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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 13, 2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed August 27, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objection and 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed May 28, 2025, hereafter referred to as the Non-Final Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 27, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s updated amended claims have been re-evaluated in light of new prior art Reitsma (US 9088261 B2, hereinafter Reitsma) that has been considered in conjunction with the arguments presented. The amendments to independent claims 1 and 11, changed the scope of the invention. The rejections of claims 1-20 are maintained.
In response to Applicant's arguments, see pages 6-9 of Applicant’s remarks, filed on August 27, 2025, with respect to the rejection of independent claims 1 & 11, under prior art reference U.S. Publication No. 2020/0257946 A1 (hereinafter “Kananian”), as cited by the Applicant, hereafter referred to as Kananian, fails to disclose “determine, without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping, a negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair based on the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches a steady state,” and “determine a resistance value associated with the resistor of the sensor resonator based on the determined negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches the steady state,”. Has been noted that even though the present application states “existing electronic systems rely on a number of sweeps to perform sensing measurements…” [0013], “The present disclose provides coupling-independent, …PT-symmetric operation obviates sweeping, permitting real-time, single-point sensing…” [0100], “As a whole, no sweeping is required, …” [0103].
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., ”without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
A new ground of rejection is made in view of Reitsma (US 9088261 B2, hereinafter Reitsma). Noting the cited portions of Kananian that refer to “using frequency sweeping to measure the amplitude of oscillations,” “…the reader apparatus sweeps its frequency…the oscillator again sweeps its frequency…sweep the frequency (e.g., sweep the resonance frequency or a frequency of an inductively-coupled oscillating signal via varactors or other circuit components) over a range of frequencies,” and “to measure the steady-state modes in the sensing mechanism, such a reader as in FIG.5 (based on off-the-shelf components) may be configured to sweep the resonance frequency of its oscillator core”. However, Applicant’s updated claim 1 has been re-evaluated in light of the new prior art, and the rejection of independent claim 1 is maintained. The examiner disagrees with the Applicant’s contention that Kananian, now in light of new prior art reference, Reitsma, fail to teach “determine, without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping, a negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair based on the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches a steady state,” and “determine a resistance value associated with the resistor of the sensor resonator based on the determined negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches the steady state”. Kananian, in view of the new prior art reference, Reitsma, explicitly disclose these additional limitations that have been amended into claims 1 and 11, and meet this requirement.
Kananian teaches “the negative resistance value MOS cross-coupled pair,” in the following paragraphs ([0010], [0044], [0048], [0059]-[0061], [0063], [0105]-[0109], & [0111]-[0112]), where “inductively-coupled sensor drawn through cross-coupled NMOS-transistor circuit” or transistor(s) refer to MOS cross-coupled pair, is configured to implement a nonlinear gain [0060] of the reader resonator [0060] via compressive saturation of negative resistance [0060]–[0061]: negative resistance is referred as gain and “the negative resistance circuitry can be used to saturate the gain mechanism”. Kananian, in view of Reitsma, teach “determine, without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping, a negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair,” in the following paragraphs ([Abstract], [Col. 2, ll. 32-40], [Col. 3, ll. 59-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3], [Col. 5, ll. 33-67], & [Col. 6, ll. 1-28]), in Figures 1A & 2, where a method of “resonant impedance sensing with a controlled negative impedance” to maintain “steady-state oscillation”, where the “sensor response data quantifies the negative impedance required to maintain steady-state oscillation”, and the system provides “sensor response data based on the controlled negative impedance” by controlling the gain (gm) of the trans-admittance amplifier to control the negative impedance without sweeping. Kananian, in view of Reitsma, teach the following limitation, “based on the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator,” in the following paragraphs ([Col. 3, ll. 59-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3 & 55-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67], & [Col. 10, ll. 10-22]), teaching the system uses “resonator oscillation amplitude” as the basis for the control loop that “responds by controlling the negative impedance presented by the negative impedance stage 123 to substantially cancel resonant impedance, and maintain a resonance state corresponding to steady-state oscillation”, where the “impedance (gm_low/high) control 639…is generated…based on detected resonator oscillation amplitude”). Kananian, in view of Reitsma, also teach the following limitation, “when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches a steady state,” in the following paragraphs ([Abstract], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3, 20-32, & 55-67], & [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67]), that teach the method is based on maintaining “steady-state oscillation”, where the system is configured to control the negative impedance to “maintain a resonance state corresponding to steady-state oscillation”, the negative impedance is controlled to “substantially cancel resonance impedance…thereby maintaining resonator oscillation amplitude substantially constant to achieve a resonance state corresponding to steady-state oscillation”. Combining the teachings of both prior art references provides a well-defined MOS cross-coupled pair hardware of Kananian with the direct, non-sweeping measurement method of Reitsma.
Kananian, in view of Reitsma, teach and “determine a resistance value associated with the resistor of the sensor resonator based on the determined negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches the steady state,” in the following paragraphs, ([Abstract], [Col. 2, ll. 1-25 & 45-49], ], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3, 20-32, & 55-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67], [Col. 6, ll. 1-28]), in Figure 1C, and teaches the determination, stating that the “response of the sensor to the target corresponds to the negative impedance required for steady-state oscillation”, figure states the condition for steady-state oscillation as “Rres = - Rp”, where Rres is the negative resistance of the reader and Rp is the parallel resistance of the sensor, the sensor’s resistance is directly determined by the value of the negative resistance required for steady-state. Combining the teachings of both prior art references provides a well-defined MOS cross-coupled pair hardware of Kananian with the direct, non-sweeping measurement method of Reitsma. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are unconvincing and the rejection of independent claim 1 along with its respective dependent claims 2-10, is respectively maintained.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
A new ground of rejection is made in view of Reitsma (US 9088261 B2, hereinafter Reitsma). Noting the cited portions of Kananian that refer to “using frequency sweeping to measure the amplitude of oscillations,” “…the reader apparatus sweeps its frequency…the oscillator again sweeps its frequency…sweep the frequency (e.g., sweep the resonance frequency or a frequency of an inductively-coupled oscillating signal via varactors or other circuit components) over a range of frequencies,” and “to measure the steady-state modes in the sensing mechanism, such a reader as in FIG.5 (based on off-the-shelf components) may be configured to sweep the resonance frequency of its oscillator core”. However, Applicant’s updated claim 11, which has been amended similarly to independent claim 1 and recites similar features, has been re-evaluated in light of the new prior art, and the rejection of independent claim 11 is maintained, for the same reasons explained above for independent claim 1. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are unconvincing and the rejection of independent claim 11 along with its respective dependent claims 12-20, is respectively maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Independent claims 1 and 11 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.
Regarding independent claims 1 & 11, the original disclosure lacks support for “without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping,” in ll. 14 & 9 respectively. Therefore, the limitations mention above, for independent claims 3 & 5 are new matter. Dependent claims 2-10 are rejected by virtue of dependency on independent claim 1 & 12-20 are rejected by virtue of dependency on independent claim 11.
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.
Claim 11 is 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.
Independent claim 11 recites the limitation "the resistance value associated," in ll. 13, without prior disclosure, resulting in a lack of antecedent basis for this claim limitation.
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kananian et al. (US 2020/0257946 A1, Pub. Date Aug. 13, 2020, hereinafter Kananian), in view of Reitsma (US 9088261 B2, Pat. Date Jul. 21, 2015, hereinafter Reitsma).
Regarding independent claim 1, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
A system (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [0001], [0008], [0017]-[0018], & [0060]-[0061]), comprising: a coupled pair of resonators ([Abstract]: resonators referred to as first and second resonance circuits) including a sensor resonator (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [Abstract], [0002], [0039]-[0043], & [0060]-[0061]: sensor circuits or sensor circuitry are referred to as sensor resonators) and a reader resonator (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [Abstract], [0002], [0039]-[0043], & [0060]-[0061]: reader device/apparatus contains a resonance circuit that refers to a reader resonator),
PNG
media_image1.png
857
1024
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
558
1062
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
750
873
media_image3.png
Greyscale
the sensor resonator including a resistor ([Abstract], [0010], [0043]-[0044], [0046]-[0047], & [0060]-[0061]), and the sensor resonator having a loss associated with the resistor (Figs.1A & 1B; [Abstract], [0043]–[0044], [0046]-[0047], & [0060]-[0061]: 104 & 106, “104 that has a resonance circuit which exhibits gain (due to negative resistance – R) associated with sensor circuitry 106 or 108 (which may be passive or active) which has a corresponding resonance circuit that exhibits loss (due to resistance R2) with “a rate of γ2 < 0”),
and the reader resonator (Figs. 1A-1B & 2D; [0044], [0048], & [0060]-[0061]: 102 or 104, “reader 102 or 104 that has a resonance circuit which exhibits gain (due to negative resistance – R) associated with sensor circuitry 106 or 108”, where reader apparatus refers to the reader resonator) including a metal-oxide-semiconductor (MOS) cross-coupled pair ([Figs. 1A-1B & 2D; [0048] & [0060]-[0061]: negative resistance circuit can “include an amplifier with positive feedback, such as a pair of cross-coupled transistors” and “can be in parallel with or in series with the resonance circuit in various embodiments”, and discloses a MOS (NMOS) cross-coupled pair used in the reader to provide a negative resistance),
PNG
media_image4.png
451
665
media_image4.png
Greyscale
a processor (Fig. 2B; [0050]–[0051] & [0122]: 244, cooperatively-coupled microcontroller (MCU), refers to a processor, where “data is stored in” the MCU and can perform and compare measurements, “programmable circuit is one or more computer circuits, including memory circuitry for storing and accessing a program to be executed”);
and a memory storing instructions ([0050] & [0122]: 244, MCU “stores data” and can be “programmed/configured to generate ramp signals”, thus acting as a memory and “programmable circuit is one or more computer circuits, including memory circuitry for storing and accessing a program to be executed”),
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
wherein the MOS cross-coupled pair is configured to implement a nonlinear gain of the reader resonator via compressive saturation of negative resistance;
However, Kananian, further teaches in a second embodiment:
wherein the MOS cross-coupled pair is configured to implement a nonlinear gain of the reader resonator via compressive saturation of negative resistance (Figs. 2D, 3A-3B, & 9A-9B; [0010], [0044], [0048], [0059]-[0061], [0063], [0105]-[0109], & [0111]-[0112]: 262 & 264, “inductively-coupled sensor drawn through cross-coupled NMOS-transistor circuit” or transistor(s) refer to MOS cross-coupled pair, is configured to implement a nonlinear gain [0060] of the reader resonator [0060] via compressive saturation of negative resistance [0060]–[0061]: negative resistance is referred as gain and “the negative resistance circuitry can be used to saturate the gain mechanism”);
PNG
media_image5.png
841
949
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
804
550
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the MOS cross-coupled pair configured to implement a nonlinear gain of the reader resonator via compressive saturation of negative resistance, of Kananian’s second embodiment to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to enhance, by combining the embodiments, the system’s sensitivity and performance of the amplitude detector by increasing the negative resistance in the resonator, and to enhance the determination of both negative resistance and the resistance of the sensor resonator using the measured amplitude, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to incorporate a known technique to improve similar devices and yield predictable results is obvious (KSR).
Kananian, in a second embodiment, is silent in regard to:
an amplitude detector configured to measure an amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator;
that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: receive from the amplitude detector, the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator;
determine, without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping, a negative resistance provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair based on the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches a steady state; and
determine a resistance value associated with the resistor of the sensor resonator based on the determined negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair when the measured amplitude oscillations associated with the reader resonator, reaches the steady state
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
an amplitude detector configured to measure an amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator ([Col. 5, ll. 33-58] & [Col. 11, Claim 2, ll. 61-65]);
that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: receive from the amplitude detector, the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator ([Col. 3, ll. 59-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3], [Col. 5, ll. 33-58], [Col. 11, Claim 2, ll. 61-65], [Col. 11, Claim 3, ll. 66-67], & [Col. 12, Claim 3, ll. 1-3]: describes a system that provides “sensor response data…to a processor or controller for detection, measurement or other processing” and teaches that the “negative impedance control stage 130…detects resonator oscillation amplitude which is represented as the output 121 of the negative impedance stage 120”);
determine, without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping, a negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair (Figs. 1A & 2; [Abstract], [Col. 2, ll. 32-40], [Col. 3, ll. 59-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3], [Col. 5, ll. 33-67], & [Col. 6, ll. 1-28]: teaches a method of “resonant impedance sensing with a controlled negative impedance” to maintain “steady-state oscillation”, where the “sensor response data quantifies the negative impedance required to maintain steady-state oscillation”, and the system provides “sensor response data based on the controlled negative impedance” by controlling the gain (gm) of the trans-admittance amplifier to control the negative impedance without sweeping) based on the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator ([Col. 3, ll. 59-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3 & 55-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67], & [Col. 10, ll. 10-22]: teaches the system uses “resonator oscillation amplitude” as the basis for the control loop that “responds by controlling the negative impedance presented by the negative impedance stage 123 to substantially cancel resonant impedance, and maintain a resonance state corresponding to steady-state oscillation”, where the “impedance (gm_low/high) control 639…is generated…based on detected resonator oscillation amplitude”) when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches a steady state ([Abstract], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3, 20-32, & 55-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67]: teaches the method is based on maintaining “steady-state oscillation”, where the system is configured to control the negative impedance to “maintain a resonance state corresponding to steady-state oscillation”, the negative impedance is controlled to “substantially cancel resonance impedance…thereby maintaining resonator oscillation amplitude substantially constant to achieve a resonance state corresponding to steady-state oscillation”); and
PNG
media_image7.png
532
1300
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
444
793
media_image8.png
Greyscale
determine a resistance value associated with the resistor of the sensor resonator based on the determined negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair when the measured amplitude oscillations associated with the reader resonator, reaches the steady state (Fig. 1C; [Abstract], [Col. 2, ll. 1-25 & 45-49], ], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3, 20-32, & 55-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67], [Col. 6, ll. 1-28]: teaches the determination, stating that the “response of the sensor to the target corresponds to the negative impedance required for steady-state oscillation”, figure states the condition for steady-state oscillation as “Rres = - Rp”, where Rres is the negative resistance of the reader and Rp is the parallel resistance of the sensor, the sensor’s resistance is directly determined by the value of the negative resistance required for steady-state).
PNG
media_image9.png
450
528
media_image9.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate an amplitude detector to measure an amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: receive from the amplitude detector, the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator, and determine, without frequency sweeping or gain sweeping, a negative resistance provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair based and a resistance value associated with the resistor of the sensor resonator based on the determined negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair based on the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches a steady state and based on the determined negative resistance, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first and second embodiments, in order to enhance, by combining the embodiments of Kananian and the teachings of Reitsma, being motivated to combine power-efficient, and well-defined MOS cross-coupled pair hardware from Kananian with the direct, non-sweeping measurement method of Reitsma, the method of Reitsma simplifies the measurement process by eliminating the need for a frequency sweep and the complex digital circuitry required to interpret the resulting frequency jumps, as described by Kananian, the combination of Kananian’s MOS cross-coupled pair with Reitsma’s non-sweeping, steady-state determination method, would create a more efficient and simplified system, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to combine a known technique to improve similar devices and yield predictable results is obvious (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 2, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 1 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [0001], [0008], [0017]-[0018], & [0060]-[0061]), and the reader resonator ([Abstract], [0002], [0009], [0031], [0111]-[0112]: reader device/apparatus contains a resonance circuit that refers to a reader resonator) also has a series topology ([0009], [0031], & [0111]-[0112]: and “the negative resistance circuitry is in parallel with or in series with the resonance circuit, in various embodiments”).
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
wherein the sensor resonator has a series topology
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
wherein the sensor resonator has a series topology (Figs. 1B & 6; [Col. 4, ll. 4-11]: figure illustrates a series resistor (Rs) with the LC resonator, demonstrating a series topology for the sensor resonator)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the sensor resonator has a series topology, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to enhance, by combining the teachings of Kananian and the teachings of Reitsma, to create a resonant sensing system using a series-configured sensor as taught by Reitsma, where Kananian’s detailed teachings of both series and parallel topologies of the reader resonator provide a roadmap for implementing a series topology, combining the series sensor of Reitsma with the series reader topology in Kananian, would create a more efficient and simplified system, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to combine a known technique to improve similar devices and yield predictable results is obvious, in this case being a straightforward and predictable design modification, resulting in a series topology for both the sensor and the reader (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 3, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 1 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [0001], [0008], [0017]-[0018], & [0060]-[0061]), and the reader resonator (Figs. 1B & 2B; [Abstract] & [0002], [0043], [0048], & [0061]: reader device/apparatus contains a resonance circuit that refers to a reader resonator) also has a parallel topology (Figs. 1B & 2B; [0009], [0031], [0043], [0048], & [0061]: and “the negative resistance circuitry is in parallel with or in series with the resonance circuit, in various embodiments”).
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
wherein the sensor resonator has a parallel topology
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
wherein the sensor resonator has a parallel topology (Fig. 1B; [Col. 4, ll. 4-11]: figure “illustrates an example resonant sensor 50 for inductive sensing based on an LC resonator 51 formed by an inductor sensing coil and parallel capacitor…Also illustrated is an equivalent LC resonator 51 circuit with parallel impedance 53 represented by resistance Rp”)
PNG
media_image10.png
451
760
media_image10.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the sensor resonator has a parallel topology, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to enhance, by combining the teachings of Kananian and the teachings of Reitsma, to modify the system of Kananian by using the well-known parallel topology sensor resonator taught by Reitsma, where a parallel topology is a standard and effective configuration for a sensor resonator, there would be no unexpected results in choosing a parallel topology for the sensor resonator when the reader resonator is also in a parallel topology , and would be considered a logical design choice for symmetry or impedance matching, would create a more efficient and simplified system, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to combine a known technique to improve similar devices and yield predictable results is obvious, in this case being a straightforward and predictable design modification, resulting in a series topology for both the sensor and the reader (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 4, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 1 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [0001], [0008], [0017]-[0018], & [0060]-[0061]),
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
wherein the resistor of the sensor resonator is a resistive sensor.
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
wherein the resistor of the sensor resonator is a resistive sensor ([Abstract], [Col. 1, ll. 22-39 & 64-67], & [Col. 2, ll. 1-25]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the resistor of the sensor resonator is a resistive sensor, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to enhance, by combining the teachings of Kananian and the teachings of Reitsma, to directly measure the sensor’s loss (resistance), rather than a correlated parameter, leading to higher accuracy and implement the sensing of a physical state (e.g., temperature) in the system of Kananian to consider a sensing mechanism that acts on the resistive component of the resonator as taught by Reitsma, given the knowledge of resistive sensors (e.g., thermistors, RTDs, piezoresistive strain gauges, etc.), would be an obvious design choice to replace the general “explicit resistance” (R2) of Kananian with a resistive sensor, applying a known type of sensor (resistive) to a known parameter of the system (resonator resistance) that is already being measured by the methodology of Reitsma, would create a more efficient and simplified system, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to combine a known technique to improve similar devices and yield predictable results is obvious, in this case being a straightforward and predictable design modification (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 5, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 4 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [0001]-[0002], [0008], [0017]-[0018], & [0060]-[0061]), wherein the instructions ([0122]: “programmable circuit is one or more computer circuits, including memory circuitry for storing and accessing a program to executed as a set (or sets) of instructions”), when executed by the processor (Fig. 2B; [0050]–[0052] & [0122]: 244, cooperatively-coupled microcontroller (MCU), refers to a processor, where “data is stored in” the MCU and can perform and compare measurements, “programmable circuit is one or more computer circuits, including memory circuitry for storing and accessing a program to be executed”),
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches the steady state.
However, Kananian, teaches in a second embodiment:
provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair (Figs. 2D, 3A-3B; [0059]-[0061]: 262 & 264, “inductively-coupled sensor drawn through cross-coupled NMOS-transistor circuit” or transistor(s) refer to MOS cross-coupled pair)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair, of Kananian’s second embodiment to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to improve the system’s performance, by simplifying the system by adopting the direct measurement of Reitsma, which operates without frequency or gain sweeping, where Reitsma’s method would seamlessly integrate with Kananian’s specific MOS cross-coupled pair, where Reitsma teaches the functional blocks, and Kananian provides a detailed circuit for one of those blocks (negative impedance stage), where the negative resistance principle is required for stable oscillation equals to the sensor’s resistance is taught in both prior art references, and since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to incorporate a known technique to improve similar devices, expect to yield predictable results (KSR).
Kananian, in a second embodiment, is silent in regard to:
further cause the processor to determine an indication of a measurement made by the resistive sensor
based on the determined negative resistance value
when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches a steady state.
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
further cause the processor to determine an indication of a measurement made by the resistive sensor ([Abstract], [Col. 1, ll. 64-67], [Col. 2, ll. 1-25], [Col. 3, ll. 59-67, ], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3 & 20-32], & [Col. 8, ll. 43-50]: teaches the “sensor response data” is based on the “controlled negative impedance”, and further states “ the response of the sensor to the target corresponds to the negative impedance required for steady-state oscillation”, and notes that this data can be provided to a processor for “detection, measurement or other processing”)
based on the determined negative resistance value (Fig. 1C; [Col. 2, ll. 1-25], [Col. 3, ll. 59-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3, 20-32, & 55-67], & [Col. 5, ll. 1-8, 15-67]: teaches that the controlled negative impedance required for steady-state oscillation is what constitutes the “sensor response data”, directly links the measured negative resistance value to the sensor’s response, figure further states the condition for steady-state oscillation as Rres = - Rp, showing the negative resistance Rres is equal and opposite to the sensor’s resistance Rp)
when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches a steady state ([Abstract], [Col. 1, ll. 64-67], [Col. 2, ll. 1-25 & 31-40], [Col. 3, ll. 59-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-3, 20-32, & 55-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67], [Col. 8, ll. 43-50], [Col. 10, ll. 10-22], [Col. 11, Claim 2, ll. 61-65], [Col. 11, Claim 3, ll. 66-67], & [Col. 12, Claim 3, ll. 1-3]: methodology is based on achieving and maintaining “steady-state oscillation”, where the “negative impedance control loop responds by controlling the negative impedance…to substantially cancel resonant impedance, and maintain a resonance state corresponding to steady-state oscillation”, the processor then uses the negative impedance value at the stable, steady-state condition to determine the sensor’s reading).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate further causing the processor to determine an indication of a measurement made by the resistive sensor based on the determined negative resistance value when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches the steady state, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first and second embodiments, in order to improve the system’s accuracy of the measurement with a more efficient and direct method than the frequency sweeping disclosed in Kananian that is a cumbersome process that requires a complex front-end circuit, and by simplifying the system by adopting the direct measurement method of Reitsma, which operates without frequency or gain sweeping, where Reitsma’s method would seamlessly integrate with Kananian’s specific MOS cross-coupled pair, where Reitsma teaches the functional blocks, and Kananian provides a detailed circuit for one of those blocks (negative impedance stage), where the negative resistance principle is required for stable oscillation equals to the sensor’s resistance is taught in both prior art references, and since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to incorporate a known technique to improve similar devices, that combines Kananian’s specific negative resistance circuit with Reitsma’s non-sweeping, steady-state measurement methodology, and would expect to yield predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 6, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 1 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [Abstract], [0001], [0008], [0014], [0017]-[0018], & [0060]-[0061]),
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
wherein the sensor resonator further includes a capacitor.
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
wherein the sensor resonator further includes a capacitor (Figs. 1A, 1B, & 2; [Col. 1, ll. 22-39] & [Col. 2, ll. 32-59]: the resonance sensor 50 is repeatedly described as an LC resonator, teaches the sensor as an LC circuit with a capacitor C and an inductor L in a parallel configuration, and the sensor can be a “resonator based on a variable capacitor”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the sensor resonator further includes a capacitor, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to improve the system’s efficiency and simplicity of Kananian’s system, to adopt Reitsma’s non-sweeping methodology, where Reitsma’s approach offers a direct measurement and eliminates the need for complex, power-hungry circuitry, the combination is a substitution of a known measurement technique (Reitsma’s steady-state method) for a less efficient one (Kananian’s frequency sweep), where all components necessary for this combination are present in both prior art references, and since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to incorporate a known technique to improve similar devices, the claimed invention would be an obvious combination of the prior art, and would expect to yield predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 7, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 6 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [Abstract], [0001], [0008]-[0009], [0014], [0017]-[0018], [0044], & [0060]-[0061]),
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
wherein the capacitor is a capacitive sensor.
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
wherein the capacitor is a capacitive sensor (Figs. 1B & 2; [Abstract], [Col. 1, ll. 22-39], [Col. 2, ll. 32-59], [Col. 3, ll. 38-67], & [Col. 4, ll. 1-11 & 20-32]: states that a “sensor with a resonator based on a variable capacitor, resonator impedance is affected by the storage or loss of electric field energy”, and describes the sensor as an LC resonator with a capacitor, and refers to “capacitive and mechanical resonant impedance sensing”, teaching the capacitive sensor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the capacitor is a capacitive sensor, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to improve the system’s efficiency and simplicity of Kananian’s system, to adopt Reitsma’s non-sweeping methodology, where Reitsma’s approach offers a direct measurement and eliminates the need for complex, power-hungry circuitry, the combination is a substitution of a known measurement technique (Reitsma’s steady-state method) for a less efficient one (Kananian’s frequency sweep), both prior art references teach that the sensor can be a capacitive sensor, therefore, the claimed invention is an obvious combination of prior art references, and since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to incorporate a known technique to improve similar devices, would expect the combination to yield predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 8, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 7 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [Abstract], [0001], [0008]-[0009], [0014], [0017]-[0018], [0044], & [0060]-[0061]),
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
based on the determined negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair
However, Kananian, further teaches in a second embodiment:
based on the determined negative resistance value provided by the MOS cross-coupled pair (Figs. 2D, 3A-3B, & 4A-4D; [0059]-[0062]: 262 & 264, “inductively-coupled sensor drawn through cross-coupled NMOS-transistor circuit” or transistor(s) refer to MOS cross-coupled pair, the resonator uses a MOS cross-coupled pair to provide a negative resistance)
PNG
media_image11.png
651
818
media_image11.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate based on the determined negative resistance from the MOS cross-coupled pair, of Kananian’s second embodiment to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to improve the performance of the system’s capacitive sensor’s measurement accuracy and sensitivity, by simplifying the system by adopting the direct measurement of Reitsma, which operates without frequency or gain sweeping, where Reitsma’s method would seamlessly integrate with Kananian’s specific MOS cross-coupled pair, where Reitsma teaches the functional blocks, and Kananian provides a detailed circuit for one of those blocks (negative impedance stage), where the system uses a negative resistance value required to maintain a steady-state oscillation (Reitsma’s method) as a direct indication of the sensor’s resistance, and thereby a direct indication of the capacitive measurement (Kananian’s sensor), where the combination would be straightforward and a logical improvement, that eliminates the complexity and time-consuming nature of a frequency sweep, while retaining the core functionality and components of both prior art references, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to incorporate a known technique to improve similar devices, and expect to yield predictable results (KSR).
Kananian, in a second embodiment, is silent in regard to:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to determine an indication of a measurement made by the capacitive sensor when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches the steady state.
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to determine an indication of a measurement made by the capacitive sensor (Figs. 1B & 2; [Abstract], [Col. 1, ll. 22-39 & 64-67], [Col. 2, ll. 1-25 & 32-59], [Col. 3, ll. 38-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-32 & 55-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67], & [Col. 8, ll. 43-50]: teaches the sensor response data (indication of measurement) is based on the controlled negative impedance, “the controlled negative impedance associated with steady-state oscillation is quantified as sensor response data that represents to the response of the sensor to the target”, and “the negative impedance control loop responds by controlling the negative impedance…This negative impedance control signal corresponds to sensor response data”)
when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches the steady state ([Abstract], [Col. 1, ll. 64-67], [Col. 2, ll. 1-25 & 31-40], [Col. 3, ll. 59-67], [Col. 4, ll. 1-32 & 55-67], [Col. 5, ll. 1-8 & 15-67], [Col. 8, ll. 43-50], [Col. 10, ll. 10-22], [Col. 11, Claim 2, ll. 61-65], [Col. 11, Claim 3, ll. 66-67], & [Col. 12, Claim 3, ll. 1-3]: the control loop methodology is based on achieving and maintaining “steady-state oscillation” amplitude, where the negative impedance is controlled based on the detected amplitude to keep it constant, “negative impedance is controlled to…maintain resonator oscillation amplitude substantially constant to achieve a resonance state corresponding to steady-state oscillation”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to determine an indication of a measurement made by the capacitive sensor when the measured amplitude of oscillations associated with the reader resonator reaches the steady state, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first and second embodiments, in order to improve the performance of the system’s capacitive sensor’s measurement accuracy and sensitivity, by simplifying the system by adopting the direct measurement of Reitsma, which operates without frequency or gain sweeping, where Reitsma’s method would seamlessly integrate with Kananian’s specific MOS cross-coupled pair, where Reitsma teaches the functional blocks, and Kananian provides a detailed circuit for one of those blocks (negative impedance stage), where the system uses a negative resistance value required to maintain a steady-state oscillation (Reitsma’s method) as a direct indication of the sensor’s resistance, and thereby a direct indication of the capacitive measurement (Kananian’s sensor), where the combination would be straightforward and a logical improvement, that eliminates the complexity and time-consuming nature of a frequency sweep, while retaining the core functionality and components of both prior art references, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to incorporate a known technique to improve similar devices, and expect to yield predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 9, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 1 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [Abstract], [0001], [0008]-[0009], [0014], [0017]-[0018], [0044], & [0060]-[0061]),
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
further comprising a divider configured to measure a frequency of oscillations associated with the reader resonator.
However, Reitsma, further teaches:
further comprising a divider configured to measure a frequency of oscillations associated with the reader resonator (Fig. 6; [Col. 10, ll. 10-44]: the output comparator in the Class D amplifier provides a signal corresponding to the resonator frequency, “The output 624 of comparator 623…corresponds to resonator frequency (resonance frequency at steady-state oscillation). That is, the comparator output 624 provides measurement (open loop) of resonator frequency”, where this signal would be fed to a counter or processor, often via divider if the frequency is too high for direct measurement, standard in the art, the system is designed to measure the resonator frequency, where the function of the divider would be to enable this measurement for the processor that is already part of the claimed system (e.g., to provide “sensor response data” as show in Fig. 6 (633)).
PNG
media_image12.png
705
1028
media_image12.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a divider to measure a frequency of oscillations associated with the reader resonator, of Reitsma to Kananian’s first embodiment, in order to improve the efficiency and simplicity of Kananian’s system, adopting Reitsma’s non-sweeping methodology that offers a direct measurement and eliminates the need for complex, power-hungry circuitry, combining specific hardware from Kananian (reader, divider to measure frequency) with the more efficient, non-sweeping method of Reitsma, being a logical and obvious design choice, while retaining the core functionality and components of both prior art references, since it has been held to be within the general skill in the art to incorporate a known technique to improve similar devices, and expect to yield predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 10, Kananian, teaches in a first embodiment:
The system of claim 9 (Figs. 1A-1B & 2A-2B; [Abstract], [0001], [0008]-[0009], [0014], [0017]-[0018], [0044], & [0060]-[0061]),
Kananian, in a first embodiment, is silent in regard to:
wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, further cause the processor to:
when the reader resonator and sensor resonator are placed at each of a plurality of distances apart; and
determine an error in the determined resistance value based on the respective measured amplitudes and respective measured frequencies at each of the plurality of distances apart
However, Kananian, in a second embodiment, further teaches:
wherein the instructions ([0122]: “programmable circuit is one or more comp