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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by
Smith (USPN 2018/0164364).
Regarding claim 1, Smith discloses a vehicle cutoff device (26) comprising
a switch (an electrical fuse 22 configured a switch to provide a power to a load 24 when closed and cut off the power when open) configured to switch a power path between a conductive state (a closed state of the fuse 22) and a cutoff state (an open state of the fuse 22), the power path serving as a path to transmit power from a power supply unit (a battery 20),
wherein the cutoff device comprises a control unit (a controller 76) configured to execute degradation determination processing (determination processing shown in figures 3-4) in which a resistance value and a resistance threshold of the switch are compared (see step 218 shown in figure 4),
the resistance value is based on a potential difference between two sides of the switch when the switch is in an ON state (a potential difference both sides the fuse 22 measured by a voltage sensor 72, 74, see figure 1) and current flows through the power path, and on the current flowing through the power path (see par. 0014-0016), and
the control unit (the controller 76) calculates the resistance value (see steps 212-218) and executes the degradation determination processing (see figures 3-4) when a state in which a magnitude of the current flowing through the power path is within a range greater than or equal to a current threshold (see step 210 of figure 3) and smaller than an upper limit current threshold has continued for a predetermined time (such as the current continues to flow for a period until the fuse has a 100 amps) and determines that the switch is in a degraded state when the resistance value is greater than or equal to the current threshold (see steps 210, 218), and notifies an external entity of the degraded state (a degradation of the fuse is notified by a display device 80).
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Achhammer (USPN 2013/0337294) in view of Smith (USPN 2018/0164364).
Regarding claim 1, Achhammer discloses a vehicle cutoff device (10, see figure 1) comprising
a switch (a switch 24 configured a switch to provide a power to a load coupled to terminals 22, 262 when closed and cut off the power when open) configured to switch a power path between a conductive state (a closed state of the switch 24) and a cutoff state (an open state of the switch 24), the power path serving as a path to transmit power from a power supply unit (a battery 12),
wherein the cutoff device comprises a control unit (a controller 44) configured to execute degradation determination processing (the controller 44 configured to monitor a wear of the switch 28, see par. 0011, 0029, 0033) in which a resistance value and a resistance threshold of the switch are compared (see par. 0008),
the resistance value is based on a potential difference between two sides of the switch when the switch (24) is in an ON state (the resistance value of the switch 24 based on a voltage drop at two points 28, 32, see par. 0032, 0033, 0018) and current flows through the power path, and on the current flowing through the power path (see par. 0011, 0021).
Achhammer does not explicitly disclose the control unit calculates the resistance value as claimed.
Smith discloses a system for a degradation diagnostic of a switch comprises a control unit (a controller 76) configured to calculate the resistance value (see steps 212-218) and executes the degradation determination processing (see figures 3-4) when a state in which a magnitude of the current flowing through the power path is within a range greater than or equal to a current threshold (see step 210 of figure 3) and smaller than an upper limit current threshold has continued for a predetermined time (such as the current continues to flow for a period until the fuse has a 100 amps) and determines that the switch is in a degraded state when the resistance value is greater than or equal to the current threshold (see steps 210, 218), and notifies an external entity of the degraded state (a degradation of the fuse is notified by a display device 80).
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 control unit of Achhammer to incorporate a control unit as disclosed by Smith in order to provide an early degraded indication of the switch so that reducing a risk of circuit component damage.
Regarding claim 3, Achhammer discloses a second switch (a second switch 20) configured to switch the power path between the conductive state and the cutoff state, wherein start of energization or current increase of the power path occurs as a result of execution of a switching control in which the switch (24) is switched from an OFF state to the ON state after the second switch (20) (a current increase of the power path 16 by an operation of the switches 24, 20, 48, 50), and the control unit (the control unit 44) executes the degradation determination processing in which the resistance value when the switching control is executed is compared with the resistance threshold (the controller 44 configured to monitor a wear of the switch 28, see par. 0008, 0011, 0029, 0033).
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 4-5 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
4. 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