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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the application filed on October 3, 2022.
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 "fluidic cavity” in Claim 6, “a conductive support having an array of pins or contacts inserted into the electrically conductive cores” in Claim 7, “the mechanical connection…strengthened by an adhesive or bonding agent” in Claim 8, “a bonding pad ring and bonding wires similar to an integrated circuit” in Claim 9, and “the mechanical connection is achieved by an adhesive or bonding agent deposed on the face (cylindrical ring edge) or periphery of the bundle seal” in Claim 10 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.
Specification
The title is objected to for failure to be sufficiently descriptive.
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the
presence of all possible minor errors. The applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which the applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-11, 19-22, and 29-32 are objected to because of the following
informalities:
Claims 2-10
In line 1, “The electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers” should be --The electromechanically connected bundle of the plurality of dielectric elastomeric microfibers--
Claim 1
In line 3, “the cross-section annular face” should be --a cross-section annual face--
In line 4, “the dielectric elastomeric microfibers” should be --the plurality of dielectric elastomeric microfibers--
In line 5, “the core” should be --a core--
In line 5, “all microfibers” should be –all microfibers in the plurality of dielectric elastomeric microfibers--
Claim 3
In line 3, “the conductive element” should be --the conductive contact--
In line 3, “the microfiber wall material” should be --a microfiber wall material--
In line 4, “the fluidic electrodes” should be --fluidic electrodes--
In lines 4-5, “the cores of the hollow dielectric elastomeric microfibers” should be –the core of each hollow microfiber in the plurality of dielectric elastomeric microfibers--
Claims 4-5
In lines 2-3, “dielectric elastomeric microfibers” should be –the plurality of dielectric elastomeric microfibers--
Claim 6
In line 2, “the electrical connection” should be --the direct electrical connection--
In line 3, “the microfibers” should be --each microfiber of the plurality of dielectric elastomeric microfibers--
In line 3, “an electrically conductive element” should be --the conductive contact--
In lines 3-4, “the mechanical connection” should be --the direct mechanical connection--
In line 4, “the periphery” should be –a periphery--
In line 4, “the bundle’s seal” should be –a seal of the electromechanically connected bundle--
Claim 7
In lines 2-3, “the electrically conductive cores of each of the plurality of microfibers of the microfiber bundle” should be --the core of each microfiber of the plurality of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of the electromechanically connected bundle--
Claim 8
In line 2, “the mechanical connection” should be --the direct mechanical connection--
Claim 9
In line 2, “the electrical connection” should be --the direct electrical connection--
Claim 10
In line 2, “the mechanical connection” should be --the direct mechanical connection--
In line 3, “the face” should be –a face--
In line 3, “periphery” should be –a periphery--
In line 3, “the bundle seal” should be –a seal of the electromechanically connected bundle--
Claim 11
In line 1, “A dielectric elastomeric DE microfiber” should be --A dielectric elastomeric (DE) microfiber--
In lines 1 and 3-5, “a hollow fiber body” should be --a hollow microfiber body--
In lines 1-2, “an outer diameter” should be --an outer diameter (OD)--
In lines 2-3, “the interior” should be --an interior--
In line 4, “the ratio alpha” should be –a ratio alpha--
In line 4, “the outer diameter” should be --the outer diameter (OD)--
In line 5, “the electromechanical performance” should be --an electromechanical performance--
Claim 19
In line 1, “the electrical time constant” should be --an electrical time constant--
Claim 20
In line 2, “fibers” should be –DE microfibers--
In line 2, “the target operating voltage” should be --a target operating voltage--
Claim 21
In line 1, “the inner electrode” should be --the inner fluidic or compliant electrode--
In line 2, “the fiber” should be –the DE microfiber--
Claim 22
In line 1, “the scale” should be --a scale--
In line 1, “ratio alpha and resistivity” should be --the ratio alpha and a resistivity--
In lines 1-2, “the inner electrode” should be --the inner fluidic or compliant electrode--
In line 2, “the microfiber” should be --the DE microfiber--
In line 3, “the mechanical time constant” should be --a mechanical time constant--
In line 3, “the application” should be --an application--
Claim 29
In line 2, “the range” should be –a range--
Claim 30
In line 1, “the DE microfibers are” should be –The DE microfiber is--
Claim 31
In line 1, “the stress” should be --a stress--
In lines 2-3, “the inner electrode” should be --the inner fluidic or compliant electrode and the outer inner fluidic or compliant electrode--
Claim 32
In lines 2-3, “the inner electrode” should be --the inner fluidic or compliant electrode and the outer inner fluidic or compliant electrode--
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-10, 19, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite
for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the applicant regards as the invention.
In Claim 1, it is unclear whether “a supportive element” is claimed or whether an “(end cap)” is claimed, whether the two are one and the same, whether it is a reference to the drawings, or whether the parentheses indicate an alternate designation. The specification references a “supportive element” in paragraphs [0015]-[0017] and includes the same use of parenthesis in relation to “end cap” in paragraphs [0016]-[0017] and does not offer a clear explanation of “supportive element.” Given the ambiguity created by the claim language, the claim construction, and the lack of specificity in the specification, the claim element(s) is rendered indefinite. Therefore, the examiner has understood the terms to be synonymous, interchangeable, and refer to a single element, namely, the insulating caps described in the aforementioned paragraphs and depicted in Figure 2 designated by element number 211.
In Claims 1, 3, and 6, it is unclear whether “a conductive contact”, “the conductive element,” and “an electrically conductive contact” all refer to the exact same contact, or one of two contacts 205/905. The specification explains in paragraph [0042] the following about element 205/905:
“Electromechanical contacts 205 typically are a portion of the insulating cap 211 that are electrically conductive and serves as a mechanical and electrical connector between the bundled fibers and the system in which it is installed for actuation, such as a robotic system.
The terms “conductive element” and “electrically conductive contact” are not a term the appears in the specification. The lack of antecedent basis, the inconsistency in language, and the lack of clarity and specificity in the specification create an ambiguity. Given the ambiguity the claim element(s) is rendered indefinite. Therefore, the examiner has understood the terms to be synonymous, interchangeable, and refer to a single element, namely, the element 205/905 described in the aforementioned paragraphs and depicted in Figures 2 and 9.
In Claims 9 and 19, it is unclear it is unclear whether “similar” and “about” refers to a fourth, a third, half, more than half, entirely, or some other quantity. The specification does not provide some standard for measuring “similar” and “about.” One of ordinary skill in the art, in view of the prior art and the status of the art, would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of “similar” and “about” from the drawings alone. The specification uses the term “similar” as follows:
[0006] …produce useful and scalable motion that is very similar to the performance of natural muscles.
[0035] Similarly, when values are expressed as approximations, by use of the antecedent "about," it will be understood that the particular value forms another embodiment. All ranges are inclusive and combinable.
[0045] In certain embodiments the electrical connection can achieved by a bonding pad ring and bonding wires similar to an integrated circuit.
[0055] This embodiment is similar to a standard IC package with peripheral pads.
[0077] For robotic systems that are intended to operate at scales similar to humans or animals,…
[0079] DEMAs were fabricated from DE fibers synthesized using commercially available silicone resins from DOW Corning using a process similar to that described in US7834527B2.
While the terms of degree at issue appear in the specification, the scope of the terms is not understood when read in light of the specification because the specification does not provide a standard for measuring “similar” and “about.” Therefore, the terms are rendered indefinite and examiner has understood the term “similar” and “about” to designate entirely or exactly.
In Claim 10, it is unclear what is claimed by “the face (cylindrical ring edge).” Again, this use of parentheses in claim construction creates an ambiguity. It is unclear whether the two are one and the same, whether it is a reference to the drawings, or whether the parentheses indicate an alternate designation. Claim 1 introduces “the cross-section annular face,” raising a lack of antecedent basis issue. Claim 10 introduces “the face (cylindrical ring edge)” which both raises a lack of antecedent basis issue and additionally raises numerous ambiguities including what if any is its connection to the “face” previously claimed in Claim 1. The specification references “the face (cylindrical ring edge)” in paragraph [0016], but does not offer any explanation or clarification. Given the ambiguity created by the claim language, the claim construction, and the lack of specificity in the specification, the claim element(s) is rendered indefinite. Therefore, the examiner has understood the terms to refer to the bundle sheath.
In Claim 22, it is unclear what is claimed by “the scale (OD).” Again, this use of parentheses in claim construction creates an ambiguity. It is unclear whether the two are one and the same, whether it is a reference to the drawings, or whether the parentheses indicate an alternate designation. The use of “OD” in the claims is not clear because there is no antecedent basis and no explanation in the specification. It is also not a typical abbreviation or alternate designation for “scale.” Given the ambiguity created by the claim language, the claim construction, and the lack of specificity in the specification, the claim element(s) is rendered indefinite. Therefore, the examiner has understood the terms to be synonymous, interchangeable, and refer to a specific and singular element, namely, “the scale” of the “outer diameter.”
In Claim 22, it is unclear what is claimed by “the application.” It is unclear whether the term refers to a device external to the claimed device, or to a mode of operating the device, or the one or one of many ways of using the device. The specification does not provide any explanation. Given the ambiguity created by the claim language, the claim construction, and the lack of specificity in the specification, the claim element(s) is rendered indefinite. Therefore, the examiner has understood the term to indicate an external device.
Dependent claims 2-10 inherit the deficiencies of dependent claim 1, and is
therefore also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b).
Claim 1 recites the limitations “the cross-section annular face,” “the dielectric
elastomeric microfibers,” “the core,” and “all microfibers.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claims 2-10 recite the limitations “The electromechanically connected bundle of
dielectric elastomeric microfibers.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 3 recites the limitations “the conductive element,” “the microfiber wall
material,” “the fluidic electrodes,” and “the cores of the hollow dielectric elastomeric microfibers.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “dielectric elastomeric microfibers.” There is
insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “dielectric elastomeric microfibers.” There is
insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 6 recites the limitations “the electrical connection,” “the microfibers,” “the
mechanical connection,” “the periphery,” and “the bundle’s seal.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 7 recites the limitations “the electrically conductive cores of each of the
plurality of microfibers of the microfiber bundle.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the mechanical connection.” There is insufficient
antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the electrical connection.” There is insufficient
antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 10 recites the limitations “the mechanical connection,” “the face,”
“periphery,” and “the bundle seal.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 11 recites the limitations “the interior,” “the ratio alpha,” and
“the electromechanical performance.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “the electrical time constant.” There is
insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “the target operating voltage.” There is
insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 22 recites the limitations “the scale,” “resistivity,” “the microfiber,”
“the mechanical time constant,” and “the application.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 29 recites the limitation “the range.” There is insufficient
antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim 31 recites the limitation “the stress.” There is insufficient
antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of AIA 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 1-32 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated
by Alvarez Icaza Rivera et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,834,527; hereinafter “Alvarez”).
Regarding claim 1, Alvarez discloses an electromechanically connected bundle of a plurality of dielectric elastomeric microfibers, comprising: a. a direct mechanical connection (Figs. 2-5, direct mechanical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and 402; [Column 30, lines 6-17] – “…suitable cross sections of the fiber bundle…”; [Column 35, lines 12-28] – “…contact 404 serves as an electrical and mechanical connection. The specific geometry of cap 402 may be such that there is an inner compartment 414 through which electrical contact 404 transfers electrical charge to inner electrodes 422. Such compartment is necessary and serves as a manifold for the embodiment in which contact 404 is permeable. In yet another embodiment in which contact 404 completely seals the inner electrode fluid 422, compartment 414 may serve as an equalizing cavity to ensure that the individual inner cores 422 of each EPFT form one single volume. In this way, compartment 414 serves as an equalizing chamber by which the pressure of the entire fluid volume 414 and 422 is maintained. In yet another embodiment where compartment 414 is non-existent, individual EPFTs can be in electrical contact with each other, through electrical connection 404, but each will have its own independent fluid core 422.”; [Column 36, lines 14-19] – “For simplicity FIG. 4C illustrates a single capped EPFT, but the same principal applies for a BEPFT. In this embodiment the coupling mechanism 404, which can be used for electrical and mechanical connections does not have an access port to the EPFT conductive core 422. Instead connection 404 is in direct contact with 422.”; [Column 36, lines 25-29] – “FIG. 4E is another extension of FIG. 4C. In this embodiment, the coupling mechanism 404 achieves a better electrical connection with the EPFT conductive core by using a pointed surface geometry to penetrate into the core 422 of the EPFT 420, thus exposing a larger surface area.”) between (Fig. 4) the cross-section annular face (Figs. 2-5, cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT; [Column 30, lines 6-17]) of each of the dielectric elastomeric microfibers (Figs. 2-5, EPFT 420 in a BEPFT 400) and a supportive element (end cap) (Figs. 2-5, 402); and b. a direct electrical connection (Figs. 2-5, direct electrical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and contact 404; [Column 35, lines 12-28]; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) between the core (Figs. 2-5, 422 of each EPFT 420 in the BEPFT 400) of all microfibers (Figs. 2-5, BEPFT 400) and a conductive contact (Figs. 2-5, 404; [Column 35, lines 12-28]; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]).
Regarding claim 2, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 1, wherein each of the direct mechanical (Figs. 2-5, direct mechanical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and 402; [Column 35, lines 12-28] ; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) and direct electrical connections (Figs. 2-5, direct electrical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and contact 404; [Column 35, lines 12-28]; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) are both achieved using an electrically conductive adhesive or electrically conductive bonding material (Figs. 2-5, adhesive/bonding fluid connecting 404 to 420; [Column 20, lines 8-12] – “In many cases, materials used in accordance with the present invention are commercially available polymers. Such polymers may include, for example, any commercially available silicone elastomer, polyurethane, PVDF copolymer and adhesive elastomer.”; [Column 20, lines 29-36] – “Electroactive polymers of the present invention may also include one or more additives to improve their various physical and chemical properties. Examples of suitable classes of materials include plasticizers, antioxidants, and high dielectric constant particulates. Examples of properties that can be controlled/modified by additives include adhesion and the ability of the electroactive polymer to convert between mechanical energy and electrical energy.”; [Column 34, lines 30-43] – “Main body 408 of cap 402 is also coupled mechanically to electrical contacts 406 and 412. This coupling may again be achieved by adhesion, welding, chemical or thermal bond during a curing process or simply mechanical pressure. Main body 408 of cap 402 is also coupled mechanically directly (not shown) or through electrical contact 412 (as shown) to enclosing sheath 418. Once more, this coupling may be achieved by adhesion, welding, chemical or thermal bond during a curing process or simply mechanical pressure. The main body 408 is essentially the glue that holds all other components of the cap 402 together and binds them mechanically while maintaining suitable electrical insulation between the inner electrodes of EPFTs 420 and their outer compliant electrodes.”; [Column 34, lines 50-53] – “Electrical contact 404 provides an electrical current path to access the internal core electrodes 422 of all EPFTs 420 and thus means of electrically connecting these to an external electrical circuit.”; [Column 34, line 59-Column 35, 28] – “…electrical contact 404 may have access port 406 as shown in FIG. 4A to allow for access and fluid transfer to internal core electrodes 422. The purpose of the port may be to transfer fluid during fabrication or operation, as means of heat exchange or to change the chemical environment of the EPFTs. In such an embodiment, overall incompressibility can be achieved by external means, which could in one embodiment be external valves or plugs. Such a valve may be open to allow fluid transfer and then closed again. In other words, even though the inner electrodes 422 may be comprised of a flowing fluid, the overall amount of fluid and thus the volume may be maintained constant by external means the ensure that the amount of fluid delivered on one end is equal to the amount of fluid removed at the other end. In yet another embodiment, electrical contact 404 is non permeable and serves to completely seal in the enclosed inner electrodes 422. Electrical contact 404 may have a dual functionality, as it may also be, in one embodiment, the point of mechanical attachment to the desired feature or load to be transduced. In this way, contact 404 serves as an electrical and mechanical connection.”).
Regarding claim 3, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 2, wherein the electrically conductive adhesive or electrically conductive bonding material (Figs. 2-5, fluid adhering/bonding 404 to 420; [Column 20, lines 8-12]; [Column 20, lines 29-36]; [Column 34, lines 30-43]; [Column 34, lines 50-53]; [Column 34, line 59-Column 35, 28]) physically bonds (Figs. 2-5; [Column 20, lines 8-12]; [Column 20, lines 29-36]; [Column 34, lines 30-43]; [Column 34, lines 50-53]; [Column 34, line 59-Column 35, 28]) the conductive element (Figs. 2-5, 404; [Column 35, lines 12-28]; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) to the microfiber wall material (Figs. 2-5, EPFT 420’s wall material) while being in electrical communication (Figs. 2-5) with the fluidic electrodes (Figs. 2-5, fluidic electrode in EPFT 420’s core 422) within the cores (Figs. 2-5, 422 of each EPFT 420 in the BEPFT 400) of the hollow dielectric elastomeric microfibers (Figs. 2-5, hollow EPFT 420 in the BEPFT 400).
Regarding claim 4, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 3, wherein the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers (Figs. 2-5, BEPFT 400) is bonded with epoxy resin (Figs. 2-5; [Column 20, lines 48-49] – “…, certain synthetic resins may be added for this purpose.”), cyanoacrylate (Figs. 2-5; [Column 21, lines 7-12] – “Specific materials included to reduce the elastic modulus of an acrylic polymer of the present invention include any acrylic acids, acrylic adhesives, acrylics including flexible side groups such as isooctyl groups and 2-ethylhexyl groups, or any copolymer of acrylic acid and isooctyl acrylate.”) or silicone (Figs. 2-5; [Column 20, lines 8-12] – “In many cases, materials used in accordance with the present invention are commercially available polymers. Such polymers may include, for example, any commercially available silicone elastomer, polyurethane, PVDF copolymer and adhesive elastomer.”; [Column 21, lines 12-24] – “…, plasticizers are often added to polymers. In the context of this invention, the addition of a plasticizer may, for example, improve the functioning of a transducer of this invention by reducing the elastic modulus of the electroactive polymer and/or increasing the dielectric breakdown strength of the electroactive polymer. Examples of suitable plasticizers include high molecular-weight hydrocarbon oils, high molecular-weight hydrocarbon greases, Pentalyne H, Piccovar.RTM. AP Hydrocarbon Resins, Admex 760, Plastolein 9720, silicone oils, silicone greases, Floral 105, silicone elastomers, nonionic surfactants, and the like. Of course, combinations of these materials may be used.”).
Regarding claim 5, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 3, wherein the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers (Figs. 2-5, BEPFT 400) comprises a silicone (Figs. 2-5, BEPFT 400; [Column 20, lines 8-12]; [Column 21, lines 12-24]).
Regarding claim 6, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 3, wherein the electrical connection (Figs. 2-5, direct electrical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and contact 404; [Column 35, lines 12-28]; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) is achieved (Figs. 2-5) by forming a fluidic cavity (Figs. 2-5, cavity between EPFT 420 core 422 and 404) between the core (Figs. 2-5, 422) of the microfibers (Figs. 2-5, BEPFT 400) and an electrically conductive contact (Figs. 2-5, 404), and wherein the mechanical connection (Figs. 2-5, direct mechanical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and 402; [Column 35, lines 12-28] ; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) is achieved (Figs. 2-5; [Column 34, lines 7-11] – “…the electroactive polymer sheath of each individual EPFT 420 is coupled mechanically to the main body 408 of cap 402. This coupling may be achieved by adhesion, welding, chemical or thermal bond during a curing process or simply mechanical pressure.”) at the periphery (Figs. 2-5, periphery of 418) of the bundle's seal (Figs. 2-5, 418).
Regarding claim 7, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 1, wherein a conductive support (Figs. 2-5, 406) has an array of pins or contacts (Figs. 2-5; Fig. 4Q; [Column 36, lines 25-29] – elements penetrating into the core) inserted into (Figs. 2-5; [Column 36, lines 25-29] – “FIG. 4E is another extension of FIG. 4C. In this embodiment, the coupling mechanism 404 achieves a better electrical connection with the EPFT conductive core by using a pointed surface geometry to penetrate into the core 422 of the EPFT 420, thus exposing a larger surface area.”; [Column 37, 27-30] – “…, the coupling mechanism 404 could have a through port 406 to provide direct access to the inner conductive core.”) the electrically conductive cores (Figs. 2-5, 422) of each of the plurality of microfibers (Figs. 2-5, 420) of the microfiber bundle (Figs. 2-5, 400).
Regarding claim 8, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 7, wherein the mechanical connection (Figs. 2-5, direct mechanical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and 402; [Column 35, lines 12-28] ; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) is strengthened (Figs. 2-5; [Column 20, lines 8-12]; [Column 20, lines 29-36]; [Column 34, lines 30-43]; [Column 34, lines 50-53]; [Column 34, line 59-Column 35, 28]) by an adhesive or bonding agent (Figs. 2-5, fluid adhering/bonding 404 to 420; [Column 20, lines 8-12]; [Column 20, lines 29-36]; [Column 34, lines 30-43]; [Column 34, lines 50-53]; [Column 34, line 59-Column 35, 28]).
Regarding claim 9, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 1, wherein the electrical connection (Figs. 2-5, direct electrical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and contact 404; [Column 35, lines 12-28]; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) is achieved by using a bonding pad ring and bonding wires similar to an integrated circuit (Figs. 2-5; [Column 37, lines 14-26] – “…substrate 428 may be one of a Silicon chip connected through a MEMS contact array or through a BGA packaging to both the electrical contact 404 and the inner cores 420 of the individual EPFTs. Such a chip 428 may receive one bulk source of power from 404 and 412 and contain internal circuitry, laid on it through standard chip manufacturing processes, as well as a control port, such that the internal circuitry was cap able of directing charge and sensing the state of each individual EPFT. Such circuits may include passive elements, PN junctions, FET or BJT transistors. Such chip may include higher level processing elements, such as a microcontroller or processor as well as the internal driving components.”; [Column 30, lines 6-17] – “…suitable cross sections of the fiber bundle 302 in accordance with the present invention may be a circumference, a triangle, a square or any other regular or non-regular polygon. Cross sectional areas resembling ellipses or other high aspect ratio shapes provide suitable embodiments for flat bundles. Cross sections where the individual EPFT occupy rings or other perimetral shapes are also suitable embodiments and may provide one or more hollow spaces within the BEPFT bundle 302. As means of actuation, such inner spaces may be used to include structural elements to attach the device for actuation, sensing and energy generating or may serve to pass wiring.”).
Regarding claim 10, Alvarez discloses the electromechanically connected bundle of dielectric elastomeric microfibers of claim 9, wherein the mechanical connection (Figs. 2-5, direct mechanical connection between cross-sectional annular face of each EPFT 420 core 422 in a BEPFT 400 and 402; [Column 35, lines 12-28] ; [Column 36, lines 14-19]; [Column 36, lines 25-29]) is achieved (Figs. 2-5) by an adhesive or bonding agent (Figs. 2-5, fluid adhering/bonding 402 to 420; [Column 20, lines 8-12]; [Column 20, lines 29-36]; [Column 34, lines 30-43]; [Column 34, lines 50-53]; [Column 34, line 59-Column 35, 28]) deposed on (Figs. 2-5) the face (cylindrical ring edge) or periphery (Figs. 2-5, face or periphery of 418) of the bundle seal (Figs. 2-5, 418).
Regarding claim 11, Alvarez discloses a DE microfiber, comprising: a hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) characterized as having an outer diameter (Figs. 2-5, outer diameter of tube to be filled with 422) and an inner diameter (Figs. 2-5, inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422), an inner fluidic or compliant electrode (Figs. 2-5, 422) deposed within the interior (Figs. 2-5, interior of tube to be filled with 422) of the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422), and an outer fluidic or compliant electrode (Figs. 2-5, 416) deposed exterior (Fig. 4B) to the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422), wherein the ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422) of the outer diameter (Figs. 2-5, outer diameter of tube to be filled with 422) to the inner diameter (Figs. 2-5, inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422) of the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) is chosen (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41] – “Where C is the theoretical capacitance of the transducer 152 measured between electrodes 138 and 120 as a function of L, the active length 150 of the transducer. E is the dielectric constant of the electroactive polymer material 116 times the permittivity of free space, b is the outer radius of polymer 116 and a is the internal radius of polymer 116, the ratio of which (b/a) remains constant independent of length L based on the incompressibility assumption. It is of great interest to note that in this modality, the baseline capacitance as well as the gain of capacitance versus the length of the transducer 152 is determined by the ratio b/a such that a transducer 152 may be customized to a desired behavior by setting such ratio during fabrication. One skilled in the art can generalize the above relation in terms of linear strain. In short, the capacitance of transducer 152 behaves linearly in relation to the length of transducer 152.”; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65] – “The internal radius of the electroactive polymer tube 204 may be from about 1/100 to 99/100ths the size of the external radius, therefore allowing great versatility in the choice of mechanical and electrical characteristics of the EPFT. The ideal choice of internal radius will depend greatly on the electromechanical properties of the electroactive polymer 204, the desired electromechanical behavior of the EPFT and the electrical properties of electrode 202.”; [Column 44, lines 15-32] – “…BEPFTs are mounted under different prestraining conditions so as to extend the overall range of actuation or motion of a single BEPFT. A principle behind this embodiment is that throughout the length of travel of link 814 there will be at least one BEPFT that is at its prestrained sweet-spot, and thus can provide optimal actuation even though the rest of the BEPFTs may or may not be active. As one skilled in the art will appreciate, such sweet spot refers to an optimal prestraining at which a BEPFT can produce the maximal actuation pressure. In other words, BEPFTs being elastic may be strained by external means to great extents, in some cases over 1000% of their initial length, however optimal actuation performance, or the sweet-spot, is achieved within a significantly narrower range. Such sweet-spot range is dependent on the specific choice of materials and the EPFT dimensions and configurations. This same variable prestraining may also be achieved within the BEPFT itself by including individual EPFTs prestrained to different amounts.”;) to maximize (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]) the electromechanical performance (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]) of the DE microfiber (Figs. 2-5, EPFT 420) as an actuator (Figs. 2-5; [Abstract]).
Regarding claim 12, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11, where the ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422), is selected to maximize mechanical energy output (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]).
Regarding claim 13, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11, where the ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422), is selected to maximize effective work density (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]).
Regarding claim 14, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11, where the ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422), is selected to maximize effective specific energy (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]).
Regarding claim 15, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11, where the ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422), is selected to maximize mechanical power density (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]).
Regarding claim 16, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11, where the ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422), is selected to maximize mechanical specific power (Figs. 2-5; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]).
Regarding claim 17, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422) is selected to maximize effective strain (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]).
Regarding claim 18, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11, where the ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422), is selected to maximize effective stress (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]).
Regarding claim 19, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the electrical time-constant (Figs. 2-5, electrical time-constant of 420) is lower than about 1000 ms, preferably lower than about 500 ms, and preferably lower than about 200 ms (Figs. 2-5; [Column 61, lines 8-20] – “A suitable electroactive polymer fiber transducer can be provided wherein application of a voltage gives rise to an axial strain, wherein such strain is achieved in less than 10 seconds, less than 1 second, less than 100 milliseconds, less than 10 milliseconds, or less than 1 millisecond. A suitable electroactive polymer fiber transducer can be provided wherein removal of a voltage gives rise to an elastic return from an axial strain, wherein such return is achieved in less than 10 seconds. Electroactive polymer fiber transducers can also be provided wherein application of a voltage having an absolute value of about 5000 V gives rise to an axial strain of at least about 3 percent relative to the length of the electroactive polymer fiber transducer at zero voltage.”).
Regarding claim 20, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the OD (Figs. 2-5, outer diameter of tube to be filled with 422) is reduced (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41] – “Where C is the theoretical capacitance of the transducer 152 measured between electrodes 138 and 120 as a function of L, the active length 150 of the transducer. E is the dielectric constant of the electroactive polymer material 116 times the permittivity of free space, b is the outer radius of polymer 116 and a is the internal radius of polymer 116, the ratio of which (b/a) remains constant independent of length L based on the incompressibility assumption. It is of great interest to note that in this modality, the baseline capacitance as well as the gain of capacitance versus the length of the transducer 152 is determined by the ratio b/a such that a transducer 152 may be customized to a desired behavior by setting such ratio during fabrication. One skilled in the art can generalize the above relation in terms of linear strain. In short, the capacitance of transducer 152 behaves linearly in relation to the length of transducer 152.”) to implement a failure rate (Figs. 2-5, failure rate of BEPFT 400; [Column 16, lines 33-35]) of less than 1 in 1000 fibers (Figs. 2-5, failure rate; [Column 16, lines 33-35] – “There may be situations where one or a plurality of EPFTs in a BEPFT undergo electrical breakdown and allow charge provided by the coupling mechanism 404 to flow directly to the outer compliant electrode 416 in a short circuit.”) within a bundle (Figs. 2-5, BEPFT 400 420) at the target operating voltage (Figs. 2-5, BEPFT 400 target operating voltage).
Regarding claim 21, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the resistivity of the inner electrode (Figs. 2-5, 422) is engineered (Figs. 2-5; [Column 61, lines 8-20]) so that the fiber (Figs. 2-5, 420) has an electrical time constant below about 200 ms (Figs. 2-5; [Column 61, lines 8-20]).
