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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed on the date: October 02, 2025.
Claims 1-9 and 11-18 are currently pending. Claims 1 and 13 have been amended. Claim 9 was previously cancelled. Claims 15-18 are new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see REMARKS pages 7-8, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made further in view of Kawano et al. US2012/0126797.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9, 11-15, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokotani et al. US2004/0017188 (called Yokotani hereinafter), in view of Terakura et al. JPH10132836A (called Terakura hereinafter, applicant disclosed art and the examiner has previously provided a English machine translation) and further in view of Kawano et al. US2012/0126797 (called Kawano hereinafter and newly cited).
Regarding independent claim 1, Yokotani teaches a magnetic detection device (Fig. 1a) to detect a moving magnetic body (Fig. 1a; magnetic moving member 1) that is rotating, the magnetic detection device comprising:
a magnet portion (Fig. 1a; magnet 3);
a plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements (Fig. 1a; magnetoresistive segments 2a and 2b) overlaid on the magnet portion along a magnetization direction of the magnet portion (Fig. 1a and 1b; para [0038], magnetization direction of magnet 3 is in a direction of the axis of rotation of the magnetic moving member 1); and
a magnetism sensing direction of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements intersecting with the magnetization direction (Figs. 1a and 1b; para [0038]; magnet 3 applies a magnetic field to the magnetoresistive segments 2a and 2b, thus the sensing direction of the magnetoresistive segments intersect with the magnetization direction of the magnet),
the magnetization direction of the magnet portion being in parallel with a rotation axis of the moving magnetic body (Fig. 1a and 1b; para [0038], magnetization direction of magnet 3 is in a direction of the axis of rotation of the magnetic moving member 1 which is parallel to the axis of rotation), and
Yokotani fails to teach a magnetic plate overlaid on the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements along the magnetization direction; the magnetic plate having a longitudinal direction that intersects with the magnetization direction and runs along a direction toward the rotation axis of the moving magnetic body.
Terakura teaches a magnetic plate overlaid on the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements along the magnetization direction (Fig. 7; magnetic pole plate 41 is between the rotating body 32 and Hall elements 16); the magnetic plate having a longitudinal direction that intersects with the magnetization direction and runs along a direction toward the rotation axis of the moving magnetic body (Fig. 7; magnetic flux plate 41 intersects with the magnetic field output from magnet 18 in the same direction as the magnetic pole plate extends towards the rotation axis of the rotating body 32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Yokotani with the magnetic flux plates as disclosed by Terakura for the purpose of reducing the leakage magnetic flux impacting the sensors, thus improving the accuracy of the sensor data collected.
Yokotani and Terakura fail to teach wherein the magnetization direction is along a Z axial direction, and the longitudinal direction is parallel to a Y axial direction.
Kawano teaches wherein the magnetization direction is along a Z axial direction (Fig. 8C; para [0042]; magnetization direction in the Z axis direction), and the longitudinal direction is parallel to a Y axial direction (Fig. 8A; flux guide 5 has a longitudinal direction along the Y-axis that is parallel to the Y-axis direction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Yokotani and Terakura with the flux guide and magnetization direction orientation as disclosed by Kawano for the purpose of allowing a isomagnetic line to be linear and allow magneto-electric converting elements to be disposed closer to the magnetic mobile object (para [0057]).
Regarding claim 2, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, Yokotani further teaches wherein the longitudinal direction of the magnetic plate runs along the magnetism sensing direction of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements (Figs. 1a and 1b; para [0041], the magnetoresistive segments 2a and 2b detect the magnetic field from the magnet 3 varies due to the rotation of the magnetic moving member 1, thus the sensing direction of the magnetoresistive segments is along the rotation of the magnetic moving member which the magnetoresistive segments are also arranged).
Regarding claim 3, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, Terakura further teaches wherein the magnetic plate includes a plurality of magnetic body portions (Fig. 7; two portions of magnetic flux plates 41), and each of the plurality of magnetic body portions is overlaid on a corresponding one of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements (Fig. 7; each plate 41 corresponds to a Hall element 16).
Regarding claim 6, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, Terakura further teaches wherein a shape of the magnetic plate when the magnetic plate is viewed along the magnetization direction is a polygon (Fig. 7; magnetic flux plate 41 is rectangular).
Regarding claim 7, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, wherein the shape of the magnetic plate when the magnetic plate is viewed along the magnetization direction is a rectangle (Fig. 7; magnetic flux plate 41 is rectangular).
Regarding claim 8, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, but fail to teach wherein the shape of the magnetic plate when the magnetic plate is viewed along the magnetization direction is an oval.
However, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the magnetic plate as described by Yokotani and Terakura to have the shape of the magnetic plate when the magnetic plate is viewed along the magnetization direction is an oval. Terakura teaches that the magnetic plate is rectangular (see Fig. 7; magnetic flux plate 41). One skilled in the art would be able to change the shape of the magnetic flux plate to be oval/elliptical in shape for the purpose of reducing the amount of material needed to cover the Hall elements, thus reducing the cost of construction.
Regarding claim 9, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, Terakura further teaches wherein the magnetic plate is overlaid on all of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements (Fig 7; magnetic flux plates 41 overlaid on Hall elements 16).
Regarding claim 11, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, Yokotani further teaches wherein each of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements is an MR element or an MI element (Fig. 1a; para [0038], magnetoresistive segments 2a and 2b).
Regarding claim 12, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 11, Yokotani further teaches wherein each of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements is either of a GMR element and a TMR element (para [0078]).
Regarding independent claim 13, Yokotani teaches a magnetic detection device (Fig. 1a) to detect a moving magnetic body (Fig. 1a; magnetic moving member 1) that is rotating, the magnetic detection device comprising:
a magnet portion (Fig. 1a; magnet 3);
a plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements (Fig. 1a; magnetoresistive segments 2a and 2b) overlaid on the magnet portion along a magnetization direction of the magnet portion (Fig. 1a and 1b; para [0038], magnetization direction of magnet 3 is in a direction of the axis of rotation of the magnetic moving member 1); and
a magnetism sensing direction of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements intersecting with the magnetization direction (Figs. 1a and 1b; para [0038]; magnet 3 applies a magnetic field to the magnetoresistive segments 2a and 2b, thus the sensing direction of the magnetoresistive segments intersect with the magnetization direction of the magnet),
the magnetization direction of the magnet portion being in parallel with a rotation axis of the moving magnetic body (Fig. 1a and 1b; para [0038], magnetization direction of magnet 3 is in a direction of the axis of rotation of the magnetic moving member 1 which is parallel to the axis of rotation),
the magnetism sensing direction of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements running along a direction in which the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements are arranged (Figs. 1a and 1b; para [0041], the magnetoresistive segments 2a and 2b detect the magnetic field from the magnet 3 varies due to the rotation of the magnetic moving member 1, thus the sensing direction of the magnetoresistive segments is along the rotation of the magnetic moving member which the magnetoresistive segments are also arranged), and
Yokotani fails to teach a magnetic plate overlaid on all of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements along the magnetization direction; the magnetic plate having a longitudinal direction that intersects with the magnetization direction and runs along the direction in which the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements are arranged.
Terakura teaches a magnetic plate overlaid on all of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements along the magnetization direction (Fig. 7; magnetic pole plate 41 is between the rotating body 32 and Hall elements 16); the magnetic plate having a longitudinal direction that intersects with the magnetization direction and runs along the direction in which the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements are arranged (Fig. 7; magnetic pole plate 41 intersects with the magnetic field output from magnet 18 in the same direction as the magnetic pole plate extends towards the rotation axis of the rotating body 32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Yokotani with the magnetic flux plates as disclosed by Terakura for the purpose of reducing the leakage magnetic flux impacting the sensors, thus improving the accuracy of the sensor data collected.
Yokotani and Terakura fail to teach wherein the magnetization direction is along a Z axial direction, and the longitudinal direction is parallel to a X axial direction.
Kawano teaches wherein the magnetization direction is along a Z axial direction (Fig. 8C; para [0042]; magnetization direction in the Z axis direction), and the longitudinal direction is parallel to a X axial direction (Fig. 8A; flux guide 5 has a longitudinal direction along the X-axis that is parallel to the X-axis direction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Yokotani and Terakura with the flux guide and magnetization direction orientation as disclosed by Kawano for the purpose of allowing a isomagnetic line to be linear and allow magneto-electric converting elements to be disposed closer to the magnetic mobile object (para [0057]).
Regarding claim 14, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 13, Terakura further teaches wherein the shape of the magnetic plate when the magnetic plate is viewed along the magnetization direction is a rectangle (Fig. 7; magnetic flux plate 41 is rectangular).
Regarding claim 15, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, Kawano further teaches wherein each of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements is an MR element (para [0086]).
Regarding claim 17, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 11, Kawano further teaches wherein each of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements is a GMR element (para [0086]).
Regarding claim 18, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 11, Kawano further teaches wherein each of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements is a TMR element (para [0086]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokotani, in view of Terakura, in view of Kawano and further in view of Miyata et al. US2004/0085062 (called Miyata hereinafter and previously cited).
Regarding claim 5, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 3, but fail to teach wherein the plurality of magnetic body portions include a first magnetic body portion and a second magnetic body portion, and the first magnetic body portion has a larger dimension along the longitudinal direction than the second magnetic body portion.
Miyata teaches wherein the plurality of magnetic body portions include a first magnetic body portion and a second magnetic body portion (Fig. 1; magnetic plates 11 and 12), and the first magnetic body portion has a larger dimension along the longitudinal direction than the second magnetic body portion (Fig. 1; magnetic plate 11 is larger than magnetic plate 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano with the magnetic plates as disclosed by Miyata for the purpose of improving the throttling of the magnetic flux placed upon the Hall elements by the magnet by covering the magnet with the magnetic plates (para [0039]).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokotani, in view of Terakura, in view of Kawano and further in view of Sogo et al. US2020/0400463 (called Sogo hereinafter and newly cited).
Regarding claim 16, Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano teach the magnetic detection device according to claim 1, but fail to teach wherein each of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements is an MI element.
Sogo teaches wherein each of the plurality of magneto-electric conversion elements is an MI element (para [0049]; magneto-impedance elements as magnetic detection elements).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Yokotani, Terakura and Kawano with the magneto-impedance elements as disclosed by Sogo for the purpose of using magnetic sensing elements to detect a rotation angle of a magnet based on a detected magnetic field.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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 4, this claim was indicated as allowable subject matter in the previous Office Action mailed on July 02, 2025.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yokotani et al. discloses “Magnetic detection apparatus” (see US7045997)
Kato et al. discloses “Angle detecting apparatus” (see US2008/0265877)
Okada discloses “Position detecting apparatus” (see US2012/0007589)
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 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