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 Objections
Claims 11 and 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 11 and 19-20, “interfeing” should be “interfering”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kreutzer et al. (DE102020209856, published on 2/10/2022, for the purpose of this examination, U.S. Publication No. 20230273236 is used as the English translation) in view of Burns (U.S. Publication No. 7379629).
Regarding claim 11, Kreutzer teaches a method for sensor state detection of an environmental sensor for measuring at least one physical environmental variable of an ambient medium, comprising the following steps: providing the environmental sensor including a micromechanical sensor structure that can be deflected depending on the environmental variable (Abstract), is exposed to the ambient medium and on which at least one interfering deposit entering via the ambient medium can be deposited (Paragraph 58) and further including a converter unit configured to provide a measured variable depending on the deflection of the sensor structure; and detecting an existing deposit of an interfering deposit type on the sensor structure via an excitation deviating from the environmental variable (Paragraphs 66-67); wherein the excitation is a mechanical excitation (Paragraphs 63-67), by which the deposit moves with an excitation movement on the sensor structure (Fig.2, inherent that the excitation signal would move protective means 7, and the also move the deposit 9).
Kreutzer is silent about wherein the excitation is a mechanical excitation acting externally on the environmental sensor.
Burns teaches wherein the excitation is a mechanical excitation acting externally on the environmental sensor (Column 9, line 12 to column 9, line 35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to externally exciting Kreutzer’s environmental sensor because it would prevent interference and increase accuracy of Kreutzer sensor.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Kreutzer and Burns teaches all the features of claim 11 as outlined above, Kreutzer further teaches wherein the deposit is present on a partial region of the sensor structure and a position of the deposit and/or dimension of the deposit and/or distribution of the deposit on the sensor structure can change due to the excitation movement (Fig.2, inherent that the excitation signal would move protective means 7, and the also move the deposit 9).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kreutzer and Burns teaches all the features of claim 11 as outlined above, Kreutzer further teaches wherein the measured variable can change depending on the excitation movement and the detection of the deposit includes an evaluation of the change in the measured variable (Paragraphs 63-67).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Kreutzer and Burns teaches all the features of claim 13 as outlined above, the combination of Kreutzer and Burns is silent about wherein during the excitation movement, a maximum value of the measured variable and a minimum value of the measured variable are detected and the detection of the deposit is dependent on a value difference between the maximum value and the minimum value.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the detection of the deposit dependent on a value difference between the maximum value and the minimum value, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Kreutzer and Burns teaches all the features of claim 13 as outlined above, Kreutzer further teaches wherein a dynamic value of the measured variable is detected during the excitation movement and the detection of the deposit is dependent on a comparison of the dynamic value with a dynamic reference value (Paragraphs 63-67).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Kreutzer and Burns teaches all the features of claim 13 as outlined above, Kreutzer further teaches wherein the environmental sensor is a capacitive environmental sensor and the converter unit provides the measured variable as an electrical measured variable depending on an electrical capacitance influenced at least by the deflection (Paragraphs 56-67).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kreutzer and Burns teaches all the features of claim 16 as outlined above, Kreutzer further teaches wherein the electrical capacitance can change depending on the excitation movement (Paragraphs 56-67).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Kreutzer and Burns teaches all the features of claim 11 as outlined above, Kreutzer further teaches wherein the mechanical excitation is a dynamic excitation in the form of a vibration and/or an acoustic oscillation (Paragraphs 63-67).
Regarding claim 19, the claim is commensurate in scope with the above claim 11, and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth above.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kreutzer et al. (DE102020209856, published on 2/10/2022, for the purpose of this examination, U.S. Publication No. 20230273236 is used as the English translation) in view of Burns (U.S. Publication No. 7379629) and Balasubramanian et al. (U.S. Publication No. 20190383688).
Regarding claim 20, Kreutzer teaches a device, comprising: an environmental sensor system including: an environmental sensor configured to measure at least one physical environmental variable and including a micromechanical sensor structure that can be deflected depending on the environmental variable (Abstract), is exposed to the ambient medium and on which at least one interfering deposit entering via the ambient medium can be deposited (Paragraph 58) and further including a converter unit configured to provide a measured variable depending on the deflection of the sensor structure, and a detection system configured to carry out a sensor state detection of the environmental sensor, the detection system configured to: detect an existing deposit of an interfering deposit type on the sensor structure via an excitation deviating from the environmental variable (Paragraphs 66-67); wherein the excitation is a mechanical excitation (Paragraphs 63-67), by which the deposit moves with an excitation movement on the sensor structure (Fig.2, inherent that the excitation signal would move protective means 7, and the also move the deposit 9); and an excitation apparatus configured generate the mechanical excitation when the detection system carries out the sensor state detection (Paragraphs 56-67).
Kreutzer is silent about the device is a mobile consumer device and the excitation is a mechanical excitation acting externally on the environmental sensor
Burns teaches wherein the excitation is a mechanical excitation acting externally on the environmental sensor (Column 9, line 12 to column 9, line 35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to externally exciting Kreutzer’s environmental sensor because it would prevent interference and increase accuracy of Kreutzer sensor.
The combination of Kreutzer and Burns is silent about the device is a mobile consumer device.
Balasubramanian teaches the device is a mobile consumer device (Paragraph 33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to put Kreutzer’s sensor in a mobile consumer device because putting a pressure sensor in a smartphone dramatically improves GPS vertical accuracy, enables multi-story indoor navigation in places like malls and airports, and provides hyper-local weather tracking.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIN Y ZHONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3798. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 a.m. - 6 p.m..
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/XIN Y ZHONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights