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 without traverse of Invention II in the reply filed on 07-01-2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07-01-2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 14 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: the word “stores” (as in “…cause the storage to stores…”) should be “store.”
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.
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.
Claim 15 is 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.
Regarding claim 15, since the third operation as claimed is not distinguished from the second operation of claim 14, it is unclear what the third operation actually entails, and the claim is indefinite.
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 15 is 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.
Regarding claim 15, the third operation as claimed is not distinguished from the second operation of claim 14, claim 15 does not further limit claim 14.
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.
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.
Claims 14-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanabe (JP 2020-106348, cited by Applicant, full translation also provided by Applicant).
Regarding claim 14, Tanabe discloses (Figs. 1-6) a sensor 10 (gas sensor: [0001], [0015]), comprising:
a sensor section (as shown in Figs. 1-6) including an element portion, the element portion including a sensor element “Rd” (thermistor: [0002], [0016]) and a conductive member “MH” (heater: [0016]); and
a circuit section (as shown in Fig. 6) including a storage 43/44 (i.e. sample-and-hold circuit: [0033]) and a controller 40 [0032],
a sensor element end (top end of “Rd” in Fig. 6, connected to Vcc) of the sensor element “Rd” being electrically connected to a first current source Vcc [0032] (as shown in Fig. 6),
a sensor element other end of the sensor element “Rd” being set to a first reference voltage (i.e. connected to ground: see Fig. 6),
the controller 40 being configured to perform a first operation and a second operation [0032]-[0033],
in the first operation (i.e. when V2 is applied to MH: [0032]), the controller 40 being configured to cause the storage 43 [0033] to store a first value corresponding to a first connection point voltage [0033] of a first connection point “N” (as shown in Fig. 6) between the sensor element end and the first current source in a state where a voltage V2 [0032] is applied to the conductive member MH [0032],
in the second operation (i.e. when V3 is applied to MH: [0032]), the controller 40 being configured to cause the storage 44 [0033] to stores a second value corresponding to the first connection point voltage [0033] in a state where the voltage is not applied to the conductive member MH (i.e. when a different voltage, V3, is applied: [0032]-[0033]), and
the circuit section being configured to output a value corresponding to a first difference between the first value and the second value (via comparator 45: [0033]).
Regarding claim 15, Tanabe discloses (Figs. 1-6) the controller 40 is configured to perform a third operation (i.e. the second operation, at a subsequent time),
in the third operation (i.e. when V3 is applied to MH: [0032], at a subsequent time), the controller 40 is configured to cause the storage to store a third value corresponding to the first connection point voltage [0033] (at a subsequent time) in a state where the voltage is not applied to the conductive member (i.e. when a different voltage, V3, is applied: [0032]-[0033]), and
the circuit section is configured to output a correction value obtained by correcting the first difference based on the third value (i.e. updating the difference at a subsequent time, via comparator 45: [0033]).
Regarding claim 19, Tanabe discloses (Figs. 1-6) the sensor section includes
a base body 21 [0027], and
a first support portion 11/12 fixed to the base 21 (as shown in Fig. 2),
the first support portion 11/12 supports the element portion Rd/MH (as shown in Fig. 2), and
a first gap is provided between the base 21 and the element portion Rd/MH (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 20, Tanabe discloses (Figs. 1-6) at least a part of the circuit section (i.e. the wires 16 and leads 31-33 connecting to the terminals 18: see Figs. 1-2) is provided at the base (i.e. the wires 16 connect to the terminals 18 which are part of the base: see Fig. 2), and
the at least the part of the circuit section (i.e. the leads 31-33) overlaps the element portion Rd/MH in a direction from the base to the element portion (as shown in Figs. 1-2).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe (JP 2020-106348).
Regarding claim 18, Tanabe is applied as above, but does not disclose a first interval time between the first operation and the second operation is 1/5 or less of a pulse time of the voltage applied to the conductive member in the first operation.
However, the interval between the first and second operations is a results-effective variable which can be optimized to increase the speed of detection and reduce the power used (see pars. [0037]-[0042]) – and see MPEP 2144.05(II).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Tanabe so that a first interval time between the first operation and the second operation is 1/5 or less of a pulse time of the voltage applied to the conductive member in the first operation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-17 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Manaka et al. (EP 0698786 – copy attached) discloses a gas density sensor which switches between, and compares the difference between, two voltage values.
Inagaki et al. (U.S. Pub. 2007/0272551) discloses a gas sensor that switches between, and compares the difference between, a transmission and interruption state.
Nishizono (U.S. Patent 8,283,934) discloses a capacitive sensor which switches between, and compares the difference between, two voltage values.
Nakano et al. (WO 2014/069264) discloses a thermal gas sensor which switches between four different temperature sensitive resistors 6-9 using three switches SW1-3.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin Schmitt, whose telephone number is (571) 270-7930. The examiner can normally be reached M-F | 8:30-5:00.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/BENJAMIN R SCHMITT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights