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 .
Examiner’s Remarks
Applicant is advised that should claim 8 be found allowable, claim 9 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 6-7 and 18-20 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 6, the phrase “the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism comprises two pressure and temperature sensing devices” can be interpreted as either (1) two pressure sensing devices and two temperature sensing devices or (2) one pressure sensing device and one temperature sensing device. For examination purposes, this limitation will be interpreted according to (2). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 18, the phrase “the piezoelectric crystal component” lacks proper antecedent basis because the claim also defines “a crystal component”. A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired (see MPEP § 2173.05(c)). In the present instance, the claim recites the broad recitation “a crystal component”, and the claim also recites “the piezoelectric crystal component” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims. Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Claims 7 and 19-20 are rejected as being dependent on the rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-7 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lundgren et al. (Pat. No. US 6,238,536) (hereafter Lundgren) in view of Cobianu et al. (Pat. No. US 8,384,524) (hereafter Cobianu) and in further view of Sato et al. (Pat. No. Us 8,136,406) (hereafter Sato)
Regarding claim 1, Lundgren teaches a multifunctional harsh environment gas monitoring device, comprising:
a housing (i.e., protective cap 37) (see Fig. 12);
a crystal structure (i.e., substrate 7 comprises, in accordance with this embodiment, oxygen-ion-conductive zirconium-dioxide, ZrO2, which is stabilized, i.e. "fixed" in a certain crystal structure which is advantageous with respect to the conductivity for oxygen ions) (see Column 4, lines 30-48) within the housing (i.e., sensors 31, 32, 33 each comprises substrate 7) (see Fig. 2 and 12);
a plurality of gas detection systems comprising at least one component exposed on a surface of the crystal structure and open to an open top of the housing (i.e., NOx -sensors, lambda sensors, oxygen sensors) (see Column 7, line 58, to Column 8, line 46); and
a temperature sensing mechanism (i.e., residual heat sensors) (see Column 7, line 58, to Column 8, line 46); but does not explicitly teach
a dumbbell-shaped crystal structure within the housing, the dumbbell-shaped crystal structure comprising a top disk, a bottom disk, and a center bar between the top disk and the bottom disk;
a plurality of gas detection systems comprising at least one component exposed on a surface of the top disk of the dumbbell-shaped crystal structure and open to an open top of the housing; and a pressure and temperature sensing mechanism attached to the center bar of the dumbbell-shaped crystal structure, wherein the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism simultaneously detects pressure and temperature from at least one gas exposed to the surface of the top disk of the dumbbell-shaped crystal structure and the plurality gas detection systems detect material content of the at least one gas.
Regarding the pressure sensing mechanism and the arrangement of the sensing mechanisms, Cobianu teaches a pressure and temperature sensing mechanism (i.e., SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18 may include, for example, chemical sensors, biological sensors, and/or physical sensors such as temperature sensors, pressure sensors, and/or flow sensors) (see Column 2, lines 52-67) attached to the center bar (i.e., the positioning of the SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18, and reader coils 22, 24, 26, and 28 may provide reduced interference or interference free communication) (see Column 5, lines 32-46), wherein the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism simultaneously detects pressure and temperature from at least one gas exposed to the surface of the crystal structure and the plurality gas detection systems detect material content of the at least one gas (i.e., the multiplexer time based interrogation of the SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18 by the SAW reader 32 may reduce the bandwidth needed to interrogate all of the SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18) (see Column 5, lines 47-60). In view of the teaching of, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the pressure sensor in order to determine the efficiency and operating conditions of the exhaust system. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the sensors on the same substrate, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C)).
Regarding the dumbbell-shaped crystal structure, Sato teaches a dumbbell-shaped crystal structure within the housing, the dumbbell-shaped crystal structure comprising a top disk, a bottom disk, and a center bar between the top disk and the bottom disk (i.e., a resonator 112 having a body section 114 having a cylindrical outer shape and be generally H-shaped in cross section) (see Fig. 5). In view of the teaching of Sato, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected a suitable symmetrical structure in order to produce more stable pressure measurements. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found changes to the shape of the piezoelectric crystal component obvious in view of the prior art (see MPEP 2144.04(IV-B)).
Regarding claim 2, Lundgren teaches that a respective one of the plurality of the gas detection systems includes an interdigital transducer (IDT) electrode (i.e., NOx -sensor 9, an oxygen sensor 10) (see Fig. 2) and a high temperature sensing film for a particular one of a plurality of gasses detected using the plurality of gas detection systems (i.e., residual heat sensor 11 comprises a conductive pattern 25 which forms two resistors, a first resistor AC which is formed by the conductive pattern between the points A and C, and a second resistor BC which is formed by the conductive pattern between the points B and C) (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Lundgren teaches that the multifunctional harsh environment gas monitoring device is mounted to a gas recirculation pipe (see Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 4, Lundgren teaches that the surface of the top disk of the dumbbell-shaped crystal structure is exposed to an interior of the gas recirculation pipe (see Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 5, Lundgren teaches that the plurality of the gas detection systems detect Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, and Carbon monoxide (i.e., to detect other components in the exhaust gases, including NOx sensors (i.e. sensors for nitrogen oxide compounds), oxygen sensors, carbon monoxide sensors and residual heat sensors. By using a plurality of different types of sensors at the same time, it should thus be possible to separate out each of the different gas components and, despite the cross-sensitivity of the different sensors, obtain a measurement of the composition of the measured gas) (see Column 2, line 51, to Column 2, line 38).
Regarding claim 6, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu and Sato as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach that the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism comprises two pressure and temperature sensing devices. However, Cobianu teaches that the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism comprises two pressure and temperature sensing devices (i.e., SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18 may include, for example, chemical sensors, biological sensors, and/or physical sensors such as temperature sensors, pressure sensors, and/or flow sensors) (see Column 2, lines 52-67). In view of the teaching of, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the pressure sensor in order to determine the efficiency and operating conditions of the exhaust system. Furthermore, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B)).
Regarding claim 7, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu and Sato as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach that the two pressure and temperature sensing devices are mounted orthogonally relative to one another on the center bar. However, Sato teaches that the two pressure and temperature sensing devices are mounted orthogonally relative to one another on the center bar (i.e., electrodes 107 and RTD 108 are orthogonal to one another) (see Fig. 1 and 3). In view of the teaching of Sato, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the sensing devices orthogonally to one another in order to compensate for temperature effects in pressure measurements. Furthermore, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C)).
Regarding claim 10, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu and Sato as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach a high temperature antenna in wireless communication with an interrogator service that generates a user interface that shows a plurality of parameters detected using the multifunctional harsh environment gas monitoring device. However, Cobianu teaches a high temperature antenna in wireless communication with an interrogator service that generates a user interface that shows a plurality of parameters detected using the multifunctional harsh environment gas monitoring device (i.e., the SAW reader 32 may be in communication with monitoring equipment 36. In some cases, the SAW reader 32 may be connected to the monitoring equipment 36 via a wired or wireless connection. For example, in some cases, the SAW reader 32 may be selectively coupled to the monitoring equipment 36 via a suitable wireless protocol, such as Bluetooth, 802.11, cellular, or other suitable wireless protocol. It is contemplated that the monitoring equipment 36 may include a portable device, such as a personal computer, PDA, or other device, as desired) (see Fig. 1 and 2). In view of the teaching of Cobianu, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have displayed the monitoring data in order for a supervisor to observe the performance of the exhaust system.
Regarding claim 11, Lungren teaches a multifunctional harsh environment gas monitoring device, comprising:
a housing (i.e., protective cap 37) (see Fig. 12);
a piezoelectric crystal component (i.e., substrate 7 comprises, in accordance with this embodiment, oxygen-ion-conductive zirconium-dioxide, ZrO2, which is stabilized, i.e. "fixed" in a certain crystal structure which is advantageous with respect to the conductivity for oxygen ions) (see Column 4, lines 30-48) within the housing (i.e., sensors 31, 32, 33 each comprises substrate 7) (see Fig. 2 and 12);
at least one gas sensor disposed on a surface of the first plate of the piezoelectric crystal component and exposed through an opening in the housing, the at least one gas sensor configured to detect material content of at least one gas exposed through the opening in the housing (i.e., NOx -sensors, lambda sensors, oxygen sensors) (see Column 7, line 58, to Column 8, line 46); and a temperature sensing mechanism (i.e., residual heat sensors) (see Column 7, line 58, to Column 8, line 46); but does not explicitly teach
the piezoelectric crystal component comprising a first plate, a second plate, and a center bar disposed between the first plate and the second plate
a pressure and temperature sensing mechanism disposed on the center bar of the piezoelectric crystal component, the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism configured to simultaneously detect pressure and temperature from the at least one gas.
Regarding the pressure sensing mechanism and the arrangement of the sensing mechanisms, Conianu teaches a pressure and temperature sensing mechanism (i.e., SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18 may include, for example, chemical sensors, biological sensors, and/or physical sensors such as temperature sensors, pressure sensors, and/or flow sensors) (see Column 2, lines 52-67) disposed on the center bar (i.e., the positioning of the SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18, and reader coils 22, 24, 26, and 28 may provide reduced interference or interference free communication) (see Column 5, lines 32-46) of the piezoelectric crystal component (i.e., one or more SAW devices including one or more interdigital transducers (IDTs) and reflectors disposed on a piezoelectric substrate to define a SAW resonator or a SAW delay line. The one or more IDTs may be configured to convert acoustic waves to electrical signals and vice versa by exploiting the piezoelectric effect of the substrate material) (see Column 2, lines 52-67), the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism configured to simultaneously detect pressure and temperature from the at least one gas (i.e., the multiplexer time based interrogation of the SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18 by the SAW reader 32 may reduce the bandwidth needed to interrogate all of the SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18) (see Column 5, lines 47-60). In view of the teaching of, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the pressure sensor in order to determine the efficiency and operating conditions of the exhaust system. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the sensors on the same substrate, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C)).
Regarding the piezoelectric crystal component, Sato teaches that the piezoelectric crystal component comprising a first plate, a second plate, and a center bar disposed between the first plate and the second plate (i.e., a resonator 112 having a body section 114 having a cylindrical outer shape and be generally H-shaped in cross section) (see Fig. 5). In view of the teaching of Sato, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected a suitable symmetrical structure in order to produce more stable pressure measurements. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found changes to the shape of the piezoelectric crystal component obvious in view of the prior art (see MPEP 2144.04(IV-B)).
Regarding claim 12, Lundgren teaches that the at least one gas sensor comprises an Interdigital Transducer (IDT) based surface acoustic wave (SAW) gas sensor (i.e., NOx -sensor 9, an oxygen sensor 10) (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, Lundgren teaches that the at least one gas sensor includes one or more patterned piezoelectric films configured to operate as an IDT and a micro electronic mechanical gas detection system (i.e., NOx -sensor 9, an oxygen sensor 10) (see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu and Sato as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach that the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism further comprises: a first temperature and pressure sensing device; and a second temperature and pressure sensing device, wherein each of the first and second temperature and pressure sensing devices comprises an IDT, a reflector, and a sensing layer. However, Cobianu teaches that the pressure and temperature sensing mechanism further comprises: a first temperature and pressure sensing device; and a second temperature and pressure sensing device, wherein each of the first and second temperature and pressure sensing devices comprises an IDT, a reflector, and a sensing layer (i.e., SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18 may include, for example, chemical sensors, biological sensors, and/or physical sensors such as temperature sensors, pressure sensors, and/or flow sensors) (see Column 2, lines 52-67). In view of the teaching of, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the pressure sensor in order to determine the efficiency and operating conditions of the exhaust system. Furthermore, it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B)).
Regarding claim 15, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu and Sato as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach a high temperature antenna disposed on an exterior surface of the housing. However, Cobianu teaches a high temperature antenna disposed on an exterior surface of the housing (i.e., the SAW reader 32 may be in communication with monitoring equipment 36. In some cases, the SAW reader 32 may be connected to the monitoring equipment 36 via a wired or wireless connection. For example, in some cases, the SAW reader 32 may be selectively coupled to the monitoring equipment 36 via a suitable wireless protocol, such as Bluetooth, 802.11, cellular, or other suitable wireless protocol) (see Column 6, lines 4-18). In view of the teaching of Cobianu, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the antenna in order for a supervisor to observe the performance of the exhaust system from a remote location.
Regarding claim 16, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu and Sato teaches that the high temperature antenna is in wireless communication with an interrogator service that generates a user interface that shows a plurality of parameters detected using the multifunctional harsh environment gas monitoring device. However, Cobianu teaches the high temperature antenna is in wireless communication with an interrogator service that generates a user interface that shows a plurality of parameters detected using the multifunctional harsh environment gas monitoring device (i.e., the SAW reader 32 may be in communication with monitoring equipment 36. In some cases, the SAW reader 32 may be connected to the monitoring equipment 36 via a wired or wireless connection. For example, in some cases, the SAW reader 32 may be selectively coupled to the monitoring equipment 36 via a suitable wireless protocol, such as Bluetooth, 802.11, cellular, or other suitable wireless protocol. It is contemplated that the monitoring equipment 36 may include a portable device, such as a personal computer, PDA, or other device, as desired) (see Fig. 1 and 2). In view of the teaching of Cobianu, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have displayed the monitoring data in order for a supervisor to observe the performance of the exhaust system.
Claims 8-9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lundgren et al. (Pat. No. US 6,238,536) (hereafter Lundgren) in view of Cobianu et al. (Pat. No. US 8,384,524) (hereafter Cobianu) and in further view of Sato et al. (Pat. No. Us 8,136,406) (hereafter Sato) and Andle et al (Pat. No. US 7,915,785) (hereafter Andle)
Regarding claim 8, Lundgren teaches that problems with calibration can be avoided when the sensors are gathered at one and the same point (see Column 8, lines 25-46); but does not explicitly teach that the center bar comprises a plurality of internal gas detection systems that match the gas detection systems exposed on the surface of the top disk, and the internal gas detection systems enable calibration of the gas detection systems. However, Andle teaches the center bar comprises a plurality of internal gas detection systems that match the gas detection systems exposed on the surface of the top disk, and the internal gas detection systems enable calibration of the gas detection systems (i.e., the 1st reflector 230 reflects a first frequency and the 1st in-line grating 240 reflects a slightly different frequency f2 in the RAC structure. Such optional in-line reflectors can return the reflected signal f2 to the bi-directional transducer 205 for one-port embodiments of the sensor. Even though the reflected signals f2, f4 from the in-line gratings 240, 255 are at a different frequency than the sensing frequencies f2, f4, they are typically close enough to serve as a calibration signal for the sensor measurements. Thus, in this embodiment, the sensor is self-calibrating as the reflected signals from the in-line gratings 240, 255 provide a signal that is unaffected by the sensing films 235, 250) (see Column 11, line 48, to Column 12, line 56). In view of the teaching of Andle, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the calibrating sensors in order to enable offline self-calibration and improve measurement accuracy.
Regarding claim 9, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu and Sato as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach that the center bar comprises a plurality of internal gas detection systems that match the gas detection systems exposed on the surface of the top disk, and the internal gas detection systems enable calibration of the gas detection systems. However, Andle teaches that the center bar comprises a plurality of internal gas detection systems that match the gas detection systems exposed on the surface of the top disk, and the internal gas detection systems enable calibration of the gas detection systems (i.e., the 1st reflector 230 reflects a first frequency and the 1st in-line grating 240 reflects a slightly different frequency f2 in the RAC structure. Such optional in-line reflectors can return the reflected signal f2 to the bi-directional transducer 205 for one-port embodiments of the sensor. Even though the reflected signals f2, f4 from the in-line gratings 240, 255 are at a different frequency than the sensing frequencies f2, f4, they are typically close enough to serve as a calibration signal for the sensor measurements. Thus, in this embodiment, the sensor is self-calibrating as the reflected signals from the in-line gratings 240, 255 provide a signal that is unaffected by the sensing films 235, 250) (see Column 11, line 48, to Column 12, line 56). In view of the teaching of Andle, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the calibrating sensors in order to enable offline self-calibration and improve measurement accuracy.
Regarding clam 17, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu and Sato as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach that the center bar further comprises a plurality of internal gas detection systems configured to enable calibration of the at least one gas sensor. However, Andle teaches that the center bar further comprises a plurality of internal gas detection systems configured to enable calibration of the at least one gas sensor (i.e., the 1st reflector 230 reflects a first frequency and the 1st in-line grating 240 reflects a slightly different frequency f2 in the RAC structure. Such optional in-line reflectors can return the reflected signal f2 to the bi-directional transducer 205 for one-port embodiments of the sensor. Even though the reflected signals f2, f4 from the in-line gratings 240, 255 are at a different frequency than the sensing frequencies f2, f4, they are typically close enough to serve as a calibration signal for the sensor measurements. Thus, in this embodiment, the sensor is self-calibrating as the reflected signals from the in-line gratings 240, 255 provide a signal that is unaffected by the sensing films 235, 250) (see Column 11, line 48, to Column 12, line 56). In view of the teaching of Andle, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the calibrating sensors in order to enable offline self-calibration and improve measurement accuracy.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lundgren et al. (Pat. No. US 6,238,536) (hereafter Lundgren) in view of Cobianu et al. (Pat. No. US 8,384,524) (hereafter Cobianu)
Regarding claim 18, Lungren teaches a multifunctional harsh environment gas monitoring device, comprising:
a housing (i.e., protective cap 37) (see Fig. 12) having an opening on a first end (i.e., hole 38) (see Fig. 2);
a crystal component (i.e., substrate 7 comprises, in accordance with this embodiment, oxygen-ion-conductive zirconium-dioxide, ZrO2, which is stabilized, i.e. "fixed" in a certain crystal structure which is advantageous with respect to the conductivity for oxygen ions) (see Column 4, lines 30-48) disposed the housing (i.e., sensors 31, 32, 33 each comprises substrate 7) (see Fig. 2 and 12), the piezoelectric crystal component comprising a first end, a second end, and a center portion disposed between the first end and the second end (see Fig. 2 and 12);
one or more gas sensors disposed on a surface of the first end of the crystal component and exposed through an opening in the housing (i.e., NOx -sensors, lambda sensors, oxygen sensors) (see Column 7, line 58, to Column 8, line 46); and
a temperature sensing mechanism disposed on the center portion (i.e., residual heat sensors) (see Column 7, line 58, to Column 8, line 46); but does not explicitly teach a pressure sensing mechanism disposed on the center portion of the crystal component and a temperature sensing mechanism disposed on the center portion of the crystal component adjacent to the pressure sensing mechanism.
Regarding the pressure sensing mechanism and the arrangement of the sensing mechanisms, Cobianu teaches one gas sensor, a pressure sensing mechanism disposed on the center portion of the crystal component, and a temperature sensing mechanism (i.e., SAW sensors 12, 14, 16, and 18 may include, for example, chemical sensors, biological sensors, and/or physical sensors such as temperature sensors, pressure sensors, and/or flow sensors) (see Column 2, lines 52-67) disposed on the center portion of the crystal component adjacent to the pressure sensing mechanism (i.e., one or more SAW devices including one or more interdigital transducers (IDTs) and reflectors disposed on a piezoelectric substrate to define a SAW resonator or a SAW delay line. The one or more IDTs may be configured to convert acoustic waves to electrical signals and vice versa by exploiting the piezoelectric effect of the substrate material) (see Column 2, lines 52-67). In view of the teaching of, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the pressure sensor in order to determine the efficiency and operating conditions of the exhaust system. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have arranged the sensors on the same substrate, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C)).
Regarding claim 19, Lundgren teaches that the one or more gas sensors further comprises: a first pair of IDT electrodes with a first sensing film; a second pair of IDT electrodes with a second sensing film; and a third pair of IDT electrodes with a third sensing film, wherein each of the first sensing film, the second sensing film, and the third sensing film is configured to detect a different gas (i.e., sensors 31, 32, 33) (see Fig. 2 and 12).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lundgren et al. (Pat. No. US 6,238,536) (hereafter Lundgren) in view of Cobianu et al. (Pat. No. US 8,384,524) (hereafter Cobianu) and in further view of Sato et al. (Pat. No. Us 8,136,406) (hereafter Sato)
Regarding claim 20, Lundgren as modified by Cobianu as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly teach that the crystal component further comprises a dumbbell-shaped piezoelectric crystal-Langasite component which maintains its piezoelectricity up to approximately 1470° C. However, Sato teaches that the crystal component further comprises a dumbbell-shaped (i.e., a resonator 112 having a body section 114 having a cylindrical outer shape and be generally H-shaped in cross section) (see Fig. 5) piezoelectric crystal-Langasite component which maintains its piezoelectricity up to approximately 1470° C (i.e., piezoelectric material includes Langasite) (see Column 3, lines 29-45). In view of the teaching of Sato, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected a suitable symmetrical structure in order to produce more stable pressure measurements. Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found changes to the shape of the piezoelectric crystal component obvious in view of the prior art (see MPEP 2144.04(IV-B)).
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
Prosecution Insights