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.
1. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ajouhy et al (USPN 2023/0038302)
Regarding claim 20, Ajouhy discloses a method (a method shown in figure 7) for operating a remote circuit breaker (the circuit breaker 20 is disposed remotely with respect to a control circuit 22, see par. 0038), the method comprising: issuing (from a step 206 in figure 7), by a microcontroller (a microcontroller 32) and to a power supply circuit (22), a gate trigger signal (such as a signal at the terminal 72 of a buck regulator 60, par. 0026) to electrically couple the power supply circuit (22) to an external electrical power (26) input at a first duty cycle (see par. 031), and activating, by the power supply circuit (22), one or more solenoids (the coil 40 of the breaker 28) (by a step 208 of the figure 7 and par. 0032);
receiving, by the microcontroller (32) and from a voltage feedback circuit (66) sampling an output voltage (at terminal 76 via a shunt resistor 82) of the power supply circuit (22), a first indication of the output voltage at a first voltage (when first voltage at the output terminal 76 is greater than a reference voltage) (see par. 0026);
activating, the power supply circuit (22), one or more solenoids (40) (see par. 0026);
issuing, by the microcontroller (52) and to the power supply circuit (22), a solenoid signal (72) based on receiving the first indication from the voltage feedback circuit;
receiving, by the microcontroller (32) and from the voltage feedback circuit (66) during the activation of the one or more solenoids (40)(a second indication that the output voltage has decreased to a second voltage (when the voltage at terminal 72 is below the reference voltage); and
in response to the second indication, increasing the first duty cycle to a second duty cycle greater than the first duty cycle (see par. 0026).
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.
2.` Claims 1, 3, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Ajouhy et al (USPN 2023/0038302) in view of Anand (USPN 2010/0079923).
Regarding claim 1, Ajouhy discloses a remote circuit breaker (such as a breaker system 20 in figure 1 and par. 0038) that receives power from an external electrical power input (a power source 26, see par. 0016), comprising:
a power supply circuit (a power sully circuit 22) electrically couplable to the external electrical power input (26) and a microcontroller (a microcontroller 32, see par. 0030 0040), the power supply circuit (22) comprising
a switch (a buck regulator 60 includes a MOSFET switch, see par. 0026 ) and one or more solenoids (such as a coil 40), the power supply circuit (22) configured to activate the switch (the MOSFET switch of the regulator 60) and electrically couple to the external electrical power input (26) in response to a gate trigger signal (a gate trigger signal of a regulator 60 applied to a gate of the switch to produce a PWM output at terminal 72, see par. 0026) thereby receiving direct current (DC) voltage (a DC voltage 100, see par. 0029) for the one or more solenoids (40), and configured to provide the DC voltage to the one or more solenoids for activating the one or more solenoids (the coil 40) in response to a solenoid signal (such as an output signal 72 configured as a solenoid signal to drive the circuit breaker 28);
a voltage feedback circuit (a feed-back circuit 66) electrically coupled between the power supply circuit (22) and the microcontroller (32), the voltage feedback circuit (66) configured to sample an output voltage of the power supply circuit (at the terminal 76 of the DC regulator 60) when the power supply circuit (22) is electrically coupled to the external electrical power input (26) (the output voltage at the output terminal 76 of the DC regulator 60 configured to supply the DC voltage to the coil 40, see par. 0039 to generate a pull-in current of the coil 40, see par. 0019, wherein this voltage is sampled via a shunt resistor 82 and provide a feedback to the feedback terminal 72 of the DC regulator 60, see figure 3); and the microcontroller (the microcontroller 32), the microcontroller configured to:
issue (via an input 70), to the power supply circuit (22), the gate trigger signal based on the feedback, wherein the power supply circuit (22) electrically couples at a first duty cycle based on the gate trigger signal (see par. 0031 and step 206 of figure 7);
issue (via the input 70), to the power supply circuit (22), the solenoid signal (the signal from the output terminal 72) based on receiving a first indication from the voltage feedback circuit (66) of the output voltage at a first voltage (when an output voltage of a comparator 84 of the feedback circuit 66 being greater than a voltage reference, see par. 0026);
receive, during the extension of the one or more solenoids (during a time the applied voltage to the coil 40 is below the reference voltage) and from the voltage feedback circuit (66), a second indication that the output voltage of the power supply circuit has decreased to a second voltage (the voltage at the terminal 72 is lower than the reference voltage, see par. 0026); and
in response to the second indication, increase the first duty cycle to a second duty cycle greater than the first duty cycle (increase the duty cycle, when the output voltage at the terminal 72 is lower than the reference voltage, until the pull-in current is reached, see par. 0026).
However, Ajouhy does not disclose the microcontroller, the microcontroller configured to: issue, to the power supply circuit, the gate trigger signal based on a trip event as claimed.
Anand discloses a remote circuit breaker comprises a microcontroller (120) (see figure 3, par. 0020) configured to issue, to a power supply circuit (230), a gate trigger signal (245) based on a trip event (via a trip event remotely received via a terminal 237) (see par. 0013).
It 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 to have modified the microcontroller of Ajouhy to incorporate a microcontroller which include issuing a gate trigger signal based on a trip event as disclosed by Anand in order to protect the circuit breaker from an under voltage event, thus, increasing reliability.
Regarding claim 3, Ajouhy discloses wherein the power supply circuit (22) comprises an isolated buck converter circuit (60, see par. 0018) or a non-isolated buck converter circuit, and wherein the switch is a solid-state switch (the buck regulator 60 includes a MOSFET switch, see par. 0026).
Regarding claim 7, Ajouhy discloses the external power source input (26), but does not disclose the external power input as claimed.
Anand discloses a remote circuit breaker comprises an external power input (40) is a signal phase power supply (see par. 0014).
It 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 to have modified the external power input of Ajouhy to incorporate a single phase power input as disclosed by Anand in order to provide simpler, cheaper, and more compatible.
3. Claim 11, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Anand (USPN 2010/0079923) in view of Ajouhy et al (USPN 2023/0038302).
Regarding claims 11, 13, Anand disclose a system (a system shown in figure 2) for a remote circuit breaker (a remote circuit breaker 10), the system comprising:
a wireless transmitter (a remote unit, see par. 0016, 0022), the wireless transmitter configured to provide a control signal (a trip signal ST, see figure 3, par. 0022) to the remote circuit breaker (a circuit breaker 10) based on a trip event; and
the remote circuit breaker (10), the remote circuit breaker comprising: a wireless receiver (235) configured to receive the control signal (the signal ST, see par. 0022, and figure 3);
a power supply circuit (a circuit 230, 240, 250) electrically couplable to the external electrical power input (40) and a microcontroller (220), the power supply circuit (230) comprising a switch (a solid state switch such as MOSFET 250, figure 3), a one or more solenoids (a solenoid 210), the power supply circuit (230, 240, 250) configured to activate the switch (250) and electrically couple to the external electrical power input (40) in response to a gate trigger signal (from a gate driver 240) thereby receiving direct current (DC) voltage (from AC-DC converter 132) for the one or more solenoids (210), and configured to provide the DC voltage to the one or more solenoids (210) for activating the one or more solenoids in response to a solenoid signal (see par. 0021).
However, Anand does not explicitly disclose a feedback voltage circuit, an isolated buck converter, and the microcontroller as claimed.
Ajoihy discloses a remote circuit breaker comprises a voltage feedback circuit (a feed-back circuit 66) electrically coupled between the power supply circuit (22) and the microcontroller (32), the voltage feedback circuit (66) configured to sample an output voltage of the power supply circuit (at the terminal 76 of the DC regulator 60) when the power supply circuit (22) is electrically coupled to the external electrical power input (26) (the output voltage at the output terminal 76 of the DC regulator 60 configured to supply the DC voltage to the coil 40, see par. 0039 to generate a pull-in current of the coil 40, see par. 0019, wherein this voltage is sampled via a shunt resistor 82 and provide a feedback to the feedback terminal 72 of the DC regulator 60, see figure 3); and the microcontroller (the microcontroller 32), the microcontroller configured to:
issue (via an input 70), to the power supply circuit (22), the gate trigger signal based on the feedback, wherein the power supply circuit (22) electrically couples at a first duty cycle based on the gate trigger signal (see par. 0031 and step 206 of figure 7);
issue (via the input 70), to the power supply circuit (22), the solenoid signal (the signal from the output terminal 72) based on receiving a first indication from the voltage feedback circuit (66) of the output voltage at a first voltage (when an output voltage of a comparator 84 of the feedback circuit 66 being greater than a voltage reference, see par. 0026);
receive, during the extension of the one or more solenoids (during a time the applied voltage to the coil 40 is below the reference voltage) and from the voltage feedback circuit (66), a second indication that the output voltage of the power supply circuit has decreased to a second voltage (the voltage at the terminal 72 is lower than the reference voltage, see par. 0026); and
in response to the second indication, increase the first duty cycle to a second duty cycle greater than the first duty cycle (increase the duty cycle, when the output voltage at the terminal 72 is lower than the reference voltage, until the pull-in current is reached, see par. 0026), and wherein the power supply circuit comprises an isolated buck converter (such as a buck regulator 60, see par. 0018).
It 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 to have modified the remote circuit breaker of Anand to incorporate a voltage feedback circuit and a microcontroller as disclosed by Ajouhy in order to reduce a large amount of electromagnetic interference, thus, enhancing an operation of a circuit breaker.
4. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Ajouhy et al (USPN 2023/0038302) in view of Anand (USPN 2010/0079923) and further in view of Okamura (USPN 6,489,748).
Regarding claim 6, Ajouhy and Anand disclose the solenoid (the coil 40 of Ajouhy) is configured to draw 14V during activation (see par. 0016), but do not disclose the solenoid draws 24v as claimed.
Proving a 24V supply to activate a solenoid is known in the art.
Okamura discloses a circuit breaker device comprises a solenoid, wherein the solenoid draws 24V during an activation (see col. 4, lines 47-51).
It 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 to have modified the 14V activated voltage of the solenoid of Ajouhy and Anand to incorporate 24V activated solenoid by Okamura in order to increase a stronger magnetic force so that improving actuation speed and reliability, therefore, providing a better performance.
5. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Anand (USPN 2010/0079923) in view of Ajouhy et al (USPN 2023/0038302) and further in view of Okamura (USPN 6,489,748).
Regarding claim 16, Anand and Ajouhy disclose the solenoid (the coil 40 of Ajouhy) is configured to draw 14V during activation (see par. 0016), but do not disclose the solenoid draws 24v as claimed.
Proving a 24V supply to activate a solenoid is known in the art.
Okamura discloses a circuit breaker device comprises a solenoid, wherein the solenoid draws 24V during an activation (see col. 4, lines 47-51).
It 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 to have modified the 14V activated voltage of the solenoid of Anand and Ajouhy to incorporate 24V activated solenoid by Okamura in order to increase a stronger magnetic force so that improving actuation speed and reliability, therefore, providing a better performance.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 2, 4, 5, 8-10, 12, 14-15, 17-19 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.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANNY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2054. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM-4:30PM.
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, Monica Lewis can be reached at 571-271-1838. 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.
/DANNY NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights