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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: last line, change “the node” to --a node-- in order to an insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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) 1-3, 7, 15-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by He et al (Evaluation of 3D-Printed titanium allot using eddy current testing with high-sensitivity magnetic sensor) [non-patent literature supplied by the applicant].
PNG
media_image1.png
326
675
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
464
649
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, He et al disclose [see Figs. 1-2 above] a method for determining an applied magnetic field [see pg. 90 under “Introduction”], the method comprising: applying an alternating excitation voltage [via VAC shown in Fig. 1 as well as pgs. 90-91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1] to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor of Fig. 1) [see also pg. 90 under “Introduction” 3rd paragraph], the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) comprising a winding [i.e. coil] and a core material (i.e. wire) [both shown in Fig. 1 as well as pg. 90 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1]; biasing the applied excitation voltage with an applied DC current [via IDC shown in Fig. 1 as well as pgs. 90-91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1]; sampling a resultant output at a node (Node A of Fig. 1) positioned between the applied voltage [via IDC] and the alternating excitation voltage [via VAC]; and determining an applied external magnetic field exposed to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) [see Fig. 2 where the output changed the external magnetic field], wherein the applied DC current operates to limit outputs of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) to fall outside of a linear region of a B-H curve of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) [see pgs. 90-91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1].
Regarding claim 2, He et al disclose wherein the core (wire part of sensor in Fig. 1) comprises a ferrous material [see pg. 90 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1 where wire is FeCoSiB] and wherein a radio frequency choke (inductor L) is positioned between a source (IDC) of the applied DC current and the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor).
Regarding claim 3, He et al disclose wherein the applied excitation voltage is an alternating voltage (VAC).
Regarding claim 7, He et al disclose wherein the applied DC current [via IDC] operates to limit outputs of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) to fall outside of a linear region of a B-H curve of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) and within a knee region of the B-H curve of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) [see pgs. 90-91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1].
Regarding claim 15, He et al disclose [see Figs. 1-2 above] a circuit for determining an applied magnetic field, the circuit comprising: an alternating excitation voltage source (VAC) electrically coupled to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor), the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) comprising a winding [i.e. coil] and a core material [i.e. wire] [both shown in Fig. 1 as well as pg. 90 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1]; a biasing current source (IDC) configured and electrically connected to apply a biasing DC current to a node (Node A) coupled to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor); and a choke (inductor L) positioned between the biasing current source (IDC) and the alternating excitation voltage (VAC), wherein the biasing current source (IDC) is set to output a DC current value that operates to limit outputs of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) to fall outside of a linear region of a B-H curve of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) [see pgs. 90-91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1].
Regarding claim 16, He et al disclose wherein the choke (L) is a radio frequency choke positioned between the biasing current source (IDC) and the node (Node A).
Regarding claim 17, He et al disclose wherein the alternating excitation voltage source (VAC) is configured to [see Note below] output a square wave.
[Note: Claim limitations that employ phrases of the type “configured to” are typical of claim limitations, which may not distinguish over the prior art. It has been held that the recitation that an element is “configured to” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. See also MPEP 2111.04]
Regarding claim 19, He et al disclose wherein the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) comprises a core [i.e. wire] having a diameter of no more than 0.1 mm [see pg. 90 under “Introduction” 3rd paragraph and pg. 91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 3].
Regarding claim 20, He et al disclose wherein the biasing current source (IDC) is configured and electrically connected to apply a biasing DC current set to 5 volts or less to a node (Node A) [see Fig. 2].
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) 4-6, 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al (Evaluation of 3D-Printed titanium allot using eddy current testing with high-sensitivity magnetic sensor) in view of Toshiya et al (JP2001-33533 A).
PNG
media_image3.png
442
299
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, He et al disclose [see Figs. 1-2 above] a method for determining an applied magnetic field [see pg. 90 under “Introduction”], the method comprising: applying an alternating excitation voltage [via VAC shown in Fig. 1 as well as pgs. 90-91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1] to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor of Fig. 1) [see also pg. 90 under “Introduction” 3rd paragraph], the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) comprising a winding [i.e. coil] and a core material (i.e. wire) [both shown in Fig. 1 as well as pg. 90 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1]. However, the prior art does not disclose a second magnetoimpedance sensor as claimed. Toshiya et al disclose [see Fig. 1 above] applying an alternating excitation voltage [via oscillator 5] to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (first magnetoimpedance element 1a) and a second magnetoimpedance sensor (second magnetoimpedance element 1b), wherein both the first and the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1a & 1b) comprising a windings (winding 2a & 2b) and a core materials [known but not shown], the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1b) electrically connected in parallel to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (1a). Further, Toshiya et al teaches that the addition of the second magnetoimpedance sensor is advantageous because it changes the impedance of the circuit in order to reduce a temperature drift and improved the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of a circuit. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of He et al by adding second magnetoimpedance sensor as taught by Toshiya et al in order to improve the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of the circuit.
Regarding claims 5-6, He et al disclose [see Figs. 1-2 above] a method for determining an applied magnetic field [see pg. 90 under “Introduction”], the method comprising: applying an alternating excitation voltage [via VAC shown in Fig. 1 as well as pgs. 90-91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1] to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor of Fig. 1) [see also pg. 90 under “Introduction” 3rd paragraph], the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) comprising a winding [i.e. coil] and a core material (i.e. wire) [both shown in Fig. 1 as well as pg. 90 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1]. However, the prior art does not disclose a second magnetoimpedance sensor and a synchronous detector as claimed. Toshiya et al disclose [see Fig. 1 above] applying an alternating excitation voltage [via oscillator 5] to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (first magnetoimpedance element 1a), and a second magnetoimpedance sensor (second magnetoimpedance element 1b); a synchronous detector (synchronous detector 7), the synchronous detector (7) configured to output a dc voltage indicative of the applied external magnetic field exposed to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (1a). Further, Toshiya et al teaches that the addition of the synchronous detector is advantageous because it synchronously detecting the voltage of the magnetic impedance element so that characteristics of the magnetic impedance element circuit can be improved. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of He et al by adding the synchronous detector as taught by Toshiya et al in order to improve the characteristics of the magnetic impedance element circuit during use of the circuit.
Regarding claim 8, He et al disclose [see Figs. 1-2 above] a circuit for determining an applied magnetic field, the circuit comprising: an alternating excitation voltage source (VAC) electrically coupled to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor), the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) comprising a winding [i.e. coil] and a core material [i.e. wire] [both shown in Fig. 1 as well as pg. 90 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1]; a biasing current source (IDC) configured and electrically connected to apply a biasing DC current to a node (Node A) coupled to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor); and a choke (inductor L) positioned between the biasing current source (IDC) and the alternating excitation voltage (VAC), wherein the biasing current source (IDC) is set to output a DC current value that operates to limit outputs of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) to fall outside of a linear region of a B-H curve of the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) [see pgs. 90-91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 1]. However, the prior art does not disclose a second magnetoimpedance sensor as claimed. Toshiya et al disclose [see Fig. 1 above] applying an alternating excitation voltage [via oscillator 5] to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (first magnetoimpedance element 1a) and a second magnetoimpedance sensor (second magnetoimpedance element 1b), wherein both the first and the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1a & 1b) comprising a windings (winding 2a & 2b) and a core materials [known but not shown], the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1b) electrically connected in parallel to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (1a). Further, Toshiya et al teaches that the addition of the second magnetoimpedance sensor is advantageous because it changes the impedance of the circuit in order to reduce a temperature drift and improved the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of a circuit. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of He et al by adding second magnetoimpedance sensor as taught by Toshiya et al in order to improve the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of the circuit.
Regarding claim 9, He et al disclose wherein the choke (L) is a radio frequency choke positioned between the biasing current source (IDC) and the node (Node A). However, the prior art does not disclose a second magnetoimpedance sensor as claimed. Toshiya et al disclose [see Fig. 1 above] a first magnetoimpedance sensor (first magnetoimpedance element 1a) and a second magnetoimpedance sensor (second magnetoimpedance element 1b), wherein the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1b) electrically connected in parallel to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (1a). Further, Toshiya et al teaches that the addition of the second magnetoimpedance sensor is advantageous because it changes the impedance of the circuit in order to reduce a temperature drift and improved the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of a circuit. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of He et al by adding second magnetoimpedance sensor as taught by Toshiya et al in order to improve the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of the circuit.
Regarding claim 10, Toshiya et al disclose the first magnetoimpedance sensor (first magnetoimpedance element 1a) and the second magnetoimpedance sensor (second magnetoimpedance element 1b) are the same.
Regarding claim 17, He et al disclose wherein the alternating excitation voltage source (VAC) is configured to [see Note below] output a square wave.
[Note: Claim limitations that employ phrases of the type “configured to” are typical of claim limitations, which may not distinguish over the prior art. It has been held that the recitation that an element is “configured to” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. See also MPEP 2111.04]
Regarding claim 18, He et al disclose [see Figs. 1-2 above] a circuit for determining an applied magnetic field, the circuit comprising: an alternating excitation voltage source (VAC) electrically coupled to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor). However, the prior art does not disclose a synchronous detector as claimed. Toshiya et al disclose [see Fig. 1 above] a first magnetoimpedance sensor (first magnetoimpedance element 1a), and a second magnetoimpedance sensor (second magnetoimpedance element 1b); a synchronous detector (synchronous detector 7), the synchronous detector (7) configured to output a dc voltage indicative of the applied external magnetic field exposed to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (1a). Further, Toshiya et al teaches that the addition of the synchronous detector is advantageous because it synchronously detecting the voltage of the magnetic impedance element so that characteristics of the magnetic impedance element circuit can be improved. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of He et al by adding the synchronous detector as taught by Toshiya et al in order to improve the characteristics of the magnetic impedance element circuit during use of the circuit.
Regarding claim 13, He et al disclose wherein the first magnetoimpedance sensor (sensor) comprises a core [i.e. wire] having a diameter of no more than 0.1 mm [see pg. 90 under “Introduction” 3rd paragraph and pg. 91 section 2.1 description of Fig. 3]. However, the prior art does not disclose a second magnetoimpedance sensor as claimed. Toshiya et al disclose [see Fig. 1 above] a first magnetoimpedance sensor (first magnetoimpedance element 1a) and a second magnetoimpedance sensor (second magnetoimpedance element 1b), wherein both the first and the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1a & 1b) comprising a windings (winding 2a & 2b) and a core materials [known but not shown], the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1b) electrically connected in parallel to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (1a). Further, Toshiya et al teaches that the addition of the second magnetoimpedance sensor is advantageous because it changes the impedance of the circuit in order to reduce a temperature drift and improved the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of a circuit. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of He et al by adding second magnetoimpedance sensor as taught by Toshiya et al in order to improve the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of the circuit.
Regarding claim 14, He et al disclose wherein the biasing current source (IDC) is configured and electrically connected to apply a biasing DC current set to 5 volts or less to a node (Node A) [see Fig. 2]. However, the prior art does not disclose a second magnetoimpedance sensor as claimed. Toshiya et al disclose [see Fig. 1 above] applying an alternating excitation voltage [via oscillator 5] to a first magnetoimpedance sensor (first magnetoimpedance element 1a) and a second magnetoimpedance sensor (second magnetoimpedance element 1b), wherein both the first and the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1a & 1b) comprising a windings (winding 2a & 2b) and a core materials [known but not shown], the second magnetoimpedance sensor (1b) electrically connected in parallel to the first magnetoimpedance sensor (1a). Further, Toshiya et al teaches that the addition of the second magnetoimpedance sensor is advantageous because it changes the impedance of the circuit in order to reduce a temperature drift and improved the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of a circuit. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the apparatus of He et al by adding second magnetoimpedance sensor as taught by Toshiya et al in order to improve the temperature stability of a drive/detection circuit during use of the circuit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERMELE M HOLLINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-1960. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-3:30pm.
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, Lee E Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/JERMELE M HOLLINGTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858