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 .
2. This Office Action is in response to amendments and remarks filed on 04/23/2026. Claims 1-11, 19 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-3, 5, 8-11, 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yehezkely et al., (US 2020/0228124 A1) in view of Bulovic et al., (US 6,297,495 B1).
Regarding claims 1 and 19, Yehezkely et al., disclose a wireless Internet of Things (loT) device ([0016], “(IoT) tag integrated with a proximity sensor”), comprising: a light sensor (140, Fig. 1A or 621, Fig.6, and [0006], “ a standard infrared (IR) based proximity sensor… the photodiode 140 are light emitting diodes (LEDs)… When a reflection of the emitted beam off of a nearby object is detected by the photodiode”); an integrated circuit (605, Fig. 6), wherein the integrated circuit (605) includes an oscillating circuit (607) that is coupled to the light sensor (621) to output a frequency value ([0059], “the measurement circuitry 607 is configured to perform repetitive measurements of the current oscillating frequencies and determine a frequency offset of the sensor 621 over time.”); and at least one harvesting antenna (610, Fig. 6) that harvests an ambient radio frequency ([0052], “ The harvesting antenna 610 is coupled to the harvester 601 and is utilized for energy harvesting”, and [0012], “power may be harvested from environmental sources such as light, movement, and electromagnetic power including existing radio frequency transmissions”) wherein energy harvested by the harvesting antenna is used to power the IC (605) ([0054], “The harvesting antenna 610 is coupled to the harvester 601, and The harvester 601 is configured to provide multiple voltage levels to the integrated circuit 605”).
Yehezkely et al., do not explicitly specify the photodiode having an organic active layer that detects an intensity of light as claimed. Bulovic et al., disclose a light sensor (an organic photosensitive optoelectronic device 400, Fig.4 or 600, Fig.6) having an organic active layer (403, Fig.4 or 603, Fig. 6) that detects an intensity of light (col. 13, lines 14-17, “Since the organic photosensitive optoelectronic devices may be desired for widely varying ambient radiation conditions, for example, with respect to the intensity of incident radiation”). The combination would include the output frequency value varies directly with the detected intensity of light as claimed. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yehezkely et al., by incorporating the light sensor having the organic active layer, as taught by Bulovic et al., to maximize the sensitivity of the device to desired spectral regions (Bulovic et al., col.10, lines 47-48).
Regarding claim 2, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, Yehezkely et al., disclose an energy harvester (601, Fig. 6) coupled to that least one harvesting antenna (610, Fig.6); and an energy storage (602) coupled to the energy harvester (601) and adapted to store harvested energy (paragraph [0052], “The harvesting antenna 610 is coupled to the harvester 601 and is utilized for energy harvesting”), wherein the stored harvested energy powers the IC (paragraph [0055], “The PMU 603 is coupled to the capacitor 602 and is configured to regulate the power to the integrated circuit 605”).
Regarding claim 3, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, Yehezkely et al., disclose a transmitter antenna (620, Fig.6) that transmits the frequency value (paragraph [0052], “the transmit antenna 620 is used for wireless communication to transmit frequency data of the IoT tag 600”) via a communication protocol (paragraph [0053], “a low energy (power) communication protocol”).
Regarding claim 5, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, Yehezkely et al., do not disclose the light sensor further comprising: a protective layer overlaid on the organic active layer as claimed. Bulovic et al., disclose (Fig.4B) a protective layer (4A05) overlaid on the organic active layer (403). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yehezkely et al., by utilizing the teaching of Bulovic et al., to improve the sensor, allowing the IoTag to detect very low light levels.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, Yehezkely et al., disclose a substrate, wherein the IC are disposed on the substrate, wherein the substrate is mechanically flexible (Fig. 2 and paragraph [0032], “The substrate is a single layer material, flexible printed circuits (FPC)”, and the substrate is a thin film made of any one of: polyethylene (PE), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyimide (PI), polystyrene (PS), and polyester ([0032], “polyethylene terephthalate (PET)”). In combination, the light sensor would be disposed on the substrate.
Regarding claim 10, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, Yehezkely et al., disclose the wireless loT device being a battery- less wireless tag ([0043], “the IoT tag 200 is battery-less” and [0052], “the IoT tag 600 does not include any external DC power source, such as a battery”).
Regarding claim 11, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, Yehezkely et al., disclose the at least one harvesting antenna operating at a frequency band including any one of: a Bluetooth low energy (BLE) frequency band, an Industrial, Scientific, and Medical (ISM) frequency band, a frequency modulation (FM) band, and a cellular frequency band ([0053], harvesting antenna connects to the integrated circuit 605 which operates using a Bluetooth low energy (BLE) communication protocol).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., and further in view of Kong et al., (US 2024/0030888 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, do not disclose an interdigital interface that supplies a bias to the light sensor, wherein the bias changes with the detected intensity of light as claimed. Kong et al., disclose an interdigital interface (paragraph [0071], “ interdigital transducers at the two terminals includes 50 metal electrodes”) that supplies a bias to a light sensor (“applied voltage… generated by the piezoelectric phenomenon”, [0070]), wherein the bias changes with the detected intensity of light ([0072], “the natural frequency of the system changes by the interference with the boundaries and the adjacent interdigital transducer”, “FIG. 10 shows frequency response characteristics”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yehezkely et al., and Bulovic et al., by utilizing the teaching of Kong et al., to have higher sensitivity for the light sensor.
5. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., and further in view of Fang et al., (US 2024/0196635).
Regarding claim 6, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, do not disclose the organic active layer being a blend of N-type and P-type organic materials as claimed. Fang et al., disclose an organic active layer (330, [0106]) being a blend ([0106], “vacuum-deposited in the same chamber”, of N-type and P-type organic materials ( [0106], “the p-type and n-type semiconductors of the photosensitive layer 330”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., by utilizing the teaching of Fang et al., to increase sensitivity of the active layer, producing a better signal for the integrated circuit.
6. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., and further in view of Rodriquez et al., (US 2017/0179199 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Yehezkely et al., in view of Bulovic et al., as discussed in claim 1, do not disclose the organic active layer being applied using any one of: spin-coating, slot-die coating, blade coating, spray coating, inkjet printing, and flexographic printing as claimed. Rodriquez et al., disclose an organic active layer (paragraphs [0007], and [0050], “one of the active and top contact layers of organic photodiodes”) being applied using any one of: spin-coating, slot-die coating, blade coating, spray coating, inkjet printing, and flexographic printing ([0050], “slot-die”, or “inkjet printing”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wiser in view of Bulovic et al., by utilizing the teaching of Rodriquez et al., to provide different sensor designs, improving the sensor’s ability to detect environmental light exposure.
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed on 04/23/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 103 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Yehezkely et al., (newly cited) and Bulovic et al, and the combination provides a direct relationship between the light intensity and the output frequency value. Specifically, Yehezkely et al., teach that when a photodiode sensor detects light, its electrical characteristics such as resistance and/or capacitor change ([0006], “the intercepted IR beam decreases the resistance of the photodiode, and a resulting electrical signal is generated”). These changes are coupled to the oscillating circuit, which generates frequency measurements based on sensor operating condition ([0015], “an integrated circuit having at least a capacitive element, wherein the capacitive element and the inductive element form a proximity sensor oscillating at a local oscillator (LO) frequency, wherein the integrated circuit is configured to measure a frequency offset from the LO frequency, wherein the frequency offset is indicative of a detection of a nearby object”). Thus, by incorporating the organic active layer of the light sensor, as taught by Bulovic et al. The organic active layer of the light sensor providing sensitive electrical change (capacitance and/or resistance) to indicate intensity of light (col.10, lines 45-48, “the materials used in the photoconductive organic layer… to maximize the sensitivity of the device to desired spectral regions). These changes affect the oscillating circuit, which responds by outing a frequency value corresponding to the detected light intensity, as claimed in claims 1 and 19.
Conclusion
8. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAI THI NGOC TRAN whose telephone number is (571)-272- 3456. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00-5:30pm.
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, GEORGIA EPPS can be reached on (571)-272-2328. 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.
/M.T.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2878
/THANH LUU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights