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 statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I without traverse in the reply flied 10 November 2025 is acknowledged. With regard to the species requirement, as no art rejection is present with regard to independent claim 1, all dependent claims are being examined and the species requirement has been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 9-13, 17, 18, 24, 28, and 31-39 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims each refer to “the primary surface acoustic wave,” the “secondary surface acoustic wave,” or both which should be changed to “the primary polar surface acoustic wave” or “the secondary polar acoustic wave” respectively to match the language of claim 1.
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities: the word “comprises” in line 1 of the claim should be changed to “comprising” since it appears to be referring back to a previously disclosed limitation and is not adding new limitations.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation of “a cavity surface” for bearing primary and secondary modes of vibration. It is not clear as to how the cavity defined would have a surface since a cavity is formed of negative space and there is no “surface” to a cavity. Additionally, the specification appears to refer to a “free or upper surface 115” of the mass 104 on which waves 108 appear to travel (paragraph 0013, fig. 1). For the purpose of examination, it is assumed that the cavity surface is the surface 115.
Regarding claim 3, the claim refers to “the first surface of the proof mass” which lacks antecedent basis. It is not clear if the limitation should read a first surface, or if the surface being referred to is the “cavity surface” previously disclosed in parent claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites the limitation that the primary mode is “arranged to induce a Raleigh surface acoustic wave” however it is unclear as to how the arrangement of the actuator would induce the wave. The actuator could be arranged to induce a wave along the surface of the gyroscope, or configured to induce a Raleigh surface acoustic wave, but the arrangement itself would not generate the wave.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites the limitation that one of the primary or secondary surface acoustic waves “forms a standing surface acoustic wave.” It is not clear as to whether the primary or secondary wave is performing an action that generates a standing surface acoustic wave or if it is in itself a standing surface acoustic wave. Claim 11 for example, indicates that the reflected surface acoustic wave forms a standing surface acoustic wave which would indicate that an action needs to be taken for the primary or secondary surface acoustic wave to form the standing surface acoustic wave and would require additional features or limitations to do so.
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites the limitation of the gyroscope comprising “at least one reflector” however there has previously been concentric circular reflectors disclosed in claim 1. Therefore, it is unclear if this is the addition of another reflector, or if it refers to the concentric reflectors previously disclosed.1
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites the limitation that the arcuate reflector comprises a variable radius, however claim 1 describes the reflectors as being circular which would require a fixed radius. Claims 17-19 each disclose further limitations with regard to the variable radius which present similar issues.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites the limitation that the gyroscope reflector comprises “one or more than one circular or cylindrical reflector.” Claim 1 previously discloses concentric circular reflectors, so it is not clear if these are the same or additional reflectors. Additionally, assuming that they are the same as in claim 1, in the case where one circular reflector is disclosed, the claim would fail to further limit the parent claim as it would remove the extra reflectors in the parent claim.
Regarding claim 22, the claim recites the limitation of “concentric reflectors” which appears to be previously disclosed in claim 1. It is therefore unclear if these are the same or additional reflectors.
Regarding claims 27, 28 and 31-34, the claims each recite limitations with respect to the location of the actuators and sensors as being dependent on n. it is unclear if this n takes the same value as the n previously disclosed in claim 1, or if it is an additional, separate variable.
Regarding claim 36, the claim recites the limitation of determining angular rate associated with at least one reflector “taken jointly and severally in any and all permutations.” It is not clear as to what is meant by this limitation and what the permutations are or would be.
Regarding claims 37 and 38, the claims recite limitations similar to those of claim 36 and are rejected for the same reasons.
All claims which depend from those above are rejected for the same reasons due to their dependency thereon.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 may be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record fails to teach the claimed gyroscope found in independent claim 1 comprising the cyclic symmetric proof mass comprising concentric circular reflectors that define a cavity and for bearing on a surface, spatially orthogonal polar primary and secondary modes of vibration which become degeneratively coupled at a shared resonant frequency in response to a rotation about an axis of the proof mass. The prior art which teaches similar acoustic wave gyroscopes fails to teach the concentric arrangement of circular reflectors which would allow for such an operation to occur. As all remaining claims ultimately depend from claim 1, they would be deemed allowable as well if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mark A. Shabman whose telephone number is (571)272-8589. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30 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, Laura Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
/MARK A SHABMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
1 Claims 12-15 refer to “the at least one reflector” which is assumed to be the same as that of claim 11.