DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on April 1, 2026 has been entered.
This action is pursuant to the claims filed on April 1, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending. A complete action on the merits of claims 1-20 is as follows.
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 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.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King et al. (hereinafter ‘King’, U.S. PGPub. No. 2020/0323491), and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (hereinafter ‘Hatakeyama’, U.S. PGPub. No. 2019/0387990).
In regards to independent claim 1 and dependent claim 8, King discloses an electronic garment (a wearable garment with integrated electrodes and conductive traces in Fig. 1A, [0035]; embodiment of Figs. 9 and 10) comprising:
an elastic textile garment (textile garment 100 in Fig. 1A) configured to be worn on anatomy of an associated wearer ([0036]: the garment is constructed of a single textile layer to be worn directly against the skin), the elastic textile garment comprising an elastic textile and having an inner surface arranged to contact the anatomy when the elastic textile garment is worn on the anatomy ([0036]: garment 100 is knitted from a regular electrically inert material 100 (e.g., an insulator material, such as cotton, wool, or polyester), note that the woven arrangement of cotton, wool or polyester to provide for an stretchable/elastic garment 100);
an electrode (textile electrodes 130) secured to the inner surface of the elastic textile garment ([0036]: the knitted electrodes 130 are knitted directly into the inner surface of the garment 100), each electrode including:
an electrically exposed portion of an insulated electrically conductive thread sewn onto or into the elastic textile garment ([0057]: the conductive wire 220 of a hybrid yarn 200 in a conductive trace 120 as shown in Figs. 9 and 10 is connected to the textile electrode region 130 via an exposed uncoated conductive wire 220’; to enhance the electrical connection, an electrical contact 1370 which is integral to the inner surface of the garment 110, as best shown in Fig. 10, is used. The electrical contact can include uninsulated conductive yarn);
an insulator on an outer surface of the elastic textile garment defining a backside of the electrode ([0057]: Fig. 10 illustrates an outer film layer 1340, surrounding the reservoir material 1350 and textile electrode region 130 to define the backside of the electrode region 1302 and extending through the garment 100 (e.g. material 110) to the inner side of the garment to encapsulate the electrode region 130 and the reservoir material 1350 to provide a water-proof barrier against the user’s skin 1301).
However, King fails to disclose an electrically conductive polymer electrode material disposed on the electric textile garment over the electrically exposed portion of [the] insulated electrically conductive thread.
Hatakeyama teaches an electrically conductive polymer electrode material (a living body contact layer 3 in Fig. 1) disposed on a mesh-form of woven metal wires (an electrode conductive substrate 2 in Fig. 1; [0123]: the living body contact layer 3 formed on the electro-conductive base material 2) so that the electrically conductive polymer electrode material is in contact with a living body when in use ([0130]). Generally, Hatakeyama discloses that the electrically conductive polymer electrode material comprises an interconnected elastomeric network of mixed ionic-electronic conducting material or a mixture of an conductor and an ionic conductor ([0123]: the living body contact layer 3 is composed of a cured material of the inventive bio-electrode composition; [0071]-[0072], [0111]: the bio-electrode composition contains component A, silicone bonded to a sulfonimide salt as an ionic material (salt), component B, adhesive resin, component C, electro-conductive powder, and additives; [0112]: component C can include carbon nanotube; note that other ionic liquid can also be ). Hatakeyama explains that the electrically conductive polymer electrode material provides excellent electric conductivity, biocompatibility, stretchability, adhesion to the skin compared to a single conductive mesh layer as the electrode ([0052]-[0054]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the knitted electrodes of King and incorporate the electrically conductive polymer electrode material as taught by Hatakeyama, thereby arriving at the claimed invention. Doing so provides excellent electric conductivity, biocompatibility, stretchability, adhesion to the skin compared to a single conductive mesh layer as the electrode ([0052]-[0054]). Note that by disposing the electrically conductive polymer electrode material of Hatekayama along the electrode of King, the electrically conductive polymer electrode material is also disposed on the garment and the insulated electrically conductive thread of King since the two garment and the insulated electrically conductive thread are disposed below the electrode.
In regards to claim 2, King further discloses wherein each electrode further includes: a flexible electrically conductive layer separate from the insulated electrically conductive thread, sewn onto the inner surface of the elastic textile garment ([0036]: the knitted electrode 130 is knitted from a conductive yarn, such as a silver coated polyester), the electrically exposed portion of the insulated electrically conductive thread being electrically connected with the flexible electrically conductive layer ([0052]-[0053]: the electrical contact 1370 is made between the textile electrode 130 and the conductive wires 220 of a conductive trace 120 as shown in exemplary Fig. 7; note that the conductive wire 220 is ‘a bare conductive wire’ exposed in the portion of the knitted extension 121 of the trace 120 which is shown in the process of making steps in Fig. 12B, [0047], [0061]).
In regards to claim 3, King further discloses wherein the flexible electrically conductive layers of the electrodes are electrically conductive meshes (the knitted textile electrode region 130 is inherently an electrically conductive mesh because there are gaps formed by the woven nature of the knitted electrode region).
In regards to claim 4, King further discloses wherein the flexible electrically conductive meshes comprise metal meshes or carbon nanotube fiber textile meshes ([0037]: the textile electrodes 130 may be knitted or otherwise constructed with a conductive wire, such as silver or copper wire or a nonconductive yarn (e.g., nylon, polyester, cotton, or wool) coated with a conductive material such as silver or copper).
In regards to claim 5, King further discloses wherein each flexible electrically conductive layer is capable of a full 180° fold back upon itself (the garment 100 is capable of being fully folded in any direction, therefore, the textile electrodes 130 can also be folded or bent as claimed).
In regards to claim 7, King further discloses wherein the electrically conductive thread of each electrode (conductive trace 120 formed from a hybrid yarn 200 as shown in Figs. 1A-1B and Fig. 2B) comprises: an electrically conductive core of each electrode comprises: an electrically conductive core ([0042]: the hybrid yarn 200 is formed from twisting two strands of copper-clad stainless steel or copper, a 50 micron conductive wire which is coated with polyurethane and nonconductive yarns 122; note that the copper-class stainless steel or copper wires and the conductive wire are electrically conductive and as these twist along the longitudinal direction, form the core at certain locations along the longitudinal direction of the hybrid yarn 200 ); and an electrically insulating coating that coats the electrically conductive core ([0042]: the 50 micron conductive wire comprises a polyurethane coating); wherein the electrically exposed portion of the electrically conductive thread comprises a stripped end of the electrically conductive thread ([0044]: the hybrid yarn 200 are laser ablated or burned to remove the polyurethane coating of the conductive wire 220 and the nonconductive yarn 210).
In regards to claim 9, the examiner notes that the claim is broad since the MIEC material of Hatekeyama (a living body contact layer 3 in Fig. 1) can be divided into arbitrary regions, and these arbitrary regions are disposed along the electrode (base material 2).
In regards to independent claim 17 and dependent claim 18, King discloses a method of manufacturing an electronic garment ([0034], [0061]: manufacturing the wearable garment with integrated electrodes and conductive traces as shown in Fig. 1A and steps of making in Figs. 12A-12D), comprising:
an elastic textile garment (textile garment 100 in Fig. 1A) configured to be worn on anatomy of an associated wearer ([0036]: the garment is constructed of a single textile layer to be worn directly against the skin), the elastic textile garment comprising an elastic textile and having an inner surface arranged to contact the anatomy when the elastic textile garment is worn on the anatomy ([0036]: garment 100 is knitted from a regular electrically inert material 100 (e.g., an insulator material, such as cotton, wool, or polyester), note that the woven arrangement of cotton, wool or polyester to provide for an stretchable/elastic garment 100);
securing electrodes ([0036]: the knitted electrodes 130 are knitted directly into the inner surface of the garment 100) to the inner surface of the elastic textile garment by:
sewing electrically exposed portions of insulated electrically conductive threads onto the elastic textile garment ([0036]: the knitted electrodes 130 are knitted directly into the inner surface of the garment 100; [0057]: the conductive wire 220 of a hybrid yarn 200 in a conductive trace 120 as shown in Figs. 9 and 10 is connected to the textile electrode region 130 via an exposed uncoated conductive wire 220’; to enhance the electrical connection, an electrical contact 1370 which is integral to the inner surface of the garment 110, as best shown in Fig. 10, is used. The electrical contact can include uninsulated conductive yarn); and
disposing an insulator on an outer surface of the elastic textile garment to define a backside of each electrode ([0057]: Fig. 10 illustrates an outer film layer 1340, surrounding the reservoir material 1350 and textile electrode region 130 to define the backside of the electrode region 1302 and extending through the garment 100 (e.g. material 110) to the inner side of the garment to encapsulate the electrode region 130 and the reservoir material 1350 to provide a water-proof barrier against the user’s skin 1301).
However, King does not disclose the method step of arranging an electrically conductive polymer material over each electrically exposed portion of an insulated electrically conductive thread.
Hatakeyama teaches an electrically conductive polymer electrode material (a living body contact layer 3 in Fig. 1) disposed on a mesh-form of woven metal wires (an electrode conductive substrate 2 in Fig. 1; [0123]: the living body contact layer 3 formed on the electro-conductive base material 2) so that the electrically conductive polymer electrode material is in contact with a living body when in use ([0130]). Generally, Hatakeyama discloses that the electrically conductive polymer electrode material comprises an interconnected elastomeric network of mixed ionic-electronic conducting material or a mixture of an conductor and an ionic conductor ([0123]: the living body contact layer 3 is composed of a cured material of the inventive bio-electrode composition; [0071]-[0072], [0111]: the bio-electrode composition contains component A, silicone bonded to a sulfonimide salt as an ionic material (salt), component B, adhesive resin, component C, electro-conductive powder, and additives; [0112]: component C can include carbon nanotube). Takayama explains that the electrically conductive polymer electrode material provides excellent electric conductivity, biocompatibility, stretchability, and adhesion to the skin compared to a single conductive mesh layer as the electrode ([0052]-[0054]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the knitted electrodes of King and incorporate the electrically conductive polymer electrode material as taught by Takeyama, thereby arriving at the claimed invention. Doing so provides excellent electric conductivity, biocompatibility, stretchability, adhesion to the skin compared to a single conductive mesh layer as the electrode ([0052]-[0054]). Note that by disposing the electrically conductive polymer electrode material of Hatekayama along the electrode of King, the electrically conductive polymer electrode material is also disposed on the garment and the insulated electrically conductive thread of King since the two garment and the insulated electrically conductive thread are disposed below the electrode.
In regards to claim 19, King/Hatakeyama combination further discloses wherein the electrodes further include electrically conductive meshes ([0036]: The textile electrodes 130 are knitted from a conductive yarn, such as a silver coated polyester, that enables the textile electrodes 130 to conduct electrical signals across the textile electrode 130; note that the knitted nature of the textile electrodes 130 forms an electrically conductive mesh), and the sewing of the electrodes onto or into the elastic textile garment includes:
sewing the electrically conductive threads onto or into the elastic textile garment ([0036]: the conductive traces 120 are knitted directly into the inner surface of the garment 100); and
sewing the electrically conductive meshes onto the elastic textile garment ([0036]: The textile electrodes 130 are knitted from a conductive yarn, such as a silver coated polyester); and
wherein the exposed portions of the electrically conductive threads are electrically connected with the electrically conductive meshes ([0057]: the conductive wire 220 of a hybrid yarn 200 in a conductive trace 120 as shown in Figs. 9 and 10 is connected to the textile electrode region 130 via an exposed uncoated conductive wire 220’; to enhance the electrical connection, an electrical contact 1370 which is integral to the inner surface of the garment 110, as best shown in Fig. 10, is used. The electrical contact can include uninsulated conductive yarn);
Claims 6 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King and Hatakeyama as applied to claim 1.
In regards to claim 6, King/Hatakeyama combination discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 1 and discussed above.
King further discloses that knitting various elements including the electrically conductive thread using a flatbed knitting machine ([0045]) which is a machine to create flat knitted fabrics. However, King does not necessarily disclose the elastic textile garment is formed by three-dimensional (3D) knitting or weaving including incorporating the electrically conductive threads into the elastic textile garment during the 3D knitting or weaving. The examiner notes that the claim is directed to a product-by-process claim limitation. Therefore, the patentability is determined by the product itself and not the process of making the product.
Additionally, the examiner notes that to form the elastic textile garment using a three-dimensional (3D) knitting machine to form the 3D structure over the flatbed knitting machine is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as doing so is merely one of several possibilities, hand knitting or flatbed knitting to form a flat knitted fabric or 3D knitting machine to form a 3D knitted fabric would select to form a garment. Furthermore, the use of machine to create garments is advantageous of flatbed knitting as the garment can be formed without the need for additional cutting or sewing.
In regards to claim 20, King/Hatakeyama combination discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 17 and discussed above.
King further discloses that knitting various elements including the electrically conductive thread using a flatbed knitting machine ([0045]) which is a machine to create flat knitted fabrics.
However, King does not necessarily disclose providing the elastic textile garment and the dewing of the electrodes onto the elastic textile garment are performed concurrently by three-dimensional (3D) knitting. Forming knitting a garment and sewing different layers onto the garment using a three-dimensional (3D) knitting machine to form the 3D structure over the flatbed knitting machine is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as doing so is merely one of several possibilities, hand knitting or flatbed knitting to form a flat knitted fabric or 3D knitting machine to form a 3D knitted fabric would select to form a garment. Furthermore, the use of machine to create garments is advantageous of flatbed knitting as the garment can be formed without the need for additional cutting or sewing.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King and Hatakeyama as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Asnis et al. (hereinafter ‘Asnis’, U.S. PGPub. No. 2018/0279951).
In regards to claim 10, King/Hatakeyama combination discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 8/1 and discussed above.
However, King/Hatakeyama combination does not disclose a compression sleeve liner configured to be worn on the anatomy underneath the elastic textile garment.
Asnis teaches generally providing a garment (garment 200 in Figs. 2A-2B) formed from a compressive material or alternatively, a garment (400 in Figs. 4A-4B) comprising a compressive layer (inner layer 405) that is internal to the outer layer ([0048]). Asnis explains that the compressive material as the inner layer assists in maintain position of the garment against a wearer’s body ([0007], [0048]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the garment of King/Hatakeyama combination and incorporate a compressive sleeve liner as taught by Asnis, thereby assisting the garment to maintain its position against the wearer’s body. As shown in Asnis, the electrodes (440) and its conductive traces (445) are disposed on an inner surface of the inner compressive layer, which means that the compressive sleeve liner of the modified garment of King/Hatakeyama/Asnis combination is modified to have the electrodes and the conductive threads.
Hatakayama further explains that the MIEC material is initially applied to the electro-conductive base material or a conductive mesh which is the claimed electrode and the MIEC material is cured ([0136]). Therefore, application of the liquid composition of MIEC material of Hatakayama onto the modified garment, specifically, the knitted electrode along the inner compression sleeve liner/layer, would substantially flow through the knitted electrode and onto the inner compression sleeve liner/layer, thus meeting the claimed limitation of “[the] compression sleeve liner coated and/or infused with the MIEC material”.
Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King and Hatakeyama as applied to claim 8/1, and further in view of Hatakeyama et al. (hereinafter ‘Hatakeyama ‘838’, U.S. PGPub. No. 2024/0032838).
In regard to claims 11 and 13, King/Hatakeyama combination discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 8/1 and discussed above.
Generally, Hatakeyama discloses that the electrically conductive polymer electrode material comprises an interconnected elastomeric network of mixed ionic-electronic conducting material (MIEC) or a mixture of an conductor and an ionic conductor ([0123]: the living body contact layer 3 is composed of a cured material of the inventive bio-electrode composition; [0071]-[0072], [0111]: the bio-electrode composition contains component A, silicone bonded to a sulfonimide salt as an ionic material (salt), component B, adhesive resin, component C, electro-conductive powder, and additives; [0112]: component C can include carbon nanotube; note that other ionic liquid can also be ).
However, King/Hatakeyama combination does not disclose wherein the ionic conductor comprises hyaluronic acid, a fluorosulfonic acid, a sulfated polysaccharaide, or a phosphonic polyvinylsulfonic acid.
Hatakeyama ‘838 teaches a bio-electrode composition comprising an ionic polymer material as a component A comprising a polymer having a group consisting of salts of ammonium, sodium, potassium, and silver formed with any of fluorosulfonic acid, fluorosulfonimide, and N-carbonyl-fluorosulfonamide to form a living body contact layer ([0023], [0075]). Hatakeyama ‘838 further teaches that neutralized salts formed from highly acidic acids such as fluorosulfonic acid provides strong polarization of ions to improve ionic conductivity and thus excellent electric conductivity ([0069], [0072], [0075]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the sulfonimide salt of the MEIC material of King/Hatakeyama combination and use instead fluorosulfonic acid as taught by Hatakeyama ‘838, as doing so provides forming the MEIC material from highly acidic acids to provide strong polarization of ions to improve ionic conductivity and excellent electric conductivity ([0069], [0072], [0075]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King, Hatakeyama and Hatakeyama ‘838 as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Heintz et al. (hereinafter ‘Heintz’, U.S. PGPub. No. 2020/0038648).
In regards to claim 12, King/Hatakeyama combination discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 1 and discussed above. King further discloses wherein the electrical conductor of the MIEC material comprises carbon nanotubes ([0123]: the living body contact layer 3 is composed of a cured material of the inventive bio-electrode composition; [0071]-[0072], [0111]: the bio-electrode composition contains component A, silicone bonded to a sulfonimide salt as an ionic material (salt), component B, adhesive resin, component C, electro-conductive powder, and additives; [0112]: component C can include carbon nanotube).
However, King/Hatakeyama combination does not disclose wherein the ionic conductor of the MIEC material comprises a glycosaminoglycan.
Heintz teaches a conductive polymer composition similar to Hatakeyama comprising ionic conductors such as hyaluronic acid to hydrate the skin and improve skin contact ([0037]). Heintz further explains that hyaluronic acid is a naturally occurring glucosaminoglycan ([0045]: hyaluron is a viscoelastic, anionic, nonsulfated glycosaminoglycan polymer). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the ionic conductor of the MIEC material of King/Kataleyama combination and incorporate a glycosaminoglycan as taught by Heintz, as doing so improves skin contact while hydrating the skin ([0037]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King and Hatakeyama as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Verma and Trivedi et al. (hereinafter ‘Verma’, WO 2021/019546).
In regards to claim 14, King/Hatakeyama combination discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 1 and discussed above.
King/Hatakeyama combination discloses that the insulator (film 1340 in Figs. 9 and 10) is used for sealing the electrode ([0058]: FIG. 10 shows the region around the textile electrode region 130 and reservoir material 1350, as well as a section of the conductive trace 120, to be sealed by the outer film 1340.).
However, King/Hatakeyama combination does not disclose the material of the insulator. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide polyurethane as the material for the insulator, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material, such as polyurethane as a moisture resistant and durable material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use, for sealing the electrode region, as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
However, King/Hatakeyama combination does not disclose a scent added to the elastic textile garment.
Verma teaches a wearable electronic garment (110 in Fig. 1) that is treated with microencapsulation containing fragrance material embedded in it which may last for predetermined washes (pg. 18, ln. 18-pg. 19, ln. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the elastic textile garment of King/Hatakeyama combination and incorporate microencapsulation containing fragrance material embedded into the garment as taught by Verma, as doing so provides lasting pleasant fragrance (pg. 18, ln. 18-pg. 19, ln. 2).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King and Hatakeyama as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Freeman et al. (hereinafter ‘Freeman’, U.S. PGPub. No. 2023/0218186).
In regards to claims 15-16, King/Hatakeyama combination discloses an electronic garment as set forth in claim 1.
King/Hatakeyama combination does not disclose an electrical stimulation system and an electrophysiology readout system as claimed in claims 15 and 16.
Freeman teaches a patient monitoring and stimulation system (electronic controller 300 in Fig. 3) connected to an electronic garment ([0073]: wearable device includes a garment that is configured to be worn about the torso of the patient) comprising a plurality of electrodes (ECG electrodes 322 and stimulation electrodes 320). Specifically, Freeman teaches an electrical stimulator connected with the electrodes to apply transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) or neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) via the electronic garment to the anatomy on which the electronic garment is worn ([0089]: therapy delivery circuitry 302 is configured to provide one or more therapeutic shocks to the patient via at least two therapy electrodes 320). Freeman further teaches an electrophysiology signal readout electronics including an electrophysiology signal amplifier connected with the electrodes of the garment to read electrophysiology signals from the anatomy on which the electronic garment is worn via the electronic garment ([0160]: the sensing electrode interface 312 includes physiological signal circuitry that is coupled to one or more sensors configured to monitor one or more physiological parameters of the patient including ECG signals; [0173]: signal processor includes circuit components to amplify, filter, and digitize the cardiac signals; [0181]: the cardiac monitoring device comprises operational amplifiers, signal amplifiers). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the garment of King/Hatakeyama combination and configure for both stimulation and sensing by providing the necessary electrical circuitry as taught by Freeman, thereby arriving at the claimed invention as doing so allows for a wearable garment configured for both sensing and stimulation therapy.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the conductive threads associated with each of the knitted electrodes of King/Hatakeyama and electrically connect to its respective electrophysiology signal readout electronics or electronic stimulator depending upon the clinical need, as electrically connecting an electrode to the sensing/stimulation device using wires or equivalent thereof, such as the conductive yarn of King, involves routine skilled in the art and a predictable result of electrical communication between electrodes and sensing or stimulation device will ensue.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on April 1, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant explains that independent claim 1 and 17 require the presence of an insulator on an outer surface of the elastic textile garment defining a backside of the electrode. The examiner is persuasive. However, upon further consideration of King, embodiment of Figs. 9-10 discloses an insulator on an outer surface of the elastic textile garment defining a backside of the electrode ([0057]: Fig. 10 illustrates an outer film layer 1340, surrounding the reservoir material 1350 and textile electrode region 130 to define the backside of the electrode region 1302 and extending through the garment 100 (e.g. material 110) to the inner side of the garment to encapsulate the electrode region 130 and the reservoir material 1350 to provide a water-proof barrier against the user’s skin 1301).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUNHWA KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1265. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5:30PM.
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, JOSEPH STOKLOSA can be reached at (571) 272-1213. 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.
/EUN HWA KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794 5/4/2026
Prosecution Insights