Detailed Action
The following NON-FINAL office action is in response to application 18/429833 filed on 2/1/24. This communication is the first action on the merits.
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-21 are currently pending and have been rejected as follows.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/15/2024 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and is being considered.
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.
Claim 1-21 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.
Claims 1, 5, 11-14, and 20 recite the limitation "accelerometer". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the “accelerometer” is being taken to be the “MEMS accelerometer” claimed in the first limitation of Claim 1, 14, and 20. The term “MEMS accelerometer” should be used consistently throughout the claims. Appropriate correction is required.
The dependent claims are further rejected based on their dependence from the independent claims.
Claims 1-21 recite the limitation "gyroscope". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the “gyroscope” is being taken to be the “MEMS gyroscope” claimed in the first limitation of Claim 1, 14, 20, and 21. The term “MEMS gyroscope” should be used consistently throughout the claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more. A subject matter eligibility analysis is set forth below. See MPEP 2106.
Claim 21 recites:
A method for processing microelectromechanical system (MEMS) sensor outputs from a MEMS gyroscope and at least one other MEMS sensor on shared processing circuitry, comprising: receiving, during a first gyroscope measurement interval, a gyroscope output signal corresponding to movement of a gyroscope proof mass, wherein the first gyroscope measurement interval includes a first peak transition during a period of the gyroscope output signal;
receiving, during an inactive gyroscope guard band interval following the first gyroscope measurement interval, a first guard signal, wherein the inactive gyroscope guard band interval includes a first zero crossing during the period of the gyroscope output signal;
receiving, during a second gyroscope measurement interval following the inactive gyroscope guard band interval, the gyroscope output signal, wherein the second gyroscope measurement interval includes a second peak transition during the period of the gyroscope output signal;
receiving, during an active gyroscope guard band interval following the second gyroscope measurement interval, an output signal of the at least one other MEMS sensor, wherein the active gyroscope guard band interval includes a second zero crossing during the period of the gyroscope output signal;
determining, based on the received gyroscope output signal during the first gyroscope measurement interval and the second gyroscope measurement interval, an angular velocity of the MEMS gyroscope; and
determining, based on the output signal of the at least one other MEMS sensor during a portion of the active guard band interval, an output value for the at least one other MEMS sensor.
Step 1:
Under Step 1 of the analysis, Claim 21 is a method claim.
Step 2A – Prong I:
This part of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim recites a judicial exception. As explained in MPEP 2106.04, subsection II, a claim “recites” a judicial exception when the judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claim.
In the instant case, Claim 21 is found to recite at least one judicial exception (i.e. abstract idea), that being a Mental Process and Mathematical Concept This can be seen in the following claim limitations: “determining, based on the received gyroscope output signal during the first gyroscope measurement interval and the second gyroscope measurement interval, an angular velocity of the MEMS gyroscope,” and “determining, based on the output signal of the at least one other MEMS sensor during a portion of the active guard band interval, an output value for the at least one other MEMS sensor.” The gyroscope output signal comes from tracking the displacement of the proof mass over time, from which angular velocity is calculated. Similarly, determining another output value based on the output signal of some other sensor, say linear acceleration by an accelerometer, would be calculated by tracking the displacement of the proof mass over time.
Step 2A – Prong II:
Step 2A, prong 2 of the eligibility analysis evaluates whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception(s) into a practical application of the exception. This evaluation is performed by (a) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and (b) evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application.
Claim 21 does not amount to the recitation of a particular practical application because there is no improvement to the performance of any underlying device merely by the determination of angular velocity.
Thus, under Step 2A, prong 2 of the analysis, even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application and the claim is directed to the judicial exception.
Step 2B:
In addition to the abstract ideas recited in Claim 21, the claimed method recites the following additional elements: “A method for processing microelectromechanical system (MEMS) sensor outputs from a MEMS gyroscope and at least one other MEMS sensor on shared processing circuitry, comprising: receiving, during a first gyroscope measurement interval, a gyroscope output signal corresponding to movement of a gyroscope proof mass, wherein the first gyroscope measurement interval includes a first peak transition during a period of the gyroscope output signal,” “receiving, during an inactive gyroscope guard band interval following the first gyroscope measurement interval, a first guard signal, wherein the inactive gyroscope guard band interval includes a first zero crossing during the period of the gyroscope output signal,” “receiving, during a second gyroscope measurement interval following the inactive gyroscope guard band interval, the gyroscope output signal, wherein the second gyroscope measurement interval includes a second peak transition during the period of the gyroscope output signal,” “receiving, during an active gyroscope guard band interval following the second gyroscope measurement interval, an output signal of the at least one other MEMS sensor, wherein the active gyroscope guard band interval includes a second zero crossing during the period of the gyroscope output signal.” However, these elements are found to be mere data gathering and thus insignificant extra-solution activity. Receiving a gyroscope output signal, receiving a guard band signal, and receiving an output signal from some other MEMS sensor are all steps necessary to obtain the data used to determine the angular velocity and output from the other MEMS sensor. See MPEP 2106.05(g) “Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity”.
Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, as described above with respect to Step 2A Prong 2, merely amount to a general purpose computer system that attempts to apply the abstract idea in a technological environment and merely performs insignificant extra-solution activities. Such insignificant extra-solution activity, e.g. data gathering and output, when re-evaluated under Step 2B is further found to be well-understood, routine, and conventional as evidenced by MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) (describing conventional activities that include transmitting and receiving data over a network, electronic recordkeeping, storing and retrieving information from memory, and electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document).
Therefore, similarly the combination and arrangement of the above identified additional elements when analyzed under Step 2B also fails to necessitate a conclusion that Claim 21 amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
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, 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 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Avantaggiati et. al. (US 20220057209 A1) in view of Tsinker et. al. (US 20190190535 A1), in further view of Czompo et. al. (US 20160091316 A1).
Regarding Claim 21, Avantaggiati discloses a method for processing microelectromechanical system (MEMS) sensor outputs from a MEMS gyroscope and at least one other MEMS sensor [See Fig. [1], 102 and 108] on shared processing circuitry [Paragraph [0023] – “In an embodiment as described herein, the motion sensing system 100 may include at least a MEMS gyroscope 102 (e.g., a single- or multi-axis gyroscope for measuring angular velocity about one or more axes) and supporting circuitry, such as processing circuitry 104 and memory 106. In some embodiments, one or more additional sensors 108 (e.g., MEMS gyroscopes, MEMS accelerometers, MEMS microphones, MEMS pressure sensors, and a compass) may be included within the motion processing system 100 to provide an integrated motion processing unit (“MPU”) (e.g., including 3 axes of MEMS gyroscope sensing, 3 axes of MEMS accelerometer sensing, microphone, pressure sensor, and compass).”], the method comprising: receiving a gyroscope output signal corresponding to movement of a gyroscope proof mass [Paragraph [0004] – “In at least some example illustrations, a micro electro-mechanical system (MEMS) gyroscope may include a suspended spring-mass system, including a drive mass and a proof mass, and a drive sense electrode for generating a drive sense signal corresponding to displacement of the drive mass. The gyroscope may also include a proof mass sense electrode for generating a proof mass sense signal corresponding to displacement of the proof mass…”; Paragraph [0015] – “A MEMS gyroscope includes drive circuitry that generates an electrical drive signal that is a periodic signal having a drive frequency.”] for producing an angular velocity determination [Paragraph [0016] - “Accordingly, a sense signal based on the movement of the suspended spring-mass system includes both the in-phase content corresponding to the magnitude of the sensed angular velocity and quadrature content corresponding to the quadrature error of the suspended spring-mass system…The accuracy of the ultimate output signal of the MEMS gyroscope depends upon the alignment...”].
Avantaggiati does not disclose a first gyroscope measurement interval, wherein the first gyroscope measurement interval includes a first peak transition during a period of the gyroscope output signal, receiving, during an inactive gyroscope guard band interval following the first gyroscope measurement interval, a first guard signal, wherein the inactive gyroscope guard band interval includes a first zero crossing during the period of the gyroscope output signal, and receiving, during a second gyroscope measurement interval following the inactive gyroscope guard band interval, the gyroscope output signal, wherein the second gyroscope measurement interval includes a second peak transition during the period of the gyroscope output signal.
However, Tsinker discloses a first IMU sensor measurement interval, wherein the first IMU sensor measurement interval includes a first peak transition during a period of the IMU output signal [Paragraph [0018] – “In this regard, in embodiment(s), the multiplexer facilitates, based on the sensor selection input, selection of the respective sensor output signals in a round-robin, e.g., serial, manner. Further, the charge or voltage sensing circuit converts the respective sensor output signals to analog output signals in the round-robin manner…In an embodiment, the defined sampling period is equal, within a defined accuracy, e.g., 1%, to a defined drive period of the sensor.”; Paragraph [0019]-[0020] – “In one embodiment, a first continuous-time Nyquist rate ADC of the group of continuous-time Nyquist rate ADCs converts, integrates, etc. a first analog output signal—corresponding to a first sensor output signal.”; Paragraph [0036] – “…In embodiment(s), a sampling period, e.g., defined sampling period, of the respective sampling periods can be equal, e.g., within a defined accuracy, e.g., 2%, to a defined drive period of the sensors, e.g., 128 kHz.” – See also Fig. [8], first “Drive X-pos” which displays the positive digital signal, which contains the peak in the analog signal];
receiving, during an inactive IMU sensor guard band interval following the first IMU sensor measurement interval [Paragraph [0019]-[0020] – “In one embodiment, a first continuous-time Nyquist rate ADC of the group of continuous-time Nyquist rate ADCs converts, integrates, etc. a first analog output signal—corresponding to a first sensor output signal…In another embodiment, the sensor comprises an accelerometer, a gyroscope, a magnetic sensor, a pressure sensor, or a microphone.” – IMU sensor output signal during first measurement interval], a first guard signal [Paragraph [0037] – “In embodiment(s), the SC2V delays a period, e.g., a “Break/recover” period, from an end of a first sampling period, e.g., “Sample X”, before beginning a second sampling period, e.g., “Sample Y”, in order to allow the MUX to complete a selection, based on the sensor selection input(s), of a sensor output signal of the sensor output signals to be sampled in the second sampling period.”], wherein the inactive IMU sensor guard band interval includes a first zero crossing during the period of the IMU sensor output signal [Paragraph [0019]-[0020] – “In one embodiment, a first continuous-time Nyquist rate ADC of the group of continuous-time Nyquist rate ADCs converts, integrates, etc. a first analog output signal—corresponding to a first sensor output signal…; Paragraph [0037] – “In embodiment(s), the SC2V delays a period, e.g., a “Break/recover” period, from an end of a first sampling period, e.g., “Sample X”, before beginning a second sampling period, e.g., “Sample Y”, in order to allow the MUX to complete a selection, based on the sensor selection input(s), of a sensor output signal of the sensor output signals to be sampled in the second sampling period.” – zero crossing occurs during break/recover interval between end of first sampling period and start of next];
and receiving, during a second IMU sensor measurement interval following the inactive IMU sensor guard band interval [See Fig. 8, “Sample Y” interval which follows “break/recover” interval], the IMU sensor output signal [Paragraph [0019]-[0020] – “In one embodiment, a first continuous-time Nyquist rate ADC of the group of continuous-time Nyquist rate ADCs converts, integrates, etc. a first analog output signal—corresponding to a first sensor output signal—to a first digital output signal during the defined sampling period in which the sense amplifier converts, amplifies, etc. a second sensor output signal to a second analog output signal…”], wherein the second IMU sensor measurement interval includes a second peak transition during the period of the IMU sensor output signal [Paragraph [0018] – “In this regard, in embodiment(s), the multiplexer facilitates, based on the sensor selection input, selection of the respective sensor output signals in a round-robin, e.g., serial, manner. Further, the charge or voltage sensing circuit converts the respective sensor output signals to analog output signals in the round-robin manner…In an embodiment, the defined sampling period is equal, within a defined accuracy, e.g., 1%, to a defined drive period of the sensor.”; See also Fig. [8], “Drive X-pos” which displays the positive digital signal, which contains the peak in the analog signal – second peak would be identical to first, but follow the “Sample Z” interval].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the sampling and processing intervals of Tsinker to sample the MEMS gyroscope of Avantaggiati in determining angular velocity in order to maximize processing capabilities in the IMU.
The combination of Avantaggiati and Tsinker discloses that the IMU sensor is a gyroscope [Avantaggiati, Paragraph [0004] – “In at least some example illustrations, a micro electro-mechanical system (MEMS) gyroscope may include a suspended spring-mass system, including a drive mass and a proof mass, and a drive sense electrode for generating a drive sense signal corresponding to displacement of the drive mass. The gyroscope may also include a proof mass sense electrode for generating a proof mass sense signal corresponding to displacement of the proof mass…”]; and
an IMU sensor guard band interval following the second IMU sensor measurement interval [See Tsinker, Fig. [8], “Sample Y” interval], wherein the active IMU sensor guard band interval includes a second zero crossing during the period of the IMU sensor output signal [See Tsinker, Fig. [8], second “break/recover” period, which occurs during transition from Drive – neg to Drive-pos and must encompass zero crossing], but fails to disclose receiving, during an active gyroscope guard band interval following the second gyroscope measurement interval, an output signal of the at least one other MEMS sensor, wherein the active gyroscope guard band interval includes a second zero crossing during the period of the gyroscope output signal.
However, Czompo discloses that there can be delays between output signals from devices such as accelerometers and gyroscopes [Paragraph [0006]] and staggering the sampling of such sensors so that different sensors are sampled at different times [See Figs. 2, 4, and Paragraph [0018]].
It would have been obvious to sample from the at least one other MEMS sensor during a guard band because Czompo teaches that such a staggered sampling scheme can be beneficial in that “errors due to time misalignment of sensor samples may be avoided in a power efficient way” [See Paragraph [0018]].
The combination of Avantaggiati, Tsinker, and Czompo discloses determining, based on the received gyroscope output signal [Avantaggiati, Paragraph [0004] – “In at least some example illustrations, a micro electro-mechanical system (MEMS) gyroscope may include a suspended spring-mass system, including a drive mass and a proof mass, and a drive sense electrode for generating a drive sense signal corresponding to displacement of the drive mass. The gyroscope may also include a proof mass sense electrode for generating a proof mass sense signal corresponding to displacement of the proof mass…”; Paragraph [0015] – “A MEMS gyroscope includes drive circuitry that generates an electrical drive signal that is a periodic signal having a drive frequency.”] during the first gyroscope measurement interval and the second gyroscope measurement interval [See Tsinker, Fig. [8], Sample X and Y intervals; See Avantaggiati, Paragraph [0004] and [0015] for gyroscope], an angular velocity of the MEMS gyroscope [Avantaggiati, Paragraph [0016] - “Accordingly, a sense signal based on the movement of the suspended spring-mass system includes both the in-phase content corresponding to the magnitude of the sensed angular velocity and quadrature content corresponding to the quadrature error of the suspended spring-mass system…The accuracy of the ultimate output signal of the MEMS gyroscope depends upon the alignment...”];
and determining, based on the output signal of the at least one other MEMS sensor during a portion of the active guard band interval [Tsinker, Fig. [8], second “break/recover” interval, per using a different sampling period as taught by Czompo], an output value for the at least one other MEMS sensor [Avantaggiati, Paragraph [0023] – “In some embodiments, one or more additional sensors 108 (e.g., MEMS gyroscopes, MEMS accelerometers, MEMS microphones, MEMS pressure sensors, and a compass) may be included…” – see Fig. [1], 108].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are currently rejected under 35 USC 112(b). However, were those rejections to be overcome, the following would be the Examiner’s reasons for allowance:
Claim 1 is allowed because the closest prior art, Avantagiatti et. al. (US 20220057209 A1), Tsinker et. al. (US 20190190535 A1), and Czompo et. al. (US 20160091316 A1), either singularly or in combination, fail to anticipate or render obvious a method for processing microelectromechanical system (MEMS) sensor outputs from multiple MEMS sensor types on shared processing circuitry, comprising: providing, to the measurement circuit during an inactive gyroscope guard band interval after the first gyroscope measurement interval, a gyroscope guard band signal that does not modify an analog angular velocity signal of the measurement circuit during the inactive gyroscope guard band interval, in combination with all other limitations in the claim as claimed and defined by the Applicant.
Claim 20 is allowed because the closest prior art, Avantagiatti et. al. (US 20220057209 A1), Tsinker et. al. (US 20190190535 A1), and Czompo et. al. (US 20160091316 A1), either singularly or in combination, fail to anticipate or render obvious a method for processing microelectromechanical system (MEMS) sensor outputs from a 3-axis MEMS accelerometer and a 3-axis MEMS gyroscope on shared processing circuitry, comprising: providing, to the measurement circuit during an inactive gyroscope guard band interval after the first gyroscope measurement interval, a gyroscope guard band signal that does not modify an analog angular velocity signal of the measurement circuit inactive gyroscope guard band interval, wherein the active gyroscope guard band interval is a same amount of time as the inactive gyroscope guard band interval, in combination with all other limitations in the claim as claimed and defined by the Applicant.
The dependent claims would be allowed based on their dependence from the independent claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance."
Pertinent Prior Art
US 20250224729 A1, MULTISENSOR MEMS INERTIAL SENSOR GUIDANCE FOR AUTOMATIC VEHICLES
US 9939290 B1, Method For Calibration Of A System With Time-multiplexed Sensors
US 20120232847 A1, High Accuracy And High Dynamic Range MEMS Inertial Measurement Unit With Automatic Dynamic Range Control
US 20110197675 A1, MICROELECTROMECHANICAL GYROSCOPE WITH INVERSION OF ACTUATION FORCES, AND METHOD FOR ACTUATING A MICROELECTROMECHANICAL GYROSCOPE
US 20210364546 A1, REAL-TIME ISOLATION OF SELF-TEST AND LINEAR ACCELERATION SIGNALS
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANELLE A HOLMES whose telephone number is (571)272-4336. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5 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, Arleen M Vazquez can be reached at (571) 272-2619. 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.
/J.A.H./Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ARLEEN M VAZQUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights