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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 03/02/2026, 08/05/2025 and 01/13/2025 have been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim(s) 1 and 15 recite a phrase “disable power distribution” in the last line. Examiner suggests amending the phrase to recite “disable the power distribution” to restore clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. The rationale for this finding is explained below:
Claim 20 recites a component "the device" before introduction. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the component in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 Langi, 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 §§ 706.02(1)(1) - 706.02(1)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-l.jsp.
Claims 1-20 of instant application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over reference claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent Number: US 12126160. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: genus type Claim(s) of the instant application are anticipated by species type reference claims as illustrated in the table below (See MPEP §804.03, § 2131.02: "A generic claim cannot be allowed to an applicant if the prior art discloses a species falling within the claimed genus." The species in that case will anticipate the genus. In re Slayter, 276 F.2d 408, 411, 125 USPQ 345, 347 (CCPA 1960); In re Gosteli, 872 F.2d 1008, 10 USPQ2d 1614 (Fed. Cir. 1989)):
Instant Application 18913320
Reference US Patent 12126160
1. A power distribution system comprising:
an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”); and
a controller connected to the AFCI, the controller operable to control the AFCI to disable power distribution, the controller including a processor and a memory, the controller configured to: transmit a digital electricity energy packet through the AFCI,
determine an amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet,
determine whether an arc fault condition is present based on the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet, and
control the AFCI to disable power distribution in response to the arc fault condition being present.
1. A power distribution system for providing power to a device, the system comprising:
an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”); and
a controller connected to the AFCI, the controller operable to control the AFCI to disable power to the device, the controller including a processor and a memory, the controller configured to: transmit a digital electricity energy packet through the AFCI to the device,
measure an amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet,
evaluate the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet,
determine whether an arc fault condition is present based on an evaluation of the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet, and
control the AFCI to disable power to the device when the arc fault condition is determined to be present.
2. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the digital electricity energy packet includes an energy payload and a data payload.
2. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the digital electricity energy packet includes an energy payload and a data payload.
3. The power distribution system of claim 2, wherein the amount of error is associated with one selected from the group consisting of: a loss of data in the data payload; an amount of attenuation of the data payload; and an amount of distortion associated with the data payload.
3. The power distribution system of claim 2, wherein the amount of error is associated with one selected from the group consisting of: a loss of data in the data payload; an amount of attenuation of the data payload; and an amount of distortion associated with the data payload.
4. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the power provided to a load is between 400W and 600W.
4. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the power provided to the device is between 400 W and 600 W.
5. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether one of a cross-line fault condition, an in-line fault condition, a ground fault condition, or a neutral fault condition is present.
5. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether one of a cross-line fault condition, an in-line fault condition, a ground fault condition, or a neutral fault condition is present.
6. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors from unreceived data in a series of energy packets.
6. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors from unreceived data in a series of energy packets.
7. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors from unreceived data over a predetermined period of time.
7. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors from unreceived data over a predetermined period of time.
8. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a comparison of the amount of error to at least one of a frame loss rate threshold value, an attenuation threshold value, or a signal-to-noise ratio threshold value.
8. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a comparison of the amount of error to at least one of a frame loss rate threshold value, an attenuation threshold value, a signal-to-noise ratio threshold value.
9. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the arc fault condition is caused by at least one of an improper connection, a loose connection, excessive cable length, or external noise.
9. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the arc fault condition is caused by at least one of an improper connection, a loose connection, excessive cable length, or external noise.
10. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a comparison to a predetermined data packet.
10. The power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on the evaluation of the amount of error based on a comparison to a predetermined data packet.
11. The power distribution system of claim 10, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a percentage correlation of the digital electricity energy packet and the predetermined data packet.
11. The power distribution system of claim 10, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a percentage correlation of the digital electricity energy packet and the predetermined data packet.
12. A power distribution system comprising:
a power transmitter configured to receive at least one of an alternative current (“AC”) input power and a direct current (“DC”) input power and generate digital electricity energy packets;
a power receiver electrically connected to the power transmitter for receiving the digital electricity energy packets;
an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”) connected between the power transmitter and the power receiver; and
a controller connected to the AFCI, the controller including a processor and a memory, the controller configured to:
transmit a digital electricity energy packet through the AFCI,
determine an amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet,
determine whether an arc fault condition is present based on the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet, and
control the AFCI to disable power distribution in response to the arc fault condition being present.
12. A power distribution system for providing power to a device, the system comprising:
a power transmitter configured to receive at least one of an alternative current (“AC”) input power and a direct current (“DC”) input power and generate digital electricity energy packets for distribution through the system;
a power receiver electrically connected to the power transmitter for receiving the digital electricity energy packets;
an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”) connected between the power transmitter and the power receiver; and
a controller connected to the AFCI, the controller operable to control the AFCI to disable power from the power transmitter to the power receiver, the controller including a processor and a memory, the controller configured to:
transmit a digital electricity energy packet through the AFCI to the power receiver,
measure an amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet,
evaluate the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet,
determine whether an arc fault condition is present based on an evaluation of the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet, and
control the AFCI to disable power to the power receiver when the arc fault condition is determined to be present.
13. The power distribution system of claim 12, wherein the digital electricity energy packet includes an energy payload and a data payload.
13. The power distribution system of claim 12, wherein the digital electricity energy packet includes an energy payload and a data payload.
14. The power distribution system of claim 13, wherein the amount of error is associated with one selected from the group consisting of: a loss of data in the data payload; an amount of attenuation of the data payload; and an amount of distortion associated with the data payload.
14. The power distribution system of claim 13, wherein the amount of error is associated with one selected from the group consisting of: a loss of data in the data payload; an amount of attenuation of the data payload; and an amount of distortion associated with the data payload.
15. A method for disabling power distribution in a digital electricity system, the digital electricity system including an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”), the method comprising:
transmitting a digital electricity energy packet through the AFCI;
determining an amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet;
determining whether an arc fault condition is present based on the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet; and
controlling the AFCI to disable power distribution in response to the arc fault condition being present.
15. A method for disabling power to a device in a digital electricity system, the digital electricity system including an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”), the method comprising:
transmitting a digital electricity energy packet through the AFCI to the device;
measuring an amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet;
evaluating the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet;
determining whether an arc fault condition is present based on an evaluation of the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet; and
controlling the AFCI to disable power to the device when the arc fault condition is determined to be present.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein the digital electricity energy packet includes an energy payload and a data payload.
16. The method of claim 15, wherein the digital electricity energy packet includes an energy payload and a data payload.
17. The method of claim 16, wherein the amount of error is associated with a loss of data in the data payload.
17. The method of claim 16, wherein the amount of error is associated with a loss of data in the data payload.
18. The method of claim 16, wherein the amount of error is associated with an amount of attenuation of the data payload.
18. The method of claim 16, wherein the amount of error is associated with an amount of attenuation of the data payload.
19. The method of claim 16, wherein the amount of error is associated with an amount of distortion associated with the data payload.
19. The method of claim 16, wherein the amount of error is associated with an amount of distortion associated with the data payload.
20. The method of claim 15, wherein the power provided to the device is between 400W and 600W.
20. The method of claim 15, wherein the power provided to the device is between 400 W and 600 W.
Terminal Disclaimer
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 seg. 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-L.jsp.
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 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8-10 and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elliott et al. (US 20200028349; hereinafter Elliott) in view of Sako et al. (US 20130234535).
Regarding claim 1, Elliott teaches in figure(s) 1-4 a power distribution system (electrical load 20 in figs. 1-2; para. 3 - detecting arc faults in a power distribution system) comprising:
an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”) (sspc 34); and
a controller (controller 46) connected to the AFCI, the controller operable to control the AFCI to disable power distribution (para. 41 - disconnecting the switchable element 40 or SSPC 34 can operate as a circuit breaker to extinguish he arc fault 42), the controller including a processor and a memory (processor 48 and memory 50), the controller configured to:
transmit electricity energy packet (sensed source voltage from sensor 52) through the AFCI (40/34),
determine an amount of error (difference of sensed voltage @ 52 and sensed load voltage @54; para. 33 - minimize the effect of the errors in each voltage difference determination – implies error determination) associated with the electricity energy packet,
determine whether an arc fault condition is present based on the amount of error associated with the electricity energy packet (para. 48 - Detection of a voltage drop exceeding a value, threshold, range, or the like can imply an arc fault 42), and
control the AFCI to disable power distribution in response to the arc fault condition being present (para. 41 - disconnecting the switchable element 40 or SSPC 34 can operate as a circuit breaker to extinguish the arc fault 42).
Elliott does not teach explicitly transmit a digital electricity energy packet.
However, Sako teaches in figure(s) 1-9 transmit a digital electricity energy packet (power packet in fig. 2; packet transmission in figs. 5-6; para. 38 - power packet and the length corresponding to power energy of the payload; para. 11 - detect the occurrence of an abnormality during power distribution since the detected interval of the identification information is a sort of digital amount).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Elliott by having transmit a digital electricity energy packet as taught by Sako in order to provide a format for transferring of electricity information as evidenced by "capable of instantaneously stably detecting the occurrence of an abnormality during power distribution, and a packet structure transmission control device capable of instantaneously stably detecting a transmission abnormality of a packet structure" (para. 6).
Regarding claim 12, Elliott teaches in figure(s) 1-4 a power distribution system comprising:
a power transmitter (power source; fig. 2) configured to receive at least one of an alternative current (“AC”) input power and a direct current (“DC”) input power and generate electricity energy packets (para. 10 - an electrical system for transmitting power from a power source to an electrical load);
a power receiver (electrical load 20) electrically connected to the power transmitter for receiving the electricity energy packets;
an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”) (sspc 34) connected between the power transmitter and the power receiver; and
a controller (controller 46) connected to the AFCI, the controller including a processor and a memory (processor 48 and memory 50), the controller configured to:
transmit electricity energy packet (sensed source voltage from sensor 52) through the AFCI (40/34),
determine an amount of error (difference of sensed voltage @ 52 and sensed load voltage @54; para. 33 - minimize the effect of the errors in each voltage difference determination – implies error determination) associated with the electricity energy packet,
determine whether an arc fault condition is present based on the amount of error associated with the electricity energy packet (para. 48 - Detection of a voltage drop exceeding a value, threshold, range, or the like can imply an arc fault 42), and
control the AFCI to disable power distribution in response to the arc fault condition being present (para. 41 - disconnecting the switchable element 40 or SSPC 34 can operate as a circuit breaker to extinguish the arc fault 42).
Elliott does not teach explicitly transmit a digital electricity energy packet.
However, Sako teaches in figure(s) 1-9 transmit a digital electricity energy packet (power packet in fig. 2; packet transmission in figs. 5-6; para. 38 - power packet and the length corresponding to power energy of the payload; para. 11 - detect the occurrence of an abnormality during power distribution since the detected interval of the identification information is a sort of digital amount).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Elliott by having transmit a digital electricity energy packet as taught by Sako in order to provide a format for transferring of electricity information as evidenced by "capable of instantaneously stably detecting the occurrence of an abnormality during power distribution, and a packet structure transmission control device capable of instantaneously stably detecting a transmission abnormality of a packet structure" (para. 6).
Regarding claim(s) 2 and 13, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the power distribution system of claim(s) 1 and 12, respectably.
Sako additionally teaches in figure(s) 1-9 wherein the digital electricity energy packet includes an energy payload and a data payload (Vpld, Vhdr in fig. 2; para. 10 - transmission of a packet structure that contains (A) a payload specified by a physical amount and (B) header information including a payload length of the payload … data that is based on the payload length).
Regarding claim(s) 3 and 14, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the power distribution system of claim(s) 2 and 13, respectably.
Sako additionally teaches in figure(s) 1-9 wherein the amount of error is associated with one selected from the group consisting of: a loss of data in the data payload; an amount of attenuation of the data payload; and an amount of distortion associated with the data payload (para. 11 - when data based on the payload length of the payload (payload amount of actually measured payload) does not match data related to the payload length (numerical data) in the header information, it is determined that an abnormality has occurred in transmission of the packet structure).
Regarding claim 5, Elliott teaches in figure(s) 1-4 the power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether one of a cross-line fault condition, an in-line fault condition, a ground fault condition, or a neutral fault condition is present (series/parallel arc faults in figs. 2,4).
Regarding claim 8, Elliott teaches in figure(s) 1-4 the power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a comparison of the amount of error to at least one of a frame loss rate threshold value (para. 28 - voltage drops causing power loss), an attenuation threshold value, a signal-to-noise ratio threshold value (para. 2-3 - arc fault threshold stored in memory and communicatively connected with the first and second power characteristic sensors …modifying an arc fault threshold stored in memory of the controller module based on the fault threshold calibration factor).
Regarding claim 9, Elliott teaches in figure(s) 1-4 the power distribution system of claim 1, wherein the arc fault condition is caused by at least one of an improper connection, a loose connection (para. 18 - an electrical arc might be caused by, or relate to a loose terminal connection, or a drawn series fault), excessive cable length, or external noise.
Regarding claim 10, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the power distribution system of claim 1,
Sako additionally teaches in figure(s) 1-9 wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a comparison to a predetermined data packet (para. 43 - a voltage value, which flows through a distribution line at predetermined time intervals, lower than a voltage value of partitioned power, a current value lower than a current value of partitioned power, or power energy smaller than partitioned power (power energy) may be used).
Regarding claim 15, Elliott teaches in figure(s) 1-4 a method for disabling power distribution in a digital electricity system (electrical load 20 in figs. 1-2; para. 3 - detecting arc faults in a power distribution system), the digital electricity system including an arc fault circuit interrupter (“AFCI”), the method comprising:
transmiting electricity energy packet (sensed source voltage from sensor 52) through the AFCI (40/34),
determining an amount of error (difference of sensed voltage @ 52 and sensed load voltage @54; para. 33 - minimize the effect of the errors in each voltage difference determination – implies error determination) associated with the electricity energy packet,
determining whether an arc fault condition is present based on the amount of error associated with the electricity energy packet (para. 48 - Detection of a voltage drop exceeding a value, threshold, range, or the like can imply an arc fault 42), and
controlling the AFCI to disable power distribution in response to the arc fault condition being present (para. 41 - disconnecting the switchable element 40 or SSPC 34 can operate as a circuit breaker to extinguish the arc fault 42).
Elliott does not teach explicitly transmitting a digital electricity energy packet.
However, Sako teaches in figure(s) 1-9 transmitting a digital electricity energy packet (power packet in fig. 2; packet transmission in figs. 5-6; para. 38 - power packet and the length corresponding to power energy of the payload; para. 11 - detect the occurrence of an abnormality during power distribution since the detected interval of the identification information is a sort of digital amount).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Elliott by having transmitting a digital electricity energy packet as taught by Sako in order to provide a format for transferring of electricity information as evidenced by "capable of instantaneously stably detecting the occurrence of an abnormality during power distribution, and a packet structure transmission control device capable of instantaneously stably detecting a transmission abnormality of a packet structure" (para. 6).
Regarding claim 16, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the method of claim 15,
Sako additionally teaches in figure(s) 1-9 wherein the digital electricity energy packet includes an energy payload and a data payload (Vpld, Vhdr in fig. 2; para. 10 - transmission of a packet structure that contains (A) a payload specified by a physical amount and (B) header information including a payload length of the payload … data that is based on the payload length).
Regarding claim 17, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the method of claim 16,
Elliott additionally teaches in figure(s) 1-4 wherein the amount of error is associated with a loss of data in the data payload (para. 28 - voltage drops causing power loss).
Regarding claim 18, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the method of claim 16,
Elliott additionally teaches in figure(s) 1-4 wherein the amount of error is associated with an amount of attenuation of the data payload (para. 31 - Detection of a voltage drop exceeding a value, threshold, range, or the like can imply an arc fault 42 condition, such as the series arc fault 44).
Regarding claim 19, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the method of claim 16,
Sako additionally teaches in figure(s) 1-9 wherein the amount of error is associated with an amount of distortion associated with the data payload (para. 39 - when it is determined that a payload length mismatch has occurred or an abnormality has occurred in transmission of the packet structure).
Claim(s) 4 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elliott in view of Sako, and further in view of DeHaven et al. (US 7345489).
Regarding claim 4, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the power distribution system of claim 1,
Elliott does not teach explicitly wherein the power provided to a load is between 400W and 600W.
However, DeHaven teaches in figure(s) 1-52 wherein the power provided to a load is between 400W and 600W (col. 28 lines 20-35: 120V x 3.6A load; figs. 7-8).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Elliott by having wherein the power provided to a load is between 400W and 600W as taught by DeHaven in order to provide "A circuit tester comprising an AFCI having two pairs of leads connected to the opposite end of each circuit tester in series for connecting an AFCI with ground fault circuit technology capabilities between an electrical circuit load and a power source to indicate electrical circuit and/or appliance ground fault current leakage in an amount greater than 30 mA and 50 mA, and parallel arcing on an electrical circuit or appliance in an amount greater than 5A, 50A, and 70A" (abstract).
Regarding claim 20, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the method of claim 15,
Elliott does not teach explicitly wherein the power provided to the device is between 400W and 600W.
However, DeHaven teaches in figure(s) 1-52 wherein the power provided to the device is between 400W and 600W (col. 28 lines 20-35: 120V x 3.6A load; figs. 7-8).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Elliott by having wherein the power provided to the device is between 400W and 600W as taught by DeHaven in order to provide "A circuit tester comprising an AFCI having two pairs of leads connected to the opposite end of each circuit tester in series for connecting an AFCI with ground fault circuit technology capabilities between an electrical circuit load and a power source to indicate electrical circuit and/or appliance ground fault current leakage in an amount greater than 30 mA and 50 mA, and parallel arcing on an electrical circuit or appliance in an amount greater than 5A, 50A, and 70A" (abstract).
Claim(s) 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elliott in view of Sako, and further in view of Zhang et al. (US 20150100856).
Regarding claim 6, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the power distribution system of claim 1,
Elliott does not teach explicitly wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors from unreceived data in a series of energy packets.
However, Zhang teaches in figure(s) 1-6 wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors from unreceived data in a series of energy packets (para. 30 - a listening meter should rebroadcast a packet from the listened-to broadcast or aggregate the data from the listen-to broadcast as well as its own data so that increasingly larger packets are sent as more data is aggregated. The utility data acquisition system 111 is arranged to receive broadcast packets e.g., that are intended for consumption by a utility; figs. 2-6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Elliott by having wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors from unreceived data in a series of energy packets as taught by Zhang in order to provide "using a PHPS-enabled data packet received from another meter, or using an aggregated data packet which may be PHPS-enabled or non-PHPS-enabled" (para. 62).
Regarding claim 7, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the power distribution system of claim 1,
Elliott does not teach explicitly wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors.
However, Zhang teaches in figure(s) 1-6 wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors (para. 32 - data packet or aggregate the data with its own data wirelessly to the antenna 210) from unreceived data over a predetermined period of time (para. 22 - the routing tables 152 can also be updated as new meters are installed and discovered and/or directly programmed by a utility provider).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Elliott by having wherein the amount of error associated with the digital electricity energy packet is an aggregate of errors as taught by Zhang in order to provide "Quickly detecting packet header errors helps the receiver to stop trying to decode a packet with errors or a non-existent packet so that it is available to receive other packets that may subsequently arrive" (para. 2).
Claim(s) 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elliott in view of Sako, and further in view of Sloop et al. (US 20210288521).
Regarding claim 11, Elliott in view of Sako teaches the power distribution system of claim 10,
Elliott does not teach explicitly wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a percentage correlation of the digital electricity energy packet and the predetermined data packet.
However, Sloop teaches in figure(s) 1-17 wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a percentage correlation of the digital electricity energy packet (fault packet; fig. 1) and the predetermined data packet (para. 16 - analyzing a plurality of sequential data points of RMS voltage from one or more sensor devices; and generating a surge event when the RMS voltage is greater than a predefined threshold percentage of a nominal voltage for a number of consecutive data points.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Elliott by having wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the arc fault condition is present based on a percentage correlation of the digital electricity energy packet and the predetermined data packet as taught by Sloop in order to provide "systems for detecting power outages and power quality in electrical systems in real time or near real time, and for notifying relevant users (including electrical grid operators and/or governmental officials) of the outages and/or undesirable changes in power quality or hazardous conditions in the electrical system" (para. 8).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
DANESH et al. (US 20130128396) discloses "measurement of current flowing in mains electrical circuits".
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKM ZAKARIA whose telephone number is (571)270-0664. The examiner can normally be reached on 8-5 PM (PST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Judy Nguyen can be reached on (571) 272-2258. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AKM ZAKARIA/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights