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 § 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.
Claims 1-18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agostinelli (US 2019/0223975 hereinafter “Agostinelli”) in view of DR. DODUCO.
As to claim 1,
Agostinelli discloses in Figs. 7, 8, 9A-I, 10, 12A-B, 13A-B:
a system for physical quantity measurement and/or for position measurement with a bistable magnetic wire (detection system 1 / magnetic detection system 10 locating magnetic marker 6, wherein magnetic marker 6 comprises magnetic marker material that exhibits a large Barkhausen jump / LBJ / bistable switching);
an excitation element adapted for creating a magnetic field in a range where the bistable magnetic wire is placed (probe 2 containing drive coils 102 driven by frequency generator 100 to generate an alternating magnetic field that excites magnetic marker 6);
which has a first end and an oppositely placed second end (magnetic marker 6 formed as a length of magnetic marker material having two ends);
wherein the bistable magnetic wire is adjusted for magnetization by a single Barkhausen jump from the first end to the second end or vice versa (magnetic marker 6 comprises magnetic marker material that exhibits a large Barkhausen jump / LBJ / bistable switching behaviour);
and which also comprises a sensing element for response receiving from the bistable magnetic wire (probe 2 containing sense coils 104 that detect the signal from magnetic marker 6; harmonic detection circuit 108 receives the signal from sense coils 104).
Agostinelli does not disclose the excitation element and the bistable magnetic wire are placed in a position such that the amplitude of the magnetic field excited by the excitation element at the first end is different from the amplitude of the magnetic field excited by the excitation element at the second end.
However, DR. DODUCO discloses in Fig. 1:
an excitation element and a bistable magnetic wire placed in a position such that the amplitude of the magnetic field at one end of the wire is different from the amplitude of the magnetic field at the opposite end (excitation winding 3 is placed close to one end of Wiegand wire 1, resulting in a magnitude of the magnetic field at the end where excitation winding 3 is placed that is different from the magnitude at the far end; the spatial arrangement of the system in Fig. 1 produces this difference).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Agostinelli and place an excitation element and a bistable magnetic wire in a position such that the amplitude of the magnetic field at one end of the wire is different from the amplitude of the magnetic field at the opposite end (excitation winding 3 is placed close to one end of Wiegand wire 1, resulting in a magnitude of the magnetic field at the end where excitation winding 3 is placed that is different from the magnitude at the far end; the spatial arrangement of the system in Fig. 1 produces this difference), as taught by DR. DODUCO (excitation winding 3 placed close to one end of Wiegand wire 1 in Fig. 1), in order to control the direction of the single domain-wall / Barkhausen jump along the wire and thereby improve the reliability and interpretability of the detected response.
As to claim 2,
Agostinelli in view of DR. DODUCO discloses the system of claim 1 as set forth above.
Agostinelli does not disclose the difference in amplitude of the magnetic field at the first end and at the second end is at least 5%, preferably at least 10%.
However, DR. DODUCO discloses in Fig. 1 an excitation element and a bistable magnetic wire placed in a position such that the amplitude of the magnetic field at one end of the wire is different from the amplitude of the magnetic field at the opposite end (excitation winding 3 placed close to one end of Wiegand wire 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Agostinelli to provide a difference in amplitude of at least 5%, preferably at least 10%, as taught by the asymmetric arrangement of DR. DODUCO, in order to ensure reliable single domain-wall propagation.
As to claim 3,
Agostinelli further discloses that the system is adapted to measure position / proximity of magnetic marker 6. It would have been obvious to adapt the same system to measure temperature and/or pressure and/or tension and/or magnetic field and/or linear position.
As to claim 4,
Agostinelli further discloses the coil of the receiving element is separate from the coil of the excitation element (separate drive coils 102 and sense coils 104 in probe 2).
As to claim 5,
Agostinelli further discloses the bistable magnetic wire has a diameter less than 50 μm (magnetic marker 6 comprises glass-coated amorphous microwire).
As to claim 6,
Agostinelli further discloses the bistable magnetic wire is covered with a layer of insulating material, preferably with a layer of glass (magnetic marker 6 comprises glass-coated amorphous microwire).
As to claim 7,
Agostinelli further discloses a glass coating on magnetic marker 6 of conventional microwire thickness (up to 20 μm).
As to claim 8,
Agostinelli further discloses the length of the bistable magnetic wire is at least 1,000 times, preferably at least 10,000 times greater than the diameter of the metal core (magnetic marker 6 is an elongated high-aspect-ratio microwire).
As to claim 9,
Agostinelli does not disclose the excitation element is placed asymmetrically to the position of the bistable magnetic wire.
However, DR. DODUCO discloses in Fig. 1 an excitation element and a bistable magnetic wire placed in a position such that the amplitude of the magnetic field at one end of the wire is different from the amplitude of the magnetic field at the opposite end (excitation winding 3 placed close to one end of Wiegand wire 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious … to place the excitation element asymmetrically relative to the bistable magnetic wire, as taught by DR. DODUCO.
As to claim 10,
Agostinelli does not disclose the excitation element has an asymmetrical structure with different amplitude of magnetic fields at its ends.
However, DR. DODUCO discloses in Fig. 1 the asymmetric placement of excitation winding 3 relative to Wiegand wire 1 that produces different field amplitudes at the ends.
Therefore, it would have been obvious … to provide the excitation element with an asymmetrical structure, as taught by DR. DODUCO.
As to claim 11,
Agostinelli does not disclose the excitation element is formed by a coil with a different winding density at the first end and the second end.
However, DR. DODUCO discloses the asymmetric field arrangement of excitation winding 3 relative to Wiegand wire 1 in Fig. 1. Providing different winding density is a conventional way to achieve the same field difference taught by DR. DODUCO.
Therefore, it would have been obvious … to form the excitation element as a coil with different winding density at the ends, as taught by the principles of DR. DODUCO.
As to claim 12,
Agostinelli further discloses the longitudinal axis of the excitation element (drive coils 102 of probe 2) being identical, parallel, or within 30 degrees of the longitudinal axis of the bistable magnetic wire (magnetic marker 6).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agostinelli (US 2019/0223975 hereinafter “Agostinelli”) in view of DR. DODUCO.
As to claim 13,
Agostinelli discloses in Figs. 7, 8, 9A-I, 10, 12A-B, 13A-B:
a method for physical quantity measurement and/or for position measurement with a bistable magnetic wire (method of detecting / locating magnetic marker 6 using detection system 1);
wherein a variable magnetic field is transmitted by an excitation element (drive coils 102 of probe 2 are driven by frequency generator 100 to apply an alternating magnetic field to magnetic marker 6);
wherein at least one bistable magnetic wire is placed within the range of the excited magnetic field, which is magnetized when the magnetic field changes by a single Barkhausen jump from the first end to the second end of the bistable magnetic wire or vice versa (magnetic marker 6 comprising magnetic marker material that exhibits a large Barkhausen jump / LBJ is placed in the field of drive coils 102 and undergoes a change in magnetization / Barkhausen jump);
and where the response of the bistable magnetic wire is subsequently sensed by a sensing element (sense coils 104 of probe 2 detect the signal from magnetic marker 6; harmonic detection circuit 108 processes the received signal).
Agostinelli does not disclose the excitation element and the bistable magnetic wire are maintained in a position such that the amplitude of the magnetic field excited by the excitation element at the first end is different from the amplitude of the magnetic field excited by the excitation element at the second end.
However, DR. DODUCO discloses in Fig. 1:
an excitation element and a bistable magnetic wire placed in a position such that the amplitude of the magnetic field at one end of the wire is different from the amplitude of the magnetic field at the opposite end (excitation winding 3 is placed close to one end of Wiegand wire 1, resulting in a magnitude of the magnetic field at the end where excitation winding 3 is placed that is different from the magnitude at the far end; the spatial arrangement of the system in Fig. 1 produces this difference).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Agostinelli and maintain an excitation element and a bistable magnetic wire in a position such that the amplitude of the magnetic field at one end of the wire is different from the amplitude of the magnetic field at the opposite end (excitation winding 3 is placed close to one end of Wiegand wire 1, resulting in a magnitude of the magnetic field at the end where excitation winding 3 is placed that is different from the magnitude at the far end; the spatial arrangement of the system in Fig. 1 produces this difference), as taught by DR. DODUCO (excitation winding 3 placed close to one end of Wiegand wire 1 in Fig. 1), in order to control the direction of the single Barkhausen jump along the wire and thereby improve the reliability of the detected response.
As to claim 14,
Using a triangle-shaped amplitude waveform and evaluating times T1 and T2 is a conventional variation of the alternating-field excitation already performed by drive coils 102 and detection by sense coils 104.
As to claim 15,
Agostinelli further discloses selecting the frequency of the excitation field (via frequency generator 100 and drive coils 102) in a range that produces a usable response from magnetic marker 6.
As to claim 16,
Evaluating the sum of T1 and T2 (preferably without absolute amplitude) is a conventional processing step of the signal detected by sense coils 104.
As to claim 17,
Taking into account the difference of T2 and T1 is a further conventional evaluation of the same detected signal.
As to claim 18,
Agostinelli further discloses that the response intercepted by sense coils 104 is evaluated in harmonic detection circuit 108 (corresponding to a control unit).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks, see page 7, filed on 7/20/26, with respect to Ex Parte Quayle Action have been fully considered and the search have been updated. The Ex Parte Quayle Action in the last office action has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of the prior art above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUNG X NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1967. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30am-6:30pm 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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-2258. 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.
/TUNG X NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858 7/30/2026
Prosecution Insights