Ex Parte Yu et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

May 30, 2014

12101447 (P.T.A.B. May. 30, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
12/101,447 04/11/2008 Lingyu Yu USC-97 8240
22827 7590 05/30/2014
DORITY & MANNING, P.A.
POST OFFICE BOX 1449
GREENVILLE, SC 29602-1449
EXAMINER
PARK, HYUN D
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2865
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
05/30/2014 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte LINGYU YU and VICTOR GIURGIUTIU
____________

Appeal 2012-006011
Application 12/101,447
Technology Center 2800
____________

Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, CHARLES F. WARREN, and
PETER F. KRATZ, Administrative Patent Judges.

GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134, Appellants appeal from the Examiner's
rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) of claims 1-3, 5-11, 13-17, 19, and 20 as
unpatentable over Giurgiutiu1 in view of Fromme.2 We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6.
We AFFIRM.

1 US 6,996,480, issued Feb. 7, 2006.
2 Fromme, "A Guided Ultrasonic Waves Array for Structural Integrity
Monitoring," Am. Inst. of Physics 24, 1780-787 (2005), CP 760, Review of
Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, ed. by D.O. Thompson & D.E.
Chimenti.
Appeal 2012-006011
Application 12/101,447

2
Appellants claim a system and method for detecting damage features
in a thin wall structure comprising a two-dimensional array or pattern of
piezoelectric sensors embedded on the structure, a generator configured to
impress pulses upon the sensors to produce ultrasonic waves, and a signal
processor configured to process received signals resulting from an echo from
a damage feature wherein detection of the damage feature involves a 360
degree azimuthal sweep along the thin wall structure (independent system
claims 1 and 10, independent method claim 15).
A copy of representative claims 1 and 10, taken from the Claims
Appendix of the Appeal Brief, appears below.
1. A system for omnidirectionally detecting damage features in
a thin wall structure, comprising:
a thin wall structure;
a two-dimensional planar array of piezoelectric sensors
embedded on said structure;
a generator configured to impress pulses having a
predetermined carrier frequency upon said sensors to produce guided
ultrasonic waves that travel along said thin wall structure; and
a signal processor configured to process received signals at
each of said sensors resulting from an echo from said damage feature,
wherein said processor is configured to implement synthetic
beamforming to determining [sic] an angular position over a 360 degree
azimuthal sweep of at least one damage feature spaced apart from the
sensors along a plane of the thin wall structure, and wherein said processor
is further configured to calculate a distance to the damage feature.

10. A system for omnidirectionally detecting damage features
in a thin all structure, comprising:
a thin wall structure,
a plurality of piezoelectric sensors embedded on said structure
in a two-dimensional pattern;
Appeal 2012-006011
Application 12/101,447

3
a generator configured to impress a pulse having a
predetermined carrier frequency upon said sensors so as to produce
ultrasonic waves that are guided to travel over a 360 degree azimuthal sweep
along said thin wall structure; and
a signal processor configured to process received signals at said
sensors resulting from an echo from said damage feature,
wherein said damage feature is spaced apart from the sensors
along a plane of the thin wall structure, and wherein the processor is
configured to calculate a distance to the damage feature.

The arguments presented by Appellants in this appeal are directed to
independent claims 1, 10, and 15 only. No additional arguments are directed
to the dependent claims specifically. As a consequence, the dependent
claims will stand or fall with their parent independent claims.
The Examiner finds that Giurgiutiu discloses a system and method for
detecting damage features in a thin wall structure comprising a plurality of
piezoelectric sensors embedded on the structure, a generator, and a signal
processor (see, e.g., Ans. 5-6). Moreover, the Examiner finds that
Giurgiutiu fails to disclose the embedded piezoelectric sensors are in a two-
dimensional array or pattern as required by Appellants' independent claims
(id. at 6) and that Giurgiutiu fails to disclose the detection of a damage
feature involves a 360 degree azimuthal sweep of the thin wall structure as
also required by the independent claims (id. at 9). Regarding these
deficiencies of Giurgiutiu, the Examiner additionally finds that Fromme
discloses a system and method for detecting damage features in a structure
which includes using a circular (i.e., two-dimensional) array of sensors and a
processor having a phased addition algorithm so as to achieve detection
performance with good sensitivity in all directions (i.e., 360 degree) (id. at 6
and ¶ bridging 11-12 citing Fromme disclosures on pages 1780-82).
Appeal 2012-006011
Application 12/101,447

4
In light of these findings, the Examiner concludes that it would have
been obvious to use the teachings of Fromme in the system and method of
Giurgiutiu thereby to provide Giurgiutiu with sensors in a two-dimensional
array and with a processor configured to implement a 360 degree azimuthal
sweep of the structure as taught by Fromme (id. at ¶ bridging 6-7 and ¶
bridging 11-12).
Appellants state that "the Examiner is suggesting Fromme's
processing system also be installed in Giurgiutiu's device [i.e., in addition to
Fromme's circular sensor array]" (Br. 8). Appellants contest this suggestion
by arguing that Fromme's system involves "a 'pitch-catch' scheme . . .
[which] is entirely different from that described by Appellants where a
synthetic beamforming process is implemented to determine an angular
position over a 360 degree azimuthal sweep as required by each of
independent claims 1, 10, and 15" (id. at 9).
Appellants' argument lacks persuasive merit for a number of reasons.
First, contrary to Appellants' above quoted averment, independent claim 10
contains no "synthetic beamforming" recitation. Second, Appellants do not
embellish this argument with any explanation why the "synthetic
beamforming" of independent claims 1 and 15 is considered to be different
from the processing scheme used by Fromme for detecting feature damage
over a 360 degree sweep. Third, the Examiner responds to Appellants'
argument by citing Fromme's disclosure (i.e., "[a] phased addition algorithm
was used to synthesize a guided wave beam that can be steered in any
direction from the array" (page 1782, ll. 2-3)) in support of finding that
"Fromme's system is based on a synthetic beamforming" (Ans. ¶ bridging
11-12). Significantly, Appellants do not dispute this finding in the record
Appeal 2012-006011
Application 12/101,447

5
before us (i.e., no Reply Brief has been filed). Appellants also do not
dispute the Examiner's additional finding that "[the] 'pitch-catch' scheme in
Fromme simply means the transmission and reception of the signal by the
sensor element, and it is independent of the beamforming" (id.).
For the above stated reasons, the record contains a preponderance of
evidence supporting the Examiner's conclusion that, in view of the teachings
of Giurgiutiu and Fromme, the system and method defined by Appellants'
independent claims would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in
this art. We sustain, therefore, the § 103 rejection advanced in this appeal.
The decision of the Examiner is affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED

cam