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
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.
Claims 1-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pflanz Patent No. 4,920,446.
Regarding claim 1, Pflanz discloses a shutoff system that shuts off a current path, the shutoff system comprising:
a shunt resistor [Fig. 4, 16] provided in the current path [Fig. 4, 12]; and
a pyroswitch [Fig. 4, pyrotechnic cutting charge 14] that includes an internal resistor [Fig. 4, 18] and shuts off the current path by performing detonation in accordance with a current that flows in the internal resistor [col. 2 – col. 3],
wherein the shunt resistor and the internal resistor are connected in parallel to each other [col. 2 lines 63-65].
Regarding claim 2, Pflanz discloses that a resistance value of the shunt resistor is a value that is based on a resistance value of the internal resistor, an anomalous current value set for a current that flows in the current path, and a current value, of the current that flows in the internal resistor, that is necessary for detonation [col. 2 lines 60 – col. 3 lines 21].
Regarding claim 3, Pflanz discloses that the shutoff system varies a magnitude of the current that flows in the internal resistor in accordance with a magnitude of the current that flows in the current path [col. 3 lines 12-22].
Regarding claim 4, Pflanz discloses that when an overcurrent of the anomalous current value flows in the current path, the pyroswitch performs detonation with the overcurrent [col. 2 and col. 3].
Regarding claim 5, Pflanz discloses that the current path is a busbar [col. 2 lines 54; busbar 54].
Regarding claim 6, Pflanz discloses that the resistance value of the shunt resistor is expressed by the following equation: Rs=Rp×Id/(Ic-Id), where Rs denotes the resistance value of the shunt resistor, Rp denotes the resistance value of the internal resistor, Ic denotes the anomalous current value set for the current that flows in the current path, and Id denotes the current value, of the current that flows in the internal resistor, that is necessary for detonation [col. 3 lines 12-22 and col. 4 lines 2 and col. 3 15-22 indicates a relationship between the resistance values of the shunt resistor and the internal resistor of 18, and inherently meets the equation].
Regarding claim 7, Pflanz discloses that the resistance value of the shunt resistor is expressed by the following equation: Rs=Rp×Id/Ic where Rs denotes the resistance value of the shunt resistor, Rp denotes the resistance value of the internal resistor, Ic denotes the anomalous current value set for the current that flows in the current path, and Id denotes the current value, of the current that flows in the internal resistor, that is necessary for detonation [col. 3 lines 12-22 and col. 4 lines 2 and col. 3 15-22 indicates a relationship between the resistance values of the shunt resistor and the internal resistor of 18, and inherently meets the equation].
Regarding claim 9, Pflanz discloses that the pyroswitch includes: a detonator [Fig. 1, 18] that performs detonation and in which the internal resistor [Fig. 1, 18] is provided; and a housing [Fig. 1, the housing around the pyroswitch 10 as shown], the current path extends to penetrate through a side wall of the housing [Fig. 1, the busbar 12 extends to penetrate through a side wall of the housing], and the detonator is provided in the side wall [Fig. 1, the detonator is provided at the side wall of the housing of the pyroswitch 10].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pflanz Patent No. 4,920,446.
Regarding claim 8, Pflanz does not disclose that the shunt resistor is embedded in the pyroswitch.
Pflanz discloses that the shunt resistor [Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, shunt resistor 16] and the pyroswitch [Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, 10] are enclosed in a housing [Fig. 1, 38]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to embed the shunt resistor in the pyroswitch, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces an put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-14 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance of claim 10: The prior art does not further comprise a blowout fuse wherein the blowout fuse is connected in parallel to the shunt resistor and the internal resistor. This feature in combination with the rest of the claim limitations is not anticipated or rendered obvious by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DHARTI PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-8659. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Thienvu Tran can be reached at 571-270-1276. 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.
DHARTI PATEL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2836
/DHARTI H PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights