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 . 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 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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by XIAO1, CN 111595511 A.
Claim 1
XIAO teaches:
A gas pressure sensor (e.g., Abstract Vacuum gauge built on MEMS) comprising:
a squeeze-film damping structure (e.g., ¶0062: damping viscous vacuum gauge, damping created from squeezing and expanding mass block in the gas film: distance between these two objects h is squeezed when mass moves down) including a first object (e.g., ¶0062: lower detection electrode: stays stationary while mass block vibrates above it) and a second object (mass block: MEMS that moves up and down or side to side) capable of moving relative to the first object (distance between these two objects h is squeezed when mass moves down), wherein a squeeze-film damping phenomenon occurs between the first object and the second object (moving parts see citation related to fig.2 ¶0063/claim 7); and
a computing device (data processing module 106) to calculate an ambient pressure of the squeeze-film damping structure from a thermal noise generated in the second object (e.g., ¶0064-¶0084: Quality-factor is inversely correlated to pressure and damping force physics correlated to viscosity and plate dimension and gas gap h, and calculating driven pressure Quality-factor is inversely correlated to thermal noise).
Claim 2
XIAO teaches the gas pressure sensor according to Claim 1 further comprising: a measuring instrument to measure a displacement or a velocity of the second object, wherein the computing device calculates the thermal noise from the displacement or the velocity of the second object (as cited ¶0064-¶0084:mass block displacement and capacitance change, output voltage are measured and read by data processing module it explicitly cites: during resonance capacitance between mass block and detection electrode changes and sample voltage is output/although velocity is not measured but is implicitly interfered mathematically from displacement signal and decay time , q-factor).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over XIAO, CN 111595511 A.
Claim 3
XIAO teaches the gas pressure sensor according to claim 1, Xiao teaches mass block is fixed at both ends not only one side like cantilevered pendulum. However, XIAO is like two cantilevered deliberately to balance forces and minimize unwanted modes and both Xiao’s mass block and cantilevered pendulum behave similar to store energy , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one end free like cantilevered pendulum as a design choice to generate vibration modes and thermoelectric damping (Zener) is derived for cantilever beams2.
Claim 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over XIAO , CN 111595511 A, in view of “Peters”, US 5176031 A.
Claim 5
XIAO teaches:
A gas pressure sensor (e.g., Abstract Vacuum gauge built on MEMS) comprising:
a first squeeze-film damping structure (e.g., ¶0062: damping viscous vacuum gauge, damping created from squeezing and expanding mass block in the gas film: distance between these two objects h is squeezed when mass moves down) including a first object (¶0062: lower electrode: stays stationary while mass block vibrates above it) and a second object (mass block: MEMS that moves up and down or side to side) capable of moving relative to the first object (distance between these two objects h is squeezed when mass moves down), wherein a squeeze-film damping phenomenon occurs between the first object and the second object (moving parts see citation related to fig.2 ¶0063/claim 7); and
a first measuring instrument to measure a displacement of the second object (during resonance the capacitance value between objects changes, U is output , therefore, implicitly data processing module 106 encodes U as displacement );
and a computing device (106) to calculate a thermal noise (q-factor inversely correlated to thermal noise) generated in the second object ( mass block), from the thermal noise (q- factor correlated to thermal noise), and to calculate, from the thermal noise (q- factor correlated to thermal noise ) an ambient pressure of the first squeeze-film damping structure (function met by e.g., computing module 106e.g., ¶0064-¶0084: Quality-factor is inversely correlated to pressure and damping force physics correlated to viscosity and plate dimension and gas gap h, thermal noise and calculating driven pressure). XIAO does not specifically teach a second squeeze-film damping structure including a third object and a fourth object capable of moving relative to the third object, wherein a squeeze-film damping phenomenon occurs between the third object and the fourth object; to calculate thermal noise generated in the fourth object by making a common-mode cancellation of displacement caused by a common disturbance from the measured displacement of the second object and the measured displacement of the fourth object and to calculate, from the thermal noise, an ambient pressure of the first squeeze-film damping structure and the second squeeze-film damping structure. However, In the similar field of endeavor, Peters teaches a second squeeze-film damping structure including a third object 44’and a fourth object 42’capable of moving relative to the third object 44’, wherein a squeeze-film damping phenomenon occurs between the third object 44’and the fourth object 42’; making a common-mode cancellation of displacement caused by a common disturbance from the measured displacement of the second object and the measured displacement of the fourth object (this is core feature of dual VBA design and common mode rejection cited in e.g., col. 7 lines 37-44 ), therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to duplicate first and second object and first measuring instrument to measure a displacement of the second object of XIAO and have third and fourth object and a second measuring instrument to measure a displacement of the modified XIAO‘s fourth object; wherein a squeeze-film damping phenomenon occurs between the modified XIAO ‘s third object and the modified XIAO ‘s fourth object; and thermal noise generated in the modified XIAO ‘s fourth object by making a common-mode cancellation of displacement caused by a common disturbance from the modified XIAO ‘s measured displacement of the modified XIAO ‘s second object and the modified XIAO ‘s measured displacement of the fourth object and to calculate, from the modified XIAO ‘s thermal noise, an ambient pressure of the first squeeze-film damping structure and the second squeeze-film damping structure. Since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8 (1977). In this case, One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to cancels as a common mode error and minimizing or eliminating mistracing, thereby effectively eliminating cross-tracking error (e.g., col. 7 lines 43-44 of Peters).
Allowable subject matter
Claim 4 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4: The prior art, alone or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious an assembly comprising a gas pressure sensor wherein the following relationship holds between the thermal noise and the ambient pressure
PNG
media_image1.png
96
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where f is the thermal noise, P is the ambient pressure, kB is the Boltzmann constant, T is an ambient temperature of the squeeze-film damping structure, S is a facing area of the first object and the second object, h is a distance between the first object and the second object, μAAP is a coefficient of viscosity of the atmosphere at normal temperature and normal pressure, and d is a diameter of a gas molecule in conjunction with the remaining claim limitations.
Examiner comment
Claim 4 is directed to an abstract idea, however, the additional elements recited in claim 1 integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Based on a preliminary analysis, the additional elements of claim 1 (e.g., the gas pressure sensor, the squeeze-film dampening structure including the first object and the second object that generates a thermal noise) amount to the abstract idea being applied with a “particular machine.” See MPEP 2106.05(b).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Maruyama, US 20250130098 A1
Maruyama teaches:
a squeeze-film damping structure including a first object (e.g., fig.1: 15 ) and a second object 12 capable of moving relative to the first object 15, wherein a squeeze-film damping phenomenon (e.g., ¶0045,0047,0078,0123,0201-0202) occurs between the first object 15 and the second object 12; and
a computing device (shown with control unit CC comprising 20-24) to calculate (function met by the computing device CC and citing e.g., ¶0335,0229,0359) a thermal noise (e.g., ¶0335) generated in the second object (function met by e.g., control circuit CC ¶0229,0359).
Maruyama teaches relationship holds between the thermal noise (N:¶0335,0336) and the ambient pressure (via damping constant D): where f (N) is the thermal noise, kB (K) is the Boltzmann constant, S (A) is a facing area of the first object 15 and the second object 12 , h (d) is a distance between the first object 15 and the second object 12. But Maruyama does not specifically teach :
PNG
media_image1.png
96
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
And Examiner could not find any motivation to combine any of prior art of record to teach this limitation as obviousness.
Kotovsky , US 20200340877 A1
Kotovsky teaches pressure sensor (100) comprises a cantilever component that is provided in the vessel. A magnet (116) is connected to the cantilever component in the vessel (102). An electromagnet is provided outside of the vessel wall. The electromagnet is connected to the magnet and the cantilever component in the vessel through the vessel wall. The electromagnet (108) has induced the movement of a magnet and the cantilever component in the vessel. The movement is related to the pressure of the fluid in the vessel. A receiving coil (110) is provided outside of the vessel wall that operatively positioned relative to a magnet. The movement of the cantilever component and the magnet in the vessel is created an electromotive response in the receiving coil.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fatemeh E. Nia whose telephone number is (469)295-9187. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 4:00 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, Kristina DeHerrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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.
/FATEMEH ESFANDIARI NIA/
Examiner, Art Unit 2855
1 Prior art of record
2 See for example: Kotovsky , US 20200340877 A1 in conclusion of this action
Prosecution Insights