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 .
This action is in response to the communication filed 3/24/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the 112 section on pages 19-21,
The Examiner acknowledges applicant’s arguments, and further notes that no specific arguments are made regarding any specific claim feature. Any rejection overcome by the amendments are therefore withdrawn, but any that remain are repeated below.
With regard to the arguments on pages 21-26 directed towards Ely (US 2014/0117980 A1),
For Claims 1 and 21, Applicant argues that Ely does not disclose that the connecting traces for the coil lobes extend in circumferential arcs about the axis as now claimed. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
While applicant may intend this phrase to define the entire shape of the trace, the claim does not require as such, and only requires some portion of the connecting traces to in the arcuate manner claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
292
422
media_image1.png
Greyscale
To that point, the various connecting traces in Ely do extend at least partially in the claimed manner as seen above when they transition into forming the various coil lobes, for example. Any curved section of the traces reasonably meets this claim requirement.
For Claim 26, applicant argues that Ely does not disclose sense coils that do not include lobes in adjacent band sections, but the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim defines the coils such that they are defined by the claimed lobes, such as the two or more lobes now claimed. The prior art can be interpreted in the same manner, such that different combinations of lobes can be said to be a coil, and where these lobes or coils are limited to the claimed arcuate sections. The Examiner acknowledges that the lobes are connected to other lobes that are within adjacent arcuate sections, but the claim does not preclude such a disclosure. Meaning, the broadest reasonable interpretation of a coil, consistent with applicant’s disclosure, is for to interpret a coil to be coil lobes that are connected together. The prior art can be interpreted in the same manner, such that only specific lobes are considered a coil, or subcoil of an overall coil. The mere fact that these lobes are subsequently connected to other lobes, or other subcoils does not preclude such an interpretation. Claiming that the coil (or subcoil) does not include lobes in other adjacent arcuate sections is not the same as claiming that the claimed lobes are not electrically connected to other lobes in adjacent arcuate sections.
As such, the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As to Claim 1,
The phrase “an excitation coil on and/or in one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about an axis of rotation for a target” on lines 4-5 introduces new matter.
The original disclosure does not disclose that the excitation coil is on and/or in one or more planes of the support structure as claimed. Instead, the excitation coil is disclosed to be made up of portions such as 304a,b as seen in Figure 4A. No further details regarding these coils are provided, and thus there is no disclosure that the coils are formed in the same plane or in more than one plane. It cannot be reasonably discerned from the figures whether the coils are in one plane, plural planes, or even the same plane. The disclosure itself provides no further explanation, and it does not state that the excitation coil is formed on and/or in one or more planes as claimed. This feature therefore introduces new matter.
The phrase “a first sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis” on lines 6-7 introduces new matter.
Similar to the above issue regarding the excitation coil, the original disclosure does not state that the first sense coil is on and/or in the same one or more planes of the support structure that the excitation coil is in. The Examiner acknowledges applicant’s figures, such as Figure 4A, but these figures do not reasonably provide support for the claim feature. First, nowhere in the original disclosure does it state that the excitation coil is formed in plural planes, and nowhere does it state that the sense coil is formed in the same plural planes as the excitation coil. Second, a top down view, such as that of Figure 4A, cannot reasonably be relied upon for support because it cannot reasonably show plural planes. Since the sense coil can be formed in more than one plane, a top down view figure cannot reasonably show what planes the various coils are in because different planes cannot be reasonably identified in this figure. These figures therefore cannot reasonably show what planes the coils are in, and whether these planes are the same planes as the other coils. Third, as such, it also cannot be discerned or identified whether the excitation coil is in a same plane as the sense coil for this reason. Fourth, the original disclosure does not disclose that the coils are “one and/or in” one or more planes, and instead only discloses that the coils are “in” one or more planes.” Applicant is clearly drawing a distinction between being “on and/or in” a plane, and thus this rejection is also being raised because the original disclosure does not reasonably make such a distinction and disclose coils that are on and/or in one or more planes. As such, this phrase introduces new matter.
The phrase “the second position at the radial distance from the axis and at is from the axis at an angular distance of substantially Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2 and α is a measurement range of angular-position sensing of the first sense coil” on lines 14-17 introduces new matter.
At issue here is that the original disclosure expressly disclosed that the second lobes were at an angular distance of Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2, and not one that is “substantially” Θ as now claimed. The scope of the new claim limitation is different than was originally disclosed, because the new limitation reasonably includes values for Θ that are outside the above originally disclosed angular range. For example, if α was 30%, then the above claim phrase originally would require the angular distance to be between 150 degrees and 210 degrees. However, by adding the term “substantially,” this range can be now be beyond this range, which was not originally contemplated. The addition of the term “substantially” therefore captures scope in the form of angular degrees that were not originally contemplated, and this phrase therefore introduces new matter.
As to Claim 6,
The phrase “a second sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis “on lines 3-4 introduces new matter.
Similar to the above issue regarding the excitation coil, the original disclosure does not state that the second sense coil is on and/or in the same one or more planes of the support structure that the excitation coil is in. The Examiner acknowledges applicant’s figures, such as Figure 4A, but these figures do not reasonably provide support for the claim feature. First, nowhere in the original disclosure does it state that the excitation coil is formed in plural planes, and nowhere does it state that the sense coil is formed in the same plural planes as the excitation coil. Second, a top down view, such as that of Figure 4A, cannot reasonably be relied upon for support because it cannot reasonably show plural planes. Since the sense coil can be formed in more than one plane, a top down view figure cannot reasonably show what planes the various coils are in because different planes cannot be reasonably identified in this figure. These figures therefore cannot reasonably show what planes the coils are in, and whether these planes are the same planes as the other coils. Third, as such, it also cannot be discerned or identified whether the excitation coil is in a same plane as the sense coil for this reason. Fourth, the original disclosure does not disclose that the coils are “one and/or in” one or more planes, and instead only discloses that the coils are “in” one or more planes.” Applicant is clearly drawing a distinction between being “on and/or in” a plane, and thus this rejection is also being raised because the original disclosure does not reasonably make such a distinction and disclose coils that are on and/or in one or more planes. As such, this phrase introduces new matter.
The phrase “the fourth position at the radial distance from the axis and at the angular distance of substantially Θ from the third position” on lines 15-17 introduces new matter.
At issue here is that the original disclosure expressly disclosed that the second lobes were at an angular distance of Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2, and not one that is “substantially” Θ as now claimed. The scope of the new claim limitation is different than was originally disclosed, because the new limitation reasonably includes values for Θ that are outside the above originally disclosed angular range. For example, if α was 30%, then the above claim phrase originally would require the angular distance to be between 150 degrees and 210 degrees. However, by adding the term “substantially,” this range can be now be beyond this range, which was not originally contemplated. The addition of the term “substantially” therefore captures scope in the form of angular degrees that were not originally contemplated, and this phrase therefore introduces new matter.
As to Claim 7,
The phrase “the fourth position at the radial distance from the axis, at an angular distance of substantially 180° from the first position, and at an angular distance of substantially Θ’ from the third position, where Θ’=180°±α / 2” on the last four lines introduces new matter.
Claim 1 is now expressly directed towards the sine coil, and expressly claims that the first and second lobes are spaced Θ=180°±α / 2. Applicant is now claiming, as part of the same sine coil, that the third and fourth lobes are spaced by a different angle, namely Θ’=180°±α / 2. The original disclosure does not reasonably disclose sine coils with lobes be spaced by different angles as claimed. This phrase, in the combination, therefore introduces new matter.
As to Claim 14,
The phrase “a second sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis “on lines 3-4 introduces new matter.
Similar to the above issue regarding the excitation coil, the original disclosure does not state that the second sense coil is on and/or in the same one or more planes of the support structure that the excitation coil is in. The Examiner acknowledges applicant’s figures, such as Figure 4A, but these figures do not reasonably provide support for the claim feature. First, nowhere in the original disclosure does it state that the excitation coil is formed in plural planes, and nowhere does it state that the sense coil is formed in the same plural planes as the excitation coil. Second, a top down view, such as that of Figure 4A, cannot reasonably be relied upon for support because it cannot reasonably show plural planes. Since the sense coil can be formed in more than one plane, a top down view figure cannot reasonably show what planes the various coils are in because different planes cannot be reasonably identified in this figure. These figures therefore cannot reasonably show what planes the coils are in, and whether these planes are the same planes as the other coils. Third, as such, it also cannot be discerned or identified whether the excitation coil is in a same plane as the sense coil for this reason. Fourth, the original disclosure does not disclose that the coils are “one and/or in” one or more planes, and instead only discloses that the coils are “in” one or more planes.” Applicant is clearly drawing a distinction between being “on and/or in” a plane, and thus this rejection is also being raised because the original disclosure does not reasonably make such a distinction and disclose coils that are on and/or in one or more planes. As such, this phrase introduces new matter.
The phrase “the sixth position at the radial distance from the axis and at the angular distance of substantially Θ from the fifth position” on lines 15-17 introduces new matter.
At issue here is that the original disclosure expressly disclosed that the second lobes were at an angular distance of Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2, and not one that is “substantially” Θ as now claimed. The scope of the new claim limitation is different than was originally disclosed, because the new limitation reasonably includes values for Θ that are outside the above originally disclosed angular range. For example, if α was 30%, then the above claim phrase originally would require the angular distance to be between 150 degrees and 210 degrees. However, by adding the term “substantially,” this range can be now be beyond this range, which was not originally contemplated. The addition of the term “substantially” therefore captures scope in the form of angular degrees that were not originally contemplated, and this phrase therefore introduces new matter.
As to Claim 17,
The phrase “a second coil structure, the second coil structure positioned substantially 45° relative to the first coil structure” on lines 5-6 introduces new matter.
Applicant is now claiming that the second coil structure is positioned substantially 45° relative to the first coil structure, but where the original disclosure neither states that the second coil structure is 45° from the first coil structure nor states that it is “substantially” 45° from the first coil structure.
PNG
media_image2.png
570
797
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As see above, the second coil structure, made up for sensor U2, is not 45 degrees or substantially 45 degrees from the first coil structure. While the exact degrees difference between the structures are not provided, these structures must be approximately 90 degrees part. In fact, if these structures were 45 degrees apart (or substantially, the coils would come into contact with each or otherwise overlap each other, which is not reasonably disclosed. As such, this phrase introduces new matter. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner is interpreting this phrase to require a second coil structure shifted in the manner seen above, or put another way, where approximately 90 degrees can be considered to be substantially 45 degrees.
The phrase “a second excitation coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis” on lines 8-9 introduces new matter.
1) The original disclosure does not disclose that the excitation coil is on and/or in one or more planes of the support structure as claimed. Instead, the excitation coil is disclosed to be made up of portions such as 304a,b as seen in Figure 4A. No further details regarding these coils are provided, and thus there is no disclosure that the coils are formed in the same plane or in more than one plane. It cannot be reasonably discerned from the figures whether the coils are in one plane, plural planes, or even the same plane. The disclosure itself provides no further explanation, and it does not state that the excitation coil is formed on and/or in one or more planes as claimed. This feature therefore introduces new matter.
2) The second issue is that the above phrase reasonably now includes the claim scope of where the excitation coils for the first and second coil structures are in the same planes as each other, completely different planes as each other, or mixed planes where the coils may or may not share any common plane (i.e. they are in completely different planes or have at least one portion in a common plane). The original disclosure does not reasonably disclose such a feature, as the original disclosure does not reasonably relate the excitation coils to explain whether they would be in the same or different planes. This phrase therefore introduces new matter.
The phrase “a third first sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure arranged about the axis, the third sense coil to carry a third sense signal induced by the second excitation signal” on lines 11-14 introduces new matter.
Similar to the above issue regarding the excitation coil, the original disclosure does not state that the third sense coil is on and/or in the same one or more planes of the support structure that the excitation coil is in. The Examiner acknowledges applicant’s figures, such as Figure 4A, but these figures do not reasonably provide support for the claim feature. First, nowhere in the original disclosure does it state that the excitation coil is formed in plural planes, and nowhere does it state that the sense coil is formed in the same plural planes as the excitation coil. Second, a top down view, such as that of Figure 4A, cannot reasonably be relied upon for support because it cannot reasonably show plural planes. Since the sense coil can be formed in more than one plane, a top down view figure cannot reasonably show what planes the various coils are in because different planes cannot be reasonably identified in this figure. These figures therefore cannot reasonably show what planes the coils are in, and whether these planes are the same planes as the other coils. Third, as such, it also cannot be discerned or identified whether the excitation coil is in a same plane as the sense coil for this reason. Fourth, the original disclosure does not disclose that the coils are “one and/or in” one or more planes, and instead only discloses that the coils are “in” one or more planes.” Applicant is clearly drawing a distinction between being “on and/or in” a plane, and thus this rejection is also being raised because the original disclosure does not reasonably make such a distinction and disclose coils that are on and/or in one or more planes. As such, this phrase introduces new matter.
The phrase “the tenth position at the radial distance from the axis and at the angular distance of substantially Θ from the ninth position” on line 23-25 introduces new matter.
At issue here is that the original disclosure expressly disclosed that the second lobes were at an angular distance of Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2, and not one that is “substantially” Θ as now claimed. The scope of the new claim limitation is different than was originally disclosed, because the new limitation reasonably includes values for Θ that are outside the above originally disclosed angular range. For example, if α was 30%, then the above claim phrase originally would require the angular distance to be between 150 degrees and 210 degrees. However, by adding the term “substantially,” this range can be now be beyond this range, which was not originally contemplated. The addition of the term “substantially” therefore captures scope in the form of angular degrees that were not originally contemplated, and this phrase therefore introduces new matter.
The phrase “the twelfth position at the radial distance from the axis, at an angular distance of substantially 180° from the ninth position, and at an angular distance of substantially Θ’ from the eleventh position, where Θ’ =180° a/2” on lines 29-32 introduces new matter.
Claim 17 expressly states that the above positions are directed towards the sine coil, and expressly claims that the first and second lobes are spaced Θ=180°±α / 2, because it uses the same Θ as recited in Claim 1. Applicant is now claiming, as part of the same sine coil, that the third and fourth lobes are spaced by a different angle, namely Θ’=180°±α / 2. The original disclosure does not reasonably disclose sine coils with lobes that are spaced by different angles as claimed. This phrase, in the combination, therefore introduces new matter.
The phrase “a fourth sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis, the fourth sense coil to carry a fourth sense signal induced by the second excitation signal” on lines 35-37 introduces new matter.
Similar to the above issue regarding the excitation coil, the original disclosure does not state that the third sense coil is on and/or in the same one or more planes of the support structure that the excitation coil is in. The Examiner acknowledges applicant’s figures, such as Figure 4A, but these figures do not reasonably provide support for the claim feature. First, nowhere in the original disclosure does it state that the excitation coil is formed in plural planes, and nowhere does it state that the sense coil is formed in the same plural planes as the excitation coil. Second, a top down view, such as that of Figure 4A, cannot reasonably be relied upon for support because it cannot reasonably show plural planes. Since the sense coil can be formed in more than one plane, a top down view figure cannot reasonably show what planes the various coils are in because different planes cannot be reasonably identified in this figure. These figures therefore cannot reasonably show what planes the coils are in, and whether these planes are the same planes as the other coils. Third, as such, it also cannot be discerned or identified whether the excitation coil is in a same plane as the sense coil for this reason. Fourth, the original disclosure does not disclose that the coils are “one and/or in” one or more planes, and instead only discloses that the coils are “in” one or more planes.” Applicant is clearly drawing a distinction between being “on and/or in” a plane, and thus this rejection is also being raised because the original disclosure does not reasonably make such a distinction and disclose coils that are on and/or in one or more planes. As such, this phrase introduces new matter.
The phrase “the fourteenth position at the radial distance from the axis and at the angular distance of substantially Θ from the thirteenth position” on lines 42-45 introduces new matter.
At issue here is that the original disclosure expressly disclosed that the second lobes were at an angular distance of Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2, and not one that is “substantially” Θ as now claimed. The scope of the new claim limitation is different than was originally disclosed, because the new limitation reasonably includes values for Θ that are outside the above originally disclosed angular range. For example, if α was 30%, then the above claim phrase originally would require the angular distance to be between 150 degrees and 210 degrees. However, by adding the term “substantially,” this range can be now be beyond this range, which was not originally contemplated. The addition of the term “substantially” therefore captures scope in the form of angular degrees that were not originally contemplated, and this phrase therefore introduces new matter.
The phrase “the sixteenth position at the radial distance from the axis, at an angular distance of substantially 180° from the thirteenth position, and at an angular distance of substantially O' from the fifteenth position, where O' = 180° + a / 2” on lines 51-53 introduces new matter.
Claim 17 expressly states that the above positions are directed towards the cosine coil, and expressly claims that the lobes of this case are spaced Θ=180°±α / 2, because it uses the same Θ as recited in Claim 1. Applicant is now claiming, as part of the cosine coil, that the third and fourth lobes are spaced by a different angle, namely Θ’=180°±α / 2. The original disclosure does not reasonably disclose cosine coils with lobes that are spaced by different angles as claimed. This phrase, in the combination, therefore introduces new matter.
As to Claim 21,
The phrase “the first sense coil comprising two or more sine lobes arranged in the first arc band section within the first excitation coil portion and two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion, the first sense coil including first connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more sine lobes arranged in the first arc band section to one of the two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section; and a second sense coil to carry a second sense signal induced by the excitation signal, the second sense coil comprising two or more cosine lobes arranged in the first arc band section within the first excitation portion and two or more cosine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation portion, the second sense coil including second connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more cosine lobes arranged in the first arc band section to one of the two or more cosine lobes arranged in the second arc band section” in the last two paragraphs introduces new matter.
Applicant is now claiming that there are distinct arc band sections defined by the excitation coil and in which “two or more” sine or cosine lobes are located. However, the original disclosure does not support such a feature, as the disclosure discloses at most two sine or cosine lobes within each section. Each section S1-S4 contains two sine coil lobes and two cosine coil lobes, but it does not disclose and is not originally disclosed to include more than two of each type of lobe. As such, claiming that there are two or more sine or cosine lobes within any section introduces new matter, and this phrase reasonably captures claim scope not originally disclosed.
Note: The Examiner acknowledges that the original claims did disclose the use of two or more lobes, such as found in original Claims 1 and 7. However, these recitations, as best understood, were attempting the capture the concept where the sine coil can have two or more lobes collectively, such as seen in Figure 4C where the sine coil has four total lobes. However, the original disclosure does not originally disclose that there are “two or more” lobes within any arcuate section as now claimed. This is the reason for this rejection and why the current claim language introduces new matter. This rationale applies to all similarly rejected claim features and will therefore not be repeated for the sake of brevity.
As to Claim 22,
The phrase “the second position at the radial distance from the axis and at an angular distance substantially Θ from the first position, where Θ = 180°±α / 2” on lines 10-11 introduces new matter.
At issue here is that the original disclosure expressly disclosed that the second lobes were at an angular distance of Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2, and not one that is “substantially” Θ as now claimed. The scope of the new claim limitation is different than was originally disclosed, because the new limitation reasonably includes values for Θ that are outside the above originally disclosed angular range. For example, if α was 30%, then the above claim phrase originally would require the angular distance to be between 150 degrees and 210 degrees. However, by adding the term “substantially,” this range can be now be beyond this range, which was not originally contemplated. The addition of the term “substantially” therefore captures scope in the form of angular degrees that were not originally contemplated, and this phrase therefore introduces new matter.
As to Claims 23,
The phrase “the fourth position at the radial distance from the axis and at an angular distance of substantially Θ’ from the third position, where Θ’ = 180°±α / 2” on the last four lines introduces new matter.
At issue here is that the original disclosure expressly disclosed that the second lobes were at an angular distance of Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2, and not one that is “substantially” Θ as now claimed. The scope of the new claim limitation is different than was originally disclosed, because the new limitation reasonably includes values for Θ that are outside the above originally disclosed angular range. For example, if α was 30%, then the above claim phrase originally would require the angular distance to be between 150 degrees and 210 degrees. However, by adding the term “substantially,” this range can be now be beyond this range, which was not originally contemplated. The addition of the term “substantially” therefore captures scope in the form of angular degrees that were not originally contemplated, and this phrase therefore introduces new matter.
As to Claim 24,
The phrase “the third sense coil comprising two or more sine lobes arranged in the third arc section within the third excitation portion and two or more sine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion” on lines 15-19 introduces new matter.
Applicant is now claiming that there are distinct arc band sections defined by the excitation coil and in which “two or more” sine or cosine lobes are located. However, the original disclosure does not support such a feature, as the disclosure discloses at most two sine or cosine lobes within each section. Each section S1-S4 contains two sine coil lobes and two cosine coil lobes, but it does not disclose and is not originally disclosed to include more than two of each type of lobe. As such, claiming that there are two or more sine or cosine lobes within any section introduces new matter, and this phrase reasonably captures claim scope not originally disclosed.
The phrase “the fourth sense coil comprising two or more cosine lobes arranged in the third arc band section within the third excitation portion and two or more cosine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion” in the last paragraph introduces new matter.
Applicant is now claiming that there are distinct arc band sections defined by the excitation coil and in which “two or more” sine or cosine lobes are located. However, the original disclosure does not support such a feature, as the disclosure discloses at most two sine or cosine lobes within each section. Each section S1-S4 contains two sine coil lobes and two cosine coil lobes, but it does not disclose and is not originally disclosed to include more than two of each type of lobe. As such, claiming that there are two or more sine or cosine lobes within any section introduces new matter, and this phrase reasonably captures claim scope not originally disclosed.
As to Claim 26,
The phrase “the first sense coil comprising two or more sine lobes arranged within the first arc band section within the first excitation coil portion and two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion” on lines 14-17 introduces new matter.
Applicant is now claiming that there are distinct arc band sections defined by the excitation coil and in which “two or more” sine or cosine lobes are located. However, the original disclosure does not support such a feature, as the disclosure discloses at most two sine or cosine lobes within each section. Each section S1-S4 contains two sine coil lobes and two cosine coil lobes, but it does not disclose and is not originally disclosed to include more than two of each type of lobe. As such, claiming that there are two or more sine or cosine lobes within any section introduces new matter, and this phrase reasonably captures claim scope not originally disclosed.
The phrase “the second sense coil comprising two or more cosine lobes arranged within the first arc band section within the first excitation coil portion and two or more cosine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion” on lines 19-22 introduces new matter.
Applicant is now claiming that there are distinct arc band sections defined by the excitation coil and in which “two or more” sine or cosine lobes are located. However, the original disclosure does not support such a feature, as the disclosure discloses at most two sine or cosine lobes within each section. Each section S1-S4 contains two sine coil lobes and two cosine coil lobes, but it does not disclose and is not originally disclosed to include more than two of each type of lobe. As such, claiming that there are two or more sine or cosine lobes within any section introduces new matter, and this phrase reasonably captures claim scope not originally disclosed.
The phrase “the third sense coil comprising two or more sine lobes arranged within the third arc band section within the third excitation coil portion and two or more sine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion” on lines 33-37 introduces new matter.
Applicant is now claiming that there are distinct arc band sections defined by the excitation coil and in which “two or more” sine or cosine lobes are located. However, the original disclosure does not support such a feature, as the disclosure discloses at most two sine or cosine lobes within each section. Each section S1-S4 contains two sine coil lobes and two cosine coil lobes, but it does not disclose and is not originally disclosed to include more than two of each type of lobe. As such, claiming that there are two or more sine or cosine lobes within any section introduces new matter, and this phrase reasonably captures claim scope not originally disclosed.
The phrase “the fourth sense coil comprising two or more cosine lobes arranged within the third arc band section within the third excitation coil portion and two or more cosine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion” on lines 39-41 introduces new matter.
Applicant is now claiming that there are distinct arc band sections defined by the excitation coil and in which “two or more” sine or cosine lobes are located. However, the original disclosure does not support such a feature, as the disclosure discloses at most two sine or cosine lobes within each section. Each section S1-S4 contains two sine coil lobes and two cosine coil lobes, but it does not disclose and is not originally disclosed to include more than two of each type of lobe. As such, claiming that there are two or more sine or cosine lobes within any section introduces new matter, and this phrase reasonably captures claim scope not originally disclosed.
As to Claims 2-20, 22-25, and 27-29,
These claims stand rejected for incorporating and reciting the above rejected subject matter of their respective parent claim(s) and therefore stand rejected for the same reasons.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 and 23 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.
As to Claim 1,
The phrase “an excitation coil on and/or in one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about an axis of rotation for a target” on lines 4-5 is indefinite.
At issue here is that it is unclear what applicant means by being “on and/or in” one or more planes. Specifically, this phrase is drawing a distinction between being “on” or “in,” but then includes the ability to be “on” and “in” a plane. While the terms “on” and “in” are clearly understood and the distinction clearly understood such that the phrase “on or in” would be clear, the difference between “on or in” and “on and in” is not clear, as there is not distinctly between “on” and “in” when a coil is in a plane. Being in a plane would require the coil to be on the plane as well. The difference in scope is therefore unclear, in that it is unclear what the difference between claiming “on or in” in contrast to “on and in” would provide.
The phrase “a first sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis” on lines 6-7 is indefinite.
At issue here is that it is unclear what applicant means by being “on and/or in” one or more planes. Specifically, this phrase is drawing a distinction between being “on” or “in,” but then includes the ability to be “on” and “in” a plane. While the terms “on” and “in” are clearly understood and the distinction clearly understood such that the phrase “on or in” would be clear, the difference between “on or in” and “on and in” is not clear, as there is not distinctly between “on” and “in” when a coil is in a plane. Being in a plane would require the coil to be on the plane as well. The difference in scope is therefore unclear, in that it is unclear what the difference between claiming “on or in” in contrast to “on and in” would provide.
As to Claim 6,
The phrase “a second sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis “on lines 3-4 is indefinite.
At issue here is that it is unclear what applicant means by being “on and/or in” one or more planes. Specifically, this phrase is drawing a distinction between being “on” or “in,” but then includes the ability to be “on” and “in” a plane. While the terms “on” and “in” are clearly understood and the distinction clearly understood such that the phrase “on or in” would be clear, the difference between “on or in” and “on and in” is not clear, as there is not distinctly between “on” and “in” when a coil is in a plane. Being in a plane would require the coil to be on the plane as well. The difference in scope is therefore unclear, in that it is unclear what the difference between claiming “on or in” in contrast to “on and in” would provide.
As to Claim 16,
The phrase “a target” on line 3 is indefinite because a target as already recited in Claim 1. As best understood, these refer to the same target, and the difference and relationship between the distinctly recited targets are therefore unclear.
The phrase “wherein a target including multiple fins, evenly radially spaced around the axis, the multiple fins defining gaps between respective fins of the multiple fins, a respective one of the gaps having a size that, when measured circumferentially around the axis, is substantially the same size as a size of the first sine lobe” on lines 1 to the end is indefinite.
The metes and bounds of what would and would not be considered “substantially” the same size as a size of the first sine lobe” is indefinite, as applicant does not reasonably provide guidance to demonstrate what dimensions would and would not meet this limitation.
As to Claim 17,
The phrase “a second excitation coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis” on lines 8-9 is indefinite.
At issue here is that it is unclear what applicant means by being “on and/or in” one or more planes. Specifically, this phrase is drawing a distinction between being “on” or “in,” but then includes the ability to be “on” and “in” a plane. While the terms “on” and “in” are clearly understood and the distinction clearly understood such that the phrase “on or in” would be clear, the difference between “on or in” and “on and in” is not clear, as there is not distinctly between “on” and “in” when a coil is in a plane. Being in a plane would require the coil to be on the plane as well. The difference in scope is therefore unclear, in that it is unclear what the difference between claiming “on or in” in contrast to “on and in” would provide.
The phrase “a third first sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure arranged about the axis, the third sense coil to carry a third sense signal induced by the second excitation signal” on lines 11-14 is indefinite.
At issue here is that it is unclear what applicant means by being “on and/or in” one or more planes. Specifically, this phrase is drawing a distinction between being “on” or “in,” but then includes the ability to be “on” and “in” a plane. While the terms “on” and “in” are clearly understood and the distinction clearly understood such that the phrase “on or in” would be clear, the difference between “on or in” and “on and in” is not clear, as there is not distinctly between “on” and “in” when a coil is in a plane. Being in a plane would require the coil to be on the plane as well. The difference in scope is therefore unclear, in that it is unclear what the difference between claiming “on or in” in contrast to “on and in” would provide.
The phrase “a fourth sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis, the fourth sense coil to carry a fourth sense signal induced by the second excitation signal” on lines 35-37 is indefinite.
At issue here is that it is unclear what applicant means by being “on and/or in” one or more planes. Specifically, this phrase is drawing a distinction between being “on” or “in,” but then includes the ability to be “on” and “in” a plane. While the terms “on” and “in” are clearly understood and the distinction clearly understood such that the phrase “on or in” would be clear, the difference between “on or in” and “on and in” is not clear, as there is not distinctly between “on” and “in” when a coil is in a plane. Being in a plane would require the coil to be on the plane as well. The difference in scope is therefore unclear, in that it is unclear what the difference between claiming “on or in” in contrast to “on and in” would provide.
As to Claim 23,
The phrase “the radial distance” on lines 12 is indefinite. More than one radial distance was previously recited, and it is unclear which distinct radial distance recitation this phrase is referencing.
As to Claims 2-20,
These claims stand rejected for incorporating and reciting the above rejected subject matter of their respective parent claim(s) and therefore stand rejected for the same reasons.
