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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Little et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20140361172) in view of Tice (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20060139647).
Instant Application 18/780537
PNG
media_image1.png
430
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Light (14)
1st Light receiving unit (18)
2nd Light receiving unit (22)
U.S. Patent Application Publication 20140361172
PNG
media_image2.png
466
236
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Sample beam (106)
Reference beam (105)
Reference detector (108)
Sample detector (114)
Sample space (110)
As per claims 1 and 14 Little et al. disclose a gas sensor and method, comprising
a light emitting unit (102) that radiates light;
a first light receiving unit (114) that receives at least a part of the light that passed through the gas to be sensed (110), and outputs a first light reception signal according to a light reception result and
a second light receiving unit (108) that receives at least a part of the light that did not pass through the gas to be sensed, and outputs a second light reception signal according to a light reception result.
[Examiner note: for brevity claims 1 and 14 are treated concurrently, as the claims recite the same substantive limitations, merely expressed in different statutory classes (apparatus vs method)]
Little et al. do not explicitly disclose a gas sensor and/or method comprising an operating unit that senses that condensation has occurred in a light path from the light emitting unit to the first light receiving unit based on the first light reception signal and the second light reception signal.
Tice discloses a gas sensor comprising an operating unit that senses that condensation has occurred in a light path from a light emitting unit to a first light receiving unit based on the first light reception signal and a second light reception signal. Tice teaches that percentage changes in received signals from the two light receiving units indicate condensation conditions (para. [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the gas sensor and method of Little et al. such that it incorporated the operating unit of Tice. One would have been motivated to make such a modification for the purpose of additionally detecting the presence of condensation by comparing received light signals as taught by Tice. [Examiner notes: the modification adds functionality to the device and method of Little et al. through the reuse of existing signals, while preserving its original operation].
As per claims 2-4, Little et al., disclose a gas sensor as modified above, but does not explicitly disclose wherein
a) the operating unit calculates a variation rate of the first light reception signal and a variation rate of the second light reception signal, and determines that the condensation has occurred based on a condensation determination evaluation value obtained by using the variation rate of the first light reception signal and the variation rate of the second light reception signal;
b) wherein the condensation determination evaluation value is a ratio of the variation rate of the first light reception signal to the variation rate of the second light reception signal; and
c) wherein it is determined that the condensation has occurred when the condensation determination evaluation value is equal to or greater than two
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify the gas sensor of Little et al. such that the operating unit calculates condensation based on a variation rate of first and second light signals and/or a ratio of a variation rate and to provide an evaluation threshold. One would have been motivated to make such a modification for the purpose(s) of determining a time rate of change and/or ratio of received signals and setting a threshold value for condensation evaluation [Examiner note: using rate of change instead of absolute value is a well-known analytical choice. Additionally, the use of ratios is treated as routine data processing and setting a threshold value for evaluation optimizes a range of received data].
As per claim 5, Little et al., disclose a gas sensor as modified above, wherein the second light receiving unit receives the light that did not pass through a space in which the gas to be sensed exists (see Fig. shown above).
As per claims 6-7, Little et al., disclose a gas sensor as modified above, but do not explicitly disclose wherein the gas sensor is provided in a microphone apparatus or in an apparatus to be worn on a head.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify the sensor of Little et al. such that it is provided in a microphone apparatus or provided in an apparatus to be worn on a head. One would have been motivated to make such a modification for the purpose(s) of providing the sensor into a known host device.
As per claims 8-13, Little et al., disclose a gas sensor as modified above, but do not explicitly disclose:
a) wherein the operating unit calculates a baseline of a waveform of the first light reception signal based on a frequency component of the first light reception signal that is lower than a first cut-off frequency that is set, and senses that the condensation has occurred based on a signal obtained by removing the baseline from the first light reception signal;
b) wherein the first cut-off frequency is set according to a change in signal values of the first light reception signal;
c) wherein the operating unit changes the first cut-off frequency at a time when the condensation is sensed;
d) wherein the operating unit calculates a value of the baseline for each signal value of the first light reception signal, and when the signal value of the first light reception signal for which the baseline value is to be calculated is decreased by a second set value or more relative to the signal value at an immediately preceding timing in a temporal waveform of the first light reception signal, the operating unit sets the first cut-off frequency to be higher compared to the first cut-off frequency when the condensation is sensed;
e) wherein the operating unit calculates at least one of a cycle or a length of breathing including the gas to be sensed by using the signal obtained by removing the baseline from the first light reception signal.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify the gas sensor of Little et al. such that it incorporated the aforementioned limitations. One would have been motivated to make such a modification for the purpose(s) of: further conditioning received data to maintain stability and sensing accuracy during data collection (e.g. filtering signals to remove noise). Additionally in the context of breathing, using waveform periodicity to determine breathing rate is well established in respiratory monitoring, requiring no modification to sensor hardware.
As per claims 15-20, Little et al., disclose a gas sensor as modified above, but do not explicitly disclose removing a baseline from the first light reception signal.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to further modify the gas sensor of Little et al. such that it incorporated the aforementioned limitations. One would have been motivated to make such a modification for the purpose(s) of: further conditioning received data to maintain stability and sensing accuracy during data collection (e.g. filtering signals to remove noise).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY D THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2496. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 AM - 5 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, David Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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.
/COURTNEY D THOMAS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884