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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
In that case claim(s) 21 which disclose of “means for generating a first analog signal transduced from vibrations propagating through an object having a first surface; means for generating a second analog signal transduced from acoustic signals incident on the first surface of the object; and means for processing data from the first analog signal and data from the second analog signal to classify combinations of the first analog signal and the second analog signal received during one or more time frames” are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
The written description provide the following corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function: see( fig.3; par [9, 52]/the transducers and circuitry which performed the functions).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 9-16 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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, 3, 5, 17-18, 31, 33, 35, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 11,736,872 B2) and Dauhajre et al. (US 11,420,013 B2) and Huang (US 12,217,595 B2).
Claim 1, Sun et al. disclose of a system comprising: a first transducer having a first output, wherein the first transducer is mechanically coupled to a surface of an object, and wherein the first transducer is configured to generate a first signal at the first output when the first signal is transduced by the first transducer from vibrations propagating through the object (fig.3 (112); col.9 line 44-50).
Nonethess, sun et al. never specify of the transducer being a piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems (MEMS); However, Dauhajre et al. disclose of a certain transducer being a piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) (col.9 line 15-40). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding such aspect related to having a transducer being a piezoelectric and microelectromechanical so as to detect motion and vibration based on miniaturized module.
Thus, the combined teaching further disclose of a second transducer having a second output, wherein the second transducer is configured to generate a second signal at the second output when the second signal is transduced by the second transducer from acoustic vibrations at a location of the object (fig.3 (113); col.9 line 50-55).
Nonethess, Sun et al. never specify of the second transducer being a piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems (MEMS); However, Dauhajre et al. disclose of a certain transducer being a piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) (col.8 line 60-67; col.9 line 15-40). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding such aspect related to having a transducer being a piezoelectric and microelectromechanical so as to detect motion and vibration based on miniaturized module.
Thus, the combined teaching of Sun et al. and Dauhajre et al.as a whole, would have further taught of classification circuitry coupled to the first output of the first piezoelectric MEMS transducer and the second output of the second piezoelectric MEMS transducer, wherein the classification circuitry is configured to process data from the first signal and data from the second signal, and to categorize combinations of the first signal and the second signal received during one or more time frames (fig.3 (306): col.11 line 1-20).
Nonetheless, the prior art never specify of the transducer to output analog signals and circuitry to process of analog signals to categorize. But Huang disclose of the similar concept with analog output and a circuitry to process analog signals to categorize (col.13 line 5-15). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such noted concept related to circuitry to process of analog signals to categorize so as to train and distinguish the various type of analog signals.
3. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein the first piezoelectric MEMS transducer has a transduction bandwidth to detect the vibrations propagating through the object at certain frequencies, nonetheless, Sun et al. never limit such frequency band as between 1 kilohertz (kHz) and 8 kHz.
However, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the vibration signals to be received by specifying any particular frequency range and including such frequency band as between 1 kilohertz (kHz) and 8 kHz so as to allow passage of such designated vibration signal to be detected by the transducer.
Claim 5, the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more time frames (col.6 line 45-55), although, none of the art specify as the time frames comprise a plurality of 20 millisecond (ms) frames.
But it would have been obvious for one of the ordinary skills in the art to have varied the received signal according to certain frames by adjusting the desired frame to any particular range and including having such time frames comprise a plurality of 20 millisecond (ms) frames so as to improve computation efficiency and smooth transition.
Claim 17, the system of claim 1, with the object as mentioned (col.13 line 5-17), although, the prior art never limit as wherein the object is an element of a robotic arm, a wall of a storage container, a wall of a building, a hull panel of a ship, or a hull panel of an airplane .
However, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have varied the object as mentioned by specifying any desired object including the noted object is an element of a robotic arm, a wall of a storage container, a wall of a building, a hull panel of a ship, or a hull panel of an airplane as per engineering preference so as to detect the motion of such specific object.
18. (Original) The system of claim 1, although, the prior art never mentioned as wherein the classification circuitry comprises one or more of decision tree circuitry, a support vector machine, or a neural network.
However, Huang disclosed of similar classification circuitry comprises a neural network (col.11 line 50-67). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding such noted circuitry comprises a neural network so as to train the sound data for classification purpose.
The method claim(s) 31, 33, 35 which in substance disclose of the same features as in claim(s) 1, 3, 5 have been analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 11,736,872 B2) and Huang (US 12,217,595 B2).
Claim 21, the prior art as in Sun et al. disclose of a system comprising: means for generating a first analog signal transduced from vibrations propagating through an object having a first surface (fig.3 (112); col.9 line 44-50); means for generating a second analog signal transduced from acoustic signals incident on the first surface of the object (fig.3 (113); col.9 line 50-55); and means for processing data from the first signal and data from the second signal to classify combinations of the first signal and the second signal received during one or more time frames (fig.3 (306): col.11 line 1-20).
Nonetheless, the prior art never specify of the means to process of analog signals to classify according to the analog signals. But Huang disclose of the similar concept with means to process of analog signals to classify according to the analog signals (col.13 line 5-15). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such noted concept related to means to process of analog signals to classify so as to train and distinguish the various type of analog signals.
Claim(s) 2, 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 11,736,872 B2) and Dauhajre et al. (US 11,420,013 B2) and Huang (US 12,217,595 B2) and Sorenson et al. (US 11,275,099 B1).
2. (Original) The system of claim 1, but the prior art never mentioned as wherein the first piezoelectric MEMS transducer has a noise floor defining a noise at a given frequency related to a signal output in gravitational units (g), and wherein the noise floor is between 100 millionths of the gravitation unit (ug) per square root of frequency in Hertz (ug/sqrt(Hz)) and 0.5 ug/sqrt(Hz).
However, Sorenson et al. disclose of a certain piezoelectric MEMS transducer has a noise floor defining a noise at a given frequency (col.12 line 50-67). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the mentioned piezoelectric MEMS transducer by adding such specific MEMS transducer has a noise floor defining a noise at a given frequency so as to assuring the accurate precision of desired signal over noise.
Although, the art never specify of the properties associated with the transducer as a noise floor defining a noise at a given frequency related to a signal output in gravitational units (g), and wherein the noise floor is between 100 millionths of the gravitation unit (ug) per square root of frequency in Hertz (ug/sqrt(Hz)) and 0.5 ug/sqrt(Hz, thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have varied the properties of the transducer in relation to noise floor to any desired one and including having such transducer as a noise floor defining a noise at a given frequency related to a signal output in gravitational units (g), and wherein the noise floor is between 100 millionths of the gravitation unit (ug) per square root of frequency in Hertz (ug/sqrt(Hz)) and 0.5 ug/sqrt(Hz) so as to assuring the accurate precision of desired signal over noise.
The method claim(s) 32 which in substance disclose of the same features as in claim(s) 2 have been analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 11,736,872 B2) and Huang (US 12,217,595 B2) and Sorenson et al. (US 11,275,099 B1).
The system claim(s) 22 which in substance disclose of the same features as in claim(s) 2 have been analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 4, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 11,736,872 B2) and Dauhajre et al. (US 11,420,013 B2) and Huang (US 12,217,595 B2) and Seo (US 11,654,898 B2).
4. (Original) The system of claim 1 with the audio data, but the prior art never mentioned as wherein the data comprises: frequency data for the vibrations propagating through the object; and magnitude data for the vibrations propagating through the object, where the magnitude data is associated with a severity of a contact with the object.
However, Seo disclose of a similar system including data comprises: frequency data for the vibrations propagating through the object; and magnitude data for the vibrations propagating through the object, where the magnitude data is associated with a severity of a contact with the object (col.13 line 1-40). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such noted aspect related to data comprises: frequency data for the vibrations propagating through the object; and magnitude data for the vibrations propagating through the object, where the magnitude data is associated with a severity of a contact with the object so as to identify received sound.
The method claim(s) 34 which in substance disclose of the same features as in claim(s) 4 have been analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 6-8, 36-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 11,736,872 B2) and Dauhajre et al. (US 11,420,013 B2) and Huang (US 12,217,595 B2) and Chandrasekaran et al. (US 10,405,078 B2).
6. (Original) The system of claim 1,However, none of the prior art disclose of further comprising a first sensor package, wherein the first sensor package comprises a substrate base and a lid, wherein the first piezoelectric MEMS transducer, the second piezoelectric MEMS transducer, and an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) are mounted to the substrate base.
But, it shall be noted Chandrasekaran et al. disclose of the similar concept related to a system comprising a first sensor package, wherein the first sensor package comprises a substrate base and a lid, wherein a certain piezoelectric MEMS transducer, and an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) are mounted to the substrate base (fig.1 (120, 140, 130); col.5 line 1-12). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such aspect related to system comprising a first sensor package, wherein the first sensor package comprises a substrate base and a lid, wherein a certain piezoelectric MEMS transducer, and an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) are mounted to the substrate base so as to enhance the accuracy of the sensor due to its insulation via the housing.
Claim 7. (Currently Amended) The system of claim 6, wherein the ASIC comprises an analog-to- digital converter (ADC), a digital signal processor (DSP), and a controller (ch-col.8 line 15-30); wherein the first output of the first piezoelectric MEMS transducer is coupled to an input of the ADC via a wire bond (ch-col.7 line 1-30; col.16 line 15-30).
However, none of the prior art disclose of the specific coupling associated with ADC and controller and classification circuitry, but, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the mentioned ADC and controller and classification circuitry as already mentioned by specifying if desired such wherein an output of the ADC is coupled to an input of the controller via the digital signal processor; and wherein an output of the controller is coupled to the classification circuitry for achieving the same result as to exchange control signal therewith for identifying obtained signals.
Claim 8, the system of claim 6, although, none of the prior art mentioned of plurality of sensor packages, but one of the ordinary skills in the art could have varied the amount of sensor packed to any designated amount including further comprising: a second sensor package comprising a third MEMS transducer and a fourth MEMS transducer; wherein the first sensor package is positioned at a first position on the surface of the object; and wherein the second sensor package is positioned at a second position on the surface of the object at a predetermined distance from the first position so as to identifying various sounds at multiple locations according to measured sensors.
The method claim(s) 36-38 which in substance disclose of the same features as in claim(s) 6-8 have been analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 11,736,872 B2) and Dauhajre et al. (US 11,420,013 B2) and Huang (US 12,217,595 B2).
Claim 19, Sun et al. disclose of a method comprising: storing, in a memory of a device, data from a first signal generated by a first transducer having a first output, wherein the first transducer is mechanically coupled to a first surface of an object (fig.3 (112); col.9 line 44-50; col.13 line 50-60 & line 30-40/machine learning based on train data and thus inherently such data may be stored to implement such machine learning aspect).
Nonethess, Sun et al. never specify of the transducer being a piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems (MEMS); However, Dauhajre et al. disclose of a certain transducer being a piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) (col.9 line 15-40). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding such aspect related to having a transducer being a piezoelectric and microelectromechanical so as to detect motion and vibration based on miniaturized module.
The prior art further would have further disclose as wherein the first piezoelectric MEMS transducer is configured to generate the first signal at the first output when the first signal is transduced by the first piezoelectric MEMS transducer from vibrations propagating through the object (Sun-fig.3 (112); col.9 line 44-50/the object is related to vibration of an object).
;
The prior art further disclose of storing, in the memory of the device, data from a second transducer having a second output, wherein the second transducer is configured to generate [[the]]a second signal at the second output when the second signal is transduced by the second transducer from acoustic vibrations incident on the first surface of the object(fig.3 (113); col.9 line 50-55; col.13 line 50-60 & line 30-40/machine learning based on train data and thus inherently such data may be stored to implement such machine learning aspect).
Nonethess, Sun et al. never specify of the second transducer being a piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems (MEMS); However, Dauhajre et al. disclose of a certain transducer being a piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) (col.8 line 60-67; col.9 line 15-40). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding such aspect related to having a transducer being a piezoelectric and microelectromechanical so as to detect motion and vibration based on miniaturized module.
The arts would have further disclose as a method of processing, using classification circuitry coupled to the first output of the first piezoelectric MEMS transducer and the second output of the second piezoelectric MEMS transducer, the data from the first signal and the data from the second signal to categorize combinations of the first signal and the second signal received during one or more time frames (fig.3 (306): col.11 line 1-20).
Nonetheless, the prior art never specify of the transducer to output analog signal and circuitry to process of analog signals to categorize. But Huang disclose of the similar concept with analog output and a circuitry to process analog signals to categorize (col.13 line 5-15). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such noted concept related to circuitry to process of analog signals to categorize so as to train and distinguish the various type of analog signals.
Claim 20, the method of claim 19, but none of the prior art further mentioned as comprising: processing the first analog signal and the second analog signal using a digital signal processor (DSP) and an analog to digital converter (ADC) to generate the data from the first analog signal and the data from the second analog signal as digital data.
However, the examiner takes official notice that it is well known in the art to have such concept related to processing the first analog signal and the second analog signal using a digital signal processor (DSP) and an analog to digital converter (ADC) to generate the data from the first analog signal and the data from the second analog signal as digital data. Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such digital component including processing the first analog signal and the second analog signal using a digital signal processor (DSP) and an analog to digital converter (ADC) to generate the data from the first analog signal and the data from the second analog signal as digital data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DISLER PAUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1187. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-6:00 M-F.
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, chin, Vivian can be reached at (571)272-7848. 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.
/DISLER PAUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights