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 .
This Office Action is in response to amendments and remarks filed April 29, 2026. Claims 1, 3-6, 8-13, 15-17, 19 and 20 are currently pending.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on April 29, 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US 11644345 and US 12117318 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see amendments and arguments, filed April 29, 2026, with respect to claims 1 and 13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of the claims 1 and 13 and their corresponding dependents has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 8-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection as set forth below.
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) 8, 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishizuka et al. (US 5569913) in view of Yamamoto et al. (US 20050157307) and Augustyniak et al. (US 20140191119).
Re claim 8: Ishizuka teaches an optical encoder (fig. 5), comprising: an encoding medium (G2/G1/G3/20/4), comprising an index pattern (G2/G3/G1/20/4) (grating patterns on the encoding medium); a substrate (PD1/PD2/PD3/PD4/PDZ1/PDZ2) configured to have a relative movement with respect to the encoding medium (G2/20 moves) along a first direction (see fig. 5, col. 6, lines 1-3, col. 6, lines 33-48), and having a longitudinal distance from the encoding medium (see fig. 5, there is a longitudinal/height distance between the substrate with the detectors and the moving pattern on 20), the substrate comprising: two index photodetectors (PD1 to PD4) adjacent to each other in a first direction (see fig. 5); and a first control photodetector (PDZ1) and a second control photodetector (PDZ2), wherein the first control photodetector (PDZ1) and the second control photodetector (PDZ2) are separated from the two index photodiodes (PD1 to PD4) respectively by a distance in the first direction (see fig. 5) and the two index photodiodes (PD1 to PD4) are adjacent and in parallel with the first control photodetector (PDZ1) and the second control photodetector (PDZ2) in the first direction (see fig. 5, PDZ2 and PDZ1 is adjacent to all index photodetectors in the first direction, adjacent means close or near, nearby); and a light source (1), configured to illuminate the encoding medium using emission light of different intensity (col. 6, lines 33-48), but does not specifically teach the photodetectors are photodiodes, different intensities according to the longitudinal distance and wherein the two index photodiodes are arranged between the first control photodiode and the second control photodiode and the respective distance in the first direction between the two index photodiodes and the respective first control photodiode and the second control photodiode and is larger than a distance between the two index photodiodes in the first direction. Yamamoto teaches different intensities according to the longitudinal distance (paragraphs 42, 56, 57, 222 228, 367, 465, 518, 521 and 546). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to control the light source to different intensities dependent on the distance between the encoding medium and the substrate with the photodiodes in order to ensure the proper amount of light is illuminating the pattern on the encoding providing for more accurate measurements of the displacement of the encoding medium. Ishizuka as modified by Yamamoto does not specifically teach the photodetectors are photodiodes, and wherein the two index photodiodes are arranged between the first control photodiode and the second control photodiode, wherein the respective distance in the first direction between the two index photodiodes and the respective first control photodiode and the second control photodiode and is larger than a distance between the two index photodiodes in the first direction. Augustyniak teaches two index photodiodes (324, paragraph 44) adjacent to each other in a first direction (see fig. 3); and a first control photodiode (316) and a second control photodiode (312) (see fig. 3), wherein the first control photodiode (316) and the second control photodiode (312) are separated from the two index photodiodes (324) respectively by a distance in the first direction larger than a distance between the two index photodiodes in the first direction (see fig. 3, the two or more photodiodes 324 are connected to each other, where the control photodiodes 312/316 are at a further distance from the index photodiodes 324), and the two index photodiodes (324) are arranged between and in parallel with the first control photodiode (316) and the second control photodiode (312) in the first direction (see fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to place the first and second control photodiodes around the two index photodiodes to have the index photodiode arranged between the first and second control photodiodes and use photodiodes similar to Augustyniak with the photodetectors of Ishizuka as modified by Yamamoto in order to correct for amplitude variations that could occur without using complicated processing techniques or circuitry providing for a more efficient and accurate design (MPEP 2144.04, VI, C).
Re claim 10: Ishizuka as modified by Yamamoto and Augustyniak teaches the optical encoder, wherein the first control photodiode (Ishizuka, PDZ1, Augustyniak, 316), the second control photodiode (Ishizuka, PDZ2, Augustyniak, 312) and the two index photodiodes (Ishizuka, PD1 to PD4, Augustyniak, 324) are opposite to a same track of the encoding medium (Ishizuka, 20, fig. 5, Augustyniak, fig. 3, all photodiodes are opposed to the scale on the code wheel).
Re claim 11: Ishizuka as modified by Yamamoto and Augustyniak teaches the optical encoder, wherein the first control photodiode (Ishizuka, PDZ1, Augustyniak, 316), the second control photodiode (Ishizuka, PDZ2, Augustyniak, 312) and the two index photodiodes (Ishizuka, PD1 to PD4, Augustyniak, 324) are opposite to a same track of the encoding medium (Ishizuka, 20, fig. 5, Augustyniak, fig. 3, all photodiodes are opposed to the scale on the code wheel), but does not specifically teach wherein the distance from the first control photodiode and the second control photodiode to the two index photodiodes in the first direction is larger than or equal to a width of the index pattern along the first direction. Yamamoto teaches wherein a distance from a first control photosensor (photosensor 4 on one edge of light receiver 3, fig. 1A) and a second control photodiode (photosensor 4 on opposite edge of light receiver 3) to two index photodiodes (two center photosensors 4 of the light receiver 3) in a first direction is larger than or equal to a width of an index pattern (2) along the first direction (see fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have width of the index pattern smaller than the width of all the photodiodes together similar to Yamamoto with the encoder of Ishizuka as modified by Augustyniak in order to ensure all of the light is captured through the index pattern providing more accurate measurements of the movement of the encoding medium.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishizuka et al. (US 5569913) as modified by Yamamoto et al. (US 20050157307) and Augustyniak et al. (US 20140191119) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Bahari et al. (US 20090206244).
Re claim 9: Ishizuka as modified by Yamamoto and Augustyniak teaches two index photodiodes (Augustyniak, 324, paragraph 44) adjacent to each other in a first direction (Augustyniak, see fig. 3); and a first control photodiode (Augustyniak, 316) and a second control photodiode (Augustyniak, 312, see fig. 3), wherein the first control photodiode (Augustyniak,316) and the second control photodiode (Augustyniak,312) are separated from the two index photodiodes (Augustyniak,324) respectively by a distance in the first direction larger than a distance between the two index photodiodes in the first direction (Augustyniak, see fig. 3, the two or more photodiodes 324 are connected to each other, where the control photodiodes 312/316 are at a further distance from the index photodiodes 324), and the two index photodiodes (Augustyniak,324) are arranged between and in parallel with the first control photodiode (Augustyniak,316) and the second control photodiode (Augustyniak,312) in the first direction (Augustyniak, see fig. 3), but does not specifically teach the first and second control photodiode and the two index photodiodes has identical sensing areas. Bahari teaches wherein a first and a second control photodiode (one of 20a and one of 20b) have identical sensing areas to two index photodiodes (one of A and one of B) (fig. 14, same width and same height, same area). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the sensing areas of all the photodiodes be equal similar to Bahari with the photodiodes of Ishizuka as modified by Yamamoto and Augustyniak in order to ensure that each photodiode is capable of receiving the same amount of light providing for more consistent measurements and output control of the photodiodes.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishizuka et al. (US 5569913) as modified by Yamamoto et al. (US 20050157307) and Augustyniak et al. (US 20140191119) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Thor et al. (US 20090272885).
Re claim 12: Ishizuka as modified by Yamamoto and Augustyniak teaches a light source (Ishizuka, 1), configured to illuminate the encoding medium (Ishizuka, 20) using emission light of different intensities (Ishizuka, col. 6, lines 33-41) according to the longitudinal distance (Yamamoto, paragraphs 42, 56, 57, 222-228, 367, 465, 518, 521 and 546), but does not specifically teach a gain control circuit connected to the two index photodiodes to perform gain regulation corresponding to the different intensity; and a regulation control circuit, configured to output a regulation control signal to the gain control circuit to turn on or turn off the gain regulation of the gain control circuit. Thor teaches a gain control circuit (134/132), configured to perform gain regulation corresponding to different intensity (paragraph 28, photocurrent is based on intensity of light entering the index photodiodes); and a regulation control circuit (142/144/146/148), configured to output a regulation control signal to the gain control circuit (134/132) to turn on or turn off the gain regulation of the gain control circuit (see fig. 4 and 6, paragraphs 26 and 27, the gain regulation of the gain control circuit 134/132 is "on" and being adjusted/regulated/changed until Vout reaches Vref, then the gain regulation of the gain control circuit 134/132 is not adjusting/regulating the gain once Vout is the same as Vref, therefore "off"). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have included the gain control and regulation control circuitry of Thor with the optical encoder of Ishizuka as modified by Yamamoto and Augustyniak in order to reduce the effects of errors in the output signals of the index photodiodes providing for more accurate measurements of the encoding medium.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-6, 13, 15-17, 19 and 20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards to claim 1, the prior art of record individually or in combination fails to teach an optical encoder as claimed, comprising: an encoding medium, comprising an index pattern; a substrate, configured to have a relative movement with respect to the encoding medium along a first direction, and comprising: an index photodiode, configured to generate an index signal; a first control photodiode, configured to generate a first control signal; and a second control photodiode, configured to generate a second control signal, wherein the index photodiode is arranged between and in parallel with the first control photodiode and the second control photodiode in the first direction: a gain control circuit, configured to amplify the index signal using a gain; and a regulation control circuit, configured to turn on or turn off gain regulation of the gain control circuit according to the first control signal and the second control signal, more specifically in combination with wherein when the index pattern is moved in the first direction to opposite to the first control photodiode, the first control photodiode generates the first control signal, when the index pattern is moved in the first direction to opposite to the second control photodiode, the second control photodiode generates the second control signal, and the regulation control circuit is configured to turn off the gain regulation of the gain control circuit within a first interval between the first control signal and the second control signal, and to turn on the gain regulation of the gain control circuit within a second interval outside the first interval.
Claims 3-6 are allowed because of their dependency on claim 1.
In regards to claim 13, the prior art of record individually or in combination fails to teach an optical encoder as claimed, comprising: two index photodiodes, adjacent to each other in a first direction, and configured to respectively generate an index signal; a first control photodiode, configured to generate a first control signal; a second control photodiode, configured to generate a second control signal, wherein the first control photodiode and the second control photodiode have a same shape identical to that of the two index photodiodes, and the two index photodiodes are arranged between and in parallel with the first control photodiode and the second control photodiode in the first direction; a gain control circuit, configured to amplify the index signal using a gain; and a regulation control circuit, configured to turn on or turn off gain regulation of the gain control circuit according to the first control signal and the second control signal, more specifically in combination with wherein the regulation control circuit comprises a flip flop configured to change a voltage value of a regulation control signal outputted by the regulation control circuit according to the first control signal and the second control signal, and the voltage value of the regulation control signal is configured to turn on or turn off the gain regulation of the gain control circuit.
Claims 15-17, 19 and 20 are allowed because of their dependency on claim 13.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER D BENNETT whose telephone number is (571)270-3419. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/JENNIFER D BENNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights