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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1, 2, 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP 2015219058 in view of Kropp et al., JP 2010287574
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe discloses a magnetic sensor apparatus, comprising: a magnetic field generation portion, the magnetic field generation portion being used for generating a magnetic field (Fig. 9; conductor 10 produces a magnetic field); a magnetic sensor portion, the magnetic sensor portion being used for sensing the magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generation portion (Fig. 9; substrate 110 with sensors 101-103); and a signal processing portion, the signal processing portion being used for processing a magnetic field signal sensed by the magnetic sensor portion (Fig. 11; amplification circuits 142-146 senses the signals from magnetic sensors); wherein the magnetic sensor portion comprises a first magnetic sensor arranged at a first position (Fig. 9; sensor 101), a second magnetic sensor arranged at a second position (Fig. 9; sensor 103), and a third magnetic sensor arranged at a third position (Fig. 9; sensor 102), and magnetic fields generated by the magnetic field generation portion at the three different positions are different (Fig. 9;signals detected by the sensors at different positions relative to current conductor 10 and are therefore different); and the signal processing portion comprises a first differential circuit, a second differential circuit, and a third differential circuit (Fig. 11; amplification circuits 142, 144, 146), the first differential circuit generates a first difference between a first signal sensed and output by the first magnetic sensor and a second signal sensed and output by the second magnetic sensor (Fig. 11; amplification circuits 142 takes difference between magnetoelectric conversion elements 101 and 103), the second differential circuit generates a second difference between the second signal and a third signal sensed and output by the third magnetic sensor (Fig. 11; amplification circuits 144 takes difference between magnetoelectric conversion elements 103 and 102), and the third differential circuit generates a differential measurement signal on the basis of a difference between the first difference and the second difference (Fig. 11; amplification circuits 146 takes difference between 144 and 142 outputs).
Watanabe is silent in wherein the differential measurement signal is based on elimination of both a uniform magnetic interfering field component and a non-uniform magnetic interfering field component from the magnetic field signal sensed by the magnetic sensor portion. Kropp teaches wherein the differential measurement signal is based on elimination of both a uniform magnetic interfering field component and a non-uniform magnetic interfering field component from the magnetic field signal sensed by the magnetic sensor portion (Fig. 1; magnetic sensors 3, 4; Page 15; “compensating electromagnetic interfering field with which system homogenous as well as inhomogeneous magnetic fields may be compensated”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Kropp into Watanabe for the benefit of providing compensation of various interfering fields.
Regarding claim 2, Watanabe taches wherein the first position, the second position, and the third position are on the same horizontal line and are arranged at equal intervals (Fig. 9; sensors 101-103 are arranged on same line).
Regarding claim 6, Watanabe discloses a magnetic sensor apparatus, comprising: a magnetic field generation portion, the magnetic field generation portion being used for generating a magnetic field (Fig. 1-4; conductor 10 ); a magnetic sensor portion, the magnetic sensor portion being used for sensing the magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generation portion (Fig. 1-4; sensors 101-104); and a signal processing portion, the signal processing portion being used for processing a magnetic field signal sensed by the magnetic sensor portion (Fig. 1-4; amplifiers 142-146); wherein the magnetic sensor portion comprises a first magnetic sensor arranged at a first position, a second magnetic sensor arranged at a second position, a third magnetic sensor arranged at a third position, and a fourth magnetic sensor arranged at a fourth position (Fig. 1-4; sensors 101-104); a first magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generation portion at the first position, a second magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generation portion at the second position, a third magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generation portion at the third position, and a fourth magnetic field generated by the magnetic field generation portion at the fourth position are different from one another (Fig. 9;signals detected by the sensors at different positions relative to current conductor 10 and are therefore different); and the signal processing portion comprises a first differential circuit, a second differential circuit, and a third differential circuit (Fig. 1-4;142, 144, 146 ), the first differential circuit generates a first difference between a first signal sensed and output by the first magnetic sensor and a second signal sensed and output by the second magnetic sensor (Fig. 1-4; 142), the second differential circuit generates a second difference between a third signal sensed and output by the third magnetic sensor and a fourth signal sensed and output by the fourth magnetic sensor (Fig. 1-4; 144), and the third differential circuit generates a differential measurement signal on the basis of a difference between the first difference and the second difference (Fig. 1-4; 146); or, the first differential circuit generates a first difference between a first signal sensed and output by the first magnetic sensor and a third signal sensed and output by the third magnetic sensor (Fig. 1; any of the sensors can be an arbitraty 1st and 3rd sensor therefore amplifier 142 can be a first differential circuit), the second differential circuit generates a second difference between a second signal sensed and output by the second magnetic sensor and a fourth signal sensed and output by the fourth magnetic sensor (Fig. 1; amplifier 144 ), and the third differential circuit generates a differential measurement signal on the basis of a difference between the first difference and the second difference (Fig. 1; amplifier 146 receives outputs of 142 and 144).
Watanabe is silent in wherein the differential measurement signal is based on elimination of both a uniform magnetic interfering field component and a non-uniform magnetic interfering field component from the magnetic field signal sensed by the magnetic sensor portion. Kropp teaches wherein the differential measurement signal is based on elimination of both a uniform magnetic interfering field component and a non-uniform magnetic interfering field component from the magnetic field signal sensed by the magnetic sensor portion (Fig. 1; magnetic sensors 3, 4; Page 15; “compensating electromagnetic interfering field with which system homogenous as well as inhomogeneous magnetic fields may be compensated”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Kropp into Watanabe for the benefit of providing compensation of various interfering fields.
Regarding claim 7, Watanabe teaches wherein the first position, the second position, the third position, and the fourth position are on the same horizontal line and are arranged at equal intervals, or an interval between the first position and the third position is the same as an interval between the second position and the fourth position, and the interval between the first position and the third position is greater than an interval between the first position and the second position (Fig. 2; sensors 101-104 are arranged on same line).
Claim 3, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP 2015219058 in view of Kropp et al., JP 2010287574 in view of Holmstrom, US 20080309327
Regarding claim 3, Watanabe is silent in wherein the magnetic sensor portion comprises a plurality of magnetic sensors, and sensing directions of the various magnetic sensors are parallel or anti-parallel. Holmstrom teaches wherein the magnetic sensor portion comprises a plurality of magnetic sensors, and sensing directions of the various magnetic sensors are parallel or anti-parallel (¶[0015] sensitivity of sensors are parallel or antiparallel). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Holmstrom into Watanabe for the benefit of providing magnetic sensor units having high sensitivity to detect various magnetic fields.
Regarding claim 8, Watanabe is silent in wherein the magnetic sensor portion comprises a plurality of magnetic sensors, and sensing directions of the various magnetic sensors are parallel or anti-parallel. Holmstrom teaches wherein the magnetic sensor portion comprises a plurality of magnetic sensors, and sensing directions of the various magnetic sensors are parallel or anti-parallel (¶[0015] sensitivity of sensors are parallel or antiparallel). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Holmstrom into Watanabe for the benefit of providing magnetic sensor units having high sensitivity to detect various magnetic fields.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 9, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe, JP 2015219058 in view of Kropp et al., JP 2010287574 in view of Leisenheimer et al., US 20210055130
Regarding claim 4, Watanabe is silent in wherein the magnetic field generation portion comprises an energized wire or a permanent magnet for generating a regular magnetic field. Leisenheimer teaches herein the magnetic field generation portion comprises an energized wire or a permanent magnet for generating a regular magnetic field (¶[0020]; “magnetic field may be produced by a magnet….a wire”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Leisenheimer into Watanabe since the substitution of a wire or magnet would produce the predictable result of generating a magnetic field.
Regarding claim 5, Watanabe is silent in wherein the magnetic sensor portion and the signal processing portion are integrated and packaged into an independent device; or the magnetic field generation portion, the magnetic sensor portion, and the signal processing portion are integrated and packaged into an independent device. Leisenheimer teaches wherein the magnetic sensor portion and the signal processing portion are integrated and packaged into an independent device; or the magnetic field generation portion, the magnetic sensor portion, and the signal processing portion are integrated and packaged into an independent device (Fig. 3a; sensor chip including signal processing circuitry and magnetic sensors 31-34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Leisenheimer into Watanabe for the benefit of integrating the components of the magnetic sensor so as to produce a compact sensor device.
Regarding claim 9, Watanabe is silent in wherein the magnetic field generation portion comprises an energized wire or a permanent magnet for generating a regular magnetic field. Leisenheimer teaches herein the magnetic field generation portion comprises an energized wire or a permanent magnet for generating a regular magnetic field (¶[0020]; “magnetic field may be produced by a magnet….a wire”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Leisenheimer into Watanabe since the substitution of a wire or magnet would produce the predictable result of generating a magnetic field.
Regarding claim 10, Watanabe is silent in wherein the magnetic sensor portion and the signal processing portion are integrated and packaged into an independent device; or the magnetic field generation portion, the magnetic sensor portion, and the signal processing portion are integrated and packaged into an independent device. Leisenheimer teaches wherein the magnetic sensor portion and the signal processing portion are integrated and packaged into an independent device; or the magnetic field generation portion, the magnetic sensor portion, and the signal processing portion are integrated and packaged into an independent device (Fig. 3a; sensor chip including signal processing circuitry and magnetic sensors 31-34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of Leisenheimer into Watanabe for the benefit of integrating the components of the magnetic sensor so as to produce a compact sensor device.
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 FEBA POTHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9219. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 PM.
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.
/FEBA POTHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights