DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/7/2025, pertaining to the claim objection and the 35 USC 103 rejection, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claim 2 is attempting to present and claim alternatives in which the piezoelectric element of claim 1 can either be a first piezoelectric element OR a second piezoelectric element. In one scenario the first piezoelectric element operates at a temperature exceeding 150 degrees C and in the second scenario the second piezoelectric element operates at a temperature exceeding 150 degrees C. Based on the how the claim is written, it appears as though the ultrasonic transducer of claim 1 consists of a piezoelectric element, a first piezoelectric element and a second piezoelectric element. Examiner suggests amending claim 2 to include 2 separate dependent claims in which the dependent claims read as “wherein the piezoelectric element is a first piezoelectric element configured to operate at a temperature exceeding 150 degrees C is provided in a first configuration of the first modular assembly” and ““wherein the piezoelectric element is a second piezoelectric element configured to operate at a temperature exceeding 150 degrees C is provided in a second configuration of the first modular assembly”. Examiner believes this amendment is more in line with the teachings of [0044] of the filed specification.
As to the arguments pertaining to the 35 USC 103 rejection, those arguments are not persuasive. Barshinger is used, specifically the spring 116 and threaded plunger 118 in [0021], to teach a coupling member rotatably coupled to the upper end of the delay and the coupling member is configured to be rotated into engagement with an upper end of the first modular assembly to secure the first and second modular assemblies together”. Looking at Barshinger, elements 116 and 118, which make up the coupling member, is connected to the upper end of the delay 111 via 110, 112 and 114. Under the broadest reasonable this coupling member is connected to the upper end of the delay, whereas in the instant application the coupling member is directly coupled to an upper end of the delay. This is a suggestion to amend over the prior art. As to the argument that the coupling member in Barshinger does not secure the first and second modular assemblies, this is not persuasive. It can be seen that the coupling element, 116 and 118, exerts a force downward against 110 so that it couples with 111. Paragraph [0020] of Barshinger also teaches “The piezoelectric element 110 is affixed to the delay line 111.” This reads on the claim limitation “to secure the first and second modular assemblies together”. The spring does allow for free expansion of the transducer, seen in [0025], which is affixed to element 111. This section also teaches “The plunger could be in several forms but generally is a threaded component that compresses the entire stack as it is tightened.”. This implies that the coupling elements aids in securing the elements together.
The same arguments pertain to claim 25, and examiner suggests amending line 7 to read as “secure the coupling member directly with an upper”.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 states “a first piezoelectric element” while claim 1 claims “a piezoelectric element”. Examiner wishes to clarify that the first piezoelectric element in claim 2 is the same piezoelectric element that is recited in claim 1. Otherwise, based on the claim language, it appears that 3 separate piezoelectric elements are claimed for this transducer.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Based on how the claim is interpreted, the second piezoelectric element must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). At most only 1 piezoelectric element is shown in the figures, labeled as element 106. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barshinger US 20190360974 in view of Takahiro JP2005354281A (as seen in the IDS) and in further view of Orban US 5354956.
As to claim 1, Barshinger teaches “An ultrasonic transducer for high temperature (Abstract; Figure 1) application comprising: a first modular assembly a piezoelectric element (Figure 1, 110), a backing (Figure 1, 112), and an electrode provided in a stacked configuration (Figure 1, 130; [0023]); and a second modular assembly including a delay (Figure 1, 111) and a coupling member rotatably coupled to an upper end of the delay, and the coupling member is configured to be rotated into engagement with an upper end of the first modular assembly to secure the first and second modular assemblies together ([0021] teaches a threaded plunger element which requires it to be rotated into place. The concept of having and utilizing rotatable elements is present in this prior art, therefore having the coupling members be rotated into engagement would be obvious to implement. Furthermore, [0019] teaches “The delay line is generally cylindrical in shape but could be other shapes and/or could contain mounting features such as flanges”. This implies that any type of securement can be used. See arguments above).” Barshinger does not teach the foils or that the modular assembly is positioned within an opening of the delay.
Takahiro teaches “including a first foil, a second foil (Figure 1, 14a and 14b).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Takahiro with Barshinger. Using foils that are heat resistant aid in securing the sensor elements together. This ensures a proper connection and operation.
The prior arts do not teach that the modular assembly is in an opening of the delay.
Orban teaches “wherein the first modular assembly is configured to be positioned within an opening of the delay (Figure 2B; 60 and 54 are in contact with delay line 70).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Orban with Takahiro and Barshinger. Having the delay line abut the modular assembly allows for the delay line to protect the sensor stack.
As to claim 2, Barshinger teaches “wherein a first piezoelectric element configured to operate at a temperature exceeding 1500 Celsius is provided in a first configuration of the first modular assembly, and a second piezoelectric element (Although a second piezoelectric element is not explicitly taught in the prior art, duplicating known elements only involves routine skill in the art. Furthermore, the instant application fails to indicate the location of the 2nd piezoelectric element, therefore one of ordinary skill in the could utilize a 2nd element and arrange it in a desired location to optimize the performance of the sensor) configured to operate at a temperature exceeding 1500 Celsius is provided in a second configuration of the first modular assembly, the first and second piezoelectric elements being configured to operate at different temperatures (Abstract teaches high temperatures, and indicates a range of 300-500 C. Adjusting the temperature tolerance of known elements only involves routine skill in the art, and this adjustment would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art).”
As to claim 25, Barshinger teaches “A method of assembling an ultrasonic transducer ([0018] teaches a method to assemble) comprising: a piezoelectric element (Figure 1, 10), a backing (Figure 1, 112), and an electrode into a stacked configuration to form a modular assembly (Figure 1, 130; [0023]); engaging a coupling member with an upper end of the delay; and rotating the coupling member to engage the coupling member with an upper end of the modular assembly ([0021] teaches a threaded plunger element which requires it to be rotated into place. The concept of having and utilizing rotatable elements is present in this prior art, therefore having the coupling members be rotated into engagement would be obvious to implement. Furthermore, [0019] teaches “The delay line is generally cylindrical in shape but could be other shapes and/or could contain mounting features such as flanges”. This implies that any type of securement can be used. See arguments above).” Barshinger does not teach the foils or that the modular assembly is positioned within an opening of the delay.
Takahiro teaches “stacking a first foil, a second foil (Figure 1, 14a and 14b appear to be stacked).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Takahiro with Barshinger. Using foils that are heat resistant aid in securing the sensor elements together. This ensures a proper connection and operation.
Orban teaches “inserting the modular assembly into a delay (Figure 2B; 60 and 54 are in contact with delay line 70. These elements are inserted into this position).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to combine the teachings of Orban with Takahiro and Barshinger. Having the delay line abut the modular assembly allows for the delay line to protect the sensor stack.
As to claim 26, Barshinger teaches “comprising electrically coupling a cable assembly to the electrode and to the delay (Abstract teaches that the elements are electrically connected).”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-23 are allowed. Claim 18 claims a ring and a third foil, both elements are not taught by the prior arts.
Claims 3, 9, 11-17, 27 are 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. Claim 3 teaches a third modular assembly which is not taught by the prior arts. Claim 9 also teaches a third modular assembly which is not taught by the prior arts. Claim 27 teaches a cap, which is not taught by the prior arts.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARUN SINHA whose telephone number is (571)270-3993. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10AM-6PM 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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at (571)270-0349. 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.
/TARUN SINHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2863