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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over US 20100037692 to Dube.
Regarding Claim 1, Dube discloses a micro-structured inertial measurement sensor (IMS) (Figs. 5-9, inertial sensor including three axis vibratory gyroscope and three axis linear accelerometer, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]) comprising: a peripheral frame (Figs. 5-9, frame, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]); one or more mechanical elements supported at least partly by the peripheral frame, wherein the one or more mechanical elements are planar in structure, at least partly piezoelectric (Figs. 5-9, each piezo accelerometer/gyro with vibrating beam a1, a connection arm c1 attached to the sensor frame by a pivot p1, a proof mass m1 and a torsion beam, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]); and configured to generate movement indicative of rate of rotation and of acceleration (Figs. 5-9, three axis vibratory gyroscope and three axis linear accelerometer with vibratory movement from the driving tines d1, d2, d3 and d4, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0066]-[0084]); and one or more sensing elements configured to generate a plurality of signals indicative of the rate of rotation and of the acceleration (Figs. 5-9, three axis vibratory gyroscope and three axis linear accelerometer with vibratory movement sensed in detection tines s1 to s6, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0066]-[0084]).
Regarding Claim 2, Dube discloses the one or more mechanical elements comprise one or more suspension arms and are configured to generate movement in three orthogonal axes for each of the rate of rotation and the acceleration (Figs. 5-9, three axis vibratory gyroscope and three axis linear accelerometer with each piezo accelerometer/gyro having vibrating beam a1, a connection arm c1 attached to sensor frame by pivot p1, proof mass m1 and torsion beam, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]); and wherein the one or more sensing elements are configured to generate the plurality of signals indicative of the rate of rotation and indicative of linear acceleration (Figs. 5-9, three axis vibratory gyroscope and three axis linear accelerometer with vibratory movement sensed in detection tines s1 to s6, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0066]-[0084]).
Regarding Claim 12, Dube discloses the one or more mechanical elements comprise an accelerometer function that is configured to use one or more drive resonators in a push-pull arrangement along an X or Y axis (Figs. 5-9, three axis linear accelerometer with two identical assemblies arranged so that an input acceleration places one beam in tension and one beam in compression (push-pull), ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0066]-[0087]).
Regarding Claim 13, Dube discloses one or more drive resonators comprise a first drive resonator and a second drive resonator are disposed on each side of a center hinge (Figs. 5-9, three axis vibratory gyroscope and three axis linear accelerometer with independent connection bars hinged by connection arms, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0066]-[0087]); and wherein the first drive resonator is configured to input a 180° shifted drive signal compared to that input to the second drive resonator (Figs. 5-9, three axis vibratory gyroscope and three axis linear accelerometer with two identical assemblies arranged so that an input acceleration places one beam in tension and one beam in compression (push-pull), i.e., with 180° shifted drive signal, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0047], [0066]-[0087]).
Regarding Claim 14, Dube discloses for an axis along X or Y, frequency shift between the first drive resonator and the second drive resonator disposed on each side of a center hinge is proportional to the acceleration along the axis (Figs. 4-9, three axis linear accelerometer with independent connection bars hinged by connection arms with accelerometer function along sensitive axes X and Y determined by the frequency changes of two opposite vibrating beam accelerometers, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0066]-[0087]).
Regarding Claim 15, Dube discloses the accelerometer function is configured to use the one or more drive resonators in a push-pull arrangement along a Z axis (Figs. 5-9, three axis linear accelerometer with two identical assemblies arranged so that an input acceleration places one beam in tension and one beam in compression (push-pull), i.e., with 180° shifted drive signal, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0047], [0066]-[0087]).
Regarding Claim 16, Dube discloses a difference between a sum of frequencies from one or more top resonators compared to a sum of frequencies from one or more bottom resonators is proportional to the acceleration along the Z axis (Figs. 4-9 and 12-13, three axis linear accelerometer with accelerometer function along Z axis obtained from shear strains in torsion bar when sensor is accelerated along the Z axis determined by the frequency changes of two opposite vibrating beam accelerometers, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0054], [0066]-[0087]).
Regarding Claim 17, Dube discloses the one or more mechanical elements comprise a gyroscope function that is configured to use one or more in-plane drive resonators that generate out-of-plane inertial energy for a non-resonant sensing function when a rotation occurs around an X or Y axis (Figs. 5-9, three axis vibratory gyroscope detecting out-of-plane and in-plane vibrations, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0055], [0066]-[0087]).
Regarding Claim 18, Dube discloses the gyroscope function is configured to use a plurality of the in-plane drive resonators that generate in-plane inertial energy for a non-resonant sensing function when a rotation occurs around a Z axis (Figs. 5-9, three axis vibratory gyroscope detecting out-of-plane and in-plane vibrations, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0055], [0066]-[0087]).
Claim(s) 3-4, 9-11 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dube as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of US 20110270569 to Stephanou.
Regarding Claim 3, Dube discloses the IMS of claim 2, and further discloses the one or more mechanical elements comprise piezoelectric material of the one or more mechanical elements (Figs. 5-9, each piezo accelerometer/gyro with vibrating beam a1; ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]). However, Dube does not disclose sputtered piezoelectric material on a surface of the one or more mechanical elements. Stephanou discloses sputtered piezoelectric material on a surface of the one or more mechanical elements (¶ [0208]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the application to modify the invention of Dube by providing sputtered piezoelectric material on a surface of the one or more mechanical elements as in Stephanou in order to provide for a well-known alternative for providing a piezo functionality to a MEMs device. See, e.g., "substitution of art-recognized equivalents" as discussed in MPEP 2144.06II "An express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982)."
Regarding Claim 4, Dube discloses the one or more mechanical elements comprise a plurality of monolithic orthogonal structures comprising one or more gyroscopes and one or more accelerometers that are manufactured in combination and that are suspended by the peripheral frame (Figs. 5-9, each piezo accelerometer/gyro with vibrating beam a1, a connection arm c1 attached to the sensor frame by a pivot p1, a proof mass m1 and a torsion beam, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]);.
Regarding Claim 9, Dube discloses at least one processor configured to analyze at least one aspect of frequency for the plurality of signals in order to determine the rate of rotation and the acceleration.(Figs. 5-9 and 13, detection circuitry for amplitude and frequency changes; ¶¶ [0014], [0038], [0066]-[0068], [0050]-[0059], [0069], [0083]-[0092]).
Regarding Claim 10, Dube discloses the at least one processor is configured to: analyze amplitude of the frequency of one or more of the plurality of signals in order to determine the rate of rotation.(Figs. 5-9 and 13, detection circuitry for amplitude and frequency changes; ¶¶ [0014], [0038], [0066]-[0068], [0050]-[0059], [0069], [0083]-[0092]); and analyze the frequency of other of the plurality of signals in order to determine the acceleration.(Figs. 5-9 and 13, detection circuitry for amplitude and frequency changes; ¶¶ [0014], [0038], [0066]-[0068], [0050]-[0059], [0069], [0083]-[0092]).
Regarding Claim 11, Dube discloses the one or more sensing elements comprise analog circuitry (Figs. 5-9 and 13, detection circuitry with wired connections (analog) to pads for amplitude and frequency changes; ¶¶ [0014], [0038], [0066]-[0068], [0050]-[0059], [0069], [0083]-[0092]).configured to: generate an analog electric signal that is proportional to the amplitude of the frequency of the one or more of the plurality of signals.(Figs. 5-9 and 13, detection circuitry with wired connection (analog) to pads for amplitude and frequency changes; ¶¶ [0014], [0038], [0066]-[0068], [0050]-[0059], [0069], [0083]-[0092]); and generate an analog electric signal that is proportional to the frequency shift of the other of the plurality of signals.(Figs. 5-9 and 13, detection circuitry with wired connections (analog) to pads for amplitude and frequency changes; ¶¶ [0014], [0038], [0066]-[0068], [0050]-[0059], [0069], [0083]-[0092]); wherein the at least one processor is configured to analyze the analog electric signal that is proportional to the amplitude of the frequency of the one or more of the plurality of signals in order to determine the rate of rotation.(Figs. 5-9 and 13, detection circuitry with wired connections (analog) to pads for amplitude and frequency changes; ¶¶ [0014], [0038], [0066]-[0068], [0050]-[0059], [0069], [0083]-[0092]); and wherein the at least one processor is configured to analyze the analog electric signal that is proportional to the frequency shift of the other of the plurality of signals in order to determine the acceleration.(Figs. 5-9 and 13, detection circuitry with wired connections (analog) to pads for amplitude and frequency changes; ¶¶ [0014], [0038], [0066]-[0068], [0050]-[0059], [0069], [0083]-[0092]).
Regarding Claim 21, Dube discloses the IMS of claim 1, but is silent regarding a top cover and a bottom cover at wafer level that sandwiches the one or more mechanical elements; and wherein the top cover and the bottom cover are vacuum-sealed using two parallel and concurrent eutectic seals. Stephanou discloses a top cover and a bottom cover at wafer level that sandwiches the one or more mechanical elements; and wherein the top cover and the bottom cover are vacuum-sealed using two parallel and concurrent eutectic seals (Fig. 39, cover 3905 attached to seal ring areas 3620a and 3620b of substrate 3505 by eutectic bonding process ¶¶ [0271]-[0272], [0297]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the application to modify the invention of Dube by providing a top cover and a bottom cover at wafer level that sandwiches the one or more mechanical elements; and wherein the top cover and the bottom cover are vacuum-sealed using two parallel and concurrent eutectic seal as in Stephanou in order to provide for protection from damage.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dube in view of Stephanou as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of US 20190265034 to Kabasawa.
Regarding Claim 8, Dube discloses the IMS of claim 3, and further discloses the one or more mechanical elements comprise a first planar structure gyroscope and a second planar structure accelerometer (Figs. 5-9, inertial sensor including three axis vibratory gyroscope and three axis linear accelerometer, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]); wherein the first planar structure gyroscope is positioned at least partly on a first layer of the IMS (Figs. 5-9, inertial sensor including three axis vibratory gyroscope, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]); and wherein the second planar structure accelerometer is positioned at least partly on a second layer of the IMS (Figs. 5-9, inertial sensor including three axis linear accelerometer, ¶¶ [0032]-[0036], [0077]-[0084]). However, although Dube disclose top/bottom electrodes on different surfaces of the device, Dube does not explicitly disclose the second layer of the IMS being different than the first layer of the IMS. Kabasawa discloses the second layer of the IMS being different than the first layer of the IMS (Figs. 21-22, gyro sensor element 30 formed into frame surrounding weight portion 125 provided on back surface of the movable plate 120 (blade portions 121 to 124) of acceleration sensor element 10; ¶¶ [0245]-[0253]; Note also that Kabasawa discloses multiple analog circuit components with processor for gyro and accelerometers in Figs. 1 and 17, e.g.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the application to modify the invention of Dube by providing the second layer of the IMS being different than the first layer of the IMS as in Kabasawa in order to provide for reduced dimensions of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7, 19-20 and 22-23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J BOLDUC whose telephone number is (571)270-1602. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 10am-6pm.
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, Walter Lindsay, Jr. can be reached at (571) 272-1672. 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 J BOLDUC/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852