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 1-10, 12, and 16-20 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 “a control circuit coupled to and configuring the first and second path couplers to connect test signals, produced by the test signal generator, to the test signal evaluator through a selected signal path in the plurality of signal paths, while maintaining a data connection between the sensing element and the sensor output using a non-selected signal path in the plurality of signal paths; wherein the control circuit is configured to change the selected signal path over time according to a self-test protocol” on lines 8 to the end is indefinite.
1) The Examiner acknowledges that the couplers are switches, and that the control unit is configured to control these switches to cause certain signal paths to exist by way of controlling the switches of the couplers. However, the issue here is that applicant is claiming and distinguishing between the paths by referring to them as selected and non-selected paths. Such terminology is indefinite, because all paths are “selected” regardless of whether the switches go from an open to a closed state during the use of the device. Meaning, in short, that when a switch is controlled to remain closed or caused to go from an open to a closed state, it is selected. A “non-selected” switching state is only reasonably one that causes or keeps a switch in an open state such that no connection is made. While applicant may intend to distinguish between switches whose states are changed or unchanged with the above claim language, the use of the phrases “selected” and “non-selected” do not reasonably capture such a concept. As evidence, the Examiner notes US 8,575,879 to Welchko et al. which explains “In some embodiments, after detecting the sensor fault, a short-circuit response can be applied at the multi-phase inverter by controlling selected switches in the multi-phase inverter drive to connect all phases of the multi-phase inverter to a single bus (e.g., either the plus bus or the minus bus), and controlling all other non-selected switches in the multi-phase inverter drive to be open such that the non-selected switches are not connected to the single bus (e.g., either the plus bus or the minus bus)” on lines 28-36 of Column 2. As such, it is unclear, in light of the disclosure and what is commonly considered to be a selected and non-selected state, what these terms/phrases are intended to mean. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner is interpreting that a non-selected state and a selected state are states in which connections are made.
2) Applicant is claiming that the control circuit is “configuring the first and second path couplers” and “maintaining a data connection” which are method steps of configuring the couplers or maintaining a connection by way of the control circuit. As explained in MPEP 2173.05(p)(II), “A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.” It is indefinite to recite method steps of using an apparatus claim feature in an apparatus claim, and this phrase is therefore indefinite.
As to Claims 2 and 12,
The phrase “the sensor comprises a magnetic field sensor and the sensing element comprises one or more magnetic field sensing elements” on lines 1-2 is indefinite.
1) The difference and relationship between the magnetic field sensor and the sensing element is unclear. Applicant does not reasonably show or disclosure the use of a sensing element separate from a magnetic sensor. As best understood, the sensing element is the same thing as the magnetic field sensor distinctly claimed, but where, as best understood, they are not distinct. The difference and relationship between the sensor and sensing element is therefore unclear. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the Examiner is interpreting that the sensor and sensing element are the same claim feature.
2) Applicant is claiming that a sensing element comprises one or more magnetic field sensing elements, but such a recitation is indefinite. In the same way that a car cannot reasonably include one or more cars, one sensing element cannot reasonably include one or more sensing elements. This phrase is therefore indefinite, because the scope of what applicant means by a sensing element is therefore unclear.
As to Claims 7 and 17,
The phrase “the self-test protocol includes a plurality of phases, each phase consisting 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” on lines 1 to the end is indefinite.
At issue here is that applicant is claiming that each phase “consists” of (a), (b), or (c), but it does not reasonably link or define what this means. As such, this phrase can reasonably be interpreted to mean that there are, for example, three phases, with one phase implementing (a), another implementing (b), and a third implementing (c). However, this phrase can also reasonably be interpreted to mean that all phases implement just one option, such as feature (a), and thus no phase implements (b) or (c) as the claim requires that each phase “consist” and thus only include feature (a). The same issue exists with each phase “consisting” of (b), or of (c), or of a subset combination such as consisting of (a) and (c) or (b) and (c). It is therefore unclear what features from the above phrase are required in the claim, and it is unclear what the phases must consist of or otherwise include as part of the respective phases.
As to Claim 9,
The phrase “maintaining the data connection comprises maintaining a data connection between the plurality of sensing elements and the sensor output” on lines 2-4 is indefinite.
1) Applicant is claiming “maintaining a data connection” and “maintaining the data connection” which are method steps of maintaining a connection by way of the control circuit. As explained in MPEP 2173.05(p)(II), “A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.” It is indefinite to recite method steps of using an apparatus claim feature in an apparatus claim, and this phrase is therefore indefinite.
2) 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 10,
The phrase “maintaining the data connection comprises maintaining a data connection between the sensing element and the plurality of sensor outputs” on lines 2-4 is indefinite.
1) Applicant is claiming “maintaining a data connection” and “maintaining the data connection” which are method steps of maintaining a connection by way of the control circuit. As explained in MPEP 2173.05(p)(II), “A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.” It is indefinite to recite method steps of using an apparatus claim feature in an apparatus claim, and this phrase is therefore indefinite.
2) 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 16,
The phrase “selecting the signal path comprises selecting signal paths cyclically for testing” on lines 1-2 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 “for testing” 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 testing is or is 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 2-4 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 2-4 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 and 18,
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).
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); and a control circuit (60 or that portion of 60 that provides control over 30 and 70) coupled to and configuring the first and second path couplers to connect test signals, produced by the test signal generator, to the test signal evaluator through a selected signal path in the plurality of signal paths, while maintaining a data connection between the sensing element and the sensor output using a non-selected 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); wherein the control circuit is configured to change 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 2,
PEEV discloses the sensor comprises a magnetic field sensor and the sensing element comprises one or more magnetic field sensing elements (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 for testing (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, each phase consisting 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 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 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 9,
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 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 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).
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 sensor comprises a magnetic field sensor and the sensing element comprises one or more magnetic field sensing elements (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 for testing (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 consisting 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 1) US 2016/0097806 to Muthers et al. which discloses a method of testing a signal path, 2) US 2022/0308129 to Kitade which disclose a magnetic sensor with a test circuit, and 3) US 2008/0103705 to Hammerschmidt which discloses a magnetic sensor with a test circuit.
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