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 .
Restriction/Election
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-5, 9-10, 12-18 and 20-22 in the reply filed on February 5, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 23-25 are now withdrawn from consideration. The Examiner acknowledges the cancellation of claims 6-8, 11, 19 and 26-30 from the previous amendment. Claims 1-5, 9-10, 12-18 and 20-22 are now pending in the application.
Examination of Application
IDS
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 14, 2023 is being considered by the Examiner.
Drawing
The drawing filed on September 14, 2023 is accepted by the Examiner.
Specification
The 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.
Title
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Suggested title: “A method and system for determining a relative angular position a first part with respect to a second part”
Claim rejection – 35 U.S.C. §112
In reference to claims 1-5, 9-10, 12-18 and 20-22. The claims are generally narrative failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document. Claims 1 and 20 use hyphen and asterisk for indentation which does not conform with U.S. practice, see MPEP section 608.01(i), when a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. The remaining claims depend on their respective base claims and inherit the attributes of their base claims and/ or have similar issues. Further, the reference to drawing labels in claims should be avoided as the change or amendment to the drawing may affect the corresponding claim(s).
Claim rejection – 35 U.S.C. §101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
In reference to claims 1-5, 9-10, 12-18 and 20-22: the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., abstract idea) without significantly more.
The requirement for subject matter eligibility test for products and processes requires first, the claimed invention must be to one of the four statutory categories. 35
U.S.C. §101 defines the four categories of invention that Congress deemed to be the appropriate subject matter of a patent: processes, machines, manufactures and compositions of matter. The latter three categories define "things" or "products" while the first category defines "actions" (i.e., inventions that consist of a series of steps or acts to be performed).
Second, the claimed invention also must qualify as patent-eligible subject matter, i.e., the claim must not be directed to a judicial exception unless the claim as a whole includes additional limitations amounting to significantly more than the exception. The judicial exceptions (also called "judicially recognized exceptions" or simply "exceptions") are subject matter that the courts have found to be outside of, or exceptions to, the four statutory categories of invention, and are limited to abstract ideas, laws of nature and natural phenomena (including products of nature).
In the first step, it is to be determined whether the patent claim under examination is directed to an abstract idea. If so, in the second step of analysis, it is to be determined whether the patent adds to the idea "something more" or "significantly more" that embodies an "inventive concept."
In the instant case, claim 1 is representative and it is reproduced here with the limitations that are part of the abstract idea in bold:
A sensor system for determining a relative angular position (Q(t)) of a first part (14) with respect to a second part (16) about an axis of rotation (A), the system comprising:
a permanent magnet having a magnetized body (10) in the form of a tubular portion symmetrical about a main axis (A') of the magnetized body, the permanent magnet being:
such that the magnetized body has a permanent magnetization such that, for any point of the magnetized body on a given circle about the main axis, each point (P) of the magnetized body on this given circle (Crp) having an angular position defined by the angle (Θ(P)) formed, about the main axis (A') and with respect to a fixed reference axis (Xa) of the permanent magnet, by a particular radial segment (SRP) originating from the main axis (A') and passing through this point (P), the magnetization vector (M(P)) at a point (P) of the given circle (Crp) presents, in orthogonal projection on a plane perpendicular to the main axis (A'), a projected vector whose relative orientation (Φrp(Θ(P))) with respect to the particular radial segment (SRP) at this point (P) is a continuously variable function according to a law of variation of the relative orientation (Φrp(Θ(P))) as a function of the angular position (Θ(P)) of the point (P) of the magnetized body (10),
such that the law of variation of the relative orientation(Φrp(Θ(P))) of the magnetization vector (M(P)) is a periodic function presenting an even integer (Np) greater than or equal to 2 of angular periods (T) over the 360° of the magnetized body (10) about the main axis (A'),
and such that the law of variation of the relative orientation (Φrp(Θ(P))) of the magnetization vector (M(P)) implies a positive variation of the relative orientation (Φrp(Θ(P))) of the projected vector, in orthogonal projection on a plane perpendicular to the main axis (A'), of the magnetization vector M(P) at a point (P), with respect to the particular radial segment (SRP), as a function of a positive variation of the angular position (Θ(P)) of the point (P) of the magnetized body (10), the permanent magnet being disposed such that the main axis (A') of the magnetized body (10) coincides with the axis of rotation (A);
a primary pair of measurement elements comprising a first primary measurement element (12.11) making it possible to determine, at a first primary measurement point (Ell), a first primary component (B11) of the magnetic induction according to a primary measurement vector (D1) perpendicular to the axis of rotation (A), and comprising a second primary measurement element (12.12) making it possible to determine, at a second primary measurement point (E12), a second primary component (B12) of the magnetic induction according to the same primary measurement vector (D1), the first primary measurement point (Ell) and the second primary measurement point (E12) being points distinct from each other on the same primary diametrical segment (SD1) with respect to the axis of rotation (A) and being located inside the internal volume (V) delimited by the magnetized body (10), and the primary measurement vector (D1) forming, with respect to the primary diametrical segment (SD1), a relative primary measurement angle (µ1);
a secondary pair of measurement elements comprising a first secondary measurement element (12.21) making it possible to determine, at a first secondary measurement point (E21), a first secondary component (B21) of the magnetic induction according to a secondary measurement vector (D2) perpendicular to the axis of rotation (A), and comprising a second secondary measurement element (12.22) making it possible to determine, at a second secondary measurement point (E22), a second secondary component (B22) of the magnetic induction according to the same secondary measurement vector (D2), the first secondary measurement point (E21) and the second secondary measurement point (E22) being points distinct from each other on the same secondary diametrical segment (5D2) with respect to the axis of rotation (A) and being located inside the internal volume (V) delimited by the magnetized body (10), and the secondary measurement vector (D2) forming, with respect to the secondary diametrical segment (SD2), a relative secondary measurement angle (µ2);
the system being arranged so that the sum ((µ2 - µ1) + Np x δ12) of, on the
one hand, the angular deviation (µ2 - µ1) between the relative secondary measurement angle (µ2) and the relative primary measurement angle (µ1) with, on the other hand, the angular deviation (δ12), multiplied by the number (Np) of periods of the law of variation of the relative orientation cprp(S(P)) of the magnetization vector M(P) as a function of the angular position (Θ(P)) of the point (P) of the magnetized body (10), between the secondary diametrical segment (5D2) and the primary diametrical segment (SD1), is non-zero and different from a multiple of 180 degrees; and
the sensor system (1) comprising an electronic calculation unit (100) programmed to calculate a value representative of the relative angular position (Ω(t)) of the first part (14) with respect to the second part (16), based on a calculation of the arc-tangent (β = Arctan {F[∆B1 / ∆B2]}; β= Arctan {F[∆B2 /∆B1]}) of a ratio (∆B2 / ∆Bl; ∆Bl/ ∆B2) between, on the one hand, a difference (∆Bl) between the two primary components (B11;B12) and, on the other hand, a difference (∆B2) between the two secondary components (B21; B22), ratio in which each difference is weighted as a function of the distance, for the considered difference, between the corresponding measurement points and the axis of rotation.
Step 2A:
Prong I: The claim recites the steps of "determining angular position", characterization of magnetized body, defining “the law of variation of the relative orientation”, defining “a primary pair of measurement elements …and …secondary pair of measurements”, computing the sum of measurement angles, “the sum ((µ2 - µ1) + Np x 512) of, on the one hand, the angular deviation (µ2 - µ1) between the relative secondary measurement angle (µ2) and the relative primary measurement angle (µ1)” and “calculate a value representative of the relative angular position ….and a calculation of arc-tangent”. These limitations could be carried out as a purely mental process (at least in a some relatively simple situations) and/or they could amount to a mathematical calculation (for example, calculating angular deviation, µ2 - µ1). Therefore, the recited method falls in the abstract idea grouping of mental processes and/or mathematical concepts at Prong 1 of the §101 analysis.
Prong II:
This abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application at Prong 2 of the
§101 analysis because the claim does not recite sufficient additional elements to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The claim recites the system comprising the additional element steps of "a permanent magnet having a magnetized body”, “a primary pair of measurement elements”, “a secondary pair of measurement elements” and “an electronic calculation unit”. However, these elements are considered part of the system for gathering data at a high level of generality, and a generic computation element that is used to carry through the computational analysis. These are generic elements that are invoked as a tool to perform the abstract idea, which does not cause the claim as a whole to integrate the abstract idea into a particular practical application or provide significantly more than the recited abstract idea.
The courts have found that adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, e.g., mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea (such as a step of obtaining information about credit card transactions so that the information can be analyzed by an abstract mental process, as discussed in CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1375, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011)) is not enough to integrate the abstract idea into a particular practical application or make the claim qualify as "significantly more" (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)).
The claim does not recite applying the abstract idea with, or by use of, any particular machine, nor does the claim affect a real-world transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing. The claim amounts to manipulating data: determining a relative angular position of the first part with respect to the second part through a purely computational analysis of some kind. The claim does not recite any particular real-world actions that are taken as a result of the computational outcome. The claim establishes using law of variation of the relative orientation as the general field-of-use, but does not recite a particular practical application being carried out within that field-of-use. Therefore, the claimed invention does not appear to be limited to the use of the mental process or math in a particular practical application, but instead the claim appears to monopolize the mental process or math itself, in any practical application where it might conceivably be used.
Step 2B:
Finally, at Step 2B, the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea for the same reasons as discussed above with regard to Prong 2. Claim 1 is rejected as ineligible under 35 USC §101.
Claim 20 analogous to claim 1, except that claim 20 is directed to a method. Therefore claim 20 is rejected as ineligible under 35 USC §101 as well.
Dependent claim 2: the instant claim is directed to computing the sum of the corresponding angular measurements and is considered a computational analysis and is considered a human thought process and/or mathematical abstract.
Dependent claims 3-5, 9 and 10: the instant claim is directed to a computational analysis for equating the primary and secondary relative angles, making them orthogonal, coincidence, arranging them at the same first distance and the same plane; and are considered a computational analysis and is considered a human thought process and/or mathematical abstract.
Dependent claims 12-13: the instant claim is directed to characterization of the magnetized body and are considered insignificant extra solution activity.
Dependent claims 14-15: the instant claim is directed to the law of variation as related to other variables and magnetization vector; and are considered a computational analysis and is considered a human thought process and/or mathematical abstract.
Dependent claims 16-18: the instant claim is directed to the characterization of the magnetized body and are considered insignificant extra solution activity.
Dependent claim 21: the instant claim is directed to computation of the arctangent value between the primary and secondary bodies and is considered a human thought process and/or mathematical abstract.
Dependent claim 22: the instant claim includes similar elements of claim 1 or claim 20 of the instant application is considered abstract idea as it is directed to the computation of relative angular position of a first part with respect to a second part.
Art of Interest
In reference to claims 1 and 20: Jerance et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,555,714, hereon Jerance) discloses a method and sensor system for determining a relative angular position between two parts (see Jerance, abstract). The method includes a magnetized body in the shape of an angular curved sector about the axis of rotation (z axis), the angular sector (section 9) including a single angular portion or several successive angular portions about the axis of rotation, the magnetized body having, at any point of at least one angular portion of the magnetized body, a magnetization whose magnetization vector: is parallel to a fixed magnetization plane for the angular portion of the magnetized body, and has a continuously variable direction in the magnetization plane as a function of the position of the point of the magnetized body along a direction perpendicular to the axis of rotation in the magnetization plane (see Jerance, Fig. 1B and column 2, lines 50-67 ). The method determines a value representative of the relative angular position between the two parts as a function of the components measured by the first measurement cell for a given relative angular position where the magnetization plane of the magnetized body is parallel to the axis of rotation.
The instant application differs from Jerance in that it uses “the law of variation of the relative orientation of the magnetization vector” which dictates that “a periodic function presenting an even integer (Np) greater than or equal to 2 of angular periods (T) over the 360° of the magnetized body (10) about the main axis (A')”, further the angular deviation are arranged so that they would satisfy the equation the sum ((µ2 - µ1) + Np x δ12) of, on the …, the angular deviation (µ2 - µ1) between the relative secondary measurement angle (µ2) and the relative primary measurement angle (µ1) wherein the angular deviation (δ12), multiplied by the number (Np) of periods of the law of variation of the relative orientation (Φrp(Θ(P))) of the magnetization vector M(P) as a function of the angular position (Θ(P)) of the point (P) of the magnetized body (10), between the secondary diametrical segment (5D2) and the primary diametrical segment (SD1), is non-zero and different from a multiple of 180 degrees, and then computing the relative angular position (Ω(t)) of the first part (14) with respect to the second part (16) based on the equation noted in claim 1 or 20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Lenz (U.S. Patent No. 8,904,658) discloses a method for measuring and optionally correcting the angular offset of two shafts which are connected to one another by way of two universal joints and a third shaft calls for the measurement heads of an optoelectronic alignment device to be mounted in the shafts in exactly two measurement positions. These measurement positions are offset by 180° to one another and are located in the plane of the three shafts.
Valasek et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,297,103) discloses a method of and apparatus for measurement and/or calibration of the position of an object in space in Such embodiment where the apparatus contains at least one moving arm fitted to the frame on one end and on the other end fitted to a platform, where the platform can be attached to the object to be measured or calibrated; during the motion of the object with the platform attached the relative positions of individual members of at least one moving arm, frame and platform are read and the measured data is used for determination of the position of the object or for its calibration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIAS DESTA whose telephone number is (571)272-2214. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30 to 5:00 pm.
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, Andrew M Schechter can be reached at 571-272-2302. 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.
/ELIAS DESTA/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights