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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/7/25 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-20 remain withdrawn.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Starzynski (US 20110239440 A1, hereinafter ‘440).
As to claim 1, ‘440 teaches a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate (¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz, and ¶22 teaches that the components are directly bonded together such that their atoms “interdiffuse and form a direct bond”; accordingly, the elements of the substrate form a monolithic substrate), the quartz substrate comprising:
a proof mass 44 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a proof mass support 42 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a flexure 40 connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure (¶21);
a first resonator 26 connected to a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator 28 connected to a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support,
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz) and
[AltContent: textbox (VSW)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
510
308
media_image1.png
Greyscale
includes a straight vertical side wall VSW (see ¶12, and figs. 1, 3-1 and 3-2 above) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
As to claim 2, ‘440 teaches wherein the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching includes:
one or more characteristics of portions of the first resonator or the second resonator being modified by a laser; and
the modified portions of the first resonator or the second resonator being removed by wet-etching (the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed using the recited selective laser etching steps, since these elements are made of crystalline quartz as taught by ¶19).
As to claim 3, ‘440 teaches wherein the quartz substrate is a crystalline quartz substrate (¶19 and ¶22).
As to claim 4, ‘440 teaches wherein the quartz substrate is a monolithic substrate (¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz, and ¶22 teaches that the components are directly bonded together such that their atoms “interdiffuse and form a direct bond”; accordingly, the elements of the substrate form a monolithic substrate).
As to claim 5, ’440 teaches wherein the first major surface of the proof mass is opposite the second major surface of the proof mass, wherein the first major surface of the proof mass support is opposite the second major surface of the proof mass support (see fig. 1).
As to claim 6, ‘440 teaches wherein the first resonator and the second resonator are not coplanar (fig. 1).
As to claim 7, ‘440 teaches wherein the first resonator is configured to have a compressive force and the second resonator is configured to have a tensile force upon rotation of the proof mass in a first direction (¶21).
As to claim 9, ‘440 teaches wherein the quartz substrate further comprises:
a dampening plate 36 connected to the proof mass support and configured to limit a range of rotation of the proof mass (¶19 teaches that the dampening plate 36 provides a damping function to the proof mass by providing resistance to the proof mass’s motion; accordingly, the motion of the proof mass is limited in comparison to the motion of the proof mass without the dampening plate),
wherein the dampening plate is formed by selective laser etching (the dampening plate is able to have been formed by selective laser etching because it is made of crystalline quartz - ¶19).
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.
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(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘440 in view of Foote et al. (US 6874363 B1, hereinafter Foote).
As to claim 8, ‘440 teaches the limitations of the claim except wherein the quartz substrate further comprises:
a strain isolator connected to the proof mass support and configured to reduce a force on at least one of the proof mass, the proof mass support, the flexure, the first resonator, or the second resonator upon application of the force to the proof mass assembly.
Foote teaches an accelerometer, wherein the monolithic substrate (col. 6 lines 8-11 teach a strain isolator 6, 10, 12 monolithically formed with a proof mass support 8 by etching slots 36, 38 in substrate 32) further comprises:
a strain isolator 6, 10, 12 connected to the proof mass support 8 and configured to reduce a force on at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator upon application of the force to the proof mass assembly (col. 6 lines 7-23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of ‘440 to use a strain isolator connected to the proof mass support and configured to reduce a force on at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator upon application of the force to the proof mass assembly, as taught by Foote for the benefit of decreasing the effects of thermal mismatching on the resonators (Foote, col. 6 lines 19-23).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of copending Application No. 18/146114 (reference application; hereinafter Milne) filed 6/10/25, in view of Starzynski (US 20110239440 A1, hereinafter ‘440).
As to instant claim 1, claims 1-2 of Milne recite a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate (claim 2 of Milne teaches that the substrate is made of crystalline quartz), the quartz substrate comprising:
a proof mass;
a proof mass support;
a flexure connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure;
a first resonator connected to a first major surface of the proof mass and a first major surface of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator connected to a second major surface of the proof mass and a second major surface of the proof mass support,
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is made of crystalline quartz).
Milne does not recite wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall that is formed by selective laser etching.
‘440 teaches wherein at least one of a first resonator 26 or the second resonator 28 is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz, as explained next; ¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz) and includes a straight vertical side wall VSW (see ¶12, and figs. 1, 3-1 and 3-2 above) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne such that at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall, as taught by ‘440, for the benefit of minimizing the complexity of the resonator’s design, in comparison with a more complex side wall design.
Milne as modified recites that the straight vertical side wall (in view of ‘440) is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
As to instant claim 2, Milne recites wherein (because the substrate is made of crystalline quartz) the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching includes:
one or more characteristics of portions of the first resonator or the second resonator being modified by a laser; and
the modified portions of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator being removed by wet-etching.
As to instant claim 3, claim 2 of Milne recites wherein the quartz substrate is a crystalline quartz substrate.
As to instant claim 4, claim 2 of Milne recites wherein the quartz substrate (claim 2 of Milne) is a monolithic substrate (preamble of claim 1 of Milne).
Claims 1 and 5 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 3 of copending Application No. 18/146114 (reference application; hereinafter Milne) filed 6/10/25 in view of Starzynski (US 20110239440 A1, hereinafter ‘440).
As to instant claim 1, claim 1 of Milne recites a proof mass assembly comprising a substrate, the substrate comprising:
a proof mass;
a proof mass support;
a flexure connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure;
a first resonator connected to a first major surface of the proof mass and a first major surface of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator connected to a second major surface of the proof mass and a second major surface of the proof mass support.
Milne does not recite that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall that is formed by selective laser etching.
‘440 teaches a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate (¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz, and ¶22 teaches that the components are directly bonded together such that their atoms “interdiffuse and form a direct bond”; accordingly, the elements of the substrate form a monolithic substrate), the quartz substrate comprising:
a proof mass 44 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a proof mass support 42 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a flexure 40 connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure (¶21);
a first resonator 26 connected to a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator 28 connected to a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support,
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching), and
includes a straight vertical side wall VSW (see ¶12, and figs. 1, 3-1 and 3-2 above) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne to use a crystalline quartz substrate as taught by ‘440 since such a modification would be a simple substitution of one method of forming a proof mass assembly for another for the predictable result that quartz is inexpensive and easy to process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne such that at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall, as taught by ‘440, for the benefit of minimizing the complexity of the resonator’s design, in comparison with a more complex side wall design.
Milne as modified recites that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz), and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall (in view of ‘440) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz, in view of ‘440)
As to instant claim 5, claim 3 of Milne recites wherein the first major surface of the proof mass is opposite the second major surface of the proof mass, wherein the first major surface of the proof mass support is opposite the second major surface of the proof mass support.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1 and 6 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 6 of copending Application No. 18/146114 (reference application; hereinafter Milne) filed 6/10/25 in view of Starzynski (US 20110239440 A1, hereinafter ‘440).
As to instant claim 1, claim 1 of Milne recites a proof mass assembly comprising a substrate, the substrate comprising:
a proof mass;
a proof mass support;
a flexure connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure;
a first resonator connected to a first major surface of the proof mass and a first major surface of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator connected to a second major surface of the proof mass and a second major surface of the proof mass support.
Milne does not recite that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall that is formed by selective laser etching.
‘440 teaches a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate (¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz, and ¶22 teaches that the components are directly bonded together such that their atoms “interdiffuse and form a direct bond”; accordingly, the elements of the substrate form a monolithic substrate), the quartz substrate comprising:
a proof mass 44 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a proof mass support 42 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a flexure 40 connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure (¶21);
a first resonator 26 connected to a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator 28 connected to a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support,
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching), and
includes a straight vertical side wall VSW (see ¶12, and figs. 1, 3-1 and 3-2 above) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne to use a crystalline quartz substrate as taught by ‘440 since such a modification would be a simple substitution of one method of forming a proof mass assembly for another for the predictable result that quartz is inexpensive and easy to process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne such that at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall, as taught by ‘440, for the benefit of minimizing the complexity of the resonator’s design, in comparison with a more complex side wall design.
Milne as modified recites that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz), and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall (in view of ‘440) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz, in view of ‘440).
As to instant claim 6, claim 6 of Milne recites wherein the first resonator and the second resonator are not coplanar.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1 and 7 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 7 of copending Application No. 18/146114 (reference application; hereinafter Milne) filed 6/10/25 in view of Starzynski (US 20110239440 A1, hereinafter ‘440).
As to instant claim 1, claim 1 of Milne recites a proof mass assembly comprising a substrate, the substrate comprising:
a proof mass;
a proof mass support;
a flexure connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure;
a first resonator connected to a first major surface of the proof mass and a first major surface of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator connected to a second major surface of the proof mass and a second major surface of the proof mass support.
Milne does not recite that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall that is formed by selective laser etching.
‘440 teaches a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate (¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz, and ¶22 teaches that the components are directly bonded together such that their atoms “interdiffuse and form a direct bond”; accordingly, the elements of the substrate form a monolithic substrate), the quartz substrate comprising:
a proof mass 44 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a proof mass support 42 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a flexure 40 connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure (¶21);
a first resonator 26 connected to a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator 28 connected to a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support,
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching), and
includes a straight vertical side wall VSW (see ¶12, and figs. 1, 3-1 and 3-2 above) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne to use a crystalline quartz substrate as taught by ‘440 since such a modification would be a simple substitution of one method of forming a proof mass assembly for another for the predictable result that quartz is inexpensive and easy to process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne such that at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall, as taught by ‘440, for the benefit of minimizing the complexity of the resonator’s design, in comparison with a more complex side wall design.
Milne as modified recites that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz), and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall (in view of ‘440) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz, in view of ‘440).
As to instant claim 7, claim 7 of Milne recites wherein the first resonator is configured to have a compressive force and the second resonator is configured to have a tensile force upon rotation of the proof mass in a first direction.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1 and 8 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8 of copending Application No. 18/146114 (reference application; hereinafter Milne) in view of Starzynski (US 20110239440 A1, hereinafter ‘440).
As to instant claim 1, claim 1 of Milne recites a proof mass assembly comprising a substrate, the substrate comprising:
a proof mass;
a proof mass support;
a flexure connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure;
a first resonator connected to a first major surface of the proof mass and a first major surface of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator connected to a second major surface of the proof mass and a second major surface of the proof mass support.
Milne does not recite that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall that is formed by selective laser etching.
‘440 teaches a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate (¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz, and ¶22 teaches that the components are directly bonded together such that their atoms “interdiffuse and form a direct bond”; accordingly, the elements of the substrate form a monolithic substrate), the quartz substrate comprising:
a proof mass 44 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a proof mass support 42 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a flexure 40 connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure (¶21);
a first resonator 26 connected to a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator 28 connected to a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support,
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching), and
includes a straight vertical side wall VSW (see ¶12, and figs. 1, 3-1 and 3-2 above) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne to use a crystalline quartz substrate as taught by ‘440 since such a modification would be a simple substitution of one method of forming a proof mass assembly for another for the predictable result that quartz is inexpensive and easy to process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne such that at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall, as taught by ‘440, for the benefit of minimizing the complexity of the resonator’s design, in comparison with a more complex side wall design.
Milne as modified recites that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz), and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall (in view of ‘440) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz, in view of ‘440).
As to instant claim 8, claim 8 of Milne recites wherein the quartz substrate further comprises:
a strain isolator connected to the proof mass support and configured to reduce a force on at least one of the proof mass, the proof mass support, the flexure, the first resonator, or the second resonator upon application of the force to the proof mass assembly.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1 and 9 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 9 of copending Application No. 18/146114 (reference application; hereinafter Milne) filed 6/10/25 in view of Starzynski (US 20110239440 A1, hereinafter ‘440).
As to instant claim 1, claim 1 of Milne recites a proof mass assembly comprising a substrate, the substrate comprising:
a proof mass;
a proof mass support;
a flexure connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure;
a first resonator connected to a first major surface of the proof mass and a first major surface of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator connected to a second major surface of the proof mass and a second major surface of the proof mass support.
Milne does not recite that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall that is formed by selective laser etching.
‘440 teaches a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate (¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz, and ¶22 teaches that the components are directly bonded together such that their atoms “interdiffuse and form a direct bond”; accordingly, the elements of the substrate form a monolithic substrate), the quartz substrate comprising:
a proof mass 44 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a proof mass support 42 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a flexure 40 connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure (¶21);
a first resonator 26 connected to a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator 28 connected to a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support,
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching), and
includes a straight vertical side wall VSW (see ¶12, and figs. 1, 3-1 and 3-2 above) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne to use a crystalline quartz substrate as taught by ‘440 since such a modification would be a simple substitution of one method of forming a proof mass assembly for another for the predictable result that quartz is inexpensive and easy to process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Milne such that at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall, as taught by ‘440, for the benefit of minimizing the complexity of the resonator’s design, in comparison with a more complex side wall design.
Milne as modified recites that the substrate is a quartz substrate, and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz), and
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator includes a straight vertical side wall (in view of ‘440) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz, in view of ‘440).
As to instant claim 9, claim 9 of Milne recites wherein the quartz substrate further comprises:
a dampening plate connected to the proof mass support and configured to limit a range of rotation of the proof mass,
wherein the dampening plate is formed by selective laser etching (since the damping plate is formed of crystalline quartz in view of ‘440).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/7/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pg. 7 that “Starzynski does not describe, in any fashion, “laser,” “etching,” or “selective laser etching,” much less at least one of a first resonator or a second resonator being formed by selective laser etching. Accordingly, Starzynski does not disclose “at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching,” as recited in amended claim 1.” Applicant makes a similar argument on pg. 8.
Applicant’s argument is not persuasive. ‘440 teaches wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz). Accordingly, the limitations cited by Applicant above fail to structurally distinguish the claim over ‘440.
Applicant argues on pg. 7 that ‘440 does not teach ““a vertical wide wall [of a resonator],”…or “a straight vertical side wall [of a resonator] formed by selective laser etching,” in any fashion much less a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate comprising at least one of a first resonator or a second resonator being formed by selective laser etching and including a straight vertical side wall that is formed by selective laser etching.”
Applicant further argues on pg. 7 that “While Starzynski describes “two sets of resonators 26, 28,”3 Starzynski does not disclose or suggest that either of the two sets of resonators 26, 28 include a straight vertical side wall such as 1s recited in amended claim 1.”
Applicant further argues on pg. 8 that “In view of the above, Starzynski, does not disclose or suggest wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching and includes a straight vertical side wall that is formed by selective laser etching, as recited in amended claim 1.”
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive since ‘440 anticipates claim 1. As to claim 1, ‘440 teaches a proof mass assembly comprising a quartz substrate (¶19 teaches that all the components are made of the same material, being single crystal quartz, and ¶22 teaches that the components are directly bonded together such that their atoms “interdiffuse and form a direct bond”; accordingly, the elements of the substrate form a monolithic substrate), the quartz substrate comprising:
a proof mass 44 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a proof mass support 42 (¶21 and fig. 2-2);
a flexure 40 connecting the proof mass to the proof mass support, wherein the proof mass is configured to rotate relative to the proof mass support via the flexure (¶21);
a first resonator 26 connected to a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a first major surface (upper surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support; and
a second resonator 28 connected to a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass and a second major surface (lower surface in fig. 1) of the proof mass support,
wherein at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is formed by selective laser etching (at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz) and
[AltContent: textbox (VSW)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
510
308
media_image1.png
Greyscale
includes a straight vertical side wall VSW (see ¶12, and figs. 1, 3-1 and 3-2 above) that is formed by selective laser etching (the straight vertical side wall of the at least one of the first resonator or the second resonator is able to have been formed by selective laser etching, since the substrate is crystalline quartz).
Applicant argues on pg. 8 that claims 2-9 are allowable for depending from claim 1. Applicant further broadly argues that claims 2-9 contain features not taught by the prior art.
Applicant’s argument is not persuasive since claims 1-9 are properly rejected.
Applicant argues on pg. 9 that the amendments to claim 1 overcome the double patenting rejections.
Applicant’s argument is not persuasive since the double patenting rejections above are proper.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUBEN C PARCO JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1968. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at 571-272-2149. 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.
/R.C.P./Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/STEPHEN D MEIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights