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 .
Response to Amendment
1. Applicant’s amendments and accompanying remarks filed 12/4/25 have been fully considered and entered. Claims 1, 5, 10, 18, 19 and 20 have been amended as requested. Applicant’s amendments are found sufficient to overcome the 112 2nd paragraph rejections set forth in the Non-Final Action dated 9/8/25. As such, these rejections are hereby withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments are also found sufficient to overcome the 102/103 rejections made over the cited prior art of Sotzing et al., US 20120224247. Specifically, the prior art of Sotzing et al., does not teach a photothermal textile without the use of photovoltaics. As such, this rejection is hereby withdrawn. However, upon further consideration the following new ground of rejection is set forth herein below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. Claim(s) 1, 5-9, 11-13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dual-Shell Photothermoelectric Textile Based on a PPy Photothermal Layer for Solar Thermal Energy Harvesting
Xuefei Zhang, Ting-Ting Li, Hai-Tao Ren, Hao-Kai Peng, Bing-Chiuan Shiu, Yanting Wang, Ching-Wen Lou, and Jia-Horng Lin ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020 12 (49), 55072-55082.
The cited NPL reference teach a photoelectric textile comprising a non-woven textile layer (e.g., transmissive layer) made of polypropylene and a coating comprising PEDOT (Poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) -PPy (Polypyrrole) (e.g., photothermal absorbing layer) (see abstract). The cited NPL reference teach that the PPy is tailored to achieve high temperature and photo-thermoelectric effects. The PPy layer can significantly increase the photothermal conversion efficiencies of as-prepared fabric (see abstract). The Examiner is of the position that the coated textile described in the NPL meets the limitation of the claimed photo-thermal textile comprising a photo-absorbing layer (e.g., Poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) -PPy (Polypyrrole). PEDOT and PPy are known to absorb light and covert to heat. The published NPL reference teach that when the IR light is on, the uncovered section (heat end) of PP-PEDOT and PP-PEDOT-PPy can absorb light quickly and convert light energy into heat. It appears that the coated fabric does not rely on connected devices to generate thermal or electrical energy (section 3.3). The flexible harvester is portable and able to wrap around the human body, as shown in Figure 6. The flexible photo-thermoelectric stripe has multiple applications. Under sunlight, it can be powered by solar energy; light radiation is absorbed and then heat flows ran from the surface of the stripe to the bottom near the body, as shown in Figure 6e (section 3.4).
With regard to emissivity of claims 1, 5-7 and 11-13 absent any further distinguishing limitations, the Examiner is of the position that the textile of the NPL reference would exhibit the claimed emissivity. The cited NPL reference teach the claimed polypropylene textile. It is expected that such a textile would scatter visible having the claimed emissivity.
With regard to claim 20, the cited NPL reference does not teach the vapor film deposition of the conjugated polymer, however, absent unexpected results it is the position of the Examiner that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that vapor film depiction can be used as an alternative to other coating methods; such a process would be within the skill of an ordinary person in the art and selected based on desired film properties, substrate materials, cost and/or environmental considerations. Applicants are invited to prove otherwise.
In summary, a flexible and portable dual-shell photo-thermoelectric fabric was fabricated successfully by performing a two-step in situ polymerization, in which the PEDOT:Tos was applied as the thermoelectric layer and the PPy was used as the photothermal layer. The photothermal properties, thermoelectric properties, and photo-thermoelectric performances of PP-PEDOT were improved by coating it with PPy, which contribute to a higher temperature under sunlight. The PPy layer was also contributed to the generated voltage output of the resultant fabrics (see section 4-conclussions).
4. Claim(s) 2-4, 10 and 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Dual-Shell Photo-thermoelectric Textile Based on a PPy Photothermal Layer for Solar Thermal Energy Harvesting
Xuefei Zhang, Ting-Ting Li, Hai-Tao Ren, Hao-Kai Peng, Bing-Chiuan Shiu, Yanting Wang, Ching-Wen Lou, and Jia-Horng Lin ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020 12 (49), 55072-55082 as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Sotzing et al., US 20120224247.
The cited NPL reference is cited above. The NPL reference fails to the teach the limitations regarding the structure of the fabric, the fabric type and/or the size of the fibers.
The published patent application issued to Sotzing et al., teach a fabric composite comprising a nylon fabric layer (woven or non-woven) that has been coated with an electrochromic conjugated polymer such as PEDOT (title, abstract, figure 2, figure 5, paragraphs 0061-0062,0072, 0084, 0094, 0096, 0099, 0108). Non-woven fabrics inherently have fibers that are disorganized (e.g., randomly oriented). Said electrochromic coating has thickness ranging from .1-10 micrometers (0060). Based on this disclosure, this Examiner is of the position that the nylon fabric layer coated with PEDOT is sufficient to meet the claimed photo-thermal absorbing layer and transmissive layers as set forth in claims 1-4 and 19-20. Sotzing et al., teach a multi-layer structure (figures 5, 8 and 9). Figure 5 illustrates the PEDOT coating layer (e.g., functionally equivalent to the claimed photothermal absorbing layer of a conjugated polymer) and a conductive fabric layer (e.g., functionally equivalent to a transmissive layer comprising fibers) of claim 1. Sotzing et al., does not specifically teach forming a spun-bond polypropylene non-woven as set forth in claim 9, but does teach that the conductive fabric layer can be a non-woven made with polyethylene fibers (paragraph 0062). A spun-bond non-woven is known non-woven structure type and polyethylene is known alternative to polypropylene since they are both polyolefin type polymers. Absent unexpected results the Examiner is of the position that a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the conductive fabrics can be made via a known method such as spun-bonding and that polypropylene (a known alternative to polyethylene) can be used as the fiber forming polymer. Applicants are invited to prove otherwise. With regard to claims 14-15, said fibers have a diameter ranging from 2nm to 2cm (paragraph 0059). With regard to claims 10 and 18, the second fabric also comprises an electrochromic coating and thus meets the limitation of a transmissive layer comprising one or more layers. With regard to the claimed “baffled structure”, the Examiner is of the position that depending on the desired/surface properties end use it would be within the skill of a worker in the art to use a baffle textile structure. The selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 199, 125 USPQ 416, 418 (CCPA 1960). With regard to claim 19, said composite is flexible and used to form stretchable electronic devices such as garments (title, abstract and 0092).
Based on the combination of teachings a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the coated fabric cited in the NPL can be modified (e.g., nylon, fiber size, number of fabric layers) using the teachings of Sotzing et al. Motivation is found in the desire to form a specific garment or article for a specific use. Applicants are invited to prove otherse.
5. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Dual-Shell Photothermoelectric Textile Based on a PPy Photothermal Layer for Solar Thermal Energy Harvesting Xuefei Zhang, Ting-Ting Li, Hai-Tao Ren, Hao-Kai Peng, Bing-Chiuan Shiu, Yanting Wang, Ching-Wen Lou, and Jia-Horng Lin ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020 12 (49), 55072-55082 in view of Sotzing et al., US 20120224247 as applied to claim 1 and further in view of CN 105040469 A.
The modified cited NPL reference does not teach adding a phase change material the conjugated polymer PEDOT-PPy coating (e.g., photo thermal absorbing layer).
The published CN document teaching a military stealth fabric coated with a composition comprising a phase change material. Said coating exhibits low-emissivity surface and uneven emission characteristics that form good thermal infrared stealth disguise (see translated document). It would be obvious to form the PEDOT-PPy coating of the modified NPL reference with phase change materials as taught by the published CN document for the purpose of providing a stretch fabric garment having good thermal infrared stealth disguise (e.g., camouflage).
6. Claim(s) 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious Dual-Shell Photothermoelectric Textile Based on a PPy Photothermal Layer for Solar Thermal Energy Harvesting Xuefei Zhang, Ting-Ting Li, Hai-Tao Ren, Hao-Kai Peng, Bing-Chiuan Shiu, Yanting Wang, Ching-Wen Lou, and Jia-Horng Lin ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020 12 (49), 55072-55082 in view of Sotzing et al., US 20120224247 as applied to claim 1 and further in view of CN 110484980 A.
Modified NPL reference does not teach the claimed polyethylene glycol -1000.
The published CN document teach forming a composite warmth retention fabric comprising a phase change material (abstract and title). Said phase change material is disclosed as polyethylene glycol (see translated document). The published CN document teach that polyethylene glycol (PEG) is non-toxic, the contact will not generate any side effect, non-irritant, has good water solubility, and has good compatibility with many organic components, at normal temperature can be obtained by amorphous to the transition of the crystalline phase change enthalpy of larger, and in the form of latent heat absorption, storage and release can be used as phase change energy storing function group (see translated document). Therefore, motivated by the desire to form a warmth retention fabric it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to form the PEDOT-PPy coating of the modified NPL reference with polyethylene glycol phase change material as taught by the published CN document. The published CN document does not specifically teach the claimed PEG-1000, however, absent unexpected results it is expected that the PEG phase change material taught by the CN document is the functional equivalent to the claimed PEG-1000 based on the disclosed phase changing properties. Applicants are invited to prove otherwise.
Conclusion
7. 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 LYNDA SALVATORE whose telephone number is (571)272-1482. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/LYNDA SALVATORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights