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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 12/22/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 7-8, and 11-14 have been amended. Claims 1-2, 7-8, and 10-14 are still pending in the application. Claims 3-6, 9, and 15-17 have been canceled. Applicant's amendments have overcome 112(f) and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 02/06/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 7-8, and 11-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
“angular width” in claims 1, 11, and 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, 10-12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Klein (US Patent 6,184,518 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Klein teaches a modulation unit (100) for an encoder (Fig. 2), the modulation unit (100) being configured to be movably supported (discloses rotatable disk 100, Col. 1, lines 44-48) between a receiver for converting the-detection of electromagnetic radiation into an output signal and an emitter (discloses disk placed between emitter and receiver, Col. 1, lines 60-68) for emitting electromagnetic radiation (“Light emitting devices 106 and 108 are typically implemented using light emitting diodes (LEDs) or lasers”, Col. 2, lines 3-5) in the direction of the receiver(Col. 1, lines 63-64), the modulation unit comprising:
a concentric circular code section (discloses circular data channel 104, Col. 1 , lines 48-50) comprising alternating opaque and transparent segments (Fig. 2); and
a single, continuous circular index track (index channel 102, Fig. 2) disposed radially inward of and separate from the circular code section (104, Fig. 2), the index track comprising at least four transparent index segments (Fig. 2), each index segment having a different angular width from the other index segments and from the transparent segments of the code section (Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23), wherein each of the at least four index segments is uniquely identifiable (“these index points contain information specifying an angular position of the index point, these index points have openings of different sizes in order to uniquely identify the index points”, Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23 ) in dependence on the output signal (“the signal from light receiving device 112 passes into signal processing device 114, which detects and decodes the index pulse”, Col. 1, lines 63-65) by a respective pulse-duration difference (discloses pulse width caused by different opening sizes, Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23).
Regarding claim 2, Klein teaches wherein the at least four index segments comprises exactly four index segments (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Klein teaches wherein the size of each of the index segments is different from the size of each of the transparent segments (Col. 1, lines 53-55 and Col. 4, lines 20-23, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Klein teaches wherein the modulation unit (100) is a disc comprising the circular code section (104) radially spaced from an axis of rotation (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, the MPEP 2113 I recites: "[E]Ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted) Claim was directed to a novella color developer. The process of making the developer was allowed. Here, the claimed modulation unit is the same as Klein, therefore the claim is unpatentable even though the prior art product may be made by a different process.
Regarding claim 11, Klein teaches a method of determining an absolute position of an encoder (Fig. 2), the encoder comprising:
a receiver (110/112);
an emitter (106/108);
a data processing apparatus (114); and
a modulation unit (100) configured to be movably supported (discloses rotatable disk 100, Col. 1, lines 44-48) between the receiver (110/112) and the emitter (106/108), the modulation unit (100) comprising:
a concentric circular code section (discloses circular data channel 104, Col. 1 , lines 48-50) comprising alternating opaque and transparent segments (Fig. 2); and
a single, continuous circular index track (index channel 102, Fig. 2) disposed radially inward of and separate from the circular code section (104, Fig. 2), the index track comprising at least four transparent index segments (Fig. 2), each index segment having a different angular width from the other index segments and from the transparent segments of the code section (Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23), wherein each of the at least four index segments is uniquely identifiable (“these index points contain information specifying an angular position of the index point, these index points have openings of different sizes in order to uniquely identify the index points”, Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23 ) in dependence on an output signal (“the signal from light receiving device 112 passes into signal processing device 114, which detects and decodes the index pulse”, Col. 1, lines 63-65) by a respective pulse-duration difference (discloses pulse width caused by different opening sizes, Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23);
wherein the method comprises:
detecting, by the receiver, an output signal while the modulation unit moves relative to the emitter and receiver (“Light emitting device 106 generates light, which passes through index channel 102 and feeds into light receiving device 112, light emitting device 108 generates light, which passes through data channel 104 and feeds into light receiving device 110, shaft 101 is coupled to a rotational input, such as a spindle for a machine tool, so that rotating the spindle cases shaft 101 and disk 100 to rotate”, Col. 1, lines 60-67);
detecting a passage of each index segment of the circular index track (102) and measuring a corresponding pulse duration in the output signal (discloses detection of index openings passing the sensor, generation of output pulses, index openings of different sizes, inherently produce different pulse durations, Col. 4, lines 21-31);
identifying, by the data processing apparatus (114), the index segment based on the measured pulse-duration (discloses identifies the segment using opening size, Col. 1, lines 63-65 and Col. 4, lines 28-31); and
determining an absolute position of the modulation unit (“these index points contain information specifying an angular position of the index point”, Col. 4, lines 19-20) based on the identified index segment (discloses detecting the signal, identifying which index point passed the sensor, determining the angular position value associated with that index point, Col. 4, lines 28-31) and the output signal derived from the circular code section (104, discloses combines index for absolute calibration and data channel for incremental movement, Col. 1, lines 53-55).
Regarding claim 12, Klein teaches wherein identifying the index segment comprises comparing the measured pulse duration (discloses pulse width caused by different opening sizes, Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23,) to a stored set of expected pulse durations ( “…the size of the opening is examined to determine the identity of the index point to determine an angular position value of the index point”, Col. 4, lines 29-31).
Regarding claim 14, Klein teaches an encoder comprising:
a receiver (110/112);
an emitter (106/108);
a modulation unit (100) configured to be movably supported (discloses rotatable disk 100, Col. 1, lines 44-48) between the receiver (110/112) and the emitter (106/108), the modulation unit (100) comprising: a concentric circular code section (discloses circular data channel 104, Col. 1 , lines 48-50) comprising alternating opaque and transparent segments (Fig. 2); and a single, continuous circular index track (index channel 102, Fig. 2) disposed radially inward of and separate from the circular code section (104, Fig. 2), the index track comprising at least four transparent index segments (Fig. 2), each index segment having a different angular width from the other index segments and from the transparent segments of the code section (Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23), wherein each of the at least four index segments is uniquely identifiable (“these index points contain information specifying an angular position of the index point, these index points have openings of different sizes in order to uniquely identify the index points”, Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23 ) in dependence on an output signal (“the signal from light receiving device 112 passes into signal processing device 114, which detects and decodes the index pulse”, Col. 1, lines 63-65) by a respective pulse-duration difference (discloses pulse width caused by different opening sizes, Fig. 2, Col. 4, lines 22-23);
a data processing apparatus (114); and
a non-transitory processor-readable data carrier (a device controller or a microprocessor, inherently execute stored program instructions, Col. 2, lines 6-8) communicatively coupled to the data processing apparatus and which stores processor-executable instructions which, when executed by the data processing apparatus, cause the data processing apparatus to perform a method, the method comprising:
detecting, by the receiver, an output signal while the modulation unit moves relative to the emitter and receiver (“Light emitting device 106 generates light, which passes through index channel 102 and feeds into light receiving device 112, light emitting device 108 generates light, which passes through data channel 104 and feeds into light receiving device 110, shaft 101 is coupled to a rotational input, such as a spindle for a machine tool, so that rotating the spindle cases shaft 101 and disk 100 to rotate”, Col. 1, lines 60-67);
detecting a passage of each index segment of the circular index track (102) and measuring a corresponding pulse duration in the output signal (discloses detection of index openings passing the sensor, generation of output pulses, index openings of different sizes, inherently produce different pulse durations, Col. 4, lines 21-31);
identifying, by the data processing apparatus (114), the index segment based on the measured pulse-duration (discloses identifies the segment using opening size, Col. 1, lines 63-65 and Col. 4, lines 28-31); and
determining an absolute position of the modulation unit (“these index points contain information specifying an angular position of the index point”, Col. 4, lines 19-20) based on the identified index segment (discloses detecting the signal, identifying which index point passed the sensor, determining the angular position value associated with that index point, Col. 4, lines 28-31) and the output signal derived from the circular code section (104, discloses combines index for absolute calibration and data channel for incremental movement, Col. 1, lines 53-55).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klein (US Patent 6,184,518 B1) in view of Watanabe (US Pub 2014/0009043 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Klein fails to teach wherein detecting the passage of each index segment further comprises detecting a variation in the second order derivative of the output signal at rising and/or falling edges of the index segment pulse.
Watanabe teaches wherein detecting the passage of each index segment further comprises detecting a variation in the second order derivative (the first derivative of the rotational position, corresponds to angular speed, the encoder detects rotational angular speed by tracking how fast the motor’s position is changing over time [0073], the second derivative of the rotational position, the angular acceleration, [0074] teaches the encoder can detect acceleration by observing how the rotational speed changes over time and the system’s ability to measure changes in position very precisely).
Since both inventions are directed towards variations caused by rotation, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to integrate second-order derivative analysis in the encoder system of Watanabe to Klein to enhance the performance, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of the encoder system [0073]. Therefore, improving positional accuracy and reducing the need for complex components.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA XING whose telephone number is (571)270-7743. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9AM - 5 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kara Geisel can be reached at 571-272-2416. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHRISTINA I XING/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877