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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
In claim 23, line 6, the phrase -- of the -- should be inserted after the phrase “proof mass”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8 and 9 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.
In claim 8, lines 1-2, the phrase “the output of the second sensor boot strap the second sensor” is not clearly understood. How is/does the output “boot strap” the second sensor? Please clarify since there is no description of such limitation/feature in the specification. And, the phrase “the output” lacks antecedent basis and indefinite since there is no “the output” for the second sensor.
In claim 9, lines 1-2, the phrase “the output” lacks antecedent basis and indefinite since there is no “the output” for the first sensor. In line 2, the phrase “the output” lacks antecedent basis and indefinite since there is no “the output” for the second sensor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0191714 (Masuda et al.).
With regards to claim 24, Masuda et al. discloses a capacitive physical quantity detection device comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-9, a method comprising receiving an external excitation Vdd (e.g. voltages; paragraph [0021]) at a MEMS device (e.g. the system illustrated in Figures 1-2) comprising a first sensor 100 (e.g. acceleration sensor; paragraph [0019]) and a second sensor 200 (e.g. acceleration sensor; paragraph [0019]) such that the first sensor is configured to output a first signal in response to the external excitation, and the second sensor is configured to output a second signal in response to the external excitation; generating a third signal (e.g. “OUTPUT” in Figure 3) from a signal (e.g. OUT1; Figures 2,4) based on the first signal and a signal (e.g. OUT2; Figures 2,4) based on the second signal; the third signal includes the first signal when the external excitation is between a first frequency and a second frequency (e.g. lowpass filter 151 extract signal components with a predetermined frequency range; paragraph [0025]; Figure 2) and the third signal includes the second signal when the external excitation is between a third frequency and a fourth frequency (e.g. lowpass filter 251 extract signal components with a predetermined frequency range; paragraph [0025]; Figure 2). (See, paragraphs [0019] to [0058]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-14 and 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0191714 (Masuda et al.) in view of either U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0347605 (Thompson et al.).
With regards to claim 1, Masuda et al. discloses a capacitive physical quantity detection device comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-9, a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) device (e.g. the system illustrated in Figure 1) comprising a first sensor 100 (e.g. acceleration sensor; paragraph [0019]) configured to output a first signal; a second sensor 200 (e.g. acceleration sensor; paragraph [0019]) configured to output a second signal such that the first and the second sensors are configured to receive an external excitation Vdd (e.g. voltages; paragraph [0021]) to generate the first and the second signals, respectively; processing circuitry 120,220,150,250,300 (e.g. detection circuits, signal processing circuits and control circuit; paragraphs [0022],[0041]) that receives a signal (e.g. OUT1; Figures 2,4) based on the first signal and a signal (e.g. OUT2; Figures 2,4) based on the second signal and outputs a third signal (e.g. “OUTPUT” in Figure 3) in response to the external excitation such that the third signal includes the first signal within a first frequency range between a first frequency and a second frequency (e.g. lowpass filter 151 extract signal components with a predetermined frequency range; paragraph [0025]; Figure 2), and the third signal includes the second signal in a second frequency range between a third frequency and a fourth frequency (e.g. lowpass filter 251 extract signal components with a predetermined frequency range; paragraph [0025]; Figure 2). (See, paragraphs [0019] to [0058]).
The only difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is the first frequency is less than the second, the third, and the fourth frequencies, and the fourth frequency is greater than the first, the second, and the third frequencies.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing the first frequency is less than the second, the third, and the fourth frequencies, and the fourth frequency is greater than the first, the second, and the third frequencies is considered to have been a matter of choice possibilities to the operator and/or manufacturer the desired frequencies for the frequency range to provide coverage for the entire sensitivity range of the particular sensors from a low for each frequency over a range of frequencies less than or greater than the resonance frequency of the particular sensors without departing from the scope of the invention, namely to detect acceleration within a range of frequencies.
With regards to claim 2, Masuda et al. does not disclose the first signal is output based upon a variation of a charge associated with the first sensor.
Thompson et al. discloses MEMS sensors comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-6, a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) device 100 (e.g. MEMS sensor system; paragraph [0029]) comprising a first sensor 132 (e.g. MEMS sensor; paragraph [0031]) configured to output a first signal; a second sensor 134 (e.g. MEMS sensor; paragraph [0033]) configured to output a second signal such that the first and the second sensors are configured to receive an external excitation 115 (e.g. charge pump; paragraphs [0030],[0031]) to generate the first and the second signals, respectively; the first signal is output based upon a variation of a charge 125 (e.g. AC drive signal; paragraph [0032]) associated with the first sensor 132. (See, paragraphs [] to []).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing the first signal is output based upon a variation of a charge associated with the first sensor as suggested by Thompson et al. to the system of Masuda et al. to have the ability to determine how to improve the sensitivity of the sensors. (See, paragraph [0027] of Thompson et al.).
With regards to claim 3, Thompson et al. further discloses the variation of the charge is based on a movement of the first sensor where a voltage source signal 125 (e.g. AC drive signal; paragraph [0032]) is provided to the first sensor 132.
With regards to claim 4, Thompson et al. further discloses the voltage source signal is AC (e.g. AC drive signal; paragraph [0032]) and is configured to AC modulate the first signal.
With regards to claim 5, Masuda et al. further discloses the second signal is output based upon a variation of a voltage Vdd (e.g. voltages; paragraph [0021]) associated with the second sensor 200.
With regards to claim 6, Masuda et al. further discloses the variation of the voltage is based on a movement of the second sensor where a DC voltage source signal Vdd (e.g. observed in Figure 2, a pulsewave that goes from zero to a positive value and back to zero is unipolar and is a pulsed DC voltage source; paragraph [0021]) is provided to the second sensor 200.
With regards to claim 7, Masuda et al. further discloses the second sensor has constant charge Vdd (e.g. observed in Figure 2, a pulsewave that goes from zero to a positive value and back to zero is unipolar and is a pulsed DC voltage source providing a constant charge; paragraph [0021]).
With regards to claim 8, Masuda et al, as best understood, further discloses a buffer 230 (e.g. C-V conversion circuits; paragraph [0022]) coupled to the output of the second sensor boot strap the second sensor.
With regards to claim 9, Masuda et al. further discloses a first amplifier 152 (e.g. GAIN circuit amplifies signals from LPF 152; paragraph [0025]) coupled to the output of the first sensor 100 and a second amplifier 252 (e.g. GAIN circuit amplifies signals from LPF 251; paragraph [0025]) coupled to the output of the second sensor 200 such that a first input to the first amplifier and a second input to the second amplifier are both low impedance inputs.
With regards to claim 10, Masuda et al. further discloses the second sensor 200 further comprises a proof mass 211,212 (e.g. movable electrodes; paragraph [0020]) that translates in response to the external excitation.
With regards to claim 11, Thompson et al. further discloses the second sensor 134 further comprises a proof mass 610 (e.g. mass; paragraph [0071]) that rotates in response to the external excitation.
With regards to claim 12, Thompson et al. further discloses the third frequency and the fourth frequency define an audio frequency range (e.g. less than 30kHz; paragraph [0025]).
With regards to claim 13, Thompson et al. further discloses the audio frequency range is below 20 kHz (e.g. less than 30kHz; paragraph [0025]).
With regards to claim 14, Thompson et al. further discloses the audio frequency range is below 3.5 kHz (e.g. less than 30kHz; paragraph [0025]).
With regards to claim 19, Thompson et al. further discloses the second sensor 134 is configured to increase a sensitivity of the second sensor in response to a bias voltage 131 (e.g. low voltage bias; paragraph [0035]) such that the increase in the sensitivity of the second sensor lowers an effective spring rate of the second sensor (e.g. paragraphs [0027],[0066]).
With regards to claim 20, Masuda et al. further discloses the processing circuitry comprises a combining circuitry 300 (e.g. control circuit; paragraph [0041]; Figure 4); however, the reference does not disclose a first analog- to-digital converter (ADC) and a second analog-to-digital converter (ADC). To have employ a first ADC and a second ADC in the processing circuitry is considered a matter of choice possibilities, in this day and age, to provide digital outputs, and a well-known concept (e.g. as evidenced by U.S. Patent Application 2020/0264210 issued to Dakshinamurthy) that would have been obvious to a skilled artisan in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention without departing from the scope of the invention.
With regards to claim 21, Masuda et al. further discloses the first sensor 100 and the second sensor 200 each comprise an accelerometer (e.g. acceleration sensor; paragraph [0019]).
With regards to claim 22, Thompson et al. further discloses the first sensor 132 and the second sensor 134 each include a common sensor type of a barometer, a microphone, a magnetometer, or a gyroscope (e.g. paragraphs [0031],[0033]).
With regards to claim 23, the claim is commensurate in scope with claims 1,2,5 and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth above.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2008/0191714 (Masuda et al.) in view of either U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0347605 (Thompson et al.), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0161377 (Rakkola et al.).
With regards to claim 15, Masuda et al. further discloses an amplifier 252 (e.g. GAIN circuit amplifies signals from LPF 251; paragraph [0025]) coupled to the second sensor 200.
The only difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is a high-pass filter with a low frequency comer coupled between the second sensor and the amplifier.
Rakkola et al. discloses an acceleration measurement system comprising, as illustrated in Figures 1-5, a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) device 200 (e.g. the system; paragraph [0041]) comprising a first sensor 205 (e.g. capacitive acceleration sensor for x-axis; paragraph [0041]) configured to output a first signal 210 (e.g. x-axis output; paragraph [0041]); a second sensor 205 (e.g. capacitive acceleration sensor for y-axis; paragraph [0041]) configured to output a second signal 210 (e.g. y-axis output; paragraph [0041]); processing circuitry 215 (e.g. signal processing ASIC; paragraph [0041]) that receives the first signal and the second signal and outputs a third signal; a high-pass filter with a low frequency comer 250 (e.g. full accuracy digital signal processor; paragraphs [0041],[0020]) coupled between the second sensor and the amplifier. (See, paragraphs [0014] to [0045]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have readily recognize the advantages and desirability of employing a high-pass filter with a low frequency comer coupled between the second sensor and the amplifier as suggested by Rakkola et al. to the system of Masuda et al., as modified by Thompson et al., to have the ability to offset drift problems, like temperature drift, from the signal outputted from the second sensor. (See, paragraph [0020] of Rakkola et al.).
With regards to claim 16, Rakkola does not explicitly specify such parameter (the low frequency corner is less than 60 Hz) as in the claim. However, to have set such test characteristics as in the claim is considered to have been a matter of optimization and choice possibilities that would have been obvious to a skilled artisan in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention without departing from the scope of the invention.
With regards to claim 17, Masuda et al. does not explicitly specify an output of the amplifier 252 feeds back to the second sensor; however, the concept of having the amplifier’s output fed back to the sensor is a well-known concept (e.g. as evidenced by U.S. Patent Application 2020/0264210 issued to Dakshinamurthy) to a skilled artisan in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention without departing from the scope of the invention.
With regards to claim 18, Masuda et al. further discloses the second sensor 200 is configured to maintain a constant charge (e.g. observed in Figure 2, a pulsewave that goes from zero to a positive value and back to zero is unipolar and is a pulsed DC voltage source; paragraph [0021]) based upon a variable voltage Vdd (e.g. voltages; paragraph [0021]) provided from the amplifier to the second sensor such that the variable voltage corresponds to the signal based on the second signal.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The references cited, particularly Hughes, Smith, Murakami, Li, Hayakawa and Itakura, are related to MEMS system comprising at least one sensor driving by an external excitation where the sensor has a range of frequencies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Helen C Kwok whose telephone number is (571)272-2197. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 7:30 to 4:00 EST.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/HELEN C KWOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855