Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/592,083

ACTIVE SELF-TRANSFORMABLE TEXTILES

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Feb 29, 2024
Examiner
STEELE, JENNIFER A
Art Unit
1789
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Massachusetts Institute Of Technology
OA Round
2 (Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 5m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allow Rate
342 granted / 708 resolved
-16.7% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 5m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
756
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
49.0%
+9.0% vs TC avg
§102
15.9%
-24.1% vs TC avg
§112
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 708 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Improper Markush Grouping Claims 8 and 21 are rejected on the basis that it contains an improper Markush grouping of alternatives. See In re Harnisch, 631 F.2d 716, 721-22 (CCPA 1980) and Ex parte Hozumi, 3 USPQ2d 1059, 1060 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1984). A Markush grouping is proper if the alternatives defined by the Markush group (i.e., alternatives from which a selection is to be made in the context of a combination or process, or alternative chemical compounds as a whole) share a “single structural similarity” and a common use. A Markush grouping meets these requirements in two situations. First, a Markush grouping is proper if the alternatives are all members of the same recognized physical or chemical class or the same art-recognized class, and are disclosed in the specification or known in the art to be functionally equivalent and have a common use. Second, where a Markush grouping describes alternative chemical compounds, whether by words or chemical formulas, and the alternatives do not belong to a recognized class as set forth above, the members of the Markush grouping may be considered to share a “single structural similarity” and common use where the alternatives share both a substantial structural feature and a common use that flows from the substantial structural feature. See MPEP § 2117. The Markush grouping of the “textile” is improper because the alternatives defined by the Markush grouping do not share both a single structural similarity and a common use for the following reasons: The textile is claimed as consisting of a “cotton, neoprene, jersey, vinyl, velvet, brocade, silk, polyesters, wool, linen, mesh and polyester-polyurethane copolymers, including elastane and spandex. The list of materials include both a fiber composition type and a textile structure. A fiber composition, e.g. wool, elastane or spandex which are fiber materials and are not the same as a textile structure, e.g. brocade, mesh or velvet which are types of textile structures. To overcome this rejection, Applicant may set forth each alternative (or grouping of patentably indistinct alternatives) within an improper Markush grouping in a series of independent or dependent claims and/or present convincing arguments that the group members recited in the alternative within a single claim in fact share a single structural similarity as well as a common use. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hockaday et al (US 2007/0184238). As to claims 1 and 15, Hockaday is directed to laminate actuators and valves (Title). Hockaday teaches artificial stoma formed with multilayer structures that actuate with humidity, temperature, chemical environment or light. The actuator can be incorporated into shoes, apparel, fuel cells, machinery and building to control fluid flow, or diffusion to regulate humidity, temperature, chemical environment and light (ABST) and [0004]-[0013]. Hockaday teaches laminates or bi-material and teaches several different embodiments wherein one typical humidity actuator is composed of two materials: the substrate material being porous polyimide, with a high modulus of elasticity and unaffected by humidity. As the substrate is unaffected by humidity, the substrate is equated with the flexible base material that is non-reactive. The second material such as Nafion or DAIS typically has a modulus of elasticity at least 10 times lower than the substrate material and has a high humidity modulus [0030]. The second material is equated with the active material that is reactive to an external stimulus, e.g. humidity, temperature, light, chemicals. Hockaday anticipates a material with a flexible base material and a second material wherein the substrate (base) is unaffected by humidity [0030] and this is equated with either non-reactive or less reactive to an external stimulus than the second material. Hockaday teaches the flap valve designs in a pattern that are coated or laminated with a material that expands when humidified as shown in the figures below [0049]. Hockaday also teaches the responsive or active material is printed on the substrate in paragraph [0485], [0486], [0488], and [0498]. Hockaday teaches in fig. 2A an array of flap valves with temperature and humidity actuation. The substrate is a 10 micron thick polyester and a print-sprayed deposit of a high coefficient of expansion material such as a film of low density of polyethylene 24 is deposited on the substrate 23 [0485]. The high coefficient of expansion material of low density polyethylene is equated with the active material and would be an embodiment that is absent an adhesive layer. Hockaday teaches depositing the high coefficient of humidity expansion material, DIAS is spray deposited. Coated, laminated or printed is equated with disposing an active material on the flexible base. Hockaday teaches the active material is applied in patterns [0068]-[0070], [0210]-[0213], lattice patterns, slit patterns [0404]-[0417]. As shown in Fig. 1b and 8A below, the bi-material response to a high humidity changes the shape from a flat laminate to a laminate with 3-D shape of open flaps or undulating openings. Hockaday teaches the flaps open and allow fluids such as air to flow through the openings [0049], [0107], and [0488]. The open flaps are equated with a predetermined 3-dimensional transformed shape. PNG media_image1.png 618 504 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 498 784 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 301 710 media_image3.png Greyscale As to claim 2, Hockaday teaches the natural shape and equated with the shape prior to exposure to humidity, temperature, chemical environment or light which actuates the multilayered structure. As to claims 3 and 17, Hockaday teaches the flap valve designs in a pattern that are coated or laminated with a material that expands when humidified as shown in the figures above [0049]. Hockaday also teaches the responsive or active material is printed on the substrate in paragraph [0485], [0486], [0488], and [0498]. As to claim 4, Hockaday teaches the radius of curvature of the bi-material strip due to a humidity changes is proportional to the thickness of the materials [0033] and similarly the radius of curvature of a bi-material strip (structure) due to a temperature change is proportional to the thickness of the layers divided by the difference in thermal expansion coefficient and the change in temperature [0038]. Hockaday teaches the strips are formed 20 micron wide and 60 micron apart strips [0521] as shown in Fig. 26A which is equated with the claimed particular heights and widths of active material along the pattern. As to claims 5 and 18, Hockaday teaches the active material can be printed on in patterns to provide the preferential bending direction as shown in figures 1B, 2A and 8A. As to claim 6, Hockaday teaches the external stimulus can be one of humidity, temperature, chemical environment or light (ABST). As to claims 7 and 20, Hockaday teaches the substrate (base material) is porous polyimide with a high modulus of elasticity [0030] which is equated with a plastic material. As to claims 8 and 21, Hockaday teaches the substrate can be a porous polyimide which is equated with a plastic material. Hockaday teaches the substrates can be fibers and fabrics [0086]. Hockaday teaches another embodiment of woven fabric from bi-material actuating fibers. The fibers are co-extruded from materials such as polyethylene or polyester. One side of the fiber is polyethylene and the other side is polyester. Hockaday teaches the bi-material fiber reacts to changes in temperature with the polyethylene 377 expanding or contracting more than the polyester [0513]. The polyethylene is equated with the active material and the polyester is equated with the base substrate material. As to claims 9, 19 and 22, Hockaday teaches the second material responds to humidity, temperature, chemical environment or light. Hockaday teaches the bi-material fiber reacts to changes in temperature with the polyethylene 377 expanding or contracting more than the polyester. The bending of the fiber causes the fabric to thicken perpendicular to the plane of the fabric and shrink in the plane of the fabric [0513]. As to claims 10 and 23, Hockaday teaches the responsive materials can be Nafion or a hydrogel [0047] and teaches the printed material is a polymer, i.e. a plastic material [0485]. As to claims 11, 12, 24 and 25, Hockaday teaches a laminate actuator composed of two materials (bi-material actuation) one that swells when exposed to high humidity and another that does not [0023] the inclusion materials 212 absorb the water and swell [0504]. The polyethylene of the bi-material fiber reacts to changes in temperature to expand or contract [0513] which is equated with swelling or shrinking. Hockaday teaches in fig. 2A an array of flap valves with temperature and humidity actuation. The substrate is a 10 micron thick polyester and a print-sprayed deposit of a high coefficient of expansion material such as a film of low density of polyethylene 24 is deposited on the substrate 23 [0485]. As to claims 13, 14, 26 and 27, Hockaday teaches both reversible and irreversible actuation [0607]. As to claims 16, Hockaday teaches the natural shape and equated with the shape prior to exposure to humidity, temperature, chemical environment or light which actuates the multilayered structure. Hockaday teaches exposing the pattern to an environmental stimulus, humidity, causes the laminate to change shape and provide an aperture as shown in figure 1B. As to claim 28, Hockaday teaches a flat laminate structure prior to exposing to the external stimulus, e.g. humidity or temperature and then a three dimensional shape after exposure as shown in Fig. 1B, 2A and 8A. As to claim 29, Hockaday teaches a number of flaps as shown in Fig. 1B and 2B. As to claim 30, Hockaday teaches the external stimulus can include temperature (ABST), [0003], [0011]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A STEELE whose telephone number is (571)272-7115. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30. 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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. /JENNIFER A STEELE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 29, 2024
Application Filed
May 03, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Oct 03, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 20, 2025
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600096
GLASS MULTIPLE-PLY ROVING, RANDOM MAT FOR FORMING THERMOPLASTIC COMPOSITE MATERIAL, AND GLASS-FIBER-REINFORCED THERMOPLASTIC RESIN SHEET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595601
FABRIC, AND FIBER PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591161
ELECTROCHROMIC WIRE THREAD AND RELATIVE FABRICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584370
MOLDED PRODUCT AND PROCESSED ARTICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577350
POLYIMIDE PRECURSOR, RESIN COMPOSITION, INSULATED ELECTRIC WIRE, AND FLEXIBLE SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
48%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+33.5%)
4y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 708 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month