FIRST NON-FINAL REJECTION
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 Objections
Claims 18-22, 24, 26, 27, 29-31, 34, and 35 recites the limitation "the emitter" and/or “the receiver” in the body of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claims (the claims should be amended to --the at least one emitter--, --the at least one receiver--).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 18-27, 31-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(!) as being anticipated by Malkin et al. U.S. Patent 7,302,866.
With respect to claims 18 and 26, Malkin teaches a substrate (polymide layer 170, figure 2) in which at least one emitter and at least one receiver (piezoelectric disk 120, figures 1 and 2) are integrated such that the substrate at least partially encloses the emitter and the receiver and only one emission surface of the emitter and only one detection surface of the receiver are free of the substrate (the piezoelectric disk are free of material on one side, figures 1 and 2).
With respect to claims 19 and 34-35, Malkin teaches wherein the emitter is configured to generate mechanical waves in the body (interpreted as being in multiple directions), and wherein the receiver is configured to detect the mechanical waves in the body (waves are induced and transduced by the sensor assembly 100, col. 6 lines 32-54, figure 7).
With respect to claims 20-21, Malkin teaches wherein the emitter is arranged on a first side of the substrate and the receiver is arranged on a second side of the substrate opposite the first side as well as laterally spaced apart (interpreted as the piezoelectric disk 120 being adjacent to each other on the sensor assembly 100, figure 1).
With respect to claim 22, Malkin teaches wherein the emitter is configured to generate mechanical waves only and the receiver is configured to detect the mechanical waves only (interpreted as the computing device 550 selectively controlling the piezoelectric disk, col. 6 lines 22-31).
With respect to claims 23, 32, and 33, Malkin teaches wherein a modulus of elasticity of the substrate is less than a modulus of elasticity of the body and wherein the sensor structure is permanently or reversibly connected to the body (the sensor assembly 100 is flexible and applied to an aircraft 510 body that is interpreted as having a modulus of elasticity and being a fiber composite material, figure 5).
With respect to claims 24-25, Malkin teaches wherein the substrate has a damping element, which is arranged between the emitter and the receiver, and wherein the damping element has a lower modulus of elasticity than the substrate and wherein the damping element extends completely over a cross-sectional area of the substrate. (interpreted as the buffer layer 110 between each piezoelectric disk 120, figures 1 and 2).
With respect to claim 27, Malkin teaches further comprising flexible electrical wiring (traces 150, figure 1) for electrical contacting of the emitter and/or the receiver is integrated into the substrate.
With respect to claim 31, Malkin teaches wherein the emitter and/or the receiver comprises an electrical shielding element (interpreted as buffer layer 110, figures 1 and 2).
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.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malkin et al. U.S. Patent 7,302,866 in view of Ladpli et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0207274.
With respect to claim 28, Malkin teaches the claimed invention except further comprising at least one sensor integrated in the substrate.
Ladpli teaches a battery state monitoring system where the sensor system had piezoelectric transducers with strain gauges for strain level measurement, temperature sensors for environmental condition monitoring (paragraph 107).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Malkin with the invention of a monitoring system having additional sensors with a piezoelectric transducer as taught by Ladpli in order to improve system performance and control characteristics (paragraph 108).
Claim(s) 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malkin et al. U.S. Patent 7,302,866 in view of Meier et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2013/0180338.
With respect to claims 29 and 30, Malkin teaches the claimed invention except wherein a carrier foil located at the emission surface of the emitter and/or at the detection surface of the receiver, and wherein the carrier foil is configured to change a resonant frequency of the emitter and/or the receiver.
Meier teaches an inspection system wherein a carrier 2 is provided with a plurality of cuboid cutouts 4 which are covered on a convex front side of the carrier 2 by a matching film 8 of which the cutouts 4 are sealed on a front side 6 of the carrier 2 and ultrasound transducer elements 10 are respectively introduced into the cutouts 4 and bonded to the matching film 8 (interpreted as the claimed carrier foil which would thereby change the resonant frequency of the ultrasound transducer, paragraph 22)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Malkin with the invention of having a film located over the surface of the ultrasound transducer as taught by Meier in order to provide a more durable monitoring system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDDIE KIRKLAND III whose telephone number is (571)272-2232. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at (571) 272-4107. 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.
FREDDIE KIRKLAND III
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
/Freddie Kirkland III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 7/18/2026
Prosecution Insights