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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I (Claims 17 - 24) in the reply filed on 10/31/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 25 and 26 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
EXAMINER’S AMENDMENT
Authorization for this examiner’s amendment was given in an interview with Duncan Stark on 02/19/2026.
It was agreed to change the dependency of claim 27 to claim 17.
Therefore, claims 17 – 24 and 27 – 32 are being examined on merits.
The application has been amended as follows:
In the claims:
Claim 27, line 4, delete the phrase “and/or are produced by a method of claim 25”.
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 21 – 24 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 21 recites the limitation "the entire flux collection element" in lines 1 and 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the reinforcement" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the at least one mechanical reinforcement" in lines 1 and 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the reshaping edges" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 is rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 22.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 27 - 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 27 recites the phrase “the first flux collection element and the second flux collection element are formed as claimed in claim 17” but does not recite any further structural features or further limitations to further narrow claim 27. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claims 28 - 32 is rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 27.
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) 17 and 19 - 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McDonald et al. (EP 2434259).
As to claim 17, McDonald et al. (hereinafter McDonald) discloses a target magnet assembly for a rotation sensor used with a steering gear a first collection zone (70) and a second collection zone (75), wherein the first collection zone (70) is arranged in a first plane and includes a first attachment edge (Fig. 3 and 4), and the second collection zone (75) is arranged in a second plane and includes a second attachment edge (Fig. 3 and 4), and wherein a connection (65) between the first collection zone and the second collection zone includes a magnetically conductive connection portion between the first attachment edge and the second attachment edge (Fig. 3, 4; shaping edge between 90 and 85; 92 and 87; sections 270/275), wherein the connection is mechanically reinforced (Fig. 3, (bead on the shaping edge) or the connecting section between the two sections 270/275, Fig. 4), [0030] – [0037].
PNG
media_image1.png
622
898
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 19, McDonald discloses that the first collection zone (70; 90 and 85, Fig. 3), the second collection zone (75; 92, 87) and the connection portion (65) are formed together in one piece [0030].
As to claim 20, McDonald discloses that the connection (65) is mechanically reinforced by a reshaping process (Fig. 3, [0030]).
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) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McDonald et al. (EP 2434259) in view of Wolfgang et al. (DE19825433).
As to claim 18, McDonald fails to explicitly disclose that the connection portion is asymmetrical with respect to a center position of the first attachment edge and a center position of the second attachment edge. Wolfgang et al. (Wolfgang) hereinafter Wolfgang discloses a magnetic position sensor wherein the connection portion (18a) is asymmetrical with respect to a center position of the first attachment edge (24) and a center position of the second attachment edge (25) (Fig. 4 and 5).
PNG
media_image2.png
454
434
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of McDonald in view of the teachings of Wolfgang wherein the connection portion is asymmetrical with respect to a center position of the first attachment edge and a center position of the second attachment edge would result in accurately detecting the relative angle of the magnet with respect to the first and second collection zone.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant s disclosure.
Frachon (20220136918) is cited for its disclosure of a position sensor.
SUZUKI et al. (20200158795) is cited for its disclosure of torque detection device and magnetic sensor module.
Jun (10094722) is cited for its disclosure of torque sensor device.
Eggimann (8087305) is cited for its disclosure of a system including a magnet and first and second concentrators.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REENA AURORA whose telephone number is (571)272-2263. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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 5712705628. 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.
/REENA AURORA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858