Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-19 of U.S. Application 18/923,695 filed on October 23, 2024 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/17/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claims 1, 6, and 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al (USPGPub 20200011902) in view of Kumar et al (US Pat No 7583073).
PNG
media_image1.png
449
507
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Prior Art: Shimizu
Regarding claim 1, Shimizu discloses a current measurement module (shown in figs 1-20) comprising: a conductor (10) which has two main body units (13 and 14) arranged side by side in a first direction (y-direction), and two current paths (11 and 12) arranged side by side across a through hole (15) in a second direction (x-direction) perpendicular to the first direction, and connecting the two main body units; and two magnetic detection elements (21 and 22) which include magnetic sensing surfaces for detecting a component in a third direction perpendicular to the first direction and the second direction (par 162 discloses 21 and 22 discloses being arranged to detect the z-axis, in magnetic fields that are generated by currents flowing through the two current paths, and which are arranged side by side in the second direction (shown in figs 1-4), wherein when viewed from the third direction, the two magnetic detection elements are arranged inside the through hole (shown in figs 1-10). Shimizu does not fully disclose in the second direction, a center position between the two magnetic detection elements is close to either one of the two current paths.
However, Kumar discloses in the second direction (x-direction), a center position between the two magnetic detection elements is close to either one of the two current paths (shown in figs 3A-4 as where the position of the sensors are varied based on intended need).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shimizu in view of Kumar in order to determine current in a conductor based on position.
Regarding claim 6, Shimizu discloses wherein widths of the two current paths in the second direction are the same as each other (as shown in figs are the same as each other).
Regarding claim 8, Shimizu discloses wherein a width of the conductor in the third direction is 4 mm or less (par 119 discloses being 1.5mm).
Regarding claim 9, Shimizu discloses wherein a current path which is close to the center position between the two magnetic detection elements, in the second direction, is set as a first current path, and both of the two magnetic detection elements are arranged 1 mm or more away from an inner end portion of the first current path (shown in figs 1-10 as the magnetic elements are arranged at certain intervals).
Regarding claim 10, Shimizu does not fully disclose wherein a current path which is close to the center position between the two magnetic detection elements, in the second direction, is set as a first current path, and a center distance between the two magnetic detection elements is greater than a distance between a center position of a magnetic detection element, among the two magnetic detection elements, on a side of the first current path, and an end portion of the first current path.
However, Kumar discloses wherein a current path which is close to the center position between the two magnetic detection elements, in the second direction, is set as a first current path, and a center distance between the two magnetic detection elements is greater than a distance between a center position of a magnetic detection element, among the two magnetic detection elements, on a side of the first current path, and an end portion of the first current path (shown in figs 3A-4 as the center can be positioned at different widths based on intended need). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shimizu in view of Kumar in order to determine current in a conductor based on position.
Regarding claim 11, Shimizu discloses wherein the two magnetic detection elements are arranged to face each other with respect to a center of the through hole, in the second direction (shown in figs 1-18 as facing each other).
Regarding claim 12, Shimizu discloses wherein the two magnetic detection elements are arranged to face each other, in the second direction, across a region in which magnetic fields that are generated by currents flowing through the two current paths cancel out each other when a current flows through the conductor and a magnetic flux density in the third direction that is detected becomes zero (par 79 discloses cancelling each other out).
Regarding claim 13, Shimizu discloses wherein the two magnetic detection elements are Hall elements (par 68 discloses being Hall elements).
Regarding claim 14, Shimizu discloses wherein an insulation member for fixing the two magnetic detection elements to the conductor (par 69 discloses being glass or epoxy to fix the elements).
Regarding claim 15, Shimizu discloses wherein a substrate for fixing the two magnetic detection elements to the conductor (shown in figs 18, 24-26 as a substrate and housing attached to the conductor).
Claims 2-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al (USPGPub 20200011902) in view of Kumar et al (US Pat No 7583073).
Regarding claim 2, Shimizu in view of Kumar does not fully disclose wherein a center distance between the two magnetic detection elements in the second direction is 2 mm or more.
However, it has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Shimizu in view of Kumar to be limited to a center distance between the two magnetic detection elements in the second direction is 2 mm or more in order to property test the conductor based on the distance.
Regarding claim 3, Shimizu in view of Kumar does not fully disclose wherein a distance between the two magnetic detection elements in the second direction is 15% or more of a width of the through hole in the second direction. However, it has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Shimizu in view of Kumar to be limited to wherein a distance between the two magnetic detection elements in the second direction is 15% or more of a width of the through hole in the second direction in order to properly detect the conductor based on the distance in relation with the width of the through hole.
Regarding claim 4, Shimizu in view of Kumar does not fully disclose wherein a width of each of the two current paths in the second direction is 20% or less of a width of the conductor in the second direction.
However, it has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Shimizu in view of Kumar to be limited to wherein a width of each of the two current paths in the second direction is 20% or less of a width of the conductor in the second direction in order to properly detect the conductor based on the distance in relation with the width of the through hole.
Regarding claim 5, Shimizu in view of Kumar does not fully disclose wherein a width of each of the two current paths in the second direction is 4 mm or less.
However, it has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Shimizu in view of Kumar to be limited to wherein a width of each of the two current paths in the second direction is 4 mm or less in order to property test the conductor based on the width.
Regarding claim 7, Shimizu in view of Kumar does not fully disclose wherein positions of the magnetic sensing surfaces of the two magnetic detection elements in the third direction are in a range of 4 mm from upper surfaces of the two current paths.
However, it has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Shimizu in view of Kumar to be limited to wherein positions of the magnetic sensing surfaces of the two magnetic detection elements in the third direction are in a range of 4 mm from upper surfaces of the two current paths in order to property test the conductor based on the range.
Claims 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu et al (USPGPub 20200011902) in view of Kumar et al (US Pat No 7583073) in further view of Akimoto et al (USPGPub 20150204916).
Regarding claim 16, Shimizu does not fully disclose a current measurement device comprising: three current measurement modules, each of which is the current measurement module according to claim 1, and which are arranged side by side in the second direction, wherein in the second direction, a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged on a left side is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged in a center, a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged in the center is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged on a right side, and a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged on the right side is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged in the center.
However, Akimoto discloses a current measurement device comprising: three current measurement modules (shown in figs 1-3), each of which is the current measurement module according to claim 1, and which are arranged side by side in the second direction (shown in fig 2), wherein in the second direction, a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged on a left side is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged in a center(left most conductor of 2), a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged in the center is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged on a right side (right most conductor of 2), and a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged on the right side is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged in the center (center conductor of 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shimizu in view of Kumar in further view of Akimoto in order to detect multiple phases on the conductor.
Regarding claim 18, Shimizu in view of Kumar does not fully disclose A current measurement device comprising: three current measurement modules, each of which is the current measurement module according to claim 1, and which are arranged side by side in the second direction, wherein in the second direction, a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged on a left side is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged in a center, a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged in the center is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged on the left side, and a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged on a right side is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged in the center.
However, Akimoto discloses a current measurement device comprising: three current measurement modules, each of which is the current measurement module according to claim 1, and which are arranged side by side in the second direction, wherein in the second direction, a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged on a left side is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged in a center (center most conductor as shown in fig 2), a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged in the center is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged on the left side (left most shown in fig 2), and a center position of the two magnetic detection elements in the current measurement module arranged on a right side is arranged at a position close to a current path on a side of the current measurement module arranged in the center (par 51 discloses positions of the elements are adjusted. Therefore, the center position can be adjusted). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shimizu in view of Kumar in further view of Akimoto in order to detect multiple phases on the conductor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 17, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a current measurement module comprising: wherein a phase of a current flowing through the current measurement module arranged on the left side is delayed by 120° from a phase of a current flowing through the current measurement module arranged in the center; and a phase of a current flowing through the current measurement module arranged on the right side is advanced by 120° from a phase of a current flowing through the current measurement module arranged in the center in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest a current measurement module comprising: wherein a phase of a current flowing through the current measurement module arranged on the left side is advanced by 120° from a phase of a current flowing through the current measurement module arranged in the center; and a phase of a current flowing through the current measurement module arranged on the right side is delayed by 120° from a phase of a current flowing through the current measurement module arranged in the center in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC E HAWKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm 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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (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 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.
/DOMINIC E HAWKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights