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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse by Applicant, and Applicant identifying claims 1-5 and 16-18 as reading on the elected species I of Fig. 10 in the reply filed on 08 October 2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “201-2” has been used to designate both a portion of element 210 and an IMU. The reference character “211” is used to designate a square opening, but it only points to a space/gap, not a square, thus it is unclear as to what constitutes the square opening. In addition, the recited “combination unit” in instant dependent claim 18 and “main body” recited in instant dependent claims 16 and 17 are not shown. The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the predetermined number of connection portions" in line four. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 2-5 and 16-18 are similarly rejected due to their dependency.
Claims 3 recites the limitation: “wherein the opening is a square.” As a preliminary matter, a square is a perfect mathematically defined shape, which is not possible to reproduce structurally. The Examiner suggests replacing “square” in all instances in the claims to “substantially square” which is employed in the instant filed specification. It is unclear as to what exactly constitutes the recited square opening. The instant filed specification and figures employ the reference number 211 to indicate the square opening. However, the instant figures do not indicate a square opening, but spaces/gaps. Based on the instant drawings, the opening(s), which is defined by an empty space/gap (white portions) are only partial-square opening(s), since the connecting portion(s) physically occupy part of the recited “square opening,” thus is not actually a “square opening,” thus rendering the claim unclear and indefinite. Furthermore, an actual “square” in regards to the opening is unclear, since a “square” can potentially be drawn around various portions of the depicted inertial measurement apparatuses depicted in the instant filed figures, thus rendering the claim indefinite, as to what exactly constitutes/defines the square in regards to an opening/spaces/gaps. An identical argument is made for instant dependent claims 4 and 5, which are similarly rejected for employing the term “square,” as well as being dependent from rejected claim 3.
Instant dependent claims 16 and 17 both recite the limitation “a main body.” It is unclear as to what exactly constitutes a main body of the recited inertial measurement apparatus, since it is not shown in the instant filed drawings, or adequately described or defined in the instant filed specification, rendering the claims indefinite.
Instant dependent claim 18 recites “a combination unit configured to combine and output detection results of the plurality of IMUs.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitations “plurality of IMUs” in the claim. In addition, the recited “combination unit” is not defined or adequately described in the instant filed specification, and it is unclear as what exactly constitutes a “combination unit,” rendering the claim indefinite.
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.
As best understood, claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. 2018/0252739 to Malvern. Malvern discloses an inertial measurement apparatus (see entire reference) including a predetermined number of mounting portions/movable support (6) configured to have a single inertial measurement unit (IMU) (4) mounted thereon; a predetermined number of connection portions/compliant legs (16) configured to connect one of the mounting portions to an edge of an opening provided on a board/frame (8) (see Figs. 1-3); wherein the connection portion is less rigid than the board (see para 0044 which states: “As can be seen schematically in FIG. 2, the compliant legs 16 are “thinned” in the z-direction compared to the frame 8 and the support 6” and “For example, the frame 8, the moveable support 6, and the interdigitated fingers 12, 14 may have a thickness of around 100 microns while the compliant legs 16 may have a thickness of only 10-20 microns” and, as such, the connection portions/compliant legs inherently are less rigid than the board/frame) (meeting all the limitations recited in instant independent claim 1); wherein the connection portion/compliant leg is less rigid than the mounting portion (see para 0044, the compliant legs are thinner than the moveable support, thus also inherently less rigid than the moveable support) (meeting the limitations recited in instant dependent claim 2); wherein the opening is a square (see Fig. 1) and each of the connection portions/compliant legs connects each side of the square to the mounting portion/moveable support (as recited in instant dependent claim 3); wherein the mounting portion/moveable support has a shape in a range serving as the opening is substantially equally divided in the in the predetermined number and each of the connection portions/compliant legs connects a part of each side of the square to the mounting portion/moveable support (as recited in instant dependent claim 4).
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.
As best understood, claim(s) 5 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2018/0252739 to Malvern as applied to claims 1-4 above, and further in view of U.S. 2021/0278218 to Chen. Malvern discloses an inertial measurement apparatus having all of the elements stated previously. Malvern does not explicitly disclose wherein the predetermined number is 4, the mounting portion has a shape in which the range serving as the opening is substantially equally divided in 4, and each of the connection portions connects a part of the right or left side from a center position of each side of the square to the mounting portion (as recited in instant dependent claim 5) or a combination unit configured to combine and output detection results of the plurality of IMUs (as recited in instant dependent claim 18). Malvern further discloses that the inertial measurement apparatus also extends to an inertial measurement unit including a plurality of MEMS/IMUs sensor packages (see para 0032), thus forming a combination unit configured to combine output detection results of the plurality of IMUs, meeting the limitations recited in instant dependent claim 18. Chen discloses an inertial measurement apparatus (see entire reference) sharing many of the structural elements/configurations disclosed by Malvern, (see Fig. 1), including a mounting/isolation portion (610) having a single IMU (700) mounted thereon, a predetermined number of connection portions/pieces (630) configured to connect one of the mounting portions to an edge of a square opening/slots (640) provided on a PCB board (600) which can include a plurality of IMUs on a PCB board being correspondingly provided with a plurality of connection portions/seats (see para 0020 and 0034) are disposed on the PCB board, the opening/spacing slot is formed between any two adjacent connection portions/seats, and pairs of connection portions/seats are symmetrically disposed on two sides of the connection portion/seat on the PCB board, and an opening/spacing slot is formed between any two adjacent connection portions/seats on the PCB board, and when the PCB board is provided with a plurality of connection seats, the spacing slot is also formed between any two adjacent connection seats. For example, the PCB board of the inertial measurement apparatus is provided with one or more connection portions/seats based on a quantity of IMUs needing to be installed. For another example, the PCB board of the inertial measurement apparatus is provided with a plurality of connection seats, a pair of installation seats are symmetrically disposed on two sides of the connection seat of the PCB board, a spacing slot is formed between each installation seat and the connection seat of the PCB board, and the spacing slot is also formed between any two adjacent connection seats. The shape of the spacing slot formed between each installation seat and the connection seat of the PCB board is the same as or different from the shape of the spacing slot formed between any two adjacent connection seats (see para 0034). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to modify the inertial measurement apparatus disclosed by Malvern, employing the teachings of Chen, to employ a predetermined number of 4 mounting portions for 4 IMUs, wherein the 4 mounting portions are symmetrically and equally divided in 4, and thus the connection portions/seats connecting a part of the right or left side from a center position of each side of the square, thus symmetrically, to the mounting portion, thus reducing noise of the IMU(s) by about 60% and problems of zero offset caused by mechanical stress (see paras 0006 and 0035), thus meeting the limitations recited in instant dependent claim 5.
As best understood, claim(s) 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2018/0252739 to Malvern as applied to claim 1 above. Malvern discloses an inertial measurement apparatus having all of the elements stated previously, including a plurality of IMUs on a plurality of mounting portions forming a combination unit. Malvern does not explicitly disclose an interval between the adjacent mounting portions is such an interval that physical contact is not made even at the time of thermal expansion of a main body (as recited in instant dependent claim 16) or an interval between the mounting portion and the edge of the opening is such an interval that physical contact is not made even at the time of thermal expansion of a main body (as recited in instant dependent claim 17). However, Malvern clearly discloses that the mounting portions/movable support (6) being supported by the connection portions/compliant legs (16) within the square opening, wherein the serpentine form of the connection portions/compliant legs allows the connection portions/legs to isolate the mounting portion/movable support from mechanical stresses due to thermal expansion rate mismatches, thus inherently preventing physical contact between the mounting portions/movable supports due to thermal expansion rates/differences (see para 0050). As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to employ the desired spacing/intervals between adjacent mounting portions/movable supports so contact is prevented due to any thermal expansion effects of a main body of the inertial measurement apparatus which would cause measurement errors.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. 10,167,189 to Zhang et al. and U.S. 9,874,459 to Najafi et al. both disclose stress isolation and vibration isolation structures related to IMUs. Applicant is invited to review PTO form 892 accompanying this Office Action for an additional listing Prior Art relevant to the instant invention cited by the Examiner.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Primary Examiner John Fitzgerald whose telephone number is (571) 272-2843. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:00 AM to 3:30 PM E.S.T. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor John Breene, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-4107. 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. The central 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.
/JOHN FITZGERALD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights