DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the amendment filed 7/1/2026. Claims 1 – 22 are pending. Claims 1, 3, 10, 15, 18, and 21 were amended.
The previous rejection of claims 1-22 under 35 USC 101 are withdrawn in view of amendments to independent claims which incorporate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/1/2026 in regards to claims 1-22 have been fully considered but are not persuasive or moot in view of new grounds of rejection. The applicant makes conclusory statements that the amendments overcome the prior art without providing evidentiary support. As best understood by the examiner, the limitations as claimed are disclosed, or obvious variations, of the primary reference Park. Additional references are provided to clarify the rejection.
Claims 1 is rejected under 35 USC 103 over US 2023/0037205 (Park) in view of US 2020/0238526 (Nammoto). Nammoto is provide as support that the limitations as claimed are an obvious variant of Park without providing any new or unexpected result. Amended claim 15 is rejected in a similar manner as claim 1.
Claims 10, 18, and 21 remain rejected under 35 USC 102 in view of Park. While the applicant provides conclusory statement that Park fails to teach the amended limitations, the examiner respectfully disagrees as Park performs a transformation to correct for a misalignment between a sensor and rotating magnetic field coupled to a shaft outlined in the rejection below.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
As best understood by the examiner, Eq. 3 is not correct. As best understood by the examiner, cos(φ) in the second column, 3rd row should be sin(φ).
The section “BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS” fails to identify figures 13A-G.
Paragraph [0048] of the specification filed 2/27/2024 discusses “rotates the constellation about the Z-axis” and references this is done using matrix Rx(φ). As best understood by the examiner, Rx(φ) corresponds to a rotation about the X-axis, not the Z-axis. Please review and correct if necessary.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 10-14 and 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2023/0037205 (Park).
Regarding claim 10, Park teaches an integrated circuit (IC) (sensor device 1100 of Fig. 11), comprising:
magnetic sensors (a 3D Hall sensor comprises three orthogonal Hall elements 20A, 20B, 20C; see Fig. 11; see [0063]);
an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) having an input coupled to the magnetic sensors, and having an output; and
a digital circuit having an input coupled to the output of the ADC (ADC 22 has an input connected to the Hall elements 20A-C and an output connected to memory 24; see Fig. 11), the digital circuit configured to:
apply a rotation correction to digital sensor values from the ADC by applying a calibration matrix to the digital sensor values to determine rotation-corrected sensor values that reduces misalignment error between the magnetic sensors and a rotating magnetic field (sensor signals are received from the ADC 22 with the measured rotation angle applied to a compensation matrix as illustrated in eq. 1; see eq. 1; see [0028]-[0029], [0046]-[0047], and [0065], [0072]); and
determine an angle of a rotating motor shaft based on the rotation-corrected sensor values (the measured 3D magnetic field vector is mapped to a 2D vector based on the compensation matrix to determine the rotation angle φ; see [0028]-[0030], [0072]).
Regarding claim 11, Park teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to apply the rotation correction to the digital sensor values by applying a matrix to the digital sensor values (see the compensation matrix of eqn. 1 and [0028]-[002], and [0047]).
Regarding claim 12, Park teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to apply the rotation correction to the digital sensor values by multiplying the digital sensor values by a correction matrix (see eqn. 1 and [0028]-[002], and [0047]).
Regarding claim 13, Park further teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to determine the rotation correction by: obtaining first digital sensor values from the ADC; determining interim rotation matrices for rotation of the first digital sensor values; and determining a calibration matrix based on the interim rotation matrices (a calibration process is performed by obtaining at least three arbitrary angle positions, the calculation unit 26 receives digital measurement values
p
→
0,
p
→
1,
p
→
2 then determines orthonormal basis vectors and determines scaling matrix S (eqn. (9)), rotation matrix R (eqn. (10)), and transformation matrix M (eqn. 5) as outlined in [0037]-[0047] and a compensation matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11); see [0046]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 14, Park further teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to determine the calibration matrix by multiplying the interim rotation matrices together to compute the calibration matrix (a compensation matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11); see [0046]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 18, Park teaches a method (a calibration process; see [0033]), comprising:
applying a rotation correction to values from magnetic sensors by applying a calibration matrix as a linear transformation that rotates a constellation of coordinates from an X,Y,Z space toward and X,Y plane having a reduced Z-component to determine rotation-corrected sensor values configured to reduce misalignment error between the magnetic sensors and a rotating magnetic field (A misalignment in the form of a tilt of the rotation axis (as shown in Fig. 1 and discussed in [0023]) causes the magnetic field to generate an ellipse in a 3D space (i.e. X,Y,Z) space as shown in Fig. 4A with the projection onto the XZ plane shown in Fig. 5A, the projection onto the YZ plane shown in Fig. 5B, and a projection onto the XY plane shown in Fig. 5C. A compensation matrix of eqs. 1 and 11 as discussed in [0028]-[0029] and [0046]-[0047]. The rotation transforms the ellipse in the X,Y,Z space as shown in Fig. 4A into the XY plane as shown in Fig. 4C, wherein the ellipse is scaled into a circle as shown in Fig. 4D. Fig. 6A shows the projection of the ellipse into the XY plane following correction and that the ellipse does not extend out of the XY plane, i.e. the s-component is reduced to zero as shown in Figs. 6B, 6C. See [0061]. The calculation unit applies a compensation matrix to correct measured values BX, BY, BZ to generate corrected values COS and SIN to correct for the misalignment; see eqn. 1; see [0032], [0056], [0072]); and
determining an angle based on the rotation-corrected sensor values (the measured 3D magnetic field vector is mapped to a 2D vector based on the compensation matrix to determine the rotation angle φ; see [0028]-[0030]).
Regarding claim 19, Park further teaches wherein applying the rotation correction to the values includes applying a matrix to the values (see the compensation matrix of eqn. 1 and [0028]-[002], and [0047]).
Regarding claim 20, Park teaches wherein applying the rotation correction to the values includes multiplying the values by a calibration matrix (see eqn. 1 and [0028]-[002], and [0047]).
Regarding claim 21, Park teaches a method (a calibration process; see [0033]), comprising:
obtaining first values from magnetic sensors (a calibration process is performed by obtaining at least three arbitrary angle positions, the calculation unit 26 receives digital measurement values
p
→
0,
p
→
1,
p
→
2 from Hall elements 20A, 20B, 20C; see [0033]);
determining a normal to the constellation values (orthonormal vector b2 is normal to ellipse (i.e. constellation) of the first sensor values; see Fig. 4B);
determining interim rotation matrices (the calculation unit 26 receives digital measurement values
p
→
0,
p
→
1,
p
→
2 then determines orthonormal basis vectors and determines scaling matrix S (eqn. (9)), rotation matrix R (eqn. (10)), and transformation matrix M (eqn. 5) as outlined in [0037]-[0047]);
rotating the constellation about respective axes to align the normal with a reference axis (orthonormal vectors b0, b1, b2 are rotated about the X, Y, and Z axes such that b0 is aligned with the x-axis, b1 is aligned with the y-axis, and b2 is aligned with the z-axis; see Figs. 4B and 4C; see [0054]);
determining a calibration matrix based on the interim rotation matrices (a compensation matrix is determined as defined in eqn. (1) and [0028]-[0029], wherein the calibration matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11); see [0046]-[0047]);
applying the calibration matrix to second values from the magnetic sensors to determine rotation-corrected sensor values (the calculation unit applies a compensation matrix to correct measured values BX, BY, BZ to generate corrected values COS and SIN; see eqn. 1; see [0032], [0056]); and
determining an angle of a rotating shaft based on the rotation-corrected sensor values (the angle is determined based on the compensated values SIN and COS; see [0030], [0056]; see Figs. 1, 16A-C).
Regarding claim 22, Park teaches wherein the first values include values from a first, second, and third magnetic sensor, and the second values includes values from two magnetic sensors of the first, second, and third magnetic sensors (a 3D Hall sensor comprises three orthogonal Hall elements 20A, 20B, 20C and compensation is performed using values BX and BY; see Fig. 11; see [0063]).
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) 1-4, 7-8, 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0037205 (Park) in view of US 2020/0238526 (Nammoto).
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches an integrated circuit (IC) (sensor device 1100 of Fig. 11), comprising:
a first magnetic sensor; a second magnetic sensor; a third magnetic sensor (a 3D Hall sensor comprises three orthogonal Hall elements 20A, 20B, 20C; see Fig. 11; see [0063]);
an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) having an input coupled to the first, second, and third magnetic sensors, and having an output (ADC 22 has an input connected to the Hall elements 20A-C and an output connected to memory 24; see Fig. 11); and
a digital circuit having an input coupled to the output of the ADC (memory 24 and angle calculation circuit 26 are coupled to the output of a ADC 22 and would be understood to be digital circuits since the received an output from an analog-to-digital circuit; see Fig. 11), the digital circuit configured to:
obtain first digital sensor values from the ADC (the ADC 22 receives measurement values
p
→
0,
p
→
1,
p
→
2 from sensors 20A-C and converts them to digital signal values where are stored in memory 24 and provided to calculation unit 26; see Fig. 11; see [0064]);
determine a normal to a constellation of the first digital sensor values (orthonormal vector b2 is normal to ellipse (i.e. constellation) of the first sensor values; see Fig. 4B);
determine interim rotation matrices configured to rotate the constellation to align the normal with a reference axis (The calculation unit 26 receives digital measurement values
p
→
0,
p
→
1,
p
→
2 then determines orthonormal basis vectors and determines scaling matrix S (eqn. (9)), rotation matrix R (eqn. (10)), and transformation matrix M (eqn. 5) as outlined in [0037]-[0047]. Fig. 4A shows a measured “constellation”. Fig. 4B shows orthogonal basis vectors for the measured “constellation” which is equivalent to Fig. 13A of the pending application. Fig. 4C shows the ellipse rotated into the X-Y plane with orthonormal basis vectors b0, b1, b2 aligned with the x, y, and z axes, respectively, wherein Fig. 4C is equivalent to Fig. 13C of the pending application. The pending application performs the rotation using three rotation matrices (i.e. Rx, Ry, Rz in Eqs. 3-5 of the pending application). In contrast, Park performs the rotation by means of two matrices M and R with matrix M rotating the ellipse into the X-Y plane, transforming the ellipse from a 3D space into 2D space, and a rotation matrix R which rotates the ellipse about the Z-axis in 2D space to align the orthonormal. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the rotations from Fig. 4B to Fig. 4C would be mathematically equivalent to performing a rotation using 3 different rotation matrices as disclosed in the pending application without requiring undue experimentation or providing any new or unexpected result.); and
determine a calibration matrix based on the interim rotation matrices (a compensation matrix is determined as defined in eqn. (1) and [0028]-[0029], wherein the calibration matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11); see [0046]-[0047])
apply the calibration matrix to second digital sensor values from the ADC to determine rotation-corrected sensor values (sensor signals are received from the ADC 22 with the measured rotation angle applied to a compensation matrix as illustrated in eq. 1; see eq. 1; see [0028]-[0029], [0065]); and
determine an angle of a rotating motor shaft based on the rotation-corrected sensor values (the measured 3D magnetic field vector is mapped to a 2D vector based on the compensation matrix to determine the rotation angle φ of a shaft 34 mechanically coupled to a magnet 2; see [0028]-[0030]; see Figs. 1, 16A-C).
Park fails to explicitly teach determine interim rotation matrices (Rx, Ry, Rz) configured to rotate the constellation about respective axes (X, Y, Z)) to align the normal with a reference axis, however, the limitations as claimed would be an obvious variation of Park which provides the same result and would not require undue experimentation or provide any new or unexpected result. As shown in eqs. (1)-(4) and discussed in [0082]-[0085] of Nammoto, a rotation about three axes R (with the X, Y, and Z axes denoted by A, B, and C, respectively) may be represented as:
PNG
media_image1.png
128
534
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
334
556
media_image2.png
Greyscale
A total rotation R may be represented by a multiplying each rotation matrix together, i.e. R(A)*R(B)*R(C) or Rx*Ry*Rc. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the three rotation matrices Rx, Ry, and Rz for rotations about respective axes as recited in claim 1 may alternatively be represented by a single transformation to achieve the same result. Park teaches wherein a first transformation rotates the ellipse from a 3D vector to a 2D vector into the X-Y plane using transformation matrix M. Since the ellipse is rotated into the X-Y plane, the m20, m21, m22 terms are skipped. See [0036]-[0038]. Then the ellipse is rotated about the Z-axis is 2D using rotation matrix R as shown in [0045]. Note, the bottom row and right most column are omitted from Eqn. 4 since the ellipse is in the X-Y plane. While Park does not disclose a rotation matrix Rx and Ry to rotate the constellation about the X-axis and Y-axis, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate a matrix M which rotates the ellipse into the X-Y plane would be equivalent to a rotation about the X-axis and a rotation about the Y-axis, i.e R(A)*R(B) or Rx*Ry. In other words, rotating the ellipse into the X-Y plane by means of a rotation matrix which rotates about the X-axis followed by a rotation matrix which rotates about the Y axis would be an obvious variation of a single matrix which rotates the ellipse into the X-Y plane.
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to determine the calibration matrix by multiplying together the interim rotation matrices (the compensation matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11); see [0046]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 3, Park teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to determine the interim rotation matrices by: determining a first interim rotation matrix to rotate the constellation about a first axis to produce a first rotated constellation (a first rotation is performed using a transformation M which rotates the measured ellipse from a 3D space to a 2D space as shown in Fig. 4C by rotating the ellipse into the X-Y plane; see rejection of claim 1); and determining a second interim rotation matrix to rotate the first rotated constellation about a second axis to produce a second rotated constellation (a second rotation is performed using rotation matrix R which rotates the matrix with respect to the Z-axis; see [0043]).
Regarding claim 4, Park teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to determine the calibration matrix by multiplying the first interim rotation matrix by the second interim rotation matrix (the compensation matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11); see [0046]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 7, Park teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to correct second digital sensor values using the calibration matrix (The compensation matrix of equation (11) may be calculated once during the described calibration process and may then be used for calculating the rotation angle of the magnet 2 according to equation (1) in real-time during an operation of the sensor device 4; see [0049]).
Regarding claim 8, Park teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to correct the second digital sensors values by multiplying the second digital sensor values by the calibration matrix (the correction is performed by multiplying the measured values by the compensation matrix; see [0028]-[002], and [0047] and eqn. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Park teaches a method (a calibration process; see [0033]), comprising:
obtaining values from magnetic sensors (a calibration process is performed by obtaining at least three arbitrary angle positions, the calculation unit 26 receives digital measurement values
p
→
0,
p
→
1,
p
→
2 from Hall elements 20A, 20B, 20C; see [0033]);
determining a normal to a constellation of the values (orthonormal vector b2 is normal to ellipse (i.e. constellation) of the first sensor values; see Fig. 4B);
determining interim rotation matrices configured to rotate the constellation about respective axes to align the normal with a reference axis (the calculation unit 26 receives digital measurement values
p
→
0,
p
→
1,
p
→
2 then determines orthonormal basis vectors and determines scaling matrix S (eqn. (9)), rotation matrix R (eqn. (10)), and transformation matrix M (eqn. 5) as outlined in [0037]-[0047]); and
determining a calibration matrix based on the interim rotation matrices (a compensation matrix is determined as defined in eqn. (1) and [0028]-[0029], wherein the calibration matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11); see [0046]-[0047]).
Park fails to explicitly teach determining interim rotation matrices configured to rotate the constellation about respective axes, however, the limitations are an obvious variation of Park as outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 16, Park teaches wherein obtaining values from the magnetic sensors includes obtaining values from first, second, and third orthogonally-arranged magnetic sensors (a 3D Hall sensor comprises three orthogonal Hall elements 20A, 20B, 20C; see Fig. 11; see [0063]).
Regarding claim 17, Park further teaches wherein determining the calibration matrix includes multiplying together the interim rotation matrices (the compensation matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11); see [0046]-[0047]).
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0037205 (Park) in view of US 2020/0238526 (Nammoto), and in further view of US 2020/0117283 (Senft).
Regarding claim 5, Park teaches determine a scaling matrix to scale the third rotated constellation; and determine the calibration matrix based on the first interim rotation matrix, the second interim rotation matrix, and the scaling matrix (the calibration is determined based on scaling matrix S, rotation matrix R, and transformation matrix M).
Park fails to teach wherein the digital circuit is configured to: determine a third interim rotation matrix to rotate the second rotated constellation about one of the first and second axes to produce a third rotated constellation; determine the calibration matrix based on the first interim rotation matrix, the second interim rotation matrix, and the third interim rotation matrix.
Senft teaches wherein a third interim rotation matrix to rotate the second rotated constellation about one of the first and second axes to produce a third rotated constellation; determine the calibration matrix based on the first interim rotation matrix, the second interim rotation matrix, and the third interim rotation matrix (The relative position between two objects is characterized by six degrees of freedom including three rotational degrees of freedom and three translational degrees of freedom, wherein rotation about three rotational degrees of freedom may be expressed by three rotation matrices Rx, Ry, Rz, and the three translational degrees of freedom may be expressed by means of a translational matrix Txyz. The relative position is determined by multiplication of each matrix and, therefore, a transformation about two or more rotations may be represented by a single transformation. See [0002]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of a rotational transformation comprising three rotational matrices into Park in order to rotate the ellipse into the X-Y plane, then further rotate the ellipse in the X-Y plane by an angle θ such that the lengths a and b of the two half axes of the ellipse are aligned with respect to one of the coordinate axes. Park shows in Fig. 4A wherein an ellipse is generated in 3D space along X, Y, and Z axes. Fig. 4B shows wherein the ellipse of Fig. 4A is represented by three orthonormal vectors b1, b2, and b3. Fig. 4C shows wherein the ellipse is rotated from 3D space to 2D space with the semi-major axis of the ellipse “a” aligned with the x-axis and the semi-minor axis of the ellipse “b” aligned with the y-axis. While Park teaches wherein the ellipse is rotated from a 3D space to a 2D space by means of transformation M, it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that transformation M would reasonably require at least two rotations to transform the ellipse from the 3D space into a 2D space. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to rotate the ellipse from a 3D space into a 2D space by using performing a single transformation comprising two or more rotations, or by two separate rotations without requiring any undue experimentation or unexpected results since two rotations may be represented by a single transformation by multiplying the two rotation matrices together.
Regarding claim 6, Park teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to determine the calibration matrix by multiplying together the first interim rotation matrix, the second interim rotation matrix, the third interim rotation matrix, and the scaling matrix (the calibration matrix is determined from the matrix product of S∙R∙M as shown in eqn. (11), wherein it would be understood M may represent two separate rotations as explained in the rejection of Fig. 5; see [0046]-[0047])..
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0037205 (Park) in view of US 2020/0238526 (Nammoto), and in further view of US 2022/0364891 (Hammerschidt).
Regarding claim 9, Park fails to teach wherein the digital circuit is configured to perform a least mean square (LMS) operation on a result of multiplying the second digital sensor values by the calibration matrix to map a planar circle to the result.
Hammerschmidt teaches wherein the digital circuit is configured to perform a least mean square (LMS) operation on a result of multiplying the second digital sensor values by the calibration matrix to map a planar circle to the result.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of performing a least-squares fit of a planar circle as taught in Hammerschmidt into Park in order to perform self-calibration by eliminating harmonic distortion, and correct for offset and amplitude errors to improve angle measurement accuracy.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
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 STEVEN LEE YENINAS whose telephone number is (571)270-0372. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 10 - 6.
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571) 272-2258. 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.
/STEVEN L YENINAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights