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 Amendment
Applicant has amended claims 1 and 4, added claim 10, and canceled claim 3. Claims 1-2 and 4-10 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-7 of Applicant’s Remarks, filed 03/12/26, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-2 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heil in view of Johnson, of claims 3-4 in further view of Bosaeus, of claims 6-8 in further view of Friedman, and of claim 9 in further view of Roe and in further view of Friedman, have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendment to claim 1. Accordingly, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further search and consideration, new grounds of rejection have been made as indicated 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.
Claims 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heil et al. (US 2017/0065464 A1) in view of Johnson et al. (US 2013/0036802 A1) and in further view of Ikoma (US 2020/0333276 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Heil discloses a diaper sensor (Figs. 18-23, feat. 103; ¶0092-0100) including a sheet-shaped wetness detection sensor device (104; ¶0092: sensor device 104 may be in the form of a sensor sheet), comprising: a highly water-permeable sheet forming a surface of the diaper sensor arranged on a user’s body surface side (160; ¶0093); and at least any one of a first water-absorbing sheet (Fig. 22, feat. 174LI; ¶0097-0099) interposed between the highly water-permeable sheet (160; ¶0095-0097) and the wetness detection sensor device (104) or a second water-absorbing sheet (Fig. 22, feat. 174LI) arranged on an opposite side of the wetness detection sensor device (104) from a highly water-permeable sheet side (176; ¶0095-0097: absorbent reservoir lining 174LI lines both permeable layer 160 and base layer 176 on opposite sides of sensor device 104).
Heil does not disclose that the wetness detection sensor device includes a board having a base, a first conductive pattern formed on the base, and a mount component electrically connected to the first conductive pattern, and a second conductive pattern forming the circuit together with the first conductive pattern in a complementary manner, the second conductive pattern being disposed directly on the first conductive pattern, in electrical contact with the first conductive pattern, and spaced from the base, wherein a portion of the base corresponding to the second conductive pattern is a missing portion where the base is missing, the missing portion extending through the base and the first conductive pattern and communicating with the second conductive pattern, and wherein the second conductive pattern is soluble in liquid, or is weakened when getting wet with liquid.
Johnson teaches sheet-shaped wetness detection sensor devices (Fig. 1, feats. 114 and 116; ¶0036-0041; Figs. 4, feat. 412; ¶0050-0059; Fig. 8, feat. 812; ¶0085-0095) comprising a board having a base (Fig. 4, feat. 414; ¶0050-0051), a first conductive pattern found on the base (422; ¶0052-0053), a mount component electrically connected to the first conductive pattern (420; ¶0054), and a second conductive pattern forming the circuit together with the first conductive pattern in a complementary manner (424; ¶0055-0057). The second conductive pattern (Fig. 4, feat. 424; ¶0055; Fig. 8, feat. 824; ¶0085-0088) may be disposed directly on and in electrical contact with the first conductive pattern (Fig. 4, feat. 422; Fig. 8, feat. 822) such that the first conductive pattern is interposed between the second conductive pattern and the base (Fig. 4, feat. 414; Fig. 8, feat. 814), thereby spacing the second conductive pattern from the base. The second conductive pattern is frangible or breakable such that it fails upon contact with liquid (Fig. 4, feat. 424; ¶0055-0057). Johnson teaches that such a frangible or breakable circuit element produces a drastic change in the electrical properties of the circuit, and therefore a drastic change in the operation of the circuit, when contacted with liquid, which advantageously provides drastically different sensing signals before and after being wetted (¶0040-0041 and 0047-0049). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor disclosed by Heil so that the wetness detection sensor device has a board having a base, a first conductive pattern formed on the base, and a mount component electrically connected to the first conductive pattern, and a second conductive pattern forming the circuit together with the first conductive pattern in a complementary manner, the second conductive pattern being disposed directly on the first conductive pattern, in electrical contact with the first conductive pattern, and spaced from the base, wherein the second conductive pattern is soluble in liquid, or is weakened when getting wet with liquid in order to produce drastically different sensing signals before and after being wetted as taught by Johnson.
Heil in view of Johnson are silent with respect to a portion of the base corresponding to the second conductive pattern is a missing portion where the base is missing, the missing portion extending through the base and first conductive pattern and communicating with the second conductive pattern.
Ikoma teaches a liquid detection sensor (Figs. 1-5, feat. 100; ¶0028-0040) comprising an insulating base layer (30; ¶0028), a first electrode (20), and a second electrode (10). The sensor comprises a plurality of holes (Figs. 1 and 5, feat. 1; ¶0030, 0033-0034, 0036, and 0040) extending through the first electrode (20) and the insulating base (30) so that liquid (4; ¶0036 and 0040) may collect in the hole and contact the surface of the second electrode (1b; ¶0033). This triggers a change in the electrical properties of the circuit formed by the electrodes, which allows the liquid to be detected (¶0040). By modifying the wetness detection sensor device suggested by Heil in view of Johnson to include a hole extending through the base and first conductive pattern as taught by Ikoma, the liquid would advantageously be able to access the second conductive pattern through the base and first conductive pattern to trigger liquid detection as taught by Ikoma. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor suggested by Heil in view of Johnson so that a portion of the base corresponding to the second conductive pattern is a missing portion where the base is missing, the missing portion extending through the base and first conductive pattern and communicating with the second conductive pattern in order to allow the liquid to access the second conductive pattern through the base and first conductive pattern to trigger liquid detection as taught by Ikoma.
Regarding claim 2, Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma suggests the sensor of claim 1, and Heil further discloses that both the first water-absorbing sheet and the second water-absorbing sheet are included in the diaper sensor (Fig. 22, feats. 160, 174LI, and 176: ¶0095-0097).
Regarding claim 5, Heil further discloses that the diaper sensor is formed in a sheet shape (Figs. 17 and 18-23, feat. 103; ¶0087 and 0092).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heil in view of Johnson, in further view of Ikoma, and in further view of Bosaeus et al. (US 2014/0371702 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma suggests the diaper sensor according to claim 1. As discussed above, Ikoma teaches a sensor comprising a plurality of holes through a first electrode and insulating base (Ikoma: Fig. 1, feat. 1; ¶0030), but does not teach multiple second electrodes. Therefore, Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma do not suggest that the second conductive pattern includes multiple second conductive patterns, and the missing portion of the base includes multiple missing portions each corresponding to the multiple second conductive patterns.
Bosaeus teaches an absorbent article (Figs. 2a-e, feat. 5; ¶0115-123) comprising a wetness detector with multiple detection electrodes comprising conductive traces (21-24; ¶0116) attached to the fluid impermeable backsheet (8) of the article (¶0117-0118). The multiple detection electrodes advantageously allow liquid discharge detections to be localized to particular zones (¶0011 and 0121). The backsheet comprises multiples holes (25) which correspond to each of the detection electrodes and advantageously allow the absorbent core (6,7) to contact the electrodes (21-25) through the intervening backsheet (8; ¶0117-0118), which allows for wetness detection through the backsheet (¶0121). The detection element of the sensor device taught by Johnson is the dissolvable second conductive pattern (Johnson: Fig. 4, feat. 424) which is only disposed on one side of the base (Johnson: 414; ¶0038 and 0058). Therefore, by including holes, or gaps, in the base corresponding to the second conductive pattern, the sensor device would be able to detect wetness through the base from the absorbent material on the side of the base opposite from the second conductive pattern, as suggested by Bosaeus. Furthermore, by including multiple second conductive patterns, which correspond to the detection electrodes of Bosaeus, and corresponding gaps in the base, liquid discharge detections would be able to be localized to particular zones as taught by Bosaeus. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor suggested by Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma so that the second conductive pattern includes multiple second conductive patterns, and the missing portion of the base includes multiple missing portions each corresponding to the multiple second conductive patterns in order to localize liquid discharges to particular zones of the diaper as suggested by Bosaeus.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heil in view of Johnson, in further view of Ikoma, and in further view of Friedman et al. (US 2002/0145526 A1).
Regarding claims 6-8, Heil in view Johnson and in further view of Ikoma suggests the diaper sensor according to claim 1. Heil (Heil: ¶0050) and Johnson (Johnson: Figs. 13 and 14A-B; ¶0150-0153) both teach the incorporation of the diaper sensor into a diaper, but are silent with respect to the positioning of one or more diaper sensors in the diaper as claimed.
Friedman teaches a diaper (Figs. 1A-B, feat. 2; ¶0045-0046 and 0079-0080) comprising a diaper body comprising a fluid impermeable lining (10), a permeable inner lining (12), and a liquid absorbent material (14; ¶0046). The diaper further comprises a first sensor located close to the discharge orifice of a wearer, such as an external urethral opening (16; ¶0079), and a second sensor located distant from the discharge orifice of the wearer, such as closer to the waistband or peripheral edge (16’; ¶0079). Friedman teaches that such positioning of the sensors can be used for determining the urgency with which the diaper must be changed because if only the first sensor has been activated, the diaper is only partially full, while if the second sensor has also been activated, then the diaper is nearing its capacity (¶0079-0080). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the sensor suggested by Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma as a first diaper sensor and a second diaper sensor in a paper diaper comprising a paper diaper body wherein the first diaper sensor is provided at a portion of the paper diaper body corresponding to an external urethral opening and a second diaper sensor is provided at a portion of the paper diaper body different from that for the first diaper sensor, with respect to claim 6, so that the second diaper sensor is arranged at a peripheral edge portion of the paper diaper body, with respect to claim 7, and so that the sensor is provided at a portion of a paper diaper body different from a portion corresponding to an external urethral opening, with respect to claim 8, in order to aid with determining the urgency with which the diaper must be changed as taught by Friedman.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heil in view of Johnson, in further view of Ikoma, in further view of Roe et al. (US 2011/0172622 A1), and in further view of Friedman.
Regarding claim 9, Heil in view Johnson and in further view of Ikoma suggests the diaper sensor according to claim 1. Heil in view of Johnson do not suggest a paper diaper kit comprising a paper diaper and an incontinence pad, the paper diaper comprising a paper diaper body and a diaper sensor provided at a portion of the paper diaper body different from a portion corresponding to an external urethral opening, the incontinence pad having an incontinence pad body and a pad-side sensor dive provided on the incontinence pad body.
Roe teaches a diaper kit (Figs. 1-3, feat. 10; ¶0049-0054) comprising a reusable outer diaper body (Figs. 2A-E, G, I, K, and M, feat. 20; ¶0051 and 0054) and a disposable absorbent incontinence pad (Figs. 2F, H, J, L, N, and 3, feat. 50; ¶0052-0054). Roe teaches that such a diaper kit may have reduced manufacturing and material costs compared to traditional disposable diaper (¶0237). The diaper sensor suggested by Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma provides wetness detection and monitoring (Heil: ¶0002-0003; Johnson: ¶0005) and may be incorporated in diapers (Heil: ¶0092; Johnson: ¶0150-0152). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the sensor suggested by Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma as the diaper sensors in a paper diaper kit comprising a paper diaper and an incontinence pad, the paper diaper comprising a paper diaper body and a diaper sensor provided in the paper diaper body, and an incontinence pad having an incontinence pad body and a pad-side sensor device provided in the incontinence pad body in order to provide a low cost diaper with wetness detection and monitoring capabilities.
Heil in view of Johnson, in further view of Ikoma, and in further view of Roe does not suggest a diaper sensor provided at a portion of the paper diaper body different from a portion corresponding to an external urethral opening.
As discussed above, Friedman teaches a diaper (Figs. 1A-B, feat. 2; ¶0045-0046 and 0079-0080) comprising a diaper body comprising a fluid impermeable lining (0), a permeable inner lining (12), and a liquid absorbent material (14; ¶0046). The diaper further comprises a first sensor located close to the discharge orifice of a wearer, such as an external urethral opening (16; ¶0079), and a second sensor located distant from the discharge orifice of the wearer, such as closer to the waistband or peripheral edge (16’; ¶0079). Friedman teaches that such positioning of the sensors can be used for determining the urgency with which the diaper must be changed because if only the first sensor has been activated, the diaper is only partially full, while if the second sensor has also been activated, then the diaper is nearing its capacity (¶0079-0080). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the paper diaper kit suggested by Heil in view of Johnson, in further view of Ikoma, and in further view of Roe so that so that a sensor is provided at a portion of a paper diaper body different from a portion corresponding to an external urethral opening in order to aid with determining the urgency with which the diaper must be changed as taught by Friedman.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heil in view of Johnson, in further view of Ikoma, and in further view of Severns et al. (US 2019/0060137 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma suggests the sensor of claim 1, but does not disclose that the wetness detection sensor device includes a soluble layer interposed between the first water-absorbing sheet and the second conductive pattern, or interposed between the second water-absorbing sheet and the missing portion, and wherein the soluble layer is soluble in liquid, or is weakened when getting wet with liquid.
Severns teaches an incontinence detection pad (Fig. 1, feat. 20) comprising a water-absorbing sheet (26), liquid detection electrodes (36a, 36b), and a fluid filter layer interposed between the water-absorbing sheet and liquid detection electrodes (28; ¶0165). The fluid filter layer may comprise liquid soluble coatings (Fig. 2, feats. 28a, 28b) disposed over the electrodes (36a, 36b; ¶0178), and therefore interposed between the water-absorbing sheet (26) and the electrodes (36a, 36b). Severns teaches that such a filter layer with liquid soluble portions over the electrodes helps to reduce the likelihood of false positive detections due to exposure to low volumes of liquid, which may not represent incontinence events (¶0166-0167). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor suggested by Heil in view of Johnson and in further view of Ikoma so that the wetness detection sensor device includes a soluble layer interposed between the first water-absorbing sheet and the second conductive pattern, or interposed between the second water-absorbing sheet and the missing portion, and wherein the soluble layer is soluble in liquid, or is weakened when getting wet with liquid in order to reduce the likelihood of false positive detections due to exposure to low volumes of liquid as taught by Severns.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Alatainio (US 2015/0084614 A1) discloses an apertured liquid detection sensor.
Pepin et al. (US 2017/0354374 A1) discloses an absorbent article moisture detector with a soluble overlayer.
Rogers et al. (US 2020/0246500 A1) discloses a moisture detector using a water-soluble conductor.
Yoshitomi et al. (US 2018/0024023 A1) discloses a laminated electrode liquid detection sensor with apertures.
Tamai (US 2004/0036484 A1) disclose a liquid detection sensor for an absorbent article.
Kobayashi et al. (US 4,677,373 A) discloses a sensor for detecting corrosive liquids which dissolve a portion of the sensor electrodes.
Materer et al. (US 7,675,295 B2) discloses a wireless corrosion sensor.
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 ARJUNA P CHATRATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-8063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at 5712727159. 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.
/ARJUNA P CHATRATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/ANDREW J MENSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights