DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/23/2024 and 10/17/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-19, drawn to eddy current sensor, classified in G01N27/9093.
II. Claim 20, drawn to method of processing sensor readings, classified in G01M15/14.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions II and I are related as process and apparatus for its practice. The inventions are distinct if it can be shown that either: (1) the process as claimed can be practiced by another and materially different apparatus or by hand, or (2) the apparatus as claimed can be used to practice another and materially different process. (MPEP § 806.05(e)). In this case the method of Group II as recited may be practiced by another and materially different apparatus, such as one that doesn’t necessitate a biasing element configured to bias the contact side of the sensor array against an inspected surface as required in Group I.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
- Groups I and II have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification. Examination of both groups would require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Attorney Karen Wang on June 18, 2025 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Group I, claims 1-19. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claim 20 is thus withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US Patent US 9,222,915 by Nishimizu et al., (Nishimizu hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Nishimizu teaches in Figures 1, 2A-2B a sensor system for component inspection, the sensor system comprising:
a sensor array (coils 10 accommodated on flexible substrate 9, see col. 7, lines 17-20) comprising a plurality of eddy current sensor elements (coils 10, see col. 8, lines 52-64) the sensor array having a contact side (side facing the device under inspection) and a mounting side opposite the contact side (side facing away from the device under inspection);
a sensor mount (11 in figures 2B) coupled to the mounting side of the sensor array (unit 11 is connected to the sensor array and thus, coupled to both the contact and mounting sides of the sensor array); and
a biasing element (16+17+14) configured to bias the contact side of the sensor array against an inspected surface of a component and secure the sensor array to the component while the inspected surface moves relative to the sensor array during data capture (for example, by action of spring 17; see col. 7, lines 42-46).
Regarding claim 2, Nishimizu teaches the sensor system of claim 1, wherein the sensor array comprises the plurality of eddy current sensor elements on a flexible substrate (flexible substrate 9, col. 7, lines 11-12), forming a flexible eddy current array probe (ECAP), and a shape of the sensor array conforms to a nonplanar surface of the sensor mount (as illustrated for example, in figure 4A; see col. 7, lines 15-16).
Regarding claim 3, Nishimizu teaches the plurality of eddy current sensor elements (coils 10) forms an omni-directional ECAP (the coils mounted on substrate 9 are capable of being moved in multiple directions with respect to the surface under inspection).
Regarding claim 4, Nishimizu teaches the sensor system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of eddy current sensor elements (coils 10) is arranged in a plurality of rows (two rows), with sensor elements in each row being offset from sensor elements in an adjacent row (as illustrated in Figure 3).
Regarding claim 6, Nishimizu teaches the sensor array (array of coils 10) is coupled to a non-planar surface of the sensor mount (flexible substrate 9, see col. 7, lines 17-20) that conforms to a contour of the inspected surface.
Regarding claim 16, Nishimizu teaches a movable platform (20+22 shown in Figure 4A) to cause relative movement between the component and the biasing element, along with the sensor array and the sensor mount (as illustrated in Figure 4A); wherein the relative movement is linear or rotational (“C” and/or “B” in Figure 4A).
Regarding claim 17, Nishimizu teaches a connector coupled between the sensor array and a signal processor to transmit signals from the sensor array to the signal processor for defect detection (Nishimizu teaches a signal processor that processes readings from the sensors. Thus, the processor is inherently connected to the eddy current sensors through a “connector”; see col. 7, lines 4-6).
Regarding claim 18, the recitation: “wherein the component comprises an aircraft component and the sensor mount is shaped to conform to a surface of the aircraft component.”, appears to describe the intended use of the claimed apparatus. That is, the claim recites the manner of intended operation of the sensor, using the sensor to test aircraft components.
The examiner notes that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Because Nishimizu teaches all structural elements as recited, and because the sensor system may be readily used in a process of testing welds in parts used for aircraft components, Nishimizu meets the claim.
Regarding claim 19, similar to that explained in regards to claim 18 above, the recitation: “wherein the component comprises a spool of a turbine engine, and wherein the spool is to be rotated by a movable platform while the sensor mount is stationary during inspection.” appears to describe characteristics of the component the recited sensor system is intended to be used with. The examiner notes that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Because Nishimizu teaches all structural elements as recited, and because the sensor system may be readily used in a process of testing welds in parts used for aircraft components in the manner recited in claim 19, Nishimizu meets the claim.
Claim(s) 1, 7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US Patent US 5,442,286 by Sutton Jr. et al., (Sutton hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Sutton teaches a sensor system for component inspection, the sensor system comprising:
a sensor array (drive coils 30 + sense coils 32, Fig. 3) comprising a plurality of eddy current sensor elements (see col. 7, lines 17-20) the sensor array having a contact side (side facing the component under inspection) and a mounting side opposite the contact side (side facing away from the component under inspection);
a sensor mount (20+21a+21b) coupled to the mounting side of the sensor array (as illustrated in figure 1B); and
a biasing element (72+66) configured to bias the contact side of the sensor array against an inspected surface of a component and secure the sensor array to the component while the inspected surface moves relative to the sensor array during data capture (as shown in Figure 1B, the actuator 72 and biasing portion 66 press on the mount to bias the sensors against the surface of the device under inspection; see also, col. 6, lines 42-49).
Regarding claim 7, Sutton teaches the sensor mount is shaped to be inserted into a groove of the component (dovetail slot 12) and the inspected surface is a side wall of the groove (wall facing the sensor).
Regarding claim 17, Sutton teaches a connector (42, 44) coupled between the sensor array and a signal processor (40) to transmit signals from the sensor array to the signal processor for defect detection.
Claim(s) 1, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US Patent US 4,303,884 by Malick et al., (Malick hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Malick teaches a sensor system for component inspection, the sensor system comprising:
a sensor array (array of coils 94; see col. 4, lines 58-61) comprising a plurality of eddy current sensor elements (each of the coils 94) the sensor array having a contact side (side facing away from the component under inspection) and a mounting side opposite the contact side (side facing the component under inspection);
a sensor mount (strips 86) coupled to the mounting side of the sensor array (see col. 4, lines 55-58); and
a biasing element (rubber tube 78) configured to bias the contact side of the sensor array against an inspected surface of a component and secure the sensor array to the component while the inspected surface moves relative to the sensor array during data capture (the sensor system may be accommodated and moved within the device under inspection during a process that includes data capture at multiple positions within the device under inspection; see col. 4, lines 30-40 and col. 4, lines 11-16).
Regarding claim 12, Malick teaches the biasing element comprises an inflatable membrane configured to be inflated to bias the sensor array against the inspected surface (see col. 4, lines 30-40).
Claim(s) 1, 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the US Patent US 6,339,326 by Trantow et al., (Trantow hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Trantow teaches a sensor system for component inspection, the sensor system comprising:
a sensor array (array 36 as illustrated in Figure 1; see col. 3, lines 14-16) comprising a plurality of eddy current sensor elements (each individual sensor that make up the array) the sensor array having a contact side (side facing away from the component under inspection) and a mounting side opposite the contact side (side facing the component under inspection);
a sensor mount (34) coupled to the mounting side of the sensor array (as illustrated in figure 2); and
a biasing element (28+26) configured to bias the contact side of the sensor array against an inspected surface of a component and secure the sensor array to the component while the inspected surface moves relative to the sensor array during data capture (see col. 3, lines 8-11).
Regarding claim 13, Trantow teaches the sensor system of claim 1, further comprising a friction reduction material covering the contact side of the sensor array (see col. 4, lines 7-13).
Regarding claim 14, Trantow teaches the sensor system of claim 13, wherein the friction reduction material comprises Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (see col. 4, lines 7-13).
Regarding claim 15, Trantow teaches the sensor system of claim 13, wherein the friction reduction material is attached to the sensor array via an adhesive, and the sensor array is affixed to the sensor mount via the friction reduction material and the adhesive (see col. 4, lines 8-10).
Claim(s) 1 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated bythe US Patent Application Publication PGPub 2014/0184215 by Nishimizu et al., (Nishimizu hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Nishimizu teaches in Figure 9, a sensor system for component inspection, the sensor system comprising:
a sensor array (coils 22, see paragraph 0048, lines 5-9) comprising a plurality of eddy current sensor elements (each individual coil that make up the array) the sensor array having a contact side (side facing the component under inspection) and a mounting side opposite the contact side (side facing away from the component under inspection);
a sensor mount (2) coupled to the mounting side of the sensor array (as illustrated in figure 2 or figure 9); and
a biasing element (64+63+62) configured to bias the contact side of the sensor array against an inspected surface of a component and secure the sensor array to the component while the inspected surface moves relative to the sensor array during data capture (in the manner illustrated in Figure 9).
Regarding claim 11, Nishimizu teaches the sensor system of claim 1, further comprising a roller (61) positioned to contact and roll along a surface of the component not being inspected during data capture (see paragraph 0071).
Claim(s) 1, 5, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the European publication EP 1 577 666 A1 by Roney Jr. et al. (Roney hereafter). Please refer to the copy of the foreign document provided with this Office Action.
Regarding claim 1, Roney teaches in Figures a sensor system for component inspection, the sensor system comprising:
a sensor array (array of coils 34 shown in figure 2; see paragraph 0017, lines 1-4) comprising a plurality of eddy current sensor elements (each of the coils that make up the array) the sensor array having a contact side (side facing the device under inspection) and a mounting side opposite the contact side (side facing away from the device under inspection);
a sensor mount (substrate 21) coupled to the mounting side of the sensor array (see Figure 2); and
a biasing element (clamp formed by portions 22+24+23) configured to bias the contact side of the sensor array against an inspected surface of a component and secure the sensor array to the component while the inspected surface moves relative to the sensor array during data capture (in the manner illustrated in Figure 1; see paragraph 0014, lines 8-12 and also, col. 7, lines 37-40).
Regarding claim 5, Roney shows in Figure 2, the sensor system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of eddy current sensor elements is arranged in a plurality of layers, with sensor elements in each layer being offset from sensor elements in an adjacent layer (see col. 3, lines 40-45 and also, col. 1, lines 51-55 which is described in terms of related prior art but incorporated to Roney’s system).
Regarding claim 8, Roney teaches the sensor system of claim 1, wherein the biasing element comprises:
a first arm (22) coupled to the sensor mount;
a second arm (24) moveable relative to the first arm; and
a tension element configured to bias the first arm and the second arm towards each other or away from each other to secure the sensor array to the component (spring element allowing for a spring-loaded bias with respect to the surface under inspection; see paragraph 0017, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 9, Roney teaches the sensor system of claim 8, wherein the tension element comprises a compression spring, an extension spring, a flat spring, a bolt fastener, a threaded fastener, an inflatable membrane, a shape memory material, or a solid foam (spring within the spring-loaded biasing mechanism described in paragraph 0017, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 10, Roney teaches the sensor system of claim 8, further comprising a second sensor array coupled to a second sensor mount on the second arm of the biasing element (each of the arms includes an array of coils, as explained for example in col. 5, lines 11-13),
wherein the second sensor array is biased against a second inspected surface of the component via the tension element (as illustrated in Figure 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
- The US Patent US 5,659,248 by Hedengren et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Richard Isla whose telephone number is (571)272-5056. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9a - 5:30p.
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, Huy Phan can be reached at 571 272-7924. 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.
/RICHARD ISLA/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 June 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights