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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 30, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, as previously made of record, “it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the connection of the controller to the flexible circuit and fabric structure of Mueller et al. to include a rivet connection as disclosed by Yu in order to provide the predictable results of ensuring physical engagement and electrical connection between the layers. Furthermore, modifying the adhesion means for the controller to the fabric structure and flexible circuit is mere optimization of manufacturing in order to ensure sufficient physical and electrical connection between the components while the device is disposed on the patient”.
Additionally, the Applicant argues that “Mueller’s and Yu’s fasteners perform only one function: to establish a mechanical connection” (page 7 of Remarks/Arguments). However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Yu et al. discloses “Referring to FIG. 2, the conductive buttons 12 to which the second ends of the conductive strips 1 are connected each comprises a female piece 12a and a male piece 12b. Each pair of a female piece 12a and a male piece 12b is rivet-jointed so that the corresponding conductive strip 1 is sandwiched by them and thus secured within the binding cloth 10. The conductive buttons 12, concentrated on a selected location of the binding cloth 10 and uncovered by the cloth, can be buckled up with a plurality of corresponding conductive buttons 21 (as shown in FIG. 3) so as to mount the electro-stimulating controller 2 to the binding cloth 10 (as shown in FIG. 4)” ([0022]). Therefore, Yu et al. does in fact disclose establishing electrical and mechanical connection as seen in Figure 2 as well as Figures 1 and 5. Therefore, for the reasons stated above and previously made of record, the Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the claims remain rejected under Mueller et al. in view of Yu et al. as detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mueller et al. (20100042180 A1) in view of Yu (US 20050055054 A1).
As to claim 1, Mueller et al. discloses a wearable neurostimulator (electrical stimulation device, depicted as 20 in Figures 1-5, 7A, 14A-14C; Abstract) comprising: a fabric structure (stretch layer, depicted as 1130 in Figure 14B; [0074]); a flexible circuit (flexible circuit board, depicted as 116 in Figures 14A-14C; [0071-0074]) printed on the fabric structure with exposed electrically conductive portions (Figures 14A-14C; [0072-0074]); a rigid printed circuit board (PCB) comprising a PCB circuit (depicted as 76 in Figure 9; [0066, 0071]) and exposed electrically conductive portions ([0066, 0071]). Mueller et al. additionally discloses a rivet (barb rivet, depicted as 78 in Figure 9; [0066]) that comprises a shank (Figure 9) that extends through the PCB (Figure 9; [0066]).
Mueller et al. discloses the controller, which houses the PCB ([0066, 0071]; rivet is disposed through PCB in Figure 9), has a mounting point ([0072]) and is mounted to the flexible circuit (flexible circuit board) and fabric structure (stretch layer) by adhesive ([0074]). Mueller et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed with a rivet engaging with the PCB and the controller, which houses the PCB, being connected to the flexible circuit and fabric structure ([0074]), but does not explicitly disclose the rivet is used to connect the controller and PCB to the flexible circuit and fabric structure. Yu discloses a controller that is connected to a fabric structure and flexible circuitry via a rivet connection (Figures 1-2 and 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the connection of the controller to the flexible circuit and fabric structure of Mueller et al. to include a rivet connection as disclosed by Yu in order to provide the predictable results of ensuring physical engagement and electrical connection between the layers. Furthermore, modifying the adhesion means for the controller to the fabric structure and flexible circuit is mere optimization of manufacturing in order to ensure sufficient physical and electrical connection between the components while the device is disposed on the patient.
As to claim 2, the modified Mueller et al. discloses the PCB and the fabric structure are positioned so that the conductive portions of the flexible circuit and PCB circuit are positioned in engagement with each other (Yu, Figures 1-2 and 5), the rivet applying a clamping force to the PCB (Mueller, Figure 9) and the Fabric structure that maintains their contact.
As to claim 3, the modified Mueller et al. discloses the rivet is constructed of an electrically conductive material and helps conduct electricity from the conductive portions of the flexible circuit to the conductive portions of the PCB circuit (Yu, conductive buttons depicted as 12 in Figure 1 and 5).
As to claim 4, the modified Mueller et al. discloses the rivet is a double sided rivet comprising a central conductive flange (Mueller et al., Figure 9) positioned between the PCB and the fabric structure, the flange engaging the conductive portions on the PCB circuit and the conductive portions on the flexible circuit.
As to claim 5, the modified Mueller et al. discloses a conductive spacer fitted onto the rivet shank between the PCB and the fabric structure (Yu, Figure 5, male piece depicted as 12b; [0027]), the spacer engaging the conductive portions of the flexible circuit and the conductive portions of the PCB circuit.
As to claim 6, the modified Mueller et al. discloses the spacer comprises a waved spacer (Yu, Figure 5, male piece depicted as 12b; [0027]) comprising a series of radially extending waves that engage the conductive portions of the flexible circuit and the conductive portions of the PCB circuit, wherein the waves are configured to deform when the rivet is applied, the waves urging a resilient compressive force on the adjacent portions of the fabric and the PCB to help maintain electrical contact between the conductive portions of the flexible circuit and the conductive portions of the PCB circuit (Yu, Figure 5, male piece depicted as 12b is compressively fit with the female piece depicted as 12a as part of the rivet shank; [0027]).
As to claim 7, the modified Mueller et al. discloses a housing (control module) for supporting the PCB and the fabric structure relative to each other and a rivet but does not explicitly disclose a pogo assembly comprising a pogo pin mounted in the pogo housing and spring biased out of the housing for engagement with the rivet. Spring mounted connections, or pogo assemblies, are well known connection and engagement means in the mechanical art. As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the housing and rivet connection of the modified Mueller et al. to include a pogo assembly in order to provide a predictable result of ensuring sufficient engagement and anchoring of the system.
As to claim 8, the modified Mueller et al. discloses the conductive portion of the PCB circuit comprises one or more conductive vias exposed on a sidewall of a through hole of the PCB through which the rivet shank extends (Mueller et al., Figure 9; Yu, Figure 5).
As to claim 9, the modified Mueller et al. discloses the conductive portion of the PCB circuit comprises a plated through hole of the PCB through which the rivet shank extends (Mueller et al., Figure 9).
As to claim 10, the modified Mueller et al. discloses the conductive portion of the PCB circuit comprises a pad (center snap, depicted as 80 in Figure 9 of Mueller et al.) surrounding a through hole of the PCB through which the rivet shank extends (also see Yu, Figures 3-5 and 8).
As to claim 11, the modified Mueller et al. discloses the PCB comprises a through hole through which the rivet shank extends (Mueller et al., Figure 9), wherein the PCB circuit comprises a pad surrounding the through hole on an upper surface of the PCB, a pad surrounding the through hole on a lower surface of the PCB (center snap, depicted as 80 in Figure 9 of Mueller et al.), and a side wall of the through hole that is plated with a conductive material and that is electrically continuous with the pads on both the upper and lower surfaces of the PCB (Yu, Figures 3-5 and 8).
As to claim 12, the modified Mueller et al. disclose the rivet mechanically connects the PCB to the fabric structure (Yu et al, [0022]; Referring to FIG. 2, the conductive buttons 12 to which the second ends of the conductive strips 1 are connected each comprises a female piece 12a and a male piece 12b. Each pair of a female piece 12a and a male piece 12b is rivet-jointed so that the corresponding conductive strip 1 is sandwiched by them and thus secured within the binding cloth 10. The conductive buttons 12, concentrated on a selected location of the binding cloth 10 and uncovered by the cloth, can be buckled up with a plurality of corresponding conductive buttons 21 (as shown in FIG. 3) so as to mount the electro-stimulating controller 2 to the binding cloth 10 (as shown in FIG. 4)” [0022]).
Conclusion
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 ALYSSA M ALTER whose telephone number is (571)272-4939. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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, David E Hamaoui can be reached at (571) 270-5625. 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.
/ALYSSA M ALTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796