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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites “the insulator or the substrate is formed with information indicative of or representing temperature characteristics of the strain gauge.” It is unclear from the claims how this is achieved or how it is limiting. As it is common to print a marking on electronics, which allows the characteristics of the device to be retrieved from a database, marking(s) printed will be considered to have met the claimed limitation.
Regarding claim 4, “a stain body” is recited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, it is defined in claim 7 that a difference in resistance temperature coefficient (TCR) of a plurality of strain gauge components is 0.5 ppm/°C. For a set of strain gauges with more than two strain gauges, it seems to be impossible that all strain gauges have a TCR difference of 0.5 ppm/°C with all the remaining strain gauges in the set. The claim is therefore ambiguous when the plurality of strain gauges comprises more than two strain gauges. The description and drawings are rather vague regarding this feature, and an intended limitation implied by the feature also does not derive from the description and drawings.
As it is common in the field to use strange gauges that have a similar TCR, the claimed limitation is interpretated as that of a difference in resistance temperature coefficient (TCR) of a plurality of strain gauge components to be less than 0.5 ppm/°C.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kikuchi et al., EP0534226 (in English; see IDS).
Regarding claims 1 and 4, Kikuchi teaches a strain gauge component (see at least figs. 1-2, 4-5, 7-9 and 20-21 and the respective columns under the heading of Description) to be attached to a strain body (beam 3) that deforms when a load is applied to the strain body, the strain gauge component comprising:
a strain gauge including an insulator (resin layer 22; fig. 7) having an insulating property and a resistor (strain gauge circuit pattern 1; fig. 5) disposed on the insulator and having an electric resistance value varying with deformation of the strain body; and
a substrate (stainless steel 21) on which the insulator of the strain gauge is disposed,
wherein the substrate is formed of a metal containing aluminum or stainless steel having the same properties as the strain body (both the beam strain body 3 and the substrate 21 are made of stainless steel to reduce the differences in the temperature coefficient).
Regarding claim 3, Kikuchi teaches the strain gauge component according to claim 1, further comprising a bonding portion disposed between the insulator and the substrate and cured by heat treatment (Kikuchi teaches that “The elastic metal substrate 2 thus manufactured is fixedly bonded to the beam 3 such that the strain gauge pattern section 1a is located at the deformation area 8(7). In this case, bonding is effected by an adhesive, such as an epoxy resin.
If the elastic metal substrate 2 and beam 3 are made of a heat-resistant material such as stainless steel, then the elastic metal substrate 2 is thermocompression bonded to the beam 3 after their bonding faces have been gold-plated. In order to obtain a stable bond after such bonding has been effected, use may be made of an adhesive mixed with a filler comprised of finely powdered ceramics.” Kikuchi further teaches that “If the elastic metal substrate 2 and beam 3 are made of a heat-resistant material such as stainless steel, then the elastic metal substrate 2 is thermocompression bonded to the beam 3 after their bonding faces have been gold-plated.”).
Regarding claim 5, Kikuchi teaches the load cell according to claim 4, wherein the strain body has a recess (formed by ledged 18 and 19; see figs. 20-21) in which the substrate (2) is accommodated at a position where the strain gauge component is disposed.
Regarding claim 6, Kikuchi teaches the load cell according to claim 4, wherein the strain body has an opening (openings 7 and 8; see at least fig. 2) that opens toward the substrate at a position where the strain gauge component (2) is disposed.
Regarding claim 7, Kikuchi teaches the load cell according to claim 4, wherein a plurality of the strain gauge components are attached to the strain body, and a difference in resistance temperature coefficient of the plurality of strain gauge components is within 0.5 ppm/°C (Kikuchi teaches that “The respective layers 22 to 25 are formed of thin layers sequentially produced within the same vacuum container. The thickness of these layers 22 to 25, though differing depending upon the configuration of the pattern and arrangement of a detection circuit for detecting a signal of a strain sensor, is set, for example, to be 4 µm for an insulating resin layer 22 formed of a polyimide layer, 1,000 Å for a strain gauge resistive layer 23 formed of a Ni-Cr-Si layer; 5,000 Å for a temperature compensation resistive layer 24 formed of a Ti layer and about 2 µm for a lead interconnection layer 25 formed of a Cu layer.”).
Regarding claim 8, Kikuchi teaches a method for manufacturing a load cell comprising: a strain gauge including an insulator (22) having an insulating property and a resistor (1)
disposed on the insulator and having an electric resistance value varying with deformation of a strain body (3) when a load is applied to the strain body; a substrate formed of a metal containing aluminum or stainless steel (both the beam strain body 3 and the substrate 21 are made of stainless steel to reduce the differences in the temperature coefficient); and a strain body that is deformed when a load is applied to the strain body and is formed of a metal containing aluminum or stainless steel having the same properties as the substrate, the method comprising:
bonding the strain gauge to the substrate to produce a strain gauge component;
heating the strain gauge component (“If the elastic metal substrate 2 and beam 3 are made of a heat-resistant material such as stainless steel, then the elastic metal substrate 2 is thermocompression bonded to the beam 3 after their bonding faces have been gold-plated.”); and joining the strain gauge component to the strain body (see figs. 20-21).
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kikuchi in view of Swiergel et al., FR2949152 (translation attached).
Regarding claim 2, Kikuchi teaches the claimed invention except for the strain gauge component according to claim 1, wherein the insulator or the substrate is provided with information indicative of or representing temperature characteristic of the strain gauge.
Swiergel teaches the gauge comprising an identification element placed on the outer surface of said substrate. Said identification element making it possible to identify said gauge individually. This identification element may be a label with an authentication sign written in clear such as a barcode, the characteristics of this sign being introduced into a database to connect the position of the gauge and its identification.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Swiegel with Kikuchi, since the markings on substrates taught by Swiegel allows for visual identification (characteristics of the strain gauge) of the strain gauge and its information for the strain components of Kikuchi.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYUNG S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1994. The examiner can normally be reached 7AM-3PM M-F.
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, Renee Luebke can be reached at 571-272-2009. 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.
/KYUNG S LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights