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 .
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 02/18/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/18/2026.
Claims 1-30 are pending. Claims 1-12 are being examined. Claims 13-30 are withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to non-elected inventions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 8 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 2-4 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the coated fiber composition". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 7, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kakimoto (JP 2020043247 A).
Considering claims 1 and 7, Kakimoto teaches a composition comprising an electrically non-conductive fiber having a surface and piezoelectric particles adhered to the surface of said electrically non-conductive fiber by a piezoelectric element containing piezoelectric ceramic particles attached to polymeric fibers without being included in the fibers (i.e., particles are on the surface of the fibers) wherein the polymer is PVDF (Kakimoto, middle of page 2 of English translation, Fig. 1, top of page 4 of English translation).
Considering claim 10, Kakimoto teaches the piezoelectric particles have a perovskite composition (Kakimoto, bottom of page 3 of English translation).
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 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakimoto (JP 2020043247 A) in view of Borchers et al. (US 6761831 B2).
Considering claims 2-3, all of the limitations are met by the prior art referenced in meeting claim 1 limitations except for the fiber composition is embedded within a matrix to form a composite material.
Kakimoto does not explicitly teach the fiber composition is embedded within a matrix to form a composite material.
However, Borchers teaches embedding of piezoelectric particles in a polymer matrix wherein the polymer matrix acts as a binder (Borchers, abstract, Col. 3 lines 7-30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to embed the coated fibers of Kakimoto into a polymeric matrix. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to do so in order to bind the fibers within a matrix with a reasonable expectation of success.
Considering claim 4, Kakimoto teaches the polymer nonwoven fabric (i.e., fibers) contain 30 to 60% by volume of piezoelectric ceramic particles; the amount is a result effective variable relative to piezoelectricity improvement and mechanical strength (Kakimoto, top of page 4 of English translation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to vary the amount of piezoelectric particles in the composition material including to within the claimed range of 0.1-10 wt.%. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to do so in order to achieve desired piezoelectricity improvement and mechanical strength with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 9 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kakimoto (JP 2020043247 A).
Considering claim 9, Kakimoto teaches the piezoelectric ceramic particles have a particle size of D50 of 1.5 to 6 µm and D90 of 2 to 10 µm (Kakimoto, middle of page 3 of English translation).
A prima facie case of obviousness exists because the claimed range of at least 100 nm (0.1 µm) overlaps the range taught by Kakimoto (see MPEP §2144.05(I)).
Considering claim 11-12, Kakimoto teaches piezoelectric ceramic particles containing at least one element of niobium, lead, titanium, zinc, barium, bismuth, zirconium, lanthanum, potassium, sodium, calcium, and magnesium (Kakimoto, bottom of page 3 of English translation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the piezoelectric particles to have one of the claimed compositions and/or zinc oxide. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to do so because such compositions are known to be suitable piezoelectric particles for the composition of Kakimoto.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANITA NASSIRI-MOTLAGH whose telephone number is (571)270-7588. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-3:00.
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, Jonathan Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1177. 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.
/ANITA NASSIRI-MOTLAGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1734
Prosecution Insights