DETAILED ACTION
This action is pursuant to claims filed on 11/17/2025. Claims 1, 8, and 11 are pending, claims 2-7 and 9-10 have been cancelled. A non-final action on the merits of claims 1, 8, and 11 is as follows.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/17/2025 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the wire electrically connected between each of the two electrode parts of the two conductive cloths and the electrode connection part must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1, 8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The applicant has added the following limitation to claim 1, “each of the two electrode parts respectively has a protrusion part extended toward another electrode part to form a convex-shape.” While the protrusion parts are shown and the specification states on page 7 that the electrode parts are convex shaped, there is not support for the protrusion parts themselves forming a convex shape as the claim requires. A convex shape, by definition, is a shape where all interior angles are less than 180 degrees, as defined by Cuemath (Convex Polygon, https://www.cuemath.com/geometry/convex/). The protrusion parts form interior angles that point towards the center of the shape which are 270 degrees, forming a concave shape as shown below.
PNG
media_image1.png
614
617
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Based on Figs. 4 and 5 of the instant application, the protrusions do not form a convex shape and therefore the newly added limitation fails to comply with the written description requirement and the newly added limitation requires claim 1 to be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as new matter.
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected due to their dependance on claim 1.
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 1, 8, and 11 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 1 states that “single electrode connection part arranged on the body, through the body and electrically connected to the two electrode connection parts of the two conductive cloths, wherein each of the two electrode parts respectively has a protrusion part extended toward another electrode part to form a convex-shape.” The newly added claim limitation appears to be attempting to claim the embodiment shown in Figs. 4 and 5. Under the original claim, the conductive cloths formed a convex shape because, by definition, squares are geometrically convex shapes as evidenced by Cuemath (Convex Polygon, https://www.cuemath.com/geometry/convex/). However, the newly added limitation changes the claimed embodiment and while page 7 of the instant application states that the electrode parts form convex shapes, the shapes shown in Figs. 4 and 5 are concave shapes because they have interior angles over 180 degrees. Based on the instant application, it is unclear how the two separate conductive cloths connected to a single connector form symmetrical and convex shapes. It is unclear whether the electrode parts protrude toward the skin to form convex shapes or if the outer edges are meant to be the convex shape. Furthermore, the claim requires the protrusions to form the convex shape. This does not have support in the instant application and, if anything, the protrusions are what make the shape concave. Based on claim 1, the specification, and the drawings of the instant application, it is unclear how the conductive cloths connected to a single connector are meant to form convex shapes and thus the claim is indefinite. Therefore, claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite.
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected due to their dependance on claim 1.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (hereinafter ‘Zhang’, CN 106580306 A) in view of Liu et al. (hereinafter ‘Liu’, CN 205433673 U).
Regarding independent claim 1, Zhang discloses a textile-type dry electrode plate comprising:
a body being (electrode body 1 in Fig. 1) a sheet-shaped body (body 1 is shaped like a rectangular sheet);
a conductive cloth (conductive cloth 3 in Fig. 1) made by a silver fiber cloth ([Page 4 of translation]: the conductive fabric 3 is made of a silver-plated conductive fiber) and arranged on one side of the body (the conductive cloth is arranged on one side of the body 1), wherein the conductive cloth respectively comprises one electrode part ([Page 4 of Translation]: the conductive cloths are made of silver-plated conductive fibers; the silver plated fibers are the electrode part because on pages 6 and 8 of the instant application it states that the specific pattern of the conductive cloth is used as the electrode part to achieve the effect of receiving and transmitting signals which is the purpose of the silver-plated conductive fibers; the instant application does not provide specific structure to the electrode part other than it being a pattern of the conductive cloth);
a single electrode connection part ([page 4 of translation]: electrode connection parts 4 and 5 which form two parts of a single button via their locked, tight connection and corresponding to each conductive cloth in Fig. 2) arranged on the body (electrode connection part 5 is arranged on the body 1 as seen in Fig. 2), through the body (electrode connection part 4 extends through the body and is locked to part 5 and the electrode cloth 3) and electrically connected to the electrode part of the conductive cloth ([Page 4 of Translation]: the conductive fabric layer 3 connected on the upper conductive screw buckle 4, on the conductive button 4 passes through the base 1 and lower conductive button 5, a conductive fabric layer 3 through conductive button 4, lower conductive button 5 and the leads are electrically connected to the controller), and
an adhesive layer ([Page 2 of translation]: the base body is provided with an adhesive or snap);
wherein the electrode connection part is configured to transmit a current onto the conductive cloth, so that the electrode part of the conductive cloth is configured to generate an effect of an electrotherapy or a thermotherapy, or both the electrotherapy and the thermotherapy simultaneously (this is interpreted functionally as there is no controller or processor claimed that generates the stimulation signal as well as no structure claimed that would limit these electrodes as only stimulation electrodes; the conductive cloth electrodes are capable of electrotherapy stimulation as they are electrically conductive and connected to a controller that if programmed to send a signal, the electrodes would be capable of conducting said signal);
the electrode part is configured to receive physiological electric signals transmitted by a human body and transmit the physiological electric signals back to an apparatus through the electrode connection part to measure the physiological electric signals ([Page 4 of Translation]: the conductive fabric layer is connected to the controller such that it can quickly and accurately transmit the detection signal; the controller is provided for receiving electric signal processing unit, the electric signal may be but is not limited to EMG signal, electrocardiogram signal, and/or electroencephalogram signal).
Zhang further discloses the use of multiple conductive cloths, each with its own electrode portion and connection part as seen in Figs. 1 and 2 which is the same as the instant application’s alternate embodiment shown in Figs. 1 and 2.
As explained on page 7 of the instant application’s specification, the electrode plate 10 shown in Fig. 4 functions as a single electrode. The conductive cloths/electrode parts both connect to a single connector 3. The therapy is applied to the connection part 3 and the single signal is transmitted onto each of the conductive cloths. The connection part 3 is further shown as a single button as shown in Figs. 4 and 5. This is a single conductive structure. The instant application does not disclose that the button can separate the signals going to or received from each piece of conductive cloth/electrode part. Therefore, the examiner is interpreting the conductive cloths/electrode parts to be a single electrode split into two symmetrical and convex shaped pieces with protruding parts.
However, Zhang does not disclose that each functioning electrode is split into two pieces with two conductive cloths that are symmetrical, convex shaped, and have protruding parts that connect to the single connection part.
Liu teaches a wearable physiological measuring device that is made from a flexible base body and utilizes a conductive fabric on the flexible base to receive the signals, similar to the device of Zhang ([Abstract]). Similar to Zhang, the device of Liu is provided with a jack 7 and a conductor 5 which electrically connects to the conductive fabric 2 ([page 3 of translation]). Furthermore, Liu teaches that multiple sensing bodies can be used, which are all electrically connected to each other and to the conductor 5 ([page 3 of translation]). Utilizing multiple, electrically connected sensing portion increases the area of contact between the conductive fabric 2 and the subject being measured, thus improving measurement precision ([page 3 of translation]). Additionally, Liu teaches that the shape of each sensing portion can be freely selected according to need ([page 4 of translation]). For instance, each sensor portion can be a cylinder, quadrangular prism, pentagonal prism, hexagonal prism, etc. ([page 4 of translation]). Each of the prisms has corners, which can be interpreted as protrusions because the claim does not state the shape of the protrusion. Furthermore, each of the shapes listed is a convex shape since all of the interior angles are less than 180 degrees. The sensing bodies can be at least two sensing bodies ([page 3 of translation]). Placing two sensing bodies of the same shape side by side would inherently form a symmetrical structure. Since the claim does not specify the shapes and locations of the protrusions, the protrusions are selected to simply be the two closest corners of the shape and they are connected to the electrode connection part because the sensing bodies are electrically connected to each other and the conductor, which inherently electrically connects the protruding parts to the connection part. The claim does not require the connection part to directly contact each of the protruding parts, only that the single electrode connection part is arranged to connect with the two protruding parts of the two electrode parts. In this case, the protruding parts would be connected by the backing to the connection part and be electrically connected to the connection part through the electrical connection between the electrodes. Modifying Zhang such that the single functioning electrode is split into two pieces with two conductive cloths that are symmetrical, convex shaped, and have protruding parts that connect to the single connection part is simply an obvious change of shape. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the electrodes of Zhang into whatever form or shape was desired or expedient since the applicant has not provided criticality to the chosen embodiment and in fact discloses the embodiment shown in Zhang as an alternative. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrode of Zhang such that the single functioning electrode is split into two pieces with two conductive cloths that are symmetrical, convex shaped, and have protruding parts that are close to each other and connect to the single connection part because changing the shape and number of electrode pieces connected to a single connection part is known in the art as taught by Liu in order to improve the contact area and measurement quality of the electrode.
However, the Zhang/Liu combination is silent to the adhesive layer and the two conductive cloths being arranged on the same one side of the body and the adhesive layer not completely covered by the two electrode parts of the two conductive cloths.
Zhang further discloses that the substrate can be an elastic bandage ([Page 3 of translation]). It is known in the art that elastic bandages comprise adhesives on the skin side of the bandage in order to adhere to the skin, as evidenced by Docuses (https://docuses.com/docuses.com/elastic-adhesive-bandage-10cm-x-1m-box-pack-1/?srsltid=AfmBOoqdEArqBDgt4uKgPiLw3o1LIP-sRkaHlhmuS-_L5tn2KeEcxPkL). Similar to the instant application, Zhang can be a non-adhesive bandage as described in the non-final rejection comprising snaps and a tight fit, or be an adhesive bandage as described on page 2 of the translation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the adhesive disclosed by Zhang on the skin side of the bandage in order to adequately adhere to the skin which would result in the adhesive layer not being completely covered by the two electrode parts of the conductive cloths as the conductive cloths only cover a small portion of the base body and the adhesive layer would need access to the skin.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Zhang/Liu combination as applied to claim 1 and described above, in view of Castagna et al. (hereinafter ‘Castagna’, US 20190313968 A1).
Regarding claim 8, the Zhang/Liu combination discloses the invention of claim 1 as described above. Zhang further discloses that the electrode cloths are made of silver-plated fibers which are interpreted to form the electrode parts (Zhang [Page 4 of Translation]).
However, Zhang is silent to whether the fibers are woven to create a mesh-like structure.
Castagna teaches a wearable electrode apparatus for ECG signal acquisition ([0001]). Castagna further teaches the cloth electrodes are composed of horizontally and vertically embroidered stainless steel yarns crossing one another over the cloth fabric, in a single manner or associated to silver- and/or carbon-based dye or paste or fabric, so as to form a mesh to widen the surface contacting the underlying skin ([0048]). The electrodes of the fabric are composed of stretchable silver- and/or carbon-based conductive pastes, dyes or fabrics to print low voltage electric circuits over elastic films and textile substrates, having excellent stretchability, gripping capability and conductibility ([0048]). Because both the Zhang/Liu combination and Castagna utilize silver-based fabrics to create cloth electrodes, it would be of routine skill in the art to combine the cloth electrodes of Castagna with those of the Zhang/Liu combination. This combination would create a mesh cloth, which inherently creates mesh pores, that imparts improved contact, stretchability, gripping capability, and conductibility. Additionally, the combination of the two cloth electrodes would maintain operability of the Zhang/Liu combination and would not lead to any unexpected effects as the electrode cloths would continue to receive sensed signals, just with improved mechanical properties. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the electrode cloth of Castagna with that of the Zhang/Liu combination such that the electrode cloths are a woven mesh of silver and/or stainless fibers that imparts improved electrical and mechanical properties.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Zhang/Liu combination as applied to claim 1 and described above, in view of Simhag et al. (hereinafter ‘Simhag’, WO 2017039518 A1).
Regarding claim 11, the Zhang/Liu combination discloses the invention substantially in claim 1 as described above.
However, the Zhang/Liu combination is silent to using a wire to connect the electrode parts of the conductive cloths to the electrode connection part.
Simhag teaches an adhesive patch with electrodes for measuring ECG. Simhag further teaches that the electrodes are embedded in a bandage, similar to that of the Zhang/Liu combination ([0049]). The electrodes of Simhag are connected to wires 40 which then connect to an electrical connection 60 which is a port for transmission ([0054]). The port 60 acts in the same manner as the electrical connection of the Zhang/Liu combination as it connects the electrode to the controller or device for further processing. While the Zhang/Liu combination does not require a wire connection as the lower part 4 is already maintaining electrical communication with the conductive fibers of the conductive cloths, the addition of a wire connecting the conductive cloth and the electrical connection portion would not adversely affect the operating nature of the Zhang/Liu combination. The device of the Zhang/Liu combination would maintain operability and no unexpected results would occur if a wire were to be included between the conductive cloths and the connection part. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include a wire between the conductive cloth and the connection port like Simhag, since applicant has not disclosed that the use of a wire between the conductive cloth and the connection part over a direct connection between the cloth and the connection part solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with a direct connection between the cloth and connection part.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 1 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The applicant argues that Zhang does not disclose a protrusion part that is extended toward a direction of another electrode part to form a convex-shape and that two or more protrusion parts of two conductive fabrics are close to each other and connect to a single connection part. This is not persuasive. As explained in the new rejection of claim 1 above, modifying the shape of a single electrode is known in the art, as taught by Liu. As explained on page 7 of the instant application’s specification, the electrode plate 10 shown in Fig. 4 functions as a single electrode. The conductive cloths/electrode parts both connect to a single connector 3. The therapy is applied to the connection part 3 and the single signal is transmitted onto each of the conductive cloths. The connection part 3 is further shown as a single button as shown in Figs. 4 and 5. This is a single conductive structure. The instant application does not disclose that the button can separate the signals going to or received from each piece of conductive cloth/electrode part. Therefore, the examiner is interpreting the conductive cloths/electrode parts to be a single electrode split into two symmetrical and convex shaped pieces with protruding parts. Liu teaches that utilizing multiple sensing portions connected to a single connection part is beneficial in order to improve contact between the user and the electrode ([page 3 of translation]). Modifying Zhang such that the single functioning electrode is split into two pieces with two conductive cloths that are symmetrical, convex shaped, and have protruding parts that connect to the single connection part is simply an obvious change of shape. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the electrodes of Zhang into whatever form or shape was desired or expedient since the applicant has not provided criticality to the chosen embodiment and in fact discloses the embodiment shown in Zhang as an alternative. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrode of Zhang such that the single functioning electrode is split into two pieces with two conductive cloths that are symmetrical, convex shaped, and have protruding parts that are close to each other and connect to the single connection part because changing the shape and number of electrode pieces connected to a single connection part is known in the art as taught by Liu in order to improve the contact area and measurement quality of the electrode.
Additionally, the newly added amendment results in 112a and 112b rejections as explained above because there is not support for the protrusions forming the convex shape and it is unclear how the conductive cloths of the embodiment in Figs. 4 and 5 of the instant application form convex shapes.
Furthermore, Applicant’s arguments that parts 4 and 5 of Zhang are not a single screw buckle are not persuasive. The claim requires “a single electrode connection part.” Parts 4 and 5 of Zhang lock together to form a single button that is on top of and through the body ([page 4 of translation]). Once the two pieces are locked together, they form a single connection part. “A single electrode connection part” is very broad and is simply interpreted as the singular portion of the electrode where the electrode connects to the lead of a device to send or receive signals. Pieces 4 and 5 are not separate distinct buttons, but rather two pieces of a singular button which lock together to form a single conductive structure as shown in Fig. 2 and explained on page 4 of the translation. The claim does not state the structure of the connection part and the button made of pieces 4 and 5 is the single location where the electrode is connected to the controller.
Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 remains.
The rejections of claims 8 and 11 remain because the rejection of claim 1 remains.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM E MOSSBROOK whose telephone number is (703)756-1936. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Linda Dvorak can be reached at (571)272-4764. 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.
/LINDA C DVORAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/W.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 3794