DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the following communications: Application filed on Nov. 14, 2024.
Claims 2-21 are presented for Examination. Claim 2 is independent.
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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: A rotary machine of a blood pump system measuring rotor to sensor spacing using a magnetic sensor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Claim 2 is drawn broadly to any rotary machine having signals generated “with one or more constant magnetic source voltages.” The disclosure describes embodiments employing rotor magnets, sensor coils, Hall sensors, motor coils, and amplitude-modulated signals resulting from rotor motion. See paragraphs [0050]– [0059], [0087]– [0099].
The specification does not adequately describe or enable the full genus implied by “constant magnetic source voltages,” including the claimed relationship between a rotor, a constant magnetic-source voltage, and stationary magnetic-field sensors. In particular, the disclosure does not provide sufficient technical detail establishing how a constant voltage source, broadly construed, produces the claimed sensor signal having a component corresponding to rotor-sensor distance across the full scope of the claim.
Claims 19 and 20 — Determining dynamic and mechanical quantities Claims 19 and 20 broadly require determination of rotor position, linear displacement speed, linear acceleration, force, and/or torque from one or more electrical sensor signals.
The specification provides a high-level statement that position may be used to determine force using bearing stiffness and that torque may be derived relative to a rotor-fixed point. See paragraph [0081].
However, the specification does not provide sufficient algorithms, calibration methods, sensor configurations, dynamic models, error treatment, or examples enabling determination of every claimed combination of position, speed, acceleration, force, and torque from the broadly claimed raw electrical sensor signals across the full scope of claim 2.
Applicant is required to explain where the originally filed disclosure provides written-description and enabling support for the full scope of these limitations.
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 2-21 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites “a rotor configured to generate one or more electrical signals . . . with one or more constant magnetic source voltages and with one or more of the magnetic field sensors.” It is unclear how the rotor itself generates electrical signals “with” magnetic source voltages and stationary magnetic-field sensors. The specification instead explains that rotor magnets generate a changing magnetic field and that the sensors/coils generate or provide the electrical signals (See, e.g. [0050]– [0054] and [0087]– [0089], [0051]; “The alternating magnetic field generated by the rotation of the rotor generates an electrical alternating voltage in the magnetic field sensors”).
Accordingly, the claim fails to clearly identify the structure that generates the electrical signals and the functional relationship among the rotor, the alleged “constant magnetic source voltages,” and the sensors.
Further, the term “constant magnetic source voltages” lacks a reasonably certain meaning. A voltage is electrical, whereas the specification generally discusses permanent magnets or electromagnets as magnetic sources. The claim does not establish whether this phrase refers to a DC excitation voltage, an electromagnetic source, a permanent-magnet source, or another quantity.
Claim 6 recites that “the electrical signals further comprise a signal component corresponding to a rotor rotation frequency,” and that demodulation is performed “such that a signal corresponding to the rotor rotation frequency is generated.”
It is unclear whether the generated signal is: (i) a distance signal;
(ii) a rotor-frequency signal; or (iii) both. The claim language does not distinctly specify the input signal(s), the demodulation operation, and the intended output(s).
Claims 7–11 use limitations such as “amplitude demodulation,” “envelope demodulation,” “carrier oscillation,” “rotor rotation frequency,” and “rotation angle” in a generally understandable technical context.
However, in view of the ambiguity in claims 2, 5, and 6 regarding the source and composition of the input electrical signal and the particular output of the demodulation, the scope of these dependent claims is also not certain.
Claim 14 recites a first processing unit configured to process sensor signals “such that the signal component . . . which contains information about the distance . . . is in each case amplified in relation to other signal components.”
The limitations of “amplified in relation to other signal components” is indefinite because the claim does not define a comparison baseline, a measurable criterion, or whether “amplified” means gain amplification, relative signal-to-noise enhancement, filtering/attenuation of other components, or a relative increase following signal combination.
Although the specification provides examples using filtering and combining signals, the claim does not provide objective boundaries for determining whether the claimed relationship is met.
Claim 15 recites rotor-position signals generated “based on the distance signal and/or the frequency signal.” Neither “frequency signal” nor a clearly defined “distance signal” has proper antecedent basis in claim 2. Further, the “and/or” construction leaves uncertain whether the second processing unit must use a distance signal, a frequency signal, or either alone.
Claims 16 and 17 depend from claims 15 and 14, respectively, and therefore inherit the above-noted uncertainty.
Claim 18 recites “a method using the rotary machine of claim 2. The limitations of “using the rotary machine” does not clearly establish whether every structural limitation of claim 2 is required, nor does it distinctly state the operative relationship between the recited method steps and the claimed rotary machine. The method further states that the distance signal “is generated,” without identifying the component or step that generates it.
Claims 19 and 20 recite that rotor position, displacement speed, acceleration, force, and/or torque are determined “based on” sensor signals. The term “based on” is broad but not necessarily indefinite standing alone. However, in combination with the unclear signal-generation and signal-demodulation requirements of claim 2, the claims do not reasonably establish whether these quantities are derived from raw sensor signals, a distance signal, a demodulated signal, or a rotor-position signal.
Appropriate correction is requested.
Since the independent claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b) hence the dependent claims of 2 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nussbaumer (US 20110187217).
Regarding Independent Claim 2, Nussbaumer discloses that a rotary machine (Fig.1) comprising:
a stator and a rotatably mounted rotor configured to move relative to the stator, one or more magnetic field sensors arranged stationary relative to the stator at a radial distance from an axis which is stationary relative to the stator, at least one measuring device, which is configured to detect magnetic field changes with the aid of the aforementioned magnetic field sensors (Fig.1: 2,3 and [0053]);
a rotor (Fig.1: 3) configured to generate one or more electrical signals in each case with one or more constant magnetic source voltages and with one or more of the magnetic field sensors (Fig.1: 51s), said electrical signals having signal components which correspond to a distance between the magnetic field sensor and the rotor in each case; and
a computation unit (Fig.1:6) configured to generate, based on said electrical signals, a distance signal corresponding to the distance between the rotor and a respective one of the one or more magnetic field sensors ([0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein at least one of the one or more magnetic field sensors comprises a Hall sensor ([0007]).
Regarding claim 4, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the Hall sensor is a differential Hall sensor (Fig.2:51).
Regarding claim 5, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the computation unit is or comprises a demodulator unit configured to generate the distance signal by carrying out a demodulation of signals generated by or derived from the magnetic field sensors (Fig.2:61 and [0045]).
Regarding claim 6, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the electrical signals further comprise a signal component corresponding to a rotor rotation frequency, and wherein the demodulator unit is further configured to carry out the demodulation of the signals generated by or derived from the magnetic field sensors such that a frequency signal corresponding to the rotor rotation frequency is generated (Fig.2).
Regarding claim 7, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the demodulator unit is configured to carry out an amplitude demodulation in at least one of a time domain and a frequency domain [0045].
Regarding claim 8, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the demodulator unit is configured to carry out an envelope demodulation ([0046]).
Regarding claim 9, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the demodulator unit is configured to carry out demodulation by multiplication with a sinusoidal signal having the frequency of carrier oscillation and subsequent low-pass filtering ([0045]).
Regarding claim 10, Nussbaumer discloses that further comprises a device configured to provide the rotor rotation frequency, wherein the demodulator unit is configured to use the rotor rotation frequency in the demodulation ([0046]).
Regarding claim 11, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the demodulator unit is configured to use a rotation angle of the rotor in the demodulation ([0043]).
Regarding claim 12, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein at least one of the one or more magnetic field sensors comprises a coil ([0040]).
Regarding claim 13, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the coil is not a motor coil configured to generate a magnetic field suitable for driving the rotor ([0040]).
Regarding claim 14, Nussbaumer discloses that comprising a first processing unit configured to superimpose and/or filter one or more electrical signals of the aforementioned magnetic field sensors into one or more signals, such that the signal component in the respectively resulting signal, which contains information about the distance between the rotor and the respective magnetic field sensor, is in each case amplified in relation to other signal components ([0050]).
Regarding claim 15, Nussbaumer discloses that comprising
a second processing unit (Fig.2:52), which is connected downstream of the computation unit and which is configured to generate one or more rotor position signals based on the distance signal and/or the frequency signal; and
a control unit (52)configured to generate control signals from the rotor position signals ([0040]).
Regarding claim 16, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the control signals are used to influence the position or the speed of the rotor relative to the magnetic field sensors (Fig.2).
Regarding claim 17, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the control signals are used to actively counteract vibrations of the rotor ([0041]; Noise).
Regarding claim 18, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein
one or more electrical signals are measured at the magnetic field sensors; and
the distance signal corresponding to the distance between the rotor and a respective one of the one or more magnetic field sensors is generated based on the one or more signals measured at the magnetic field sensors ([0050]).
Regarding claim 19, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein at least one or more components of a rotor position and/or a linear displacement speed and/or a linear acceleration of the rotor axis is determined based on the one or more electrical signals measured at the magnetic field sensors (Fig.1:51s).
Regarding claim 20, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein a force and/or a torque acting on the rotor is determined based on the one or more electrical signals measured at the magnetic field sensors ([0038]).
Regarding claim 21, Nussbaumer discloses that wherein the rotary machine is included in a blood pump system ([0002]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD S ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8439. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am to 6:00pm.
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, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached on 571-272-2060. 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.
/MUHAMMAD S ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights