DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 1/18/2023, 1/18/2023, 1/18/2023, 1/18/2023, 2/15/2023, 2/15/2023, 3/10/2023, 5/18/2023, 7/14/2023, 11/20/2023, 12/11/2023, 6/11/2024, 8/5/2024, 2/14/2025, 6/20/2025, and 7/21/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 5-8, 10-11, 13, 15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Fiori (US 4838139 A, June 13, 1989), hereinafter Fiori, over Clark et al. (US 20150170625 A1, June 18, 2015), hereinafter Clark, and further in view of Noroozian et al. (Crosstalk Reduction for Superconducting Microwave Resonator Arrays," June 25, 2012, retrieved March 2, 2016), hereinafter Noroozian
Regarding claim 1, Fiori teaches a sensing system comprising a set of sensors for a keyboard of a keyboard instrument, wherein the keyboard has a plurality of keys (Fiori abstract: "A musical keyboard having keys which carry metal spoilers that alter the resonance characteristics of tank circuits associated with the keys as the keys move toward and away from the inductance coils of the tank circuits.").
Fiori does not explicitly disclose that each sensor of the set of sensors comprises a passive resonant circuit for mounting on a moving part of a key and an active resonant circuit for mounting in a reference position, the passive resonant circuit having a resonant frequency, the active resonant circuit exciting the passive resonant circuit at the resonant frequency, each sensor of the set of sensors further having a detector to detect a variation of a resonant signal in the active resonant circuit corresponding to a variation of a relative position of the active and passive resonant circuits to detect a position and/or velocity of the key; and wherein the set of sensors comprises sensors having two or more different resonant frequencies arranged such that sensors having the same resonant frequency are non-adjacent.
However, Clark suggests that each sensor of the set of sensors comprises a passive resonant circuit for mounting on a moving part of a key and an active resonant circuit for mounting in a reference position (Clark ¶0020: "providing the device with a moveable control; providing a second passive tuned resonant circuit for said moveable control; and sensing a position of said moveable control using a driven first tuned resonant circuit and read-out electronics coupled to said driven tuned resonant circuit to sense a relative position of said first and second tuned resonant circuits"), the passive resonant circuit having a resonant frequency, the active resonant circuit exciting the passive resonant circuit at the resonant frequency (Clark ¶0020: "wherein said sensing comprises: driving said first tuned resonant circuit, with a drive signal at a resonant frequency, at an input of said first tuned resonant circuit; providing a resonant LC circuit coupled in series between said input and an output of said first tuned resonant circuit; matching a first frequency of resonance of said first tuned resonant circuit with a second frequency of resonance of said second, passive tuned circuit and with said resonant frequency of said drive signal"), each sensor of the set of sensors further having a detector to detect a variation of a resonant signal in the active resonant circuit corresponding to a variation of a relative position of the active and passive resonant circuits to detect a position and/or velocity of the key (Clark ¶0018: "Embodiments of the circuit operate by providing a controllable amplitude signal dependent on the mutual separation of the active and passive tuned circuits. To achieve this the resonant frequencies of the active and passive tuned circuits should be matched to one another and also to the drive frequency.").
Furthermore, Noroozian suggests that the set of sensors comprises sensors having two or more different resonant frequencies arranged such that sensors having the same resonant frequency are non-adjacent (Noroozian § II(B): "To further reduce crosstalk, the resonator frequencies are split into two groups of 128: a high frequency band (H) and a low frequency band (L) that are separated by 100 MHz, and are distributed in a checkerboard pattern in the array.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensing system of Fiori by adding the active and passive resonators of Clark to improve robustness, durability, and longevity (Clark ¶0012) and the two or more different resonant frequencies of Noroozian to reduce crosstalk (Noroozian title).
Regarding claim 5, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches that each sensor of the set of sensors further comprises a deformable element configured to limit motion of one or both of the passive resonant circuit and the active resonant circuit for pressure sensing (Fiori col. 5, lines 52-59: "Similarly, by establishing an arbitrary "fully depressed" position, any degree of aftertouch sensitivity can be permitted. In normal operation, the fully depressed position will correspond to the point at which the key travel is physically limited (by, for example, an elastomeric stop (not shown)). Compression of the stop will permit limited key travel past this point and be encoded as aftertouch.").
Regarding claim 6, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches that each key of the plurality of keys having a deformable end-stop, such that an after-touch position corresponds to movement of a key beyond an end-stop position defined by the deformable end-stop (Fiori col. 5, lines 52-59: "Similarly, by establishing an arbitrary "fully depressed" position, any degree of aftertouch sensitivity can be permitted. In normal operation, the fully depressed position will correspond to the point at which the key travel is physically limited (by, for example, an elastomeric stop (not shown)). Compression of the stop will permit limited key travel past this point and be encoded as aftertouch."), wherein identification of the aftertouch position for the key (Fiori col. 5, line 65 - col. 6, line 2: "Further initialization sets up threshold values for the "key up" position, the "key down" position, and the "pressure point", beyond which aftertouch will be encoded.") enables polyphonic aftertouch (Fiori col. 5, lines 30-40: "The functions of the computer-implemented process include the sequential addressing of each of the tank circuits associated with keys 10 on the keyboard, enablement of the counter circuit 52 to determine the position of each key 10, storage of the key position, comparison of the newly determined key position with the last stored key position available, formatting of a serial data stream indicative of key position and other information (in MIDI format), and transmission of the digital serial data to remote devices such as sequencers, recorders, and musical synthesizers (not shown).").
Regarding claim 7, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Noroozian further suggests that sensors having a first resonant frequency are interleaved with sensors having a second, different resonant frequency (Noroozian § II(B): "To further reduce crosstalk, the resonator frequencies are split into two groups of 128: a high frequency band (H) and a low frequency band (L) that are separated by 100 MHz, and are distributed in a checkerboard pattern in the array. ").
Regarding claim 8, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches that a multiplexing system and/or controller configured to control selection of sensors of the set of sensors such that adjacent keyboard sensors are selected at different times (Fiori col. 3 line 67 - col. 4 line 7: "Computer 48 controls the on/off operation of transistor 44 and transistors 40 to sequentially connect the reference tank circuit and the sensor tank circuits to frequency sensing means composed of a pulse generator 50 and a counter 52. In particular, reference inductance coil 36 and sensor inductance coils 32 are switched sequentially to the input of pulse generator 50 according to the sequential activation of transistor 44 and transistors 40 by computer 48." Fiori col. 5, lines 30-40: "The functions of the computer-implemented process include the sequential addressing of each of the tank circuits associated with keys 10 on the keyboard, enablement of the counter circuit 52 to determine the position of each key 10, storage of the key position, comparison of the newly determined key position with the last stored key position available, formatting of a serial data stream indicative of key position and other information (in MIDI format), and transmission of the digital serial data to remote devices such as sequencers, recorders, and musical synthesizers (not shown).").
Regarding claim 10, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 8 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches that the multiplexing system and/or controller is configured to perform time division multiplex operation of the sensors, wherein each resonant frequency defines a group of sensors having the resonant frequency, wherein the time division multiplexing defines a plurality of n time slots, and wherein successive keyboard sensors of each group are allocated successive time slots (Fiori teaches that each key has its own frequency and its own time slot. Fiori col. 3 line 67 - col. 4 line 7: " Computer 48 controls the on/off operation of transistor 44 and transistors 40 to sequentially connect the reference tank circuit and the sensor tank circuits to frequency sensing means composed of a pulse generator 50 and a counter 52. In particular, reference inductance coil 36 and sensor inductance coils 32 are switched sequentially to the input of pulse generator 50 according to the sequential activation of transistor 44 and transistors 40 by computer 48." Fiori col. 5, lines 30-40: "The functions of the computer-implemented process include the sequential addressing of each of the tank circuits associated with keys 10 on the keyboard, enablement of the counter circuit 52 to determine the position of each key 10, storage of the key position, comparison of the newly determined key position with the last stored key position available, formatting of a serial data stream indicative of key position and other information (in MIDI format), and transmission of the digital serial data to remote devices such as sequencers, recorders, and musical synthesizers (not shown)." Fiori teaches a frequency and a time slot for each key).
Regarding claim 11, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 10 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches that the multiplexing system and/or controller is configured to multiplex an RF drive signal used to drive active resonant circuits of the set of sensors such that one of the sensors is driven in each of a set of time slots (Fiori teaches that each key has its own frequency and its own time slot. Fiori col. 3 line 67 - col. 4 line 7: "Computer 48 controls the on/off operation of transistor 44 and transistors 40 to sequentially connect the reference tank circuit and the sensor tank circuits to frequency sensing means composed of a pulse generator 50 and a counter 52. In particular, reference inductance coil 36 and sensor inductance coils 32 are switched sequentially to the input of pulse generator 50 according to the sequential activation of transistor 44 and transistors 40 by computer 48.").
Regarding claim 13, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 10 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches that there are N resonant frequencies and N groups of sensors (Fiori teaches that each key has its own frequency and its own time slot. Fiori col. 3 line 67 - col. 4 line 7: " Computer 48 controls the on/off operation of transistor 44 and transistors 40 to sequentially connect the reference tank circuit and the sensor tank circuits to frequency sensing means composed of a pulse generator 50 and a counter 52. In particular, reference inductance coil 36 and sensor inductance coils 32 are switched sequentially to the input of pulse generator 50 according to the sequential activation of transistor 44 and transistors 40 by computer 48." Fiori col. 5, lines 30-40: "The functions of the computer-implemented process include the sequential addressing of each of the tank circuits associated with keys 10 on the keyboard, enablement of the counter circuit 52 to determine the position of each key 10, storage of the key position, comparison of the newly determined key position with the last stored key position available, formatting of a serial data stream indicative of key position and other information (in MIDI format), and transmission of the digital serial data to remote devices such as sequencers, recorders, and musical synthesizers (not shown)." Fiori teaches a frequency and a time slot for each key).
Noroozian further suggests that sensors of the groups of sensors are interleaved on the keyboard (Noroozian § II(B): "To further reduce crosstalk, the resonator frequencies are split into two groups of 128: a high frequency band (H) and a low frequency band (L) that are separated by 100 MHz, and are distributed in a checkerboard pattern in the array. ").
Regarding claim 15, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches a processor configured to process the variation of the resonant signal in the active resonant circuit of each sensor to determine the motion of each key of the keyboard over a succession of time intervals as a depressed key moves between released and depressed positions (Fiori col. 5, line 65 - col. 6, line 2: "Further initialization sets up threshold values for the "key up" position, the "key down" position, and the "pressure point", beyond which aftertouch will be encoded."), wherein the motion of each key comprises a position and a velocity of the key as the key moves between released and depressed positions (Fiori col. 5, lines 41-52: "Because aftertouch and velocity are two subtle factors in the tonal characteristics of keyboard instruments, the keyboard of the present invention provides a mechanism for determination of this information. Specifically, key positions are sampled rapidly (for example, at a rate of 10,000 keys/second) and key positions are stored in a "key state record" for comparison with subsequent position information. By comparison of two positions separated by the known length of time (at a minimum, that required to scan all other keys on the keyboard,) key velocity (speed and direction) can be determined.").
Regarding claim 17, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 15 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches a processor configured to process the variation of the resonant signal to determine a key press and key release event for each key (Fiori col. 6, lines 34-45: "Based upon the current position of the key being addressed and its position on the last scan of the keyboard, there are several possible events which can occur. These events may be summarized as a list of possible key state transitions: [None, NoteOn (Velocity), Note (AfterTouch), NoteOff (Velocity)].").
Regarding claim 18, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 15 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches that the processor is further configured to distinguish between at least three different key positions, a first, note-off position, a second, note-on position, and a third, aftertouch position (Fiori col. 6, lines 34-45: "Based upon the current position of the key being addressed and its position on the last scan of the keyboard, there are several possible events which can occur. These events may be summarized as a list of possible key state transitions: [None, NoteOn (Velocity), Note (AfterTouch), NoteOff (Velocity)]."), wherein the aftertouch position is beyond the note-on position (Fiori col. 5, lines 52-59: "Similarly, by establishing an arbitrary "fully depressed" position, any degree of aftertouch sensitivity can be permitted. In normal operation, the fully depressed position will correspond to the point at which the key travel is physically limited (by, for example, an elastomeric stop (not shown)). Compression of the stop will permit limited key travel past this point and be encoded as aftertouch.") and corresponds to additional pressure applied to the key after depression (Fiori col. 5, line 65 - col. 6, line 2: "Further initialization sets up threshold values for the "key up" position, the "key down" position, and the "pressure point", beyond which aftertouch will be encoded.").
Regarding claim 19, Fiori teaches a method of sensing the positions of a plurality of keys of a keyboard instrument (Fiori abstract: "A musical keyboard having keys which carry metal spoilers that alter the resonance characteristics of tank circuits associated with the keys as the keys move toward and away from the inductance coils of the tank circuits.").
Fiori does not explicitly disclose providing each key with a sensor comprising a passive resonant circuit for mounting on a moving part of a key and an active resonant circuit for mounting in a reference position, the passive resonant circuit having a resonant frequency, the active resonant circuit exciting the passive resonant circuit at the resonant frequency, each sensor further having a detector to detect variation of a resonant signal in the active resonant circuit with relative position of the active and passive resonant circuits to detect a position and/or velocity of the key; and arranging the sensors to operate at two or more different resonant frequencies arranged such that keyboard sensors having the same resonant frequency are non-adjacent; and/or reducing interference between sensors by configuring one or more coils of at least the active resonant circuits to have windings in opposite senses.
However, Clark suggests providing each key with a sensor comprising a passive resonant circuit for mounting on a moving part of a key and an active resonant circuit for mounting in a reference position (Clark ¶0020: "providing the device with a moveable control; providing a second passive tuned resonant circuit for said moveable control; and sensing a position of said moveable control using a driven first tuned resonant circuit and read-out electronics coupled to said driven tuned resonant circuit to sense a relative position of said first and second tuned resonant circuits"), the passive resonant circuit having a resonant frequency, the active resonant circuit exciting the passive resonant circuit at the resonant frequency (Clark ¶0020: "wherein said sensing comprises: driving said first tuned resonant circuit, with a drive signal at a resonant frequency, at an input of said first tuned resonant circuit; providing a resonant LC circuit coupled in series between said input and an output of said first tuned resonant circuit; matching a first frequency of resonance of said first tuned resonant circuit with a second frequency of resonance of said second, passive tuned circuit and with said resonant frequency of said drive signal"), each sensor further having a detector to detect variation of a resonant signal in the active resonant circuit with relative position of the active and passive resonant circuits to detect a position and/or velocity of the key (Clark ¶0018: "Embodiments of the circuit operate by providing a controllable amplitude signal dependent on the mutual separation of the active and passive tuned circuits. To achieve this the resonant frequencies of the active and passive tuned circuits should be matched to one another and also to the drive frequency.").
Furthermore, Noroozian suggests arranging the sensors to operate at two or more different resonant frequencies arranged such that keyboard sensors having the same resonant frequency are non-adjacent; and/or reducing interference between sensors by configuring one or more coils of at least the active resonant circuits to have windings in opposite senses (Noroozian § II(B): "To further reduce crosstalk, the resonator frequencies are split into two groups of 128: a high frequency band (H) and a low frequency band (L) that are separated by 100 MHz, and are distributed in a checkerboard pattern in the array.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Fiori by adding the active and passive resonators of Clark to improve robustness, durability, and longevity (Clark ¶0012) and the two or more different resonant frequencies of Noroozian to reduce crosstalk (Noroozian title).
Regarding claim 20, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a method of sensing the positions of a plurality of keys of a keyboard instrument comprising the features of claim 19 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches providing polyphonic (Fiori col. 5, lines 30-40: "The functions of the computer-implemented process include the sequential addressing of each of the tank circuits associated with keys 10 on the keyboard, enablement of the counter circuit 52 to determine the position of each key 10, storage of the key position, comparison of the newly determined key position with the last stored key position available, formatting of a serial data stream indicative of key position and other information (in MIDI format), and transmission of the digital serial data to remote devices such as sequencers, recorders, and musical synthesizers (not shown).") aftertouch (Fiori col. 5, lines 52-59: "Similarly, by establishing an arbitrary "fully depressed" position, any degree of aftertouch sensitivity can be permitted. In normal operation, the fully depressed position will correspond to the point at which the key travel is physically limited (by, for example, an elastomeric stop (not shown)). Compression of the stop will permit limited key travel past this point and be encoded as aftertouch.") by distinguishing between at least three different key positions, a first, note-off position, a second, note-on position, and a third, aftertouch position (Fiori col. 6, lines 34-45: "Based upon the current position of the key being addressed and its position on the last scan of the keyboard, there are several possible events which can occur. These events may be summarized as a list of possible key state transitions: [None, NoteOn (Velocity), Note (AfterTouch), NoteOff (Velocity)]."), wherein the aftertouch position is beyond the note-on position (Fiori col. 5, lines 52-59: "Similarly, by establishing an arbitrary "fully depressed" position, any degree of aftertouch sensitivity can be permitted. In normal operation, the fully depressed position will correspond to the point at which the key travel is physically limited (by, for example, an elastomeric stop (not shown)). Compression of the stop will permit limited key travel past this point and be encoded as aftertouch.") and corresponds to additional pressure applied to the key after depression and movement of a key beyond an end-stop position (Fiori col. 5, line 65 - col. 6, line 2: "Further initialization sets up threshold values for the "key up" position, the "key down" position, and the "pressure point", beyond which aftertouch will be encoded.").
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Fiori in view of Clark and further in view of Noroozian and Yan et al. (US 20150206634 A1, July 23, 2015), hereinafter Yan.
Regarding claim 2, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) does not explicitly disclose that the active resonant circuit comprises one or more coils with windings in opposite senses, wherein the windings in opposite senses are configured to generate magnetic fields in opposite senses to cancel one another.
However, Yan suggests that the active resonant circuit comprises one or more coils with windings in opposite senses, wherein the windings in opposite senses are configured to generate magnetic fields in opposite senses (Yan ¶0004: "The first inductor includes a first coil portion having more than one turn that defines a first enclosed area and a second coil portion having more than one turn that defines a second enclosed area. The first coil portion and the second coil portion are arranged to generate magnetic fields having substantially equal strength and opposite directions.") to cancel one another (Yan ¶0030: "When the first coil portion 240 and the second coil portion 250 have substantially the same shape and size, the first magnetic field and the second magnetic field have about the same strength but different directions. Thus, the first magnetic field and the second magnetic field cancel out each other's affect to the victim inductive component, and cause little interference to the victim inductive component.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensing system of Fiori (as modified by Clark and Noroozian) by adding the opposite windings of Yan to reduce interference with other inductive components (Yan ¶0030).
Regarding claim 3, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) does not explicitly disclose that the active resonant circuit comprises a pair of laterally adjacent pancake coils.
However, Yan suggests that the active resonant circuit comprises a pair of laterally adjacent pancake coils (Yan ¶0032: "FIGS. 3A-3B show diagrams of another inductor according to an embodiment of the disclosure. The inductor 330 includes a first coil portion 340 and a second coil portion 350. The first coil portion 340 includes coil turns that form a first spiral inductor and the second coil portion 350 includes coil turns that form a second spiral inductor.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensing system of Fiori (as modified by Clark and Noroozian) by adding the laterally adjacent pancake coils of Yan to reduce interference with other inductive components (Yan ¶0030).
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Fiori in view of Clark and further in view of Noroozian and Yamauchi et al. (US 20130207733 A1, August 15, 2013), hereinafter Yamauchi.
Regarding claim 4, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 1 as discussed above.
Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) does not explicitly teach a temperature-compensation system to temperature-compensate a detected resonant signal in the active resonant circuit, wherein the temperature-compensation system is configured to apply an off-resonance drive signal to at least one of the active resonant circuits, to measure a level of the off-resonance drive signal from the at least one detector, and to compensate a detected level of the resonant signal responsive to the level of the off-resonance drive signal.
However, Yamauchi teaches a temperature-compensation system to temperature-compensate a detected resonant signal in the active resonant circuit (Yamauchi ¶0035: "In this case, the ring oscillator 51 may have a characteristic varying in dependence upon its temperature. In consideration of this, at step S1, the control circuit 54 implements thermal correction to enable, regardless of the ambient temperature, sweeping of the driving signal from the minimum frequency to the maximum frequency in the frequency range."), wherein the temperature-compensation system is configured to apply an off-resonance drive signal to at least one of the active resonant circuits, to measure a level of the off-resonance drive signal from the at least one detector (Yamauchi ¶0035: "In the beginning, at steps S1 and S2, the control circuit 54 executes the approximately-resonant control processing. Specifically, at step S1, the control circuit 54 sweeps the driving signal sent from the DCO 53. More specifically, the control circuit 54 sweeps the driving signal in a frequency range between a lower frequency, which is sufficiently lower than the resonance frequency of the element 10, and an upper frequency, which is sufficiently higher than the resonance frequency. On determination that the oscillator 11 of the element 10 is approximately in the resonance state, the control circuit 54 terminates the sweep of the driving signal."), and to compensate a detected level of the resonant signal responsive to the level of the off-resonance drive signal (Yamauchi ¶0037: "At step S3, the control circuit 54 detects the phase difference between the driving signal and the detection signal. Specifically, the control circuit 54 retrieves the signal representing the phase difference from the TDC 52. At step S4, the control circuit 54 manipulates the frequency of the driving signal, such that the detected phase difference coincides with the resonant phase difference. Specifically, the control circuit 54 raises the frequency of the driving signal by a predetermined value when the detected phase difference is smaller than the resonant phase difference. Alternatively, the control circuit 54 lowers the frequency of the driving signal by a predetermined value when the detected phase difference is larger than resonant phase difference. In this way, the control circuit 54 raises or lowers the frequency of the driving signal.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensing system of Fiori (as modified by Clark and Noroozian) by adding the temperature-compensation system of Yamauchi to produce a self-resonant circuit having a high reliability and high noise tolerance (Yamauchi ¶0009).
Regarding claim 12, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 11 as discussed above.
Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) does not explicitly disclose a temperature-compensation system configured to temperature-compensate a level of a resonant signal, in a first active resonant circuit of a first sensor, that is detected by a first detector of the first sensor, wherein the temperature-compensation system is configured to apply an off-resonance drive signal to the first active resonant circuit, to measure a level of the off-resonance drive signal from the first detector, and to compensate the detected level of the resonant signal responsive to the level of the off-resonance drive signal, and wherein the temperature-compensation system is configured to apply the off-resonance drive signal during an additional time slot to the set of time slots.
However, Yamauchi suggests a temperature-compensation system configured to temperature-compensate a level of a resonant signal, in a first active resonant circuit of a first sensor, that is detected by a first detector of the first sensor (Yamauchi ¶0035: "In this case, the ring oscillator 51 may have a characteristic varying in dependence upon its temperature. In consideration of this, at step S1, the control circuit 54 implements thermal correction to enable, regardless of the ambient temperature, sweeping of the driving signal from the minimum frequency to the maximum frequency in the frequency range."), wherein the temperature-compensation system is configured to apply an off-resonance drive signal to the first active resonant circuit, to measure a level of the off-resonance drive signal from the first detector (Yamauchi ¶0035: "In the beginning, at steps S1 and S2, the control circuit 54 executes the approximately-resonant control processing. Specifically, at step S1, the control circuit 54 sweeps the driving signal sent from the DCO 53. More specifically, the control circuit 54 sweeps the driving signal in a frequency range between a lower frequency, which is sufficiently lower than the resonance frequency of the element 10, and an upper frequency, which is sufficiently higher than the resonance frequency. On determination that the oscillator 11 of the element 10 is approximately in the resonance state, the control circuit 54 terminates the sweep of the driving signal."), and to compensate the detected level of the resonant signal responsive to the level of the off-resonance drive signal, and wherein the temperature-compensation system is configured to apply the off-resonance drive signal during an additional time slot to the set of time slots
(Yamauchi ¶0037: "At step S3, the control circuit 54 detects the phase difference between the driving signal and the detection signal. Specifically, the control circuit 54 retrieves the signal representing the phase difference from the TDC 52. At step S4, the control circuit 54 manipulates the frequency of the driving signal, such that the detected phase difference coincides with the resonant phase difference. Specifically, the control circuit 54 raises the frequency of the driving signal by a predetermined value when the detected phase difference is smaller than the resonant phase difference. Alternatively, the control circuit 54 lowers the frequency of the driving signal by a predetermined value when the detected phase difference is larger than resonant phase difference. In this way, the control circuit 54 raises or lowers the frequency of the driving signal.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensing system of Fiori (as modified by Clark and Noroozian) by adding the temperature-compensation system of Yamauchi to produce a self-resonant circuit having a high reliability and high noise tolerance (Yamauchi ¶0009).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Fiori in view of Clark and further in view of Noroozian and Lavache (US 8981907 B1, October 15, 2012), hereinafter Lavache.
Regarding claim 9, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 8 as discussed above.
Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) does not explicitly disclose that the multiplexing system and/or controller is further configured to damp the active resonant circuits of unselected sensors.
However, Lavache suggests that the multiplexing system and/or controller is further configured to damp the active resonant circuits of unselected sensors (Lavache col. 4, lines 18-28: "To overcome and/or reduce the effects of antenna multiplexer 35, as described above, antenna shorting circuits may be provided for individual antennas in a multi-antenna RFID interrogator. When the RFID interrogator intends to communicate with an RFID tag on one of the multiple antennas, other antennas may be shorted by one or more shorting circuits. As a result or shorting, unwanted signals may be not transmitted (and/or at least not transmitted to the same extent or having the same energy) by the shorted antennas. The shorted antennas may cause no or reduced interference with a (non-shorted) antenna being used for communications.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensing system of Fiori (as modified by Clark and Noroozian) by adding the damped circuits of Lavache to reduce interference with other inductive components (Lavache col. 4, lines 26-28).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Fiori in view of Clark and further in view of Noroozian and Krishna et al. (US 20060022800 A1), hereinafter Krishna.
Regarding claim 14, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 13 as discussed above.
However, Krishna suggests that the multiplexing system and/or controller is configured such that keyboard sensors in the same group and activated in the same time slot have (n x N)-1 sensors between them (Krishna ¶0165: "Specifically, the above-described techniques can be used to coordinate multiple readers occupying the same general vicinity within a site or facility and connected through a wired or wireless network such that the readers are time-multiplexed and frequency-multiplexed, and their transmit power is adjusted for desired tasks at specific times, thereby reducing the likelihood of the transmissions of one reader interfering with the receptions of the other readers.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensing system of Fiori (as modified by Clark and Noroozian) by adding the multiplexing of Krishna to reduce interference with other inductive components (Krishna ¶0165).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Fiori in view of Clark and further in view of Noroozian and Lengeling (US 20050204906 A1, September 22, 2005), hereinafter Lengeling.
Regarding claim 16, Fiori (in view of Clark and Noroozian) teaches a sensing system comprising the features of claim 15 as discussed above.
Fiori further teaches that the processor is configured to process the variation of the resonant signal in the active resonant circuit of each sensor to determine the velocity of a key, as the key moves between depressed and released positions (Fiori col. 2 line 65 - col 3. line 1: "As key 10 is depressed and moves in the direction of arrow 14, the key moves against a restoring spring 16 which returns the key to its rest position when the force moving the key is removed."), from changes in position of the key determined at successive time intervals (Fiori col. 5, lines 44-52: "Specifically, key positions are sampled rapidly (for example, at a rate of 10,000 keys/second) and key positions are stored in a "key state record" for comparison with subsequent position information. By comparison of two positions separated by the known length of time (at a minimum, that required to scan all other keys on the keyboard,) key velocity (speed and direction) can be determined.").
However, Lengeling suggests that the changes are filtered dependent upon key velocity (Lengeling ¶0038: "The force function may also be defined as a function of sensor inputs, such as key position, velocity and/or acceleration. Force values for different combinations may then be pre-computed and stored in a lookup table for instant reference in real time. Different lookup tables may be stored for different keyboard profiles. The granularity of the pre-computed values should be sufficient to provide a musician with a smooth keyboard action, though simple filters may be used for post-processing the resistance value to smooth the response.").
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sensing system of Fiori (as modified by Clark and Noroozian) by adding the filtering of Lengeling to smooth the response of the keyboard (Lengeling ¶0038).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP SCOLES whose telephone number is (703)756-1831. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dedei Hammond can be reached on 571-270-7938. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of 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.
/PHILIP G SCOLES/
Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837