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(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 2, 3, and 12 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: the connection between the receivers of the parent claim and the groups of acoustic receivers of the child claim.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. It is unclear if the receivers of the parent claim are intended to be one of the two groups of receivers in the dependent claim or if some portion of the receivers is to be in each respective group. This claim is an omnibus type claim.
Claim 3 depends from claim 2 and incorporates it in its entirety and therefore is rejected for the reasons provided above.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: the connection between the receivers of the parent claim and the groups of acoustic receivers of the child claim.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite in that it fails to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. It is unclear if the receivers of the parent claim are intended to be one of the two groups of receivers in the dependent claim or if some portion of the receivers is to be in each respective group. This claim is an omnibus type claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the disclosed invention is inoperative and therefore lacks utility.
Claim 7 requires an additional acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the second acoustic receiver (on the first axis) and positioned along the second axis (perpendicular to the first axis and through the first acoustic receiver and third acoustic receiver). This is impossible. There is no position adjacent to the second acoustic receiver that is on the second axis.
Claim 8 requires a sixth acoustic receiver adjacent to the third acoustic receiver (on the second axis) and positioned along the first axis (perpendicular to the second axis and through the first acoustic receiver and second acoustic receiver). This is impossible. There is no position adjacent to the third acoustic receiver that is on the first axis.
Claims 9 and 10 depend from claim 8 and incorporate it in its entirety and therefore are rejected for the reasons provided above.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Okuda (2008/0072675).
With respect to claim 1, Okuda discloses providing a first acoustic receiver having a center point ([0120]; Fig 10a:12r); positioning a second acoustic receiver adjacent to the first acoustic receiver, wherein the second acoustic receiver has a center point, wherein the center points of each of the first acoustic receiver and the second acoustic receiver are positioned along a first axis ([0120]; Fig 10a:12s); positioning a third acoustic receiver adjacent to the first acoustic receiver, wherein the third acoustic receiver has a center point, wherein the center points of each of the first acoustic receiver and third acoustic receiver are positioned along a second axis, wherein the second axis is perpendicular to the first axis, and wherein a third axis crosses the center point of the third acoustic receiver and a fourth axis crosses the center point of the second acoustic receiver, wherein the third and fourth axes are different from the first and second axes, respectively, and are perpendicular ([0120]; Fig 10a:12p); positioning a fourth acoustic receiver adjacent to the second acoustic receiver and the third acoustic receiver, wherein a center point of the fourth acoustic receiver is positioned an offset distance from each of the third axis and the fourth axis ([00129]; Fig 10a:12q); and receiving an incoming acoustic wave having a wavelength, wherein the offset distance is greater than zero but less than one-half a wavelength of the incoming acoustic wave ([0122]; [0131]).
With respect to claim 11, Okuda discloses a first acoustic receiver having a center point ([0120]; Fig 10a:12r); a second acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the first acoustic receiver, wherein the second acoustic receiver has a center point, wherein the center points of each of the first acoustic receiver and the second acoustic receiver are positioned along a first axis ([0120]; Fig 10a:12s); a third acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the first acoustic receiver, wherein the third acoustic receiver has a center point, wherein the center points of each of the first acoustic receiver and third acoustic receiver are positioned along a second axis, wherein the second axis is perpendicular to the first axis, and wherein a third axis crosses the center point of the third acoustic receiver and a fourth axis crosses the center point of the second acoustic receiver, wherein the third and fourth axes are different from the first and second axes, respectively, and are perpendicular ([0120]; Fig 10a:12p); a fourth acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the second acoustic receiver and the third acoustic receiver, wherein a center point of the fourth acoustic receiver is positioned an offset distance from each of the third axis and the fourth axis ([0120]; Fig 10a:12q); and an incoming acoustic wave having a wavelength, wherein the offset distance is greater than zero but less than one-half a wavelength of the incoming acoustic wave ([0122]; [0131]).
With respect to claim 4, Okuda discloses calculating a position of an object in a spatial environment using at least one of: a distance of the object from at least one of the first, second, third, or fourth acoustic receivers; an elevation of the object relative to the position of at least one of the first, second, third, or fourth acoustic receivers; and an azimuth of the object relative to the position of at least one of the first, second, third, or fourth acoustic receivers ([0032]; [0130]).
With respect to claim 5, Okuda discloses positioning a transducer adjacent to at least one of the acoustic receivers; and emitting at least one acoustic wave with the transducer ([0099]; [0101]; Fig 8: 10, 20).
With respect to claim 14, Okuda discloses a transducer positioned adjacent to at least one of the acoustic receivers; wherein the transducer is configured to emit at least one acoustic wave ([0099]; [0101]; Fig 8: 10, 20).
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 6, 13, and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuda in view of Scholte (9084045).
With respect to claim 6, Okuda teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach positioning an additional acoustic receiver adjacent to the second acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the first axis.
Scholte teaches positioning an additional acoustic receiver adjacent to the second acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the first axis (Fig 1; Fig 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Okuda with the additional sensor of Scholte since such a modification would have increased the accuracy of the results.
With respect to claim 13, Okuda teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach the acoustic receivers comprises a transducer.
Scholte teaches the acoustic receivers comprises a transducer (Col 3, line 60-61). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Okuda with the transducers of Scholte since transducers are well known in the art as a type of acoustic sensor.
With respect to claim 15, Okuda teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach an additional acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the second acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the first axis.
Scholte teaches an additional acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the second acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the first axis (Fig 1; Fig 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Okuda with the additional sensor of Scholte since such a modification would have increased the accuracy of the results.
With respect to claim 16, Okuda teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach an additional acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the third acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the second axis.
Scholte teaches an additional acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the third acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the second axis (Fig 1; Fig 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Okuda with the additional sensor of Scholte since such a modification would have increased the accuracy of the results.
With respect to claim 17, Okuda teaches the invention as discussed above. However, it does not teach a fifth acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the third acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the second axis; and a sixth acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the second acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the first axis.
Scholte teaches a fifth acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the third acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the second axis (Fig 1; Fig 2); and a sixth acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the second acoustic receiver, wherein the additional acoustic receiver has a center point positioned along the first axis (Fig 1; Fig 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Okuda with the additional sensor of Scholte since such a modification would have increased the accuracy of the results.
With respect to claim 18 Okuda teaches the invention as discussed above. It further teaches the offset distance between the receivers is greater than zero but less than one-half the wavelength of the incoming acoustic wave ([0122]; [0131]).
However, it does not teach a seventh acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the fifth acoustic receiver, wherein a center point of the seventh acoustic receiver is positioned the offset distance from a fifth axis, wherein the fifth axis is perpendicular to the second and third axes.
Scholte teaches a seventh acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the fifth acoustic receiver, wherein a center point of the seventh acoustic receiver is positioned the offset distance from a fifth axis, wherein the fifth axis is perpendicular to the second and third axes (Col 7, lines 24-29; Fig 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the system of Okuda with the perpendicularly offset receiver of Scholte since such a modification would have assisted in the removal of background noise or reflections.
With respect to claim 19, Okuda teaches the invention as discussed above. It further teaches the offset distance between the receivers is greater than zero but less than one-half the wavelength of the incoming acoustic wave ([0122]; [0131]).
However, it does not teach an eighth acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the sixth acoustic receiver, wherein a center point of the eighth acoustic receiver is positioned the offset distance from a sixth axis, wherein the sixth axis is perpendicular to the first and fourth axes.
Scholte teaches an eighth acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the sixth acoustic receiver, wherein a center point of the eighth acoustic receiver is positioned the offset distance from a sixth axis, wherein the sixth axis is perpendicular to the first and fourth axes (Col 7, lines 24-29; Fig 7). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the present application to modify the system of Okuda with the perpendicularly offset receiver of Scholte since such a modification would have assisted in the removal of background noise or reflections.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okuda.
Okuda teaches a housing having a sensor array ([0138]); the sensor array has: a first acoustic receiver having a center point ([0120]; Fig 10a:12r); a second acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the first acoustic receiver, wherein the second acoustic receiver has a center point, wherein the center points of each of the first acoustic receiver and the second acoustic receiver are positioned along a first axis ([0120]; Fig 10a:12s); a third acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the first acoustic receiver, wherein the third acoustic receiver has a center point, wherein the center points of each of the first acoustic receiver and third acoustic receiver are positioned along a second axis, wherein the second axis is perpendicular to the first axis, and wherein a third axis crosses the center point of the third acoustic receiver and a fourth axis crosses the center point of the second acoustic receiver, wherein the third and fourth axes are different from the first and second axes, respectively, and are perpendicular ([0120]; Fig 10a:12p); a fourth acoustic receiver positioned adjacent to the second acoustic receiver and the third acoustic receiver, wherein a center point of the fourth acoustic receiver is positioned an offset distance from each of the third axis and the fourth axis ([0120]; Fig 10a:12q); and an incoming acoustic wave having a wavelength, wherein the offset distance is greater than zero but less than one-half a wavelength of the incoming acoustic wave ([0122]; [0131]). It further teaches the numbers and arrangements of the acoustic matching members and ultrasonic detecting elements can be arbitrarily made in accordance with an application (0128], lines 3). However it does not specifically teach first and second sensor arrays positioned adjacently. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to have two sensor arrays, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device or system involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to position the arrays adjacently since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Jaikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Conclusion
The prior art which is cited but not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The references made herein are done so for the convenience of the applicant. They are in no way intended to be limiting. The prior art should be considered in its entirety.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRYSTINE E BREIER whose telephone number is (571)270-7614. The examiner can normally be reached Monday (9:30am-6:30pm); Tuesday & Friday (11:30am-5:30pm).
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571 272 6970. 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.
/KRYSTINE E BREIER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645