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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8, 10-11, 14-16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array -previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1-previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai -previously cited).
In regards to claim 1 Fuh teaches a system comprising:
piezoelectric nanofibers wherein an applied pressure produces a strain in the piezoelectric nanofibers thereby producing a charge (Figure 1 PVDF fibers);
an encapsulation polymer, wherein the encapsulation polymer is configured to fill voids between the piezoelectric nanofibers (Fig 1 PDMS);
and patterned electrodes in an array (Page 6 Paragraph 2 Patterned electrodes),
Fuh fails to teach a system wherein a pair of the arrays are disposed on opposite sides of the piezoelectric nanofibers, wherein the patterned electrodes are poly(3,4-ethvlenedioxythiophene) polystyrene sulfonate. Filiz teaches PEDOT electrodes for use in piezo based force sensing, and a pair of the arrays are that disposed on opposite sides of a piezoelectric layer ([0023] PDOT, Fig 4, electrode 406 and electrode 410). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the electrodes of Fuh to be multiple PEDOT electrodes sandwiching the piezoelectric fibers like the electrodes of Filiz. Doing so would merely be a simple substitution of one known electrode material for another to obtain predictable results and a mere duplication and rearrangement of parts.
Modified Fuh fails to teach a system that has a thickness from 5 μm to 1 mm. Wang teaches piezoelectric fibers on a substrate with a thickness of 1mm ([0008-0009]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the system of modified Fuh 1mm thick like the device of Wang. Doing so would merely be a mere change in size.
In regards to claim 7 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the encapsulation polymer is polydimethylsiloxane or parylene (Fig 1 PDMS).
In regards to claim 8 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh does not explicitly teach a system wherein from 90% to 100% of the voids are filled with the encapsulation polymer. Wang teaches that the polymer and fibers are mixed together in the layer ([0008]). Inherently 100% of the voids would be filled with the polymer if the entire layer is made up of fibers encased in the polymer. It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the PVDF and PDMS layers of modified Fuh mixed like the device of Wang so 90% to 100% of the voids are filled with the encapsulation polymer. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of encapsulating the PVDF fibers on all sides.
In regards to claim 10 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the system is flexible (Abstract). Modified Fuh does not teach a Young's modulus from 360 kPa to 870 kPa. It is noted that Applicant has not disclosed in the specification that the Young's modulus provides an advantage or unexpected result. As such, it would have been obvious, through routine experimentation, to determine an optimum Young's modulus of Fuh. Furthermore, “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
In regards to claim 11 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric nanofibers, the encapsulation polymer, and the patterned electrode are disposed on a substrate (Figure 1 TPE substrate).
In regards to claim 14 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh does not teach a system wherein the encapsulation polymer has a thickness from 10 μm to 25 μm. It is noted that Applicant has not disclosed in the specification that the encapsulation polymer thickness provides an advantage or unexpected result. As such, it would have been obvious, through routine experimentation, to determine an optimum encapsulation polymer thickness of Fuh. Furthermore, “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
In regards to claim 15 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh does not teach a system wherein the piezoelectric nanofibers have a thickness of approximately 50 μm and the encapsulation polymer has a thickness on either side of the piezoelectric nanofibers of 15 μm. It is noted that Applicant has not disclosed in the specification that the nanofiber thickness encapsulation polymer thickness provides an advantage or unexpected result. As such, it would have been obvious, through routine experimentation, to determine an optimum nanofiber thickness and encapsulation polymer thickness of Fuh. Furthermore, “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
In regards to claim 16 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric nanofibers have a diameter from 10 nm to 10 μm (Page 2 “diameter range of NMFs are found to be between 1 and 5 μm”).
In regards to claim 18, modified Fuh teaches a method of measuring pressure applied to the system of claim 1, wherein the applied pressure produces the strain in the piezoelectric nanofibers thereby producing the charge that is processed (Figures 3 and 5 and Page 6 paragraph 2).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array-previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1-previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai-previously cited) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Zhang (US 20130274620 A1) .
In regards to claim 2, modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh fails to teach a system further comprising a processor in electronic communication with the patterned electrodes configured to measure the charge from the piezoelectric nanofibers, wherein the processor is configured to determine a blood pressure based on a pulse wave velocity detected by the piezoelectric nanofibers. Zhang teaches a processor in electronic communication with a piezoelectric patch sensor in order to interpret the piezoelectric signal and determine muscle movement ([0077] measurement and computation unit is a processor, “calculation of the blood pressure, either alone on the basis of the evaluation of a piezoelectric pressure measurement of the radial pulse on the patient's wrist using equation 2 for calculation of the pulse wave velocity in conjunction with one of equations 3 to 5”). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of modified Fuh to include a processor like Zhang in order to interpret the piezoelectric signal of the device blood pressure.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array-previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1 - previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai) - previously cited as applied to claim 1, further in view of Hsu (US 20200330002 A1 - previously cited) .
In regards to claim 3, modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh fails to teach a system comprising a wireless data transmission system in electronic communication with the patterned electrodes. Hsu teaches wireless connection between a piezoelectric patch to a host processor ([0016] [0061]). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of modified Fuh to include a wireless data transmitter and a processor like Hsu in order to interpret the piezoelectric signal of the device as muscle movement.
In regards to claim 4, modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh fails to teach a system comprising piezoelectric nanofibers that are poly(vinylidene fluoride- cotrifluoroethylene). Hsu teaches piezoelectric nanofibers that are poly(vinylidene fluoride- cotrifluoroethylene) ([0063])). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fibers of modified Fuh to be made of poly(vinylidene fluoride- cotrifluoroethylene) like the fibers of Hsu. Doing so would merely be a simple substitution of one known piezoelectric fiber material for another to obtain predictable results
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array - previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1 - previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai - previously cited) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Kaspar (Case Study of Polyvinylidene Fluoride Doping by Carbon Nanotubes - previously cited).
In regards to claim 5, modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh fails to teach a system wherein piezoelectric nanofibers and/or the encapsulation polymer include a dopant. Kaspar teaches PVDF fibers doped with carbon nanotubes to improve conductivity and permittivity (Figure 10 and Conclusions). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fibers of modified Fuh to be doped with carbon nanotubes like the fibers of Kaspar in order to have increased conductivity and permittivity.
In regards to claim 6, modified Fuh in view of Kaspar teaches the system of claim 5, wherein the dopant is carbon nanotubes, lead zirconate titanate (PZT),barium titanate, and/or zinc oxide (Kaspar Figure 10 and Conclusions)).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array - previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1 - previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai - previously cited) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Kawamura (US 20180045586 A1 - previously cited).
In regards to claim 12 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh fails to teach a device wherein the piezoelectric nanofibers, the encapsulation polymer, and the patterned electrodes are configured as part of a core with a shell. Kawamura teaches a device wherein a piezoelectric sensor core is inside of a shell ([0126] sensor is a core and housing is a shell). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of modified Fuh to include housing like the device of Kawamura. Doing so would merely be combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable result of protecting the sensor with a housing.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array - previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1 - previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai - previously cited) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Myslinski (US 20220185437 A1).
In regards to claim 12 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh fails to teach a device wherein the piezoelectric nanofibers, the encapsulation polymer, and the patterned electrodes are configured as part of a core with a shell. Myslinski teaches a device wherein an electrically conducting core is inside of a piezoelectric sensor shell ([0028] “piezoelectric fibers with a piezoelectric shell around an electrically conducting core are able to be used”). It would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of modified Fuh to include be a tube shape with the electrodes inside like the device of Myslinski. Doing so would be a mere change in shape to yield predictable result of allowing the sensors to be woven into fabric for sensing.
In regards to claim 13 modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the patterned electrodes are in the core and the piezoelectric nanofibers are disposed around the core in the shell (Myslinski [0028] “piezoelectric fibers with a piezoelectric shell around an electrically conducting core are able to be used”).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array - previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1 - previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shangha - previously cited) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Sun (US 20060195035 A1 - previously cited).
In regards to claim 17, modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the applied pressure produces the strain in the piezoelectric nanofibers thereby producing the charge that is processed (Figures 3 and 5 and Page 6 paragraph 2). Modified Fuh fails to teach using this method to measure blood pressure. Sun teaches using piezoelectric sensors to measure wrist blood pressure ([0052]). would have been prima facie obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of modified Fuh so that the sensors are placed at a wrist like the method of Sun. Doing so would allow the device to measure the wrist blood pressure of a user.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 05/27/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection(s) of claim(s) 12, 13, and 15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection(s) of claim(s) 12, 13, and 15 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 05/27/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 7, 8, 11, and 16 under Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai -previously cited) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array -previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1-previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai -previously cited).
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 05/27/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 7, 11, and 16 under Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array -previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai -previously cited) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Fuh (Self-Powered Pressure Sensor with fully encapsulated 3D printed wavy substrate and highly-aligned piezoelectric fibers array -previously cited) in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1-previously cited) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai -previously cited).
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 LUCY EPPERT whose telephone number is (571)270-0818. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 EST.
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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at (571) 272-5001. 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.
/LUCY EPPERT/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/ADAM J EISEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights