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 § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 7, & 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer et al., US20200083697 (hereinafter referred to as Fischer) in view of Budelman et al., US5629608 (hereinafter referred to as Budelman).
In regards to claim 1, Fischer teaches a switch (low-voltage circuit breaker; [Title] & [0037]) having an electronic trip unit (electronic trip unit ETU; [Fig. 1]) and a power supply circuit (power supply unit NT; [Fig. 1]) for supplying energy (energy supply; [0107]) to the electronic trip unit from a monitored circuit (conductors L1-L3 & N; [Fig. 1]).
Fischer does not teach in which switch, the power supply circuit is formed by a linear regulator and a switching regulator, wherein the linear regulator and the switching regulator are connected in parallel, the switching regulator has a Power Good output, the linear regulator has a Disable input, and the Power Good output of the switching regulator is connected to the Disable input of the linear regulator.
Budelman teaches in which switch, the power supply circuit (voltage regulating device 400; [Fig. 4]) is formed by a linear regulator (secondary voltage regulator 440; [Col. 4, Ln. 46-48] & [Fig. 4]) and a switching regulator (primary voltage regulator 420 and control circuitry 430; [Col. 4, Ln. 31-33] & [Fig. 4]), wherein the linear regulator and the switching regulator are connected in parallel (implicit; [Fig. 4]), the switching regulator has a Power Good output (output for “activates” signal from the control circuitry 430; [Col. 4, Ln. 42-46]), the linear regulator has a Disable input (input for the received “activates” signal; [Col. 4, Ln. 42-46]), and the Power Good output of the switching regulator is connected to the Disable input of the linear regulator (implicit; [Col. 4, Ln. 42-46] & [Fig. 4]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fischer in order to incorporate in which switch, the power supply circuit is formed by a linear regulator and a switching regulator, wherein the linear regulator and the switching regulator are connected in parallel, the switching regulator has a Power Good output, the linear regulator has a Disable input, and the Power Good output of the switching regulator is connected to the Disable input of the linear regulator as taught by Budelman. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known power supply to the power supply unit NT as taught by Fischer.
In regards to claim 7, Fischer teaches wherein the power supply circuit is configured to supply energy to the electronic trip unit via energy taken from the monitored circuit by an energy converter (energy converter EW; [0107] & [Fig. 1]).
In regards to claim 10, Fischer teaches wherein the switch is a low-voltage circuit breaker (low-voltage circuit breaker; [Title]).
Claim(s) 2 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer et al., US20200083697 (hereinafter referred to as Fischer), in view of Budelman et al., US5629608 (hereinafter referred to as Budelman), and in further view of Palmer et al., US20130307422 (hereinafter referred to as Palmer).
In regards to claim 2, Fischer and Budelman do not teach wherein the switching regulator is a step-down converter, a SEPIC converter or a step- up converter.
Palmer teaches wherein the switching regulator (switching converter circuit 204; [Fig. 2]) (primary voltage regulator 420 and control circuitry 430; Budelman) is a step-down converter, a SEPIC converter or a step- up converter (buck, boost, or buck-boost regulator; [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fischer & Budelman in order to incorporate wherein the switching regulator is a step-down converter, a SEPIC converter or a step- up converter as taught by Palmer. The motivation for doing so would be an engineering design choice to meet the voltage needs of the rectified AC line input and control voltage of the electronic trip unit ETU.
In regards to claim 8, Fischer & Budelman do not teach wherein the power supply circuit contains components for rectification, for filtering or smoothing and for voltage transformation connected in series.
Palmer teaches wherein the power supply circuit contains components for rectification, for filtering or smoothing (rectifier circuit 202; [Fig. 2]) and for voltage transformation (Switching Converter Circuit 204; [Fig. 2]) connected in series (implicit; [Fig. 2]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fischer & Budelman in order to incorporate wherein the power supply circuit contains components for rectification, for filtering or smoothing and for voltage transformation connected in series as taught by Palmer. The motivation for doing so would be to enable an AC input for DC regulated power supply.
In regards to claim 9, Fischer does not teach wherein the component (stage) for voltage transformation is formed by the linear regulator and the switching regulator.
Budelman teaches wherein the component (stage) for voltage transformation is formed by the linear regulator (secondary voltage regulator 440; [Col. 4, Ln. 46-48] & [Fig. 4]) and the switching regulator (primary voltage regulator 420 and control circuitry 430; [Col. 4, Ln. 31-33] & [Fig. 4]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fischer & Budelman in order to incorporate wherein the component (stage) for voltage transformation is formed by the linear regulator and the switching regulator as taught by Budelman. Palmer's Switching Converter Circuit 204 would be substituted with Budelman's voltage regulators. The motivation for doing so would be to apply a known power supply to the power supply unit NT as taught by Fischer.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer et al., US20200083697 (hereinafter referred to as Fischer), in view of Budelman et al., US5629608 (hereinafter referred to as Budelman), and in further view of
In regards to claim 3, Fischer & Budelman do not teach wherein a diode or a circuit replicating the behaviour of a diode is connected in series with the output of the switching regulator.
Currelly teaches wherein a diode or a circuit replicating the behaviour of a diode (rectifying element, Schottky diode 32; [Fig. 3]) is connected in series (implicit; [Fig. 3]) with the output of the switching regulator (linear regulator 30; [Fig. 3]) (primary voltage regulator 420 and control circuitry 430; Budelman).
Therefore, Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fischer & Budelman in order to incorporate wherein a diode or a circuit replicating the behaviour of a diode is connected in series with the output of the switching regulator as taught by Currelly. The diode is on the output of the linear regulator, but Currelly teaches the diode being on the output of a regulator if it is below the output voltage. The motivation to combine is that the switching regulator is at a lower voltage than the output voltage and prevent back flow.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 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. Claim 4 is indicated containing allowable subject matter because prior art fails to teach or suggest, either alone or in combination all of the limitations of claim 1, 3, & 4, especially “wherein a circuit replicating the behaviour of a diode is connected in series with the output of the switching regulator, and the circuit replicating the behaviour of a diode is configured in such a way and connected to the Power Good output of the switching regulator in such a way that the circuit replicating the behaviour of a diode becomes conductive when a Power Good signal is present.”
Claims 5-6 would be allowed based on dependence of claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMANTHA L FAUBERT whose telephone number is (703)756-1311. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM - 5PM.
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, Crystal Hammond can be reached at 5712701682. 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.
SAMANTHA LYNETTE FAUBERT
Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/CRYSTAL L HAMMOND/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights