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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 4, add “the” before length. 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 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.
Claim 1 requires the resonance frequency of the ultrasonic element to be less than 2000kHz. Technically speaking, the claim would encompass a resonant frequency of less than 20kHz, which is considered the lower limit of the ultrasonic waves, and therefore the limitation is indefinite.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
It is not clear from the specification how the resonance frequency of the ultrasonic element can be less than 2000 kHz, including values less than the range of ultrasonic frequencies. In addition, it is unclear how the applicants achieve the 1500-2000 kHz resonant frequency. It is unclear what kind of structure of the sensor, including materials and dimensions of the sensor, allows for the claimed frequency range.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Senkal et al. (US20220291513, hereinafter Senkal).
Regarding claim 1, Senkal discloses an ultrasonic sensor (Fig. 3) that transmits an ultrasonic wave to a target object and receives the ultrasonic wave reflected by the target object (Fig. 5), the ultrasonic sensor comprising: an ultrasonic array chip (300) on which ultrasonic elements (310) that transmit and receive the ultrasonic wave are arranged in an array shape, wherein each of the ultrasonic elements includes a vibrating section and a piezoelectric element (paragraph [0043]) provided in the vibrating section, vibrates the vibrating section to transmit the ultrasonic wave, and outputs a reception signal of the ultrasonic wave by the vibration of the vibrating section, and a resonance frequency of the ultrasonic element is 2000 kHz or less (100-1000kHz, paragraph [0064]).
Regarding claim 2, in Fig. 3, Senkal discloses the ultrasonic array chip, when viewed from a transmission direction of the ultrasonic wave, the ultrasonic array chip has a rectangular shape, and length of one side of the ultrasonic array chip is 5 mm or less. Paragraph [0063] discloses a width W1 of 2mm.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kojima et al. (JP2021057752, hereinafter Kojima).
Regarding claim 1, Kojima discloses an ultrasonic sensor (Fig. 3) that transmits an ultrasonic wave to a target object and receives the ultrasonic wave reflected by the target object, the ultrasonic sensor (20) comprising: an ultrasonic array chip (Fig. 2) on which ultrasonic elements (Tr) that transmit and receive the ultrasonic wave are arranged in an array shape, wherein each of the ultrasonic elements includes a vibrating section and a piezoelectric element (22) provided in the vibrating section (212A), vibrates the vibrating section to transmit the ultrasonic wave, and outputs a reception signal of the ultrasonic wave by the vibration of the vibrating section, and a resonance frequency of the ultrasonic element is 2000 kHz or less (600kHz, paragraph [0026] of the machine translation provided by the applicants).
Regarding claim 3, the resonance frequency of the ultrasonic element is less than 1000 kHz (600kHz), and the ultrasonic element is configured to set a reverberation time to 60 µs or less, the reverberation time being a time until vibration amplitude of the vibrating section caused by transmitting the ultrasonic wave from the ultrasonic element decreases to 10% or less of the vibration amplitude of the vibrating section immediately after the transmission of the ultrasonic wave. Please refer to Fig. 7, which shows the time to around 40µs.
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 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kojima in view of Senkal, or vice versa.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Kojima discloses the invention as explained above, including the reverberation time, but fails to explicitly disclose the resonance frequency of the ultrasonic element between 1000kHz and 1500kHz. Senkal discloses a resonance frequency of 1000 kHz or even higher frequencies (paragraph [0066]), but fails to disclose the reverberation time as claimed. The examiner takes Official Notice that it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify either reference based on the teachings of each other, as necessitated by the specific requirements of the particular application in order to obtain the desired function and characteristics. For example, Senkal discloses that higher frequencies may attenuate over short distances. It is the examiner’s position that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to determine the range of frequencies in which the sensor would work best for the specific application or use.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jaydi San Martin whose telephone number is (571)272-2018. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 7:45-6:00pm.
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, 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 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.
/J. San Martin/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837