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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities: “e.g.” The abbreviation is used for the adjacent resonant modes. Applicant is advised to delete “e.g.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Herman et al. (US 2020/0041431 – hereafter “Herman”).
As per claim 1, Herman teaches the following:
a resonator (236) (see Fig. 3, see para [0025]);
a temperature regulating element (thermoelectric member 254) arranged to control the temperature of the resonator by heating and a temperature regulating element (cooling member 258) by cooling (see Fig. 4, see para [0026], 254, 258)
frequency measuring circuitry arranged to measure at least one frequency of the resonator and to generate signals indicative of the measured frequency (see para [0028] - [0029], see Fig. 7, wavelength meter 282, frequency shifter 290, receiver 294, detectors 292.1-2, frequency signal 296.1 – 2);
and at least one processor (microprocessor 318) that receives the signals from the frequency measuring circuitry (see fig. 7), wherein the processor is programmed to determine the temperature of the resonator at which condensation appears on the resonator or evaporates from the resonator according to the signals (see para [0075]).
Regarding claim 3, Herman teaches the device of claim 1, wherein the processor is programmed to determine the presence of condensation on a surface of the resonator or evaporation of the condensation from frequency signals indicating at least one frequency shift of the resonator induced by mass loading or unloading of the condensation on a surface of the resonator. Specifically, Herman teaches that a microprocessor 318 measures relative humidity (see para [0063]) by using a frequency shifter 290 that receives primary light 234.2 and produces frequency shifted primary light 234.4. The detectors 292.1 and 292.2 that receive combined light 300.1 and 300.2 and produce frequency signal 296.1 and 296.2 it also notes a heterodyne receiver 294 that is in optical communication with detector 292.1 and 292.2 and produces frequency signal 296 (see para [0029]).
As per claim 10, Herman teaches the following:
A method comprising the heating and cooling a resonator to a dew point using at least one temperature regulating element arranged to control the temperature of the resonator (see para [0026], [0050] – [0051]);
Measuring at least one frequency of the resonator using frequency measuring circuitry and generating signals indicative of the frequency of the resonator (see para [0028] - [0029]);
Utilizing at least one processor to determine the temperature of the resonator at which condensation is formed on the resonator or evaporates from the resonator according to signals (see para [0075]).
Regarding claim 12, similarly to claim 3, Herman teaches the processor determines the presence of condensation on the resonator by a change in dissipation or quality factor, through a microprocessor 318 that detects the presence of humidity through the dew-point sensor comprised of the frequency measuring configuration (see para [0029]).
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.
Claims 2, 4 – 9, 11 and 13 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herman in view of Britt et al. (US 2022/0082525 – hereafter “Britt”).
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “The device of claim 1, wherein the resonator has multiple resonant modes having different sensitivities to the temperature of the resonator, the frequency measuring circuitry is arranged to measure the resonance frequencies of the resonator at the multiple resonant modes, and the processor is programmed to determine the temperature of the resonator according to the resonance frequencies measured at the multiple resonant modes.” Herman teaches the device of claim 1 and a processor programmed to determine resonator temperatures, but does not explicitly teach the resonator having multiple resonant nodes.
Britt however teaches a similar configuration to Herman, but is used as a gas sensor that utilizes a mechanical resonator that has two resonant modes with different temperature dependencies (see para [0021]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s resonant modes in order to improve temperature sensing performance and accuracy of Herman’s resonator measurements.
Regarding claim 4, the claim recites “The device of claim 1, wherein the processor is programmed to convert the signals indicative of the measured frequencies of the resonator to the temperature of the resonator and a secondary parameter that indicates if condensation is formed on the resonator or evaporated from the resonator, and wherein the secondary parameter is either mass of the condensation on the resonator, dissipation of the resonator, or quality factor of the resonator.”
Herman teaches the device of claim 1, but does not teach that the processor is programmed to compute both temperature and a secondary parameter.
Britt however teaches a resonant mass transducer and a microprocessor that is configured to receive and process frequency signals indicative of changes in resonator frequency, mass loading, dissipation, or quality factor due to condensation/evaporation of analyte on the sensing surface (see para [0016], [0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s resonant mass transducer and processor functionality for measuring and processing frequency, mass loading, dissipation, or quality factor in order to improve the detection and quantify condensation or evaporation on the resonator surface, providing enhanced sensing accuracy and reliability.
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites “The device of claim 1, wherein the temperature regulating element is arranged to cool the resonator to a dew point, and the processor is programmed to determine the temperature of the resonator and mass of the condensation on a surface of the resonator substantially simultaneously according to the measured frequencies of the resonator as indicated by the signals.
Herman teaches the device of claim 1, but does not teach that the processor determines a mass of the condensation or that the processor determines both temperature and condensation mass substantially simultaneously from the measured frequency signals.
Britt however teaches a resonant mass transducer and microprocessor configured to receive and process frequency signals indicative of changes in resonator frequency, mass loading, dissipation, or quality factor due to condensation/evaporation of analyte on the sensing surface (see para [0016], [0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s resonant mass transducer processing capabilities so that the processor could simultaneously determine both the temperature of the resonator and the mass of condensation formed on the resonator surface in order to improve the accuracy and responsiveness of dew-point measurement by enabling real-time monitoring of both temperature and condensation mass.
Regarding claim 6, the claim recites “The device of claim 1, wherein the temperature of the resonator at which condensation appears or evaporates is the dew point, and the processor is further programmed to convert the dew point to a relative humidity or absolute humidity value.” Herman teaches the device of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach that the processor converts the dew point temperature of the resonator itself to a relative or absolute humidity value.
Britt, however, teaches a resonant mass transducer and a processor configured to receive frequency signals from the transducer and compute humidity values based on those signals (see para [0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s processor functionality for converting the measure dew-point temperature to relative or absolute humidity.
Regarding claim 7, the claim recites “The device of claim 1, wherein the temperature regulating element is arranged to modulate the temperature of the resonator in thermal cycles around a dew point so that vapor may both condense and evaporate from a surface of the resonator during each thermal cycle, and the processor is programmed to determine the dew point repetitively with one or two measurements of the dew point per thermal cycle.” Herman teaches the device of claim 1, but does not teach that the processor is programmed to determine the dew point repetitively with one or two measurements of the dew point per thermal cycle.
Britt, however, teaches a resonant mass transducer system in which a microprocessor controls a thermal element through a temperature control feedback loop to heat and/or cool the resonator according to a programmed temperature profile (see para [0022]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s feedback-controlled temperature modulation so that the resonator temperature could be cycled around the dew point and dew point determinations could be repeated each cycle to improve measurement stability and repeatability.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites “The device of claim 1, wherein the processor is further programmed to determine a mass of the condensation on the resonator according to the signals and to utilize the mass as a process variable in a control loop with the temperature regulating element so that the temperature of the resonator is regulated to follow a dew point and the mass of the condensation on the resonator is maintained substantially constant around a setpoint mass.” Herman teaches the device of claim 1, but does not teach determining a mass of the condensation, using that mass as a process variable, or employing the consideration mass in a closed loop temperature regulation system to maintain the mass near a setpoint.
Britt teaches a resonant mass transducer and microprocessor arrangement in which mass loading on the resonator is detected and converted into processor readable signals, and further teaches feedback controlled thermal regulation system in which the microprocessor directs heating/cooling through a control loop (see para [0016], [0022], [0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s mass-derived process variable and closed-loop control features so that condensation mass, obtained from frequency-derived mass loading, could be used as a control variable to stabilize the resonator near a dew-point condition.
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites “The device of claim 1, wherein the processor is programmed to determine the temperature of the resonator using frequency signals of a single mode of resonance (e.g., b-mode), and the processor is further programmed to determine the presence of the condensation on the resonator using a quality factor or dissipation of the resonator as an indicator of the condensation on the resonator.” Herman teaches the device of claim 1, but does not teach determining the temperature of the resonator from frequency signals of a single resonant mode, nor does it teach determining the presence of condensation using a quality factor or dissipation value of the resonator.
Britt, however, teaches a mechanical resonator-based sensing system where resonator frequency signals are temperature dependent and may be used to determine temperature, and further teaches that resonator measurement parameters may include dissipation and quality factor, which change in response to absorption or mass loading on the resonator (see para [0016], [0021], [0026]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s teachings of a resonator’s single-mode frequency to determine temperature and using Q-factor or dissipation changes to detect the presence of condensation improving detection robustness.
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites “the method of claim 10, wherein the resonator has multiple resonant modes having different sensitivities to the temperature of the resonator, the frequency measuring circuitry detects resonance frequencies of the resonator in the multiple resonant modes, the processor determines the temperature of the resonator according to the resonance frequencies of the multiple resonant modes, and the presence of condensation on the resonator is determined by a change in at least one of the resonance frequencies indicative of mass loading of the condensation on a surface of the resonator.”
Herman teaches the method of claim 10, including the frequency measuring configuration and the processor that determines the temperature of the resonator, but does not teach that the resonator has multiple resonator modes.
Britt however teaches a similar configuration to Herman, but is used as a gas sensor that utilizes a mechanical resonator that has two resonant modes with different temperature dependencies (see para [0021]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Herman with Britt’s to include multiple modes for the resonator in order to improve temperature sensing performance and accuracy of Herman’s resonator measurements.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites “The method of claim 10, further comprising the step of utilizing the processor to convert the temperature of the resonator at which condensation appears or evaporates to a relative humidity or absolute humidity value.” Similarly to claim 6, Herman teaches the method of claim 10, but does not explicitly teach that the processor converts the dew point temperature of the resonator itself to a relative or absolute humidity value.
Britt, however, teaches a resonant mass transducer and a processor configured to receive frequency signals from the transducer and compute humidity values based on those signals (see para [0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s processor functionality for converting the measure dew-point temperature to relative or absolute humidity.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites “The method of claim 10, further comprising the steps of modulating the temperature of the resonator in thermal cycles around the dew point so that vapor both condenses and evaporates from a surface of the resonator during each thermal cycle, and determining the temperature of the resonator at least once per thermal cycle when either condensation or evaporation is detected.” Herman teaches the method of claim 10, but does not teach temperature modulation of the resonator in thermal cycles, nor is taught determining the temperature at least one per thermal cycle.
Britt teaches that the resonant-mass transducers exhibit measurable changes in resonance, dissipation, or quality factor due to sorption and desorption of vapor on the resonator surface and that a microprocessor processes these signals to determine temperature-dependent and analyte-dependent conditions (see para [0016], [0021], [0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Herman with Britt’s teaching of detecting sorption/desorption events and performing measurement in response to such events so that the temperature control cycle is executed around the dew-point temperature and both condensation and evaporation phases are captured, to improve the accuracy and stability of dew-point and humidity determination.
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites “The method of claim 10, further comprising the steps of determining a mass of the condensation on the resonator according to the signals and utilizing the mass as a process variable in a control loop with the temperature regulating element so that the temperature of the resonator is regulated to follow the dew point while the mass of the condensation on the resonator is maintained substantially constant around a setpoint mass.” Similarly to claim 8, Herman teaches the method of claim 10, but does not teach determining a mass of the condensation, using that mass as a process variable, or employing the consideration mass in a closed loop temperature regulation system to maintain the mass near a setpoint.
Britt teaches a resonant mass transducer and microprocessor arrangement in which mass loading on the resonator is detected and converted into processor readable signals, and further teaches feedback controlled thermal regulation system in which the microprocessor directs heating/cooling through a control loop (see para [0016], [0022], [0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s mass-derived process variable and closed-loop control features so that condensation mass, obtained from frequency-derived mass loading, could be used as a control variable to stabilize the resonator near a dew-point condition.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites “The method of claim 10, wherein the temperature of the resonator is determined by the processor using frequency signals of a single mode of resonance (e.g., b-mode),and the presence of the condensation on the resonator or evaporation of the condensation is detected using a quality factor or dissipation of the resonator.” Similarly to claim 16, Herman teaches the method of claim 16, but does not teach determining the temperature of the resonator from frequency signals of a single resonant mode, nor does it teach determining the presence of condensation using a quality factor or dissipation value of the resonator.
Britt, however, teaches a mechanical resonator-based sensing system where resonator frequency signals are temperature dependent and may be used to determine temperature, and further teaches that resonator measurement parameters may include dissipation and quality factor, which change in response to absorption or mass loading on the resonator (see para [0016], [0021], [0026]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the device of Herman with Britt’s teachings of a resonator’s single-mode frequency to determine temperature and using Q-factor or dissipation changes to detect the presence of condensation improving detection robustness.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Manuel Castellon whose telephone number is (571)272-4575. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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.
/MANUEL SALVADOR CASTELLON JR/
Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855