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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 4 and 13 are 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 claims 4 and 13, the limitations “the at least one electrode section is provided on the base body in a section or over the entire surface” cover all possible configurations and therefore do not further limit claims 1 and 10.
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 1, 3-4, 8, 10, 12-13, 17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Najorka et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0384958).
Regarding claims 1, 10, and 19, Najorka discloses (Figs. 1-10) a sensor cover for a sensor system (see pars. [0105]-[0106]) configured to remove weather-induced soiling [0105] for the unimpaired use of a sensor of the sensor system [0105], the sensor cover comprising:
at least one sensor section (i.e. the portion of the cover 12 that covers the camera system: [0107]-[0113]);
at least one base body 12 [0106] configured to extend over the sensor (i.e. cover the camera system: [0107]-[0113]);
at least one electrode section [0017]-[0020] provided on the base body 12 (i.e. the transducers 10 comprise electrodes: [0017]-[0020]); and
at least one piezoactive actuator 10 [0105]-[0106] configured to generate sound waves in the sensor cover 12 (see pars. [0105]-[0108]), the at least one piezoactive actuator 10 being arranged at the at least one electrode section of the base body.
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Najorka further discloses (Figs. 1-10) a sensor system for a motor vehicle [0105], comprising: at least one voltage source [0132]; and at least one sound transducer 10 [0105].
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Najorka discloses (Figs. 1-10) the at least one sensor section is sensor-transparent [0105]-[0106].
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Najorka discloses (Figs. 1-10) the at least one electrode section 10 is provided on the base body 12 in a section (as shown in Figs. 2, 4, 5, etc.).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Najorka discloses (Figs. 1-10) the at least one electrode section 10 comprises at least two electrode sections (as shown in Figs. 2, 4, 5, etc.), and wherein each of the at least two electrode sections includes a respective piezoactive actuator [0105]-[0108], each of the respective piezoactive actuators configured to be separately modulatable [0108].
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.
Claims 5, 9, 14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Najorka et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0384958).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Najorka is applied as above, but does not disclose the sensor cover comprises a plurality of cover layers, each cover layer including at least one base body and at least one piezoactive actuator.
However, such a modification would be merely a duplication of parts, which is obvious – see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
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 Najorka’s device so that the sensor cover comprises a plurality of cover layers, each cover layer including at least one base body and at least one piezoactive actuator.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Najorka is applied as above, but does not disclose the piezoactive layer of each piezoactive actuator has a thickness ranging from 5 nm to 500 nm, or 5 nm to 50 nm in the at least one sensor section.
However, such a modification would be merely a change of size/proportion of the piezoactive actuator, which is obvious – see MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
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 Najorka’s device/system so that the piezoactive layer of each piezoactive actuator has a thickness ranging from 5 nm to 500 nm, or 5 nm to 50 nm in the at least one sensor section.
Claims 2, 6-7, 11, 15-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Najorka et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0384958) in view of Kobrin et al. (U.S. Pub. 2018/0309043).
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 20, Najorka is applied as above, but does not disclose each piezoactive actuator comprises: a first electrode coating; a second electrode coating; and a piezoactive layer, wherein at least a section of the piezoactive layer is arranged between the first electrode coating and the second electrode coating.
Kobrin discloses (Figs. 4A/B) each piezoactive actuator comprises: a first electrode coating 14 (see pars. [0031] and [0041]); a second electrode coating 14 (see pars. [0031] and [0041]); and a piezoactive layer 15 (see pars. [0031] and [0041]), wherein at least a section of the piezoactive layer 15 is arranged between the first electrode coating 14 and the second electrode coating 14 (see pars. [0031] and [0041]; Figs. 14A/B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Najorka’s device/system so that each piezoactive actuator comprises: a first electrode coating; a second electrode coating; and a piezoactive layer, wherein at least a section of the piezoactive layer is arranged between the first electrode coating and the second electrode coating, as taught by Kobrin.
Such a modification would be a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Regarding claims 6-7 and 15-16, Najorka is applied as above, but does not disclose the piezoactive layer is polyvinyl fluoride; and the first electrode coating and/or the second electrode coating of each piezoactive actuator comprises indium tin oxide, fluoridated tin oxide, aluminum-doped tin oxide, or antimony tin oxide.
Kobrin discloses (Figs. 4A/B) the piezoactive layer is polyvinyl fluoride [0045]; and the first electrode coating and/or the second electrode coating of each piezoactive actuator comprises indium tin oxide [0031].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Najorka’s device/system so that the piezoactive layer is polyvinyl fluoride; and the first electrode coating and/or the second electrode coating of each piezoactive actuator comprises indium tin oxide, fluoridated tin oxide, aluminum-doped tin oxide, or antimony tin oxide, as taught by Kobrin.
Such a modification would be a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results – see MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Conclusion
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