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
The amendment filed March 9th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 29-66 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the objections and rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed December 8th, 2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 29-66 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. The claim amendments changed the scope of the claimed invention. See new grounds for rejection below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/30/2026 and 06/10/2026 are being considered by the examiner.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 29, 30, 31, 37, and 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny et al. (US 20180038022 A1) herein referred to as “Podhajny” in view of Markel et al. (US 20120136231 A1) herein referred to as “Markel”.
Regarding claim 29, Podhajny discloses an electrically conductive textile-based electrode (the paths may be used as portions of capacitive touch sensor electrodes, Paragraph [0006] and [0083]-[0084]) comprising: a textile comprising a plurality of yarns interlaced in horizontal, vertical, and/or angled directions (fabric 60 may contain multiple sets of insulating weft strands interwoven with multiple orthogonal sets of insulating warp strands using a basket weave pattern, Paragraph [0077], conductive warp strands may be inserted within some of the warp strand pairs and conductive weft strand pairs may be inserted within some of the weft strand pairs, conductive weft strand 64C has been inserted in the middle of weft strands 64-2 and conductive warp strands 28C has been inserted in the middle of warp strands 28-2, Paragraph [0078], Figures 32-34); wherein the plurality of yarns comprises yarns that are electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and/or electrically non-conductive (strands may be single filaments of material or may be threads, yarns or other multifilament strands that have been formed by intertwining multiple single-filament strands, strands may be formed of insulating (non-conductive) and conductive materials, Paragraph [0040] and [0083]); and wherein the electrode is configured to form and/or control a primary signal path for transmission of signals in an axial direction and/or in a transverse direction of the electrode (the weaving techniques used in forming fabric 60 may be used in forming single-strand signal paths, signal paths that used patches of conductive strands to form electrodes or other structure or other conductive paths, Paragraph [0083]-[0084], Figures 32-34).
However Podhajny does not explicitly disclose wherein the primary signal path comprising a pattern of electrically conductive regions and electrically non-conductive regions comprising gaps between electrically conductive regions in an axial direction and/or in a transverse direction of the textile and is controlled such that the primary signal path passes through or adjacent to electrically non-conductive regions of the textile and electrically conductive regions of the textile to reduce noise and/or reject transmission of differential and/or common noise.
Markel discloses a garment with health-monitoring capability 9Abstract) wherein the garment comprises a primary signal path (conductive paths, Paragraph [0035]), wherein the primary signal path comprising a pattern of electrically conductive regions and electrically non-conductive regions comprising gaps between electrically conductive regions in an axial direction and/or in a transverse direction of the textile and is controlled such that the primary signal path passes through or adjacent to electrically non-conductive regions of the textile and electrically conductive regions of the textile to reduce noise and/or reject transmission of differential and/or common noise (utilization of conductive paths, for reducing signal noise, Paragraph [0035], a form-fitting garment may be produced that comprises a generic matrix of conductive regions that contact the skin of the subject. Such conductive regions may, for example, be formed by alternating fabric regions of conductive and non-conductive material. As a non-limiting example, an entire garment may be formed of non-conductive material and then conductive fibers may be woven into the fabric to create the matrix of conductive regions. In such a scenario, an optimum set of conductive regions may then be selected after production (e.g., by a health-care professional), and such conductive regions may then be utilized as skin contact points for selected sensors and/or conductively connected to form conductive pathways in the garment, Paragraph [0033]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny to incorporate the teachings of Markel by including wherein the primary signal path comprising a pattern of electrically conductive regions and electrically non-conductive regions comprising gaps between electrically conductive regions in an axial direction and/or in a transverse direction of the textile and is controlled such that the primary signal path passes through or adjacent to electrically non-conductive regions of the textile and electrically conductive regions of the textile to reduce noise and/or reject transmission of differential and/or common noise. The motivation to do so being to form conductive pathways as selective sensors within the garment while reducing noise (Markel, Paragraph [0033]and [0035]).
Regarding claim 30, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
Podhajny further discloses wherein the plurality of yarns are formed in repeated or irregular patterns of underlays and overlays that are configured to transmit the signals in a direction of extension of the electrode (fabric 60 may contain multiple sets of insulating weft strands interwoven with multiple orthogonal sets of insulating warp strands using a basket weave pattern, Paragraph [0077], conductive warp strands may be inserted within some of the warp strand pairs and conductive weft strand pairs may be inserted within some of the weft strand pairs, conductive weft strand 64C has been inserted in the middle of weft strands 64-2 and conductive warp strands 28C has been inserted in the middle of warp strands 28-2, Paragraph [0078], Figure 32), as well as on a top surface, internal to, and/or on a bottom surface of the electrode (fabric 60 may be formed using weaving techniques, conductive and insulating strands may likewise be selectively exposed on the front and back of a knitted fabric, Paragraph [0074], Figure 32).
Regarding claim 31, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
Podhajny further discloses wherein the plurality of yarns are assembled together using a weaving technique, a knitting technique, a lacing technique, and/or a non-woven technique to form the electrode (the weaving technique used in forming fabric 60 may be used in forming single-strand signal paths, signal paths that use patches of conductive strands to form electrodes, Paragraph [0084], Figure 32).
Regarding claim 37, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
Podhajny further discloses wherein a stitch pattern of the textile from which the electrode is formed can be selected to control a signal transmission path in which the signals can gain or attenuate measurements comprising voltage, current, resistance, capacitance, and/or inductance (the conductive paths may be used in forming signal paths may be used in forming part of a capacitive touch sensor electrode or a resistive touch sensor electrode, Paragraph [0027], conductive strands and insulating strands are weaved together to form the fabric, Paragraph [0084], wherein the conductive strands may be used in forming other conductive structures in fabric 60 and item 10, (i.e., resistive sensor or touch capacitive sensor), Paragraph [0083]).
Regarding claim 42, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
Podhajny further discloses wherein the electrode is configured such that the signals can enter or exit the electrode through a textile patch, which is sewn, embroidered, hemmed, crimped, soldered, magnetic, chemical bond, or combinations thereof to the electrode, to connect the electrode with further devices (circuitry 16 may contain touch sensor array controller circuitry that emits drive signals onto a first set of conductive electrodes and that gathers and processes corresponding sense signals on a second set of conductive electrodes, the touch sensor array controller circuitry can emit the drive signals and con process the sense signal to gather touch input data, in fabric based device 10 (see as the textile patch), touch sensor electrodes may be formed from conductive paths that are selectively formed within the conductive fabric 60, Paragraph [0083]).
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Bozkurt et al. (US 20170224280 A1) herein referred to as “Bozkurt”.
Regarding claim 32, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein a shape, size, thickness, and/or material type of the electrode can be selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode.
Bozkurt discloses a smart patch integrated into clothing or other textiles where the strands of the smart patch include sensory elements to measure different signals (Abstract), wherein a shape, size, thickness, and/or material type of the electrode can be selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode (the mechanical and electrical properties of the insulating and conductive materials are decided based on the contaminants and noise sources in the medium to achieve a practical and useful sensitivity, specificity and dynamic range, Paragraph [0103]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Bozkurt by including wherein a shape, size, thickness, and/or material type of the electrode can be selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode. The motivation to do so being to achieve a practical and useful sensitivity, specificity, and dynamic range based on the sensing modality and where the application is deployed (Bozkurt, Paragraph [0103]).
Claim(s) 33, 34, 41, 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Shen et al. (US 20090277528 A1) herein referred to as “Shen”.
Regarding claim 33, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein, in forming the electrode, the textile is cut, folded, sewn, embroidered, and/or stacked horizontally and/or vertically to have a series of textile layers that can each be electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and/or electrically non-conductive.
Shen discloses a fabric for detecting vital signals from the human body including a layer of fabric and electrically conductive yarns (Abstract) wherein in forming the electrode, the textile is cut, folded, sewn, embroidered, and/or stacked horizontally and/or vertically to have a series of textile layers that can each be electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and/or electrically non-conductive (a fabric 100 includes a first layer 102, a second layer 104, and a third layer 106, in order to detect vital signals from human body, an electrically conductive yarn 120 is woven into the fabric 100, Paragraph [0020], Figure 1).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein, in forming the electrode, the textile is cut, folded, sewn, embroidered, and/or stacked horizontally and/or vertically to have a series of textile layers that can each be electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and/or electrically non-conductive. The motivation to do so being to electrically isolate the conductive transfer layer from outer environments and transfer vital signals to a measuring instrument (Shen, Paragraph [0020]).
Regarding claim 34, Podhajny in view of Markel and Shen discloses the electrode of claim 33.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein cutting and/or folding of the textile and/or stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically is used to control a primary transmission path for the signals in a direction of extension of the textile and/or in a direction perpendicular to the direction of extension.
Shen discloses wherein cutting and/or folding of the textile and/or stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically is used to control a primary transmission path for the signals in a direction of extension of the textile and/or in a direction perpendicular to the direction of extension (electrically conductive yarn 120 is woven into the fabric 100, the electrically conductive yarn 120 includes a detecting section 120a and a transferring section 120b, Figure 1, Paragraph [0020]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Shen to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein cutting and/or folding of the textile and/or stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically is used to control a primary transmission path for the signals in a direction of extension of the textile and/or in a direction perpendicular to the direction of extension. The motivation to do so being to electrically isolate the conductive transfer layer from outer environments and transfer vital signals to a measuring instrument (Shen, Paragraph [0020]).
Regarding claim 41, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein, by cutting or folding the textile and/or by stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically, the electrode is configured to maintain at least one area of contact, and/or with a fractal pattern, with a measurement location to ensure sufficient impedance matching for signal transmission.
Shen discloses wherein, by cutting or folding the textile and/or by stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically, the electrode is configured to maintain at least one area of contact (three layers of fabric (102, 104, 106) consists of mainly electrically insulating yarns (122,124) and electrically insulating yarn 126, electrically conductive yarn 120 includes a detecting section 120a (i.e., at least one area of contact) and a transferring section 120b, Paragraph [0020], Figure 1), and/or with a fractal pattern, with a measurement location to ensure sufficient impedance matching for signal transmission.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein, by cutting or folding the textile and/or by stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically, the electrode is configured to maintain at least one area of contact, and/or with a fractal pattern, with a measurement location to ensure sufficient impedance matching for signal transmission.. The motivation to do so being to include a contact area for detecting vital signals (Shen, Paragraph [0021]).
Regarding claim 43, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrode comprises a plurality of horizontally or vertically stacked textile layers formed from the textile, wherein the textile layers are angled such that the horizontal and vertical yarns create looped patterns or pores between the textile layers to form the electrode.
Shen discloses wherein the electrode comprises a plurality of horizontally or vertically stacked textile layers formed from the textile (three fabric layers (102, 104, 106), Paragraph [0020], Figure 1), wherein the textile layers are angled such that the horizontal and vertical yarns create looped patterns or pores between the textile layers to form the electrode (horizontal and vertical yarns create looped patterns or pore between the textile layers to form the electrode from the conductive yarns 120, Figure 1, Paragraph [0021]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein the electrode comprises a plurality of horizontally or vertically stacked textile layers formed from the textile, wherein the textile layers are angled such that the horizontal and vertical yarns create looped patterns or pores between the textile layers to form the electrode. The motivation to do so being to incorporate multiple layers to electrically isolate the conductive material (Shen, Paragraph [0020]).
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Mayer et al. (US 10400364 B1) herein referred to as “Mayer”.
Regarding claim 35, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein, for the textile, ends per inch, picks per inch, stitches per inch, knits per inch, and/or weaves per inch can be selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal-to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode.
Mayer discloses a fabric based item with fabric that comprises conductive strands and insulating strands (Abstract) wherein for the textile, ends per inch, picks per inch, stitches per inch, knits per inch, and/or weaves per inch can be selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal-to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode (the conductive strands may have a greater density than the insulating strands (i.e., sensitivity), if the weft strands are conductive, the fabric may have a higher number of picks per inch than ends per inch, Col. 8, lines 50-67 – Col. 9, lines 1-3).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Mayer by including wherein for the textile, ends per inch, picks per inch, stitches per inch, knits per inch, and/or weaves per inch can be selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal-to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode. The motivation to do so being incorporate a greater density of conductive fibers for increasing the sensitivity of the fabric (Mayer, Col. 8, lines 50-67 – Col. 9, lines 1-3).
Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Tao et al. (US 20060258247 A1) herein referred to as “Tao”.
Regarding claim 36, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein, for the textile, a weight, a density, a stitch pattern, a ratio of underlay and overlay yarns of the textile and a direction of the signals within the electrode are selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode.
Tao discloses a pressure sensing fabric comprising insulating and conducting portions in the fabric (Abstract) wherein, for the textile, a weight, a density, a stitch pattern, a ratio of underlay and overlay yarns of the textile and a direction of the signals within the electrode are selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode (as to sensitivity of the sensor, increasing contacting numbers for a given length of the fabric can improve the sensitivity, this can be achieve by 1) increasing the fabric density, Paragraph [0060]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Tao by including wherein, for the textile, a weight, a density, a stitch pattern, a ratio of underlay and overlay yarns of the textile and a direction of the signals within the electrode are selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode. The motivation to do so being to improve the sensitivity of the sensor (Tao, Paragraph [0060]).
Claim(s) 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Niemi et al. (US 20100324405 A1) herein referred to as “Niemi”.
Regarding claim 38, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein a stitch pattern of the textile from which the electrode is formed can be selected to control a signal transmission path in which the signals can disrupt, shield, and/or absorb external noise from radio frequencies, electromagnetic radiation, and/or voltage, current, resistive, capacitive, and/or inductive signals from an adjacent noise source.
Niemi discloses an electrode for acquiring physiological signals of a patient comprising two conductive textile layers (Abstract) wherein a stitch pattern of the textile from which the electrode is formed can be selected to control a signal transmission path in which the signals can disrupt, shield, and/or absorb external noise from radio frequencies, electromagnetic radiation, and/or voltage, current, resistive, capacitive, and/or inductive signals from an adjacent noise source (the matrix structure (i.e., stitch pattern) of the woven layer reduces and unifies the resistance across the surface area of the knitted skin contact layer and reduces the noise levels, Paragraph [0011]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Niemi by including wherein a stitch pattern of the textile from which the electrode is formed can be selected to control a signal transmission path in which the signals can disrupt, shield, and/or absorb external noise from radio frequencies, electromagnetic radiation, and/or voltage, current, resistive, capacitive, and/or inductive signals from an adjacent noise source. The motivation to do so being reduce resistance and noise levels to improve the accuracy and consistency of the signal readings (Niemi, Paragraph [0011]).
Claim(s) 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Tajitsu et al. (US 20190273199 A1) herein referred to as “Tajitsu”.
Regarding claim 39, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrode of claim 29 comprises electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarns that are embroidered in the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode to aggregate, absorb, or differentially transmit signal and noise sources.
Tajitsu discloses a piezoelectric element comprising braided fibers (Abstract) wherein the piezoelectric element comprises electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarns that are embroidered in the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode to aggregate, absorb, or differentially transmit signal and noise sources (the piezoelectric element 201 comprises a core 203 formed of a conductive fiber B, a sheath 202 formed of braided piezoelectric fibers A covering the core 203 and a conductive layer 204 covering the sheath 202, the conductive layer 204 functions as a shield to block the conductive fiber of the core 203 from external electromagnetic waves and minimize noise signal generated in the conductive fiber of the core 203, Paragraph [0209], wherein the piezoelectric element may be embroidered or bonded with a fabric, Paragraph [0300]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Tajitsu by including wherein the electrode of claim 29 comprises electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarns that are embroidered in the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode to aggregate, absorb, or differentially transmit signal and noise sources. The motivation to do so being to minimize the noise signal generated in the conductive fibers (Tajitsu, Paragraph [0300]).
Claim(s) 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Thornton et al. (US 4606968 A) herein referred to as “Thornton”.
Regarding claim 40, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrode comprises an electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarn that is, by varying a tension applied thereto when being sewn into the textile, at the top surface and/or the bottom surface of the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode and/or an interface with electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and electrically non-conductive regions formed in the textile.
Thornton discloses an electrostatic dissipating fabric (Abstract) wherein the electrode comprises an electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarn that is, by varying a tension applied thereto when being sewn into the textile, at the top surface and/or the bottom surface of the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode and/or an interface with electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and electrically non-conductive regions formed in the textile (the double beaming allows a non-conductive warp yarn 12 to be woven at a different pre-weaving tension than the electroconductive warp yarns 52, in order to form a rib the nonconductive yarns 12 are woven at the normal tension required for weaving satisfactory base fabric and the electroconductive warp fabric is woven at a lower pre-weaving tension, thus the finished woven fabric will have a longitudinal rib (seen as forming the direction of transmission of the signals) formed of the electroconductive warp yarn 52 which extends above and below the surface of the base fabric, Col. 5, lines 7-39, Figure 6 and 7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Thornton by including wherein the electrode comprises an electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarn that is, by varying a tension applied thereto when being sewn into the textile, at the top surface and/or the bottom surface of the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode and/or an interface with electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and electrically non-conductive regions formed in the textile. The motivation to do so being concentrate static electricity along the grid lines ad result in enhances static dissipation performance (Thornton, Col. 5, lines 62-66).
Claim(s) 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Cobanoglu et al. (US 20180171514 A1) herein referred to as “Cobanoglu”.
Regarding claim 44, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrode comprises a plurality of horizontally or vertically stacked textile layers formed from the textile, wherein the textile layers are configured to control a resistive signal, a capacitive signal, and/or an inductive signal through a transverse direction of the electrode.
Cobanoglu discloses a woven textile fabric comprising a first and second electrically conductive layer (Abstract) wherein the electrode comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and using the textile layers to control a resistive signal, a capacitive signal, and/or an inductive signal through a transverse direction of the electrode (the woven textile fabric comprises a resistive pseudo-layer which the resistive signal has to travel a long distance to get weakened throughout its path on the resistive layer 90, Paragraph [0074], Figure 6).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Cobanoglu by including wherein the electrode comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and using the textile layers to control a resistive signal, a capacitive signal, and/or an inductive signal through a transverse direction of the electrode. The motivation to do so being to incorporate a layer to weaken a resistive signal (Cobanoglu, Paragraph [0074]).
Claim(s) 45 and 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Berzowska et al. (US 20140343390 A1) herein referred to as “Berzowska”.
Regarding claim 45, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the electrode comprises a plurality of horizontally or vertically stacked textile layers formed from the textile, wherein the textile layers are knitted, woven, sewn, and/or electromechanically and/or chemically attached to secure edges of the electrode in repeating patterns, thereby controlling signal transmission within the electrode.
Berzowska discloses a textile-based electrode system (Abstract) wherein the electrode comprises a plurality of horizontally or vertically stacked textile layers formed from the textile, wherein the textile layers are knitted, woven, sewn, and/or electromechanically and/or chemically attached to secure edges of the electrode in repeating patterns, thereby controlling signal transmission within the electrode (seamlessly knitting the electrode and conductive pathways within the fabric of the textile-based electrode systems, which controls the signal transmission pathway of the electrode, Paragraph [0027]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Berzowska by including wherein the electrode comprises a plurality of horizontally or vertically stacked textile layers formed from the textile, wherein the textile layers are knitted, woven, sewn, and/or electromechanically and/or chemically attached to secure edges of the electrode in repeating patterns, thereby controlling signal transmission within the electrode. The motivation to do so being to create electrode systems that are more economical, efficient, and scalable for mass production (Berzowska, Paragraph [0027]).
Regarding claim 46, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the textile is embroidered, folded, cut, and/or stacked with an additional textile layer configured as a signal reservoir and/or a sacrificial textile layer for absorbing noise.
Berzowska discloses wherein the textile is embroidered, folded, cut, and/or stacked with an additional textile layer configured as a signal reservoir and/or a sacrificial textile layer for absorbing noise (a first insulating member can be disposed between the first fabric layer 1102 and second fabric layer 1104, a second insulating layer can be disposed between the second fabric layer 1104 and the third fabric layer 1106, the first and second insulating members can be configured to electrically and mechanically isolate the knitted conductive pathway 1120 from the first fabric layer 1102 and the second fabric layer 1104, this can reduce signal noise and thereby, enhance signal quality, Paragraph [0059]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Berzowska by including wherein the textile is embroidered, folded, cut, and/or stacked with an additional textile layer configured as a signal reservoir and/or a sacrificial textile layer for absorbing noise. The motivation to do so being to reduce signal noise and enhance signal quality (Berzowska, Paragraph [0059]).
Claim(s) 47, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel further in view of Shen further in view of Brunner et al. (US 20140100436 A1) herein referred to as “Brunner”.
Regarding claim 47, Podhajny in view of Markel discloses the electrode of claim 29.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the textile is embroidered, folded, cut, and/or stacked with an additional textile layer for impedance matching with a measurement location to optimize power transmission into and/or out of the electrode.
Shen discloses wherein the textile is embroidered, folded, cut, and/or stacked with an additional textile layer to optimize power transmission into and/or out of the electrode (three layers of fabric (102, 104, 106) consists of mainly electrically insulating yarns (122,124) and electrically insulating yarn 126, electrically conductive yarn 120 includes a detecting section 120a (i.e., at least one area of contact) and a transferring section 120b, wherein the transferring section 120b is woven within the second layer, Paragraph [0020], Figure 1).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein the textile is embroidered, folded, cut, and/or stacked with an additional textile layer to optimize power transmission into and/or out of the electrode. The motivation to do so being to electrically isolate the transferring section from the outer environments and to transfer vital signals to a measuring instrument (Shen, Paragraph [0020]).
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Shen does not explicitly disclose impedance matching the textile with a measurement location.
Brunner discloses an electrode sensor kit (Abstract) wherein the textile is impedance matched to the measurement location (the invention optimizes the electrical properties of the contact impedance between the electrode and an interface layer made of poorly conductive material towards the lowest possible values (impedance matching), Paragraph [0120]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Shen to incorporate the teachings of Brunner by including wherein the textile is impedance matched to the measurement location. The motivation to do so being to optimize the overall performance of the electrode-skin interface (Brunner, Paragraph [0120]).
Claim(s) 48, 49, 50, 56, 57, 61 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi.
Regarding claim 48, Podhajny discloses a method of forming an electrically conductive textile-based electrode (the weaving techniques used in forming fabric 60 may be used in forming single-strand signal paths, signal paths that use patches of conductive strands to form electrodes or other structures, Paragraph [0084]), the method comprising: interlacing a plurality of yarns in horizontal, vertical, and/or angled directions to form a textile (fabric 60 may contain multiple sets of insulating weft strands interwoven with multiple orthogonal sets of insulating warp strands using a basket weave pattern, Paragraph [0077], conductive warp strands may be inserted within some of the warp strand pairs and conductive weft strand pairs may be inserted within some of the weft strand pairs, conductive weft strand 64C has been inserted in the middle of weft strands 64-2 and conductive warp strands 28C has been inserted in the middle of warp strands 28-2, Paragraph [0078], Figures 32-34), wherein the plurality of yarns comprises yarns that are electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and/or electrically non-conductive (strands may be single filaments of material or may be threads, yarns or other multifilament strands that have been formed by intertwining multiple single-filament strands, strands may be formed of insulating (non-conductive) and conductive materials, Paragraph [0040] and [0083]); forming and/or controlling a primary signal path within the electrode (the weaving techniques used in forming fabric 60 may be used in forming single-strand signal paths, signal paths that used patches of conductive strands to form electrodes or other structure or other conductive paths, Paragraph [0083]-[0084], Figures 32-34); and transmitting signals along the primary signal path in an axial direction and/or in a transverse direction (the weaving techniques used in forming fabric 60 may be used in forming single-strand signal paths, signal paths that used patches of conductive strands to form electrodes or other structure or other conductive paths in the axial direction in a transverse direction, Paragraph [0083]-[0084], Figures 32-34).
However Podhajny does not explicitly disclose wherein the primary signal path comprises a pattern of electrically conductive regions and electrically non-conductive regions comprising gaps between electrically conductive regions in an axial direction and/or in a transverse direction of the textile.
Markel discloses a wherein the primary signal path comprises a pattern of electrically conductive regions and electrically non-conductive regions comprising gaps between electrically conductive regions in an axial direction and/or in a transverse direction of the textile (utilization of conductive paths, for reducing signal noise, Paragraph [0035], a form-fitting garment may be produced that comprises a generic matrix of conductive regions that contact the skin of the subject. Such conductive regions may, for example, be formed by alternating fabric regions of conductive and non-conductive material. As a non-limiting example, an entire garment may be formed of non-conductive material and then conductive fibers may be woven into the fabric to create the matrix of conductive regions. In such a scenario, an optimum set of conductive regions may then be selected after production (e.g., by a health-care professional), and such conductive regions may then be utilized as skin contact points for selected sensors and/or conductively connected to form conductive pathways in the garment, Paragraph [0033]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny to incorporate the teachings of Markel by including wherein the primary signal path comprises a pattern of electrically conductive regions and electrically non-conductive regions comprising gaps between electrically conductive regions in an axial direction and/or in a transverse direction of the textile. The motivation to do so being to form conductive pathways as selective sensors within the garment while reducing noise (Markel, Paragraph [0033]and [0035]).
Further Podhajny does not explicitly disclose wherein the primary signal path is controlled such that the primary signal path passes through or adjacent to electrically non-conductive regions of the textile and electrically conductive regions of the textile to reduce noise and/or reject transmission of differential and/or common noise; wherein the electrically non-conductive regions and the electrically conductive regions of the textile absorb, in the manner of a reservoir, noise introduced along the primary signal path.
Niemi discloses wherein the primary signal path is controlled such that the primary signal path passes through or adjacent to electrically non-conductive regions of the textile and electrically conductive regions of the textile to reduce noise and/or reject transmission of differential and/or common noise, wherein the electrically non-conductive regions and the electrically conductive regions of the textile absorb, in the manner of a reservoir, noise introduced along the primary signal path (the matrix structure (i.e., stitch pattern) of the woven layer reduces and unifies the resistance across the surface area of the knitted skin contact layer and reduces the noise levels, Paragraph [0011], conductive textile layers are made of conductive and non-conductive yarns, Paragraph [0016]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny to incorporate the teachings of Niemi by including wherein the primary signal path is controlled such that the primary signal path passes through or adjacent to electrically non-conductive regions of the textile and electrically conductive regions of the textile to reduce noise and/or reject transmission of differential and/or common noise, wherein the electrically non-conductive regions and the electrically conductive regions of the textile absorb, in the manner of a reservoir, noise introduced along the primary signal path. The motivation to do so being reduce resistance and noise levels to improve the accuracy and consistency of the signal readings (Niemi, Paragraph [0011]).
Regarding claim 49, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
Podhajny further discloses wherein the method comprises: forming the plurality of yarns in repeated or irregular patterns of underlays and overlays (fabric 60 may contain multiple sets of insulating weft strands interwoven with multiple orthogonal sets of insulating warp strands using a basket weave pattern, Paragraph [0077], conductive warp strands may be inserted within some of the warp strand pairs and conductive weft strand pairs may be inserted within some of the weft strand pairs, conductive weft strand 64C has been inserted in the middle of weft strands 64-2 and conductive warp strands 28C has been inserted in the middle of warp strands 28-2, Paragraph [0078], Figure 32); and transmitting, via the underlays and overlays, the signals in a direction of extension of the electrode, as well as on a top surface and/or on a bottom surface of the electrode (fabric 60 may be formed using weaving techniques, conductive and insulating strands may likewise be selectively exposed on the front and back of a knitted fabric, Paragraph [0074], Figure 32).
Regarding claim 50, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
Podhajny further discloses wherein the method comprises assembling the plurality of yarns together using a weaving technique, a knitting technique, a lacing technique, and/or a non-wove technique to form the electrode (the weaving technique used in forming fabric 60 may be used in forming single-strand signal paths, signal paths that use patches of conductive strands to form electrodes, Paragraph [0084], Figure 32).
Regarding claim 56, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
Podhajny further discloses wherein the method comprises selecting a stitch pattern of the textile from which the electrode is formed to control a signal transmission path in which the signals can gain or attenuate measurements comprising voltage, current, resistance, capacitance, and/or inductance (the conductive paths may be used in forming signal paths may be used in forming part of a capacitive touch sensor electrode or a resistive touch sensor electrode, Paragraph [0027], conductive strands and insulating strands are weaved together to form the fabric, Paragraph [0084], wherein the conductive strands may be used in forming other conductive structures in fabric 60 and item 10, (i.e., resistive sensor or touch capacitive sensor), Paragraph [0083]).
Regarding claim 57, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the method further comprises selecting a stitch pattern of the textile from which the electrode is formed to control a signal transmission path in which the signals can disrupt, shield, and/or absorb external noise from radio frequencies, electromagnetic radiation, and/or voltage, current, resistive, capacitive, and/or inductive signals from an adjacent noise source.
Niemi discloses selecting a stitch pattern of the textile from which the electrode is formed can be selected to control a signal transmission path in which the signals can disrupt, shield, and/or absorb external noise from radio frequencies, electromagnetic radiation, and/or voltage, current, resistive, capacitive, and/or inductive signals from an adjacent noise source (the matrix structure (i.e., stitch pattern) of the woven layer reduces and unifies the resistance across the surface area of the knitted skin contact layer and reduces the noise levels, Paragraph [0011]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Niemi by including selecting a stitch pattern of the textile from which the electrode is formed can be selected to control a signal transmission path in which the signals can disrupt, shield, and/or absorb external noise from radio frequencies, electromagnetic radiation, and/or voltage, current, resistive, capacitive, and/or inductive signals from an adjacent noise source. The motivation to do so being reduce resistance and noise levels to improve the accuracy and consistency of the signal readings (Niemi, Paragraph [0011]).
Regarding claim 61, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
Podhajny further discloses wherein the method comprises transmitting the signals into or out of the electrode through a textile patch, which is sewn, embroidered, hemmed, crimped, soldered, magnetic, chemical bond, or combinations thereof to the electrode, to connect the electrode with further devices (circuitry 16 may contain touch sensor array controller circuitry that emits drive signals onto a first set of conductive electrodes and that gathers and processes corresponding sense signals on a second set of conductive electrodes, the touch sensor array controller circuitry can emit the drive signals and con process the sense signal to gather touch input data, in fabric based device 10 (see as the textile patch), touch sensor electrodes may be formed from conductive paths that are selectively formed within the conductive fabric 60, Paragraph [0083]).
Claim(s) 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Bozkurt.
Regarding claim 51, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel does not explicitly disclose wherein the method further comprises selecting a shape, size, thickness, and/or material type of the electrode to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode.
Bozkurt wherein the method further comprises selecting a shape, size, thickness, and/or material type of the electrode to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode (the mechanical and electrical properties of the insulating and conductive materials are decided based on the contaminants and noise sources in the medium to achieve a practical and useful sensitivity, specificity and dynamic range, Paragraph [0103]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Bozkurt by including selecting a shape, size, thickness, and/or material type of the electrode can be selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode. The motivation to do so being to achieve a practical and useful sensitivity, specificity, and dynamic range based on the sensing modality and where the application is deployed (Bozkurt, Paragraph [0103]).
Claim(s) 52, 53, 60, 62 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Shen.
Regarding claim 52, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises, while forming the electrode, cutting, folding, sewing, embroidering, and/or stacking the textile horizontally and/or vertically to have a series of textile layers that can each be electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and/or electrically non-conductive.
Shen wherein the method comprises, while forming the electrode, cutting, folding, sewing, embroidering, and/or stacking the textile horizontally and/or vertically to have a series of textile layers that can each be electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and/or electrically non-conductive. (a fabric 100 includes a first layer 102, a second layer 104, and a third layer 106, in order to detect vital signals from human body, an electrically conductive yarn 120 is woven into the fabric 100, Paragraph [0020], Figure 1).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein the method comprises, while forming the electrode, cutting, folding, sewing, embroidering, and/or stacking the textile horizontally and/or vertically to have a series of textile layers that can each be electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and/or electrically non-conductive.. The motivation to do so being to electrically isolate the conductive transfer layer from outer environments and transfer vital signals to a measuring instrument (Shen, Paragraph [0020]).
Regarding claim 53, Podhajny in view of Markel, Niemi, and Shen discloses the method of claim 52.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method includes cutting and/or folding of the textile and/or stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically is used to control a primary transmission path for the signals in a direction of extension of the textile and/or in a direction perpendicular to the direction of extension..
Shen discloses wherein cutting and/or folding of the textile and/or stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically is used to control a primary transmission path for the signals in a direction of extension of the textile and/or in a direction perpendicular to the direction of extension (electrically conductive yarn 120 is woven into the fabric 100, the electrically conductive yarn 120 includes a detecting section 120a and a transferring section 120b, Figure 1, Paragraph [0020]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein cutting and/or folding of the textile and/or stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically is used to control a primary transmission path for the signals in a direction of extension of the textile and/or in a direction perpendicular to the direction of extension. The motivation to do so being to electrically isolate the conductive transfer layer from outer environments and transfer vital signals to a measuring instrument (Shen, Paragraph [0020]).
Regarding claim 62, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and angling adjacent textile layers relative to each other such that the horizontal and vertical yarns create looped patterns or pores between the textile layers to form the electrode.
Shen discloses wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; (three fabric layers (102, 104, 106), Paragraph [0020], Figure 1), stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and angling adjacent textile layers relative to each other such that the horizontal and vertical yarns create looped patterns or pores between the textile layers to form the electrode (horizontal and vertical yarns create looped patterns or pore between the textile layers to form the electrode from the conductive yarns 120, Figure 1, Paragraph [0021]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and angling adjacent textile layers relative to each other such that the horizontal and vertical yarns create looped patterns or pores between the textile layers to form the electrode. The motivation to do so being to incorporate multiple layers to electrically isolate the conductive material (Shen, Paragraph [0020]).
Claim(s) 54 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Mayer.
Regarding claim 54, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method further comprises selecting, for the textile, ends per inch, picks per inch, stitches per inch, knits per inch, and/or weaves per inch to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal-to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode.
Mayer discloses selecting, for the textile, ends per inch, picks per inch, stitches per inch, knits per inch, and/or weaves per inch to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal-to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode (the conductive strands may have a greater density than the insulating strands (i.e., affects sensitivity), if the weft strands are conductive, the fabric may have a higher number of picks per inch than ends per inch, Col. 8, lines 50-67 – Col. 9, lines 1-3).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Mayer by including selecting, for the textile, ends per inch, picks per inch, stitches per inch, knits per inch, and/or weaves per inch to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal-to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode. The motivation to do so being incorporate a greater density of conductive fibers for increasing the sensitivity of the fabric (Mayer, Col. 8, lines 50-67 – Col. 9, lines 1-3).
Claim(s) 55 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Tao.
Regarding claim 55, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method further comprises selecting, for the textile, a weight, a density, a stitch pattern, a ratio of underlay and overlay yarns of the textile and a direction of the signals within the electrode to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode.
Tao discloses selecting, for the textile, a weight, a density, a stitch pattern, a ratio of underlay and overlay yarns of the textile and a direction of the signals within the electrode are selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode (as to sensitivity of the sensor, increasing contacting numbers for a given length of the fabric can improve the sensitivity, this can be achieve by 1) increasing the fabric density, Paragraph [0060]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Tao by including selecting, for the textile, a weight, a density, a stitch pattern, a ratio of underlay and overlay yarns of the textile and a direction of the signals within the electrode are selected to control a response time, an input dynamic range, an output dynamic range, a bandwidth, a signal- to-noise ratio, a common-noise rejection ratio, differential-noise rejection, a signal gain, a sensitivity, and/or an insensitivity of the electrode. The motivation to do so being to improve the sensitivity of the sensor (Tao, Paragraph [0060]).
Claim(s) 58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Tajitsu.
Regarding claim 58, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method further comprises embroidering electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarns in the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode to aggregate or differentially transmit signal and noise sources.
Tajitsu discloses embroidering electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarns in the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode to aggregate or differentially transmit signal and noise sources (the piezoelectric element 201 comprises a core 203 formed of a conductive fiber B, a sheath 202 formed of braided piezoelectric fibers A covering the core 203 and a conductive layer 204 covering the sheath 202, the conductive layer 204 functions as a shield to block the conductive fiber of the core 203 from external electromagnetic waves and minimize noise signal generated in the conductive fiber of the core 203, Paragraph [0209], wherein the piezoelectric element may be embroidered or bonded with a fabric, Paragraph [0300]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before
the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Tajitsu by including embroidering electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarns in the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode to aggregate or differentially transmit signal and noise sources. The motivation to do so being to minimize the noise signal generated in the conductive fibers (Tajitsu, Paragraph [0300]). US 20190273199 A1
Claim(s) 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Thornton.
Regarding claim 59, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method further comprises varying a tension applied to an electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarn that is sewn into the textile, at the top surface and/or the bottom surface of the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode and/or an interface with electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and electrically non-conductive regions formed in the textile.
Thornton discloses wherein the method further comprises varying a tension applied to an electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarn that is sewn into the textile, at the top surface and/or the bottom surface of the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode and/or an interface with electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and electrically non-conductive regions formed in the textile (the double beaming allows a non-conductive warp yarn 12 to be woven at a different pre-weaving tension than the electroconductive warp yarns 52, in order to form a rib the nonconductive yarns 12 are woven at the normal tension required for weaving satisfactory base fabric and the electroconductive warp fabric is woven at a lower pre-weaving tension, thus the finished woven fabric will have a longitudinal rib (seen as forming the direction of transmission of the signals) formed of the electroconductive warp yarn 52 which extends above and below the surface of the base fabric, Col. 5, lines 7-39, Figure 6 and 7).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Thornton by including wherein the method further comprises varying a tension applied to an electrically conductive and/or electrically semi-conductive yarn that is sewn into the textile, at the top surface and/or the bottom surface of the textile to control a direction of transmission of the signals within the electrode and/or an interface with electrically conductive, electrically semi-conductive, and electrically non-conductive regions formed in the textile. The motivation to do so being concentrate static electricity along the grid lines ad result in enhances static dissipation performance (Thornton, Col. 5, lines 62-66).
Claim(s) 63 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Cobanoglu.
Regarding claim 63, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and using the textile layers to control a resistive signal, a capacitive signal, and/or an inductive signal through a transverse direction of the electrode.
Cobanoglu discloses a woven textile fabric comprising a first and second electrically conductive layer (Abstract) wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and using the textile layers to control a resistive signal, a capacitive signal, and/or an inductive signal through a transverse direction of the electrode (the woven textile fabric comprises a resistive pseudo-layer which the resistive signal has to travel a long distance to get weakened throughout its path on the resistive layer 90, Paragraph [0074], Figure 6).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Cobanoglu by including wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and using the textile layers to control a resistive signal, a capacitive signal, and/or an inductive signal through a transverse direction of the electrode. The motivation to do so being to incorporate a layer to weaken a resistive signal (Cobanoglu, Paragraph [0074]).
Claim(s) 64 and 65 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Berzowska.
Regarding claim 64, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and knitting, weaving, sewing, and/or electromechanically and/or chemically attaching the textile layers to secure edges of the electrode in repeating patterns, thereby controlling signal transmission within the electrode.
Berzowska discloses wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and knitting, weaving, sewing, and/or electromechanically and/or chemically attaching the textile layers to secure edges of the electrode in repeating patterns, thereby controlling signal transmission within the electrode (seamlessly knitting the electrode and conductive pathways within the fabric of the textile-based electrode systems, which controls the signal transmission pathway of the electrode, Paragraph [0027]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Berzowska by including wherein the method comprises: forming textile layers from the textile; stacking, horizontally or vertically, the textile layers; and knitting, weaving, sewing, and/or electromechanically and/or chemically attaching the textile layers to secure edges of the electrode in repeating patterns, thereby controlling signal transmission within the electrode. The motivation to do so being to create electrode systems that are more economical, efficient, and scalable for mass production (Berzowska, Paragraph [0027]).
Regarding claim 65, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises embroidering, folding, and/or stacking the textile with an additional textile layer, which is operable as a signal reservoir, and/or a sacrificial textile layer, which is operable for absorbing noise.
Berzowska discloses wherein the method comprises embroidering, folding, and/or stacking the textile with an additional textile layer, which is operable as a signal reservoir, and/or a sacrificial textile layer, which is operable for absorbing noise (a first insulating member can be disposed between the first fabric layer 1102 and second fabric layer 1104, a second insulating layer can be disposed between the second fabric layer 1104 and the third fabric layer 1106, the first and second insulating members can be configured to electrically and mechanically isolate the knitted conductive pathway 1120 from the first fabric layer 1102 and the second fabric layer 1104, this can reduce signal noise and thereby, enhance signal quality, Paragraph [0059]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Berzowska by including wherein the method comprises embroidering, folding, and/or stacking the textile with an additional textile layer, which is operable as a signal reservoir, and/or a sacrificial textile layer, which is operable for absorbing noise. The motivation to do so being to reduce signal noise and enhance signal quality (Berzowska, Paragraph [0059]).
Claim(s) 60 and 66 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi further in view of Shen further in view of Brunner.
Regarding claim 60, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
However Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises maintaining, by cutting or folding the textile and/or by stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically, at least one area of contact, with a fractal pattern, with a measurement location to ensure sufficient impedance matching for signal transmission.
Shen discloses wherein the method comprises maintaining, by cutting or folding the textile and/or by stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically, at least one area of contact, (three layers of fabric (102, 104, 106) consists of mainly electrically insulating yarns (122,124) and electrically insulating yarn 126, electrically conductive yarn 120 includes a detecting section 120a (i.e., at least one area of contact) and a transferring section 120b, Paragraph [0020], Figure 1).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein the method comprises maintaining, by cutting or folding the textile and/or by stacking a series of textile layers horizontally and/or vertically, at least one area of contact, with a fractal pattern, with a measurement location to ensure sufficient impedance matching for signal transmission. The motivation to do so being to include a contact area for detecting vital signals (Shen, Paragraph [0021]).
However Podhajny in view of Markel, Niemi, and Shen does not explicitly disclose a fractal pattern, with a measurement location to ensure sufficient impedance matching for signal transmission.
Brunner discloses an electrode sensor kit (Abstract) a fractal pattern, with a measurement location to ensure sufficient impedance matching for signal transmission (the invention optimizes the electrical properties of the contact impedance between the electrode and an interface layer made of poorly conductive material towards the lowest possible values (impedance matching), Paragraph [0120]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel, Niemi, and Shen to incorporate the teachings of Brunner by including a fractal pattern, with a measurement location to ensure sufficient impedance matching for signal transmission. The motivation to do so being to optimize the overall performance of the electrode-skin interface (Brunner, Paragraph [0120]).
Regarding claim 66, Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi discloses the method of claim 48.
Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi does not explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises embroidering, folding, and/or stacking the textile with an additional textile layer for impedance matching with a measurement location to optimize power transmission into and/or out of the electrode.
Shen discloses wherein the method comprises wherein the method comprises embroidering, folding, and/or stacking the textile with an additional textile layer to optimize power transmission into and/or out of the electrode. (three layers of fabric (102, 104, 106) consists of mainly electrically insulating yarns (122,124) and electrically insulating yarn 126, electrically conductive yarn 120 includes a detecting section 120a (i.e., at least one area of contact) and a transferring section 120b, wherein the transferring section 120b is woven within the second layer, Paragraph [0020], Figure 1).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel and Niemi to incorporate the teachings of Shen by including wherein the method comprises embroidering, folding, and/or stacking the textile with an additional textile layer to optimize power transmission into and/or out of the electrode. The motivation to do so being to electrically isolate the transferring section from the outer environments and to transfer vital signals to a measuring instrument (Shen, Paragraph [0020]).
However Podhajny in view of Markel, Niemi, and Shen does not explicitly disclose impedance matching the textile with a measurement location.
Brunner discloses an electrode sensor kit (Abstract) wherein the textile is impedance matched to the measurement location (the invention optimizes the electrical properties of the contact impedance between the electrode and an interface layer made of poorly conductive material towards the lowest possible values (impedance matching), Paragraph [0120]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Podhajny in view of Markel, Niemi, and Shen to incorporate the teachings of Brunner by including wherein the textile is impedance matched to the measurement location. The motivation to do so being to optimize the overall performance of the electrode-skin interface (Brunner, Paragraph [0120]).
Conclusion
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 Dana Stumpfoll whose telephone number is (703)756-4669. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 pm (CT), M-F.
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, Joanne Rodden can be reached at (303) 297-4276. 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.
/D.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOANNE M RODDEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights