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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment dated 3/25/2026 has been considered and entered into the record. Independent claims 1 and 13 have been amended to require that a reducing agent solution comprises a surfactant or a surfactant mixture. This amendment overcomes the previous prior art rejections that did not address this new limitation. Accordingly, the prior art rejections are withdrawn. New claims 28 and 29 have added, while claim 16 has been added. Claims 1–8, 12–15, 17–19, 24, 25, 28 and 29 are pending and examined below.
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.
Claim 8 is 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.
Regarding claim 8, the phrase "and others" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "others"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1–8, 12–19, 24, 28, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (US 2016/0160066 A1) in view of Lee (EP 3 553 023 A1) and JP 5859838 B2, “ ’838.”
Zhang teaches a process for depositing metal on a substrate, which comprises applying a reducing agent solution to a surface of the substrate followed by an application of a metal ion solution, wherein the reducing agent solution reduces ions at ambient temperature to form conductive films. Zhang abstract, ¶ 5. The reduction agent may be hydroxylamine. Id. ¶ 9. The deposition process may be applied to any suitable substrate, including, but not limited to polyethylene terephthalates (PETs) and fibrous materials using inkjet printing. Id. ¶ 14. The metal ion solution may comprise silver, copper, gold, and/or aluminum ions and may include a second reducing agent. Id. ¶¶ 8–11. Accordingly, a reducing agent solution and metal ion solution are implemented in one sequence. The application of a reduction solution and metal ion solution may be repeated multiple times. See id. ¶ 85. Surfactants should be added to the metal solution when silver is being used. Id. ¶¶ 32–35.
Zhang fails to teach the deposition of metal on a yarn comprising a plurality of filaments.
Lee teaches a method of fabricating a stretchable conductive fiber comprising the application of a solution containing silver ions and then a reduction agent to the fiber made up of a plurality of filaments. Lee abstract, ¶¶ 27, 77–82, Figs. 1A, 1B. This application process may be repeated. Id. ¶¶ 84–86.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have used the process described in Zhang on the fiber taught in Lee motivated by the desire to make a conductive fiber comprising a plurality of filaments to in turn make a conductive fabric. See Lee ¶ 5.
Zhang and Lee fail to teach the use of a surfactant or a surfactant mixture along with the reducing agent solution.
’838 is directed to a method of plating metal on various substrates, including fibers. ’838 abstract, Background art. The method includes the addition of surfactants to hydrophilic pretreatments that are applied prior to the plating of the metal in order to improve wettability of the pretreatment. Id. Description of Embodiments.
The ordinarily skilled artisan would have found it obvious to have added a surfactant and hydrophilic agent to the pretreatment step (i.e., application of reducing agent) in order to improve wettability of the reducing agent to the surface to be treated.
Claim 12 is rejected as it would have been obvious to may formed a conductive pattern in a selected area of a piece of fabric made by the fibers motivated by the desire to form a strain sensor as part of wearable articles. Lee Description of the Disclosure. Lee fails to teach that the stretchable fiber comprises at least one of polyester, nylon, acrylic, and polypropylene. However, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan to have used one of the fibers of the claimed composition as the process is applicable to a variety of synthetic fibers and not particularly limited. Claims 28 are 29 are rejected as it would have been obvious to have applied the reduction and metal ion solution steps to at least a majority of the plurality of filaments motivated by the desire to form a more robust strain sensor.
Claim(s) 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, Lee, and “’838.”as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Alshazly (CH 701426 A2).
Zhang et al. fail to teach having the plurality of filaments undergo a yarn swelling process to that involves exposing the plurality of filaments to at least one of water and steam.
Alshazly teaches a process for the creation of a textile garment comprising metallic yarns with a surface that is formed by a metal coating and suitable finishing. Alshazly abstract, Description. The yarns may also be subjected to swelling by exposure to steam. Id. Description.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to subjected the yarns of prior art to steam to swell filaments of the yarn as a known finishing process for metal-coated garment textiles, which would cause the filaments to separate and reduce contact between the plurality of filaments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D MATZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-5732. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Jennifer Boyd can be reached at 571.272.7783. 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.
/MATTHEW D MATZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786
Prosecution Insights