DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 10 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aiello et al. (2017/0168098).
As to claims 1, 10 and 16, Aiello et al. (hereinafter Aiello) discloses an electrical phase identification comprising: predicting a phase correlated with each electricity meter of a plurality of electricity meters (claim 21, “selecting a meter from among a first meter and a second meter”) based on voltage time series data (claim 21, “energy measured by the selected meter”) collected over a preselected collection time period [0013]-[0014, “ data may be obtained that indicates energy or power measured over time by a meter and/or energy or power transmitted over time by each phase of a feeder line”], the phase being one of a first phase, a second phase, or a third phase [0013]; selecting a reliability parameter [0077, Data] associated with predicted phases of the plurality of electricity meters (claim 29, “identifying a known phase meter whose phase is known with a certainty above a confidence level threshold”); determining whether a parameter value associated with the reliability parameter meets a threshold parameter value (claim 29), [0077]; and one of: based on determining that the parameter value meets the threshold parameter value, determining that the predicted phases of the plurality of electricity meters are valid (claim 29), [0038]-[0040]; or based on determining that the parameter value fails to meet the threshold parameter value, determining that the predicted phases of the plurality of electricity meters are invalid (claim 29), [0038]-[0040].
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claims 2 – 3, 11 – 12 and 17, the prior art fails to disclose determining: a first phase correlation line associated with the first cluster, a second phase correlation line associated with the second cluster, and a third phase correlation line associated with the third cluster; determining an angle index associated with the plurality of electricity meters, the angle index being one of: a difference between a maximum separation angle and a minimum separation angle, a separation angle being an angle between adjacent phase correlation lines on the phase correlation plot, or a ratio of the minimum separation angle and the maximum separation angle; and setting the angle index as the reliability parameter. These features taken together with the other limitations of the claim renders the claims allowable over prior art.
As to claims 4 – 5, 13 and 18, the prior art fails to disclose determining a minimum size of the first population of electricity meters, the second population of electricity meters, and the third population of electricity meters; determining a maximum size of the first population of electricity meters, the second population of electricity meters, and the third population of electricity meters; determining a balance index as a ratio of the minimum size and the maximum size; and setting the balance index as the reliability parameter. These features taken together with the other limitations of the claim renders the claims allowable over prior art.
As to claims 6 – 7, 14 and 19, the prior art fails to disclose that for each electricity meter of the plurality of electricity meters, determining whether a sub-period predicted phase of the selected sub-period matches the predicted phase; determining a sub-period consistency as a ratio of a sub-period phase matching population of electricity meters having sub-period predicted phases matching corresponding predicted phases over a number of electricity meters in the plurality of electricity meters; and determining an average consistency by averaging sub-period consistencies over the preselected collection time period. These features taken together with the other limitations of the claim renders the claims allowable over prior art.
As to claims 8 – 9, 15 and 20, an individual confidence level based at least in part on the highest correlation, a first number of observations associated with the highest correlation, the median correlation, and a second number of observations associated with the median correlation; determining an average confidence level of the plurality of electricity meters based on individual confidence levels of the plurality of electricity meters; and setting the average confidence level as the reliability parameter. These features taken together with the other limitations of the claim renders the claims allowable over prior art.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant s disclosure.
ZHANG et al. (20230387716) is cited for its disclosure of high frequency signal based power consumer relative position identification apparatus, method and device.
Arya et al. (8825416) is cited for its disclosure of systems and methods for phase identification.
Davis, JR. et al. (20090125351) is cited for its disclosure of a power line communication device using method for providing user services.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REENA AURORA whose telephone number is (571)272-2263. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at 5712705628. 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.
/REENA AURORA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights