DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of claims
Claims 10-11, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claims 1-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Claim 18 is objected to.
Title Objections
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2 of claim 9, “a second, opposing surface” should be changed to “a second
In line 2 of claim 18, “the current sensors” should be changed to “the plurality of current sensors”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 10-11, 15 and 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites the term “substantially identical” in line 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear what is the meets and bounds of term “substantially”.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites the term “substantially alike” in line 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially alike” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear what is the meets and bounds of term “substantially alike”.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites “the current sensor” in line 1, claim 15 depends on claim 1, claim 1 recites “a plurality of current sensors”, “a first current sensor” and “a second current sensor”; therefore, it is not clear which current sensor that “the current sensor” is referring to.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 recites the term “substantially identical” in line 8 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear what is the meets and bounds of term “substantially”.
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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-12, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (US 2004/0178875), and further in view of Pierquet et al. (US 12,126,264).
Regarding independent claim 1, Saito teaches a current sensor assembly (e.g. figs. 10-11, [0076], title, Rogowski coil 1 is current transformer assembly as shown in fig. 10) comprising:
a stacked plurality of current sensors (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0076], a stacked plurality of printed circuit boards 7 with associated winding 2 formed corresponding current sensors as shown in figs 2-3 for detail construction of each the printed circuit boards 7), each of the plurality of current sensors (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0076], detail construction of each of the printed circuit boards 7 is shown in figs. 2-3) comprising:
a substrate (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0044], printed circuit board 7 has top surface 11 and bottom surface 11b which form a substrate);
a path for a conductor carrying current (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0044], opening 9 for a conductor 5 carrying an alternating current as shown in fig. 11 and described in [0078] and [0082]); and
a plurality of measurement coils each arranged to progress at least partially
around the path for the conductor (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, coils around opening 9 forms winding 2 as shown in figs. 2-3),
However, Saito silent with regard to wherein the plurality of current sensors are stacked such that, in use, a first signal induced in a first current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by a current in the conductor has a different polarity to a second signal induced in a second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by the current in the conductor.
Pierquet teaches a plurality of current sensors are stacked (e.g. fig. 15, column 20: lines 49-67, alternating stack of coils 1520 having coils 1530, 1532, 1534, 1536, and the alternating stack of coils 1520 have alternating winding direction) such that, in use, a first signal induced in a first current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by a current in a conductor has a different polarity to a second signal induced in a second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by the current in the conductor (e.g. figs. 13 and 15, column 20: lines 49-67, signals induced in corresponding coils 1530 and 1532 by current I in conductor 1342 as shown in fig. 13, where the induced signals have a opposite polarity according to right-hand-rule for a current flow through a coil).
It would produce a predictive result of using alternating stack winding 2 of corresponding the stacked plurality of printed circuit boards 7 of Saito, for the purpose of improving signal reliability and/or reducing winding space and/or length between sensor connections.
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 the invention of Saito by applying the teaching of Pierquet to explicitly have wherein the plurality of current sensors are stacked such that, in use, a first signal induced in a first current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by a current in the conductor has a different polarity to a second signal induced in a second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by the current in the conductor, for the purpose of improving signal reliability and/or reducing winding space and/or length between sensor connections.
Regarding claim 2, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches wherein the first current sensor and the second current sensor are adjacent in the stacked plurality of current sensors (e.g. Saito, figs. 2-3 and 10, [0076], each of the stacked plurality of printed circuit boards 7 with associated winding 2 formed corresponding current sensors that are adjacent to each other as shown in fig. 10).
Regarding claim 4, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches wherein the stacked plurality of current sensors further comprises a third current sensor arranged (e.g. Pierquet, fig. 15, a third current sensor layer 1514), such that, in use, a third signal induced in the third current sensor by the current in the conductor has a same polarity as the first signal induced in the first current sensor (e.g. Pierquet, fig. 15, first current sensor layer 1510 and third current sensor layer 1514 have corresponding induced signals with same polarity according to right-hand-rule for a current flow through a coil).
Regarding claim 5, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches wherein the second current sensor is positioned between the first current sensor and the third current sensor in the stack (e.g. Pierquet, fig. 15, second sensor layer 1512 is positioned between first current sensor layer 1510 and third current sensor layer 1514).
Regarding claim 6, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches wherein the first current sensor is electrically coupled to the third current sensor (e.g. Pierquet, fig. 15, first current sensor layer 1510 is electrically coupled to third current sensor 1514).
Regarding claim 7, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches wherein the first current sensor is electrically coupled to the second current sensor (e.g. Pierquet, fig. 15, first current sensor layer 1510 is electrically coupled to the second current sensor layer 1512).
Regarding claim 8, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches wherein the second current sensor is electrically coupled to the third current sensor (e.g. Pierquet, fig. 15, second current sensor layer 1512 is electrically coupled to third current sensor layer 1514).
Regarding claim 10, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches each of the plurality of current sensors are substantially identical in design (e.g. Saito, fig. 10, each printed circuit board 7 with corresponding winding 2 has identical design as shown in figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 11, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches wherein a layout of the plurality of measurement coils on each substrate of the plurality of substrates is substantially alike (e.g. Saito, fig. 10, each printed circuit board 7 with corresponding winding 2 is alike as shown in figures 2-3).
Regarding claim 12, combination of Saito and Pierquet teaches wherein at least one measurement coil of the plurality of measurement coils on each of the current sensors of the plurality of current sensors is coupled to at least one measurement coil of the plurality of measurement coils on at least one other current sensor of the plurality of current sensors (e.g. Pierquet, fig. 15, measurement coil 1530 on current sensor layer 1510 is coupled to measurement coil 1532 on current sensor layer 1512).
Regarding claim 14, combination of Saito and Pierquet is silent with regard to wherein each substrate of the plurality of current sensors comprises castellated vias on an external circumference of the substrate (e.g. Satio, fig. 4, [0047], drilled holes acts as castellated via (castellated vias 710 in fig. 7 applicant’s published application) are holes as interpreted in fig.7 and paragraph [0094] of applicant’s published application; and the drilled holes are on an external circumference of printed circuit board 7).
Regarding independent claim 19, Saito teaches a current measurement system (e.g. figs. 10-11, current measurement system as shown in fig. 11), the current measurement system comprising:
a current sensor assembly (e.g. figs. 10 and 11, [0076], title, Rogowski coil 1 is current transformer assembly as shown in fig. 10) comprising:
a stacked plurality of current sensors (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0076], a stacked plurality of printed circuit boards 7 with winding 2 as shown in figs 2-3 for detail construction of each the printed circuit boards 7), each of the plurality of current sensors (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0076], detail construction of each of the printed circuit boards 7 is shown in figs. 2-3) comprising:
a substrate (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0044], printed circuit board 7 has top surface 11 and bottom surface 11b which form a substrate);
a path for a conductor carrying current (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0044], opening 9 for a conductor 5 carrying an alternating current as shown in fig. 11 and described in [0078] and [0082]); and
a plurality of measurement coils each arranged to progress at least partially around the path for the conductor (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, coils around opening 9 forms winding 2 as shown in figs. 2-3); and
a measurement circuit coupled to the current sensor assembly (e.g. figs. 11, [0078]-[0079], sensor unit (US) 20 coupled to Rogowski coil 1 via electric wire 31, where details of Rogowski coil 1 is shown in fig. 10), the measurement circuit configured to receive an output of the current sensor assembly and determine a current in the conductor (e.g. fig. 11, [0078]-[0079], the sensor unit (US) 20 configured to receive an output from the Rogowski coil 1 and determine a current in the conductor 5).
However, Saito silent with regard to wherein the plurality of current sensors are stacked such that, in use, a first signal induced in a first current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by a current in the conductor has a different polarity to a second signal induced in a second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by the current in the conductor.
Pierquet teaches a plurality of current sensors are stacked (e.g. fig. 15, column 20: lines 49-67, alternating stack of coils 1520 having coils 1530, 1532, 1534, 1536, and the alternating stack of coils 1520 have alternating winding direction) such that, in use, a first signal induced in a first current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by a current in the conductor has a different polarity to a second signal induced in a second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by the current in the conductor (e.g. figs. 13 and 15, column 20: lines 49-67, signals induced in corresponding coils 1530 and 1532 by current I in conductor 1342 as shown in fig. 13, where the induced signals have a opposite polarity according to the right hand rule).
It would produce a predictive result of using alternating stack winding 2 of corresponding the stacked plurality of printed circuit boards 7 of Saito, for the purpose of improving signal reliability and/or reducing winding space and/or length between sensor connections.
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 the invention of Saito by applying the teaching of Pierquet to explicitly have wherein the plurality of current sensors are stacked such that, in use, a first signal induced in a first current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by a current in the conductor has a different polarity to a second signal induced in a second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors by the current in the conductor, for the purpose of improving signal reliability and/or reducing winding space and/or length between sensor connections.
Claims 3, 9 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (US 2004/0178875) in view of Pierquet et al. (US 12,126,264), and further in view of Dou (CN 101329937 A).
Regarding claim 3, combination of Saito and Pierquet is silent with regard to wherein the first current sensor and the second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors have different relative orientations such that, in use, the first signal has a different polarity to the second signal.
Dou teaches a first current sensor and a second current sensor of a plurality of current sensors have different relative orientations (e.g. figs. 4-5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou, each of current sensors 1 has a corresponding bottom surface as first surfaces oriented in a downward direction and a corresponding top surface as second surfaces oriented in a upward direction, and each of current sensors 2 has a corresponding top surfaces as first surfaces oriented in a upward direction and a corresponding bottom surfaces as second surfaces oriented in a downward direction) such that, in use, a first signal has a different polarity to a second signal (e.g. figs. 4-5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou, current flows inward in sensor 1 and current flows outward in sensor 2 as shown in fig. 4; therefore, corresponding signals from the sensor 1 and sensor 2 have different polarity).
It would produce a predictive result of having wherein the first current sensor and the second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors have different relative orientations such that, in use, the first signal has a different polarity to the second signal, for the purpose of eliminating magnetic force line interferences perpendicular to coil planes (e.g. Dou, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou).
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 the invention of Saito and Pierquet by applying the teaching of Dou to explicitly have wherein the first current sensor and the second current sensor of the plurality of current sensors have different relative orientations such that, in use, the first signal has a different polarity to the second signal, for the purpose of eliminating magnetic force line interferences perpendicular to coil planes (e.g. Dou, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou).
Regarding claim 9, combination of Saito and Pierquet is silent with regard to wherein the substrate of each of the plurality of current sensors comprises a first surface and a second, opposing surface, and wherein the first current sensor is oriented such that its first surface faces a first direction in the stack and its second surface faces a second direction in the stack, and the second sensor is oriented such that its first surface faces the second direction in the stack and its second surface faces the first direction in the stack, wherein the first direction is opposite to the second direction.
Dou teaches a substrate of each of the plurality of current sensors comprises a first surface and a second, opposing surface (e.g. fig. 5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou, each of current sensors 1 has a corresponding bottom surface as first surfaces oriented in a downward direction and a corresponding top surface as second surfaces oriented in a upward direction, and each of current sensors 2 has a corresponding top surfaces as first surfaces oriented in a upward direction and a corresponding bottom surfaces as second surfaces oriented in a downward direction), and
wherein the first current sensor is oriented such that its first surface faces a first direction in the stack and its second surface faces a second direction in the stack (e.g. fig. 5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou, each of current sensors 1 has a corresponding bottom surface as first surfaces oriented in a downward direction and a corresponding top surface as second surfaces oriented in a upward direction), and
the second sensor is oriented such that its first surface faces the second direction in the stack and its second surface faces the first direction in the stack (e.g. fig. 5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou, each of current sensors 2 has a corresponding top surfaces as first surfaces oriented in a upward direction and a corresponding bottom surfaces as second surfaces oriented in a downward direction),
wherein the first direction is opposite to the second direction (e.g. fig. 5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou, the upward direction (associated with the top surfaces of sensors 1) being opposite to downward direction (associated with the bottom surfaces of sensors 1), where bottom surfaces of sensors 1 are mirror images of corresponding top surfaces of sensors 2, as a result the bottom surfaces are opposite the corresponding top surfaces).
It would produce a predictive result of having wherein the substrate of each of the plurality of current sensors comprises a first surface and a second, opposing surface, and wherein the first current sensor is oriented such that its first surface faces a first direction in the stack and its second surface faces a second direction in the stack, and the second sensor is oriented such that its first surface faces the second direction in the stack and its second surface faces the first direction in the stack, wherein the first direction is opposite to the second direction, for the purpose of eliminating magnetic force line interferences perpendicular to coil planes (e.g. Dou, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou).
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 the invention of Saito and Pierquet by applying the teaching of Dou to explicitly have wherein the substrate of each of the plurality of current sensors comprises a first surface and a second, opposing surface, and wherein the first current sensor is oriented such that its first surface faces a first direction in the stack and its second surface faces a second direction in the stack, and the second sensor is oriented such that its first surface faces the second direction in the stack and its second surface faces the first direction in the stack, wherein the first direction is opposite to the second direction, for the purpose of eliminating magnetic force line interferences perpendicular to coil planes (e.g. Dou, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou).
Regarding claim 13, combination of Saito and Pierquet is silent with regard to wherein each current sensor of the plurality of current sensors is electrically coupled at least one other current sensor of the plurality of current sensors using at least one Z-interconnect.
Dou teaches each current sensor of a plurality of current sensors is electrically coupled at least one other current sensor of the plurality of current sensors using at least one Z-interconnect (e.g. fig. 5, each current sensors 1 is electrically coupled to corresponding current sensors 2 using vias 3 and 4 where the vias 3 and 4 bonds current sensors 1 to corresponding current sensors 2, according to paragraph [0093] of applicant’s published application, Z-interconnect is interpreted as conductive material that bonds substrates together).
It would produce a predictive result of electrically coupled each of the plurality of current sensors using at least one Z-interconnect, for the purpose of increasing connection performing to improve signal quality.
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 the invention of Saito and Pierquet by applying the teaching of Dou to explicitly have wherein each current sensor of the plurality of current sensors is electrically coupled at least one other current sensor of the plurality of current sensors using at least one Z-interconnect, for the purpose of increasing connection performing to improve signal quality.
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (US 2004/0178875) in view of Pierquet et al. (US 12,126,264), and further in view of Buck et al. (US 2019/0290351).
Regarding claim 15, combination of Saito and Pierquet is silent with regard to wherein the current sensor further comprises: a first support substrate upon which the plurality of current sensors are stacked.
However, Buck teaches a first support substrate upon which a current sensor is stacked (e.g. figs. 25A-25D, [0121]-[0122], first housing portion 630a supports and stacked with PCB 601 having current sensor coil 602).
It would produce a predictive result of having housing portions to stack with the plurality of current sensors between the housing portions, for the purpose of protecting the current sensors from external damages.
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 the invention of Saito and Pierquet by applying the teaching of Buck to explicitly have wherein the current sensor further comprises: a first support substrate upon which the plurality of current sensors are stacked, for the purpose of protecting the current sensors from external damages.
Regarding claim 16, combination of Saito and Pierquet is silent with regard to further comprising:
a second support substate; and
a plurality of mechanical supports coupling the first support substrate and the second support substate, wherein the stacked plurality of current sensors are positioned between the first support substrate and the second support substrate.
However, Buck teaches a second support substate (e.g. figs. 25A-25D, [0121]-[0122], second housing portion 630b supports and stacked with PCB 601 having current sensor coil 602); and
a plurality of mechanical supports coupling the first support substrate and the second support substate (e.g. figs. 25A-25D, a pair of opposing spacers 610a and 110b coupling corresponding first housing portion 630a and second housing portion 630b), wherein the current sensor is positioned between the first support substrate and the second support substrate (e.g. figs. 25A-25D, PCB 601 having current sensor coil 602 positioned between first housing portion 630a and second housing portion 630b).
It would produce a predictive result of having housing portions to stack with the plurality of current sensors between the housing portions, for the purpose of protecting the current sensors from external damages.
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 the invention of Saito and Pierquet by applying the teaching of Buck to explicitly have the a second support substate; and a plurality of mechanical supports coupling the first support substrate and the second support substate, wherein the stacked plurality of current sensors are positioned between the first support substrate and the second support substrate, for the purpose of protecting the current sensors from external damages.
Regarding claim 17, combination of Saito and Pierquet is silent with regard to further comprising: a frame arranged to hold the stacked plurality of current sensors such that each of the current sensors is held in a fixed position relative to other current sensors of the stacked plurality of current sensors.
However, Buck teaches a frame arranged to hold and stack with the current sensors such that a current sensors is held in a fixed position (e.g. figs. 25A-25D, first housing portion 630a and second housing portion 630b form a frame to frame and hold PCB 601 with current sensor coil 602 in a fixed position).
It would produce a predictive result of having housing portions as frame to hold and stack with the plurality of current sensors between the housing portions, for the purpose of protecting the current sensors from external damages.
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 the invention of Saito and Pierquet by applying the teaching of Buck to explicitly have further comprising: a frame arranged to hold the stacked plurality of current sensors such that each of the current sensors is held in a fixed position relative to other current sensors of the stacked plurality of current sensors, for the purpose of protecting the current sensors from external damages.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (US 2004/0178875), and further in view of Dou (CN 101329937 A).
Regarding independent claim 20, Saito teaches a current sensor assembly (e.g. figs. 10 and 11, [0076], title, Rogowski coil 1 is current transformer assembly as shown in fig. 10) comprising:
a stacked plurality of current sensors (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0076], a stacked plurality of printed circuit boards 7 with winding 2 as shown in figs 2-3 for detail construction of each the printed circuit boards 7), each of the plurality of current sensors (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0076], detail construction of each of the printed circuit boards 7 is shown in figs. 2-3) comprising:
a substrate (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0044], printed circuit board 7 has top surface 11 and bottom surface 11b which form a substrate);
a path for a conductor carrying current (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0044], opening 9 for a conductor 5 carrying an alternating current as shown in fig. 11 and described in [0078] and [0082]); and
a plurality of measurement coils each arranged to progress at least partially
around the path for the conductor (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, coils around opening 9 forms winding 2 as shown in figs. 2-3),
wherein each of the plurality of current sensors are substantially identical in design (e.g. figs 2-3 and 10, each printed circuit board 7 has identical design as shown in figures 2-3), and each of the plurality of current sensors comprise a first surface and a second surface (e.g. figs. 2-3 and 10, [0044], printed circuit board 7 has the top surface 11 and the bottom surface 11b).
However, Saito is silent with regard to wherein a first group of current sensors of the plurality of current sensors are oriented in the stack such that the first surface of each of the first group of current sensors is oriented in a first direction, and
wherein a second group of current sensors of the plurality of current sensors are
oriented in the stack such that the first surface of each of the second group of current sensors is oriented in a second direction, the second direction being opposite to the first direction.
Dou teaches a first group of current sensors of the plurality of current sensors are oriented in a stack such that a first surface of each of a first group of current sensors is oriented in a first direction (e.g. fig. 5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou, first group of current sensors 1 oriented in a stack as shown in fig. 5, a bottom surface of each of current sensors 1 is oriented in a downward direction), and
a second group of current sensors of the plurality of current sensors are
oriented in the stack such that a first surface of each of the second group of current sensors is oriented in a second direction (e.g. fig. 5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou second group of current sensors 2 oriented in a stack as shown in fig. 5, a top surface of each of current sensors 2 is oriented in a upward direction), the second direction being opposite to the first direction (e.g. fig. 5, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou, the upward direction (associated with the top surface of sensors 1) being opposite to downward direction (associated with the bottom surface of sensors 1), where bottom surfaces of sensors 1 are mirror images of corresponding top surface of sensors 2, as a result the bottom surfaces are opposite the corresponding top surfaces).
It would produce a predictive result of having wherein a first group of current sensors of the plurality of current sensors are oriented in the stack such that the first surface of each of the first group of current sensors is oriented in a first direction, and wherein a second group of current sensors of the plurality of current sensors are oriented in the stack such that the first surface of each of the second group of current sensors is oriented in a second direction, the second direction being opposite to the first direction, for the purpose of eliminating magnetic force line interferences perpendicular to coil planes (e.g. Dou, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou).
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 the invention of Saito by applying the teaching of Pierquet to explicitly have wherein a first group of current sensors of the plurality of current sensors are oriented in the stack such that the first surface of each of the first group of current sensors is oriented in a first direction, and wherein a second group of current sensors of the plurality of current sensors are oriented in the stack such that the first surface of each of the second group of current sensors is oriented in a second direction, the second direction being opposite to the first direction, for the purpose of eliminating magnetic force line interferences perpendicular to coil planes (e.g. Dou, paragraph 2 of “Description according to claim claimpixels” section of the English translation of Dou).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 is 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; and if the objection of claim 18 is properly overcome without broadening the scope of claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAIDONG ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5815. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Phan can be reached on (571) 272-7924. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HAIDONG ZHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/ALVARO E FORTICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights