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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/26/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filled on 11/25/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-7 and 9-13 are remain pending in the application.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to newly amended limitations in claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to newly amended limitations in claim 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 20200323453 A1), hereafter Lee 2020’.
Regarding claim 7, Lee 2020’ teaches a sensor substrate (Fig. 1 element 10) having a metal nanomesh structure (Fig. 3 element 33 “mesh-shaped conductive coating”, is a metal coating structure form by coating the interlinked fiber mesh 2, [0051, 0059, 0061]) attachable to a surface of an object or a biological organism, [0059, 0063] (Additionally, the recitation “attachable to a surface of an object or a biological organism” is not limiting because the body of the claim describes a complete invention and the language recited solely in the preamble does not provide any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention' s limitations. Thus, the preamble of the claim(s) is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. See Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See MPEP § 2111.02.), the sensor substrate being used to measure surface-enhanced Raman-scattered light from molecules adsorbed on the metal nanomesh structure, (the term " the sensor being used to…" in the claim merely designates an intended use which does not carry enough weight so as to patentably distinguish from the cited prior See MPEP 2111.02, also is a contingent limitation and do not carry patentably weight as those steps are not required to be performed under a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, See Ex parte Schulhauser,, MPEP 2111.04), wherein the metal nanomesh structure (Figs. 3-4 element 33) has a thickness of 30 nm to 100 um, (the thickness of the conductive coating 33 is preferably 20 nm to 2000 nm, more preferably 20 to 1000 nm, and even more preferably 50 nm to 100 nm, [0072]).
Regarding claim 9, Lee 2020’ teaches the sensor substrate according to claim 7, wherein the metal nanomesh structure has an area of 0.01 mm2 to 1 m2, (the size of the aperture portion 1A that comprise the mesh fiber sheet is at least 10 μm square and at most 10 cm square, [0056]).
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 1 and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabolt et al. (US 2016/0069811 A1), hereafter Rabolt, in view of Kalgutkar et al. (US 2009/0130778 A1), hereafter Kalgutkar and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0323453 A1), hereafter Lee 2020’.
Regarding Claim 1, 4 and 6, Rabolt teaches a method for fabricating a sensor substrate used to measure surface-enhanced Raman scattered light, [0022], the substrate comprising a mesh with AuNrs function as a sensor for detecting ions in fluid based on the significant enhancement of the Raman signal generated by the device, [0056]. “The resulting AuNR/PCL nanocomposite serves as an effective SERS substrate”, (surface-enhanced Raman scattered light), [0026], Additionally the term "used to measure surface-enhanced Raman scattered light" in the preamble merely designates an intended use which does not carry enough weight so as to patentably distinguish from the cited prior See MPEP 2111.02), the method comprising:
preparing a mesh fiber sheet (polycaprolactone (PCL) fibrous mesh as the substrate) made of a given material by electrospinning;(the substrate is produced by electrospinning, [0022, 0035])
forming a metal layer (AuNR) on the mesh fiber sheet (PCL) by a prescribed film formation method; (applying to AuNR assemblies on any fibrous substrate, [0022], “With the proper immersion time, a homogeneous and highly dense AuNR deposition is produced on the PCL fiber surface, [0025]) and
Rabolt fail to teach:
(claim 1) removing the mesh fiber sheet using liquid that dissolves the given material to obtain the sensor substrate having a metal nanomesh structure, wherein fibers constituting the mesh fiber sheet have a diameter of 1 nm to 100 pm.
( claim 4) wherein the metal layer has a thickness of 0.1 nm to 0.1 mm.
(claim 6) wherein the given material is polyvinyl alcohol; and the metal nanomesh structure is obtained by dissolving the mesh fiber sheet made of polyvinyl alcohol with water.
Kalgutkar related to fiber mesh sensor and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches:
(claim 1) removing the mesh fiber sheet (polyvinyl mesh substrate) using liquid that dissolves the given material ( the substrate is water-soluble, [0009, [0018]]) to obtain the sensor substrate having a metal nanomesh structure, (the device is “a sensor comprising the metallic nanoparticle coated water soluble polymer substrate”, [0014]. The polymer substrate dissolve in water and provide discontinuous coating of metallic nanoparticle, [0012]. Since “"discontinuous" means the nanoparticle coating is disposed as islands of nanoparticles or agglomerates thereof surrounded by uncoated areas, such that the coating exhibits surface plasmon resonance”, [0018]. Therefore, the metallic nanoislands coat is interpreted as equivalent to a nanomesh structure since it generate a mesh-like structure by a plurality of nanoislands).
( claim 4) wherein the metal layer has a thickness of 0.1 nm to 0.1 mm, (“The coating generally has a thickness of less than 100 nanometers, preferably less than 10 nanometers”, “a metallic nanoparticle coating” [0019]). (
(claim 6) wherein the given material is polyvinyl alcohol; ( the substrate is made polyvinyl alcohol, [0009]), and the metal nanomesh structure is obtained by dissolving the mesh fiber sheet made of polyvinyl alcohol with water, (the substrate is water-soluble generating sensor with a discontinuous metallic nanoparticle coating, [0009, [0018]])
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Rabolt by including removing the mesh fiber sheet using liquid that dissolves the given material to obtain the sensor substrate having a metal nanomesh structure, wherein the metal layer has a thickness of 0.1 nm to 0.1 mm, wherein the given material is polyvinyl alcohol; and the metal nanomesh structure is obtained by dissolving the mesh fiber sheet made of polyvinyl alcohol with water (as taught by Kalgutkar) for several advantages such as: the coated article allows the optical properties to be varied by stretching or shrinking. As the article is stretched or shrunk, the absorbance spectrum maximum is shifted to shorter or longer wavelengths respectively, so the optical properties may be varied as desired. In optical filter applications, this enables one to adjust the absorbance to a preselected maximum, so as to most efficiently filter out undesired wavelengths such as ultraviolet or infrared wavelengths. In sensor applications, it allows one to match the absorbance peak maximum to a particular analyte and thereby maximize the response signal., ([0021], Kalgutkar).
Rabolt in view of Kalgutkar still lack to teach wherein fibers constituting the mesh fiber sheet have a diameter of 1 nm to 100 pm.
However, Lee 2020 related to fiber mesh sensor and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches wherein fibers constituting the mesh fiber sheet have a diameter of 1 nm to 100 pm, (the resin composition 2 forming the fiber mesh preferably has a diameter of 100 nm to 10 μm, and more preferably 200 nm to 2000 nm, [0067]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device of Rabolt by including wherein fibers constituting the mesh fiber sheet have a diameter of 1 nm to 100 pm (as taught by Lee 2020) for several advantages such as: the substrate area allow an electronic component and a wearable device to firmly held on the substrate by providing a substrate having an aperture portions as a mesh thus increase high surface conformability, lateral stretchability, gas and moisture permeability ([0022], Lee 2020). Also If the diameter of the fiber is within this range of 100 nm to 10 μm, and more preferably 200 nm to 2000 nm, allow to generate a fiber structure with a strength sufficient to obtain an electronic functional member having high gas and moisture permeability, thus increase the device versability, ([0067], Lee 2020).
Regarding Claim 3, Rabolt in the combination outlined above teaches the method according to claim 1.
Rabolt is silent about wherein the mesh fiber sheet has an area of 0.01 mm2 to 1 m2.
However, Lee 2020 further teaches wherein the mesh fiber sheet has an area of 0.01 mm2 to 1 m2, (the size of the aperture portion 1A that comprise the mesh fiber sheet is at least 10 μm square and at most 10 cm square, [0056]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Rabolt by including wherein the mesh fiber sheet has an area of 0.01 mm2 to 1 m2 (as taught by Lee) for several advantages such as: the substrate area allow an electronic component and a wearable device to firmly held on the substrate by providing a substrate having an aperture portions as a mesh thus increase high surface conformability, lateral stretchability, gas and moisture permeability ([0022], Lee 2020).
Regarding Claim 5, Rabolt in the combination outlined above teaches the method according to claim 1.
Rabolt further teaches wherein the metal layer is made of a pure metal or an alloy that exhibits a surface plasmon resonance, [0026]
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 20200323453 A1), hereafter Lee 2020’, in view of Moser, H.O., Bahou, M., Casse, B.D.F. et al. Making and measuring nanostructures: Nanoscience and technology at the Singapore synchrotron light source. Crystallogr. Rep. 51 (Suppl 1), S170–S182 (2006), hereafter Moser.
Regarding Claim 10, Lee 2020’ teaches the sensor substrate according to claim 7.
Lee 2020’ is silent about wherein an average density of a metal constituting the metal nanomesh structure is 0.1 g/cm3 to 50 g/cm3.
However, Moser related to method of generating nanostructure and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches wherein an average density of a metal constituting the metal nanomesh structure is 0.1 g/cm3 to 50 g/cm3, ( the metallic GeTe layer in the nanomesh comprise a density of 6.27 g/cm3 as shown in Table 2, [Page S177 Section 3.2.3.3.]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee 2020’ by including wherein an average density of a metal constituting the metal nanomesh structure is 0.1 g/cm3 to 50 g/cm3 (as taught by Moser) for several advantages such as: the density of the nanomesh significantly improve stretchability of the layer thus eliminate strain fatigue and increase the efficiency of the sensor.
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 20200323453 A1), hereafter Lee 2020’, in view of Lee et al. (US 2022/0136972 A1), hereafter Lee 2022.
Regarding Claim 11, Lee 2020’ teaches the sensor substrate according to claim 7.
Lee 2020’ is silent about wherein a metal constituting the metal nanomesh structure is a pure metal or an alloy that exhibits a surface plasmon resonance.
However Lee 2022 related to sensing devices and thus from the same field of endeavor teaches wherein a metal constituting the metal nanomesh structure is a pure metal or an alloy that exhibits a surface plasmon resonance, [0067-0069].
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee 2020’ by including wherein a metal constituting the metal nanomesh structure is a pure metal or an alloy that exhibits a surface plasmon resonance (as taught by Lee 2022) for several advantages such as: the system allows to increase the nanoarray Raman signal thus enable tunable energy level. The system also allows to detect neuronal differentiation of neural stem cells (NSCs) to neurons by selective detection of stem cell derived genes which results in selective release via DNA hybridization, [0055-0056], Lee 2022).
Regarding Claim 12, Lee 2020’ teaches the sensor substrate attachable to the surface of the object or the biological organism, [0059, 0063] according to claim 7.
Even though Lee 2020’ teaches a sensor system (Fig. 7 element 100), a light source (Fig. 7 element 41), a detector (Fig. 7 element 42), [0095], Lee 2020’ fail to teach a sensor system, comprising: a light source configured to emit light toward the sensor substrate; and a detector configured to detect the surface-enhanced Raman-scattered light from the molecules adsorbed on the metal nanomesh structure, by light emission from the light source.
However Lee 2022 further teaches a sensor system (Fig. 1A element 100), comprising: a light source (Fig. 1A element 103) configured to emit light toward the sensor substrate (Fig. 1A element 101 “nanoarray”), [0055]; and a detector (Fig. 1A element 105) configured to detect the surface-enhanced Raman-scattered light from the molecules adsorbed on the metal nanomesh structure (Figure 1A element 101 comprise a substrate and a metal nanoarray as a graphene-Au hybrid SERS nanoarray, [Paragraph 0055, lines 16-23]). Since the structure of the metal nanoarray can be any shape that enhances Raman shift as wedges, cylinders, rings, trees, branches, rods, wires, sheets or the likes, and this shapes comprise interconnecting structures, therefore the nanoarray is interpreted as a nanomesh, [0058],
, by light emission from the light source, (the detector element 105 if Fig. 1A detect the SERS “surface-enhanced Raman-scattered light” from the interaction of the nanoarray and a sample by applying illumination by element 103, [Paragraph 0055, lines 7-16] and [Paragraph0056, lines 1-11]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee 2020’ by including a sensor system, comprising: a light source configured to emit light toward the sensor substrate; and a detector configured to detect the surface-enhanced Raman-scattered light from the molecules adsorbed on the metal nanomesh structure, by light emission from the light source (as taught by Lee 2022) for several advantages such as: the system allows to increase the nanoarray Raman signal thus enable tunable energy level. The system also allows to detect neuronal differentiation of neural stem cells (NSCs) to neurons by selective detection of stem cell derived genes which results in selective release via DNA hybridization, [0055-0056], Lee 2022).
Regarding Claim 13, Lee 2020’ teaches the sensor substrate having the metal nanomesh structure attached to the surface of the object or the biological organism, [0059, 0063] according to claim 7.
Lee 2020’ fail to teach the method for detecting Raman scattered light, emitting light from a light source toward the sensor substrate having the metal nanomesh structure attached to the surface of the object or the biological organism; and detecting, by a detector, surface-enhanced Raman-scattered light from molecules adsorbed on the metal nanomesh structure, by light emission from the light source.
However Lee 2022 further teaches a method for detecting Raman-scattered light, [0055] comprising:
emitting light from a light source (Figure 1A element 103) toward the sensor substrate (Figure 1A element 101 “nanoarray”), [0055]; and having the metal nanomesh structure (Figure 1A element 101 comprise a substrate and a metal nanoarray as a graphene-Au hybrid SERS nanoarray, [Paragraph 0055, lines 16-23]). Since the structure of the metal nanoarray can be any shape that enhances Raman shift as wedges, cylinders, rings, trees, branches, rods, wires, sheets or the likes, and this shapes comprise interconnecting structures, therefore the nanoarray is interpreted as a nanomesh, [0058],
attached to the surface of the object or the biological organism (it can be attached via π-π staking interaction for neuronal differentiation, [Paragraph 0055, lines 25-34]); and
detecting, by a detector (Fig. 1A element 105), surface-enhanced Raman-scattered light from molecules adsorbed on the metal nanomesh structure, by light emission from the light source, (the detector element 105 detect the SERS from the interaction of the nanoarray and a sample by applying illumination by element 103, [Paragraph 0055, lines 7-16] and [Paragraph0056, lines 1-11]).
Therefore, it would been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Lee 2020’ by including emitting light from a light source toward the sensor substrate having the metal nanomesh structure attached to the surface of the object or the biological organism; and detecting, by a detector, surface-enhanced Raman-scattered light from molecules adsorbed on the metal nanomesh structure, by light emission from the light source. (as taught by Lee 2022) for several advantages such as: the system allows to increase the nanoarray Raman signal thus enable tunable energy level. The system also allows to detect neuronal differentiation of neural stem cells (NSCs) to neurons by selective detection of stem cell derived genes which results in selective release via DNA hybridization, [0055-0056], Lee 2022).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS G PEREZ-GUZMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3904. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached at (571) 272-2287. 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.
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/CARLOS PEREZ-GUZMAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2877