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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 2/27/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the term “sensor” at the end of the claim should be corrected to “sensors”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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) 1, 5, 7, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inoue et al (US 2019/0265180 A1).
With respect to claim 1 Inoue discloses a detection device comprising:
a plurality of sensor (conductive members 28, See Fig. 3 and Para. 0029) each of which is configured to detect one or more substances causing an odor in a gas;
a storage chamber (installation space/chamber C1; See Fig. 3 and Para. 0023) that stores the plurality of sensors;
one or more sensor substrates (wiring board 50, See Fig. 3 and Paras. 0022-0025) each forming at least a part of a lower surface of the storage chamber and each having an upper surface on which one or more of the plurality of sensors are mounted; and
a cover (casing 22, See Fig. 3 and Para. 0023) provided on the one or more of sensor substrates, having one or more openings (inlet port 22a and outlet port 22b, See Fig. 3 and Para. 0027) that expose the plurality of sensors, and being in contact with the upper surface of the one or more sensor substrates (See Fig. 3 for depiction of the casing being in contact with left and right most portions of the wiring board).
Applicant should note the italicized limitations are directed to the function of the apparatus and/or the manner of operating the apparatus. All the structural limitations of the claim have been disclosed by Inoue and the apparatus of Inoue is capable of the recitation of claim 1. As such, it is deemed that the claimed apparatus is not differentiated from the apparatus of Inoue (see MPEP §2114).
With respect to claim 5 Inoue discloses that the at least some of the two or more openings expose two or more of the plurality of sensors (See Fig. 3 for depiction of the inlet and outlet ports).
With respect to claim 7 Inoue discloses a conductor pattern (element peripheral pads 50S, See Figs. 4-5 and Para. 0025) provided on the upper surface of the one or more sensor substrates, and
An insulating layer (seal member 23, See Figs. 3-5 and Para. 0035) is provided between the cover and the conductor pattern.
With respect to claim 8 Inoue discloses that the conductor pattern is an element constituting a part of a circuit electrically connected to the at least one of the plurality of sensors (See Paras. 0025 and 0029).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al (US 2019/0265180 A1).
Refer above for the disclosure of Inoue.
With respect to claim 2, although Inoue depicts that the cover is in contact with the upper surface of each of the plurality of sensor substrate (See Fig. 3 for depiction of the casing being fixed via a seal member to the outer circumference of the wiring board 50, See Para. 0023 and 0035), there is no discussion of there being a plurality of sensor substrate provided adjacent to each other. However, the courts have held In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) that even if a reference does not teach a plurality of a feature, a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
With respect to claim 3 Inoue teaches that the cover is provided on a peripheral edge region of the upper surface of each of the plurality of sensor substrates (See Paras. 0023 and 0035 for discussion of the casing being fixed via a seal member to the outer circumference of the wiring board 50).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al (US 2019/0265180 A1) in view of Hagiwara (US 2022/0397555 A1).
Refer above for the teachings of Inoue.
With respect to claim 12 Inoue fails to teach an environment sensor substrate having an environment sensor provided on an upper surface thereof, the environment sensor being a temperature sensor or a humidity sensor; wherein the cover is in contact with the upper surface of each of the plurality of sensor substrates and the upper surface of the environment sensor substrate, and the one or more openings expose the plurality of sensors and the environment sensor.
Hagiwara teaches a gas detection device 100 that includes a casing 10 and a plurality of sensor elements 11 capable of detecting the type of gas introduced into the casing 10 (See Para. 0030 and Fig. 1). The casing 10 includes a wiring board 1 and a case main body 2 and is configured by combining them (See Para. 0031). The wiring board 1 is a rectangular substrate having the long side in the Y-axis direction and is typically a double-sided wiring board including wiring layers formed on the first main surface 1a and the second main surface 1b (See Para. 0033). The casing 10 includes gas introducing portions 12, the gas introducing space 20, and a gas exhausting portion 23. The gas introducing portions 12 are provided in the wiring board 1, and the gas introducing space 20 and the gas exhausting portion 23 are provided in the case main body 2 (See Para. 0036). A temperature sensor 14 and a humidity sensor 15 are mounted on the first main surface 1a of the wiring board 1. The mounting region for the temperature sensor 14 and the humidity sensor 15 is not particularly limited. In this embodiment, the temperature sensor 14 and the humidity sensor 15 are disposed in any region between the sensor element 11 and the gas exhausting portion 23. Further, the humidity sensor 15 may be used as a detection sensor for water vapor, for example. For example, a thermistor is applicable to the temperature sensor 14, and a QCM sensor including a sensitive membrane having adsorption property with respect to water vapor is applicable to the humidity sensor 15. Note that at least one of the temperature sensor 14 and the humidity sensor 15 may be omitted if necessary (See Para. 0048).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a temperature and/or humidity sensor into the plurality of sensor substrates of Inoue, such as taught by Hagiwara, in order to incorporate elements that can monitor conditions of the interior of the gas detection device, such as water vapor (See Para. 0048 of Hagiwara).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, and 9-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest cited prior art of reference fails to disclose or fairly teach:
a circuit substrate electrically connected to the plurality of sensor substrates and being provided below the plurality of sensor substrates, wherein the plurality of sensor substrates are detachably attached to the circuit substrate (claim 4) (Inoue discloses that a sensor element is disposed on the top surface of the wiring board 50, See Para. 0024);
A shortest distance between each of the plurality of sensors and a side surface of the opening is smaller than a maximum width of each of the plurality of sensors (claim 6);
a thermal conductivity of at least a part of layers in the cover is higher than a thermal conductivity of an insulating layer in the one or more sensor substrates (claim 9);
the storage chamber is defined by a housing, the one or more sensor substrates and the cover, the housing having a lower wall portion an upper surface of which forms a part of the lower surface of the storage chamber, the lower wall portion of the housing having a cavity, the one or more sensor substrates being provided inside the cavity in a plan view, and the cover is mounted to the lower wall portion via a mounting member, and wherein a difference in height between the upper surface of the one or more sensor substrates and the upper surface of the lower wall portion is 1/10 or less of a thickness of the cover (claim 10); and
wherein a thickness of the cover is 1/2 times or more and twice or less a thickness of the plurality of sensors (claim 11).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Katta (US 2017/0234863 A1) discloses a detection device comprising:
A plurality of sensors (first IDT electrode 5a, second IDT electrode 6a, See Fig. 6B and Para. 0104 and 0107), each of which is configured to detect one or more substances causing an odor in a gas;
a storage chamber (space 20) that stores the plurality of sensors (See Fig. 6B and Para. 0107);
one or more sensor substrates (piezoelectric substrate 1, See Fig. 6B and Para. 0086), each forming at least a part of a lower surface of the storage chamber and each having an upper surface on which one or more of the plurality of sensors are mounted (See Fig. 6B for depiction of disposal of the IDT electrodes on the surface of the piezoelectric substrate); and
a cover (cover 3, See Fig. 6B and Para. 0101-0102) provided on the one or more of sensor substrate, having one or more openings (first and second through holes 18 and 19, See Para. 0097) that exposes the plurality of sensors. However, there is no disclosure or suggestion of the cover being in contact with the upper surface of the one or more sensor substrates. Rather, Katta depicts the cover being in contact with a film (4) that is disposed over the piezoelectric substrate and sensors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY I FISHER whose telephone number is (469)295-9182. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
/BRITTANY I FISHER/Examiner, Art Unit 1796 June 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights