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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
It appears that Figure 15 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 11, 13 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Asanuma et al. (US 2010/0287751 A1).
Regarding claims 1-5, 11, 13 and 17, Asanuma teaches a method for more easily producing a functional composite material internally containing a piezoelectric fiber (Abstract). As shown in FIG. 1, the method for producing functional composite material of this embodiment includes a step of forming a metal thin film layer 2 on a first metal substrate 1 (FIG. 1(A)), a step of forming a groove on the first metal substrate 1 with the metal thin film layer 2 (FIG. 1(B)), a step of placing hollow fiber 4 on the groove 3 of the first metal substrate (FIG. 1(C)), and a step of pressing a second metal substrate 5 and the first metal substrate (FIG. 1(D)) ([0019]). For the hollow fiber 4, many kinds of sections are applicable as long as the hollow fiber is a tube ([0040]). For example, circular shape, triangulate shape or square shape is preferable ([0040]). The examiner notes that a triangulate shape would have at least one interior angle of 60° or less and a square shape would have interior angles of 90°.
Regarding claim 18, as applied above, Asanuma teaches triangulate and square shapes ([0040]). The examiner notes that all the vertices of a triangle or a square would be inscribed in a circle.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5 and 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tanimoto et al. (US 2020/0020846 A1).
Regarding claims 1-3, 5, 13 and 17, Tanimoto teaches a piezoelectric substrate attachment structure including a press section pressed by contact, a piezoelectric substrate provided adjacent to the press section, and a base section provided adjacent to the piezoelectric substrate on an opposite side from the press section (Abstract, [0058] and FIGS. 1A to 1C). The piezoelectric substrate of the present embodiment includes an elongate conductor, and an elongate first piezoelectric material helically wound in one direction around the conductor ([0085]). The first piezoelectric material includes an optically active helical chiral polymer (A) (also simply referred to as "helical chiral polymer (A)") ([0085]).
From the viewpoint of improving piezoelectric sensitivity and piezoelectric output stability, in the piezoelectric substrate of the first embodiment, the first piezoelectric material preferably has a fiber shape that includes a single or plural bundles, and the major axis diameter of a cross-section of the first piezoelectric material is preferably from 0.0001 mm to 10 mm, more preferably from 0.001 mm to 5 mm, and still more preferably from 0.002 mm to 1 mm ([0128]). From the viewpoint of improving the piezoelectric sensitivity and piezoelectric output stability in the piezoelectric substrate of the embodiment (for example, in the piezoelectric substrate of the first embodiment), the first piezoelectric material preferably has an elongate flat plate shape ([0132]).
Various cross-sectional profiles may be employed as the cross-sectional profile of the fibrous piezoelectric material, such as a circular profile, an elliptical profile, a rectangular profile, a cocoon profile, a ribbon profile, a four-leafed profile, a star profile, and an irregular profile for cross-sections perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the fibrous piezoelectric material ([0333]). Examples of the elongate-flat-plate-shaped piezoelectric material include an elongate-flat-plate-shaped piezoelectric material (for example, a slit ribbon) obtained by slitting a piezoelectric film produced by a known method or a procured piezoelectric film ([0335]). Example 1 teaches a slit ribbon with a rectangular cross-section profile ([0517]).
The examiner notes that a fibrous piezoelectric material with a rectangular profile and a ribbon-shaped piezoelectric material (a slit ribbon) with a rectangular cross-section would both have interior angles of 90°.
Regarding claim 14, Tanimoto further teaches that, in the piezoelectric substrate of the embodiment, the helical chiral polymer (A) included in the first piezoelectric material is preferably a polylactic acid-based polymer ([0158], [0217]-[0220]). Among polylactic acid-based polymers, polylactic acid is preferred, and a homopolymer (PLLA, also simply referred to as "L-form") of L-lactic acid or a homopolymer (PDLA, also simply referred to as "D-form") of D-lactic acid is most preferred ([0230]).
Regarding claim 15, Tanimoto teaches that in the piezoelectric substrate of the present embodiment, the content of the helical chiral polymer (A) included in the first piezoelectric material is preferably 80% by mass or more with respect to the total amount of the first piezoelectric material, from the viewpoint of further improving piezoelectric properties [(0257]).
Regarding claim 16, Tanimoto teaches that the first piezoelectric material preferably further includes a stabilizer (B) having in one molecule one or more kinds of functional group selected from the group consisting of a carbodiimide group, an epoxy group, and an isocyanate group, and having a weight average molecular weight of from 200 to 60,000 ([0260]-[0263] and [0269]).
Regarding claim 18, as applied above, Tanimoto teaches fibrous piezoelectric material and slit-ribbons with rectangular cross-sections ([0333] and [0517]). The examiner notes that all the vertices of a rectangle would be inscribed in a circle.
Regarding claims 19-20, Tanimoto teaches that examples of the fibrous piezoelectric material include monofilament yarn and multifilament yarn ([0320]; also see [0317]). Tanimoto also teaches enabling a connection between a first outer conductor or the conductor (preferably an inner conductor) and a layered body to be more easily made in cases in which the piezoelectric substrate is being employed as one of the configuration elements of, for example, a piezoelectric device (such as a piezoelectric textile or a piezoelectric fabric), a force sensor, an actuator, or a biodata acquisition device) ([0153]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 or 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.
Claim(s) 6-10 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Tanimoto et al. (US 2020/0020846 A1).
Regarding claims 6-10, Tanimoto remains as applied to claim 1 above.
As applied above, Tanimoto teaches fibrous piezoelectric material and slit-ribbons with rectangular cross-sections ([0333] and [0517]). Tanimoto further teaches that, in the piezoelectric substrate of the embodiment, the helical chiral polymer (A) included in the first piezoelectric material is preferably a polylactic acid-based polymer ([0158], [0217]-[0220] and [0229]). Among polylactic acid-based polymers, polylactic acid is preferred, and a homopolymer (PLLA, also simply referred to as "L-form") of L-lactic acid or a homopolymer (PDLA, also simply referred to as "D-form") of D-lactic acid is most preferred ([0230]). The examiner notes that these are the same shapes and materials disclosed and claimed by applicant. Therefore, it is the examiner’s position that the fibers disclosed by Tanimoto would be capable of the claimed functions.
In the alternative, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have expected that the fibers disclosed by Tanimoto would be capable of the claimed functions, as the reference teaches the same structure and materials as the claimed structure, and as the properties cannot be separated from the materials.
Regarding claim 12, with regard to the claimed electric field intensity property, the examiner notes that applicant has provided at paragraphs [0035] and [0080] of applicant’s specification specific structural examples which provide the structure and properties claimed. As applied above to claims 1 and 6-10, Tanimoto teaches fibers of rectangular cross-sections comprising polylactic acid (PLLA) polymers, which are the same shapes and materials disclosed by applicant. Thus, it is the position of the Office that the fibers of Tanimoto would have the claimed property as the same compound necessarily has the same properties. In the alternative, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have expected that the claimed properties would be so provided, as the reference teaches the same materials as the claimed structure, and as the properties cannot be separated from the materials. Thus, absent an objective showing to the contrary, the examiner expects the fibers taught by Tanimoto to have the claimed properties.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2006/0016055 A1
US 2007/0042179 A1
US Patent No. 10,102,722 B2
US 2019/0267538 A1
Multimaterial piezoelectric fibers.
Fatigue life characterization for piezoelectric macrofiber composites.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Worrell whose telephone number is (571)270-7728. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
/Kevin Worrell/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789