Response After Non-Final
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed on 07/22/2025.
Claims 1-37 are pending in the application.
Claims 1-37 are rejected.
Claims 1-8, 10-12, 16-18, 20, 22-25, 27-33, and 36 are currently amended.
Claim 37 is new.
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.
Response to Arguments
The applicant's arguments filed July 22, 2025 have been fully considered
and are respectfully found persuasive in part and unpersuasive in part.
The applicant argues the following:
[1] Title and claim objections and the 112 rejection have been addressed and should be withdrawn. The new claim limitation has required an new claim objection.
[2] Prior art of record fails to teach the claimed “central control unit” and its claimed function of minimizing or preventing mutual electrical damping of the at least two piezoelectric units.
[3] Prior art of record fails to teach the new claim limitation.
Regarding [1], the examiner respectfully agrees and the title and claim objections and the 112 rejection raised in the non-final office action are hereby withdrawn.
Regarding [2] and [3], the examiner respectfully disagrees because the prior art of record teaches the claim limitations at issue. First, Moore teaches a central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007] – “The receiver-stimulator is then a collection of multiple harvesting elements whose electrical outputs are combined to deliver an electrical output to tissue in order to stimulate the tissue.”), with which the integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) make electrical contact (Fig. 3D; [0003]; [0007]; [0010]), wherein the control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) comprises a control module (Fig. 3D, control module in control unit for 300; [0007]) and is designed to collect (Fig. 3D) electrical energy (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007] – “The receiver-stimulator is then a collection of multiple harvesting elements whose electrical outputs are combined to deliver an electrical output to tissue in order to stimulate the tissue.”) from the piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120), and wherein the control module (Fig. 3D, control module in control unit for 300; [0007]) is designed (Fig. 3D; [0055]) to minimize (Fig. 3D; [0055]) or prevent (Fig. 3D; [0055]) mutual electrical damping (Fig. 3D; [0055]) of the piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120). Second, Moore does not merely teach a method of manufacturing, but rather a central control unit that collects electrical outputs from various piezoelectric units to deliver an electrical output. Thirdly, does not merely teach a method of manufacturing, but rather a means of minimizing or preventing interference between units, thereby, minimizing or preventing mutual electrical damping of the at least two piezoelectric units. Lastly, the prior art of record reads on the new claim limitation as shown below.
Claim Objections
Claim 37 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “the control unit” should be --the central control unit--
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 1-8, 10-15, 17-19, 23-26, 31, 33-34, and 36-37 are rejected under 35
U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0345026; hereinafter “Moore”) in view of Feng et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2021/0135593; hereinafter “Feng”).
Regarding claim 1, Moore teaches an energy harvesting system comprising: - at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) each piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, 120) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) comprising: - a piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120), and - integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313), wherein the integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) make electrical contact (Fig. 3D) with the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120), and wherein the integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) comprises electrical components (Fig. 3D, electrical components of 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) for an electrical voltage (Fig. 3D, voltage output by 120) generated (Figs. 3D/6) in the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120); wherein the piezoelectric layers (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) are arranged (Fig. 3D) at an angle (Fig. 3D) to one another (Fig. 3D); - a central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007] – “The receiver-stimulator is then a collection of multiple harvesting elements whose electrical outputs are combined to deliver an electrical output to tissue in order to stimulate the tissue.”), with which the integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) make electrical contact (Fig. 3D; [0003]; [0007]; [0010]), wherein the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) comprises a control module (Fig. 3D, control module in control unit for 300; [0007]) and is designed to collect (Fig. 3D) electrical energy (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007] – “The receiver-stimulator is then a collection of multiple harvesting elements whose electrical outputs are combined to deliver an electrical output to tissue in order to stimulate the tissue.”) from the piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120), and wherein the control module (Fig. 3D, control module in control unit for 300; [0007]) is designed (Fig. 3D; [0055]) to minimize (Fig. 3D; [0055]) or prevent (Fig. 3D; [0055]) mutual electrical damping (Fig. 3D; [0055]) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120). Moore does not teach components for smoothing an electrical voltage.
Feng, however, does teach components for smoothing an electrical voltage (Fig. 1, 14/Cfilter in combination; [0026]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the smoothing components of Feng because it would smooth out the pulsating DC output of a rectifier thereby improving the stability of the voltage driving the DC-DC converter (Feng [0026]).
Regarding claim 2, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric layers (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) are arranged (Fig. 3D) perpendicular (Fig. 3D) to one another (Fig. 3D).
Regarding claim 3, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) comprise a first piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, first unit of 120), a second piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, second unit of 120), and comprises a third piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, 120), the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of third piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, 120) is at an angle (Fig. 3D) to the piezoelectric layers (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of the first piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, first unit of 120) and the second piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, second unit of 120).
Regarding claim 4, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 3, wherein the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of the third piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, 120) is perpendicular (Fig. 3D) to the piezoelectric layers (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of the first piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, first unit of 120) and the second piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, second unit of 120).
Regarding claim 5, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 3, which comprises further piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120), the piezoelectric layers (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) being at an angle (Fig. 3D) to the further piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120).
Regarding claim 6, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric layers (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) are in the form of circle segments (Figs. 1/3D; [0051] – “The can assembly 300 (shown in FIG. 3 A or alternatively in FIGS. 3E and 3F) is folded to produce an octagonal for rolled to produce an otherwise substantially cylindrical or tubular) can structure 310, as shown in FIGS. 3C and 3I) or alternatively in FIGS. 3G-3I.”).
Regarding claim 7, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 6, wherein the piezoelectric layers (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) are arranged (Fig. 3D) in three intersecting circular planes (Fig. 3D, planes of perpendicularly arranged units 120 are intersecting).
Regarding claim 8, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) and the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) are fastened in a frame (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]; [0058] – “Acoustic apertures could also be created by attaching other materials such as frames or cylinders of titanium, ceramic or other material to the substrate in the space not occupied by the piezoelectric components.”).
Regarding claim 10, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) are connected (Figs. 1/3/6) in parallel (Fig. 6A) or in series (Fig. 6B) with one another (Figs. 1/3/6) to form a group (Figs. 1/3/6, group for each 120 and each’s respective set connections).
Regarding claim 11, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, further comprising: a plurality of connected groups (Figs. 1/3/6, group for each 120 and each’s respective set connections) of integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/311-313), and wherein the plurality of connected groups of integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) are connected (Figs. 1/3/6) in parallel (Fig. 6A) or in series (Fig. 6B) with one another (Figs. 1/3/6).
Regarding claim 12, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) and/or (Examiner’s Note: Use of “or” is a broad construction, such that, the prior art is only required to read on one element of the “or” chain.) the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) further comprises electrical components for limiting an electrical voltage (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300 regulating voltage; [0007]; [0043]) generated (Figs. 1/3/6) in the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120).
Regarding claim 13, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) comprises a rectifier (Fig. 3D, 121).
Regarding claim 14, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim13, wherein the rectifier (Fig. 3D, 121) is constructed from (Fig. 6) a connection (Fig. 6) of discrete individual diodes (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 15, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 13, wherein the rectifier (Fig. 3D, 121) is integrated (Fig. 3D, 121/311-313) in an integrated circuit (Fig. 3D, 121/311-313; Fig. 6) and a Zener diode (Fig. 3D, 121 protection circuitry Zener diode; [0043]; [Claim 11]) is connected in parallel (Fig. 6A) with the integrated circuit (Fig. 3D, 121/311-313).
Regarding claim 17, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) comprises an RF module (Fig. 3D, wireless module of control unit for 300; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]).
Regarding claim 18, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 17, wherein the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) and the RF module (Fig. 3D, wireless module of control unit for 300; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]) are designed (Fig. 3D; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]) to be operated with (Fig. 3D; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]) the electrical energy (Fig. 3D; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]) collected ([0007]) by the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]).
Regarding claim 19, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the energy harvesting system (Figs. 1/3A; Fig. 1, 101; Fig. 3A, 300) is autonomous in terms of energy (Fig. 3D; [0010] – “In a first aspect, the present invention provides an implantable receiver-stimulator device which is capable of harvesting acoustic power from an acoustic field that is delivered from an acoustic source (physically separate from the receiver-stimulator device) and converting that acoustic power to electrical power to deliver electrical energy to stimulate tissue. The receiver-stimulator of the present invention is configured to be efficient, meaning it harvests all or nearly all of the acoustic power available and converts it into electrical power sufficient to stimulate cardiac tissue. In addition to efficient harvesting of acoustic power, the implantable receiver-stimulators of the present invention are also capable of functioning with a high degree of isotropy. This means that the output electrical power of the receiver-stimulator is constant or nearly constant as the receiver-stimulator's orientation is varied, relative to the propagation direction of the acoustic field transmitted by the controller-transmitter. In addition, the receiver-stimulator consists of multiple harvesting elements integrated into a mechanical structure that in aggregate provide high efficiency and a high degree of isotropy.”; [0060]-[0061]; [0066]-[0068]; [0073]).
Regarding claim 23, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein each piezoelectric unit (Fig. 3D, 120) of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120) comprise a limiter (Fig. 3D; [0010]; [0060]-[0061]; [0066]-[0068]; [0073]) which is designed to limit a deflection (Fig. 3D; [0010]; [0060]-[0061]; [0066]-[0068]; [0073]) of the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120).
Regarding claim 24, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]). Moore does not teach a DC/DC converter.
Feng, however, does teach a DC/DC converter (Fig. 1, 16; [Claim 15]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the DC/DC converter of Feng because it would provide the ability to efficiently step up a lower input voltage to a higher output voltage thereby improving power provision to other components while reducing overall power consumption (Feng [0026]).
Regarding claim 25, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the integrated electronics (Fig. 3D, 121/121 protection circuitry/311-313) and/or (Examiner’s Note: Use of “or” is a broad construction, such that, the prior art is only required to read on one element of the “or” chain.) the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]). Moore does not teach a smoothing capacitor.
Feng, however, does teach a smoothing capacitor (Fig. 1, Cfilter; [0026]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the smoothing capacitor of Feng because it would smooth out the pulsating DC output of a rectifier thereby improving the stability of the voltage driving the DC-DC converter (Feng [0026]).
Regarding claim 26, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the control module (Fig. 3D, control module in control unit for 300; [0007]). Moore does not teach a system-on-a-chip or a microcontroller.
Feng, however, does teach a system-on-a-chip or a microcontroller (Fig. 1, 12).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the ASIC chip of Feng because it would provide low quiescent current consumption, configurable converter impedance, simple periphery circuit of the system, and the large scale integration (LSI) design of the chip thereby improving the energy conversion, storage, transfer and regulation with maximum power point tracking (MPPT) to efficiently supply power to operate the on-chip sensor load while making the ASIC scalable to provide low-cost, maintenance-free, and miniature sensors for pervasive IoT sensor networks (Feng [0024]).
Regarding claim 31, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]). Moore does not teach a rechargeable battery or a capacitor for storing energy.
Feng, however, does teach a rechargeable battery or (Examiner’s Note: Use of “or” is a broad construction, such that, the prior art is only required to read on one element of the “or” chain.) a capacitor for storing energy (Fig. 1, Csupp; [0026]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the storage capacitor of Feng because it would provide store energy to be supplied to other components thereby improving power efficiency and consumption (Feng [0023]; [0026]).
Regarding claim 33, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) further comprises additional sensors (Fig. 3D, additional sensors of control unit for 300; [0007.
Regarding claim 34, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) is a polymer layer, a ceramic layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120; [0067]), a thin ceramic layer, a multilayer ceramic or a monolithic ceramic.
Regarding claim 36, Moore as modified teaches a shock sensor comprising: at least one energy harvesting system (Figs. 1/3A; Fig. 1, 101; Fig. 3A, 300) according to claim 1, wherein the energy harvesting system (Figs. 1/3A; Fig. 1, 101; Fig. 3A, 300) is designed to detect (Figs. 1/3A; Fig. 1, 101; Fig. 3A, 300; [0011] – “At least two electrodes in electrical contact with the tissue are coupled to the rectifier circuitry to receive the stimulating electrical output and deliver said output to tissue.”; [0012] – “The inner surface may also contain additional circuitry that combines the output power from each of the individual harvesting elements to the pair of electrodes that are in electrical contact with the tissue.”; [0014] – “The electrical output flowing over time between stimulation electrodes which are in electrical contact with tissue may possess specific characteristics of voltage, current, waveform, and the like. These electrical characteristics will be selected to stimulate the target cardiac tissue, nerve tissue, brain tissue, voluntary muscle tissue, bone tissue, or the like.”; [0073] – “…using the rectifiers 121 to produce an electrical output from the electrical power that is delivered to stimulation electrodes in electrical contact with tissue; and transmitting the acoustic field for sufficient time to produce sufficient electrical energy to stimulate the tissue.”) an impact or shock (Figs. 1/3A; Fig. 1, 101; Fig. 3A, 300; [0011] – “contact…stimulating”; [0014] – “stimulation”; [0073] – “stimulation…transmitting”) and to transmit (Figs. 1/3A; Fig. 1, 101; Fig. 3A, 300; [0011]; [0014]; [0073] – “stimulation…transmitting”) this information (Figs. 1/3A; [Abstract]; [Claim 1]) to a receiver (Figs. 1/3A; [Abstract]; [Claim 1]).
Regarding claim 37, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 17, wherein the RF module (Fig. 3D, wireless module of control unit for 300; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]) is configured (Fig. 3D; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035] ) such that the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) can wirelessly send information (Fig. 3D, wireless harvesting of acoustic power; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]) to a receiver (Fig. 3D, receiver of the wireless harvesting of acoustic power; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore
in view of Feng and further in view of Hogg (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0310471; hereinafter “Hogg”).
Regarding claim 9, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 8. Moore does not teach the frame is spherical.
Hogg, however, does teach the frame is spherical (Fig. 3, 100).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the spherical frame of Hogg because it would provide passive sensor data collected to represent fluid parameters at an instant in time to derive information about the flow, the motion and position of the device, and parameters of the physical system constraining the flow using quasi-static analysis techniques, and appropriate feature selection for machine learning thereby improving measurement by providing very accurate determinations, generally in real time, with very modest computational requirements that can then be used to map systems, navigate devices through a system, or otherwise control the actions of, e.g., robotic devices for clean-up, leak detection, or other functions (Hogg [Abstract]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore
in view of Feng and further in view of Levine (U.S. Patent No. 4,066,981; hereinafter “Levine”).
Regarding claim 16, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 13, wherein the rectifier (Fig. 3D, 121) is integrated (Fig. 3D, 121/311-313) in an integrated circuit (Fig. 3D, 121/311-313; Fig. 6) and a protective circuit (Fig. 3D, 121 protection circuitry; [0043]) is connected (Figs. 1/3/6) in parallel (Fig. 6A; [0043]) with the integrated circuit (Fig. 3D, 121/311-313; Fig. 6), wherein the protective circuit (Fig. 3D, 121 protection circuitry; [0043]). Moore does not teach a circuit that comprises a voltage divider, a transistor and a capacitor, wherein the transistor and the capacitor are connected in series, and wherein the voltage divider is connected in parallel with the transistor and the capacitor, and wherein the transistor is controlled by a voltage taken from the voltage divider.
Levine, however, does teach a circuit (Fig. 2) that comprises a voltage divider (Fig. 2, 24-25), a transistor (Fig. 2, 27) and a capacitor (Fig. 2, 26), wherein the transistor (Fig. 2, 27) and the capacitor (Fig. 2, 26) are connected (Fig. 2) in series (Fig. 2), and wherein the voltage divider (Fig. 2, 24-25) is connected (Fig. 2) in parallel (Fig. 2) with the transistor (Fig. 2, 27) and the capacitor (Fig. 2, 26), and wherein the transistor (Fig. 2, 27) is controlled (Fig. 2) by a voltage (Fig. 2, output of 24-25) taken from (Fig. 2) the voltage divider (Fig. 2, 24-25).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the divider-capacitor-transistor circuit of Levine because it would stabilize negative feedback thereby reducing the overall gain and improving device stability (Levine [Column 2, lines 41-43]; [Column 4, lines 24-30]).
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore
in view of Feng and further in view of Makdissi et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0289830; hereinafter “Makdissi”).
Regarding claim 32, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the central control unit (Fig. 3D, control unit for 300; [0007]) and the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) of each of the at least two piezoelectric units (Fig. 3D, 120). Moore does not teach a unit configured to determine an acceleration acting on the energy harvesting system in a direction-dependent manner on the basis of the voltage generated in the piezoelectric layers.
Makdissi, however, does teach a unit ([Abstract]; [Claim 1]) configured to determine ([Abstract]; [Claim 1]) an acceleration ([Abstract]; [Claim 1]) acting on the energy harvesting system ([Abstract]; [Claim 1]) in a direction-dependent manner ([Abstract]; [Claim 1]) on the basis of the voltage ([Abstract]; [Claim 1]) generated ([Abstract]; [Claim 1]) in the piezoelectric layer ([Abstract] – “The energy harvesting module is provided with a pendular unit comprising an inertial mass coupled to an elastic piezoelectric beam providing a power voltage. An acceleration sensor provides a signal representative of the instantaneous acceleration of the beam in a direction perpendicular to a surface of the beam, and an angular speed sensor provides a signal representative of the instantaneous angular speed of rotation of the beam about an axis perpendicular to a plane of bending of the beam. Based on the voltage, acceleration and angular speed values, a beam integrity monitoring circuit estimates parameters of a mechanical-electrical transfer function and derives therefrom metrics representative of physical and electrical parameters of the pendular unit and of the material of the beam. This makes it possible to evaluate the proper operation of the energy harvester and to detect a potential performance decrease liable to lead to a failure in the more or less short term.”; [Claim 1] – “An energy harvesting module, comprising: a pendular unit subjected to external stresses applied to the module, the pendular unit comprising a beam that is elastically deformable in bending according to at least one degree of freedom, with a clamped end and an opposite free end coupled to an inertial mass; wherein the beam is a piezoelectric beam forming a mechanical-electrical transducer adapted to convert into an oscillating electrical signal a mechanical energy produced by oscillations of the pendular unit; and a power management circuit, adapted to rectify and regulate the oscillating electrical signal to output a stabilized direct power voltage or current, the energy harvesting module further comprising a circuit for monitoring the integrity of the beam, comprising: an acceleration sensor for providing an acceleration signal representative of the instantaneous acceleration of the beam in a direction perpendicular to a surface of the beam; a collecting and sampling circuit, adapted to receive the oscillating signal and the acceleration signal, and to provide a plurality of successive samples each containing an oscillating signal value associated with a concomitant acceleration value; a memory storing a transfer function describing the mechanical-electrical behavior of the beam, wherein said transfer function is a relation providing, for respective given values of a set of modelling parameters, an oscillating signal value as a function of a value of instantaneous acceleration of the beam; and a processor and a memory comprising instructions for causing the processor to execute a process comprising the following steps: a) receiving the plurality of said successive samples each containing an oscillating signal value associated with a concomitant acceleration value; b) applying these successive samples to said transfer function to derive therefrom a corresponding set of estimates of said modelling parameters from the oscillating signal and acceleration values of the successive samples; and c) deriving from said estimates of the modelling parameters at least one physical metric of the pendular unit and/or of the beam.”).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the acceleration sensor of Makdissi because it would provide the ability to detect a potential performance decrease liable to lead to a failure in the more or less short term thereby improving device protection and optimizing functionality by making it possible to evaluate the proper operation of the energy harvester (Makdissi [Abstract]).
Claims 20-22, 27-30, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Moore in view of Feng and further in view of Hall et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2014/0276247; hereinafter “Hall”).
Regarding claim 20, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120) is arranged on a substrate (Fig. 3D; [0056] – “Acoustic apertures could also be created by attaching other materials such as frames or cylinders of titanium, ceramic or other material to the substrate in the space not occupied by the piezoelectric components.”). Moore does not teach the substrate being thinner than 1 mm.
Hall, however, does teach the substrate being ([0025] – “The overall thickness of the device is typically about…1, 0.5, 0.4, 0.3, 0.2, 0.1, 0.05 mm or less).”) thinner than 1 mm ([0025]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the substrate thickness of Hall because it would provide a flexible and disposable transducer thereby improving applicability to a variety of surfaces while decreasing cost (Hall [0025]).
Regarding claim 21, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 20. Moore does not teach the substrate is electrically conductive.
Hall, however, does teach the substrate ([0025]; [0041]) is electrically conductive ([0041] – “The device substrate may be, for example, made from metals,…”).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the conductive substrate of Hall because it would provide a flexible and disposable transducer thereby improving applicability to a variety of surfaces while decreasing cost (Hall [0025]).
Regarding claim 22, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 20. Moore does not teach the shape of the piezoelectric layer is adapted to the shape of the substrate.
Hall, however, does teach the shape (Fig. 4, 130; [0041]) of the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 4, 130; [0041]; [0085]) is adapted (Fig. 4, 130; [0041]; [0085]) to the shape of the substrate (Fig. 4, 120; [0041]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the piezoelectric layer-substrate shape relationship of Hall because it would provide a flexible and disposable transducer thereby improving applicability to a variety of surfaces while decreasing cost (Hall [0025]).
Regarding claim 27, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 17, wherein the RF module (Fig. 3D, wireless module of control unit for 300; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]). Moore does not teach a power-on reset time with a duration of less than 50 ms.
Hall, however, does teach a power-on reset time with a duration of less than 50 ms, (Examiner’s Note: Use of “or” is a broad construction, such that, the prior art is only required to read on one element of the “or” chain.).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the communication system of Hall because it would provide low energy communication system thereby improving energy consumption efficiency (Hall [0177]).
Regarding claim 28, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 17, wherein the RF module (Fig. 3D, wireless module of control unit for 300; [0007]; [Title]; [0002]; [0035]). Moore does not teach a Bluetooth transmitter, wherein the transmitter is configured to adapt a number of channels.
Hall, however, does teach a Bluetooth transmitter ([0177]), wherein the transmitter ([0177]) is configured to adapt a number of channels ([0177]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the transmitter of Hall because it would provide low energy communication system thereby improving energy consumption efficiency (Hall [0177]).
Regarding claim 29, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 28. Moore does not teach the transmitter transmits on a single channel.
Hall, however, does teach the transmitter ([0177]) transmits ([0177]) on a single channel ([0177]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the transmitter of Hall because it would provide low energy communication system thereby improving energy consumption efficiency (Hall [0177]).
Regarding claim 30, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 17. Moore does not teach a duration of a transmission signal, a transmission power and an inter-signal pause are set in such a manner that as little energy as possible is consumed.
Hall, however, does teach a duration of a transmission signal ([0177]), a transmission power ([0177]) and an inter-signal pause ([0177]) are set ([0177]) in such a manner that as little energy as possible ([0177]) is consumed ([0177] – inherent functions of Bluetooth).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the Bluetooth transmitter of Hall because it would provide low energy communication system thereby improving energy consumption efficiency (Hall [0177]).
Regarding claim 35, Moore as modified teaches the energy harvesting system according to claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3D, piezoelectric layer in each unit 120). Moore does not teach a piezoelectric layer which is thinner than 300 µm.
Hall, however, does teach a piezoelectric layer which is thinner than 300 µm ([0085] – “Preferred thicknesses for the flexible ultrasound emitter (e.g., a piezoelectric coating (film or paint)) are about 50 to 200 .mu.m (e.g., about 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200 .mu.m, or some range therebetween).”).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Moore to include the piezoelectric layer thickness of Hall because it would provide a flexible and disposable transducer thereby improving applicability to a variety of surfaces while decreasing cost (Hall [0025]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to MONICA MATA
whose telephone number is (571) 272-8782. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday from 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
supervisor, Dedei Hammond, can be reached on (571) 270-7938. 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 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).
/MONICA MATA/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
17 October 2025
/EMILY P PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837