DETAILED ACTION
1. The communication is in response to the application received 08/11/2025, where Claims 1-3 are pending and are examined as follows. The Instant Application is a Divisional of Parent Application 17/121,705, now U.S. Patent Number 12,388,958 B2.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 08/11/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
4. 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. Please include relevant terms from the claim (e.g. weather conditions) in the title, that better reflects the invention.
The following title is suggested: “A device for detecting weather conditions on a power line” or something equivalent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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 1-3 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.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites “a housing configured to be mounted on a power line” (emphasis added). This is interpreted to mean said housing is positioned on the power line/transmission line itself. However, figs. 7, 9, 10, and 12 seem to suggest the housing (502) for the fire weather condition monitor (500) is mounted to a support structure that supports the power line. As such, it is not entirely clear where the housing is to be mounted. For this reason, the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be unequivocally ascertained.
Regarding claims 2-3, claims 2-3 depend on claim 1, and therefore include all of its features. Thus, claims 2-3 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same reasons presented above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lancaster US 8,386,198 B2, in view of Pinney et al. US 2019/0235011 A1, hereinafter referred to as Lancaster and Pinney, respectively.
Regarding Claim 1, Given the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the following limitations, Lancaster teaches and/or suggests “A device for detection of weather conditions [See sensor device 105 for detecting weather conditions (fig. 1)], the device comprising: a housing configured to be mounted on a power line [Although Lancaster does not explicitly refer to “a housing”, sensor 105 (fig. 1), which can be placed on power line 205 (fig. 2 and col. 4 lines 4-5), must be enclosed in a housing in order to withstand environmental stresses and other conditions. Please refer to Pinney below for more explicit support]; an anemometer configured to sense at least one of wind speed or wind direction [Sensor 105 (fig. 1) has both a wind speed sensor 160 and a wind direction sensor 155 (col. 3 lines 29-47)]; an ambient temperature sensor [Sensor 105 (fig. 1) also has an ambient temperature sensor 150 (col. 3 lines 29-47)]; an ambient humidity sensor [Sensor 105 (fig. 1) further has an humidity sensor 165 (col. 3 lines 29-47)]; and a microprocessor configured to track changes of weather conditions based on information sensed by at least one of the anemometer, the ambient temperature sensor, or the ambient humidity sensor [Processing unit 110 can communicate with sensor software module 120 and database 125 for monitoring sensed weather conditions from all three sensors (fig. 1 and text). Although tracking changes of said conditions is not explicit, Lancaster appears to suggest this. Given the processing unit may implement program modules that include routines, programs, etc. for performing particular tasks (col. 6 lines 38-47), performing various data analyses would thus be within the level of skill in the art. For additional support, please see Pinney below], and send information of the weather conditions to a remote location.” [Fig. 1 further shows how sensor 105 can transmit the sensor data to other points in a network via communications package 130. See col. 2 lines 61-67 and col. 3 lines 1-28. Also please note, central station 220 may receive the sensor data (fig. 1 and col. 4 lines 4-14)] Although Lancaster’s teachings appear to suggest tracking changes in weather conditions, this feature is not explicit. As such the work of Pinney from the same or similar field of endeavor is relied on to teach and/or suggest this feature. [See for e.g. ¶0038-¶0040, ¶0042, and ¶0122. Microcontroller 50 can perform various processing tasks on sensor data, which are all inside main enclosure 60M of transmission line monitoring system 10 (fig. 2). Data analysis may be carried out locally via microcontroller 50. Tracking weather data (e.g., temperatures) can facilitate determining corrections to biases in electrical responses of A/D converters] Given Pinney’s system for power transmission line monitoring, it would have therefore been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the work of Lancaster for detecting weather conditions at a location of a power line (e.g. fig. 2), to add the teachings of Pinney as above that allows processed weather data to be used for increasing the accuracy of an EMF model via dynamic corrections in for e.g. temperature and precipitation. Thus, a more precise and accurate determination of the line power can be made (e.g. ¶0122).
Regarding Claim 2, Lancaster and Pinney teach and/or suggest all the limitations of claim 1, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Lancaster further teaches and/or suggests “further comprising a magnetic field harvesting power supply configured to obtain power from the power line to power the device.” [See col. 3 lines 54-59. Due to the proximity of sensor device 105 to the power line, power supply 170 may scavenge power from the power line using for e.g. a current transformer].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lancaster, in view of Pinney, and in further view of Kast et al. US 2013/0187636 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kast.
Regarding Claim 3, Lancaster and Pinney teach and/or suggest all the limitations of claim 2, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. However, Lancaster and Pinney do not appear to address the feature of claim 3. Kast on the other hand from the same or similar field of endeavor is brought in to teach and/or suggest “further comprising a battery that is chargeable by the power obtained by the magnetic field harvesting power supply.” [Kast describes power line sensors installed on the power line (e.g. fig. 3) that can harvest power to power said sensors. Also included in said sensors is a battery (e.g. ¶0044 and ¶0048). Using a rechargeable battery is deemed within the level of skill in the art in order to help guarantee that a constant source of power is available to maintain operations of the power line sensors] Given Kast’s teachings, it would have therefore been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the work of both Lancaster and Pinney, to add the teachings of Kast as above for providing line sensors in a power distribution monitoring system with robust energy harvesting designs that allow for long term reliability and performance in challenging environmental conditions (e.g. ¶0003).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see PTO 892 for additional references. For e.g., the work of Brown US 6,097,298 describes a method for monitoring a power transmission line (e.g. abstract). In particular, Brown discloses a possible installation of weather station equipment (e.g. fig. 2 and col. 5 lines 49-59). Also please note the micro-meteorological monitoring device for power transmission lines in Zhang et al. CN 207557513U.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD A HANSELL JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-0615. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10 am- 7 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, Jamie Atala can be reached at 571-272-7384. 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.
/RICHARD A HANSELL JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights