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 .
Claims 1-5 filed on November 2, 2024, are pending.
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 4, 5, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Zimmerman (5,649,035, Patented July 15, 1997).
As to claim 4, Zimmerman discloses a displacement sensor comprising:
LiDAR circuitry including a light emitter and a light receiver (Zimmerman at Fig. 6, source 31 and photo-detector 33);
an optical fiber capable of elongation having one end optically connected to both the light emitter of the LiDAR circuitry and the light receiver of the LiDAR circuitry through the effect of an optical coupler (Zimmerman at Figs. 1-4, 5, 6, optical fiber 11, 21, 36);
a plurality of anchors displaced apart from one another and affixed to the optical fiber (Zimmerman at Figs. 1-4, reflective markers 12; col. 1, ll. 26-34); 1
wherein the LiDAR circuitry is configured to operate and determine a relative displacement between the plurality of anchors (Zimmerman at col. 2, ll. 3-21 discloses “The elongation of the structure between the two reflective markers is monitored by measuring the elongation of the optical fiber. The elongation of the optical fiber is determined by monitoring the changes in the time of flight of the optical signal between the reflective markers.”).
As to claim 5, Zimmerman discloses a displacement sensor comprising:
LiDAR circuitry including a light emitter and a light receiver (Zimmerman at Fig. 6, source 31 and photo-detector 33);
a plurality of optical fibers capable of elongation each having one end optically connected to both the light emitter of the LiDAR circuitry and the light receiver of the LiDAR circuitry through the effect of an optical coupler (Zimmerman at Figs. 1-2, 6, 7, optical fibers from splitter 41 to respective optical fibers 11 of FOGSPs 20);
a plurality of anchors displaced apart from one another and respectively affixed to the optical fibers such that each of the plurality of optical fibers has affixed thereto at least two of the plurality of anchors that are not affixed to any of the other optical fibers (Zimmerman at Figs. 1-4, 7, reflective markers 12 respectively in each of FOGSPs 20);
wherein the LiDAR circuitry is configured to operate and determine a relative displacement between the plurality of anchors (Zimmerman at Fig. 7; col. 2, ll. 3-21 discloses “The elongation of the structure between the two reflective markers is monitored by measuring the elongation of the optical fiber. The elongation of the optical fiber is determined by monitoring the changes in the time of flight of the optical signal between the reflective markers.”).
Claims 1, 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmerman (5,649,035, Patented July 15, 1997) in view of Dammann (US 2002/0125414 A1, Published September 12, 2002).
As to claim 1, Zimmerman discloses a displacement sensor comprising:
LiDAR circuitry including a light emitter and a light receiver (Zimmerman at Fig. 6, source 31 and photodetector 33);
an optical fiber capable of elongation having one end optically connected to the light emitter of the LiDAR circuitry (Zimmerman at Figs. 1-2, 6) and…
a pair of anchors displaced apart from one another and affixed to the optical fiber (Zimmerman at Figs 1-2, markers 12 are analogous to anchors);2
wherein the LiDAR circuitry is configured to operate and determine a relative displacement between the two anchors (Zimmerman at col. 2, ll. 3-21 discloses “The elongation of the structure between the two reflective markers is monitored by measuring the elongation of the optical fiber. The elongation of the optical fiber is determined by monitoring the changes in the time of flight of the optical signal between the reflective markers.”).
While Zimmerman strongly suggests another end optically connected to the light receiver of the LiDAR circuitry (Zimmerman at Figs. 1-2, 6), Zimmerman does not expressly depict or state that the another end optically connected to the light receiver of the LiDAR circuitry.
However, Dammann does disclose that the another end optically connected to the light receiver of the LiDAR circuitry (Dammann at Fig. 1, sensor 5; ¶ [0027] discloses “On the other hand, the fiber optic cable of the sensor 5 is laid out as a loop, whereby both of its ends are connected through respective interfaces 2 to the optical receiver 7 and the laser emitter 8.”).
Zimmerman discloses a base fiber optic system upon which the claimed invention is an improvement. Dammann discloses a comparable fiber optic system which has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention. Hence, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify or add to Zimmerman the teachings of Dammann for the predictable result of monitoring temperature (Dammann at ¶ [0027]).
As to claim 2, the combination of Zimmerman and Dammann discloses the displacement sensor of claim 1 wherein the optical fiber is arranged in a single loop configuration such that the optical fiber is affixed to each anchor at two points (Dammann at Fig. 1, sensor 5; ¶ [0027]).
Zimmerman discloses a base fiber optic system upon which the claimed invention is an improvement. Dammann discloses a comparable fiber optic system which has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention. Hence, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify or add to Zimmerman the teachings of Dammann for the predictable result of monitoring temperature (Dammann at ¶ [0027]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zimmerman and Dammann as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Doc1 (JP-11-223513, Published February 9, 1998 – provided on IDS – See Google Patents for translation).
As to claim 3, the combination of Zimmerman and Dammann discloses the displacement sensor of claim 1.
The combination does not disclose wherein the optical fiber is arranged in a multi-pass configuration such that the optical fiber is affixed to each anchor at more than two points effectively forming multiple loops of fiber between the light emitter and the light receiver.
However, Doc1 does disclose wherein the optical fiber is arranged in a multi-pass configuration such that the optical fiber is affixed to each anchor at more than two points effectively forming multiple loops of fiber between the light emitter and the light receiver (Doc1 at Fig. 3, mounting plates 21).
the combination of Zimmerman and Dammann discloses a base fiber optic strain gauge device upon which the claimed invention is an improvement. Doc1 discloses a comparable fiber optic strain gauge device which has been improved in the same way as the claimed invention. Hence, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify or add to the combination of Zimmerman and Dammann the teachings of Doc1 for the predictable result of detecting distortion in a narrow range with high accuracy (Doc1 at ¶ [0003]-[0004]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
O’Banion (US 2019/0006157 A1, Published January 3, 2019) is made of record for its relevance to claims 1, 4, 5 by its disclosure of the following at Fig. 2:
PNG
media_image1.png
605
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sanjiv D Patel whose telephone number is (571)270-5731. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, William Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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.
/Sanjiv D. Patel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
08/23/2026
1 See also Doc1 (JP-11-223513, Published 1998) (provided on IDS) at Fig. 3, anchors 21; Olsen (US 2010/0054935 A1, Published March 4, 2010) at Fig. 2, mounts 40.
2 See also Doc1 (JP-11-223513, Published 1998) (provided on IDS) at Fig. 3, anchors 21; Olsen (US 2010/0054935 A1, Published March 4, 2010) at Fig. 2, mounts 40.
Prosecution Insights