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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1-3, 7-10, and 15-17, in the reply filed on January 30, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that search and examination of the entire application can be made with serious search and/or examination burden. This is not found persuasive because the inventions require a different field of search (searching for different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries). Group I would require a search in at least CPC G01N 27/41, along with a unique text search. Group II would not be searched as above and would require a search in at least CPC G01N 33/004, along with a unique text search.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 4-6, 11-14, and 18-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on January 30, 2026.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 14, 17, 20, and 23, “the solid electrolyte” should read “the oxygen-ion conductive solid electrolyte”.
In lines 26-27 and 29, “water vapor and carbon dioxide” should read “the water vapor and the carbon dioxide”.
In line 33, “decomposition of water vapor” should read “the decomposition of the water vapor”.
In line 37, “decomposition of carbon dioxide” should read “the decomposition of the carbon dioxide”.
In line 41, “water vapor” should read “the water vapor”.
In line 45, “carbon dioxide” should read “the carbon dioxide”.
In lines 49 and 51, “oxygen” should read “the oxygen”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 5, 11, 16, and 21, “the solid electrolyte” should read “the oxygen-ion conductive solid electrolyte”.
In lines 7, 13, 18, and 23, “oxygen” should read “the oxygen”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “first pumping-out operation” should read “a first pumping-out operation”.
In line 3, “second pumping-out operation” should read “a second pumping-out operation”.
In lines 4, 8, and 11-12, “water vapor and carbon dioxide” should read “the water vapor and the carbon dioxide”.
In lines 8 and 11, “oxygen” should read “the oxygen”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 3, “stopping” should read “the stopping”.
In lines 3-4, “or the second pumping-out operation” should read “or the performing of the second pumping-out operation”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 4, “stopping” should read “the stopping”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 3, “from time” should read “from a time”.
In line 4, “to time” should read “to a time”.
In line 4, “stopping” should read “the stopping”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “first pumping-out operation” should read “a first pumping-out operation”.
In line 3, “second pumping-out operation” should read “a second pumping-out operation”.
In lines 4, 8, and 11-12, “water vapor and carbon dioxide” should read “the water vapor and the carbon dioxide”.
In lines 8 and 11, “oxygen” should read “the oxygen”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 3, “stopping” should read “the stopping”.
In lines 3-4, “or the second pumping-out operation” should read “or the performing of the second pumping-out operation”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “first pumping-out operation” should read “a first pumping-out operation”.
In line 3, “second pumping-out operation” should read “a second pumping-out operation”.
In lines 4, 8, and 11-12, “water vapor and carbon dioxide” should read “the water vapor and the carbon dioxide”.
In lines 8 and 11, “oxygen” should read “the oxygen”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakasone et al. (US 2015/0034484 A1) in view of Nakagaki et al. (US 2019/0383766 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nakasone teaches a gas sensor capable of measuring concentrations of a plurality of sensing target gas components in a measurement gas at least containing water vapor and carbon dioxide (a gas sensor 200 for detecting concentrations of water vapor and carbon dioxide in a measurement gas, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0022]-[0023], [0082], [0087]-[0088]; the components included in the gas sensor 200 in Fig. 3 that are the same as those of the gas sensor 100 in Fig. 1 are described and denoted by the same reference numbers herein, Nakasone, para. [0082]), the gas sensor comprising:
a sensor element including a structure formed of an oxygen-ion conductive solid electrolyte (a sensor element 201 including a structure formed of an oxygen-ion conductive solid electrolyte, the structure including a first substrate layer 1, a second substrate layer 2, a third substrate layer 3, a first solid electrolyte layer 4, a spacer layer 5, and a second solid electrolyte layer 6 each formed of an oxygen-ion conductive solid electrolyte, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0022], [0024], [0083]); wherein
the sensor element includes:
a gas inlet through which the measurement gas is introduced (a gas inlet 10 through which the measurement gas is taken into the sensor element 101 from the outside, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0029]);
a sub adjustment chamber, a first chamber as a main adjustment chamber, a second chamber, and a third chamber communicating sequentially from the gas inlet via different diffusion control parts (a buffer space 12, a first internal space 20, a second internal space 40, and a third internal space 80 communicating sequentially from the gas inlet 10 via a first diffusion control part 11, a fourth diffusion control part 13, a second diffusion control part 30, and a third diffusion control part 145, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0025], [0083], [0086]);
a first pump cell including a first inner electrode disposed to face the first chamber, the outer electrode, and a portion of the solid electrolyte present between the first inner electrode and the outer electrode (a main pumping cell 21 including a main inside pump electrode 22 disposed to face the first internal space 20, an outside pump electrode 23 disposed on an outer surface of the sensor element 201, and a portion of the oxygen-ion conductive solid electrolyte sandwiched between these electrodes, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0035]);
a second pump cell including a second inner electrode disposed to face the second chamber, the outer electrode, and a portion of the solid electrolyte present between the second inner electrode and the outer electrode (a first measuring pumping cell 50 including a first measuring inside pump electrode 51 disposed to face the second internal space 40, the outside pump electrode 23, and a portion of the oxygen-ion conductive solid electrolyte sandwiched between these electrodes, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0041], [0085]); and
a third pump cell including a third inner electrode disposed to face the third chamber, the outer electrode, and a portion of the solid electrolyte present between the third inner electrode and the outer electrode (a second measuring pumping cell 47 including a second measuring inside pump electrode 44 disposed to face the third internal space 80, the outside pump electrode 23, and a portion of the oxygen-ion conductive solid electrolyte sandwiched between these electrodes, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0045], [0085]),
the first pump cell pumps out oxygen from the first chamber so that substantially all of water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas introduced from the sub adjustment chamber into the first chamber are decomposed (the main pumping cell 21 pumps out oxygen from the first internal space 20 to an extent that substantially all of the water vapor and carbon dioxide in the measurement gas introduced into the first internal space 20 are decomposed, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0036], [0053]-[0054]),
the second pump cell pumps in oxygen to the second chamber to selectively oxidize, in the second chamber, hydrogen contained in the measurement gas, which has been generated by decomposition of water vapor and is introduced from the first chamber into the second chamber (the first measuring pumping cell 50 pumps in oxygen to the second internal space 40 to selectively oxidize hydrogen which was generated by the decomposition of water vapor in the first internal space 20, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0042], [0058]),
the third pump cell pumps in oxygen to the third chamber to oxidize, in the third chamber, carbon monoxide contained in the measurement gas, which has been generated by decomposition of carbon dioxide and is introduced from the second chamber into the third chamber (the second measuring pumping cell 47 pumps in oxygen to the third internal space 80 to selectively oxidize carbon monoxide which was generated by the decomposition of carbon dioxide in the first internal space 20 and has reached the third internal space 80, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0063], [0085]-[0087]).
Nakasone teaches the buffer space 12 which is provided to cancel concentration fluctuations of the measurement gas which are caused due to pressure fluctuations of the measurement gas in the outside (Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0031]). Nakasone fails to teach a sub adjustment pump cell including a sub adjustment inner electrode disposed to face the sub adjustment chamber, an outer electrode disposed on an outer surface of the sensor element, and a portion of the solid electrolyte present between the sub adjustment inner electrode and the outer electrode.
Nakagaki teaches a gas sensor which is capable of measuring respective concentrations of a plurality of target components in a gas to be measured (Nakagaki, para. [0002]). Nakagaki teaches a third gas sensor 10C in Figs. 12-13 having substantially the same configuration as a first gas sensor 10A in Fig. 1 (Nakagaki, para. [0139]), so the same components will be described and denoted by the same reference numbers herein. Nakagaki teaches that the third gas sensor 10C includes a preliminary pump cell 80 constituted by a preliminary pump electrode 82 facing toward a preliminary adjustment chamber 21, an exterior side pump electrode 44, and a second solid electrolyte layer 28 therebetween (Nakagaki, Fig. 12, para. [0088]). Nakagaki teaches that the preliminary adjustment chamber 21 functions as a buffer space for cancelling fluctuations in the concentration of the gas to be measured which are caused by pressure fluctuations of the gas to be measured in the external space (Nakagaki, Fig. 12, para. [0091]). Nakagaki teaches that the preliminary pump cell 80 is capable of pumping out oxygen within the atmosphere inside the preliminary adjustment chamber 21 into the external space to adjust the oxygen partial pressure within the gas to be measured which is introduced from a gas introduction port 16 (Nakagaki, Fig. 12, para. [0087], [0090]). Nakagaki teaches that the preliminary pump current Ip0 when the preliminary pump cell 80 is turned ON represents the amount of oxygen that is pumped out of the preliminary pump cell 80 and thus the oxygen concentration of the exhaust gas (Nakagaki, Fig. 12, para. [0163]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gas sensor of Nakasone to further include a preliminary pump cell constituted by a preliminary pump electrode facing toward the buffer space, the outside pump electrode, and the solid electrolyte therebetween as taught by Nakagaki in order to yield the predictable result of adjusting the oxygen partial pressure within the gas to be measured and cancelling fluctuations in the concentration of the gas to be measured which are caused by pressure fluctuations of the gas to be measured in the external space. Furthermore, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
Modified Nakasone teaches wherein the sub adjustment pump cell pumps out oxygen from the measurement gas introduced through the gas inlet into the sub adjustment chamber to the extent that water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas are not decomposed (the preliminary pump cell pumps out oxygen within the atmosphere inside the buffer space into the external space to adjust the oxygen partial pressure within the gas to be measured which is introduced from the gas inlet, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0031], Nakagaki, Fig. 12, para. [0087], [0090], see modification supra).
Modified Nakasone teaches identifying a concentration of water vapor contained in the measurement gas based on a magnitude of a current flowing between the second inner electrode and the outer electrode at the time when the second pump cell pumps in oxygen to the second chamber (the current Ip1 flowing through the first measuring pump cell 50 is proportional to the concentration of water vapor generated through burning of hydrogen near the surface of the first measuring inside pump electrode 51 when the first measuring pump cell 50 pumps in oxygen to the second internal space 40, so the water vapor concentration of the original measurement gas is obtained based on the value of the current Ip1, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0042], [0060], [0071], [0087]-[0088]); identifying a concentration of carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas based on a magnitude of a current flowing between the third inner electrode and the outer electrode at the time when the third pump cell pumps in oxygen to the third chamber (the current Ip2 flowing through the second measuring pump cell 47 is proportional to the concentration of carbon dioxide generated through burning of carbon monoxide on the surface of the second measuring inside pump electrode 44 when the second measuring pump cell 47 pumps in oxygen to the third internal space 80, so the carbon dioxide concentration of the original measurement gas is obtained based on the value of the current Ip2, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0063], [0065], [0071], [0085]-[0088]); and identify a concentration of oxygen contained in the measurement gas based on a magnitude of a current flowing between the sub adjustment inner electrode and the outer electrode at the time when the sub adjustment pump cell pumps out oxygen from the sub adjustment chamber (the concentration of oxygen in the measurement gas can be obtained based on the detected current values of the pump cells, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0090]; the preliminary pump current when the preliminary pump cell is turned ON represents the amount of oxygen that is pumped out of the preliminary pump cell from the buffer space and thus the oxygen concentration of the exhaust gas, Nakagaki, Fig. 12, para. [0163], see modification supra). Thus, Modified Nakasone teaches the functions of the claimed controller of instant claim 1 (as mapped supra), but is silent with respect to a controller controlling operation of the gas sensor and including a water vapor concentration identification element, a carbon dioxide concentration identification element, and an oxygen concentration identification element.
Nakagaki teaches a gas sensor which is capable of measuring respective concentrations of a plurality of target components in a gas to be measured (Nakagaki, para. [0002]). Nakagaki teaches a third gas sensor 10C in Figs. 12-13 having substantially the same configuration as a first gas sensor 10A in Figs. 1-2 (Nakagaki, para. [0139]), so the same components will be described and denoted by the same reference numbers herein. Nakagaki teaches that the third gas sensor 10C includes a specified component measurement unit 106 that measures the concentration of a specified component inside the measurement chamber 20 based on the measured pump current Ip3 of the measurement pump cell 61 (Nakagaki, Figs. 12-13, para. [0084], [0092]), and a target component acquisition unit 112 that acquires the respective concentrations of the target components based on the sensor outputs from the specified component measurement unit 106 (Nakagaki, Figs. 12-13, para. [0092], [0100]). Nakagaki teaches that these units are each constituted by one or more electronic circuits having one or a plurality of CPUs, memory devices, and the like (Nakagaki, Fig. 13, para. [0093]).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gas sensor of Modified Nakasone to further include one or more electronic circuits having one or a plurality of CPUs, memory devices, and the like as taught by Nakagaki in order to yield the predictable result of obtaining the concentrations of water vapor, carbon dioxide, and oxygen based on the currents flowing through the first measuring pump cell 50, the second measuring pump cell 47, and the preliminary pump cell, respectively. Generally, the court has held that broadly providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. MPEP § 2144.04(III). Furthermore, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
The limitations “capable of measuring concentrations of a plurality of sensing target gas components in a measurement gas at least containing water vapor and carbon dioxide,” “pumps out oxygen from the measurement gas introduced through the gas inlet into the sub adjustment chamber to the extent that water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas are not decomposed,” “pumps out oxygen from the first chamber so that substantially all of water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas introduced from the sub adjustment chamber into the first chamber are decomposed,” “pumps in oxygen to the second chamber to selectively oxidize, in the second chamber, hydrogen contained in the measurement gas, which has been generated by decomposition of water vapor and is introduced from the first chamber into the second chamber,” and “pumps in oxygen to the third chamber to oxidize, in the third chamber, carbon monoxide contained in the measurement gas, which has been generated by decomposition of carbon dioxide and is introduced from the second chamber into the third chamber” are interpreted as intended use and/or functional language. The Courts have held that the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). A functional recitation of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See MPEP § 2114. The gas sensor disclosed by Modified Nakasone teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim and thus is configured for and capable of performing the intended use and/or functional language as mapped in the rejection supra.
Examiner further notes that the limitations “a measurement gas at least containing water vapor and carbon dioxide,” “water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas are not decomposed,” “substantially all of water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas introduced from the sub adjustment chamber into the first chamber are decomposed,” “selectively oxidize, in the second chamber, hydrogen contained in the measurement gas, which has been generated by decomposition of water vapor,” and “oxidize, in the third chamber, carbon monoxide contained in the measurement gas, which has been generated by decomposition of carbon dioxide” are with respect to articles worked upon (water vapor, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and carbon monoxide) and not a positively recited element of the gas sensor. Inclusion of the material or article worked upon (water vapor, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and carbon monoxide) by a structure (gas sensor) being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. MPEP § 2115.
Regarding claim 7, Modified Nakasone teaches the first pump cell (the main pumping cell 21 pumps out oxygen from the first internal space 20, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0036], [0053]-[0054]), the sub adjustment chamber, the first chamber, the second chamber, and the third chamber (the buffer space 12, the first internal space 20, the second internal space 40, and the third internal space 80 communicating sequentially from the gas inlet 10, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0025], [0083], [0086]).
The limitations “for a predetermined time period during first pumping-out operation, the first pump cell stops the first pumping-out operation or performs second pumping-out operation so as to interrupt reduction of water vapor and carbon dioxide in the first chamber, to thereby emit water vapor generated in the second chamber and carbon dioxide generated in the third chamber outside the sensor element through the first chamber and the sub adjustment chamber, the first pumping-out operation being operation of pumping out oxygen from the first chamber so that substantially all of water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas introduced from the sub adjustment chamber into the first chamber are decomposed, the second pumping-out operation being operation of pumping out oxygen from the first chamber to the extent that water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas are not decomposed” are interpreted as intended use and/or functional language. The Courts have held that the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). A functional recitation of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See MPEP § 2114. The gas sensor comprising the main pumping cell 21 and internal spaces disclosed by Modified Nakasone teach all of the structural limitations of the claim and thus is configured for and capable of performing the intended use and/or functional language.
Examiner further notes that the limitations “interrupt reduction of water vapor and carbon dioxide in the first chamber,” “emit water vapor generated in the second chamber and carbon dioxide generated in the third chamber outside the sensor element through the first chamber and the sub adjustment chamber,” “substantially all of water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas introduced from the sub adjustment chamber into the first chamber are decomposed,” and “water vapor and carbon dioxide contained in the measurement gas are not decomposed” are with respect to articles worked upon (water vapor and carbon dioxide) and not a positively recited element of the gas sensor. Inclusion of the material or article worked upon (water vapor and carbon dioxide) by a structure (gas sensor) being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. MPEP § 2115.
Regarding claim 8, Modified Nakasone teaches the first pump cell (the main pumping cell 21 pumps out oxygen from the first internal space 20, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0036], [0053]-[0054]), the second chamber (the second internal space 40, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0025], [0083], [0086]), the second pump cell (the first measuring pumping cell 50 pumps in oxygen to the second internal space 40, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0042], [0058]), the third chamber (the third internal space 80 Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0083], [0086]), and the third pump cell (the second measuring pumping cell 47 pumps in oxygen to the third internal space 80, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0063], [0085]-[0087]).
The limitations “alternately and periodically performs the first pumping-out operation and either of stopping of the first pumping-out operation or the second pumping-out operation, and pumping-in of oxygen to the second chamber by the second pump cell and pumping-in of oxygen to the third chamber by the third pump cell are performed periodically in accordance with operation of the first pump cell” are interpreted as intended use and/or functional language. The Courts have held that the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). A functional recitation of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See MPEP § 2114. The gas sensor comprising the main pumping cell 21, the first measuring pumping cell 50, and the second measuring pumping cell 47 disclosed by Modified Nakasone teach all of the structural limitations of the claim and thus is configured for and capable of performing the intended use and/or functional language.
Regarding claim 9, Modified Nakasone teaches the first pump cell (the main pumping cell 21 pumps out oxygen from the first internal space 20, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0036], [0053]-[0054]), the second chamber (the second internal space 40, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0025], [0083], [0086]), the second pump cell (the first measuring pumping cell 50 pumps in oxygen to the second internal space 40, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0042], [0058]), the third chamber (the third internal space 80 Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0083], [0086]), and the third pump cell (the second measuring pumping cell 47 pumps in oxygen to the third internal space 80, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0063], [0085]-[0087]).
The limitation “pumping-in of oxygen to the second chamber by the second pump cell and pumping-in of oxygen to the third chamber by the third pump cell are performed in synchronization with the second pumping-out operation or stopping of the first pumping-out operation by the first pump cell” is interpreted as intended use and/or functional language. The Courts have held that the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). A functional recitation of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See MPEP § 2114. The gas sensor comprising the main pumping cell 21, the first measuring pumping cell 50, and the second measuring pumping cell 47 disclosed by Modified Nakasone teach all of the structural limitations of the claim and thus is configured for and capable of performing the intended use and/or functional language.
Regarding claim 10, Modified Nakasone teaches the first pump cell (the main pumping cell 21 pumps out oxygen from the first internal space 20, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0036], [0053]-[0054]), the second chamber (the second internal space 40, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0025], [0083], [0086]), the second pump cell (the first measuring pumping cell 50 pumps in oxygen to the second internal space 40, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0042], [0058]), the third chamber (the third internal space 80 Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0083], [0086]), and the third pump cell (the second measuring pumping cell 47 pumps in oxygen to the third internal space 80, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0063], [0085]-[0087]).
The limitation “pumping-in of oxygen to the second chamber by the second pump cell and pumping-in of oxygen to the third chamber by the third pump cell are performed from time during the first pumping-out operation to time during stopping of the first pumping-out operation or during the second pumping-out operation by the first pump cell” is interpreted as intended use and/or functional language. The Courts have held that the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). A functional recitation of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See MPEP § 2114. The gas sensor comprising the main pumping cell 21, the first measuring pumping cell 50, and the second measuring pumping cell 47 disclosed by Modified Nakasone teach all of the structural limitations of the claim and thus is configured for and capable of performing the intended use and/or functional language.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claims 3 and 15-17 are also objected to since they are dependent upon claim 2.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not disclose nor render obvious all of the cumulative limitations of the gas sensor of dependent claim 2, with particular attention to the limitations:
“the controller further includes:
a sub adjustment pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the sub adjustment inner electrode and the outer electrode of the sub adjustment pump cell so that the electromotive force V0 in the sub adjustment chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 400 mV to 700 mV;
a first pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the first inner electrode and the outer electrode of the first pump cell so that the electromotive force V1 in the first chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 1000 mV to 1500 mV;
a second pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the second inner electrode and the outer electrode of the second pump cell so that the electromotive force V2 in the second chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 250 mV to 450 mV; and
a third pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the third inner electrode and the outer electrode of the third pump cell so that the electromotive force V3 in the third chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 100 mV to 300 mV” in combination with the other limitations of dependent claim 2 and independent claim 1.
The closest prior art of record is considered to be Nakasone et al. (US 2015/0034484 A1), Nakagaki et al. (US 2019/0383766 A1) (hereinafter “Nakagaki-1”), and Nakagaki (US 2020/0103368 A1) (hereinafter “Nakagaki-2”).
Nakasone teaches a first chamber sensor cell which includes the first inner electrode, the reference electrode, and a portion of the solid electrolyte present between the first inner electrode and the reference electrode, and in which electromotive force V1 in accordance with the concentration of oxygen in the first chamber is generated between the first inner electrode and the reference electrode (a first oxygen-partial-pressure detection sensor cell 60 which includes the main inside pump electrode 22, the reference electrode 42, and the solid electrolyte sandwiched between these electrodes, and in which an electromotive force V0 in accordance with the oxygen partial pressure in the first internal space 20 is generated between the main inside pump electrode 22 and the reference electrode 42, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0037]-[0038]);
a second chamber sensor cell which includes the second inner electrode, the reference electrode, and a portion of the solid electrolyte present between the second inner electrode and the reference electrode, and in which electromotive force V2 in accordance with the concentration of oxygen in the second chamber is generated between the second inner electrode and the reference electrode (a second oxygen-partial-pressure detection sensor cell 61 which includes the first measuring inside pump electrode 51, the reference electrode 42, and the solid electrolyte sandwiched between these electrodes, and in which an electromotive force V1 in accordance with the oxygen partial pressure in the second internal space 40 is generated between the first measuring inside pump electrode 51and the reference electrode 42, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0043]-[0044]); and
a third chamber sensor cell which includes the third inner electrode, the reference electrode, and a portion of the solid electrolyte present between the third inner electrode and the reference electrode, and in which electromotive force V3 in accordance with the concentration of oxygen in the third chamber is generated between the third inner electrode and the reference electrode (a third oxygen-partial-pressure detection sensor cell 41 which includes the second measuring inside pump electrode 44, the reference electrode 42, and the solid electrolyte sandwiched between these electrodes, and in which an electromotive force V2 in accordance with the oxygen partial pressure in the third internal space 80 is generated between the second measuring inside pump electrode 44 and the reference electrode 42, Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0045], [0047]-[0048], [0085]).
Nakasone teaches that each of the voltages Vp0, Vp1, and Vp2 applied to the main pumping cell 21, the first measuring pumping cell 50, and the second measuring pumping cell 47 are controlled to maintain the target values of the electromotive forces V0, V1, and V2, respectively (Nakasone, Fig. 3, para. [0038], [0044], [0048], [0055], [0059], [0064]). Nakasone is silent with respect to the target value ranges of each of the electromotive forces, and therefore fails to teach “a first pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the first inner electrode and the outer electrode of the first pump cell so that the electromotive force V1 in the first chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 1000 mV to 1500 mV; a second pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the second inner electrode and the outer electrode of the second pump cell so that the electromotive force V2 in the second chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 250 mV to 450 mV; and a third pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the third inner electrode and the outer electrode of the third pump cell so that the electromotive force V3 in the third chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 100 mV to 300 mV” in combination with the other limitations of dependent claim 2 and independent claim 1. Nakasone is also silent with respect to a sub adjustment chamber sensor cell, and therefore fails to teach “a sub adjustment pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the sub adjustment inner electrode and the outer electrode of the sub adjustment pump cell so that the electromotive force V0 in the sub adjustment chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 400 mV to 700 mV” in combination with the other limitations of dependent claim 2 and independent claim 1.
Nakagaki-1 teaches that the auxiliary pump cell 54 carries out pumping by a first variable power source 60, the voltage of which is controlled based on a second electromotive force V2 detected by the auxiliary oxygen partial pressure detecting sensor cell 58 (Nakagaki-1, Fig. 12, para. [0077]-[0079]), and a second variable power source 68 for the measurement pump cell 61 is controlled based on a third electromotive force V3 detected by the third oxygen partial pressure detecting sensor cell 66 (Nakagaki-1, Fig. 12, para. [0082]-[0084]). Nakagaki-1 is silent with respect to the target value ranges of each of the electromotive forces, and therefore fails to teach “a second pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the second inner electrode and the outer electrode of the second pump cell so that the electromotive force V2 in the second chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 250 mV to 450 mV; and a third pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the third inner electrode and the outer electrode of the third pump cell so that the electromotive force V3 in the third chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 100 mV to 300 mV” in combination with the other limitations of dependent claim 2 and independent claim 1. Nakagaki-1 is also silent with respect to a sub adjustment chamber sensor cell and a first chamber sensor cell, and therefore fails to teach “a sub adjustment pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the sub adjustment inner electrode and the outer electrode of the sub adjustment pump cell so that the electromotive force V0 in the sub adjustment chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 400 mV to 700 mV; a first pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the first inner electrode and the outer electrode of the first pump cell so that the electromotive force V1 in the first chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 1000 mV to 1500 mV” in combination with the other limitations of dependent claim 2 and independent claim 1.
Nakagaki-2 teaches that the preliminary pump cell 80 carries out pumping by a preliminary variable power source 86, the voltage of which is controlled based on a preliminary electromotive force V0 detected by the preliminary oxygen partial pressure detecting sensor cell 84 (Nakagaki-2, Fig. 2, para. [0089]); the first sensor cell 15A feedback-controls the first variable power source 48A of the first main pump cell 42A in accordance with the first electromotive force V1 generated in the first oxygen partial pressure detecting sensor cell 50A (Nakagaki-2, Fig. 2, para. [0069]); the first auxiliary pump cell 56A carries out pumping by a second variable power source 48B, the voltage of which is controlled based on a second electromotive force V2 detected by the second oxygen partial pressure detecting sensor cell 50B (Nakagaki-2, Fig. 2, para. [0076]); and a third voltage Vp3 of the third variable power source 48C is controlled in a manner so that the third electromotive force V3 detected by the third oxygen partial pressure detecting sensor cell 50C becomes constant (Nakagaki-2, Fig. 2, para. [0082]). Nakagaki-2 teaches that the electromotive force V0 may be 230 mV (Nakagaki-2, Fig. 2, para. [0139]), the electromotive force V1 may be 230 mV (Nakagaki-2, Fig. 2, para. [0136]), the electromotive force V2 may be 380 mV (Nakagaki-2, Fig. 2, para. [0137]), and the electromotive force V3 may be 400 mV (Nakagaki-2, Fig. 2, para. [0138]). Nakagaki-2 only teaches V2 within the claimed range, and therefore fails to teach “a sub adjustment pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the sub adjustment inner electrode and the outer electrode of the sub adjustment pump cell so that the electromotive force V0 in the sub adjustment chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 400 mV to 700 mV; a first pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the first inner electrode and the outer electrode of the first pump cell so that the electromotive force V1 in the first chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 1000 mV to 1500 mV; and a third pump cell control element configured to control a voltage applied across the third inner electrode and the outer electrode of the third pump cell so that the electromotive force V3 in the third chamber sensor cell is maintained at a predetermined target value in a range of 100 mV to 300 mV” in combination with the other limitations of dependent claim 2 and independent claim 1. Furthermore, Nakagaki-2 does not teach measuring concentrations of water vapor and carbon dioxide.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIVIAN A TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3232. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9am-5pm.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
/V.T./ Examiner, Art Unit 1794
/JAMES LIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1794