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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in the bottom right corner of Figure 4, “4x x 26” appears to be a typographical error. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, Applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 4, line 2, “maya be” appears to be a typographical error. In paragraph 0014, the second and third lines involve an incomplete sentence. In paragraph 0017, fourth line, “oil” should read --coil--. On page 9, line 9, “silicon” should apparently be --silicone--; on line 14, “122”, second occurrence, should be --120--. On page 10, lines 7-8, the extra period (.) should be deleted. On page 17, line 5, reference character 426 is not shown in the drawings; on the last line of page 17, Applicant may want to replace “device” with --devices--. In paragraph 0066, third line, “and implementations” seems redundant. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 5 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1 at page 23, line 4, “oil” should read --coil--. In claim 5, line 6, “oil” should be --coil--. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bergmann, US 2018/0284890 A1, in view of Levesque et al., US 10,327,974 B2. Bergmann discloses a haptic perception system for a hand prosthesis (Figures 9, 15; paragraphs 0001, 0006-0008, 0029, 0036, 0056-0058), the system comprising pressure sensors attached to the hand prosthesis (paragraphs 0059-0060, 0092), passive magnetic tags configured to be embedded in a hypoderm tissue of a residual limb (paragraphs 0040, 0049, 0051, 0054-0055), electromagnetic coils configured to be attached onto residual limb skin and to urge the passive magnetic tags to move toward the EM coils upon activation of the coils (paragraphs 0038, 0062, 0066), and a processor configured to activate the EM coils responsive to pressures applied to the sensors (paragraphs 0006, 0042-0043, 0059-0060, 0066).
Bergmann lacks explicit mention of thresholds, but such were common in the art at the effective filing date of the present application, as seen from Levesque et al. (column 1, lines 53-56; column 10, lines 7-11). To incorporate pressure thresholds into the algorithm of Bergmann would have been obvious in order to adapt to different sensitivities among patients (Bergmann: paragraph 0042) and/or to lessen the effects of signal noise, as would have been understood by the ordinary practitioner, with further motivation (to combine) provided by the similarities in Levesque et al. as to “implantable haptic devices” (column 1, line 30; column 2, lines 53-65; column 8, lines 51-56), magnetic materials (column 3, lines 38-47; column 5, lines 32-38), and prosthetics (column 6, lines 27-31; column 8, lines 19-21). Regarding the stereognosis aspect (instant claim 2 at line 3), the size and spatial distribution of pressure applied to the prosthesis imparts information about the held or touched objects themselves (Bergmann: paragraphs 0059-0060).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if the minor error identified above is corrected.
Claims 3-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, provided the minor error in claim 5 is corrected.
The prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the combination of units and elements as set forth in claims 1 and 3.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
KR 10-2009-0121688 A (Kim): electromagnet 312 (Figures 2-3); pressure sensor system 110 and 310 (Figures 6-7); abstract.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David H. Willse, whose telephone number is 571-272-4762. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Melanie Tyson can be reached at telephone number 571-272-9062. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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.
/DAVID H WILLSE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774