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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 and its dependents are objected to because of the following informalities: the use of periods after the citation of a percentage range. For example the applicant writes “50 to 95%. of” in claim 1 wherein the period should not be present. This is repeated in the claim multiple times. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 1 and its dependents are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In particular, in the most recent response the applicant removed the word “weight” from the phrase “wherein the weight % is based on the total weight” leaving the “%” behind. Now the claims recites “wherein the % is based”. The problem is that several percentages were previously cited in the claim and it is not apparent which “%” that the applicant is referring to when the claim says “wherein the % is based”. The applicant may choose how to correct the issue themselves but for example the examiner might recommend to add the phrase “by weight of the composition” after each of the four percentage ranges listed in steps a-d. For example the claims would thereafter read “a) 50-95% by weight of the composition of a (meth)acrylate”. There are other possibilities for how this issue can be corrected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8-12 and 15 would likely be allowed if the claim objections and rejections cited above were properly corrected.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: it is not known in the prior art to form a stimulation electrode comprising an ionically conductive pressure sensitive adhesive composition comprising 50 to 95%. of a (meth)acrylate resin comprising at least 10% of a (meth)acrylate monomer comprising OH-group by weight of the total weight of the (meth)acrylate resin, wherein the content of said (meth)acrylate monomer comprising OH-group in said (meth)acrylate resin is at least 15% and no more than 50% by weight of the total weight of the (meth)acrylate resin, 1 to 35%. 4 to 25%. of an ionic liquid, 0.01 to 50% 1 to 20%. of a polyether polyol havinq a molecular weiqht of 380 to 420 q/mol and 1 to 20%. of a plurality of electrically conductive particles wherein the stimulation electrode is free of water and does not contain a hydrogel and wherein the weight % is based on the total weight of the ionically conductive pressure sensitive adhesive composition and wherein the ionically conductive pressure sensitive adhesive composition has an impedance value of 100 to 1,000,000 Ohm at 1000 Hz when measured by connectinq two electrodes coated each with 25 um havinq a contact area of 0.25 cm2 as in claim 1.
The most pertinent prior art previously cited as Gusakov et al. teaches the formation of transdermal patches using conductive electrode but is largely silent about properties present relating to impedance as current claims and does not comprise the exact composition of the current claims expected to provide said impedance.
Another pertinent prior art previously cited as Murnane et al. teaches the formation of transdermal patches but is largely unrelated to the problems solved by the current invention.
Another pertinent prior art previously cited as Hussan et al. teaches the formation ionic electro-gels but is largely unrelated to the problems solved by the current invention.
Another pertinent prior art previously cited as Naier et al. teaches the formation of electrodes but is largely unrelated to the problems solved by the current invention.
Another pertinent prior art previously cited as Versek et al. teaches the use of conductivity promoters as claimed but is largely unrelated to the problems solved by the current invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J BOWMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5342. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Sat 5:00AM-11:00AM.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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 J BOWMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights