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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/12/2026 has been entered.
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 1-5 and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borigo (US 2016/0023772 A1), Giles (US 2016/0280379 A1), and Nott (WO 2019/130106 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Borigo teaches an ice removal system for an ultrasonic sensor, the system comprising:
the ultrasonic sensor including a transducer [[0010] amount of power required for ice, mud, debris or contamination removal or prevention is reduced via appropriate ultrasonic actuator design to excite specific ultrasonic modes in the structure; [0065] system is triggered by an ice/contaminant sensing system which is achieved by use of the system actuators or by a supplementary set of sensors]; and
an electronic processor configured to
output, at the transducer, a chirp signal [[0092] a frequency sweep is performed. As described above, a frequency sweep includes driving actuators 501 (FIG. 11) at different frequencies within a finite frequency range],
determine, based on the chirp signal, whether a mechanical impedance is present at the transducer [[abstract] method includes calculating, using a processor, an impedance or forward and reflected power coefficients of a phased system including a plurality of actuators disposed on a structure; and activating the plurality of actuators disposed on the structure to produce shear stress via ultrasonic continuous wave activation to at least one of delaminate or weaken an adhesion strength of a contamination on the structure],
in response to determining that the mechanical impedance is present, output, at the transducer, a frequency sweep signal [[0047] electromechanical impedance of the actuator-ice/contaminant-structure system may be periodically measured in order to adjust the actuator driving parameters including frequency and impedance matching],
receive, at the transducer, a reflected frequency sweep signal [[0043] wave encounters boundaries, the wave is reflected at various angles. The initial wave patterns are complex but eventually, after many reflections and as the wave travels from one boundary to another, a modal pattern is established at a resonant frequency],
determine, based on the reflected frequency sweep signal, a [frequency] [[0044] after the many reflections leading to the vibration state. The ice or contaminant is removed as a result of ultrasonic transient waves, reflection factors; [0047] electromechanical impedance of the actuator-ice/contaminant-structure system may be periodically measured in order to adjust the actuator driving parameters including frequency and impedance matching], and
output, at the transducer, an output signal according to the [frequency] [[0047] system may be driven at one or more of the frequencies at which an impedance minimum occurs, which are the resonant frequencies associated with the electromechanical system, or in some embodiments, at off-resonant frequencies. As material is disbonded, cracked, removed, or otherwise altered, and as the actuators may heat up during operation, the electromechanical resonance characteristics of the system change].
Borigo does not explicitly teach and yet Giles teaches resonant frequency [[abstract] methods and systems are generally described that inhibit debris (such as ice) accretions and/or remove debris (such as ice) accretions from the exterior surface of an aircraft.; [0013] driving the plurality of actuators at at least the resonant frequencies; measuring an impedance of the plurality of actuators as a function of frequency; selecting, based on the measuring, a plurality of resonant frequencies for use in driving the plurality of actuators during flight of the aircraft in order to inhibit a formation of ice; [0040] actuation frequency of the one or more actuators will be controlled by the microcontroller based on feedback received from the sensor … configured to switch a driving frequency of the one or more actuator/s 114 based on signaling received from the sensor 122; [0041] resonant frequency along one or more location/s of the component 120. This measured resonant frequency of the component 120 may then be used by the microcontroller 104 to tune the frequency of the signal generated by the wave generator 106 … may be affected by many factors … mass, composition; [0088]; [0091]; [0093] driving frequency of one ( or more) actuators to correspond to a new or changing resonance frequency of the component; [fig. 2] model structure and determine resonant frequencies – 204; [fig. 13] Adjust driving mode and/or frequency based on sensed conditions - 1360].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the impedance/resonant frequencies measurement as taught by Borigo, with the determine of a resonant frequency as taught by Giles so that the driving mode may be adjusted based on frequency change in response to sensed conditions (Giles) [[fig. 13]].
Borigo does not explicitly teach and yet Nott teaches wherein the chirp signal is a lower power test signal as compared to the frequency sweep signal [[0202] computed response of the physical system takes into account properties like mass, inertia, viscous friction, inductance
resistance, etc., to predict what the states and outputs of the physical system will be by knowing
the input.; [0602] spectra 132030 can be evaluated by applying a low-power electrical signal across the ultrasonic transducer to produce a non-therapeutic excitation of the ultrasonic blade. The low-power electrical signal can be applied in the form of a sweep or a compound Fourier series to measure the impedance Z9 (t) = Vg(t) across the ultrasonic transducer at a range of Ig(t) frequencies in series (sweep) or in parallel (compound signal) using an FFT.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify the impedance/resonant frequencies measurement as taught by Borigo, with the use of a low power electrical signal across the ultrasonic transducer to measure impedance with a frequency sweep as taught by Nott so that a non-therapeutic excitation of the ultrasonic transducer is produced (Nott) [[0602]].
Regarding claim 2, Borigo teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the electronic processor is further configured to: output at the transducer, following outputting the output signal, a second chirp signal; receive, at the transducer, a second reflected response signal, and determine, from the second reflected response signal, whether the mechanical impedance is still present [[0047] electromechanical impedance of the actuator-ice/contaminant-structure system may be periodically measured in order to adjust the actuator driving parameters including frequency and impedance matching.].
Regarding claim 3, Borigo teaches the system of claim 2, wherein the electronic processor is further configured to: in response to determining that the mechanical impedance is still present, output, at the transducer, a second frequency sweep signal; receive, at the transducer, a second reflected frequency sweep signal, determine, based on a second received frequency sweep signal, a second resonant frequency, and output, at the transducer, the second output signal at the second resonant frequency [[abstract] ultrasonic continuous wave activation].
Regarding claim 4, Borigo teaches the system of claim 2, wherein the electronic processor is further configured to: in response to determining that the mechanical impedance is still present, provide power to the transducer for a predetermined amount of time [[0047] as material is disbonded, cracked, removed, or otherwise altered, and as the actuators may heat up during operation, the electromechanical resonance characteristics of the system change, thus the system impedance is monitored in order to operate the system effectively and efficiently].
Regarding claim 5, Borigo teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the transducer is a piezoelectric transducer [[0060] actuator designs that can be considered non-limiting embodiments include, normal incidence loading using either shear polarized piezoelectric elements].
Regarding claim 8, Borigo teaches a method for removing ice for an ultrasonic sensor, the method comprising:
outputting, at a transducer of the sensor [[0010]], a chirp signal [[0092]],
determining with an electronic processor, based on the chirp signal, whether a mechanical impedance is present at the transducer [[abstract]],
in response to determining that the mechanical impedance is present, outputting, at the transducer, a frequency sweep signal [[0047]],
receiving, at the transducer, a reflected frequency sweep signal [[0043]],
determining, based on the reflected frequency sweep signal, a [frequency] [[0044]], and
outputting, at the transducer, an output signal according to the [frequency] [[0047]].
Borigo does not explicitly teach and yet Giles teaches resonant frequency [[abstract] methods and systems are generally described that inhibit debris (such as ice) accretions and/or remove debris (such as ice) accretions from the exterior surface of an aircraft.; [0013] driving the plurality of actuators at at least the resonant frequencies; measuring an impedance of the plurality of actuators as a function of frequency; selecting, based on the measuring, a plurality of resonant frequencies for use in driving the plurality of actuators during flight of the aircraft in order to inhibit a formation of ice [0088]; [0091]; [0093] driving frequency of one ( or more) actuators to correspond to a new or changing resonance frequency of the component; [fig. 2] model structure and determine resonant frequencies – 204; [fig. 13] Adjust driving mode and/or frequency based on sensed conditions - 1360].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the impedance/resonant frequencies measurement as taught by Borigo, with the determine of a resonant frequency as taught by Giles so that the driving mode may be adjusted based on frequency change in response to sensed conditions (Giles) [[fig. 13]].
Borigo does not explicitly teach and yet Nott teaches wherein the chirp signal is a lower power test signal as compared to the frequency sweep signal [[0202] computed response of the physical system takes into account properties like mass, inertia, viscous friction, inductance
resistance, etc., to predict what the states and outputs of the physical system will be by knowing
the input.; [0602] spectra 132030 can be evaluated by applying a low-power electrical signal across the ultrasonic transducer to produce a non-therapeutic excitation of the ultrasonic blade. The low-power electrical signal can be applied in the form of a sweep or a compound Fourier series to measure the impedance Z9 (t) = Vg(t) across the ultrasonic transducer at a range of Ig(t) frequencies in series (sweep) or in parallel (compound signal) using an FFT.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify the impedance/resonant frequencies measurement as taught by Borigo, with the use of a low power electrical signal across the ultrasonic transducer to measure impedance with a frequency sweep as taught by Nott so that a non-therapeutic excitation of the ultrasonic transducer is produced (Nott) [[0602]].
Regarding claim 9, Borigo teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising: outputting at the transducer, following outputting the output signal, a second chirp signal; receiving, at the transducer, a second reflected response signal, and determine, from the second reflected response signal, whether the mechanical impedance is still present [[0047]].
Regarding claim 10, Borigo teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising: in response to determining that the mechanical impedance is still present, outputting, at the transducer, a second frequency sweep signal; receiving, at the transducer, a second reflected frequency sweep signal, determining, based on a second received frequency sweep signal, a second resonant frequency, and outputting, at the transducer, the second output signal at the second resonant frequency [[abstract]].
Regarding claim 11, Borigo teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising: in response to determining that the mechanical impedance is still present, providing power to the transducer for a predetermined amount of time [[0047]].
Regarding claim 12, Borigo teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the transducer is a piezoelectric transducer [[0060]].
Regarding claim 13, Borigo teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the resonant frequency corresponds to an ice blockage on the transducer [[0058]].
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borigo (US 2016/0023772 A1), Giles (US 2016/0280379 A1), and Nott (WO 2019/130106 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Johnson (US 5,627,310 A).