Regarding claim 22, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the scale (OD) (Figs. 2-5, scale of outer diameter of tube to be filled with 422), ratio alpha (Figs. 2-5, ratio of outer to inner diameter of tube to be filled with 422) and resistivity (Figs. 2-5, resistivity of 422; [Column 16, lines 33-35] – “a suitable electroactive polymer may include one of a high-volume resistivity and low mechanical damping for maximizing energy efficiency for an application.”) of the inner electrode Figs. 2-5, resistivity of 422) are selected (Figs. 2-5; [Column 12, lines 26-41]; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 24, lines 57-65]; [Column 44, lines 15-32]) so that the microfiber (Figs. 2-5, 420) has an electrical time constant (Figs. 2-5, electrical time-constant of 420) that matches the mechanical time constant (Figs. 2-5, mechanical time-constant of external device connected to 420) of the application (Figs. 2-5, device external to and connected to 420 with a mechanical time constant that matches 420’s electrical time-constant).
Regarding claim 23, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) comprises a silicone elastomeric material (Figs. 2-5; [Column 20, lines 8-12] – “In many cases, materials used in accordance with the present invention are commercially available polymers. Such polymers may include, for example, any commercially available silicone elastomer, polyurethane, PVDF copolymer and adhesive elastomer.”; [Column 21, lines 12-24] – “…, plasticizers are often added to polymers. In the context of this invention, the addition of a plasticizer may, for example, improve the functioning of a transducer of this invention by reducing the elastic modulus of the electroactive polymer and/or increasing the dielectric breakdown strength of the electroactive polymer. Examples of suitable plasticizers include high molecular-weight hydrocarbon oils, high molecular-weight hydrocarbon greases, Pentalyne H, Piccovar.RTM. AP Hydrocarbon Resins, Admex 760, Plastolein 9720, silicone oils, silicone greases, Floral 105, silicone elastomers, nonionic surfactants, and the like. Of course, combinations of these materials may be used.”).
Regarding claim 24, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) comprises a thermoset elastomeric material (Figs. 2-5; [Column 20, lines 8-12] – “In many cases, materials used in accordance with the present invention are commercially available polymers. Such polymers may include, for example, any commercially available silicone elastomer, polyurethane, PVDF copolymer and adhesive elastomer.”; [Column 21, lines 12-24] – “…, plasticizers are often added to polymers. In the context of this invention, the addition of a plasticizer may, for example, improve the functioning of a transducer of this invention by reducing the elastic modulus of the electroactive polymer and/or increasing the dielectric breakdown strength of the electroactive polymer. Examples of suitable plasticizers include high molecular-weight hydrocarbon oils, high molecular-weight hydrocarbon greases, Pentalyne H, Piccovar.RTM. AP Hydrocarbon Resins, Admex 760, Plastolein 9720, silicone oils, silicone greases, Floral 105, silicone elastomers, nonionic surfactants, and the like. Of course, combinations of these materials may be used.”).
Regarding claim 25, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) comprises a thermoplastic elastomeric material (Figs. 2-5; [Column 19, lines 9-16] – “Exemplary classes of polymer suitable for use with transducers of this invention include silicone elastomers, acrylic elastomers, polyurethanes, thermoplastic elastomers, copolymers comprising PVDF, pressure-sensitive ADHEsives, fluoroelastomers, polymers comprising silicone and acrylic moieties, and the like. Combinations of some of these materials may be used as the electroactive polymer matrix in transducers of this invention.”).
Regarding claim 26, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) comprises a urethane elastomeric material (Figs. 2-5; [Column 17, lines 29-31] – “In one example, a high dielectric polyurethane may be made from partially fluorinated urethane monomers.”).
Regarding claim 27, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) comprises a polyester elastomeric material (Figs. 2-5; [Column 19, lines 9-16] – “Exemplary classes of polymer suitable for use with transducers of this invention include silicone elastomers, acrylic elastomers, polyurethanes, thermoplastic elastomers, copolymers comprising PVDF, pressure-sensitive ADHEsives, fluoroelastomers, polymers comprising silicone and acrylic moieties, and the like. Combinations of some of these materials may be used as the electroactive polymer matrix in transducers of this invention.”).
Regarding claim 28, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) comprises an acrylic elastomeric material (Figs. 2-5; [Column 15, lines 43-50] – “Other exemplary materials suitable for use as a electroactive polymer include, any dielectric elastomeric polymer, silicone rubbers, fluoroelastomers, silicones such as Dow Corning HS3 as provided by Dow Corning of Wilmington, Del., fluorosilicones such as Dow Corning 730 as provided by Dow Corning of Wilmington, Del., and the like, and acrylic polymers such as any acrylic in the 4900 VHB acrylic series as provided by 3M Corp.”; [Column 21, lines 7-12] – “Specific materials included to reduce the elastic modulus of an acrylic polymer of the present invention include any acrylic acids, acrylic adhesives, acrylics including flexible side groups such as isooctyl groups and 2-ethylhexyl groups, or any copolymer of acrylic acid and isooctyl acrylate.”).
Regarding claim 29, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the hollow fiber body (Figs. 2-5, tube to be filled with 422) comprises an elastomeric material (Figs. 2-5, material of tube to be filled with 422) characterized as having a Young's Modulus in the range of between 100 kPa and 5000 kPa (Figs. 2-5; [Column 15, lines 63-67] – “Suitable electroactive polymers can have an elastic modulus below 100 MPa. Suitable electroactive polymers can also be selected having a maximum actuation pressure between about 0.05 MPa and about 10 MPa, and preferably between about 0.3 MPa and about 3 MPa.”; [Column 55, lines 6-8] – “Electroactive polymer fibers can be provided wherein the dielectric elastomer is characterized as having an elasticity modulus smaller than about 10 MPa.”).
Regarding claim 30, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the DE microfibers (Figs. 2-5, EPFT 420) are characterized as having a passive elasticity constant between 400 kPa and 800 kPa (Figs. 2-5; [Column 15, lines 63-67] – “Suitable electroactive polymers can have an elastic modulus below 100 MPa. Suitable electroactive polymers can also be selected having a maximum actuation pressure between about 0.05 MPa and about 10 MPa, and preferably between about 0.3 MPa and about 3 MPa.”; [Column 55, lines 6-8] – “Electroactive polymer fibers can be provided wherein the dielectric elastomer is characterized as having an elasticity modulus smaller than about 10 MPa.”).
Regarding claim 31, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the stress (Figs. 2-5; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 29, lines 59-63]) produced (Figs. 2-5; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 29, lines 59-63]) by the DE microfiber (Figs. 2-5, EPFT 420) decreases to zero (Figs. 2-5; [Column 50, lines 50-55] – “…electroactive fibers 302a can have a voltage applied to it sequentially, e.g., starting with the outermost/longest electroactive fiber, causing each to expand sequentially. Each subsequent electroactive fiber can initially have a slack (i.e., less than zero strain or stress) initially which becomes taut upon actuation of a prior muscle.”) when electrically activated (Figs. 2-5; [Column 50, lines 50-55]) using an activation voltage (Figs. 2-5; [Column 50, lines 55-Column 51, line 2] – “Voltage can then be sequentially applied to the previously tightened electroactive fiber to create additional motion. Continuing to do this in series allows the range of motion to increase beyond the strain actuation limit for any one fiber at maximum voltage. For example, under a maximum applied voltage of 7000 V that gives rise to a maximum 10% strain elongation due to electrostatic potential, but such a fiber can be readily stretched further to strains of 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, or more under mechanical stress, which can be applied by other electroactive fibers or other stressing means. In concert with actuation of electroactive fibers 302a, electroactive fibers 302b can have the voltage removed in a sequentially opposite manner to give rise to a corresponding motion of mechanical linkage 304 contracting and causing additional motion.”) between (Figs. 2-5) the inner (Figs. 2-5, 422) and outer electrodes (Figs. 2-5, 416).
Regarding claim 32, Alvarez discloses the DE microfiber of claim 11 where the DE microfiber (Figs. 2-5, EPFT 420) is pre-stressed (Figs. 2-5; [Column 16, lines 13-35]; [Column 29, lines 59-63] – “…EPFTs are bundled under the same pre-straining conditions,…EPFTs are prestressed…”) to produce (Figs. 2-5) a desired baseline stress (Figs. 2-5, desired baseline stress of EPFT 420) when there is no activation voltage (Figs. 2-5; [Column 13, lines 10-22] – stress when voltage is zero –“…Where Y is the modulus of elasticity of polymer 116 and E is its dielectric constant times the permittivity of free space, bo is the outer radius of polymer 116 in an initial passive state and ao is the internal radius of polymer 116 in the same passive state. S is the axial strain of transducer 152 in direction 110 when activated by a voltage V. One skilled in the art can specify the above relation in terms of specific length. The above relation may be manipulated to obtain a closed form solution of the strain as a function of the voltage by one skilled in the art devoted to solving the cubic form of the equation. However, for simplicity's sake, the above relation may be computed and plotted with the axes inverted to imply the proper causality.”; [Column 61, lines 8-20] – “A suitable electroactive polymer fiber transducer can be provided wherein application of a voltage gives rise to an axial strain, wherein such strain is achieved in less than 10 seconds, less than 1 second, less than 100 milliseconds, less than 10 milliseconds, or less than 1 millisecond. A suitable electroactive polymer fiber transducer can be provided wherein removal of a voltage gives rise to an elastic return from an axial strain, wherein such return is achieved in less than 10 seconds. Electroactive polymer fiber transducers can also be provided wherein application of a voltage having an absolute value of about 5000 V gives rise to an axial strain of at least about 3 percent relative to the length of the electroactive polymer fiber transducer at zero voltage.”) between (Figs. 2-5) the inner (Figs. 2-5, 422) and outer electrodes (Figs. 2-5, 416).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to MONICA MATA
whose telephone number is (571) 272-8782. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday from 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
supervisor, Dedei Hammond, can be reached on (571) 270-7938. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/MONICA MATA/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
8 January 2026
/EMILY P PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837