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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 1-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ely (US 2014/0117980 A1).
PNG
media_image3.png
596
702
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
510
536
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
532
530
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
292
422
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Note: As seen above, for either the Sine or Cosine coils, the coils (lobes) must be spaced 30 degrees apart, because there are 12 total coils (lobes) evenly spaced around a full 360 degree circle as seen above, and 360 degrees / 12 = 30 degrees. As such, any adjacent coils (lobes) on either the Sine or Cosine coils must be spaced 30 degrees apart. Also note that the Sine and Cosine coils are identical coils but rotated 15 degrees relative to each other (Paragraph [0133]), and thus corresponding coils from the Sine coil and Cosine Coil are spaced 15 degrees apart.
As to Claim 1,
Ely discloses An apparatus comprising: a target (7) to rotate about an axis (Figure 7a or 9) (Paragraphs [0136],[00152]); a support structure (1) (Paragraph [0129]), an excitation coil (23) on and/or in one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about an axis of rotation for a target (7) (Paragraph [0134]),(see above figures), (Figure 7a or 9) (Paragraphs [0136],[0152]); and a first sense coil (sine coil 25-4) on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis, the first sense coil to carry a first sense signal induced by the excitation signal (Figures 6c,6d), (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134] / note the coil is formed from the “lobes” or sub coils seen in these figures), a first set of sine lobes including a first sine lobe at a first position relative to the axis, the first position at a radial distance from the axis (see the above figures / note first lobe example but that plural lobes exist as seen above, and any two lobes can be the set) (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134] (Figures 6c,6d); and a second set of sine lobes including a second line lobe at a second position relative to the axis (see the above figures / note the second lobe), the second position at the radial distance from the axis and at is from the axis at an angular distance of substantially Θ from the first position, where Θ=180°±α / 2 and α is a measurement range of angular-position sensing of the first sense coil (see above figures / note the coils are spaced 30 degrees apart, and thus α is defined to equal 60 degrees, and note the two lobes are the same distance from the center and thus have the same radial distance to the rotating axis which is located at the center of the overall coil), and first connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect the first set of sine lobes to the second set of sine lobes (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134] (see above figures / note that the connecting traces transition to the lobes in an arcuate manner, an example of which is seen above).
As to Claim 2,
Ely discloses the first sine lobe defines a clockwise path for the sense signal about a central axis of the first sine lobe; and the second sine lobe defines a counter-clockwise path for the sense signal about a central axis of the second sine lobe (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134]).
As to Claim 3,
PNG
media_image7.png
644
637
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses the excitation coil comprises a first excitation coil portion arranged to substantially surround the first set of sine lobes of the first sense coil (see above figure), a second excitation coil portion arranged to substantially surround the second set of sine lobes of the first sense coil (see above figure); a connecting trace segment extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect the first excitation portion to the second excitation portion (see above figure and note that the portions connected by the wiring of the excitation coil itself that extends from one portion to the next), and a center tap (node for current where the first and second coil portions meet) coupling between the first excitation coil portion and the second excitation coil portion to supply an excitation voltage signal to the first excitation coil portion and the second excitation coil portion (see above figure / note the above coil portions reasonably surround the lobes as claimed).
As to Claim 4,
Ely discloses wherein: the first excitation coil portion and the first set of sine lobes of the first sense coil are located within a first quadrant defined by two perpendicular lines, crossing at the axis, in a plane of the one or more planes (see above figure); and the second excitation coil portion and the second set of sine lobes of the first sense coil are located within a third quadrant defined by the two perpendicular lines, the third quadrant opposite the first quadrant (see above figure / note the entire excitation coil is within all quadrants, and the third and first quadrant can be defined in the same way as applicant).
As to Claim 5,
Ely discloses wherein respective ones of the first excitation coil portion and the second excitation coil portion comprises: an inner-circumferential portion defining a respective arc of a first circle centered at the axis (see above figures); an outer-circumferential portion defining a respective arc of a second circle centered at the axis (see above figures), the second circle larger than the first circle (see above figures); and radial portions between respective ends of the inner-circumferential portion and the outer-circumferential portion (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134] / note the claimed radial portions must be present to connect the inner and outer portions of the excitation coil 23).
As to Claim 6,
PNG
media_image8.png
532
536
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses: a second sense coil (cosine coil 25-3) on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis, the second sense coil to carry a second sense signal induced by the excitation signal (Paragraph [0137]), (see above figures), (Paragraph [0133] / note the sine coil is formed in the same way as the cosine coil), comprising a first set of cosine lobes including a first cosine lobe at a third position relative to the axis (see above figures), the third position at the radial distance from the axis and adjacent to the first position of the first sine lobe of the first sense coil (see above figures), and a second set of cosine lobes including a second cosine lobe at a fourth position relative to the axis (see above figures), the fourth position at the radial distance from the axis and at the angular distance of substantially Θ from the third position (see above figures), and second connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect the first set of cosine lobes to the second set of cosine lobes (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134] (see above figures / note that the connecting traces transition to the lobes in an arcuate manner, an example of which is seen above).
As to Claim 7,
PNG
media_image9.png
644
637
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses wherein the first set of sine lobes includes a third sine lobe (see above figures) at a third position relative to the axis (see above figures), the third position at the radial distance from the axis (see above figure), and the second set of sine lobes includes a fourth sine lobe (see above figures) at a fourth position relative to the axis (see above figures), the fourth position at the radial distance from the axis, at an angular distance of substantially 180° from the first position, and at an angular distance of substantially Θ’ from the third position, where Θ’=180°±α / 2 (see above figures).
As to Claim 8,
Ely discloses the first sine lobe defines a respective clockwise path for the sense signal about a central axis of the first sine lobe (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134]); the second sine lobe defines a respective counter-clockwise path for the sense signal about a central axis of the second sine lobe (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134]); the third sine lobe defines a respective counter-clockwise path for the sense signal about a central axis of the third sine lobe (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134]); and the fourth sine lobe defines a respective clockwise path for the sense signal about a central axis of the fourth sine lobe (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134]).
As to Claim 9,
Ely discloses wherein a path defined for the sense signal to traverse, in order: the first sine lobe in a clockwise direction around a central axis of the first sine lobe; the third sine lobe in a counter-clockwise direction around a central axis of the third sine lobe; the fourth sine lobe in a clockwise direction around a central axis of the fourth sine lobe; and the second sine lobe in a counter-clockwise direction around a central axis of the second sine lobe (see above figures).
As to Claim 10,
Ely discloses the first sine lobe has a first shape that when rotated substantially 180° around the axis, is substantially the same as a fourth shape of the fourth sine lobe (see above figures), and the second sine lobe has a second shape that, when rotated substantially 180° around the axis, is substantially the same as a third shape of the third sine lobe (see above figures).
As to Claim 11,
PNG
media_image7.png
644
637
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses the excitation coil comprises a first excitation coil portion arranged to substantially surround the first set of sine lobes (see above figure), a second excitation coil portion arranged to substantially surround the second set of sine lobes (see above figure); a connecting trace segment extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect the first excitation portion to the second excitation portion (see above figure and note that the portions connected by the wiring of the excitation coil itself that extends from one portion to the next).
As to Claim 12
PNG
media_image10.png
644
637
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses wherein: the first excitation coil portion and the first set of sine lobes are located within a first quadrant defined by two perpendicular lines, crossing at the axis, in a plane of the one or more planes (see above figures); and the second excitation coil portion and the second set of sine lobes are located within a third quadrant defined by the two perpendicular lines (see above figures), the third quadrant opposite the first quadrant (see above figures).
As to Claim 13,
Ely discloses wherein the first excitation coil portion comprises: an inner-circumferential portion defining a respective arc of a first circle centered at the axis (see above figures); an outer-circumferential portion defining a respective arc of a second circle centered at the axis (see above figures); the second circle larger than the first circle (see above figures); and radial portions between respective ends of the inner-circumferential portion and the outer-circumferential portion (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134] / note the claimed radial portions must be present to connect the inner and outer portions of the excitation coil 23).
As to Claim 14,
PNG
media_image8.png
532
536
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses: a second sense coil (cosine coil 25-3) on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis, the second sense coil to carry a second sense signal induced by the excitation signal (Paragraph [0137]), (see above figures), (Paragraph [0133] / note the sine coil is formed in the same way as the cosine coil), comprising a first set of cosine lobes including a first cosine lobe at a fifth position relative to the axis (see above figures), the fifth position at the radial distance from the axis and adjacent to the first position of the first sine lobe of the first sense coil (see above figures), and a second set of cosine lobes including a second cosine lobe at a sixth position relative to the axis (see above figures), the sixth position at the radial distance from the axis and at the angular distance of substantially Θ from the fifth position (see above figures), and second connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect the first set of cosine lobes to the second set of cosine lobes (Paragraphs [0129]-[0134] (see above figures / note that the connecting traces transition to the lobes in an arcuate manner, an example of which is seen above).
As to Claim 15,
Ely discloses wherein the first set of cosine lobes includes a third cosine lobe (see above figures) at a seventh position relative to the axis (see above figures), the seventh position at the radial distance from the axis (see above figure), and the second set of cosine lobes includes a fourth cosine lobe (see above figures) at an eight position relative to the axis (see above figures), the eighth position at the radial distance from the axis, at an angular distance of substantially 180° from the first position, and at an angular distance of substantially Θ’ from the seventh position, where Θ’=180°±α / 2 (see above figures).
As to Claim 16,
Ely discloses wherein a target including multiple fins (10A,10B,10C), evenly radially spaced around the axis (Figure 9 / note the coils 10A-10C are evenly spaced),, the multiple fins defining gaps between respective fins of the multiple fins, a respective one of the gaps having a size that, when measured circumferentially around the axis, is substantially the same size as a size of the first sine lobe (Figure 9 / applicant does not define what would and would not be considered “substantially” the same size, and the gaps are being interpreted as being substantially the same size as a lobe).
As to Claim 17,
PNG
media_image11.png
512
536
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
553
758
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses the apparatus comprises a first inductive angular-position sensor comprising the first coil structure, the first coil structure including the excitation coil, the first sense coil, and the second sense coil, the excitation coil comprising a first excitation coil, the apparatus comprising: a second inductive angular-position sensor comprising: a second coil structure (a set of the coils for the sine and cosine coils that are shifted 45 or 90 degrees from the set selected for the first coil structure), the second coil structure positioned substantially 45° relative to the first coil structure (see above figures), (Figures 6a-f), a second excitation coil (23) on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis, the excitation coil to carry a respective excitation signal (Paragraph [0134]),(see above figures / note that while the same coil (23) is indicated, each of the sine and cosine coil have their own respective distinct portion of the excitation coil (23) wound around that respective coil, and thus it is reasonable consider the above distinct portion of the excitation coil as being a respective excitation coil); a third first sense coil (sine coil 25-4) on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure arranged about the axis, the third sense coil to carry a third sense signal induced by the second excitation signal (Figures 6b,6e), (Paragraphs [0133] / note the coil is formed from the “lobes” or sub coils seen in these figures), a first set of sine lobes including a first sine lobe at a ninth position relative to the axis, the ninth position at the radial distance from the axis, second set of sine lobes including a second sine lobe at a tenth position relative to the axis, the tenth position at the radial distance from the axis and at the angular distance of substantially Θ from the ninth position; the first set of sine lobes including a third sine lobe at an eleventh position relative to the axis, the eleventh position at the radial distance from the axis; and the second set of sine lobes including a fourth sine lobe at a twelfth position relative to the axis, the twelfth position at the radial distance from the axis, at an angular distance of substantially 180° from the ninth position, and at an angular distance of substantially Θ’ from the eleventh position, where Θ’ =180° a/2; and third connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect the first set of sine lobes to the second set of sine lobes; and a fourth sense coil on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure and arranged about the axis, the fourth sense coil to carry a fourth sense signal induced by the second excitation signal, the fourth sense coil comprising: a first set of cosine lobes including a first cosine lobe at a thirteenth position relative to the axis, the thirteenth position at the radial distance from the axis and adjacent to the ninth position of the first sine lobe of the first sense coil of the second coil structure; a second set of cosine lobes including a second cosine lobe at a fourteenth position relative to the axis, the fourteenth position at the radial distance from the axis and at the angular distance of substantially Θ from the thirteenth position; the first set of cosine lobes including a third cosine lobe at a fifteenth position relative to the axis, the fifteenth position at the radial distance from the axis; the second set of cosine lobes including a fourth cosine lobe at a sixteenth position relative to the axis, the sixteenth position at the radial distance from the axis, at an angular distance of substantially 180° from the thirteenth position, and at an angular distance of substantially O' from the fifteenth position, where O' = 180° + a / 2; and fourth connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect the first set of cosine lobes to the second set of cosine lobes (see above figures, and note that the coils of the second coil structure can be defined in the same way as has already been explained above regarding the first coil structure).
As to Claim 18,
Ely discloses the first excitation coil of the first coil structure comprises: a first excitation coil portion arranged to substantially surround the first set of sine lobs of the first sense coil and the first set of cosine lobes of the second sense coil, and a second excitation coil portion arranged to substantially surround the second set of sine lobes of the first sense coil and the second set of cosine lobes of the second sense coil; and the second excitation coil of the second coil structure comprises: a third excitation coil portion arranged to substantially surround the first set of sine lobes of the third sense coil and the first set of cosine lobes of the fourth sense coil; and a fourth excitation coil portion arranged to substantially surround the second set of sine lobes of the third sense coil and the second set of cosine lobes of the fourth sense coil (see above figures), (Figures 6a-6f / note that applicant is claiming a “portion” of the excitation coils, and such portions can be selected of the two disclosed excitation coils to meet this claim feature for the explained above excitation coils).
As to Claim 19,
PNG
media_image13.png
561
627
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image14.png
512
536
media_image14.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses the first excitation coil portion of the first coil structure is located within a first quadrant defined by two perpendicular lines, crossing at the axis, in a plane of the one or more planes (see above figure / note that the excitation coil is in all quadrants); the second excitation coil portion of the first coil structure is located within a third quadrant defined by the two perpendicular lines, the third quadrant adjacent the first quadrant (see above figures / note that all quadrants are located adjacent each other); the third excitation coil portion of the second coil structure is located within a second quadrant defined by the two perpendicular lines (see above figures), the second quadrant adjacent the first quadrant and the third quadrant (see above figures / note that all quadrants are located adjacent each other); and the fourth excitation coil of the second coil structure is located within a fourth quadrant defined by the two perpendicular lines, the fourth quadrant opposite the second quadrant (see above figures / note that all quadrants are located adjacent each other).
As to Claim 20,
Ely discloses wherein α = 60° (see above figures, note that the spacing between the coils (lobes) is 30 degrees, and thus α is 60°).
As to Claim 21,
PNG
media_image8.png
532
536
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
510
536
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
644
637
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
292
422
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses An apparatus comprising: a support structure (PCB 1) (Figure 6b), (Paragraph [134]), a coil structure (Sine 25-4 including traces 69-1,69-2) of an inductive angular-position sensor (Figures 6b-6e), (Paragraphs [0130]-[0135]), (see above figure), the coil structure comprising conductive traces on and/or in one or more planes of the support structure (Figures 6b-6e]), the coil structure arranged about an axis of rotation for a target (Figure 7), (Paragraph [0136] / note the center of rotation for the target is the center of the PCB 1 with the coils), the coil structure comprising: an excitation coil (23) to carry an excitation signal (Paragraph [0134]),(see above figures), the excitation coil comprising a first excitation coil portion and a second excitation coil portion (see above figures), the first excitation coil portion arranged along a first arc band section about the axis (see above figures), the second excitation coil portion arranged around a second arc band section (see above figures), the second arc band section opposite the first arc band section (see above figures); a first sense coil (69-2 of sine coil 25-4) to carry a first sense signal induced by the excitation signal (Figures 6b,6e), (Paragraph [0133] / note the coil is formed from the “lobes” or sub coils seen in these figures), the first sense coil comprising two or more sine lobes arranged in the first arc band section within the first excitation coil portion and two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion (see above figures and note that applicant claims “arc band sections” without any further claim limitation, and such sections can be defined as seen above that reasonably meet the claim requirements), the first sense coil including first connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more sine lobes arrange din the first arc band section to one of the two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section (see above figures / note that the connecting traces all have at least a portion that arcuately extends as claimed, and that there is no requirement that anything more than a portion of the trace extends in the claimed manner), (Paragraph [0133]), (Figures 6b,6e); and a second sense coil (65-1 of Cosine coil 25-3) to carry a second sense signal induced by the excitation signal (Paragraph [0132]), the second sense coil comprising two or more cosine lobes arranged in the first arc band section within the first excitation portion and two or more cosine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation portion (see above figures / note that when placed together, the cosine and sine coil lobes will be located in the claimed excitation portions in plan view (Figures 6a-6f), (Paragraphs [0129]- [0132] / note the sine coil is formed from lobes which are also located within the same excitation coil portions, as these same portions of the excitation coil are formed in all layers of the sense coil), the second sense coil including second connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more cosine lobes arranged in the first arc band section to one of the two or more cosine lobes arranged in the second arc band section (see above figures / note that the connecting traces all have at least a portion that arcuately extends as claimed, and that there is no requirement that anything more than a portion of the trace extends in the claimed manner), (Paragraph [0133]), (Figures 6a-6f);
As to Claim 22,
PNG
media_image15.png
512
536
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses wherein: the two or more sine lobes arranged in the first arc band section within the first excitation portion comprise: a first sine lobe at a first position relative to the axis, the first position at a radial distance from the axis (see above figures); and two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion comprise: a second sine lobe at a second position relative to the axis, the second position at the radial distance from the axis and at an angular distance substantially Θ from the first position, where Θ = 180°±α / 2, and α is a measurement range of angular-position sensing of the inductive angular-position sensor (Figure 6b / note the coils are spaced 30 degrees apart, and thus meet the claim requirements),(see above figures).
As to Claim 23,
PNG
media_image16.png
512
536
media_image16.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses wherein: the two or more sine lobes arranged in the first arc band section within the first excitation portion further comprise: a third sine lobe at a third position relative to the axis (see above figure), the third position at a radial distance from the axis (see above figures), and the two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the section excitation coil portion further comprise a fourth sine lobe at a fourth position relative to the axis (see above figure), the fourth position at the radial distance from the axis and at an angular distance of substantially Θ’ from the third position, where Θ’ = 180°±α / 2 (see above figure).
As to Claim 24,
PNG
media_image11.png
512
536
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Ely discloses the coil structure comprises a first coil structure (the Sine 25-4 coil), the inductive angular-position sensor comprises a first inductive angular-position sensor, the excitation coil comprises a first excitation coil, and the excitation signal comprises a first excitation signal (see above figures / note that applicant is merely renaming the same features already identified above, and thus applicant’s attention is directed to the above rejections of these features), the apparatus comprising: a second coil structure for a second inductive angular-position sensor, the second coil structure comprising conductive traces on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure (see above figure), (Paragraph [0132]), the second coil structure arranged about the (see above figure), (Figures 6a-6f,9), the second coil structure comprising: a second excitation coil (23) to carry a second excitation signal (Paragraphs [0132]-[0134]),(see above figures / note that while the same coil (23) is indicated, each of the sine and cosine coil have their own respective distinct portion of the excitation coil (23) wound around that respective coil, and thus it is reasonable consider the above distinct portion of the excitation coil as being a respective excitation coil); the second excitation coil comprising a third excitation coil portion and a fourth excitation coil portion (see above figure / note the third portion is the outer circumferential coil portion of the excitation coil for the Cosine coil, and the fourth portion is the inner circumferential portion of the excitation coil for the Cosine coil), the third excitation coil portion arranged along a third arc band section about the axis (see above figure), the fourth excitation coil portion arranged along a fourth arc band section about the axis (see above figure), the fourth arc band section opposite the third arc band section (see above figure); a third sense coil (69-1 of the Sine coil 25-4) to carry a third sense signal induced by the second excitation signal (Figure 6e), the third sense coil comprising two or more sine lobes arranged in the third arc section within the third excitation portion and two or more sine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion (Figure 6e), the third sense coil including third connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more sine lobes arranged in the third arc band section to one of the two or more sine lobes in the fourth arc band section (see above figures and note that the connecting segments have a least a portion that is arcuate as claimed), and a fourth sense coil (69-2 of the Cosine coil 25-3) to carry a fourth sense signal induced by the second excitation signal (Figure 6c), the fourth sense coil comprising two or more cosine lobes arranged in the third arc band section within the third excitation portion and two or more cosine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion (Figures 6a-f / note in plan view the coils are within the third and fourth coil excitation portions seen in Figures 6c or 6e, or the third and fourth coil portions can be considered the combination of the excitation coils from Figures 6c,6e), (Paragraphs [0132],[0133]), (see above figures and note that the connecting segments have a least a portion that is arcuate as claimed).
As to Claim 25,
Ely discloses the first sense coil and the second sense coil have no lobes arranged in the third arc band section within the third excitation coil portion nor in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion, and the third sense coil and the fourth sense coil have no lobes arranged in the first arc band section within the first excitation coil portion nor in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion. (Paragraphs [0132],[0133]),(see above figures / note that the coils are defined by the lobes, and the identified lobes for each coil are only found within the designated arcuate sections as claimed).
As to Claim 26,
PNG
media_image8.png
532
536
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
510
536
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
532
530
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image17.png
544
537
media_image17.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image18.png
532
534
media_image18.png
Greyscale
Note:
1) For brevity, the Examiner notes that Ely discloses Sine and Cosine coils formed from individual coils (lobes) around an axis of rotation, and that each Sine and Cosine coil is formed in plural layers as seen in Figures 6a-6f. The first coil structure of this claim is being defined to include two layers, one from the Sine Coil in Figure 6c, and one from the Cosine coil in Figure 6b. Similarly, the second coil structure is defined to include two layers, one from the Sine coil in Figure 6d, and one from the Cosine coil in Figure 6e.
One overall excitation coil (23) is disclosed, having distinct individual subcoils sections, one for each layer, as seen as the darkened outer and inner portions of the layers in Figures 6a-6f. As such, the first excitation coil is the combination of the subcoils for the excitation coil found in Figures 6b,6c, and the second excitation coil is the combination of the subcoils for the excitation found in Figures 6d,6e.
2) As seen above, for either the Sine or Cosine coils, the coils (lobes) must be spaced 30 degrees apart, because there are 12 total coils (lobes) evenly spaced around a full 360 degree circle as seen above, and 360 degrees / 12 = 30 degrees. As such, any adjacent coils (lobes) on either the Sine or Cosine coils must be spaced 30 degrees apart. Also note that the Sine and Cosine coils are identical coils but rotated 15 degrees relative to each other (Paragraph [0133]), and thus corresponding coils from the Sine coil and Cosine Coil are spaced 15 degrees apart.
Ely discloses An apparatus comprising: a support structure (PCB 1) (Paragraph [0129]); a first coil structure (layer containing traces 69-1 of Sine (25-4) in Figure 6c and layer containing traces 65-1 in Figure 6b of the Cosine (25-3) coils) of a first inductive angular-position sensor (Paragraphs [0132],[0133]), the first coil structure comprising conductive traces on and/or in one or more planes of the support structure (Paragraphs [0132],[0133]), the first coil structure arranged about an axis of rotation for a target (Figures 6b,6c / note the coils are arranged about an axis of rotation which is at the center of the structures shown in these figures), the first coil structure comprising: a first excitation coil (portion of 23 in layers Figures 6b,6c indicated by the dark outlined inner and outer segments in these features) to carry a first excitation signal (Paragraph [0134]), the first excitation coil comprising a first excitation coil portion (half of the excitation coil portions of (23) for layers of the sine and cosine coil seen in Figures 6b,6c) and a second excitation coil portion (the other half of the excitation coil portions of (23) for layers of the sine and cosine coil seen in Figures 6b,6c) (Paragraphs [0134],[0135]), the first excitation coil portion arranged along a first arc band section about the axis (see above figures), the second excitation coil portion arranged along a second arc band section about the axis (see above figures), the second arc band section opposite the first arc band section (see above figures / note that any section of the support structure can be selected as an “arc band section,” and the above two selected sections are arc band sections, and these sections from the two layers of the PCB are “adjacent” each other as they are directed above/below each other); a first sense coil (the sine coil 25-4 formed lobes 69-1 in Figure 6c) to carry a first sense signal induced by the first excitation signal (Paragraphs [0133],[0137]), the first sense coil comprising two or more sine lobes arranged within the first arc band section within the first excitation coil portion and two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion (see above figures / note any two of the individual coils (lobes) of the Sine coil in Figure 6c can be selected), a second sense coil (the cosine coil 25-3 formed from lobes 65-1 in Figure 6b) to carry a second sense signal induced by the first excitation signal (see above figures), the second sense coil comprising two or more cosine lobes arranged within the first arc band section within the first excitation coil portion and two or more cosine lobes arranged in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion (see above figures / note any two of the individual coils (lobes) of the Cosine coil in Figure 6b can be selected); a second coil structure (layer containing traces 69-2 of Sine (25-4) in Figure 6d and layer containing traces 65-2 in Figure 6e of the Cosine (25-3) coils) of a second inductive angular-position sensor (Paragraphs [0132],[0133]), the second coil structure comprising conductive traces on and/or in the one or more planes of the support structure (Paragraphs [0132],[0133]), the second coil structure arranged about the (Figures 6d,6e / note all individual coils / lobes are arranged around the central axis of rotation), the second coil structure comprising: a second excitation coil (portion of 23 in layers Figures 6d,6e indicated by the dark outlined inner and outer segments in these features) to carry a second excitation signal (Paragraph [0134]), the second excitation coil comprising a third excitation coil portion (half of the excitation coil portions of (23) for layers of the sine and cosine coil seen in Figures 6d,6e) and a fourth excitation coil portion (the other half of the excitation coil portions of (23) for layers of the sine and cosine coil seen in Figures 6d,6e), the third excitation coil portion arranged along a third arc band section about the axis (see above figures / note the same type of arc band section shown above can also be selected for Figures 6d,6e, and the half of the coil portion (23) can be selected to include at least part of this arcuate section), the fourth excitation coil portion arranged along a fourth arc band section about the axis (see above figures / note the same type of arc band section shown above can also be selected for Figures 6d,6e, and the half of the coil portion (23) can be selected to include at least part of this arcuate section), the fourth arc band section opposite the third arc band section (see above figures / note that any section of the support structure can be selected as an “arc band section,” and the above two selected sections are arc band sections, and these sections from the two layers of the PCB are “adjacent” each other as they are directed above/below each other); a third sense coil (the sine coil 25-4 formed lobes 69-2 in Figure 6d) to carry a third sense signal induced by the second excitation signal (Paragraphs [0133],[0137]), the third sense coil comprising two or more sine lobes arranged within the third arc band section within the third excitation coil portion and two or more sine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion (see above figures / note two lobes of the lobes of the Sine coil in Figure 6d can be selected to be within the third and fourth excitation portion) ; and a fourth sense coil (the cosine coil 25-3 formed lobes 65-2 in Figure 6e) to carry a fourth sense signal induced by the second excitation signal, the fourth sense coil comprising two or more cosine lobes arranged within the third arc band section within the third excitation coil portion and two or more cosine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion (see above figures / note two lobes of the lobes of the cosine coil in Figure 6e can be selected to be within the third and fourth excitation portion), wherein the first sense coil and the second sense coil of the first coil structure have no lobes arranged in the third arc band section within the third excitation coil portion nor in the fourth arc band section within the fourth excitation coil portion, and wherein the third sense coil and the fourth sense coil of the second coil structure have no lobes arranged in the first arc band section within the first excitation coil portion nor in the second arc band section within the second excitation coil portion (Paragraphs [0132],[0133]),(see above figures / note that the coils are defined by the lobes, and the identified lobes for each coil are only found within the designated arcuate sections as claimed).
As to Claim 27,
Ely discloses wherein, in respective ones of the first arc band section, the second arc band section, the third arc band section, and the fourth arc band section, the two or more sine lobes arranged therein alternate with the two or more cosine lobes arranged therein (Figures 6a-6f / note that in plan view, the combination of the layers is such that the sine and cosine coil lobes will alternate as claimed).
As to Claim 28,
Ely discloses wherein: the first sense coil includes first connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more sine lobes arranged in the first arc band section to one of the two or more sine lobes arranged in the second arc band section, the second sense coil includes second connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more cosine lobes arranged in the first arc band section to one of the two or more cosine lobes arranged in the second arc band section, the third sense coil includes third connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more sine lobes arranged in the third arc band section to one of the two or more sine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section, and the fourth sense coil includes fourth connecting trace segments extending in a circumferential arc about the axis to connect one of the two or more cosine lobes arranged in the third arc band section to one of the two or more cosine lobes arranged in the fourth arc band section (see above figures and note that as explained above, the connecting traces for the lobes have at least a portion that extends in the claimed arcuate manner).
As to Claim 29,
Ely discloses the first inductive angular-position sensor and the second inductive angular-position sensor are redundant sensors (Figures 6a-6f / note that no specific new limitation is claimed, and any claimed redundancy must be provided by the claimed structure, and that 1) since the prior art reasonably discloses the claim structure, it must reasonably be considered a redundant sensor, and 2) similar to applicant, the lobes provide a level of redundancy and thus reasonably meet this claim requirement).
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 DAVID M. SCHINDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2112. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
DAVID M. SCHINDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2858
/DAVID M SCHINDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights