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
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention of Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/29/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 07/29/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract contains at least one of the phrases that can be implied, such as the phrase “in a particular embodiment”. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the title is not descriptive. A new title that would include the inventive features of the claimed invention is respectfully requested.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase “the outer region being substantially level” includes the relative term “substantially level” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially level” is not defined by the claim, which does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree of “substantially level”. One of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the inventio as claimed. On the other hand, the specification, dated 06/06/2024, discloses that “the outer region (680) is substantially level or flat such that the outer region is absent any grooves into the force-compliant element or has a small groove” (see paragraph section [0035]). For examination purposes, the phrase “substantially level” would be understood as a surface comprising at least one substantially flat portion and can be with or without grooves. Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 3, the phrase “L-gauges that measure strain in both a radial direction and a tangential direction” is ambiguous because the term “L-gauges” is not explicitly defined by the claim as referring to gauges which can detect strain in radial and tangential direction (1), gauge which are arranged along the radial and tangential direction and are perpendicular to one another (2), or gauges arranged in a shape of the letter L (3). For examination purposes, the phrase will be interpreted according to (1). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claims 8 and 13, the phrase “a small groove” (claim 8) and “one or more small grooves” (claim 13) include a relative term “small” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “small” is not defined by the claim. The specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 10, the claim discloses “a printed circuit board configured to receive the signal from the sensing element” without describing the structural cooperation between the printed circuit board and the sensing element. The claim is incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections (see MPEP § 2172.01). The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the structural cooperation between the printed circuit board and the sensing element. Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 11, the abbreviation “PCB” is indefinite as lacking proper antecedent basis. Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Claims 2, 4-7, 9, 12 are rejected as being dependent on the rejected base claim.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
289
343
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wilkie et al. (Pat. No. US 7,047,823) (hereafter Wilkie).
Regarding claim 1, Wilkie teaches a force sensor apparatus, comprising:
a force-compliant element that deforms in response to applications of forces to the force sensor apparatus (i.e., sense element body 34) (see Fig. 6a-d); and
a sensing element (i.e., piezoresistors R1-R4) (see Fig. 6a-d) coupled to an upper region of the force-compliant element (i.e., planar sense region 34a) (see Fig. 6a-d) and configured to generate one or more signals indicating an amount that the force-compliant element deforms in response to the application of forces to the force sensor apparatus (i.e., single crystalline silicon piezoresistors or gauges are glass bonded to the sense surface as described above and electrically connected to form a full Wheatstone bridge and are disposed so that for each half bridge) (see Column 8, lines 34-53);
the force-compliant element having a bottom region that includes a force-receiving surface (i.e., hub portion including post 34e having portion 34k and a lower radially inwardly extending surface 34m which serves as a force reacting surface) (see Fig. 6a-d) and an outer region surrounding the force-receiving surface (i.e., flat region on the backside of body 34 which is located between the groove 34n and the outer periphery 34b) (see Fig. 6a-d), the outer region being substantially level (i.e., said flat region is level) (see Fig. 6b).
Regarding claim 2, Wilkie teaches that the sensing element includes a plurality of gauges (i.e., piezoresistors R1-R4) (see Fig. 6a-d).
Regarding claim 3, Wilkie teaches that the plurality of gauges includes L-gauges that measure strain in both a radial direction and a tangential direction (i.e., one gauge is aligned radially near the perimeter of the sense surface and the second gauge is aligned tangentially closely to the first gauge) (see Fig. 6c).
Regarding claim 4, Wilkie teaches the gauges of the plurality of gauges are evenly distributed around the circumference of the force-compliant element (i.e., the piezoresistors are arranged at periphery of the body 34) (see Fig. 6c).
Regarding claim 5, Wilkie teaches that the bottom region of the force-compliant element includes a circular force interface that defines a boundary of the force-receiving surface (i.e., surface 34m) (see Fig. 6b).
Regarding claim 6, Wilkie teaches that the force-compliant element is ring-shaped (i.e., body 34 is annular) (see Fig. 6a-d).
Regarding claim 7, Wilkie teaches that the diameter of the circular force interface can be increased to make it suitable for higher forces (i.e., portion 34k of increasing diameter with increasing distance from body 34 and having a lower radially inwardly extending surface 34m which serves as a force reacting surface) (see Fig. 6b) or reduced to make it suitable for lower forces. Furthermore, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (IV)).
Regarding claim 8, Wilkie teaches that the outer region has a small groove into force-compliant element (i.e., annular groove 34n) (see Fig. 6b).
Regarding claim 9, Wilkie teaches an interface structure that distributes a load to the force-compliant element, the interface structure coupled to the force-compliant element (i.e., portion 34k of increasing diameter with increasing distance from body 34 and having a lower radially inwardly extending surface 34m which serves as a force reacting surface) (see Fig. 6b).
Regarding claim 10, Wilkie teaches a printed circuit board configured to receive the signal from the sensing element (i.e., circuit board 38) (see 6a); a support structure having a surface on which the printed circuit board is coupled (i.e., weld ring is slidingly received on annular flange 34d with folded over retainer tabs 40b engaging the top surface of circuit board 38) (see Fig. 6a); and a sensor housing that covers the printed circuit board (i.e., second body 36) (see Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 11, Wilkie teaches an electrical connector assembly coupled to the PCB and extended through an opening of the sensor housing (i.e., an opening 36g is formed in sidewall 36b to allow placement of an insert molded connector/terminal assembly 36h) (see Fig. 6e); and a seal between the electrical connector assembly and the sensor housing (i.e., environmental seal 46 or environmental seal 96) (see Fig. 6a and 10).
Regarding claim 12, Wilkie teaches that the outer region being substantially level includes the outer region being absent any grooves into the force-compliant element (i.e., flange 12e is substantially flat as the groove 12n being positioned between the hub 12k and the flange 12e and not disposed on the flange 12e or the backside of the sense surface 12d) (see Fig. 3a).
Regarding claim 13, Wilkie teaches that the outer region being substantially level includes the outer region having one or more small grooves into the force-compliant element (i.e., annual groove 34n) (see Fig. 6b).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see PTO-892.-
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAN M. TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0307. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 11:30am - 7:00pm.
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, Laura Martin can be reached on (571)-272-2160. 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.
/Tran M. Tran/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
