DETAILED ACTION
Notice to Applicant
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1-10 are pending.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
4. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference numeral 58 has been used to designate both the assembly tool (see Figure 4) and the slot (see Figure 8). 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.
Specification
5. The specification is objected to due to the following informalities.
In paragraph 60, it appears that the reference numeral designating “the retaining element” should be revised from 2 to 12.
In paragraph 73, it appears that the phrase “the circuit boards 24” should be revised to “the circuit board 24.”
In paragraph 74, it appears that the reference numeral following the first recitation of “the circuit board” should be revised from 44 to 24.
In paragraph 74, it appears that the reference numeral designating “the slots” should be revised from 58 to 38.
In paragraph 75, it appears that the reference numeral designating “the slots” should be revised from 58 to 38.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Lines 2-3 of claim 1 describe fastening a Hall sensor to a circuit board and inserting “such” into a receptacle of an assembly tool. It is unclear if “such” refers to the Hall sensor. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 2-7 are consequently rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
Per claim 6, the limitation “the assembly” in line 1 lacks sufficient antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required. For the purpose of examination, said limitation is interpreted as implying “the assembly tool.”
Per claim 10, the limitations “the portion” in line 1, “the base” in line 2, and “the remaining portion” in line 3 lack sufficient antecedent bases. Appropriate correction is required. For the purpose of examination, said limitations are interpreted as implying “a portion,” “a base,” and “a remaining portion,” respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Keefover et al. (US 2005/0183695 – hereinafter “Keefover”).
Per claim 1, Keefover teaches a method for producing an angular position sensor (¶44), the method comprising: fastening a Hall sensor (Fig. 2; sensor assembly 27; ¶32) to a circuit board (Fig. 2; printed circuit board 32; ¶31) and inserting such into a receptacle (Fig. 4; inner space surrounded by fingers 46 of an alignment tool 42; ¶35) of an assembly tool (Fig. 4; alignment tool 42; ¶35); arranging a housing (Fig. 4; casting 12; ¶34) around the circuit board, the housing being aligned with the assembly tool; and fastening the circuit board to the housing (A sensor assembly 27, which may be a Hall effect sensor, is arranged on a printed circuit board 32 and inserted into a receptacle of an alignment tool 42. A casting 12 is arranged around the printed circuit board 32 and has a predetermined alignment with the alignment tool 42. The printed circuit board 32 is fastened to the casting 12 via fasteners 34 (¶34)).
Per claim 2, Keefover teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein an outer contour of the housing is aligned with an edge of the assembly tool (An outer contour of the casting 12 would be in a predetermined alignment with an edge of the alignment tool 42 to enable the printed circuit board 32 to be in a position for fastening (Fig. 4; ¶34)).
Per claim 3, Keefover teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the circuit board is also placed on pins of the assembly tool (The printed circuit board 32 is placed on fingers 46 of the alignment tool 42 (Fig. 4)).
Per claim 6, Keefover teaches an assembly tool for carrying out the method according to claim 1, the assembly comprising: a receptacle for a Hall sensor that is fastened to a circuit board; and an alignment device to align a housing (The alignment tool 42 includes an inner space surrounded by fingers 46 for receiving a sensor assembly 27 that is fastened to a printed circuit board 32. The other end of the alignment tool 42 may be controlled to align a casting 12 to the printed circuit board 32 (Fig. 4; ¶34)).
10. Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wallner et al. (US 2013/0133412 – hereinafter “Wallner”).
Per claim 1, Wallner teaches a method for producing an angular position sensor (¶44), the method comprising: fastening a Hall sensor (Fig. 1; sensor element 3; ¶34) to a circuit board (Fig. 1; circuit board 2; ¶34) and inserting such into a receptacle (Fig. 3; cavity 11; ¶39) of an assembly tool (Fig. 3; insert mold tool 10; ¶39); arranging a housing (Fig. 4; encapsulation formed by insert molding material 14; ¶42) around the circuit board, the housing being aligned with the assembly tool; and fastening the circuit board to the housing (A sensor element 3, which may be a Hall IC, is arranged on a circuit board 2 and inserted into a cavity 11 of an insert mold tool 10. An encapsulation is formed around the circuit board 2 by filling the insert mold tool 10 with insert molding material 14 (Figs. 3-4; ¶42)).
Per claim 2, Wallner teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein an outer contour of the housing is aligned with an edge of the assembly tool (An outer contour of the encapsulation is aligned with an inner edge of the insert mold tool 10 (Figs. 3-4; ¶42)).
Per claim 3, Wallner teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the circuit board is also placed on pins of the assembly tool (The circuit board 2 is placed on pins 6 disposed in the insert mold tool 10 (Fig. 3; ¶42)).
Per claim 6, Wallner teaches an assembly tool for carrying out the method according to claim 1, the assembly comprising: a receptacle for a Hall sensor that is fastened to a circuit board; and an alignment device to align a housing (The insert mold tool 10 includes a cavity 11 for receiving a sensor element 3 that is fastened to a circuit board 2. A lower tool part 10b of the insert mold tool 10 includes positioning receptacles 13 for aligning the encapsulation (Fig. 3; ¶40-41)).
11. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mikami (US 2004/0184128).
Per claim 8, Mikami teaches an angular position sensor (¶68) comprising a circuit board (Fig. 1; printed board 18; ¶68) that is arranged in a one-piece cup-shaped housing (Fig. 1; housing 11; ¶62) and to which a Hall sensor (Fig. 1; Hall device 46; ¶66) is fastened.
12. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okuya (US 2008/0106873).
Per claim 8, Okuya teaches an angular position sensor (Fig. 1; angle detection device 4; ¶20) comprising a circuit board (Fig. 6; printed circuit board 18; ¶29) that is arranged in a one-piece cup-shaped housing (Fig. 6; detection-side housing 5a; ¶29) and to which a Hall sensor (Fig. 6; Hall elements 12; ¶29) is fastened.
13. Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okumura (US 6,246,232).
Per claim 8, Okumura teaches an angular position sensor (Fig. 1; rotation sensor 1; col. 8, line 66) comprising a circuit board (Fig. 3; circuit board 17; col. 9, lines 55-57) that is arranged in a one-piece cup-shaped housing (Fig. 3; case 2; col. 9, lines 5-11) and to which a Hall sensor (Fig. 6; Hall element 14; col. 9, lines 55-57) is fastened.
Per claim 9, Okumura teaches the angular position sensor according to claim 8, wherein a thickened area (Figs. 3 and 5; area that includes projections 2f; col. 9, line 9) that protrudes inwardly at an inner wall of the housing has a slot (Figs. 3 and 5; groove 2k; col. 9, line 12) arranged substantially in parallel to the circuit board, within which the circuit board rests (A thickened area that protrudes inwardly at an inner side wall of the case 2 includes a groove 2k that is arranged in parallel to the circuit board 17, within which the circuit board 17 rests (Figs. 3 and 5; col. 11, lines 7-11)).
14. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mehnert et al. (US 2016/0033305 – hereinafter “Mehnert”).
Per claim 8, Mehnert teaches an angular position sensor (Fig. 1; rotary encoder 1; ¶24) comprising a circuit board (Fig. 1; carrier 33; ¶45 and 53) that is arranged in a one-piece cup-shaped housing (Fig. 1; shield 38; ¶52) and to which a Hall sensor (Fig. 1; Hall probes 25-28; ¶35) is fastened.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
15. 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.
16. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Okumura in view of Kumamoto et al. (US 2014/0130633 – hereinafter “Kumamoto”).
Per claim 10, Okumura does not explicitly teach the angular position sensor according to claim 9, wherein the portion of the thickened area facing the base of the housing, with respect to the slot, is hollow and accommodates a screw head of a screw that is screwed into the remaining portion of the thickened area, the circuit board being clamped between the remaining portion of the thickened area and the screw head.
In contrast, Kumamoto teaches a position sensor comprising a Hall element 44 that is disposed on a circuit board 53. The circuit board 53 is sandwiched between a first housing cover 13 and a first housing main body 11. Screws are used to fasten the first housing cover 13 to first housing main body 11 and hold the circuit board 53 therebetween (Figs. 4-5; ¶36, 39, and 48).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the angular position sensor of Okumura such that one projection 2f is hollow and accommodates a screw that is screwed into the other projection 2f by passing through the circuit board 17 provided in the groove 2k. One of ordinary skill would make such a modification for the purpose of securing a circuit board (Kumamoto; ¶39).
Claim Objections
17. Claims 7 and 9 are objected to due to the following informalities.
Per claim 7, the parenthesis following “device” in line 1 should be removed.
Per claim 9, “substantialy” in line 2 should be revised to “substantially.”
Claim Remarks
18. Although claims 4-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the prior art of record does not teach or suggest the subject matter disclosed in these claims.
Conclusion
19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAS A. SANGHERA whose telephone number is (571)272-4787. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, alt. Fri, 8-5 EST.
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, WALTER LINDSAY can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/JAS A SANGHERA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights