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 1-11, drawn to a system for detecting aromatic compounds in the reply filed on 12/16/2025 is acknowledged.
The applicant’s reply for “Group I(claims 1-12)” appears to be a typo, as claim 12 is in Group II, claims 12-22. Group I (claims 1-11) as specified in the restriction action (of 10/23/2025) will be examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belbruno (US PG-Pub 20150241374 A1), in further in view of Matsumoto et al. (US PG-Pub 20230102451 A1) and Tan et al. (CN 103245634 A).
Regarding claim 1, the examiner is interpreting the "resistor mesh" to be a metal or semiconductor, that can include silver, copper, zinc, or any number of other conductive metals, and indium oxide, gallium arsenide, and the like for semiconductors. This is in light of the instant application's specification [0024].
Belbruno teaches systems and methods for detecting small aromatic molecules using molecularly imprinted polymers. The systems and methods may include a molecularly imprinted polymer film; a resistive or capacitive material. The molecularly imprinted polymer film may be coated upon the resistive or capacitive material, where a change in resistance or capacitance may indicate a presence of a target molecule (see Belbruno, [0006], [0016]).
Belbruno fails to teach the system comprising: a lower substrate; and an upper substrate disposed over the polymer film, wherein the upper substrate comprises an opening exposing the resistor mesh.
However, in the analogous art of pressure-sensitive adhesive sheet, optical member, and touch panel, Matsumoto et al. teaches two transparent substrates 12a and 12b, layered on top of one another. The substrates compose an optical member, such as transparent conductive films (e.g., plastic films having an indium tin oxide layer (ITO) on the surface thereof), which preferably are ITO films such as polyethylene terephthalate indium tin oxide (PET-ITO), polycarbonate, and cycloolefin polymer. These films can also have a metal nanowire layer, where metallic thin wires may be mesh-printed on the films. The metal wiring comprising the mesh may constitute electrically conductive material such as copper wiring and/or silver wiring for the mesh (see Matsumoto et al., [0212]-[0214], [0226], Fig. 2A-2D). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system and method for detecting small aromatic molecules that includes a polymer film over a resistive material as taught by Belbruno by incorporating the layered transparent substrate, and the printed metal mesh on the film (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of reducing deterioration of appearance of the substrates from the effects of low pressure environments such as in high altitude regions, manufacture processes, and in aircraft (see Matsumoto et al., [0008]-[0010]).
Furthermore, the combination of Belbruno and Matsumoto et al. fails to teach that the upper substrate comprises an opening exposing the resistor mesh.
However, in the analogous art of monolithic integrated micro infrared gas sensors, Tan et al. teaches an infrared gas sensor, comprising: an upper substrate 101 that has a concave pit for a lower substrate 108 below, which are bonded together to form a hollow air chamber 107. The lower substrate houses an infrared detector 105 used for the detection of gas. Said gas is entered from an outside vent hole on the upper substrate 101 to exchange air (see Tan et al., [0027]-[0028], [0030], Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify systems and methods for detecting small aromatic molecules, the substrate layers, polymer films, and the metal wiring mesh printed on the film of Belbruno and Matsumoto et al. to further incorporate the upper substrate vent holes to allow air to pass to a chamber, or towards the lower substrate and its components (as taught by Tan et al.), for the benefit of the miniaturization of an integrated air chamber structure in a gas detection system (see Tan et al., [0017]-[0018]).
Regarding claim 2, Belbruno and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the lower substrate comprises glass.
However, Matsumoto et al. teaches transparent substrates, including glass substrates such as glass sensors, and glass plates having a transparent electrode (see Matsumoto et al., [0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Belbruno and Tan et al. by having the lower substrate be made out of glass (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of reducing deterioration of appearance of the substrates from the effects of low pressure environments such as in high altitude regions, manufacture processes, and in aircraft (see Matsumoto et al., [0008]-[0010]).
Regarding claim 10, Belbruno and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the upper substrate comprises glass.
However, Matsumoto et al. teaches transparent substrates, including glass substrates such as glass sensors, and glass plates having a transparent electrode (see Matsumoto et al., [0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Belbruno and Tan et al. by having the upper substrate be made out of glass (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of reducing deterioration of appearance of the substrates from the effects of low pressure environments such as in high altitude regions, manufacture processes, and in aircraft (see Matsumoto et al., [0008]-[0010]).
Claims 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Khalil et al. (US PG-Pub 20030003589 A1).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the lower substrate comprises acetal copolymer, acetal homopolymer, nylon, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), or polyvinylidene fluoride, or any combination thereof.
However, in the analogous art of ammonia detection and measurement device, Khalil et al. teaches a sensor composition for detecting and measuring volatile acidic or basic compounds in a gas or liquid state fluid, comprising an ammonia-sensitive indicator dye having measurable spectral characteristics immobilized in or on a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) solid substrate, whereby exposure to a volatile acidic or basic compound causes a change in spectral characteristics of the ammonia-sensitive indicator dye (see Khalil et al., [0004]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. by having the lower substrate be made of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (as taught by Khalil et al.), for the benefit of being highly permeable to gases, insoluble in water, and relatively inert to a wide variety of chemical agents (see Khalil et al., [0009]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the upper substrate comprises acetal copolymer, acetal homopolymer, nylon, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), or polyvinylidene fluoride, or any combination thereof.
However, Khalil et al. teaches a sensor composition for detecting and measuring volatile acidic or basic compounds in a gas or liquid state fluid, comprising an ammonia-sensitive indicator dye having measurable spectral characteristics immobilized in or on a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) solid substrate, whereby exposure to a volatile acidic or basic compound causes a change in spectral characteristics of the ammonia-sensitive indicator dye (see Khalil et al., [0004]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrates of the combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. to incorporate the substrate comprising polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (as taught by Khalil et al.), for the benefit of enabling the substrate to be highly permeable to gases, insoluble in water, and relatively inert to a wide variety of chemical agents (see Khalil et al., [0009]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fischer et al. (US PG-Pub 20180164263 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Matsumoto et al. teaches a number of film materials used, including transparent conductive films (e.g., plastic films having an indium tin oxide layer (ITO) on the surface thereof), which preferably are ITO films such as polyethylene terephthalate indium tin oxide (PET-ITO), polycarbonate, and cycloolefin polymer (see Matsumoto et al. [0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Belbruno and Tan et al. having various types of polymer film (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of reducing deterioration of appearance of the substrates from the effects of low pressure environments such as in high altitude regions, manufacture processes, and in aircraft (see Matsumoto et al., [0008]-[0010]).
The combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the polymer film comprises a cyclic olefin copolymer (COC).
However, in the analogous art of optochemical sensor, Fischer et al. teaches a first and second sensing layer configured to measure the concentration of a dissolved gas, and a temperature sensitive medium respectively. The sensing layers are immobilized on a transparent polymer matrix, which can include polystyrene film, cyclic olefin copolymers (COC) such as ethylene-norbornene copolymer, or cyclic olefin polymer (COP) (see Fischer et al., [0062]-[0063], Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the polymer films of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. to incorporate cyclic olefin copolymer as a polymer matrix (as taught by Fischer et al.), for the benefit of providing high mechanical strength thereby bringing stability to the optochemical sensitive element structure. Further, the polymer matrices are also very stable in withstanding acidic and basic cleaning processes, which results in a longer service life of the optochemical sensitive element (see Fischer et al., [0027]).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zyhowski et al. (US PG-Pub 20050042758 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Matsumoto et al. teaches a number of film materials used, including transparent conductive films (e.g., plastic films having an indium tin oxide layer (ITO) on the surface thereof), which preferably are ITO films such as polyethylene terephthalate indium tin oxide (PET-ITO), polycarbonate, and cycloolefin polymer (see Matsumoto et al. [0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Belbruno and Tan et al. having various types of polymer film (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of reducing deterioration of appearance of the substrates from the effects of low pressure environments such as in high altitude regions, manufacture processes, and in aircraft (see Matsumoto et al., [0008]-[0010]).
The combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the polymer film comprises poly(acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) (ABS).
However, in the analogous art of leak detection method using microencapsulated dye precursor, Zyhowski et al. teaches a method for detecting leaks of volatile organic compounds within closed systems, utilizing a microcapsule or film containing a dye precursor that is released when in contact with a target compound. The dye precursor may be integrated into a polymeric layer that displays some degree of solubility in a leaking compound, which can include acrylonitrile butadiene styrene and polyphenylene oxide (see Zyhowski et al., Abstract, [0011], [0091], [0108]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the polymer films of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. to incorporate the acrylonitrile butadiene styrene polymeric layer (as taught by Zyhowski et al.), for the benefit of having target compounds diffuse through the polymeric layer for ease of detection, and can also help prevent harm through early detection and allow for finer emission control (see Zyhowski et al., [0015]-[0017], [0085]).
Regarding claim 6, Matsumoto et al. teaches a number of film materials used, including transparent conductive films (e.g., plastic films having an indium tin oxide layer (ITO) on the surface thereof), which preferably are ITO films such as polyethylene terephthalate indium tin oxide (PET-ITO), polycarbonate, and cycloolefin polymer (see Matsumoto et al. [0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Belbruno and Tan et al. having various types of polymer film (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of reducing deterioration of appearance of the substrates from the effects of low pressure environments such as in high altitude regions, manufacture processes, and in aircraft (see Matsumoto et al., [0008]-[0010]).
The combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the polymer film comprises polyphenylene oxide (PPO).
