Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/019,290

Method of Manufacturing a Flexible Sensor Belt and a Flexible Sensor Belt

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jul 24, 2023
Examiner
GRAHAM, ANDREW D
Art Unit
1742
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Bambi Belt Holding B V
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
218 granted / 363 resolved
-4.9% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+22.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
394
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
54.8%
+14.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.6%
-21.4% vs TC avg
§112
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 363 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-8 and 16-17 in the reply filed on 2/26/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 9-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention(s), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/26/2026. Claim Interpretation The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “retaining elements” in claim 1. The limitation uses a generic placeholder (“elements”) that is coupled with functional language (“retaining”) without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function, and is not preceded by a structural modifier. The corresponding structure appears to be “retaining elements 75” which appear to look like “pins” or “posts” that extend from a substrate (see Fig. 8, Instant Specification), and there is no description of the structure in the specification – they are only referred to as “retaining elements”. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Objections Claims 3-4 are objected to because of the following informalities: “the belt section” should read “the longitudinal belt section.” As to use the same language as introduced in claim 3. Appropriate correction is required. Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the electronic circuit” should read “the flexible electronic circuit” as to use the same language as in claim 6. 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. 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 16-17 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 1, the phrase “in particular” is read similarly as the term: "such as" or “for example” and thus, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 2-8 and 16-17 are also rejected at least due to their dependence or ultimate dependence upon claim 1. 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. Claim(s) 1-8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Luna et al. (US 2015/0297145), hereinafter Luna. Regarding claim 1, Luna discloses a method of manufacturing a flexible sensor belt (wearable device) suitable for being worn around an abdominal part of a human body (intended use, not required to be met in the prior art), the method comprising the steps of: (a) applying one or more electrodes in a mold (par. 0087); (b) casting, using a mold, a belt containing the electrodes, by injecting a flexible material (par. 0088, 0175, 0185 – different embodiments, injection molding is described in the passages); and (c) wherein the step of casting the belt comprises a step of retaining the one or more electrodes using one or more retaining elements [post 3231 and support structure 3230 – par. 0176; this is interpreted as equivalent to what is shown in Applicant’s Fig. 8 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f)] extending into the mold. Regarding claims 2-3, Luna discloses the subject matter or claim 1, and further discloses: (a) providing a support layer (inner strap) made of the flexible material (par. 0175 – “inner strap of a strap band”); (b) applying, onto the support layer, the one or more electrodes (par. 0175 – “electrode 3202 . . . may be positioned relative to an aperture of an inner strap of a strap band” – this is considered to meet both claims 2 and 3); and (c) casting a complementary layer (outer strap) onto the support layer using the flexible material (par. 0175 – “a material 3243, such as a material used to form an outer strap of the strap band (e.g., via injection molding), such as to cover the one or more electrodes with the complementary material (par. 0175, 0185) formed on the support layer as to immerse the electrodes in the injected material. The casting or molding of the inner and outer straps is done using a mold (par. 0089 describes both steps of molding the inner and outer straps of a band as to integrate the materials together). Regarding claim 4, Luna discloses the subject matter of claim 3, and further discloses setting the material and retracting the one or more retaining elements (par. 0185). Regarding claims 5 and 16, Luna discloses the subject matter of claims 3-4, and further discloses that the material is a thermoplastic elastomer (par. 0192). Regarding claims 6-8 and 17, Luna discloses the subject matter of claim 1, and further discloses applying a flexible electronic circuit (wire 3212 – par. 0172; also, par. 0179 describes that the wire bus is flexed, and par. 0185 describes that the flexible circuit is attached) and the path is wavy or meandering as to connect the required elements. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW D GRAHAM whose telephone number is (469)295-9232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM-4:00PM (CST). 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, Christina Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-1176. 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. /ANDREW D GRAHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 24, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594688
Recycled Board Manufacturing Method and Recycled Board
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589520
BINDER COMPOSITION, COMPRISING BASIC SUBSTANCES, FOR PRODUCING A LIGNOCELLULOSIC COMPOSITE, RESPECTIVE PROCESS, USE AND PRODUCTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575033
THERMOFORMING DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FLEXIBLE CIRCUIT BOARD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12558255
A METHOD OF MANUFACTURING AN INTRAORAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12558799
GRIPPING APPARATUS AND ASSOCIATED SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GRIPPING FLEXIBLE MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
60%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+22.1%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 363 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month