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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 21 May 2024 and 12 November 2025 are acknowledged and the information referred to therein has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a first set of proof masses including four proof masses arranged in one row and/or one column (as per "one or more rows and one or more columns" language in claim 11), also a "drive frame" (claim 11; non-depiction of which in fig. 1 is explicitly acknowledged in [0027] as-published, and no mention is made of this element in further figures) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 11-20 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.
Claim 11 sets forth configuration requiring "a first set of proof masses including four proof masses arranged in one or more rows and one or more columns" and "a second set of proof masses, wherein proof masses of the second set are disposed between columns of the first set of proof masses." However, it is not possible for the second set of proof masses to be disposed between a single column. For the purpose of examination, claim 11 is understood to require at least two columns.
Claims 12-20 depend from claim 11 and are deficient under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same reason.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7-12, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2018/0216935 to Senkal et al. (hereinafter referred to as Senkal).
With regards to claim 1, Senkal disclose an angular rate sensor (abstract, etc.) comprising:
a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) structure (see fig. 10-12, this structure is also in the embodiments of fig. 17-22) comprising:
a first set of proof masses (GZ proof masses 1028, 1030, 1032, 1034) arranged in a first two-dimensional array (see the arrangement of these proof masses, individually and collectively extending lengthwise and widthwise, in fig. 10);
a second set of proof masses (GY proof masses 1004, 1006, 1008, 1010, and GX proof masses 1040, 1042) arranged in a second two-dimensional array (see the arrangement of these proof masses, individually and collectively extending lengthwise and widthwise, in fig. 10), wherein proof masses of the first set of proof masses are disposed at opposite sides of the second set of proof masses (GZ proof masses 1028, 1030, 1032, 1034 are outside GY proof masses 1004, 1006, 1008, 1010, and GX proof masses 1040, 1042 in fig. 10); and
drive actuators (drive shuttles 1020, 1022, 1024, 1026), wherein each of the drive actuators is coupled between and configured to drive a respective proof mass of the first set of proof masses and a respective proof mass of the second set of proof masses (drive shuttles 1020, 1022, 1024, 1026 are connected to a respective one of GZ proof masses 1028, 1030, 1032, 1034 and to respective ones of GY proof masses 1004, 1006, 1008, 1010 to drive these masses as per [0117], etc.).
PNG
media_image1.png
573
818
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 2, Senkal discloses the angular rate sensor of claim 1. Senkal further discloses:
a first set of common mode rejection mechanisms (lever arms 1036, 1038 and pivots 1050) each coupled to at least two proof masses of the first set of proof masses (see fig. 10), wherein the common mode rejection mechanisms of the first set of common mode rejection mechanisms are configured to suppress common mode oscillation of the first set of proof masses in at least one dimension ([0110]); and
a second set of common mode rejection mechanisms (lever arms 1012, 1014, 1016, 1018 and pivots 1050) each coupled to at least two proof masses of the second set of proof masses (see fig. 10), wherein the common mode rejection mechanisms of the second set of common mode rejection mechanisms are configured to suppress common mode oscillation of the second set of proof masses in at least one dimension ([0105]).
With regards to claim 7, Senkal discloses the angular rate sensor of claim 2. Senkal further discloses that, in a drive mode, the drive actuators are configured to drive the first and second sets of proof masses, causing anti-phase oscillation of the first and second sets of proof masses along a first dimension (the shuttles are driven to induce anti-phase motion of the proof masses along a y-axis according to [0117]).
With regards to claim 8, Senkal discloses the angular rate sensor of claim 7. Senkal further discloses that, in a first sense mode, driving motion of the drive actuators in combination with rotation of the angular rate sensor about a third dimension (along a z-axis) that is orthogonal to the first dimension causes anti-phase oscillation of the first set of proof masses along a second dimension (along an x-axis) ([0119]-[0120]), and wherein the first dimension, the second dimension, and the third dimension are mutually orthogonal (these x, y, and z axes are mutually orthogonal).
With regards to claim 9, Senkal discloses the angular rate sensor of claim 8. Senkal further discloses that, in a second sense mode, driving motion of the drive actuators in combination with rotation of the angular rate sensor about the second dimension causes anti-phase oscillation of the second set of proof masses along the third dimension (in at least the embodiment of fig. 19, the second set of proof masses is driven in anti-phase along the z-axis; see [0132]).
With regards to claim 10, Senkal discloses the angular rate sensor of claim 9. Senkal further discloses detection circuitry (at least capacitive electrodes 1060, 1062, 1064, 1066, 1068, 1070, 1208) configured to generate a first signal indicating a first magnitude of angular motion of the angular rate sensor about the third dimension in response to detected motion of the first set of proof masses in the second dimension (capacitive electrodes 1208 detect motion of the first set of masses as per [0127], and would generate signals with corresponding magnitudes), and to generate a second signal indicating a second magnitude of angular motion of the angular rate sensor about the second dimension in response to detected motion of the second set of proof masses in the third dimension (capacitive electrodes 1060, 1062, 1064, 1066, 1068, 1070 detect motion of the second set of masses as per [0114], and would generate signals with corresponding magnitudes).
With regards to claim 11, Senkal discloses a microelectromechanical system (MEMS) structure (see fig. 10-12, this structure is also in the embodiments of fig. 17-22) comprising:
a first set of proof masses (GZ proof masses 1028, 1030, 1032, 1034) including four proof masses arranged in one or more rows and one or more columns (see the arrangement of these proof masses in one or more row and one or more column in fig. 10);
a second set of proof masses (GY proof masses 1004, 1006, 1008, 1010, and GX proof masses 1040, 1042), wherein proof masses of the second set are disposed between columns of the first set of proof masses (GY proof masses 1004, 1006, 1008, 1010, and GX proof masses 1040, 1042 are between members of the first set of GZ proof masses in fig. 10); and
drive actuators (drive shuttles 1020, 1022, 1024, 1026), wherein each of the drive actuators is coupled between and configured to drive a respective proof mass of the first set of proof masses and a respective proof mass of the second set of proof masses (drive shuttles 1020, 1022, 1024, 1026 are connected to a respective one of GZ proof masses 1028, 1030, 1032, 1034 and to respective ones of GY proof masses 1004, 1006, 1008, 1010 to drive these masses as per [0117], etc.), wherein a drive frame (coupling 1052, 1054, 1056, 1058 and lever arms 1012, 1014, 1016, 1018) is coupled to the drive actuators and is at least partially disposed between at least one proof mass of the first set of proof masses and at least one proof mass of the second set of proof masses (see fig. 10).
With regards to claim 12, Senkal discloses the MEMS structure of claim 11. Senkal further discloses:
a first set of common mode rejection mechanisms (lever arms 1036, 1038 and pivots 1050) each coupled to at least two proof masses of the first set of proof masses (see fig. 10), wherein the common mode rejection mechanisms of the first set of common mode rejection mechanisms are configured to suppress common mode oscillation of the first set of proof masses in at least one dimension ([0110]); and
a second set of common mode rejection mechanisms (lever arms 1012, 1014, 1016, 1018 and pivots 1050) each coupled to at least two proof masses of the second set of proof masses (see fig. 10), wherein the common mode rejection mechanisms of the second set of common mode rejection mechanisms are configured to suppress common mode oscillation of the second set of proof masses in at least one dimension ([0105]).
With regards to claim 17, Senkal discloses the MEMS structure of claim 12. Senkal further discloses that, in a drive mode, the drive actuators are configured to drive the first and second sets of proof masses, causing anti-phase oscillation of the first and second sets of proof masses along a first dimension (the shuttles are driven to induce anti-phase motion of the proof masses along the y axis according to [0117]).
With regards to claim 18, Senkal discloses the MEMS structure of claim 17. Senkal further discloses, in a first sense mode, driving motion of the drive actuators in combination with rotation of the MEMS structure about a third dimension (along a z-axis) that is orthogonal to the first dimension causes anti-phase oscillation of the first set of proof masses along a second dimension (along an x-axis) ([0119]-[0120]), and wherein the first dimension, the second dimension, and the third dimension are mutually orthogonal (these x, y, and z axes are mutually orthogonal), and, in a second sense mode, driving motion of the drive actuators in combination with rotation of the MEMS structure about the second dimension causes anti-phase oscillation of the second set of proof masses along the third dimension (in at least the embodiment of fig. 19, the second set of proof masses is driven in anti-phase along the z-axis; see [0132]).
With regards to claim 19, Senkal discloses the MEMS structure of claim 12. Senkal further discloses at least one common mode rejection mechanisms of the first set of common mode rejection mechanisms includes at least a first lever and a second lever, the first lever is coupled to the second lever via a linkage, the first lever is connected to a first proof mass of the first set of proof masses, and the second lever is connected to a second proof mass of the first set of proof masses (in the detailed view of fig. 12, lever 1036 is shown comprising levers corresponding to the locations of pivots 1050 in fig. 10; the lever connected to mass 1028 corresponds to the first lever, and the lever connected to mass 1030 corresponds to the second lever, and connecting lever 1036 corresponds to the linkage).
With regards to claim 20, Senkal discloses the MEMS structure of claim 12. Senkal further discloses at least one common mode rejection mechanism of the second set of common mode rejection mechanisms is configured to suppress common mode oscillation of the second set of proof masses in two dimensions (lever arms 1012, 1014, 1016, 1018 work together to suppress common mode oscillation in the x-y plane; see fig. 11).
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.
Claims 3-6 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Senkal as applied to claims 2 and 12 above, and further in view of US 2022/0260372 to Geisberger et al. (hereinafter referred to as Geisberger).
With regards to claim 3, Senkal teaches the angular rate sensor of claim 2. Senkal further teaches the first set of common mode rejection mechanisms comprising: a common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1036) coupled to first (mass 1028) and third (mass 1030) proof masses of the first set of proof masses (see fig. 10); anda common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1038) coupled to second (mass 1032)and fourth (mass 1034) proof masses of the first set of proof masses (see fig. 10).
Senkal does not teach the first set of common mode rejection mechanisms comprising a common mode rejection mechanism coupled to first and second proof masses of the first set of proof masses; and a common mode rejection mechanism coupled to third and fourth proof masses of the first set of proof masses.
Geisberger (see fig. 1) teaches the feature of connecting all proof masses (102-106) in a 2x2 grid with linkages 118, in order to reject common mode motion of adjacent proof masses ([0024]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to similarly link the first set of proof masses in Senkal with such linkages, and thus also provide linkages (common mode rejection mechanisms) respectively connecting the first and second, and the third and fourth proof masses. Specifically, such that the sensor comprises a first common mode rejection mechanism coupled to first (mass 1028) and second (mass 1032) proof masses of the first set of proof masses; a second common mode rejection mechanism coupled to third (mass 1030) and fourth (mass 1034) proof masses of the first set of proof masses; a third common mode rejection mechanism coupled to a second proof mass and the fourth proof mass; and a fourth common mode rejection mechanism coupled to the first proof mass and the third proof mass. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so in order to reject in-phase motion of adjacent masses as in Geisberger.
With regards to claim 4, the combination of Senkal and Geisberger teach the angular rate sensor of claim 3. Senkal further teaches the second set of common mode rejection mechanisms comprising:
a fifth common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1012) coupled between fifth (mass 1004) and sixth (mass 1006) proof masses of the second set of proof masses (see fig. 10);
a sixth common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1016) coupled between seventh (mass 1008) and eighth (mass 1010) proof masses of the second set of proof masses (see fig. 10);
a seventh common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1014) coupled between the sixth proof mass and the eighth proof mass (coupled via elements 1024, 1032, 1038, 1034, 1026; see fig. 10); and
an eighth common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1018) coupled between the fifth proof mass and the seventh proof mass (coupled via elements 1024, 1032, 1038, 1034, 1026; see fig. 10).
With regards to claim 5, the combination of Senkal and Geisberger teach the angular rate sensor of claim 4. Senkal further teaches the drive actuators including first, second, third, and fourth drive actuators (drive shuttles 1020, 1022, 1024, 1026), and the MEMS structure including first, second, third, and fourth quadrants (the upper left, upper right, lower left, and lower right portions of fig. 10), wherin the first quadrant includes the first proof mass, the fifth proof mass, and the first drive actuator (shuttle 1020) (see fig. 10), the second quadrant includes the second proof mass, the sixth proof mass, and the second drive actuator (shuttle 1024) (see fig. 10), the third quadrant includes the third proof mass, the seventh proof mass, and the third drive actuator (shuttle 1022) (see fig. 10), and the fourth quadrant includes the fourth proof mass, the eighth proof mass, and the fourth drive actuator (shuttle 1026) (see fig. 10).
With regards to claim 6, the combination of Senkal and Geisberger teach the angular rate sensor of claim 5. Senkal further teaches the first drive actuator coupled between the first proof mass and the fifth proof mass (see fig. 10), the second drive actuator coupled between the second proof mass and the sixth proof mass (see fig. 10), the third drive actuator coupled between the third proof mass and the seventh proof mass (see fig. 10), and the fourth drive actuator coupled between the fourth proof mass and the eighth proof mass (see fig. 10).
With regards to claim 13, Senkal teaches the MEMS structure of claim 12. Senkal further teaches the first set of common mode rejection mechanisms comprising: a common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1036) coupled to first (mass 1028) and third (mass 1030) proof masses of the first set of proof masses (see fig. 10); and a common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1038) coupled to second (mass 1032)and fourth (mass 1034) proof masses of the first set of proof masses (see fig. 10).
Senkal does not teach the first set of common mode rejection mechanisms comprising a common mode rejection mechanism coupled to first and second proof masses of the first set of proof masses; and a common mode rejection mechanism coupled to third and fourth proof masses of the first set of proof masses.
Geisberger (see fig. 1) teaches the feature of connecting all proof masses (102-106) in a 2x2 grid with linkages 118, in order to reject common mode motion of adjacent proof masses ([0024]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to similarly link the first set of proof masses in Senkal with such linkages, and thus also provide linkages (common mode rejection mechanisms) respectively connecting the first and second, and the third and fourth proof masses. Specifically, such that the MEMS structure comprises a first common mode rejection mechanism coupled to first (mass 1028) and second (mass 1032) proof masses of the first set of proof masses; a second common mode rejection mechanism coupled to third (mass 1030) and fourth (mass 1034) proof masses of the first set of proof masses; a third common mode rejection mechanism coupled to a second proof mass and the fourth proof mass; and a fourth common mode rejection mechanism coupled to the first proof mass and the third proof mass. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so in order to reject in-phase motion of adjacent masses as in Geisberger.
With regards to claim 14, the combination of Senkal and Geisberger teach the MEMS structure of claim 13. Senkal further teaches the second set of common mode rejection mechanisms comprising:
a fifth common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1012) coupled between fifth (mass 1004) and sixth (mass 1006) proof masses of the second set of proof masses (see fig. 10);
a sixth common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1016) coupled between seventh (mass 1008) and eighth (mass 1010) proof masses of the second set of proof masses (see fig. 10);
a seventh common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1014) coupled between the sixth proof mass and the eighth proof mass (coupled via elements 1024, 1032, 1038, 1034, 1026; see fig. 10); and
an eighth common mode rejection mechanism (lever arm 1018) coupled between the fifth proof mass and the seventh proof mass (coupled via elements 1024, 1032, 1038, 1034, 1026; see fig. 10).
With regards to claim 15, the combination of Senkal and Geisberger teach the MEMS structure of claim 14. Senkal further teaches the drive actuators including first, second, third, and fourth drive actuators (drive shuttles 1020, 1022, 1024, 1026), and the MEMS structure including first, second, third, and fourth quadrants (the upper left, upper right, lower left, and lower right portions of fig. 10), wherin the first quadrant includes the first proof mass, the fifth proof mass, and the first drive actuator (shuttle 1020) (see fig. 10), the second quadrant includes the second proof mass, the sixth proof mass, and the second drive actuator (shuttle 1024) (see fig. 10), the third quadrant includes the third proof mass, the seventh proof mass, and the third drive actuator (shuttle 1022) (see fig. 10), and the fourth quadrant includes the fourth proof mass, the eighth proof mass, and the fourth drive actuator (shuttle 1026) (see fig. 10).
With regards to claim 16, the combination of Senkal and Geisberger teach the MEMS structure of claim 15. Senkal further teaches the first drive actuator coupled between the first proof mass and the fifth proof mass (see fig. 10), the second drive actuator coupled between the second proof mass and the sixth proof mass (see fig. 10), the third drive actuator coupled between the third proof mass and the seventh proof mass (see fig. 10), and the fourth drive actuator coupled between the fourth proof mass and the eighth proof mass (see fig. 10).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James Split whose telephone number is (571)270-1524. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9:00 to 3:30.
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-2258. 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.
/JS/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/JUDY NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights