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 .
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 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.
Response to Amendment
1. This office action is in response to the amendments/arguments submitted by the Applicant(s) on 03/30/2026.
Response to Arguments
I. Status of the Claims
2. Claims 1-21 are still pending.
3. Applicant's amendments to claims are accepted because do not introduce new matter pursuant to MPEP 2163.
II. Objections
8. Applicant's arguments with respect to the objections have been fully considered and found persuasive. Therefore, the objections have been withdrawn.
III. Double Patent
9. Applicant's arguments with respect to the double patenting rejection have been fully considered and found persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
IV. Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 101
9. Applicant's arguments with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 have been fully considered and found persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
V. Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 103
6. With respect to claims 1-21, Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the newly found prior art because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching, or, matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
33. Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5, 8-13, 15-16 and 21 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Motz et al (Pub. No.: US 2013/0342194 hereinafter mentioned as “Motz”, which was submitted via IDS and used in the previous rejection) in view of Middelhoek et al (Pub. No.: US 2007/0029999 hereinafter mentioned as “Middelhoek”, which was submitted via IDS and used in the previous rejection), and further in view of Ausserlechner et al. (Pub. No.: US 2011/0270553).
As per claim 1, Motz, in the embodiment of Fig. 2, discloses:
A sensor device (See MPEP 2111.02, Effect of Preamble, and II. Preamble Statements Reciting Purpose or Intended Use) comprising:
a silicon substrate having an active surface (Fig. 2, see the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]. Furthermore, silicon is a semiconductor material mostly used, see https://www.hitachi-hightech.com/global/products/device/semiconductor/properties.html),
a first sensing area (Fig. 2, see the area of the Hall effect region 11 and layer 31. Also see [0032] and [0034]) disposed near a first edge of said active surface of said semiconductor substrate (Fig. 2, see the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]), said first sensing area comprising at least one first magnetic sensing element (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 11. Also see [0032] and [0034]),
a second sensing area (Fig. 2, see the area of the Hall effect region 12 and layer 32. Also see [0032] and [0034]) disposed near a second edge of said active surface of said silicon substrate (Fig. 2, see the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]), said second edge being substantially opposite to said first edge (Fig. 2, see the edges of the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]), said second sensing area comprising at least one second magnetic sensing element (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 12. Also see [0032] and [0034]);
wherein the first sensing area (Fig. 2, see the area of the Hall effect region 11 and layer 31. Also see [0032] and [0034]) is closer to the first edge (Fig. 2, see the Left-edge of the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]) than to a center line of the active surface (Fig. 2, see the center line of the semiconductor-substrate 10 in the marked Fig. 2 below. Also see [0032]), the center line defined between and equidistant from the first edge and the second edge (Fig. 2, see the center line of the semiconductor-substrate 10 in the marked Fig. 2 below being equidistant between Left-edge and Right-edge. Also see [0032]).
The embodiment of Fig. 2 does not explicitly disclose:
a processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate and electrically connected with said first and said second sensing area and arranged to derive a first signal from said at least one first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area, to derive a second signal from said at least one second magnetic sensing element of said second sensing area and to compute a signal difference between said first and said second signal.
However, another embodiment of Motz further discloses:
a processing circuit electrically connected with said first and said second sensing area and arranged to derive a first signal from said at least one first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area (Fig. 3, see the amplifiers 381-384 with switches 371-374 connected to the sensing areas of Hall effect regions 11, 12, 13, and 14. Also see [0060] and [0054]), to derive a second signal from said at least one second magnetic sensing element of said second sensing area and to compute a signal difference between said first and said second signal (see [0065], [0101] and claim-13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate and electrically connected with said first and said second sensing area and arranged to derive a first signal from said at least one first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area, to derive a second signal from said at least one second magnetic sensing element of said second sensing area and to compute a difference signal between said first and said second signal” disclosed by another embodiment into the embodiment of Fig. 2 of Motz, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by increasing the symmetry at the sensing nodes and to thus reduce the residual offset after spinning of the vertical Hall devices (Motz, Paragraph [0041]).
Motz teaches the processing circuit but does not explicitly disclose that it is disposed in said silicon substrate.
However, Middelhoek further discloses:
a processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate and electrically connected with said first and said second sensing area (Fig. 1, see processing circuit. Also see [0054]-[0055]) and arranged to derive a first signal from said at least one first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area, to derive a second signal from said at least one second magnetic sensing element of said second sensing area and to compute a difference signal between said first and said second signal (see [0059]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the processing circuit being “disposed in said silicon substrate” disclosed by Middelhoek into Motz, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system, sensor and measurements by integrating Hall plates, generally together with amplification and signal processing electronics in the silicon substrate while reducing cost and increasing measurement accuracy and sensitivity of the Hall sensors (Middelhoek, Paragraph [0002]-[0003] and [0011]).
Motz in view of Middelhoek does not explicitly disclose that said difference signal being indicative of a magnetic field difference between said first sensing area and said second sensing area for performing a gradiometric measurement.
However, Ausserlechner further discloses:
said difference signal being indicative of a magnetic field difference between said first sensing area and said second sensing area for performing a gradiometric measurement (see [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to “performing a gradiometric measurement” disclosed by Ausserlechner into Motz in view of Middelhoek, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system, sensor and measurements by allowing to separate disturbances or unwanted parts or portions of the primary physical quantity from the wanted part or portion of the physical quantity (Ausserlechner, Paragraph [0034]), and further provide sensors and/or systems using such sensors robust against manipulation or against an abnormal operating condition and/or to detect, whether a manipulation or an abnormal operating condition occurs (Ausserlechner, Paragraph [0006]).
Furthermore, Motz states that “It is understood that modifications and variations of the arrangements and the details described herein will be apparent to others skilled in the art” (Motz, Paragraph [0111]).
As per claim 2, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said first sensing area comprises at least two first magnetic sensing elements (Fig. 3A, see the Hall effect region 11 and Hall effect region 12. Also see [0054]) and said second sensing area comprises at least two second magnetic sensing elements (Fig. 3A, see the Hall effect region 13 and Hall effect region 14. Also see [0054]).
As per claim 4, the combination of Motz and Middelhoek discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said sensor device is coreless (Fig. 2, see the unnumbered vertical Hall sensor with no-core/coreless. Also see [0032]).
As per claim 5, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said first and/or second magnetic sensing elements are Hall effect elements (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 11 and/or the Hall effect region 12. Also see [0032] and [0034]).
As per claim 8, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said at least one first magnetic sensing element (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 11. Also see [0032] and [0034]) is made of a first semiconductor material (see [0005] and [0032]. Hall effect region 11 of Motz is a semiconductor) and/or said at least one second magnetic sensing element (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 12. Also see [0032] and [0034]) is made of a second semiconductor material (see [0005] and [0032]. Hall effect region 12 of Motz is a semiconductor).
As per claim 9, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 8 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said first semiconductor material is a first compound semiconductor material (see [0005] and [0032]. Hall effect region 11 of Motz is either n-doped or p-doped into a compound. Additionally, doping in semiconductor is a process that uses silicon with another element, therefore, it is a compound, see https://www.halbleiter.org/en/fundamentals/doping/#top) and/or said second semiconductor material is a second compound semiconductor material (see [0005] and [0032]. Hall effect region 12 of Motz is either n-doped or p-doped into a compound).
As per claim 10, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 9 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said first compound semiconductor material and/or said second compound semiconductor material is a III-V semiconductor material (see [0005] and [0032]. Hall effect regions 11 and/or 12 are made of silicon that is a III-V semiconductor material, see https://eng.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Materials_Science/Supplemental_Modules_(Materials_Science)/Solar_Basics/C._Semiconductors_and_Solar_Interactions/I._Basic_Properties_of_Semiconductors/2._Bond_Model_of_a_Group_IV_Semiconductor).
As per claim 11, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 9 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said first compound semiconductor material and said second compound semiconductor material are the same (see [0005] and [0032]. Hall effect regions 11 and/or 12 are made of silicon that is a III-V semiconductor material).
As per claim 12, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 2 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said at least two first magnetic sensing elements are orthogonally biased with respect to each other (Fig. 3A, see the Hall effect region 11 and Hall effect region 12. Also see [0054]) and/or said at least two second magnetic sensing elements are orthogonally biased with respect to each other (Fig. 3A, see the Hall effect region 13 and Hall effect region 14. Also see [0054]).
As per claim 13, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein an adhesive layer is provided between said silicon substrate and said first sensing area and between said silicon substrate and said second sensing area (Fig. 2, the layer, film or coating that sticks together the Hall effect region 11 and Hall effect region 12 to the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0034]).
As per claim 15, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said first sensing area (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 11. Also see [0032] and [0034]) and said second sensing area (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 12. Also see [0032] and [0034]) each comprise corresponding contact pads for the at least four contacts (Fig. 2, see plurality of contacts 21-24 and 25-28. Also see [0032] and [0034]).
As per claim 16, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz further discloses:
wherein said processing circuit (Fig. 3, see the amplifiers 381-384 with switches 371-374 connected to the sensing areas of Hall effect regions 11, 12, 13, and 14. Also see [0060] and [0054]) is connected with said first and second sensing area (Fig. 2-3, see area of the Hall effect region 11 and layer 31 and the area of the Hall effect region 12 and layer 32. Also see [0032] and [0034]) via wire bonds and/or a redistribution layer (Fig. 3, see the unnumbered wires. Also see [0054]).
As per claim 21, Motz, in the embodiment of Fig. 2, discloses:
A sensor device (See MPEP 2111.02, Effect of Preamble, and II. Preamble Statements Reciting Purpose or Intended Use) comprising:
a silicon substrate having an active surface (Fig. 2, see the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]. Furthermore, silicon is a semiconductor material mostly used, see https://www.hitachi-hightech.com/global/products/device/semiconductor/properties.html),
a first sensing area (Fig. 2, see the area of the Hall effect region 11 and layer 31. Also see [0032] and [0034]) disposed near a first edge of said active surface of said semiconductor substrate (Fig. 2, see the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]), said first sensing area comprising at least one first magnetic sensing element (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 11. Also see [0032] and [0034]),
a second sensing area (Fig. 2, see the area of the Hall effect region 12 and layer 32. Also see [0032] and [0034]) disposed near a second edge of said active surface of said silicon substrate (Fig. 2, see the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]), said second edge being substantially opposite to said first edge (Fig. 2, see the edges of the semiconductor-substrate 10. Also see [0032]), said second sensing area comprising at least one second magnetic sensing element (Fig. 2, see the Hall effect region 12. Also see [0032] and [0034]);
wherein a distance between said first edge (Fig. 2 and/or marked Fig. 2 below, see the first-edge of the semiconductor-substrate 10 from left to right. Also see [0032]) and a most distant edge of a first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area (Fig. 2 and/or marked Fig. 2 below, see the most distant edge of the Hall effect region 11 from the second-edge of the semiconductor-substrate 10 on the right-side of the area of the Hall effect region 11 and layer 31 within 30% of distance. Also see [0032] and [0034]) is within 30% of a distance between said first edge and said second edge substantially opposite to said first edge (Fig. 2 and/or marked Fig. 2 below, see the distance from first-edge on the left-side of the semiconductor-substrate 10 to second-edge on the right-side. Also see [0032]).
The embodiment of Fig. 2 does not explicitly disclose:
a processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate and electrically connected with said first and said second sensing area and arranged to derive a first signal from said at least one first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area, to derive a second signal from said at least one second magnetic sensing element of said second sensing area and to compute a difference signal between said first and said second signal.
However, another embodiment of Motz further discloses:
a processing circuit electrically connected with said first and said second sensing area and arranged to derive a first signal from said at least one first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area (Fig. 3, see the amplifiers 381-384 with switches 371-374 connected to the sensing areas of Hall effect regions 11, 12, 13, and 14. Also see [0060] and [0054]), to derive a second signal from said at least one second magnetic sensing element of said second sensing area and to compute a difference signal between said first and said second signal (see [0065], [0101] and claim-13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the “processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate and electrically connected with said first and said second sensing area and arranged to derive a first signal from said at least one first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area, to derive a second signal from said at least one second magnetic sensing element of said second sensing area and to compute a difference signal between said first and said second signal” disclosed by another embodiment into the embodiment of Fig. 2 of Motz, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system and measurements by increasing the symmetry at the sensing nodes and to thus reduce the residual offset after spinning of the vertical Hall devices (Motz, Paragraph [0041]).
Motz teaches the processing circuit but does not explicitly disclose that it is disposed in said silicon substrate.
However, Middelhoek further discloses:
a processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate and electrically connected with said first and said second sensing area (Fig. 1, see processing circuit. Also see [0054]-[0055]) and arranged to derive a first signal from said at least one first magnetic sensing element of said first sensing area, to derive a second signal from said at least one second magnetic sensing element of said second sensing area and to compute a difference between said first and said second signal (see [0059]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the processing circuit being “disposed in said silicon substrate” disclosed by Middelhoek into Motz, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system, sensor and measurements by integrating Hall plates, generally together with amplification and signal processing electronics in the silicon substrate while reducing cost and increasing measurement accuracy and sensitivity of the Hall sensors (Middelhoek, Paragraph [0002]-[0003] and [0011]).
Motz in view of Middelhoek does not explicitly disclose that said difference signal being indicative of a magnetic field difference between said first sensing area and said second sensing area for performing a gradiometric measurement.
However, Ausserlechner further discloses:
said difference signal being indicative of a magnetic field difference between said first sensing area and said second sensing area for performing a gradiometric measurement (see [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to “performing a gradiometric measurement” disclosed by Ausserlechner into Motz in view of Middelhoek, with the motivation and expected benefit related to improving the system, sensor and measurements by allowing to separate disturbances or unwanted parts or portions of the primary physical quantity from the wanted part or portion of the physical quantity (Ausserlechner, Paragraph [0034]), and further provide sensors and/or systems using such sensors robust against manipulation or against an abnormal operating condition and/or to detect, whether a manipulation or an abnormal operating condition occurs (Ausserlechner, Paragraph [0006]).
Furthermore, Motz states that “It is understood that modifications and variations of the arrangements and the details described herein will be apparent to others skilled in the art” (Motz, Paragraph [0111]). Furthermore, pursuant to MPEP 2144.04 Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, VI. REVERSAL, DUPLICATION, OR REARRANGEMENT OF PARTS, the Rearranging/shifting the position of the elements, edges, etc., with respect to the each other within certain ranges and distances does not modify the operation of the sensor in a novel manner, therefore, components’ positions and/or rearrangement has no patentable weight (see “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Additionally, rearranging the component positions is an obvious design choice (see “In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
34. Claim(s) 3 and 17-20 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Motz in view of Middelhoek, in view of Ausserlechnere, and further in view of Ausserlechnere (Pub. No.: US 2011/0304327 hereinafter mentioned as “Ausserlechner_327”, which was submitted via IDS and used in the previous rejection).
As per claim 3, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz discloses said at least one first magnetic sensing element and/or said at least one second magnetic sensing elements as described above but does not explicitly disclose that either one or both elements is/are so positioned that there is no overlap with a lead frame of said sensor device.
However, Ausserlechner_327 further discloses that
said at least one first magnetic sensing element and/or said at least one second magnetic sensing elements (Fig. 13A, see any or all of the Hall plates 1026. Also see [0063]) is/are so positioned that there is no overlap with a lead frame (Fig. 13A, see the leadframe conductor 1040. Also see [0061]) of said sensor device (Fig. 13A, see the current sensor 1000. Also see [0061] and [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the at least one first magnetic sensing element and/or said at least one second magnetic sensing elements of Motz “positioned that there is no overlap with a lead frame of said sensor device”, as it is disclosed by Ausserlechner_327 into Motz in view of Middelhoek and Ausserlechner, with the motivation and expected benefit improving the system, sensor and measurements by implementing the magnetic sensing elements in current sensor, thus, expanding the invention and not limit the scope of the invention (Ausserlechnere, Paragraph [0067]), and by further providing a sensor that has fewer contacts and therefore lower internal resistance, less heat generation and smaller space requirements while also achieving improved reliability and a stable magnetic field per amp over the lifetime of devices (Ausserlechnere, Paragraph [0066]).
As per claim 17, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above but does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the sensor device is a current sensor device.
However, Ausserlechner_327 further discloses:
wherein the sensor device is a current sensor device (Fig. 13A, see the current sensor 1000. Also see [0061] and [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the sensor device of Motz being “current sensor device”, as it is disclosed by Ausserlechner_327 into Motz in view of Middelhoek and Ausserlechner, with the motivation and expected benefit improving the system, sensor and measurements by implementing the magnetic sensing elements in current sensor, thus, expanding the invention and not limit the scope of the invention (Ausserlechnere, Paragraph [0067]), and by further providing a sensor that has fewer contacts and therefore lower internal resistance, less heat generation and smaller space requirements while also achieving improved reliability and a stable magnetic field per amp over the lifetime of devices (Ausserlechnere, Paragraph [0066]).
As per claim 18, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above but does not explicitly disclose:
A sensor system, comprising a sensor device as in claim 1, comprised in a package and a conductor for conducting electrical current, said conductor being outside said package comprising said current sensor device.
However, Ausserlechner_327 further discloses:
A sensor system, comprising the sensor device as in claim 1, comprised in a package (see [0044]) and a conductor for conducting electrical current (Fig. 13A, see the leadframe conductor 1040. Also see [0061]), said conductor being outside said package comprising said sensor device (Fig. 13A, see the current sensor 1000. Also see [0061] and [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the sensor device of Motz being “A sensor system, comprising a sensor device as in claim 1, comprised in a package and a conductor for conducting electrical current, said conductor being outside said package comprising said current sensor device”, as it is disclosed by Ausserlechner_327 into Motz in view of Middelhoek and Ausserlechneret, with the motivation and expected benefit improving the system, sensor and measurements by implementing the magnetic sensing elements in current sensor, thus, expanding the invention and not limit the scope of the invention (Ausserlechnere, Paragraph [0067]), and by further providing a sensor that has fewer contacts and therefore lower internal resistance, less heat generation and smaller space requirements while also achieving improved reliability and a stable magnetic field per amp over the lifetime of devices (Ausserlechnere, Paragraph [0066]).
As per claim 19, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 18 as described above.
The combination of Motz and Ausserlechner_327, with the obvious motivation set forth above in claim-18, further discloses:
wherein at least two first magnetic sensing elements of said sensor device and at least two second magnetic sensing elements of said sensor device (Motz, Fig. 2-3, see area of the Hall effect region 11 and layer 31 and the area of the Hall effect region 12 and layer 32. Also see [0032] and [0034]) are arranged in a direction perpendicular to the direction of said electrical current (Ausserlechner_327, see [0033]).
Furthermore, pursuant to MPEP 2144.04 Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, VI. REVERSAL, DUPLICATION, OR REARRANGEMENT OF PARTS, the Rearranging/shifting the position of the elements with respect to the each other does not modify the operation of the sensor in a novel manner, therefore, components’ positions and/or rearrangement has no patentable weight (see “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Additionally, rearranging the component positions is an obvious design choice (see “In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
As per claim 20, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 18 as described above.
The combination of Motz and Ausserlechner_327, with the obvious motivation set forth above in claim-18, further discloses:
wherein at least two first magnetic sensing elements of said sensor device (Motz, Fig. 3A, see the Hall effect region 11 and Hall effect region 12. Also see [0054]) and at least two second magnetic sensing elements of said sensor device (Motz, Fig. 3A, see the Hall effect region 13 and Hall effect region 14. Also see [0054]) are arranged in a direction parallel to said current direction (Ausserlechnere, see [0033]).
Furthermore, pursuant to MPEP 2144.04 Legal Precedent as Source of Supporting Rationale, VI. REVERSAL, DUPLICATION, OR REARRANGEMENT OF PARTS, the Rearranging/shifting the position of the elements with respect to the each other does not modify the operation of the sensor in a novel manner, therefore, components’ positions and/or rearrangement has no patentable weight (see “In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)). Additionally, rearranging the component positions is an obvious design choice (see “In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
35. Claim(s) 6 and 7 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Motz in view of Middelhoek, in view of Ausserlechnere, and further in view of FUJITA et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0184211 hereinafter mentioned as “Fujita”, which was submitted via IDS and used in the previous rejection).
As per claim 6, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above.
Motz discloses said processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate as described above but does not explicitly disclose that comprises a temperature and/or a stress sensor and is arranged to determine a temperature signal and/or stress signal from said temperature and/or stress sensor.
However, Fujita further discloses that
said processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate comprises a temperature and/or a stress sensor and is arranged to determine a temperature signal and/or stress signal from said temperature and/or stress sensor (see Fig. 5 with paragraph [0123]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to the processing circuit disposed in said silicon substrate of Motz comprising “a temperature and/or a stress sensor and is arranged to determine a temperature signal and/or stress signal from said temperature and/or stress sensor”, as it is disclosed by Fujita into Motz in view of Middelhoek and Ausserlechner, with the motivation and expected benefit improving the system, sensor and measurements by generating a correction signal of the output of the Hall sensor using a signal acquired from the temperature proportional coefficient (Fujita, Paragraph [0123]),
As per claim 7, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek, Ausserlechnere and Fujita discloses the sensor device of claim 6 as described above.
The combination of Motz and Fujita, with the obvious motivation set forth above in claim-6, further discloses:
wherein said processing circuit is arranged to adjust said first signal and/or said second signal (Motz, Fig. 3, see the amplifiers 381-384 with switches 371-374 connected to the sensing areas of Hall effect regions 11, 12, 13, and 14, which are compensated/adjusted to reduce spikes and residual offset. Also see [0050], [0060] and [0054]) based on said temperature signal and/or stress signal (Fujita, see Fig. 5 with paragraph [0123]) prior to (once the temperature and/or stress measurements of Fujita is added into Motz, the temperature and/or stress measurement are to be taken first, then, the difference of Motz, is computed) computing said difference signal between said first and said second signal (Motz, see [0065], [0101] and claim-13).
36. Claim(s) 14 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Motz in view of Middelhoek, in view of Ausserlechnere, and further in view of Ausserlechner (Pub. No.: US 2011/0304327 hereinafter mentioned as “Ausserlechner_218”, which was used in the previous rejection).
As per claim 14, the combination of Motz, Middelhoek and Ausserlechnere discloses the sensor device of claim 1 as described above but does not explicitly disclose that each of the first sensing area and the second sensing area has a surface area that is less than or equal to 10% of a surface area of the active surface.
However, Ausserlechner_218 further discloses:
wherein each of the first sensing area and the second sensing area has a surface area that is less than or equal to 10% of a surface area of the active surface (Figs. 6A-6B, see hall sensor elements 426 being less than or equal to 10% of the substrate active surface 402. Also see [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the feature relative to each of the first sensing area and the second sensing area of Motz having “a surface area that is less than or equal to 10% of a surface area of the active surface”, as it is disclosed by Ausserlechner_218 into Motz in view of Middelhoek and Ausserlechner, with the motivation and expected benefit improving the system, sensor and measurements by providing fewer contacts and therefore lower internal resistance, less heat generation and smaller space requirements with improved reliability and a stable magnetic field per amp over the lifetime of devices (Ausserlechner_218, Paragraph [0066]),
Furthermore, the claim limitation “less than or equal to 10% of a surface area of the active surface” is simply claiming a percentage-range, and it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ALVARO E. FORTICH whose telephone number is (571) 272-0944. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon thru Fri from 8:00am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Huy Phan, can be reached on (571)272-7924. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALVARO E FORTICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights