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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1, drawn to a sensor arrangement of claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 12/16/25 is acknowledged.
Claim(s) 10-15 is/are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/16/25.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “in an at least substantially common plane” (lines 3-4) appears that it should be “in an at least a substantially common plane.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
For claim 1, the claim language “a plurality of foil-based sensor elements arranged as individual elements in an at least a substantially common plane formed by a carrier” is ambiguous. It is unclear how common the plane needs to be to be considered “substantially” common. The claim is examined as meaning “a plurality of foil-based sensor elements arranged as individual elements in an at least a common plane formed by a carrier.”
For claim 1, the claim language “corresponding to a number of sensor elements” is ambiguous. Claim 1 already recites “a plurality of foil-based sensor elements” and therefore it is unclear whether the same sensor elements or different sensor elements is being referred to. The claim is examined under the former interpretation.
For claim 4, the claim language “wherein the plurality of pad elements and the plurality of sensor elements are attached to each other at least partially or in sections” is ambiguous. It is unclear what is meany by the plurality of pad elements being attached to each other in sections. It appears that if they were attached to each other, that they would not be attached in sections, thereby contradicting itself. The claim is examined as meaning “wherein the plurality of pad elements and the plurality of sensor elements are attached to each other at least partially.”
Dependent claim(s) 2-9 fail to cure the ambiguity of independent claim 1, thus claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 10 2018 127320 to Volckers et al. (hereinafter “Volckers”).
For claim 1, Volckers discloses a sensor arrangement for detecting a force between a foot and a supporting surface (Abstract) (also see para [0012]), comprising:
a plurality of foil-based sensor elements (5) (Fig. 2) arranged as individual elements in an at least a substantially common plane formed by a carrier (4) (as can be seen in Fig. 2) (see para [0027]);
a plurality of pad elements (8) (Fig. 2), a number of the plurality of pad elements corresponding to a number of sensor elements (as can be seen in Fig. 2), and wherein the plurality of pad elements are arranged as individual elements in a manner that an area extension of a respective one of the plurality of pad elements at least partly overlaps with an area extension of a corresponding one of the plurality of sensor elements (as can be seen in Fig. 2) (also see para [0039] and [0044]).
For claim 2, Volckers further discloses wherein exactly one of the plurality of pad elements is assigned to exactly one of the number of sensor elements (as can be seen in Fig. 2).
For claim 3, Volckers further discloses wherein each of the plurality of sensor elements together with an assigned one of the plurality of pad elements is arranged to be free-standing with respect to the other of the plurality of sensor elements and their assigned pad elements (as can be seen in Fig. 2).
For claim 4, Volckers further discloses wherein the plurality of pad elements and the plurality of sensor elements are attached to each other at least partially or in sections (as can be seen in Fig. 2) (also see para [0044]).
For claim 5, Volckers further discloses wherein a respective one of the plurality of pad elements is applied on a side of the carrier facing the supporting surface (as can be seen in Fig. 2).
For claim 6, Volckers further discloses wherein a material of the plurality of pad elements has at least elastic or rubber elastic properties (para [0039]).
For claim 7, Volckers further discloses wherein the material of the plurality of pad elements has a shore A hardness in a range of 10 to 60 (para [0039], which discloses that the pad elements may be made of silicone rubber, which has a shore A hardness between 45 and 551).
For claim 8, Volckers further discloses wherein a total number of the plurality of sensor elements or the plurality of pad elements is between 3 and 30 (see Figs. 1-2, which shows 15).
For claim 9, Volckers further discloses wherein the carrier is formed by at least one foil (para [0027]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL LEE CERIONI whose telephone number is (313) 446-4818. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM PT.
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 Robertson can be reached at (571) 272-5001. 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.
/DANIEL L CERIONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
1 See claim 13 of U.S. Patent Application No. 10,335,056 to Seitz et al.
Prosecution Insights