However, in the analogous art of leak detection method using microencapsulated dye precursor, Zyhowski et al. teaches a method for detecting leaks of volatile organic compounds within closed systems, utilizing a microcapsule or film containing a dye precursor that is released when in contact with a target compound. The dye precursor may be integrated into a polymeric layer that displays some degree of solubility in a leaking compound, which can include acrylonitrile butadiene styrene and polyphenylene oxide (see Zyhowski et al., Abstract, [0011], [0091], [0108]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the polymer films of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. to incorporate the acrylonitrile butadiene styrene polymeric layer (as taught by Zyhowski et al.), for the benefit of having target compounds diffuse through the polymeric layer for ease of detection, and can also help prevent harm through early detection and allow for finer emission control (see Zyhowski et al., [0015]-[0017], [0085]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Asabe et al. (US PG-Pub 20080129193 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Matsumoto teaches the substrate composing an optical member, such as films, which can have a metal nanowire layer mesh-printed on the films (see Matsumoto et al., [0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Belbruno and Tan et al. by using printing methods for depositing metal mesh onto the polymer film (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of having a highly sensitive mesh film as an input device, while having low resistance (see Matsumoto et al., [0003]).
The combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein metal particles are used for printing.
However, in the analogous art of light emitting device and producing method thereof, Asabe et al. teaches a method of producing a light emitting device using an organic light emitting layer, the method including the steps of forming a transparent conductive polymer layer, and printing (using a method of inkjet printing) a solution in which metal particles are dispersed in a solvent in a mesh shape on the transparent conductive polymer layer so as to form a mesh-like metal layer on the transparent conductive polymer layer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the metal printing method of the combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. by incorporating the dispersal of metal particles in a mesh shape on the polymer film (as taught by Asabe et al.), for the benefit of decreasing production costs for using an inkjet printing method (see Asabe et al., [0006]).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Frey et al. (US PG-Pub 20080095988 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Matsumoto teaches the substrate composing an optical member, such as films, which can have a metal nanowire layer mesh-printed on the films (see Matsumoto et al., [0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Belbruno and Tan et al. by using printing methods for depositing metal mesh onto the polymer film (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of having a highly sensitive mesh film as an input device, while having low resistance (see Matsumoto et al., [0003]).
The combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the resistor mesh comprises metal traces deposited on the polymer film.
However, in the analogous art of methods of patterning a deposit metal on a polymeric substrate, Frey et al. teaches methods for applying a metal coating on a polymeric film substrate, which can include using evaporation, sputtering, chemical vapor deposition, or chemical solution deposition (including electroless plating). Functionalized molecules is taught to serve as a mask for deposition patterning, where deposit metal trace can be deposited selectively on the substrate's un-functionalized recessed regions to form a deposit metal pattern (see Frey et al., [0007]-[0008], [0018], [0033], [0050], [0057], Fig. 1A-1H). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for depositing a metal mesh layer onto a film from the combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. by incorporating depositing metal trace onto un-functionalized regions of a polymeric film substrate (as taught by Frey et al.), for the benefit of creating a conductive pattern in-situ by filling grooves (i.e. un-functionalized regions) with the inorganic material without the need for the expensive practice of manipulating delicate fine metal wires onto a substrate in creating a similar effect (see Frey et al. [0003]-[0007]).
Regarding claim 9, Matsumoto teaches the substrate composing an optical member, such as films, which can have a metal nanowire layer mesh-printed on the films (see Matsumoto et al., [0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Belbruno and Tan et al. by using printing methods for depositing metal mesh onto the polymer film (as taught by Matsumoto et al.), for the benefit of having a highly sensitive mesh film as an input device, while having low resistance (see Matsumoto et al., [0003]).
The combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. fails to teach wherein the metal traces are deposited on the polymer film by chemical vapor deposition through a mask.
However, Frey et al. teaches methods for applying a metal coating on a polymeric film substrate, which can include using evaporation, sputtering, chemical vapor deposition, or chemical solution deposition (including electroless plating). Functionalized molecules is taught to serve as a mask for deposition patterning, where deposit metal trace can be deposited selectively on the substrate's un-functionalized recessed regions to form a deposit metal pattern (see Frey et al., [0007]-[0008], [0018], [0033], [0050], [0057], Fig. 1A-1H). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method for depositing a metal mesh layer onto a film from the combination of Belbruno, Matsumoto et al., and Tan et al. by incorporating depositing metal trace onto un-functionalized regions of a polymeric film substrate using chemical vapor deposition (as taught by Frey et al.), for the benefit of creating a conductive pattern in-situ by filling grooves (i.e. un-functionalized regions) with the inorganic material without the need for the expensive practice of manipulating delicate fine metal wires onto a substrate in creating a similar effect (see Frey et al. [0003]-[0007]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tracy C Colena whose telephone number is (571)272-1625. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thus 8:00am-5:00pm.
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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at (571) 272-1254. 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.
/TRACY CHING-TIAN COLENA/Examiner, Art Unit 1797
/JENNIFER WECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797