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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-8, 11, 12, 14-17, 21-23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 34, 35 and 37-41 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the limitation “the sensor magnet” in lines 4, 5, 7, 10, 11 and 12. This limitation is referring back to the original limitation “a rotatable bipolar sensor magnet” in line 3. The naming of the limitations used throughout the claims have to be consistent, thus the other limitations referring back to the original limitation should be amended to be “the rotatable bipolar sensor magnet”. Other claims have been identified that contain the limitation requiring correction. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: This claim recites the limitation “the magnetic flux sensor” in line 8. This limitation appears to be referring back to the original limitation “a magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor” found in line 2. The naming of the limitations has to be consistent throughout the claims, thus the limitation of line 8 should be amended to “the magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 25 is objected to because of the following informalities: This claim recites the limitation “bearing arrangement” in line 1. This limitation is missing an “a” before the limitation and should be amended to “a bearing arrangement”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 39 is objected to because of the following informalities: This claim recites the limitation “the magnetic sensor” in line 1. This limitation appears to be referring back to the original limitation “a magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor” found in claim 1 line 2. The naming of the limitations has to be consistent throughout the claims, thus the limitation of claim 39 should be amended to “the magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 41 is objected to because of the following informalities: This claim recites the limitation “the sensor” in line 1 and “magnetic sensor” in line 5. These limitations appear to be referring back to the original limitation “a magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor” found in claim 1 line 2. The naming of the limitations has to be consistent throughout the claims, thus the limitations of claim 41 should be amended to “the magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor”. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20, 22, 23 and 29-41 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims (8 and 42), 11, 11, 15, 11, 37, 19, 19, 32, 12, (16 and 17), 41, (24 and 32), 41, 15, 28, 29, 30, 30, 30, 8, 8, (8 and 9), (8 and 15), 28, 28, 28, (8 and 15), 25, 12, 20, (20 and 21), 9, 10 and (11 and 40) of U.S. Patent No. 11846529, respectively. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of claims cover similar subject matter.
Both independent claims’ features of the instant application and the co-pending application can be compared as:
Claim 1 of the Instant Application
Claims 8 and 42 of Patent 11846529
A magnetic encoder comprising: (a) a magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor; (b) a rotatable bipolar sensor magnet having a first magnetic field sensible by the magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor, the sensor magnet having a pair of spaced apart ends and an axis of rotation,
(Claim 8)
A linear magnetic position sensing system comprised of: (a) a linear position sensor comprising: (1) a rotatable sensor magnet having (i) an axis of rotation extending between opposite ends of the sensor magnet, and (ii) a magnetic field emanating therefrom; (2) a magnetic sensor having a sensing region disposed adjacent one end of the sensor magnet and configured for sensing changes in magnetic flux of the magnetic field emanating from the sensor magnet during rotation of the sensor magnet and providing an output indicative of at least one of an angle of rotation of the sensor magnet and rotations of the sensor magnet relative thereto;
the sensor magnet disposed along or on one side of the axis of rotation and disposed along or on the other side of the axis of rotation of the sensor magnet, the sensor magnet oriented with one axial end facing toward the magnetic flux sensor;
(Claim 8)
(1) a rotatable sensor magnet having (i) an axis of rotation extending between opposite ends of the sensor magnet, and (2) a magnetic sensor having a sensing region disposed adjacent one end of the sensor magnet and configured for sensing changes in magnetic flux of the magnetic field emanating from the sensor magnet during rotation of the sensor magnet and providing an output indicative of at least one of an angle of rotation of the sensor magnet and rotations of the sensor magnet relative thereto;
and wherein a second magnetic field extending between a pair of spaced apart position magnets is configured to interact with the first magnetic field of the sensor magnet and rotate the sensor magnet in response to relative movement between one of the sensor magnet and the position magnets relative to the other one of the sensor magnet and the position magnets.
(Claim 8)
and (b) a pair of spaced apart position magnets having a magnetic field emanating therebetween that operably magnetically cooperates with the magnetic field emanating from the sensor magnet that rotates the sensor magnet during movement of the sensor magnet generally linearly relative to the position magnets from at or adjacent one of the position magnets toward the other one of the position magnets.
the sensor magnet having a North Pole disposed along or on one side of the axis of rotation and a South Pole disposed along or on the other side of the axis of rotation of the sensor magnet.
(Claim 42)
wherein the sensor magnet comprises a disc or cylinder having a center defining a center axis about which the sensor magnet is configured to rotate, the sensor magnet having a North magnetic pole extending in an axial direction relative thereto along one portion thereof and having a South magnetic pole extending in an axial direction relative thereto along another portion thereof.
Regarding claim 2, see claim 11 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 3, see claim 11 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 4, see claim 15 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 5, see claim 11 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 6, see claim 37 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 7, see claim 19 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 8, see claim 19 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 9, see claim 32 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 10, see claim 12 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 11, see claims 16 and 17 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 12, see claim 41 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 13, see claims 24 and 32 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 14, see claim 41 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 15, see claim 15 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 16, see claim 28 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 17, see claim 29 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 18, see claim 30 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 19, see claim 30 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 20, see claim 30 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 22, see claim 8 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 23, see claim 8 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 29, see claims 8 and 9 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 30, see claims 8 and 15 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 31, see claim 28 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 32, see claim 28 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 33, see claim 28 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 34, see claims 8 and 15 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 35, see claim 25 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 36, see claim 12 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 37, see claim 20 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 38, see claims 20 and 21 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 39, see claim 9 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 40, see claim 10 of Patent 11846529.
Regarding claim 41, see claims 11 and 40 of Patent 11846529.
Claims 21 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11846529 in view of Siraky US2011/0192045.
Regarding claim 21, Patent 11846529 claims the magnetic encoder of claim 9, but fails to claim wherein the magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor and the sensor magnet comprise a position read head.
Siraky teaches wherein the magnetic field or magnetic flux sensor and the sensor magnet comprise a position read head (para [0004 and 0015]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the structure as described by Patent 11846529 with the reading head as described by Siraky for the purpose of allowing absolute value determination of lengths and of angles while carrying out different compensations and calibrations.
Claims 24 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4 of U.S. Patent No. 11846529 in view of Siraky.
Regarding claim 24, Patent 11846529 claims the magnetic encoder of claim 4, but fails to claim further comprising a housing and onboard electronics.
Siraky teaches a housing and onboard electronics (Figs. 2 and 3; housing covering control unit 30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the structure as described by Patent 11846529 with the housing and electronics as described by Siraky for the purpose of protecting the electronics from external environments while allowing absolute value determination of lengths and of angles.
Claims 25 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4 and 24 of U.S. Patent No. 11846529, in view of Siraky and further in view of Hunger US2011/0187351.
Regarding claim 25, Patent 11846529 and Siraky teaches the magnetic encoder of claim 24, but fails to teach further comprising bearing arrangement configured to rotationally support freewheeling rotation of the sensor magnet.
Hunger teaches bearing arrangement configured to rotationally support freewheeling rotation of the sensor magnet (para [0014]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the structure as described by Patent 11846529 and Siraky with the magnet mounted via a bearing as described by Hunger for the purpose of allowing the magnet to rotate around a rotation axis relative to the sensor system to allow the sensor to detect the changing magnetic field to detect an angle of an object.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-28 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 26, the prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest:
“further comprising a housing and a pair of bearings rotatively supporting the sensor magnet for rotation about the axis of rotation of the sensor magnet, and wherein one of the bearings is disposed at one axial end of the sensor magnet and the other one of the bearings is disposed at an opposite axial end of the sensor magnet.”
Claims 27 and 28 are indicated as allowable subject matter for depending on claim 26.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Etherington et al. discloses “Combination Hall effect position sensor and switch” (see 2005/0134257)
Parakka discloses “High resolution absolute orientation rotary magnetic encoder” (se 2012/0217956)
Matsumoto et al. discloses “Stroke amount detecting device” (see 2011/0248705)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID B FREDERIKSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8152. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am - 5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Phan can be reached at (571)272-7924. 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 B FREDERIKSEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/HUY Q PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858