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 .
This action is in response to the communication filed 6/18/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regard to the arguments on pages 7-10 directed towards the previous 112(b) rejections,
No specific arguments have been presented. As such, those rejections that have been overcome by the instant amendments are withdrawn, but those that have not are maintained and repeated below.
With regard to the arguments on pages 10-11 directed towards the prior art rejections in view of PEEV et al. (PEEV) (US 2020/0132514 A1),
As to Claim 1,
Applicant argues that PEEV does not disclose the claim features because PEEV discloses a selection circuit that selects between a sensor signal and a diagnostic test signal for processing through a common path, and does not disclose selecting one signal path for testing while concurrently maintaining sensor operation through a different, non-selected signal path. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
First, the Examiner respectfully notes that what applicant is arguing is not claimed. Claim 1 does not recite any form of selecting, does not claim a “non-selected signal path,” and does not claim maintaining sensor operation through a different, non-selected signal path.
Paragraph [0043] of PEEV discloses that the output from either the sensor element or test signal selected and output, and thus while either is applied, they are “maintained” during that process. The control circuit is therefore configured to maintain a data connection between the sensing element and sensor output using the second signal path as claimed, and later, at a different time, it is configured to change the signal path has a signal maintained over time, according to a self-test protocol, as claimed. The prior art therefore discloses the claim features.
As to Claim 11,
The Examiner respectfully notes that similar to the above explanation, a “non-selected path” is not claimed. The Examiner further notes that while Claim 11 does recite connecting the test signals while maintaining a data connection between the sensing element and a sensor output, this phrase is broader than applicant’s interpretation. This phrase does not require that a signal from the sensing element reach the sensor output. Instead, it requires that data connection, which is reasonably some type of wiring that exists between the sensing element and the sensor output be maintained. To that point, the wires leaving sensing element (10) that connect to the first coupler (30) are never changed, and thus are maintained. A data connection, including the signal on these wires that physically does exist between the sensing element and the sensor output, is therefore respectfully maintained between these features. These wires themselves can be considered a data connection, because they are connections for data from the sensor element. While applicant may desire the claim to require that the sensor element output and overall sensor output to have an electrical connection that is maintained, or that the actual data be transmitted between the sensor element and sensor output to be maintained, such a feature is not claimed. The Examiner further respectfully notes that paragraph [0079] expressly states that actions and steps can be conducted simultaneously, and thus both the sensor signal and test signal can be simultaneously connected, thereby disclosing the claim feature as well. The Examiner therefore respectfully disagrees.
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 1-10, 16, 19, and 20 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.
As to Claim 1,
The phrase “the control circuit is configured to change which signal path the plurality of signal paths maintains a data connection over time according to a self-test protocol” on the last two lines is indefinite.
At issue here is that applicant has already claimed a data connection between the sensing element and the sensor output on lines 12-14. The above phrase then introduces a new data connection that is recited broadly and thus would reasonably include a data connection for either a test signal or signal from the sensing element, and thus reasonably encompasses the previous recited data connection even though it is not necessarily that data connection. This is indefinite, because it is unclear what the relationship is between the two recited data connections, as the above recited data connection is broadly recited and can be the same as the previously recited data connection, making it unclear how many data connections are maintained between the sensing element and the sensor output in the claim The Examiner acknowledges that the data connection for the above phrase is maintained according to a self-test protocol, but the self-test protocol reasonably includes being turned off such that no self-test is performed, and thus the regular sensor operation is maintained. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner is interpreting that the data connection in the above phrase can be the same as or different from the previously recited data connection.
As to Claim 8,
The phrase “the second signal path” on line 5 is indefinite. A second signal path was not previously recited, and it is unclear if this phrase is referring to one of the plurality of signal paths recited in Claim 1, and if so, which signal path.
As to Claim 9,
The phrase “wherein the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection between the plurality of sensing elements and the sensor output” on lines 3-5 is indefinite.
Applicant recites “the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection,” but where the recitation of “a detection connection” is indefinite. First, it is unclear what “data connection” for all elements is being maintained. It is unclear, in light of the disclosure, if each element has its own distinct data connection, or if all elements have a collective data connection for all elements. It is unclear which data connection this phrase is referencing. Second, the relationship between the “a data connection” recited above and the previously recited data connection of Claim 1 is unclear. While applicant recites that maintaining the data connection comprises this feature, applicant is still distinctly reciting a new “a data connection” from the previously recited data connection, making it unclear whether these connections are the same or different. Note that Claim 1 already recites the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection between one of the sensing elements and the sensor output, which would reasonably be one of the data connections or the same as the data connection of Claim 9.
As to Claim 10,
The phrase “wherein the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection between the sensing element and the plurality of sensor outputs” on lines 3-5 is indefinite.
Applicant recites “the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection,” but where the recitation of “a detection connection” is indefinite. First, it is unclear what “data connection” for all elements is being maintained. It is unclear, in light of the disclosure, if each element has its own distinct data connection, or if all elements have a collective data connection for all elements. It is unclear which data connection this phrase is referencing. Second, the relationship between the “a data connection” recited above and the previously recited data connection of Claim 1 is unclear. While applicant recites that maintaining the data connection comprises this feature, applicant is still distinctly reciting a new “a data connection” from the previously recited data connection, making it unclear whether these connections are the same or different. Note that Claim 1 already recites the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection between one of the sensing elements and the sensor output, which would reasonably be one of the data connections or the same as the data connection of Claim 10.
As to Claim 16,
The phrase “selecting the signal path comprises selecting signal paths cyclically to connect between the test signal generator and the test signal evaluator” on lines 1-3 is indefinite. Claim 16 is a method of using claim, and is therefore directed towards the positive use of a device. Reciting an intended use phrase such as “to connect” is in definite, because it is unclear whether such a use is or is not required in a claim intended to positively recite the actual use of the device. While such a phrase is reasonable in an apparatus claim, it is indefinite in a method of use claim. It is therefore unclear whether actual connecting to the test signal generator and evaluator are or not required in the claim.
As to Claim 19,
The phrase “maintaining the data connection comprises maintaining a data connection between the plurality of sensing elements and the sensor output” on lines 3-4 is indefinite.
Applicant recites “maintaining the data connection comprises maintaining a data connection,” but where the second “a detection connection” recitation is indefinite. First, it is unclear what “data connection” for all elements is being maintained. It is unclear, in light of the disclosure, if each element has its own distinct data connection, or if all elements have a collective data connection for all elements. It is unclear which data connection this phrase is referencing. Second, the relationship between the “a data connection” recited above and the previously recited data connection is unclear. While applicant recites that maintaining the data connection comprises this feature, applicant is still distinctly reciting a new “a data connection” from the previously recited data connection, making it unclear whether these connections are the same or different.
As to Claim 20,
The phrase “maintaining the data connection comprises maintaining a data connection between the sensing element and the plurality of sensor outputs” on lines 3-4 is indefinite.
Applicant recites “maintaining the data connection comprises maintaining a data connection,” but where the second “a detection connection” recitation is indefinite. First, it is unclear what “data connection” for all elements is being maintained. It is unclear, in light of the disclosure, if each element has its own distinct data connection, or if all elements have a collective data connection for all elements. It is unclear which data connection this phrase is referencing. Second, the relationship between the “a data connection” recited above and the previously recited data connection is unclear. While applicant recites that maintaining the data connection comprises this feature, applicant is still distinctly reciting a new “a data connection” from the previously recited data connection, making it unclear whether these connections are the same or different.
As to Claims 2-10,
These claims stand rejected for incorporating and reciting the above rejected subject matter of their respective parent claim(s) and therefore stand rejected for the same reasons.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by PEEV et al. (PEEV) (US 2020/0132514 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
442
416
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to Claim 1,
PEEV discloses a sensor comprising a housing that includes: a first path coupler (30) and a second path coupler (70) (Paragraphs [0058],[0059],[0071] / note the sensor 10 along with the circuit components are all packaged and thus in a housing), (Figure 1), wherein outputs of the first path coupler are coupled to respective inputs of the second path coupler via a plurality of signal paths (Figures 1,2) (Paragraph [0058] / note the various signal paths that switches 34a,34b can select); a sensing element (10) and a test signal generator (20) (Paragraphs [0042],[0043]), (Figure 1), each coupled to a different input of the first path coupler (Figure 1); a sensor output (52,62,64) and a test signal evaluator (20,60 or that portion of 60 that actually evaluates the received signal) (Paragraph [0067]), each coupled to a different output of the second path coupler (Paragraph [0053]), (Figure 1 / note the sensor output and test signal evaluator are each coupled to the two different outputs of amplifier 70, and thus each are coupled to a respective different output of the amplifier 70 (second path coupler); wherein each signal path in the plurality of signal paths is configured to connected between the sensing element and the sensor output (see above figure / note that both signal paths are configured to connect between the sensing element and overall sensor output), and a control circuit (60 or that portion of 60 that provides control over 30 and 70) coupled to the first and second path couplers and configured to connect test signals, produced by the test signal generator, to the test signal evaluator through a first signal path in the plurality of signal paths (Figure 1), (see above figure), wherein the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection between the sensing element and the sensor output using a second signal path in the plurality of signal paths (Figures 1,2), (Paragraphs [0058],[0067] / note the paths are selected to pass the desired signals via the selected switches in 30, and the non-selected path is the path between 30 and 70 or 70 and 50, and the second signal path performs the claim function when the device is using the sensing element to sense); wherein the control circuit is configured to change which signal path the plurality of signal paths maintains a data connection over time according to a self-test protocol (Paragraphs [0058],[0067] / note the control circuit must be following a test protocol to select the desired signal paths).
As to Claim 2,
PEEV discloses the sensing element comprises a magnetic field sensing element (Figure 1), (Paragraph [0042]).
As to Claim 3,
PEEV discloses wherein the test signal generator comprises a circuit configured to generate signals to test different signal processes performed within a signal path in the plurality of signal paths (Paragraphs [0048],[0049] / note the different processes tested are the upper and lower limits).
As to Claim 4,
PEEV discloses the test signal generator comprises a circuit configured to generate an amplifier gain test signal, or a notch filter offset test signal, or both (Paragraphs [0048],[0049] / because an amplifier is in the path, the amplifier is reasonably tested and the test signal can therefore be reasonably considered an amplifier gain test signal).
As to Claim 5,
PEEV discloses each signal path in the plurality of signal paths comprises an amplifier, or a notch filter, or both (Figure 1), (Paragraphs [0059],[0061] / note both paths include amplifier 70 and the amplifiers in comparator 50, and thus both include an amplifier).
As to Claim 6,
PEEV discloses the control circuit is configured to select signal paths cyclically to connected between the test signal generator and the test signal evaluator (Paragraph [0023] / since the sensor operates in cycles, the testing following these cycles must also be in cycles).
As to Claim 7,
PEEV discloses the self-test protocol includes a plurality of phases, wherein each phase is one of: (a) disconnecting the first signal path from the sensing element and the sensor output, and connecting the first signal path to the test signal generator and the test signal evaluator; or (b) evaluating, by the test signal evaluator, a test signal generated by the test signal generator and processed by the selected signal path; or (c) disconnecting the first signal path from the test signal generator and the test signal evaluator, and connecting the first signal path to the sensing element and the sensor output (Paragraph [0043] / note that each phase reasonably includes these features, because the switches are controlled to disconnect and connect the test signal(s) and sensor signal(s), and to evaluate the output response from the circuit, and thus at least includes two phases that implement feature b), where the two phases occur over time as the device is used).
As to Claim 8,
PEEV discloses the self-test protocol includes: identifying two signal paths that each maintain a data connection between the sensing element and the sensor output; and selecting one of the first signal path and the second signal path for testing (Figures 1,2), (Paragraph [0058] / note the multiple signal paths, such as the two lines 36, and where one is selected vial 34a and/or 34b).
As to Claim 9,
PEEV discloses the sensing element comprises a plurality of sensing elements, each coupled to a different input of the first path coupler, and wherein the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection between the plurality of sensing elements and the sensor output (Paragraphs [0056],[0058 / note the sensor can be plural hall or magneto-resistive sensors and that such sensors must have their own respective outputs, such as the different lines 36 seen in Figure 2 that connect to different inputs of the first path coupler, and the data connection is maintained at least after it is established via a switch).
As to Claim 10,
PEEV discloses the sensor output comprises a plurality of sensor outputs (52,62,64) (Figure 1 / note outputs 36), each coupled to a different output of the second path coupler (Figure 1), and wherein the control circuit is configured to maintain a data connection between the sensing element and the plurality of sensor outputs (Paragraphs [0056],[0058 / note the sensor outputs and the sensor connection is maintained at least after it is established via a switch).
As to Claim 11,
PEEV discloses A method of testing a sensor (99) within a housing (Paragraphs [0058],[0059],[0071] / note the sensor along with the circuit components are all packaged and thus in a housing), (Figure 1), the sensor comprising a first path coupler (30) and a second path coupler (70) wherein outputs of the first path coupler are coupled to respective inputs of the second path coupler via a plurality of signal paths (Paragraphs [0058],[0059],[0071]), (Figures 1,2 / note the plural lines connecting these couplers and that these paths are switchable (selectable via the switches 34a,34b), the method comprising: selecting a signal path in the plurality of signal paths for testing (Paragraph [0058] / note a path is selected via 34a and 34b); and responsive to the selecting, configuring the first and second path couplers to connect test signals (Paragraphs [0043],[0058],[0059]), (Figures 1,2 / note the plural test signals on lines 38 that are connected after the couplers are configured by way of controlling the switches 34a,34b and the gain is set in 70), produced by a test signal generator (20) connected to a first input of the first path coupler (Figure 1), (Paragraph [0043]), through the selected signal path to a test signal evaluator (20,60 or that portion of 60 performing evaluation) connected to a first output of the second path coupler (Figure 1),(Paragraph [0067]), while maintaining a data connection between a sensing element (element in 10) connected to a second input of the first path coupler and a sensor output connected to a second output of the second path coupler (Figures 1,2 / note the sensor elements connect on lines 36 to the first path coupler 30 which is different from the inputs for the test signal generator that connects via lines 38, and this connection is maintained after any switching, and the sensor output is connected to one of the two outputs from 70 ), wherein selecting the signal path comprises changing the selected signal path over time according to a self-test protocol (Paragraphs [0058],[0067] / note the control circuit must be following a test protocol to select the desired signal paths).
As to Claim 12,
PEEV discloses the sensing element comprises a magnetic field sensing element (Figure 1), (Paragraph [0042]).
As to Claim 13,
PEEV discloses the test signal generator generating test signals to test different signal processes performed within a signal path in the plurality of signal paths (Paragraphs [0048],[0049] / note the different processes tested are the upper and lower limits).
As to Claim 14,
PEEV discloses the test signals comprise an amplifier gain test signal, or a notch filter offset test signal, or both (Paragraphs [0048],[0049] / because an amplifier is in the path, the amplifier is reasonably tested and the test signal can therefore be reasonably considered an amplifier gain test signal).
As to Claim 15,
PEEV discloses each signal path in the plurality of signal paths comprises an amplifier, or a notch filter, or both (Figure 1), (Paragraphs [0059],[0061] / note both paths include amplifier 70 and the amplifiers in comparator 50, and thus both include an amplifier).
As to Claim 16,
PEEV discloses selecting the signal path comprises selecting signal paths cyclically to connect between the test signal generator and the test signal evaluator (Paragraph [0023] / since the sensor operates in cycles, the testing following these cycles must also be in cycles).
As to Claim 17,
PEEV discloses the self-test protocol includes a plurality of phases, each phase is one of: (a) disconnecting the selected signal path from the sensing element and the sensor output, and connecting the selected signal path to the test signal generator and the test signal evaluator; or (b) evaluating, by the test signal evaluator, a test signal generated by the test signal generator and processed by the selected signal path; or (c) disconnecting the selected signal path from the test signal generator and the test signal evaluator, and connecting the selected signal path to the sensing element and the sensor output (Paragraph [0043] / note that each phase reasonably includes these features, because the switches are controlled to disconnect and connect the test signal(s) and sensor signal(s), and to evaluate the output response from the circuit, and thus at least includes two phases that implement feature b), where the two phases occur over time as the device is used).
As to Claim 18,
PEEV discloses the self-test protocol includes: identifying two signal paths that each maintain a data connection between the sensing element and the sensor output; and selecting one of the two identified signal paths for testing (Figures 1,2), (Paragraph [0058] / note the multiple signal paths, such as the two lines 36, and where one is selected vial 34a and/or 34b).
As to Claim 19,
PEEV discloses the sensing element comprises a plurality of sensing elements, each coupled to a different input of the first path coupler, and maintaining the data connection comprises maintaining a data connection between the plurality of sensing elements and the sensor output (Paragraphs [0056],[0058 / note the sensor can be plural hall or magneto-resistive sensors and that such sensors must have their own respective outputs, such as the different lines 36 seen in Figure 2 that connect to different inputs of the first path coupler, and the data connection is maintained at least after it is established via a switch).
As to Claim 20,
PEEV discloses the sensor output comprises a plurality of sensor outputs (52,62,64) (Figure 1 / note outputs 36), each coupled to a different output of the second path coupler (Figure 1), and maintaining the data connection comprises maintaining a data connection between the sensing element and the plurality of sensor outputs (Paragraphs [0056],[0058 / note the sensor outputs and the sensor connection is maintained at least after it is established via a switch).
Conclusion
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 DAVID M. SCHINDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2112. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-4:30pm.
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 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.
DAVID M. SCHINDLER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2858
/DAVID M SCHINDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights