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
In the amendments filed June 29th, 2026, the following has occurred: claim 7 has been amended; claims 1-15 remain pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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(s) 1, 2, 4, 8, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sun et al. (US 20150078136 A1, “Sun”).
Regarding claim 1, Sun an acoustic system for measuring an object having a curved surface ([0023] a conforming of array (102) to a contour or shape of a structure subject to inspection (NDE) may be provided via an adjustment of pressure behind the array), the system comprising:
a flexible sheet configured to wrap at least partially around the curved surface of the object, the flexible sheet comprising a plurality of acoustic transducers distributed over a sheet surface of the flexible sheet for acoustically contacting the curved surface of the object from different sides (Fig. 1 (102) illustrates piezoelectric composite array being disposed within a sheet (104) of elastomeric filling & backing layer)([0016], transducer may be configured to achieve surface conformability via the structurally compliant composite matrix, elastomeric backing, and non-constraining connecting wire configuration),
wherein ones of the acoustic transducers are configured to generate and/or measure acoustic waves at variable locations relative to other ones of the acoustic transducers([0016], transducer may be configured to achieve surface conformability via the structurally compliant composite matrix, elastomeric backing, and non-constraining connecting wire configuration),
wherein spatial coordinates of the variable locations in three dimensional space are dependent on a deformation of the sheet surface positioned against the curved surface of the object([0016], transducer may be configured to achieve surface conformability via the structurally compliant composite matrix, elastomeric backing, and non-constraining connecting wire configuration)(applying the transducer array to a curved object implicitly means the spatial coordinates of variable locations are dependent on the deformation of the array against the surface of the object to be imaged);
and a controller configured to determine the spatial coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers, while the flexible sheet is positioned against the curved surface of the object, based on a set of travel times of the acoustic waves sent through the object ([0021] each array element is coupled to controller. Information or data may be supplied via the flex circuit to the controller)([0024]-[0027], automatic spatial scanning and depth focusing for each sensor or sensing elements may be determined and updated as the transducer scans the surface. Determining conformed positions of the array is executed by identifying neutral positions of sensing elements and positions from which the array is deformed. Each sensing element generates an acoustic pulse which is then received by the array. comparison of the arrival times for received signals at each element determines the amount of deformation or displacement of a given element with respect to the neutral position of said element).
Regarding claim 2, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun further discloses
the set of travel times includes travel times of the acoustic waves sent through the object between different ones of the acoustic transducers of the plurality of acoustic transducers distributed over the sheet surface acoustically contacting the curved surface of the object at different spatial positions of the curved surface of the object([0024]-[0027], automatic spatial scanning and depth focusing for each sensor or sensing elements may be determined and updated as the transducer scans the surface. Determining conformed positions of the array is executed by identifying neutral positions of sensing elements and positions from which the array is deformed. Each sensing element generates an acoustic pulse which is then received by the array. comparison of the arrival times for received signals at each element determines the amount of deformation or displacement of a given element with respect to the neutral position of said element).
Regarding claim 4, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun further discloses
each one of the acoustic transducers has a set of predetermined surface coordinates and/or predetermined surface distances there between along the sheet surface, and wherein the controller is configured to determine the spatial coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers further based on the predetermined surface coordinates and/or predetermined surface distances([0021] each array element is coupled to controller. Information or data may be supplied via the flex circuit to the controller)([0024]-[0027], automatic spatial scanning and depth focusing for each sensor or sensing elements may be determined and updated as the transducer scans the surface. Determining conformed positions of the array is executed by identifying neutral positions of sensing elements and positions from which the array is deformed. Each sensing element generates an acoustic pulse which is then received by the array. comparison of the arrival times for received signals at each element determines the amount of deformation or displacement of a given element with respect to the neutral position of said element).
Regarding claim 8, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun further discloses
the controller is configured to determine a set of current spatial coordinates of the acoustic transducers by adjusting a set of predetermined spatial coordinates of the acoustic transducers in accordance with the set of travel times([0021] each array element is coupled to controller. Information or data may be supplied via the flex circuit to the controller)([0024]-[0027], automatic spatial scanning and depth focusing for each sensor or sensing elements may be determined and updated as the transducer scans the surface. Determining conformed positions of the array is executed by identifying neutral positions of sensing elements and positions from which the array is deformed. Each sensing element generates an acoustic pulse which is then received by the array. comparison of the arrival times for received signals at each element determines the amount of deformation or displacement of a given element with respect to the neutral position of said element)(it is the examiner’s interpretation that Sun determines current spatial coordinates of sensing elements by measuring a displacement of the sensing elements when compared to their neutral coordinates, which are determined based on travel time measurements).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is a method claim corresponding to claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is a CRM claim corresponding to claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Tsutsumi (US 20190054324 A1, “Tsutsumi”).
Regarding claim 3, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun fails to disclose
the controller is configured to generate an image of the object using the plurality of acoustic transducers,
wherein the image is generated based on acoustic waves generated and/or measured by ones of the acoustic transducers, and relative spatial coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers determined based on the set of travel times.
Tsutsumi teaches the controller is configured to generate an image of the object using the plurality of acoustic transducers([0034], plurality of transducers sense direct or reflected waves emitted from other transducers in order to generate three-dimensional images of the target),
wherein the image is generated based on acoustic waves generated and/or measured by ones of the acoustic transducers, and relative spatial coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers determined based on the set of travel times([0034], plurality of transducers sense direct or reflected waves emitted from other transducers in order to generate three-dimensional images of the target).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Sun, to include teachings of Tsutsumi, in order to yield a conformable ultrasonic imaging system that is capable of generating three dimensional images of a curved object by determining the time required for each ultrasonic wave emitted from a respective transducer based on deformation characteristics of the array such that regardless of geometry of the object to be measured, accurate measurements may be made. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Balomey (US 6424597 B1, “Balomey”).
Regarding claim 6, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun fails to disclose
the flexible sheet is stretchable, and thus allows allowing a variable surface distance between ones of the acoustic transducers along the sheet surface,
and wherein ones of the acoustic transducers are further configured to generate and/or measure guided waves traveling inside and/or along the sheet surface for determining the variable surface distance.
Balomey teaches
the flexible sheet is stretchable, and thus allows allowing a variable surface distance between ones of the acoustic transducers along the sheet surface([column 4, lines 1-39], in order to determine positions of each of the ultrasound emitting elements, ultrasound emitters attached to the backings of the elements are designed to emit ultrasound signals in sequences, which are received by auxiliary ultrasound receivers fixed to the non-deformable part of the system. Positions of the emitters are then determined by measuring the distance between each emitter and receivers),
and wherein ones of the acoustic transducers are further configured to generate and/or measure guided waves traveling inside and/or along the sheet surface for determining the variable surface distance ([column 4, lines 1-39], in order to determine positions of each of the ultrasound emitting elements, ultrasound emitters attached to the backings of the elements are designed to emit ultrasound signals in sequences, which are received by auxiliary ultrasound receivers fixed to the non-deformable part of the system. Positions of the emitters are then determined by measuring the distance between each emitter and receivers)(Fig. 4 illustrates ultrasonic emitters (16) and receivers (18), which show that the signals are generated inside the deformable housing (or sheet)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Sun, to include teachings of Balomey, in order to yield a conformable ultrasonic imaging system that is capable of determining accurate images of a curved object by through the computation of appropriate adaptive delay laws in order to get accurate distance measurements between deformed array elements such that a more accurate image may be determined based on the geometry of the object under imaging. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Claim(s) 5 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Sada et al. ("Preliminary study of self-shape estimation of ultrasonic flexible probe using direct waves among elements for medical ultrasound imaging." Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 59.SK (2020): SKKE25., “Sada”)
Regarding claim 5, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun fails to disclose
the controller is configured to determine a modelled shape of the sheet surface, wherein the modelled shape is calculated based on travel times between pairs of the acoustic transducers,
wherein each one of the acoustic transducers transducer has a modelled position constrained to the sheet surface,
and wherein ones of the modelled positions of ones of the acoustic transducers are further constrained by a set of predetermined surface coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers on the flexible sheet and/or surface distances there between along the sheet surface.
Sada teaches
the controller is configured to determine a modelled shape of the sheet surface([pg. 3] shape estimation algorithm is used to determine position of each element by transmitting ultrasonic pulses by given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance.),
wherein the modelled shape is calculated based on travel times between pairs of the acoustic transducers([pg. 3] shape estimation algorithm is used to determine position of each element by transmitting ultrasonic pulses by given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance.),
wherein each one of the acoustic transducers transducer has a modelled position constrained to the sheet surface([pg. 3] shape estimation algorithm is used to determine position of each element by transmitting ultrasonic pulses by given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance.)(the Euclidean distances between elements are implicitly calculated based on their position within the sheet surface),
and wherein ones of the modelled positions of ones of the acoustic transducers are further constrained by a set of predetermined surface coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers on the flexible sheet and/or surface distances there between along the sheet surface ([pg. 3] shape estimation algorithm is used to determine position of each element by transmitting ultrasonic pulses by given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance. This process is repeated to determine a third Euclidean distance which is then input into a series of equations to determine each element’s respective coordinates. In order to determine accuracy, ground truth coordinates of each element were used in order to determine mean absolute error) (Implicit, Fig. 7, [pg. 8] probe shapes are estimated using the direct waves in different models)(Fig. 7a through 7d illustrate the estimated probe shape based on the spatial coordinates of the elements).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Sun, to include teachings of Sada, in order to yield a conformable ultrasonic imaging system that is capable of determining accurate images of a curved object by through the computation of degrees of curvature of the respective transducers such that an appropriate shape determination of the object may be made which directly would impact the overall quality of the image by accounting for differences in measured travel times based on the deformed positioning of the array. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 10, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun fails to disclose
the controller is configured to determine the spatial coordinates of individual ones of the acoustic transducers, by comparing, for each pair of acoustic transducers of the acoustic transducers in at least a subset of the plurality of the acoustic transducers: a Euclidian distance between the pair of acoustic transducers based on a travel time of acoustic waves sent through the object between a first transducer and a second transducer of the pair of acoustic transducers, and a surface distance between the first transducer and the second transducer along the sheet surface based on predetermined information about relative or absolute positions of ones of the acoustic transducers.
Sada teaches
the controller is configured to determine the spatial coordinates of individual ones of the acoustic transducers, by comparing, for each pair of acoustic transducers of the acoustic transducers in at least a subset of the plurality of the acoustic transducers: a Euclidian distance between the pair of acoustic transducers based on a travel time of acoustic waves sent through the object between a first transducer and a second transducer of the pair of acoustic transducers, given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance. This process is repeated to determine a third Euclidean distance which is then input into a series of equations to determine each element’s respective coordinates. In order to determine accuracy, ground truth coordinates of each element were used in order to determine mean absolute error).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Sun, to include teachings of Sada, in order to yield a conformable ultrasonic imaging system that is capable of determining accurate images of a curved object by through the computation of degrees of curvature of the respective transducers such that an appropriate shape determination of the object may be made which directly would impact the overall quality of the image by accounting for differences in measured travel times based on the deformed positioning of the array. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 11, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun fails to disclose
a degree of curvature of the sheet surface is determined based on the set of travel times between one or more pairs of the plurality of acoustic transducers,
wherein a shape of the sheet surface is determined based on one or more degrees of curvature of the flexible sheet between respective pairs of the plurality of acoustic transducers,
wherein the controller is configured to determine the spatial coordinates of ones of the plurality of acoustic transducers, by calculating a set of curvatures comparing respective Euclidian distance with respective surface distance for respective pairs of transducers in at least a subset of the plurality of transducers.
Sada teaches
a degree of curvature of the sheet surface is determined based on the set of travel times between one or more pairs of the plurality of acoustic transducers,
wherein a shape of the sheet surface is determined based on one or more degrees of curvature of the flexible sheet between respective pairs of the plurality of acoustic transducers,
wherein the controller is configured to determine the spatial coordinates of ones of the plurality of acoustic transducers, by calculating a set of curvatures comparing respective Euclidian distance with respective surface distance for respective pairs of transducers in at least a subset of the plurality of transducers([pg. 3] shape estimation algorithm is used to determine position of each element by transmitting ultrasonic pulses by given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance. This process is repeated to determine a third Euclidean distance which is then input into a series of equations to determine each element’s respective coordinates. In order to determine accuracy, ground truth coordinates of each element were used in order to determine mean absolute error)(Implicit, Fig. 7, [pg. 8] probe shapes are estimated using the direct waves in different models. Fig. 7c and 7d illustrate the estimated probe shape having different degrees of curvature between the transducer elements)( shape estimation implicitly includes accounting for differing degrees of curvature between elements in determining the overall shape of the probe)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Sun, to include teachings of Sada, in order to yield a conformable ultrasonic imaging system that is capable of determining accurate images of a curved object by through the computation of degrees of curvature of the respective transducers such that an appropriate shape determination of the object may be made which directly would impact the overall quality of the image by accounting for differences in measured travel times based on the deformed positioning of the array. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Regarding claim 12, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun fails to disclose
the controller is configured to determine the spatial coordinates of ones of the plurality of acoustic transducers using a model of the sheet surface including respective positions of modelled transducers on the modelled sheet surface,
wherein the model is used to calculate a set of modelled travel times between ones of the modelled acoustic transducers,
wherein the modelled travel times are dependent on respective distances between modelled ones of the plurality of acoustic transducers,
wherein the respective distances between the modelled ones of the acoustic transducers are dependent on respective positions of ones of the acoustic transducers on the modelled sheet surface and a variable shape of the modelled sheet surface,
wherein the variable shape of the modelled sheet surface is adjusted to fit the modelled travel times with the measured set of travel times,
and wherein the spatial coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers are determined based on the respective positions of the modelled transducers on the modelled sheet.
Sada teaches
the controller is configured to determine the spatial coordinates of ones of the plurality of acoustic transducers using a model of the sheet surface including respective positions of modelled transducers on the modelled sheet surface(Implicit, Fig. 7, [pg. 8] probe shapes are estimated using the direct waves in different models. Fig. 7c and 7d illustrate the estimated probe shape having different degrees of curvature between the transducer elements)([pg. 5-7], in models 1-4, time of flight of ultrasonic signals are estimated to model the probe shape versus a ground truth),
wherein the model is used to calculate a set of modelled travel times between ones of the modelled acoustic transducers([pg. 5-7], in models 1-4, time of flight of ultrasonic signals are estimated to model the probe shape versus a ground truth),
wherein the modelled travel times are dependent on respective distances between modelled ones of the plurality of acoustic transducers(Implicit, [pg. 5-7], in models 1-4, time of flight of ultrasonic signals are estimated to model the probe shape versus a ground truth)(travel times are implicitly dependent upon positions of transducers),
wherein the respective distances between the modelled ones of the acoustic transducers are dependent on respective positions of ones of the acoustic transducers on the modelled sheet surface and a variable shape of the modelled sheet surface(Implicit, [pg. 5-7], in models 1-4, time of flight of ultrasonic signals are estimated to model the probe shape versus a ground truth)(travel times are implicitly dependent upon positions of transducers),
wherein the variable shape of the modelled sheet surface is adjusted to fit the modelled travel times with the measured set of travel times (Implicit, Fig. 7, [pg. 8] probe shapes are estimated using the direct waves in different models. Fig. 7c and 7d illustrate the estimated probe shape having different degrees of curvature between the transducer elements) ([pg. 3] shape estimation algorithm is used to determine position of each element by transmitting ultrasonic pulses by given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance. This process is repeated to determine a third Euclidean distance which is then input into a series of equations to determine each element’s respective coordinates. In order to determine accuracy, ground truth coordinates of each element were used in order to determine mean absolute error)(mean absolute error calculation is a type of modelled travel time fit determination)(using a ground truth set of measurements to calculate absolute mean error implicitly means modelled measurements are given a set adjustment value based on differences in measured travel times compared to the ground truth),
and wherein the spatial coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers are determined based on the respective positions of the modelled transducers on the modelled sheet([pg. 3] shape estimation algorithm is used to determine position of each element by transmitting ultrasonic pulses by given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance. This process is repeated to determine a third Euclidean distance which is then input into a series of equations to determine each element’s respective coordinates. In order to determine accuracy, ground truth coordinates of each element were used in order to determine mean absolute error)(Implicit, Fig. 7, [pg. 8] probe shapes are estimated using the direct waves in different models. Fig. 7c and 7d illustrate the estimated probe shape having different degrees of curvature between the transducer elements)([pg. 5-7], in models 1-4, time of flight of ultrasonic signals are estimated to model the probe shape versus a ground truth).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Sun, to include teachings of Sada, in order to yield a conformable ultrasonic imaging system that is capable of determining accurate images of a curved object by comparison of measured travel times to various modelled shapes in order to quantitatively determine an amount of measurement error such that further refinements in modeling can be conducted to improve the overall quality of the resulting image. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Casula et al.( "A flexible phased array transducer for contact examination of components with complex geometry." Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Nondestructive Testing, Montreal, QC, Canada. Vol. 30. 2004., “Casula”)
Regarding claim 13, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun fails to disclose
the controller is configured to measure a travel time of acoustic waves sent through the curved object between a first acoustic transducer and a third transducer,
wherein a second transducer is arranged along a surface path over the sheet surface of the flexible sheet between the first acoustic transducer and the third transducer,
wherein the controller is configured to determine spatial coordinates of the second transducer based at least in part on interpolating predetermined surface coordinates and/or surface distances of the second transducer relative to the first acoustic transducer and third transducer on a modelled surface of the flexible sheet.
Casula teaches
the controller is configured to measure a travel time of acoustic waves sent through the curved object between a first acoustic transducer and a third transducer, (Implicit, [pg. 5], 3D-profilometer is an extension of the 2D flexible instrumentation and measures the 3D deformation of the active area. An interpolation algorithm is utilized to compute the coordinates of each element to provide adaptive delay laws)(Fig. 6B illustrates plurality of elements comprising the flexible matrix transducer) )(measurement of transmitted wave reflections implicitly includes measurement of travel times)
wherein a second transducer is arranged along a surface path over the sheet surface of the flexible sheet between the first acoustic transducer and the third transducer([pg. 5], 3D-profilometer is an extension of the 2D flexible instrumentation and measures the 3D deformation of the active area. An interpolation algorithm is utilized to compute the coordinates of each element to provide adaptive delay laws)(Fig. 6B illustrates plurality of elements comprising the flexible matrix transducer,
wherein the controller is configured to determine spatial coordinates of the second transducer based at least in part on interpolating predetermined surface coordinates and/or surface distances of the second transducer relative to the first acoustic transducer and third transducer on a modelled surface of the flexible sheet ([pg. 5], 3D-profilometer is an extension of the 2D flexible instrumentation and measures the 3D deformation of the active area. An interpolation algorithm is utilized to compute the coordinates of each element to provide adaptive delay laws).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the system of Sun, to include teachings of Casula, in order to yield a conformable ultrasonic imaging system that is capable of determining accurate images of a curved object by compensating the measured waves of the array under deformation by interpolation of 3D coordinates of array elements so that the resulting image reflects an accurate three dimensional profile of the two dimension probe under deformation. Making such a modification amounts to using a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale (C).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 9 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 7, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun fails to disclose the controller is configured to calculate the modelled shape based on a predetermined parameterized shape according to an analytical function defined by a set of variable scaling parameters and/or coordinates.
Tsutsumi teaches
the controller is configured to calculate scaling parameters and/or coordinates ([0047]-[0048], reflection point calculation unit calculates reflection point position information based on position information of transducers and orientation of transducers. Contact surface calculation unit then calculates the contact surface shape information based on the reflection point position information)(The reflection point calculation of Tsutsumi pertains to the transducer positions in order to generate an object surface calculation, as opposed to the sheet surface itself, therefore Tsutsumi fails to teach the claim limitation with sufficient detail. No other identified prior art teaches this limitations with sufficient motivation to combine).
Regarding claim 9, Sun discloses the acoustic system according to claim 1. Sun further discloses the controller is configured to determine a convex subsection of the flexible sheet based on one or more acoustic signals being blocked along a path between a pair of acoustic transducers of the acoustic transducers through the convex subsection([0024]-[0027], automatic spatial scanning and depth focusing for each sensor or sensing elements may be determined and updated as the transducer scans the surface. Determining conformed positions of the array is executed by identifying neutral positions of sensing elements and positions from which the array is deformed. Each sensing element generates an acoustic pulse which is then received by the array. comparison of the arrival times for received signals at each element determines the amount of deformation or displacement of a given element with respect to the neutral position of said element, However Sun fails to teach the determination of a convex subsection of the array based on the blocking of a signal between a pair of transducers).
Sada teaches the controller is configured to determine a convex subsection of the flexible sheet based on one or more acoustic signals being blocked along a path between a pair of acoustic transducers of the acoustic transducers through the convex subsection ([pg. 3] shape estimation algorithm is used to determine position of each element by transmitting ultrasonic pulses by given elements and determining a first and second Euclidean distance. This process is repeated to determine a third Euclidean distance which is then input into a series of equations to determine each element’s respective coordinates. In order to determine accuracy, ground truth coordinates of each element were used in order to determine mean absolute error, However Sada fails to teach the determination of a convex subsection of the array based on the blocking of a signal between a pair of transducers. No other identified prior art teaches the determination of a shape of the array based on a signal being blocked, nor does any prior art teach the limitation in part with sufficient motivation to combine.)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 29th, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On pg. 2-6 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that Sun fails to teach the limitations of claim 1 for the following reasons:
Sun does not teach measurement through the curved object
The teachings of Sun do not render the claimed invention as the piezoelectric sensor is not a part of the array and does not travel through the curved object, but rather the backing layer and elastomeric filling.
With respect to (1), the examiner respectfully disagrees that Sun fails to teach measurement through the curved object. Applicant points to [0025]-[0029] in the specification of Sun to justify that acoustic pulses are sent to piezoelectric sensor on the top or within a threshold distance of the array. While this may be true, that does not mean that the system does not teach measurement through the curved object. For example, Sun at [0003] states that the array is configured to “conform to a surface of a structure under evaluation and emit acoustic waves in two directions in sequence”. These two directions of emission are utilized for two different reasons: to perform NDE inspections of the object under test, as well as to ensure proper mapping of the scanned surface based on the spatial coordinates of the conformed array. Sun at [0023] explicitly states that the conforming of the array (102) to a contour or shape of a structure subject to an inspection such as an NDE inspection may be provided via an adjustment of pressure behind the array. This implicitly means that acoustic waves are being transmitted into the object under test in order to determine features such as surface imperfections, etc.. Sun at [0025]-[0029], as referenced in Applicant’s arguments regarding (1), corresponds to the other emission direction as referenced by Sun at [0003]. Sun at [0025-[0029] utilizes transmission in a second direction to map travel time differences between elements in the array and a piezoelectric sensor in a conformed vs. neutral state of the array elements. Being able to accurately determine and compensate for the conformed state of the transducer array is advantageous as it allows enhances in frequency, spatial resolution, signal-to-noise ratio, as well as NDE reliability and test efficiency on structures with one or more complex surfaces. While the examiner recognizes that the travel times referenced in [0025]-[0029] of Sun are not sent through the curved object, the claim language as currently drafted does not require it. Rather the claim limitation states “determine the spatial coordinates of the ones of the acoustic transducers, while the flexible sheet is positioned against the curved surface of the object, based on a set of travel times of the acoustic waves sent through the object”. The term “based on” is recited at a high level of generality and does not preclude the interpretation that waves sent out in a direction corresponding to the NDE evaluation, as taught by sun at [0023] would implicitly have travel times that result from the conformed nature of the array around the surface of an object under test. The travel times of the NDE emission direction waves that are directly impacted by the conformed position, which directly impact the differences in travel times between the array and the piezoelectric sensor measured in [0025]-[0029] of Sun, or that the spatial coordinates are determined “based” on the travel times through the curved object. If the basis of the travel time and spatial coordinate relationship be recited in more detail in the future, the examiner believes the rejection may be overcome.
With respect to (2), the examiner agrees that there are waves that are transmitted through the elastomeric filler and backing layer, however those are not the only waves generated. As referenced in the response to arguments with respect to (1) above, the disclosure of Sun pertains to a conformable acoustic transducer array that is utilized to perform NDE inspections of various parts under test such as an aerospace composite structure like a helicopter blade (See Sun at [0003], [0023] and [0040]). The waves emitted in the direction corresponding to the elastomeric filler and backing layer are utilized to measure differences in travel times between the arrays conformed vs. neutral state, as discussed by Sun at [0025]-[0029]. The differences in said travel times are then used to determine spatial coordinates of the array elements, which are implicitly “based” on the travel times through the curved object as a part of the NDE evaluation. The term “based on” in the claim limitations is recited at a high level of generality and does not preclude the interpretation that waves sent out in a direction corresponding to the NDE evaluation, as taught by Sun at [0023] would implicitly have travel times that result from the conformed nature of the array around the surface of an object under test. Therefore the rejection of claim 1, as currently drafted, under 35 U.S.C. 102 is maintained.
On pg. 6-7 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that dependent claims 2, 4, 8, and 15 are in condition for allowance for the following reasons:
Sun only teaches the emitted acoustic waves traveling towards the piezoelectric sensors (claim 2)
Sun only teaches the
With respect to (1), for the same reasons as discussed with respect to (1) and (2) in relation to the rejection of claim 1, the rejections of claims 2, 4, 8, and 15 are similarly maintained.
With respect to (2), the examiner agrees that Sun’s neutral/conformed comparison determines a deflection relative to the separate position sensor, however that does not indicate that the deflection point is not based on travel times of waves through the object. As noted in the response to arguments with respect to claim 1, Sun teaches emitting acoustic waves in two directions: one to the object under NDE inspection (see Sun at [0003] and [0040]), as well as between the array elements and the piezoelectric sensor (see Sun at [0025]-[0029]) in order to measure the difference in travel times of the array based on its neutral vs. conformed state. The differences in said travel times are then used to determine spatial coordinates of the array elements, which are implicitly “based” on the travel times through the curved object as a part of the NDE evaluation where the conformation alters the predetermined (or neutral) coordinates of the elements. The degree of the conformed state directly impacts the spatial coordinate determining emissions to the piezoelectric sensor. The term “based on” is recited at a high level of generality and does not preclude the interpretation that waves sent out in a direction corresponding to the NDE evaluation. Therefore the rejections of claims 4 and 8 are similarly maintained.
On pg. 7 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that dependent claims 3 and 7 are in condition for allowance for the following reasons:
Claim 1 is allegedly allowable
Applicant’s amendments to claim 7 have differentiated from Tsutsumi’s teachings
With respect to (1), the examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted in the response to arguments with respect to claim 1, the rejection is maintained, therefore the rejection of claim 3 is maintained.
With respect to (2), the examiner agrees that Applicant’s amendment to the claim has overcome the current grounds of rejection. Therefore the rejection of claim 7 has been withdrawn, and the claim is indicated as containing allowable subject matter.
On pg. 7-8 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that dependent claim 6 is in condition for allowance for the following reasons:
The teachings of Bolomey are different than Applicant’s invention as Bolomey uses auxiliary emitters and receivers to determine element positions relative to a non-deformable part.
With respect to (1), the examiner agrees that Bolomey teaches determining element positions relative to a non-deformable part, however the examiner respectfully disagrees that this precludes Balomey from reading upon the limitations. The cited teaching of Bolomey, column 4, lines 1-39, states that in order to determine positions of each of the ultrasound emitting elements, ultrasound emitters attached to the backings of the elements are designed to emit ultrasound signals in sequences, which are received by auxiliary ultrasound receivers fixed to the non-deformable part of the system. Positions of the emitters are then determined by measuring the distance between each emitter and receivers. Fig. 2 of Bolomey illustrates the system comprising a number of elements (6conforming to a curved object to be imaged (10). Bolomey further teaches that the emitting face may be comprised of a flexible strip of piezoelectric polymer (See Bolomey at column 6, lines 1-2) and that the sensors are used to measure distances D1 and D2 separating it from two previously known points on the transducer housing (See Bolomey at column 6, lines 53-56). These waves used for the distance measurements implicitly have a component traveling parallel to the surface of the flexible piezoelectric film and object to be imaged (or in other words, along the surface), thus reading upon the claim limitation. Therefore the rejection of claim 6 is maintained.
On pg. 8-9 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that Sada fails to teach the limitations of claims 5 and 10-12 for the following reasons.
Claim 1 is in condition for allowance
Sada fails to teach the limitations of the claims
With respect to (1), as noted in the response to arguments with respect to claim 1, the rejection of claim 1 is maintained, therefore so are the rejections of claims 5 and 10-12.
With respect to (2), Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Therefore the rejections of claims 5 and 10-12 are maintained.
On pg. 9 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant argues that claim 13 is in condition for allowance for the following reasons:
Claim 1 is in condition for allowance
With respect to (1), as noted in the response to arguments with respect to claim 1, the rejection of claim 1 is maintained, therefore so is the rejection of claim 13.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record though not relied upon in the present basis of rejection are noted in the attached PTO 892 and include:
Xu et al. (US 20190328354 A1, “Xu”) which discloses stretchable ultrasonic transducers
Hakkens et al. (US 20180130457 A1, “Hakkens”), which discloses a deformable ultrasonic transducer array
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6136. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at 571-270-3603. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER RICHARD WALKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights