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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the core and shell of claims 12 and 13 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 12-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the patterned electrode". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this is the multiple patterned electrodes of claim 1, or just a single electrode of the array of electrodes. For purposes of examination the claim is being interpreted as “the patterned electrodes”.
Claim 13 states that the nanofibers are disposed around the core. It is unclear how the nanofibers can be disposed around the core when claim 12 states that the elements of the device are configured “in a core with a shell”.
In regards to claim 15, it is unclear how “thickness” of the nanofibers is different from the diameter of the nanofibers in paragraph 0015 of the provided specification.
The term “approximately” in claim 15 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear how close to 50 μm the thickness of the nanofibers needs to be.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8, 11, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai).
In regards to claim 1 Wang teaches a system comprising:
piezoelectric nanofibers ([0008]);
an encapsulation polymer, wherein the encapsulation polymer is configured to fill voids between the piezoelectric nanofibers ([0008] polydimethylsiloxane);
and patterned electrodes in an array, wherein the system has a thickness from 5 μm to 1 mm ([0008-0009]).
In regards to claim 7 Wang teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the encapsulation polymer is polydimethylsiloxane or parylene ([0007]).
In regards to claim 8 Wang teaches the system of claim 1. 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.
In regards to claim 11 Wang teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric nanofibers, the encapsulation polymer, and the patterned electrode are disposed on a substrate ([0008] flexible substrate).
In regards to claim 16 Wang teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric nanofibers have a diameter from 10 nm to 10 μm ([0013]).
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, 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) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai).
In regards to claim 1 Fuh teaches a system comprising:
piezoelectric nanofibers (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 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 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 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 using the system of claim 1, wherein an applied pressure produces a strain in the piezoelectric nanofibers thereby producing a charge that is processed (Figures 3 and 5 and Page 6 paragraph 2).
Claim(s) 2-4 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) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Hsu (US 20200330002 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. Hsu teaches a processor in electronic communication with a piezoelectric patch sensor in order to interpret the piezoelectric signal and determine muscle movement ([0013] [0045] [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 processor like Hsu in order to interpret the piezoelectric signal of the device as muscle movement.
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) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Kaspar (Case Study of Polyvinylidene Fluoride Doping by Carbon Nanotubes).
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) 9 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) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Filiz (US 20160306481 A1)
In regards to claim 9, modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1. Modified Fuh fails to teach a system wherein the patterned electrodes are poly(3,4- ethylenedioxythiophene) polystyrene sulfonate (PEDOT). Filiz teaches PEDOT electrodes for use in piezo based force sensing ([0023]). 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 conductive material of the electrodes of modified Fuh to be PEDOT electrodes like the electrodes of Filiz. Doing so would merely be a simple substitution of one known electrode material for another to obtain predictable results
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) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Kawamura (US 20180045586 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 in 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) 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) in view of Wang (CN106328803A - cited by applicant as Univ. Shanghai) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Sun (US 20060195035 A1).
In regards to claim 17, modified Fuh teaches the system of claim 1, wherein an applied pressure produces a strain in the piezoelectric nanofibers thereby producing a 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.
Examiner’s Note
Claim 13 contains no prior art rejections, however it is not in condition for
allowance due to its rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Conclusion
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
/ETSUB D BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791