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
With the response filed 6/8/2026 Applicant added new claims 21 and 22, which are drawn to distinct species of sensors, adding to the search and examination burden. For purposes of compact prosecution, an election of species is not being required at this time. However, if additional species are later added, the examiner may subsequently require an election of species. See MPEP 818.02(b).
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 3 and 4 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 claim 3, the phrase “a first group consisting of at least” renders the claim indefinite, because the term “consisting of” is a closed term, whereas “at least” modifies “consisting of” to become the equivalent of comprising, i.e. the language is open-ended. Therefore, it is unclear what other possible ranges are encompassed within the first group.
Similarly, in claim 4, the phrase “a second group consisting of at least” renders the claim indefinite, because the term “consisting of” is a closed term, whereas “at least” modifies “consisting of” to become the equivalent of comprising, i.e. the language is open-ended. Therefore, it is unclear what other possible ranges are encompassed within the second group.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (CN114143924A).
Liu discloses the claimed invention as follows (limitations not disclosed are crossed out, below):
Claim 1. A method of producing a textile sensor, the method comprising:
obtaining an organic fabric ([n0016]);
selecting a particular carbonization process from a plurality of carbonization processes1 based on a type of the textile sensor, wherein each carbonization process comprises a corresponding activation temperature (i.e., carbonization temperature; see “800-1200°C” in [n0017]), an activation time period (i.e., holding time; see “1-2h” in [n0017]), a ramp-up time period (implicitly understood to be the change in temperature from ambient to the selected carbonization temperature, divided by the selected heating rate),
carbonizing the organic fabric (step 1 in [n0010]) to produce a conductive textile substrate suitable for integration into the textile sensor, based on the selected carbonization process (see footnote 1 above), by applying heat (see [n0017]) to the organic fabric in an inert environment (see “nitrogen or argon” in [n0017]) to form a conductive fabric having a conductivity corresponding to the type of the textile sensor (clearly, the particular materials are selected for the particular product being made, thereby resulting in a conductive fabric having a conductivity corresponding to the type of the textile sensor); and
attaching one or more electrical terminals (“two electrodes” in [n0014], [n0015] and [n0023]) to the conductive fabric.
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein applying the heat to the organic fabric comprises maintaining the organic fabric in an inert environment having at least a specified temperature for at least a specified time period. See [n0017].
Claim 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the activation temperature of the selected carbonization process is selected from a first group consisting of at least 450 °C or greater, 600 °C or greater, 750 °C or greater, or 900 °C or greater. See “800-1200°C” in [n0017].
Claim 4. The method of claim 2, wherein the activation time period of the selected carbonization process is selected from a second group consisting of at least thirty minutes or greater, sixty minutes or greater, a hundred minutes or greater, or a hundred twenty minutes or greater. See “1-2h” in [n0017].
Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the organic fabric comprises knitting or weaving at least one yarn of degradable organic fiber into a sheet. See “woven fabric” and “knitted fabric” in [n0016], which, clearly, require weaving, respectively knitting, of yarn.
Claim 7. The method of claim 1, comprising coating the conductive fabric with a polymeric encapsulating material (see step 2 in [n0011]) comprising at least one of Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), natural rubber latex (NRL), and chitosan. See “polydimethylsiloxane” in [n0018].
Claim 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the textile sensor comprises at least one of a pressure sensor, a proximity sensor, a touch sensor, a strain sensor, a wind sensor, a temperature sensor, a heating element, a triboelectric sensor, and an energy harvester. See [n0009].
Liu does not explicitly require a ramp-down time period. However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious that, after a heat treatment, a workpiece must cool down, and would have found it obvious to determine a suitable/desirable ramp-down time for each possible carbonization process (see footnote 1, above), to ensure fastest throughput, without negatively affecting the quality/properties of the carbonized fabric.
Regarding claim 6, Liu discloses the claimed invention, but does not specifically disclose the organic fabric being organic waste fabric.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to source suitable fabric from any available source, such as, for example, waste fabric, for example to take advantage of lower cost and to put to use a material that would otherwise be thrown away. This limitation is not deemed to patentably define over the prior art, as selecting from among available materials would require only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Swiatek (US2014/0353300A1).
Liu further discloses the claimed invention as follows (limitations not disclosed are crossed out, below):
Claim 8. The method of claim 1, wherein each of the one or more electrical terminals comprises a snap connector or a conductive thread (the terminal is considered to include the electrode and the carbonized thread(s) of the fabric, where the electrode is attached), the method comprising, for each of the one or more electrical terminals: connecting a first end of a flexible conductor (wire) to the electrical terminal; and
Swiatek discloses various heated clothing articles 22, comprising heating elements. A first printed circuit board 50 is disposed in the inside chamber of the enclosure. A plurality of output drivers 28 are attached to a printed circuit board 50 and are electrically connected to the heated clothing articles 22 for providing power to the heated clothing articles 22 through the wiring connectors 26. The output drivers 28 also detect an electrical connection to the heated clothing articles 22. A Bluetooth transceiver 54 is attached to the printed circuit board 50 and is electrically connected to a microcontroller 52 for wireless communication with Bluetooth or equivalent enabled personal electronic equipment 32 to adjust settings and monitor operation of the automated local thermal management system 20.
In view of the teachings of Swaitek, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to connect the flexible conductor to a wireless interface printed circuit board, as part of electrically heated clothing (see [n0043] of Liu), in order to allow a user to adjust settings and monitor operation of the device.
Claim(s) 21 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadokami (JP2004051909A).
Kadokami discloses the claimed invention as follows (refer to [0039]; limitations not disclosed are crossed out, below):
Claim 21. (limitations from claim 1) A method of producing a textile sensor, the method comprising:
obtaining an organic fabric (cotton sheet in [0039]; also see [0025]);
selecting a particular carbonization process from a plurality of carbonization processes2 based on a type of the textile sensor, wherein each carbonization process comprises a corresponding activation temperature (800 °C), an activation time period (5 hours),
carbonizing the organic fabric (see generally [0023] and see “carbonized cotton sheet (obtained by baking the bleached cotton)” in [0039]) to produce a conductive textile substrate suitable for integration into the textile sensor, based on the selected carbonization process, by applying heat to the organic fabric in an inert environment (“nitrogen atmosphere” in [0039]) to form a conductive fabric having a conductivity (see 1200 Ω in [0039]) corresponding to the type of the textile sensor; and
attaching one or more electrical terminals (“electrodes” in [0039]) to the conductive fabric.
(limitations from claim 9) The method of claim 1, wherein the textile sensor comprises at least one of a pressure sensor (see [0039]), a proximity sensor, a touch sensor (a pressure sensor can act as a touch sensor), a strain sensor, a wind sensor, a temperature sensor, a heating element, a triboelectric sensor, and an energy harvester.
(claim 21 per se) wherein the textile sensor comprises at least one of proximity sensor and a touch sensor, .
Claim 22. (limitations from claim 1) A method of producing a textile sensor, the method comprising:
obtaining an organic fabric (cotton sheet in [0039]; also see [0025]);
selecting a particular carbonization process from a plurality of carbonization processes (see footnote 2, above) based on a type of the textile sensor, wherein each carbonization process comprises a corresponding activation temperature (800 °C), an activation time period (5 hours),
carbonizing the organic fabric (see generally [0023] and see “carbonized cotton sheet (obtained by baking the bleached cotton)” in [0039]) to produce a conductive textile substrate suitable for integration into the textile sensor, based on the selected carbonization process, by applying heat to the organic fabric in an inert environment (“nitrogen atmosphere” in [0039]) to form a conductive fabric having a conductivity (see 1200 Ω in [0039]) corresponding to the type of the textile sensor; and
attaching one or more electrical terminals (“electrodes” in [0039]) to the conductive fabric.
(limitations from claim 9) The method of claim 1, wherein the textile sensor comprises at least one of a pressure sensor (see [0039]), a proximity sensor, a touch sensor (a pressure sensor can act as a touch sensor), a strain sensor, a wind sensor, a temperature sensor, a heating element, a triboelectric sensor, and an energy harvester.
(claim 22 per se) wherein the textile sensor comprises at least one of the strain sensor and the pressure sensor (see [0039]), and wherein the conductive fabric has a resistance in a range of kilohms (1200 Ω = 1.2 kΩ) to megohms
Kadokami does not explicitly mention a ramp-up time period with respect to the embodiment of [0039]. However, in claim 7 Kadokami mentions a rate of temperature rise of 50 to 200 °C per hour. Claim 13, which is related to manufacturing a pressure sensor (see also claim 14), depends upon any one of claims 1 to 12. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to select a temperature rise in the 50 to 200 °C per hour range as suitable for producing the sensor, since Kadokami suggests this range to be suitable for use with the disclosed process. Kadokami does not explicitly require a ramp-down time period. However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious that, after a heat treatment, a workpiece must cool down, and would have found it obvious to determine a suitable/desirable ramp-down time for each possible carbonization process (see footnote 2, above), to ensure fastest throughput, without negatively affecting the quality/properties of the carbonized fabric.
Regarding claim 21, although Kadokami discloses a temperature of 800 °C, it is also understood from Kadokami that resistance decreases with increasing carbonization temperature. See [0037] and Table 1. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to, alternatively, obtain a sensor having the same 1200 Ω resistance by increasing the temperature to 900 °C (within the disclosed 700 to 1200 °C range), but reducing the width of the strip, such that the total resistance is the same, thereby obtaining a narrower sensor, suitable for applications requiring reduced sensor width.
Regarding claim 22, although Kadokami discloses a temperature of 800 °C, it is also understood from Kadokami that resistance increases with decreasing carbonization temperature. See [0037] and Table 1. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to, alternatively, obtain a sensor having the same 1200 Ω resistance by decreasing the temperature to 750 °C (within the disclosed 700 to 1200 °C range), but reducing the length of the strip, such that the total resistance is the same, thereby obtaining a shorter sensor, suitable for applications requiring reduced sensor length.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments regarding the newly-added limitations have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the cited references do not teach or suggest the added limitations.
The examiner respectfully submits that Liu teaches various possible types of fabric (see [n0016], and ranges of values for various process parameters (see [n0017]). It is readily apparent that a selection of the suitable carbonization temperature, hold time and heating rate is akin to selecting a particular carbonization process from a plurality of possible carbonization processes. With respect to ramp-down time, it is deemed obvious that a workpiece subjected to a heat treatment must also cool down. Selecting a suitable ramp-down time would have been obvious, as discussed in more detail above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: CN 110715757 A discloses a pressure sensor making use of carbonized fabric.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIVIUS R CAZAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday noon-8:30 pm ET.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/LIVIUS R. CAZAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
1 Liu teaches various possible types of fabric (see [n0016], and ranges of values for various process parameters (see m0017]). It is readily apparent that a selection of the suitable carbonization temperature, hold time and heating rate is akin to selecting a particular carbonization process from a plurality of possible carbonization processes.
2 Kadokami teaches various possible types of fabric (see [0025]), and describes how electrical resistance varies with temperature ([0037]), how resistance varies with pressure ([0039]), changes in resistance due to temperature change ([0041]), heat generation temperature due to energization ([0044]-[0046]) and others. Kadokami also mentions a temperature rise time of 50 to 200 °C per hour and hold time of 2 to 8 hours (see [0017]) and carbonization temperature of 700 to 1200 °C ([0023]). It is readily apparent that a selection of the suitable carbonization temperature, hold time and heating rate is akin to selecting a particular carbonization process from a plurality of possible carbonization processes.
Prosecution Insights