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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claims are replete with issues of clarity, the Examiner has identified numerous issues as cited herein of duplicate operations and structure rendering claims unclear. Applicant should carefully review each claim for issues of clarity.
Claim 1 recites having an impedance selected to “attenuate the AC power coming from the AC power source….” However, in contrast to the newly presented claim it is not the AC power which is attenuated rather transients or harmonics which are for example attenuated. It is therefore unclear if Applicant is intending to attenuate the AC power or merely transients. The claim further recites “such disturbances” however no disturbances have been recited. The claims have been amended by Applicant to remove the recitation of different disturbances such as transients and surges. Therefore, it is unclear what disturbances the claim refers to.
Claim 2 and 12 recites “a controller” and set of breakers for example. The claims further recite multiple modes which is required by the changing of modes recited in the parent claim. Claim 2 appears to merely restate the operation and elements presented in claim 1 and 11. Applicant should cancel the claim.
Claims 3 and 13 recites “a first operational mode” this again appears to restate the frequency regulation, voltage stabilization of the parent claim. The claim does not completely overlap with the parent claim as such Applicant may wish to rewrite claim 3 and 13 consistent with the amendments made to claims 1 and 11 to remove duplicate structure and operations.
Claims 4 and 14 recites the “first portion” and “other portion” of supplied AC power now amended to be included in claim 1. Claim 4 and 14 are therefore unclear what portions are being further limited. Applicant should cancel the claim.
Claims 6 and 16 recites “an instance” it is unclear if more than one integrated electrical power unit is being recited. The claim appears to require an expansion connection “for that integrated electrical power unit” It is unclear which power unit or units are being claimed or if the additional structure is merely added to the present power unit of claim 1 and 11. Applicant should address the matter.
Claims 7 and 17 again recites a controller already claim in the parent claim it is unclear if a new controller is required. The claim further recites a tap, delay, sole source and sensor already presented. Applicant should cancel the claim.
Claims 10 and 20 recites multiple power units is in conflict with the amended claim 1 and 11, present one power unit, not one or more. Claim 1 states the power unit is configured as a sole source of power. It is therefore unclear how claim 10 or 20 would be incorporated into claim 1 and 11.
Claim 11 suffers from the same defects identified in claim 1 related to the attenuate and disturbances and is similarly unclear.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Fin whose telephone number is (571)272-5921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at 571-272-7429. 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.
MICHAEL FIN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/MICHAEL R. FIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights