to the first interior surface, the first eyelet including a first aperture (6- See Figure of Claim 1), and a second eyelet (4- See Figure of Claim 1, the one affiliated with the second ferrule) extending adjacent (See Figure of Claim 1: the second eyelet extends adjacent to the "second interior surface") to the second interior surface, the second eyelet including a second aperture (6- See Figure of Claim 1), and wherein the first (See Figure of Claim 1) and second (See Figure of Claim 1) ends of the first fusible wire (5) is configured to extend through the respective first and second apertures (6) (See Fig.1: each end of 5 extends through a corresponding 6).
However, Beswick does not disclose:
Wherein the first and second ends of each of the first and the second fusible wires are configured to extend through the respective first and second apertures.
However, as mapped above, Miller teaches:
See next page→
Wherein the first (any one of the 12') and second (any other one of the 12' that is not the "first fusible element") fusible element comprises a first fusible wire and second fusible wire (each 12' is a fusible wire, and thus the first and second fusible element will be a “first fusible wire” and "second fusible wire"), each having a first end (end in contact with the left 44) and a second end (end in contact with the right 44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that when the first and second fusible elements/wires are incorporated into the device, as modified above, the first and second ends of each of the first and the second fusible wires are configured to extend through the respective first and second apertures, as claimed, in order to achieve the optimized rated current as outlined in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 7, Beswick further discloses:
A first eyelet (4- See Figure of Claim 1) and a second eyelet (4- See Figure of Claim 1, the one affiliated with the second ferrule).
However, Beswick does not disclose:
Wherein the spacing between the first and second fusible elements is greater at a location corresponding to a center of the housing than at a location prior to the first and second fusible elements extending through a first eyelet or at another location prior to extending through a second eyelet.
Ross, however, further teaches:
Wherein the spacing (See Figure of Claim 1) between the first (20a) and second (20b) fusible elements is greater at a location corresponding to a center (Fig.1: area that 30a and 30b occupies will define a center area of 12) of the housing (12) (Fig.1: the spacing between 20a and 20b is greatest at the center of 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Ross to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the spacing between the first and second fusible elements is greater at a location corresponding to a center of the housing than at a location prior to the first and second fusible elements extending through the first eyelet or at another location prior to extending through the second eyelet, as claimed, in order to achieve the improved breaking capabilities as outlined in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, Beswick further discloses:
Wherein the first eyelet (4- See Figure of Claim 1) includes a mating surface (4a- the one corresponding to the "first eyelet"), such that the first end (See Figure of Claim 1) of the first fusible wire (5) is secured between the mating surface and the first interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1) (See Figure of Claim 1: the first end of the fusible wire is between the "first interior surface" and the 4a corresponding to the first eyelet 4).
However, Beswick fails to disclose:
The first ends of the first and second fusible wires are secured between the mating surface and the first interior surface.
However, as outlined in claim 1 above, Miller teaches:
The first (any one of the 12) and second (any other one of the 12' that is not the "first fusible element") fusible wires.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that when the first and second fusible wires are incorporated, as modified in claim 1 above, the first ends of the first and second fusible wires are secured between the mating surface and the first interior surface, as claimed, in order to achieve the optimized rated current fuse as outlined in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, Beswick further discloses:
Wherein the second eyelet (4- See Figure of Claim 1, the one affiliated with the Second Ferrule) includes a mating surface (4a- the one affiliated with the Second Ferrule), such that the second end (See Figure of Claim 1) of the first fusible wire (5) is secured between the mating surface and the second interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1) (See Figure of Claim 1: the second end of the fusible wire is between the "second interior surface" and the 4a corresponding to the second eyelet 4).
However, Beswick fails to disclose:
The second ends of the first and second fusible wires are secured between the mating surface and the second interior surface.
However, as outlined in claim 1 above, Miller teaches:
The first (any one of the 12) and second (any other one of the 12' that is not the "first fusible element") fusible wires.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that when the first and second fusible wires are incorporated, as modified in claim 1 above, the second ends of the first and second fusible wires are secured between the mating surface and the second interior surface, as claimed, in order to achieve the optimized rated current fuse as outlined in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 10, Beswick further discloses:
Wherein at least one of the first (5) or second fusible wires contacts the boss (3) of the first ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1) at a point directly opposite the first aperture (See Figure of Claim 1) (See Figure of Claim 1: 5 contacts 3 of the first ferrule at a point that is opposite to the side of the first aperture facing the filler in the housing 1).
Regarding claim 13, Beswick further discloses:
A filler (Fig.1: the filler material surrounding 5) disposed within the housing (1) between the first eyelet (4- See Figure of Claim 1) and the second eyelet (4- See Figure of Claim 1, the one affiliated with the second ferrule).
Regarding claim 15, Beswick further discloses:
Wherein at least one of the first (5) or second fusible wires extends diagonally (Fig.1: 5 substantially extends diagonally within the housing) within the housing (1), such that the first end (See Figure of Claim 1) of the at least one of the first (5) or second fusible wires contacts either a top side or a bottom side (bottom of 1) of the housing (1) (See Figure of Claim 1: the first end of 5 contacts the bottom/bottom side of 1), while the second end (See Figure of Claim 1) of the at least one of the first (5) or second fusible wires contacts an opposite side, either the bottom or the top side (upper/top side of 1), of the housing (1) (See Figure of Claim 1: the second end of 5 contact the upper/top side of 1).
Regarding claim 16, Miller further teaches:
A third fusible element (the remaining 12' that is neither the "first fusible element" nor the "second fusible element") positioned inside the housing (42), the third fusible element connected to (See Fig.8) the first and the second ferrules (44).
See next page→
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that it comprises a third fusible element that is positioned inside the housing and connected to the first and second ferrules, as claimed, in order to further optimize the rated current of the fuse, as taught by Miller (Col.1 Lns.33-36: teaches that multiple fuses in parallel increases the rated current), due to the increased number of fusible elements in the device.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beswick (GB 1167583) (of record, cited in the IDS- see IDS of 02/24/2022 in 17/679,961), Miller (US 4084145), Ross (US 4417224), and Yan (CN 108364838) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of HIS RENEWABLES GMBH (EP 3261109) (referred to as "His") and Nye (US 3692924)1.
Regarding claim 3, modified Beswick does not teach:
Wherein the aluminum alloy of the first and second ferrules is plated with a first metal plating fabricated from a first metal and a second metal plating fabricated from a second metal different from the first metal, the second metal plating overlaying the first metal plating.
His, however, teaches (Fig.1):
See next page→
Wherein the aluminum ([0043]) of the first and second ferrules ([0041] and [0043]: the contact caps will define the “first and second ferrules”) is plated with a first metal plating ([0043]: “nickel-plated brass and/or copper and/or aluminum”- outlines an embodiment in which the ferrules are made of an aluminum material that is plated with copper and nickel, and thus the copper layer will define “the first metal plating”, which is different from the “aluminum”) fabricated from a first metal ([0043]: as discussed above, the copper will define the “first metal”) and a second metal plating ([0043]: the nickel plate/layer in the aluminum-copper-nickel composition will define the “second metal plating”) fabricated from a second metal ([0043]: as discussed above, the nickel will define the second metal that is different from the copper) different from the first metal.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of His to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the aluminum alloy of the first and second ferrules is plated with a first metal plating fabricated from a first metal and a second metal plating fabricated from a second metal different from the first metal, as claimed, in order to further enhance the overall durability of the ferrules and thus further improving the overall lifespan of the ferrules due to the ferrules having a multilayered structure.
However, the above combination would still fail to teach:
The second metal plating overlaying the first metal plating.
Nye however teaches (Fig.1):
An aluminum core material (1) that is plated with a first metal plating (3) and a second metal plating (5); the second metal plating (5) overlaying (See Fig.1) the first metal plating (3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Nye to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the second metal plating overlays the first metal plating, as claimed, in order to further optimize the conduction capabilities of the ferrules since the arrangement will provided enhanced termination properties and improved corrosion resistance as taught by Nye (Col.4 Lns.30-38).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beswick (GB 1167583) (of record, cited in the IDS- see IDS of 02/24/2022 in 17/679,961), Miller (US 4084145), Ross (US 4417224), and Yan (CN 108364838) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Gaia (US 4703300) (of record, cited in the IDS- see IDS of 02/24/2022 in 17/679,961).
Regarding claim 12, modified Beswick does not teach:
A fusible paste positioned between the first eyelet and the end wall of the first ferrule, and between the second eyelet and the end wall of the second ferrule, the fusible paste configured to weld the first and second fusible wires to the respective first and second eyelets, as well as to the end walls of the first and second ferrules.
Gaia however teaches (Fig.4):
A fusible paste (74) positioned between (See Fig.4) the first eyelet (78) and the end wall (outer sidewall surface of 50) of the first ferrule (50), the fusible paste (74) configured to weld the first wire (70) to the first eyelet (78) and the end wall of the first ferrule (50) (Wire being welded to Eyelet and End Wall: Col.5 Lns.19-22).
See next page→
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Gaia to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that it further includes a fusible paste that is positioned between the first eyelet and the end wall of the first ferrule, and between the second eyelet and the end wall of the second ferrule, and such that the fusible paste is configured to weld the first and second fusible wires to the respective first and second eyelets, as well as to the end wall of the first and second ferrules, as claimed, in order to further enhance the mechanical connection between the fusible element/wire and the ferrule due to the fusible paste providing an additional retention holding means.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beswick (GB 1167583) (of record, cited in the IDS- see IDS of 02/24/2022 in 17/679,961), Miller (US 4084145), Ross (US 4417224), and Yan (CN 108364838) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Douglass (US 20160343531).
Regarding claim 14, modified Beswick does not teach:
Wherein the filler comprises a mixture of a silica sand with at least one of a gypsum or zeolites.
Douglass however teaches (Fig.2):
Wherein the filler (68) comprises a mixture of a silica sand with at least one of a gypsum or zeolites (Filler comprising Mixture of Silica Sand and Zeolites: [0081]- "the zeolite may be applied in 100% concentrations or in reduced concentration when combined with another material, including but not necessarily limited to quartz silica sand", emphasis added).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Douglass to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the filler comprises a mixture of a silica sand with zeolites, as claimed, in order to further optimize the arc dissipating capabilities due to the mixture providing a desired dual effects of arc quenching as suggested by Douglass ([0081]).
Claims 17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beswick (GB 1167583) (of record, cited in the IDS- see IDS of 02/24/2022 in 17/679,961) in view of Miller (US 4084145) in further view Ross (US 4417224) in further view of ASANO2 and in further view of HIS RENEWABLES GMBH (EP 3261109) (referred to as "His").
Regarding claim 17, Beswick discloses (Fig.1):
A miniature cartridge fuse comprising: a cylindrical housing (1) having opposing first and second ends (See Figure of Claim 1: the ends of 1 where 2 are located will define "opposing first and second ends"); a first fusible element (5) positioned inside (See Fig.1) the cylindrical housing (1); and first and second deep-drawn ferrules (2), the first and second deep-drawn ferrules (2) fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the cylindrical housing (1) as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events (See Pg.1 Lns.15-30, 59-69 and Pg.2 Lns.1-5: the end caps/ferrules are firmly secured and made to stay on 1 such that it can withstand high pressure and will also stay in place after repeated temperature and pressure changes caused by current flowing through the fusible element 5 and to stay in place as a result of arcing due to the firm connection created between 5 and 1), wherein the first and second deep-drawn ferrules (2) are respectively attached (See Fig.1) to the first and second ends of the cylindrical housing (1) and electrically connected to the respective first fusible element (5), each of the first and second deep-drawn ferrules (2) comprising: a side wall (See Figure of Claim 1) surrounding the first or second end of the cylindrical housing (1) (Side Wall Surrounding First or Second End of Cylindrical Housing: See Figure of Claim 1); and an end wall (See Figure of Claim 1) extending from (See Figure of Claim 1) the side wall and closing (See Figure of Claim 1) the first or second end of the cylindrical housing (1), wherein the end wall includes a boss (3) extending toward an interior (See Figure of Claim 1) of the cylindrical housing (1) and defining an interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1) of the end wall, and wherein the side wall and the end wall define an interior receptacle (Pg.1 Lns.59-61: each 2 has an interior cavity/receptacle that is sized and press-fitted over 1) that is sized to receive the first or second end of the cylindrical housing (1).
However, Beswick does not disclose:
A first and a second fusible element positioned inside the cylindrical housing; and first and second deep-drawn ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy, the aluminum alloy first and second deep-drawn ferrules fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the cylindrical housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events, wherein the first and second deep-drawn ferrules are respectively attached to the first and second ends of the cylindrical housing and electrically connected to the respective first and second fusible elements, the aluminum alloy being plated with nickel; wherein a spacing between the first and second fusible elements varies along a longitudinal axis of the cylindrical housing; and wherein the aluminum alloy is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 138 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater.
Miller, however, teaches (Fig.8):
A first (any one of the 12') and a second (any other one of the 12' that is not the "first fusible element") fusible element positioned inside (See Fig.8) the cylindrical housing (42); wherein the first and second deep-drawn ferrules (44) are respectively attached to the first and second ends (Fig.8 the opposite ends of 42 will define the "first and second ends" of 42) of the cylindrical housing (42) and electrically connected to the respective first and second fusible elements (Fig.8: 44 has to be electrically connected to 12' in order to allow current to flow from one 44 to the other 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to modify the device of Beswick such that it has a first and second fusible element that is positioned inside the cylindrical housing and electrically connected to the first and second deep-drawn ferrules (i.e., duplicate the first fusible element of Beswick so that there are two fusible element and connect them in parallel as taught by Miller), as claimed, in order to optimize the rated current due to the increased number of fusible elements as taught by Miller (Col.1 Lns.33-36: teaches that multiple fuses in parallel increases the rated current).
However, the above combination fails to teach:
First and second deep-drawn ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy, the aluminum alloy first and second deep-drawn ferrules fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the cylindrical housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events, the aluminum alloy being plated with nickel; wherein a spacing between the first and second fusible elements varies along a longitudinal axis of the cylindrical housing; and wherein the aluminum alloy is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 138 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater.
Ross however teaches (Fig.1):
Wherein a spacing between the first (20a) and second (20b) fusible elements varies along a longitudinal axis (See Figure of Claim 1) of the housing (12) (Spacing between First and Second Fusible Elements Varying Along Longitudinal Axis: See Figure of Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Ross to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the spacing between the first and second fusible elements varies along a longitudinal axis of the housing, as claimed, in order to better ensure that fusing of the first and second fusible elements are localized and thus improve the overall breaking capabilities (i.e., the varied spacing will better ensure that fusing of the first fusible element does not accidentally break the second fusible element when the first fusible element fuses, and vice-versa).
However, the above combination still fails to teach:
First and second deep-drawn ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy, the aluminum alloy first and second deep-drawn ferrules fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the cylindrical housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events, the aluminum alloy being plated with nickel; and wherein the aluminum alloy is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 138 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater.
ASANO, however, teaches:
An aluminum alloy ferrule (“*Material: A5052”, A5052 is the same thing as AL 5052, which is an aluminum alloy); and wherein the aluminum alloy is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 138 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater (“*Material: A5052”, A5052 is the same thing as AL 5052, and will thus have the claimed tensile strength and yield strength as evidenced in paragraph [0047] of Applicant’s specification and as shown in the table provided on pages 7-8 of Applicant’s specification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of ASANO to further modify the device modified Beswick such that the first and second deep-drawn ferrules are fabricated from an aluminum alloy that is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 138 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater so that the aluminum alloy first and second deep-drawn ferrules fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the cylindrical housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events, as claimed, in order to further optimize the performance of the first and second deep-drawn ferrules (i.e., increase the robustness of the ferrules so that they can better withstand stresses acting on them, like temperature and pushing/pulling forces, and thus improve the overall lifespan of the ferrules).
However, the above combination would still fail to teach:
The aluminum alloy being plated with nickel.
His however teaches (Figs.1-3):
See next page→
The aluminum being plated with nickel ([0041] and [0043]: contemplates an embodiment in which the contact plates, which will define the ferrules, are made of nickel-plated aluminum).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of His to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the aluminum alloy is plated with nickel, as claimed, in order to further optimize the rigidity of the ferrules and thus improve the overall useable life of the ferrules (i.e., plating the aluminum alloy with nickel will provide additional rigidity to the ferrules, which will improve the overall useable life of the ferrules).
Examiner Note: the limitations “the aluminum alloy first and second deep-drawn ferrules fabricated to withstand pressure generated inside the cylindrical housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events” are functional limitations and are rendered obvious should the prior art(s) teach all of the structural limitations of the claim. "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
In the instant case, the combination of Beswick, Miller, Ross, ASANO, and His teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim, and will thus be capable of performing the function of withstanding “pressure generated inside the cylindrical housing as a result of arcing and to stay in place after temperature or pressure changes caused by at least one of i) current or ii) arcing during short circuit events” as claimed, since Applicant has not introduced any other structural limitation/limitations that would be necessary to achieve the aforementioned limitations.
Regarding claim 19, Beswick further discloses:
A first eyelet (4: See Figure of Claim 1- the one affiliated with the first ferrule) extending adjacent (See Figure of Claim 1: the first eyelet extends adjacent to the "first interior surface") to the interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1: the one affiliated with the “first ferrule”) of the end wall (See Figure of Claim 1: the “end wall” affiliated with the “first ferrule”) of the first ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1), the first eyelet having a first aperture (6- See Figure of Claim 1), and a second eyelet (4: See Figure of Claim 1- the one affiliated with the second ferrule) extending adjacent (See Figure of Claim 1: the second eyelet extends adjacent to the "second interior surface") to the interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1: the one affiliated with the second ferrule) of the end wall (See Figure of Claim 1: the end wall affiliated with the second ferrule) of the second ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1), the second eyelet having a second aperture (6- See Figure of Claim 1), and wherein each of the first (See Figure of Claim1) and second (See Figure of Claim 1) ends of the first fusible element (5) is configured to extend through (See Fig.1) the respective first and second apertures (6).
However, Beswick does not disclose:
Wherein each of the first and second ends of each of the first and the second fusible elements is configured to extend through the respective first and second apertures.
However, as mapped in claim 17 above, Miller teaches:
The first (any one of the 12') and second (any other one of the 12' that is not the "first fusible element") fusible elements each having a first end (end of each 12’ connected to the left 44 will define the “first end”) and a second end (end of each 12’ connected to the right 44 will define the “second end”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that when the device is modified to incorporate the first and second fusible wires, as modified in claim 17 above, each of the first and second ends of each of the first and the second fusible elements is configured to extend through the respective first and second apertures, as claimed, in order to achieve the optimized rated current as outlined in claim 17 above.
Regarding claim 20, Beswick further discloses:
Wherein the first eyelet (4: See Figure of Claim 1- the one affiliated with the first ferrule) includes a first mating surface (4a- the one corresponding to the "first eyelet"), such that the first end (See Figure of Claim 1) of the first fusible element (5) is secured between the first mating surface (4a- the one corresponding to the “first eyelet”) and the first interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1) of the boss (3: See Figure of Claim 1- the one affiliated with the first ferrule) of the first ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1) (See Figure of Claim 1: the first end of the fusible wire is between the "first interior surface" and the 4a corresponding to the first eyelet 4), and wherein the second eyelet (4: See Figure of Claim 1- the one affiliated with the second ferrule) includes a second mating surface (4a- the one corresponding to the “second eyelet”), such that the second end (See Figure of Claim 1) of the first fusible element (5) is secured between the second mating surface and the interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1: the one affiliated with the second ferrule) of the boss (3: See Figure of Claim 1: the one affiliated with the second ferrule) of the second ferrule (See Figure of Claim 1: the second end of the fusible wire is between the "second interior surface" and the 4a corresponding to the second eyelet 4).
However, Beswick does not disclose:
The first ends of the first and second fusible elements are secured between the first mating surface and the interior surface of the boss of the first ferrule, and the second ends of the first and second fusible elements are secured between the second mating surface and the interior surface of the boss of the second ferrule.
However, as mapped in claim 17 above, Miller teaches:
The first (any one of the 12') and second (any other one of the 12' that is not the "first fusible element") fusible elements each having a first end (end of each 12’ connected to the left 44 will define the “first end”) and a second end (end of each 12’ connected to the right 44 will define the “second end”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that when the device of Beswick is modified to have the first and second fusible elements/wires, as modified in claim 17 above, the first ends of the first and second fusible elements are secured between the first mating surface and the interior surface of the boss of the first ferrule, and such that the second ends of the first and second fusible elements are secured between the second mating surface and the interior surface of the boss of the second ferrule, as claimed, in order to achieve the optimized rated current as outlined in claim 17 above.
See next page→
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beswick (GB 1167583) (of record, cited in the IDS- see IDS of 02/24/2022 in 17/679,961), Miller (US 4084145), Ross (US 4417224), and Yan (CN 108364838) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of ASANO3.
Regarding claims 21-22, modified Beswick does not teach:
(Claim 21): Wherein the aluminum alloy is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 138 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater.
(Claim 22): wherein the aluminum alloy is one of AL 1100, AL 5052, AL 5005, and AL 5154.
ASANO, however, teaches:
An aluminum alloy ferrule that is made out of AL 5052 (“*Material: A5052”, A5052 is the same thing as AL 5052, and will thus have the claimed tensile strength and yield strength as claimed in claim 21 as evidenced in paragraph [0047] of Applicant’s specification, and as shown in the table provided on pages 7-8 of Applicant’s specification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of ASANO to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the aluminum alloy is made of AL 5052, as claimed in claim 22, so that the aluminum alloy is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 138 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater, as claimed in claim 21, in order to further optimize the performance of the first and second ferrules (i.e., increase the robustness of the ferrules so that they can better withstand stresses acting on them, like temperature and pushing/pulling forces, and thus improve the overall lifespan of the ferrules).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beswick (GB 1167583) (of record, cited in the IDS- see IDS of 02/24/2022 in 17/679,961) in view of Miller (US 4084145) and in further view of ASANO4.
Regarding claim 23, Beswick discloses (Fig.1):
A miniature cartridge fuse comprising: a cylindrical housing (1) comprising opposing first and second ends (See Figure of Claim 1: the ends of 1where 2are located will define “opposing first and second ends”); a first fusible element (5) positioned inside the cylindrical housing (1); and first and second ferrules (2), wherein the first and second ferrules (2) are respectively secured to the first and second ends of the cylindrical housing (1) and electrically connected to the respective first fusible element (5) (Fig.1, See Figure of Claim 1, Pg.1 Lns.42-44, PG.1 Lns.86-90, and Pg.2 Lns.1-2: each 2 is secured to a respective end of the first and second ends of 1 and electrically connected to 5 so that current can flow from one 2 to the other 2), and each of the first and second ferrules (2) comprising: a side wall (See Figure of Claim 1) surrounding the first or second end of the cylindrical housing (1) (Side Wall Surrounding First or Second End of the Cylindrical Housing: See Figure of Claim 1); and an end wall (See Figure of Claim 1) extending from the side wall and closing the first or second end of the cylindrical housing (1) (End Wall Extending from the Side Wall and Closing the First or Second End of the Cylindrical Housing: See Figure of Claim 1), wherein the end wall includes a boss (3) extending toward an interior (See Figure of Claim 1) of the cylindrical housing (1) and defining an interior surface (See Figure of Claim 1) of the end wall, and wherein the side wall and the end wall define an interior receptacle (Pg.1 Lns.59-61: each 2 has an interior cavity/receptacle that is sized and press-fitted over 1) that is sized to receive the first or second end of the cylindrical housing (1).
However, Beswick does not disclose:
First and second fusible elements positioned inside the cylindrical housing; and first and second ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy, wherein the first and second ferrules are respectively secured to the first and second ends of the cylindrical housing and electrically connected to the respective first and second fusible elements; and wherein the aluminum alloy is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 139 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater.
Miller, however, teaches (Fig.8):
First (any one of the 12’) and second (any other one of the 12’ that is not the “first fusible element”) fusible elements positioned inside (See Fig.8) the cylindrical housing (42); wherein the first and second ferrules (44) are respectively secured to the first and second ends (Fig.8: opposite ends of 42 will define the “first and second ends” of 42) of the cylindrical housing (42) and electrically connected to the respective first and second fusible elements (Fig.8: 44 has to be electrically connected to 12’ in order to allow current to flow from one 44 to the other 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of Miller to modify the device of Beswick such that it has first and second fusible elements positioned inside the cylindrical housing and arranged such that the first and second ferrules are respectively secured to the first and second ends of the cylindrical housing and electrically connected to the respective first and second fusible element, as claimed, in order to further optimize the rated current due to the increased number of fusible elements as taught by Miller (Col.1 Lns.33-36: teaches that multiple fuses in parallel increases the rated current).
However, the above combination fails to teach:
First and second ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy; and wherein the aluminum alloy is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 139 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater.
ASANO, however, teaches:
An aluminum alloy ferrule that is made out of AL 5052 (“*Material: A5052”, A5052 is the same thing as AL 5052, and will thus have the claimed tensile strength and yield strength as evidenced in paragraph [0047] of Applicant’s specification, and as shown in the table provided on pages 7-8 of Applicant’s specification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the above teaching of ASANO to further modify the device of modified Beswick such that the first and second ferrules are fabricated from an aluminum alloy that is associated with one or more of a tensile strength of 139 megapascals (MPa) or greater and a yield strength of 117 MPa or greater, as claimed, in order to further optimize the performance of the first and second ferrules (i.e., increase the robustness of the ferrules so that they can better withstand stresses acting on them, like temperature and pushing/pulling forces, and thus improve the overall lifespan of the ferrules) while also providing an efficient means of conveying current from the first ferrule to the second ferrule due to the material of the ferrules (i.e., it is known in the art that aluminum and its alloys are an excellent conductor of electricity).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments of 10/05/2026 have been fully considered but have been found unpersuasive. Regarding the rejection made to independent claim 1, Applicant contests that the claim is in condition for allowance because none of the references reasonably teaches and/or suggests “first and second ferrules fabricated from aluminum alloy”. Specifically regarding the His reference, Applicant contests that the reference does not properly suggest the use of aluminum alloy as contested by the Office since “His states that the material of the connection caps 10 and 12 is electrically conductive and preferably comprises a silver or a silver alloy” and because “the applicant respectfully disagrees with the Office’s footnote on page 7 of the action that argues that the mention of a silver alloy in the immediately preceding sentence of paragraph 0043, which relates to a different component (the connection caps 10 and 12), provides ‘enough suggestion’ to disclose aluminum alloy. For example, the use of ‘alloy’ in the sentence related to the connections caps 10 and 12 contrasted with the total absence of the term ‘alloy’ in the next sentence about the contact caps suggests that His does not contemplate that contact caps are fabricated from an alloy” (see page 3 of Applicant’s remarks).
The Office has fully considered the above argument but respectfully disagrees and notes that Applicant’s arguments are substantially conclusory because Applicant’s argument is directed to semantics. While Applicant is correct that the contact caps are different from the connection caps (10 and 12) of His, the Office still contests that there is sufficient evidence and suggestion in His for one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts to reasonably infer that at least the brass, copper, and aluminum taught in paragraph [0043] of His includes the metals in their pure form and alloyed form. Since His explicitly contemplates utilizing silver or silver alloy for the connection caps (10 and 12), then there is no reason why one of ordinary skill in the pertinent arts would assume that the aluminum taught by His would exclude aluminum alloy just because the word “alloy” is not present. In other words, if His already contemplates a metal in its pure form or alloyed form, then there is no reason why that logic would not apply to the other metals listed, especially since there would be no change in function since all of the metals in both their pure form or alloyed form are known in the art to be excellent electrical conductors. For all of the reasons outlined above, Applicant’s argument is believed to be in error.
However, for the purposes of compact prosecution, the rejection has been updated to provide a reference that explicitly teaches the use of aluminum alloy for fuse ferrules in order to further evidence that the concept is an especially well-known concept in the art. Therefore, even if it is determined that His does not sufficiently suggest the use of aluminum alloy for fuse ferrules, the updated rejection with Yan will further evidence that the aforementioned concept is a well-known concept in the art and is not a limitation that is believed to further advance prosecution. For all of the reasons outlined above, Applicant’s argument is believed to be in error.
Applicant’s remaining arguments have been fully considered but notes that Applicant's remaining arguments are directed to the claims as amended and are thus moot since the rejection has been modified to meet the limitations of the amended claims (See rejection above).
See next page→
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN S SUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1243. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached at (571)272-3740. 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.
/STEPHEN S SUL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2841
1 Examiner’s Note: Although the Nye reference is not within the same field of endeavor as the Beswick, Miller, Ross, Yan, and/or the His reference, the Nye reference still qualifies as analogous art because the reference is drawn to an improved method of manufacturing a conductor for electrical current with enhanced conduction and corrosion resistance, which is reasonably pertinent to the problem and solution as Applicants’ invention. In other words, because the Nye reference is directed to a problem that is reasonably pertinent to Applicants’ invention, the Nye reference still qualifies as prior art and can be combined with the Beswick reference, Miller reference, Ross reference, Yan reference, and/or His reference. See MPEP 2141.01(a).
2 Examiner’s Note: the ASANO reference was cited and provided in the PTO-892 form of the parent case 16404093 on 07/23/2023. However, for convenience, this Office action will reattach the reference and re-recite the reference in the PTO-892.
3 Examiner’s Note: the ASANO reference was cited and provided in the PTO-892 form of the parent case 16404093 on 07/23/2023. However, for convenience, this Office action will reattach the reference and re-recite the reference in the PTO-892.
4 Examiner’s Note: the ASANO reference was cited and provided in the PTO-892 form of the parent case 16404093 on 07/23/2023. However, for convenience, this Office action will reattach the reference and re-recite the reference in the PTO-892.
