DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed on 10 March 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-6, 9 and 11-20 are now pending in the application.
Amendments to the claims 8-10 to overcome the informalities are acceptable. Therefore, the claim objections have been withdrawn.
Amendments to the claim 10 to overcome the rejections under U.S.C 112(b) have been fully considered and the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of claim 10 has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 11 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baruah (Baruah et.al., Thermally actuated MEMS based silicon micropump, 2012 International Conference on Communications, Devices and Intelligent Systems (CODIS), pages 176-179) in view of Britton (US 20150016487).
[AltContent: textbox (wetted surface)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (flexible diaphragm)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
397
856
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1, Baruah.
Regarding claim 11, Baruah teaches, a method for forming a valve component (cantilever type inlet/outlet valve, see Abstract), comprising:
providing a flexible diaphragm (flexible diaphragm, col. 1, page 176, see annotated Fig. 1 above), the flexible diaphragm comprising a wetted surface (see the fluid channel in Fig. 1) and an opposing non-wetted surface (see Fig. 1);
forming a flexible heater (microheater, Fig. 1, substrate of the microheater is the diaphragm, col. 1, page 177, microheater is formed on a flexible diaphragm, in which it is obvious that the microheater is a flexible heater) over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm (see Fig. 1, and col. 1, page 177, see Note below).
Though, Baruah teaches monitoring the temperature of the chamber in Fig. 5 and the influence of temperature on the performance of the microfluidic cavity, Baruah does not teach forming a flexible temperature sensor over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm. However, Briton teaches a temperature sensor for a fluid sensor including forming a flexible temperature sensor (a printed temperature sensor, Fig. 4a and 4b, para. [0055]) over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm (flexible substrate 50, Figs. 4a and 4b). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Briton, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of forming the valve component of Baruah and to include a flexible temperature sensor as Briton taught in Figs. 4a and 4b so that it enables forming a flexible temperature sensor over a desired surface of the flexible diaphragm. Doing so would enable monitoring the temperature of the microheater and to optimize the microvalve characteristics as Baruah disclosed in col. 1, Page 178. Moreover, there is no indication in the instant invention that any surprising results were derived, or that any special steps were devised in forming a flexible temperature sensor over the non-wetted surface or the wetted surface of the diaphragm. Such a combination would have been done by one of ordinary skill in the art without any need for experimentation and with reasonable expectations of success.
Note: unless otherwise defined, the limitation “the flexible heater and the flexible temperature sensor are formed upon the same surface.” does not contribute over the prior art Baruah in view of Briton because, it is obvious that prior art Baruah could be modified to form a thermocouple on the same surface.
Regarding claim 16, Baruah teaches, a method for forming a valve component (cantilever type inlet/outlet valve, see Abstract), comprising:
providing a flexible diaphragm (flexible diaphragm, col. 1, page 176, see annotated Fig. 1 above), the flexible diaphragm comprising a wetted surface (see the fluid channel in Fig. 1) and an opposing non-wetted surface;
forming a flexible heater (microheater, Fig. 1, substrate of the microheater is the diaphragm, col. 1, page 177, microheater is formed on a flexible diaphragm, in which it is obvious that the microheater is a flexible heater) over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm (see Fig. 1); and wherein the flexible heater and the flexible temperature sensor are formed upon different surfaces (see Fig.1).
Though, Baruah teaches monitoring the temperature of the chamber in Fig. 5 and the influence of temperature on the performance of the microfluidic cavity, Baruah does not teach forming a flexible temperature sensor over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm. However, Briton teaches a temperature sensor for a fluid sensor including forming a flexible temperature sensor (a printed temperature sensor, Fig. 4a and 4b, para. [0055]) over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm (flexible substrate 50, Figs. 4a and 4b). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Briton, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of forming a valve component of Baruah and to include a flexible temperature sensor as Briton taught in Figs. 4a and 4b so that it enables forming a flexible temperature sensor over a desired surface of the flexible diaphragm. Doing so would enable monitoring the temperature of the microheater and to optimize the microvalve characteristics as Baruah disclosed in col. 1, Page 178.
Claim(s) 12-14 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baruah in view of Briton as applied to claims 11 and 16 above and further in view of Oehler (US 20180172172).
[AltContent: textbox (valve component)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (printed flexible heater)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
627
479
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figs. 19 and 20 Oehler.
Regarding claims 12 and 17, modified Baruah does not teach, printing the flexible heater. However, Oehler teaches, in Figs. 19 and 20, a valve component 202 comprising a flexible diaphragm 212, and a flexible heater 214 over the non-wetted surface, in which,
forming the flexible heater (electrically-resistive trace 214, Figs. 19 and 20, the electrically-resistive trace 214 of the flow control device 202 is printed directly onto the flap 212, para. [0070]) further comprises printing the flexible heater (electrically-resistive trace 214 is printed e.g., directly written, on the sheet 204, para. [0070]) over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm utilizing one or more conductive inks (electrically-resistive trace 114 is a thin bead or layer of electrically-resistive material (e.g., hardened ink) that is deposited directly onto the first surface 106 of the sheet 104, para. [0055]).
From the teachings of Oehler, a flap 212 in Figs. 5, 6, 19 and 20 and para. [0052-0053], “sheet 104, including the flaps 112, has a planar or two-dimensional shape and a thin-walled construction”, one of ordinary skill in the art would have known that the sheet 104 forms a flexible diaphragm and printing flexible heater 214 directly on a shape memory alloy metal sheet. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Oehler, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method for forming a valve component of Baruah and to replace the microheater of Baruah in Fig. 1 with a printed flexible heater 214 as Oehler taught in Fig. 19 so that it enables to adjust a magnitude of the deformation of the flexible diaphragm by controlling the magnitude of the heat generated by the electrically-resistive trace in response to an adjustment to the magnitude of the electrical current as Oehler disclosed in para. [0011-00112].
Regarding claims 13 and 18, modified Baruah does not teach, printing the flexible heater directly over the non-wetted surface. However, Oehler further teaches, further comprising printing the flexible heater directly over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm (electrically-resistive trace 114 is a thin bead or layer of electrically-resistive material (e.g., hardened ink) that is deposited directly onto the first surface 106 of the sheet 104, para. [0055]). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Oehler, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method for forming a valve component of Baruah and to replace the microheater of Baruah in Fig. 1 with a printed flexible heater 214 as Oehler taught in Fig. 19 so that it enables to adjust a magnitude of the deformation of the flexible diaphragm.
[AltContent: textbox (flexible substrate)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (flexible heater)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image3.png
326
866
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 12, Oehler.
Regarding claims 14 and 19, modified Baruah does not teach, forming a flexible substrate over the flexible heater. However, Oehler further teaches, further comprising forming a flexible substrate (second layer 854, see annotated Fig. 12 above, flow control device 802 is sandwiched between a first layer 852 and a second layer 854, para. [0078]) over the flexible heater. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Oehler, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method for forming a valve component of Baruah and to replace the microheater of Baruah with a printed flexible heater 114 as Oehler taught in Fig. 1 so that it enables to embed a flow control device between desired substates.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 and 9 are allowed. A statement of the reasons for indicating the allowable subject matter has been presented in the 10 December 2025 office action.
Claims 15 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter:
Claims 15 and 20 would be allowable for disclosing a method for forming a valve component, further comprising printing the flexible heater over a surface of a flexible intermediate substrate and bonding a lower surface of the flexible intermediate substrate to the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm.
Though, prior art of record Briton teaches forming a flexible temperature sensor over the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm, Briton fails to teach printing the flexible heater over a surface of a flexible intermediate substrate and bonding a lower surface of the flexible intermediate substrate to the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm.
Prior art of record Baruah or Oehler does not teach printing the flexible heater over a surface of a flexible intermediate substrate and bonding a lower surface of the flexible intermediate substrate to the non-wetted surface of the flexible diaphragm.
Therefore, claims 15 and 20 would be allowable.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE K. ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1087. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 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, THOMAS J. HONG can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/JOSE K ABRAHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3729 /THOMAS J HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3729