Regarding claim 6, Borigo does not explicitly teach and yet Johnson teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the resonant frequency is the same as a natural frequency of an ice blockage on the transducer [[abstract] a sensor arrangement principally for ice bank control using a single probe (9) allowed to resonate at its natural resonant frequency. That resonant frequency is different when ice has adhered to the probe and this is detected to indicate ice growth in the ice bank. A resonator/detector (11) oscillates the probe for short periods of time at regular intervals, which allows ice to form about the probe when not in oscillation.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the impedance/resonant frequencies measurement as taught by Borigo, with the determination of natural resonant frequency as taught by Johnson because resonant frequency is different when ice has adhered to the probe and this is detected to indicate ice growth in the ice bank. (Johnson) [[abstract]].
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borigo (US 2016/0023772 A1), Giles (US 2016/0280379 A1), and Nott (WO 2019/130106 A1) as applied to claim 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Mielenz (US 2012/0020188 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Borigo does not explicitly teach and yet Mielenz teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the ultrasonic sensor is part of an advanced driver-assistance system of a vehicle [[abstract] ultrasound sensor for distance detection includes a transducer external surface and a blockage sensor provided on the transducer external surface; [0004] driver assistance systems, in the area of motor vehicle technology ultrasound-based sensors are used that make use of a pulse-echo method to detect the object].
It would have been obvious to incorporate the blockage sensor as taught by Borigo, into the driver assistance system as taught by Mielenz so that an ultrasonic sensor used for detecting objects from a vehicle may have a high reliability (Mielenz) [[0006]].
Regarding claim 14, Borigo does not explicitly teach and yet Mielenz teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the ultrasonic sensor is part of an advanced driver-assistance system of a vehicle [[abstract][0004]].
It would have been obvious to incorporate the blockage sensor as taught by Borigo, into the driver assistance system as taught by Mielenz so that an ultrasonic sensor used for detecting objects from a vehicle may have a high reliability (Mielenz) [[0006]].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See below.
Additionally, neither Borigo nor Giles teaches determining a resonant frequency "based on the reflected frequency sweep signal," as recited in amended claims 1 and 8. Giles determines resonant frequencies through pre-modeling and Finite Element Analysis during a design phase, not dynamically from a reflected signal received at a transducer during operation. Giles discloses that "[i]n step 204, the component is modeled and the resonant frequencies of the component are determined." Giles, paragraph [0046]. Giles further discloses that resonance "may be determined by attaching one or more actuators to the component/component surface and performing a vibrational analysis (e.g., using Finite Element Analysis) to determine one or more resonance frequencies of the component and/or component surface." Giles, paragraph [0047]. Giles also discloses that resonance frequencies may be determined "using a sensor... for running a constant impedance analysis in the desired frequency zones." Giles, paragraph [0048]. Thus, Giles' resonant frequency determination is performed during a design or testing phase before operational use, not dynamically based on a reflected signal received at a transducer. In contrast, the amended claims recite "receive, at the transducer, a reflected frequency sweep signal" and "determine, based on the reflected frequency sweep signal, a resonant frequency." Neither Borigo nor Giles teaches receiving a reflected frequency sweep signal at a transducer and determining a resonant frequency based on that reflected signal.
The Examiner disagrees because Giles explains in para. 0041 that the sensor 122 may sense/detect the operational or resonant frequency along one or more location/s of the component 120, and this measured resonant frequency of the component 120 may then be used by the microcontroller 104 to tune the frequency of the signal generated by the wave generator 106. Giles is understood as described in the abstract to be used for inhibiting and/or remove debris accretions such as ice from the exterior surface of an aircraft.
Furthermore, the amended claims recite an ultrasonic sensor's transducer performing both ice detection (via chirp signal) and ice removal (via output signal at resonant frequency). Borigo is directed to ice removal from aircraft structures, such as helicopter rotor blades and wing leading edges, using separate actuator arrays, not ultrasonic sensors. Borigo discloses that "[i]ce formation on helicopter rotor blades or on the wing leading edges of fixed-wing aircraft, for example, alter the aerodynamic characteristics of the aircraft." Borigo, paragraph [0003]. Borigo's system uses dedicated actuator arrays that are distinct from any sensing elements and are specifically designed for large structural surfaces. In contrast, the amended claims are directed to an ice removal system for an ultrasonic sensor where the sensor's own transducer performs both detection and removal functions. Neither Borigo nor Giles teaches or suggests using an ultrasonic sensor's transducer for both ice detection and ice removal.
The Examiner disagrees because the claims recite an ultrasonic sensor including a transducer. This is equivalent to the explanation of Borigo in para. 0032 which explains that each of the actuators 114 will be further coupled to the sensor 122.
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 7-8 bridging, filed 6/12/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 6, 8, and 13 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Nott (WO 2019/130106 A1) and Johnson (US 5,627,310 A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7339. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9am-5pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights