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 § 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, 4, 8, 11, 15, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Winer (EP4075100A1).
With respect to Claim 1 Winer teaches A system comprising: (See Fig 1) a shaft configured to rotate about an axis (See Fig 1-4 Component 106, 107); a target coupled to the shaft and having a radius that varies around a circumference of the target; (See Para[0015] a sensor configured to measure a distance between the sensor and an outer surface of the target; and at least one processing device configured to (See Fig 1-4 Component 102, 108): receive at least one distance measurement from the sensor; and (See Para[0015]) determine a rotational angular position of the shaft based on the at least one distance measurement and known profile data of the target. (See Para[0015]) With respect to Claim 4 Winer teaches The system of claim 1, wherein the radius of the target gradually increases around an entirety of the circumference of the target. (See Fig 1-4) With respect to Claim 8 Winer teaches A device comprising: (See Fig 1) at least one processing device configured to: (See Fig 1-4 Component 102, 108): receive at least one distance measurement from a sensor (See Fig 1-4 Component 102, 108):, the at least one distance measurement relating to a distance between the sensor and an outer surface of a target having a radius that varies around a circumference of the target and coupled to a shaft configured to rotate about an axis; and (See Fig 1-4) determine a rotational angular position of the shaft based on the at least one distance measurement and known profile data of the target. (See Para[0015]) With respect to Claim 11 Winer teaches The device of claim 8, wherein the radius of the target gradually increases around an entirety of the circumference of the target. (See Fig 1-4) With respect to Claim 15 Winer teaches A method comprising: receiving at least one distance measurement from a sensor, the sensor configured to measure a distance between the sensor and an outer surface of a target, the target coupled to a shaft and having a radius that varies around a circumference of the target, the shaft configured to rotate about an axis; and (See (See Fig 1-4 Component 102, 108 and Para[0015]) determining a rotational angular position of the shaft based on the at least one distance measurement and known profile data of the target. (See Para[0015]) With respect to Claim 18 Winer teaches The method of claim 15, wherein the radius of the target gradually increases around an entirety of the circumference of the target. (See Fig 1-4)
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.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winer (EP4075100A1) in view of Boudreau (EP 3744951 A1).
With respect to Claim 2 Winer is silent to the language of The system of claim 1, further comprising: a second target coupled to the shaft and having a constant radius around a circumference of the second target; and a second sensor configured to measure a distance between the second sensor and an outer surface of the second target; wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to: receive multiple distance measurements from the second sensor; determine whether a variance exists in the distance between the second sensor and the outer surface of the second target; and adjust a determination of the rotational angular position of the shaft based on any existing variance. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches a second target coupled to the shaft and having a constant radius around a circumference of the second target; and (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) a second sensor configured to measure a distance between the second sensor and an outer surface of the second target; (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to: receive multiple distance measurements from the second sensor; (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) determine whether a variance exists in the distance between the second sensor and the outer surface of the second target; and (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) adjust a determination of the rotational angular position of the shaft based on any existing variance. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and have a second sensor such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because a second sensor would allow for accurate measurements. With respect to Claim 3 Winer is silent to the language of The system of claim 1, further comprising: a second sensor positioned at a different angular location around the target; wherein the at least one processing device is configured to determine the rotational angular position of the shaft for different portions of the circumference of the shaft. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches a second sensor positioned at a different angular location around the target; wherein the at least one processing device is configured to determine the rotational angular position of the shaft for different portions of the circumference of the shaft. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and have a second sensor positioned such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because a second sensor would allow for accurate measurements. With respect to Claim 5 Winer is silent to the language of The system of claim 1, wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because such a pattern would allow for a curvilinear surface having a continuously increasing radius centered at the vane axis and would be no more than predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. With respect to Claim 7 Winer is silent to the language of The system of claim 1, wherein the shaft is part of a turbine engine. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches wherein the shaft is part of a turbine engine (See Abstract) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer wherein the shaft is part of a turbine engine such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because wherein the shaft is part of a turbine engine would be no more than predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. With respect to Claim 9 Winer is silent to the language of The device of claim 8, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to: receive multiple distance measurements from a second sensor, the second sensor configured to measure a distance between the second sensor and an outer surface of a second target, the second target coupled to the shaft and having a constant radius around a circumference of the second target; determine whether a variance exists in the distance between the second sensor and the outer surface of the second target; and adjust a determination of the rotational angular position of the shaft based on any existing variance. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to: receive multiple distance measurements from a second sensor, the second sensor configured to measure a distance between the second sensor and an outer surface of a second target, the second target coupled to the shaft and having a constant radius around a circumference of the second target; (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) determine whether a variance exists in the distance between the second sensor and the outer surface of the second target; and adjust a determination of the rotational angular position of the shaft based on any existing variance. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and have a second sensor such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because a second sensor would allow for accurate measurements. With respect to Claim 10 Winer is silent to the language of The device of claim 8, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to: receive multiple distance measurements from a second sensor positioned at a different angular location around the target, determine the rotational angular position of the shaft for different portions of the circumference of the shaft. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to: receive multiple distance measurements from a second sensor positioned at a different angular location around the target, determine the rotational angular position of the shaft for different portions of the circumference of the shaft. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and have a second sensor positioned such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because a second sensor would allow for accurate measurements. With respect to Claim 12 Winer is silent to the language of The device of claim 8, wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because such a pattern would allow for a curvilinear surface having a continuously increasing radius centered at the vane axis and would be no more than predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. With respect to Claim 14 Winer is silent to the language of The device of claim 8, wherein the shaft is part of a turbine engine Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches wherein the shaft is part of a turbine engine (See Abstract) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer wherein the shaft is part of a turbine engine such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because wherein the shaft is part of a turbine engine would be no more than predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. With respect to Claim 16 Winer is silent to the language of The method of claim 15, further comprising: receiving multiple distance measurements from a second sensor, the second sensor configured to measure a distance between the second sensor and an outer surface of a second target, the second target coupled to the shaft and having a constant radius around a circumference of the second target; determining whether a variance exists in the distance between the second sensor and the outer surface of the second target; and adjusting a determination of the rotational angular position of the shaft based on any existing variance. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches receiving multiple distance measurements from a second sensor, the second sensor configured to measure a distance between the second sensor and an outer surface of a second target, the second target coupled to the shaft and having a constant radius around a circumference of the second target; (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) determining whether a variance exists in the distance between the second sensor and the outer surface of the second target; and adjusting a determination of the rotational angular position of the shaft based on any existing variance. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) adjust a determination of the rotational angular position of the shaft based on any existing variance. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and have a second sensor such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because a second sensor would allow for accurate measurements. With respect to Claim 17 Winer is silent to the language of The method of claim 15, further comprising: receiving multiple distance measurements from a second sensor positioned at a different angular location around the target, determining the rotational angular position of the shaft for different portions of the circumference of the shaft. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches receiving multiple distance measurements from a second sensor positioned at a different angular location around the target, determining the rotational angular position of the shaft for different portions of the circumference of the shaft. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and have a second sensor positioned such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because a second sensor would allow for accurate measurements. With respect to Claim 19 Winer is silent to the language of The method of claim 15, wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target. Nevertheless Bourdreau teaches wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target. (Fig 6-8 and Para[0037]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer wherein the radius of the target has a sawtooth pattern that gradually increases and rapidly decreases multiple times around the circumference of the target such as that of Bourdreau. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because such a pattern would allow for a curvilinear surface having a continuously increasing radius centered at the vane axis and would be no more than predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions.
Claim(s) 6, 13, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winer (EP4075100A1) in view of Boudreau (EP 3744951 A1) and further in view of Hagari (US 2018/0087459 A1).
With respect to Claim 6 Winer is silent to the language of The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to use low-pass frequency filtering to remove noise from the at least one distance measurement from the sensor. Nevertheless Hagari teaches wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to use low-pass frequency filtering to remove noise from the at least one distance measurement from the sensor. (See Para[0063]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and use a low pass filter such as that of Hagari. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because using a low pass filter would reduce a noise component of the frequency and thus improve accuracy. With respect to Claim 13 Winer is silent to the language of The device of claim 8, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to use low-pass frequency filtering to remove noise from the at least one distance measurement from the sensor. Nevertheless Hagari teaches wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to use low-pass frequency filtering to remove noise from the at least one distance measurement from the sensor. (See Para[0063]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and use a low pass filter such as that of Hagari. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because using a low pass filter would reduce a noise component of the frequency and thus improve accuracy. With respect to Claim 20 Winer is silent to the language of The method of claim 15, further comprising: using low-pass frequency filtering to remove noise from the at least one distance measurement from the sensor. Nevertheless Hagari teaches using low-pass frequency filtering to remove noise from the at least one distance measurement from the sensor. (See Para[0063]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Winer and use a low pass filter such as that of Hagari. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Winer because using a low pass filter would reduce a noise component of the frequency and thus improve accuracy.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOSHIHISA ISHIZUKA whose telephone number is (571)270-7050. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00-7:00.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
YOSHIHISA . ISHIZUKA
Examiner
Art Unit 2857
/YOSHIHISA ISHIZUKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights