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 71, 80-81 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 71 recites “ or……or…..or…..and/or…. or…..and/or…and/or…..or..” It is not clear how the claim is divided and what is required and is therefore indefinite. Claim 80 recites “the probe signal”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 81 recites “ A non-transitory digital storage medium having a computer program stored thereon to perform the method for operating a sensor array when said computer program is run by a computer.” It is not clear what “the method” is referring to and is therefore indefinite. Claims that depend on the above rejected claims are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
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) 81 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Manoli (US 2020/0359921 A1).
With respect to Claim 81 Manoli teaches A non-transitory digital storage medium having a computer program stored thereon to perform the method for operating a sensor array when said computer program is run by a computer. (See Para[0002])
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) 80 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manoli (US 2020/0359921 A1).
With respect to Claim 80 Manoli teaches A method for operating a sensor array, the method comprising(See Fig 2, 3):: recording of an analog signal with a sensor element of a modular recording site of a plurality of modular recording sites of the sensor array (See Para[0015]); converting of the analog signal into a digital sensor signal using the respective in-situ analog-to-digital converter of the modular recording site (See Para[0014]); reducing a data rate of the respective digital sensor signal acquired by the modular recording site of the plurality of modular recording sites using the data compression unit (See Para[0103]); determining the probe signal based on the digital sensor signal with the reduced data rate using the base of the sensor array; and providing the probe signal to a remote device using the base of the sensor array. (See Para[0050]) However Manoli is silent to the language of determining the probe signal based on the digital sensor signal with the reduced data rate using the base of the sensor array; and Nevertheless it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to determining the probe signal based on the digital sensor signal with the reduced data rate using the base of the sensor array since Manoli teaches that the data rate can be different (See Para[0103]) and thus determining the probe signal would be the result of an option that Manoli suggests.
Claim(s) 62-74, 76-79 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manoli (US 2020/0359921 A1) in view of Ould-Ahmed-Vall (US 2017/0031681 A1).
With respect to Claim 62 Manoli teaches A sensor array comprising (See Fig 2, 3): a base for providing a probe signal; (See Fig 1, component 110 and Para0078]) a plurality of modular recording sites, wherein each modular recording site of the plurality of modular recording sites comprises, (See Fig 1, component 120 and Para0078]) a CMOS substrate, (See Para[0124]) at least one sensor element configured for receiving an analog signal (See Para[0037]), an in-situ analog-to-digital converter configured for converting the analog signal into a digital sensor signal (See Fig 2 Component 226), and However Manoli is silent to the language of a reduction element configured to reduce a word size of the digital sensor signal. Nevertheless Ould-Ahmed-Vall teaches a reduction element configured to reduce a word size of the digital sensor signal (See Para[0038]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Manoli and reduce a word size such as that of Nevertheless Ould-Ahmed-Vall One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Manoli because doing so would improve efficiency. With respect to Claim 63 Manoli is silent to the language of The sensor array according to claim 62, wherein, for each modular recording site, the respective reduction element is configured to reduce the word size of the respective digital sensor signal by omitting a predefined number of high-order bits. Nevertheless Ould-Ahmed-Vall teaches wherein, for each modular recording site, the respective reduction element is configured to reduce the word size of the respective digital sensor signal by omitting a predefined number of high-order bits (See Para[0079) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Manoli reduce word size such as that of Ould-Ahmed-Vall One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Manoli because to improve efficiency. With respect to Claim 64 Manoli is silent to the language of The sensor array according to claim 62, wherein the respective reduction element is configured to reduce the word size of the digital sensor signal by determining a difference between a preceding digital sensor signal acquired by the respective modular recording site during a first instance of time and the digital sensor signal acquired by the respective modular recording site during a second, later instance of time. Nevertheless Ould-Ahmed-Vall teaches wherein, for each modular recording site, the respective reduction element is configured to reduce the word size of the respective digital sensor signal by omitting a predefined number of high-order bits (See Para[0079) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Manoli reduce word size such as that of Ould-Ahmed-Vall One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Manoli because to improve efficiency. With respect to Claim 65 Manoli is silent to the language of The sensor array according to claim 62, wherein the respective reduction element is configured to reduce the word size of the digital sensor signal by determining a difference between two consecutive samples of the digital sensor signal acquired by the respective modular recording site. Nevertheless Ould-Ahmed-Vall teaches wherein the respective reduction element is configured to reduce the word size of the digital sensor signal by determining a difference between two consecutive samples of the digital sensor signal acquired by the respective modular recording site. (See Para[0038]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Manoli and reduce a word size such as that of Nevertheless Ould-Ahmed-Vall One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Manoli because doing so would improve efficiency. With respect to Claim 66 Manoli is silent to the language of The sensor array according to claim 64,
wherein the respective reduction element is configured to determine the difference to acquire a delta-signal or a delta-value, and wherein the base is configured to provide the probe signal based on the delta-signal or the delta-value. Nevertheless Ould-Ahmed-Vall teaches wherein the respective reduction element is configured to determine the difference to acquire a delta-signal or a delta-value, and wherein the base is configured to provide the probe signal based on the delta-signal or the delta-value. (See Para[0038]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Manoli and provide the probe signal based on the delta-signal or the delta-value such as that of Nevertheless Ould-Ahmed-Vall One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Manoli because doing so would improve efficiency. With respect to Claim 67 Manoli teaches The sensor array according to one of claim 62, wherein the base is configured to provide the probe signal based on the digital sensor signals provided by the plurality of modular recording sites. (See Abstract) With respect to Claim 68 Manoli teaches The sensor array according to one of claim 62, wherein each modular recording site of the plurality of modular recording sites comprises a communication interface; and wherein the communication interfaces of the plurality of modular recording sites are connected serially or/and in parallel with respect to each other and to the base. (See Para[0012]) With respect to Claim 69 Manoli teaches The sensor array according to claim 62, wherein each modular recording site comprises a first-order or higher-order delta-sigma analog-to-digital converter as the in-situ analog-to-digital converter. (See Para[0034]) With respect to Claim 70 Manoli teaches The sensor array according to one of claim 62, wherein each in-situ analog-to-digital converter is configured for operating in a first operating mode for performing a first quantization of the analog signal using a first quantization setting and to acquire a residual error from the first quantization; and for operating in a second operating mode for performing a second quantization of the residual error using a second, different quantization setting for a same element of the analog-to-digital converter. (See Para[0103]) With respect to Claim 71 Manoli teaches The sensor array of claim 70, wherein each in-situ analog-to-digital converter comprises a signal input and is configured for providing a connection between the signal input and the signal in the first operating mode and for disconnecting the signal input from the signal in the second operating mode; or wherein the first operating mode and the second operating mode differ from each other in view of an amplification applied in a feedback loop of a delta-sigma modulator of the analog-to-digital converter; a sampling rate of the delta-sigma modulator; and/or of a signal shape applied for sampling in the delta-sigma-modulator; or (See Para[0095] wherein in the second operating mode an integrator and/or a quantizer and/or a feedback DAC of a delta-sigma modulator of an analog-to-digital-converter is reused with respect to the first operating mode; or wherein a delta-sigma-modulator of a digital-to-analog converter is implemented in absence of an input-feedforward path. With respect to Claim 72 Manoli teaches The sensor array according to claim 62, wherein the plurality of modular recording sites is arranged along an axial direction and forms an array along the axial direction; wherein an extension of the base along a first perpendicular direction perpendicular to the axial direction is at most an extension of the plurality of modular recording sites along the first perpendicular direction; and wherein an extension of the base along a second perpendicular direction perpendicular to the axial direction is at most an extension of the plurality of modular recording sites along the second perpendicular direction. (See Para[0038]) With respect to Claim 73 Manoli teaches The sensor array according to claim 62, wherein a cross section of the plurality of modular recording sites in a plane perpendicular to an axial extension of the sensor array is independent of the number of modular recording sites. (See Para[0038]) With respect to Claim 74 Manoli teaches The sensor array according to claim 62, wherein each modular recording site of the plurality of modular recording sites is divided into an analog part and a digital part, (See Para[0014] wherein the analog part and the digital part comprise a separate supply routing (See Fig 1-5), wherein the digital part is shielded from the analog part by a first conductive element(See Fig 1-5), wherein a second conductive element is arranged encircling a connector of the sensor element so as to shield the analog part and the digital part from the sensor element(See Fig 1-5), wherein the analog part is configured to convert the signal received by the sensor element into the digital sensor signal(See Fig 1-5), wherein the analog part and the digital part are coupled for providing the digital sensor signal to the digital part, wherein the digital part is configured to provide the digital sensor signal to the base(See Fig 1-5). With respect to Claim 76 Manoli teaches A measurement system comprising a sensor array according to claim 62, a reference electrode, and a reference control unit configured to control a reference voltage applied to the reference electrode. (See Para[0081]) With respect to Claim 77 Manoli teaches The measurement system according to claim 76, wherein the reduction element of the sensor array or a plurality of reduction elements comprising the reduction element is configured for omitting, for each digital sensor signal provided by the plurality of modular recording sites, a predefined number of high-order bits, wherein a respective difference between two consecutive samples of the respective digital sensor signal is determinable, wherein a reconstructed value of a temporally last sample of the two consecutive samples is determinable based on the respective difference. (See Para[0105]) With respect to Claim 78 Manoli teaches The measurement system according to claim 76, wherein the reduction element and/or data compression unit of the sensor array or a plurality of reduction elements and/or data compression units comprising the reduction element and/or data compression unit is configured for determining, for each digital sensor signal provided by the plurality of modular recording sites, a respective difference between two consecutive samples of the respective digital sensor signal, wherein a reconstructed value of a temporally last sample of the two consecutive samples is determinable based on the respective difference. (See Para[0105]) With respect to Claim 79 Manoli teaches The measurement system according to claim 77, wherein in an initial step the reference control unit is configured to change a potential applied to the reference electrode until, for each modular recording site of the plurality of modular recording sites, the respective difference equals zero and then, in a further step, the reference control unit is configured to further change the potential applied to the reference electrode with a configurable increment and acquire, for each potential applied to the reference electrode, an average of a plurality of the reconstructed values, and perform the further change of the potential applied to the reference electrode until the average of the plurality of the reconstructed values is equal to a predetermined value, wherein the reference control unit is configured to determine the potential applied to the reference electrode, so that the average of the plurality of the reconstructed values remains equal to the predetermined value. (See Para[0147][0148]))
Claim(s) 75 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manoli (US 2020/0359921 A1) in view of Ould-Ahmed-Vall (US 2017/0031681 A1) and further in view of Steensgaard-Madsen (US 2013/0278453 A1). With respect to Claim 75 Manoli is silent to the language of The sensor array according to claim 62, further comprising, in each modular recording site, an offset compensation circuit configured for compensating an offset in the analog signal. Nevertheless Steensgaard-Madsen teaches further comprising, in each modular recording site, an offset compensation circuit configured for compensating an offset in the analog signal. (See Para[0094]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Manoli and have an offset such as that of Steensgaard-Madsen One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to modify Manoli because an offset would 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