Detailed Action
This office action is in response to the filing with the office dated 04/10/2024.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/20/2025 The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SCHWARTZ et al. (Hereinafter, “Schwartz”) in the Patent Application Publication Number US 20170328761 A1.
PNG
media_image1.png
424
584
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Independent claim 1, Schwartz teaches, “A system comprising: a sticker configured to attach to a fluid container,” ([0021], “(a “smart label”) 102, which is adhered to a surface 104 of a container 106.” Reads on, “a sticker configured to attach to a fluid container”), “the sticker comprising a metal layer shaped as an antenna;” ([0023], “level sensor label 200 contains a capacitor 202 comprised of two conductive strips, conductive strip 202a and conductive strip 202b,” reads on “metal layer” and “shaped as an antenna”) “a processor,” ([0024], “Further shown in FIG. 3 is a simplified reader circuit 308 having an inductive coil portion 310 and
PNG
media_image2.png
237
361
media_image2.png
Greyscale
electronics 312 used to process signals” reads on, “processor.” See [0039]) “The processor configured to: cause a network analyzer to send a signal in a direction of the fluid container;” ([0021], “The reader 110 is configured to be placed an appropriate distance from the level sensor label 102, such that signals from the level sensor label are detected by reader 110.”)
“Detect a shift in a resonant frequency of the antenna;” ([0022], ”The level of the material 108 inside the container 106 affects the impedance of the mentioned resonant tank circuit in such a way as to be measurable remotely via inductive (e.g., near-field) coupling achieved by use of reader 110” Reads on “Detect” and “resonant frequency.”)
“And measure, based on the change in resonant frequency, an amount of fluid in the container.” ([0037], “for a system such as shown in FIG. 5. For example, from 1 cm to 3 mm (702), the resonant frequency is approximately 42.8 MHz; when the reader is from 1 cm to 2 mm (704) the resonant frequency is 42.4 MHz; when the reader is from 1 cm to 1 mm (706) the resonant frequency is 42.0 MHz; and when the reader is from 1 cm to 0 mm from the level sensor label (708) the resonant frequency is 41.2 MHz.” Reads on “measure” and “change in resonant frequency.” [0003], “level sensing system” reads on “fluid.”)
As per claim 2, Schwartz teaches, “The system of claim 1, wherein the antenna (102) comprises parallel electrodes placed adjacent to each other” ([0043], “Other configurations are also possible, including using multiple strips of electrodes to form the capacitor of the structures.” Reads on parallel electrodes placed adjacent to each other.”)
PNG
media_image3.png
414
480
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As Per Claim 3, Schwartz teaches, “The system of claim 1, wherein the sticker is attached to an outside of the container.” ([0021], “FIG. 1 provides a side view of a simplified drawing of a level sensing system 100 including disposable electronic printed level sensor (a “smart label”) 102, which is adhered to a surface 104 of a container 106.” Reads on, “sticker is attached to outside of the container.”)
As per claim 4, Schwartz teaches, “the system of claim 1, wherein the fluid container is a flexible fluid bag.” ([0025], “Ideally in this use the container 414 is in an upright position. Again, container 414, while shown as a solid stiff structure, may also be in the form of a flexible bag, including plastic bags as well as in other forms.” Read on “flexible fluid bag.”)
As per claim 5, Schwartz teaches, “The system of claim 1, wherein the sticker comprises an adhesive layer” ([0025], “being adhered to the container 414 by use of an adhesive or other appropriate manner.” Reads on “adhesive layer”) “which covers the metal layer and attaches the metal layer to the fluid container.” ([0025], “The conductive strips 404a, 404b of capacitive structure 404 are generally oriented along the height of the container 414.” Reads on “attaches metal layer to fluid container.”)
As per claim 6, Schwartz teaches, “The system of claim 1, wherein the antenna is a first antenna, ([0003], “level sensor label” reads on “first antenna”) “where the system further comprises: a second antenna, ([0045], “far field reader” reads on “second antenna.”) “wherein the processor is further configured to: detect a change in an amplitude of a resonant peak of the second antenna; ([0032], “a reader device having a reader coil (e.g., 110 of FIG. 1; 308 of FIG. 3; 418 of FIG. 4) on a second substrate (for example a PCB)” reads on “detect a change in an amplitude of a resonant peak”) and measure, based on the change in the amplitude of the resonant peak of the second antenna, a conductivity of the fluid.” ([0045], “far field reader” reads on “measure” and “resonant peak of the second antenna, a conductivity of the fluid.”)
As per claim 7, Schwartz teaches, “The system of claim 6, wherein the second antenna comprises parallel plate resonators.” ([0032], “reader coil” reads on parallel plate resonators.”)
Claims 10, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by YAMADA et al. (Hereinafter, “Yamada”) in the Patent Application Publication Number JP 2022009209 A.
In Regards to Independent claim 10, Yamada teaches, “An antenna sticker, comprising: a release layer;” ([0023], “release liner” reads on “release layer”) “an antenna layer comprising, a first adhesive layer, a metal layer, and a substrate layer between the first adhesive layer and metal layer,” ([0023], “RFID tag label sheet” reads on “a first adhesive layer, substrate layer.” Moreover in [0027], “metal foil” reads on “metal layer.”) “where the first adhesive layer, the metal layer, and the substrate layer are in the shape of an antenna;” ([0027], further teaches, “into the shape of the antenna” reads on “shape of an antenna”) “and a second adhesive layer covering at least a portion of the antenna layer and at least a portion of the release layer,” ([0024],“RFID tag label sheet 1” reads on “antenna layer” furthermore, “surface layer sheet 2” and “adhesive layer 212” reads on “second adhesive layer”) “wherein the antenna layer and second adhesive layer separate from the release layer in response to removing the second adhesive layer from the release layer.” ([0029] “release liner” reads on “adhesive layer separate from the release layer.”)
As per claim 12, Yamada teaches “The antenna sticker of claim 10, wherein the antenna comprises a first antenna and a second antenna.” ([0011], “plurality of RFID tag labels each having an inlet including at least an antenna” reads on “first and a second antenna.”)
In regards to independent claim 15, Yamada teaches, “A method, comprising: providing a metalized paper comprising a release layer,” ([0027], “a base material using a conductive ink or an etching method of etching a metal foil provided on the inlet sheet 210” reads on “metalized paper.” Furthermore, ([0023)], “release liner” reads on “release layer.”) “a first adhesive layer,” ([0026], “RFID tag label sheet 1” reads on “a first adhesive layer”) “a substrate layer,” ([0027], “a synthetic resin film” reads on “a substrate layer”) “and a metal face layer;” ([0027], “metal foil” reads on “a metal face layer.”) “Laser cutting an outline of an antenna into the metal face layer, substrate layer, and first adhesive layer;” ([0027], “as a method of forming the antenna 201 on the inlet sheet 210, a screen printing method of printing the shape of the antenna 201 on a base material using a conductive ink or an etching method of etching a metal foil provided on the inlet sheet 210 into the shape of the antenna 201” reads on “cutting an outline of an antenna.”) “removing, from the release layer,” ([0023], “release liner” reads on “release layer”) “a portion of the metal face layer, a portion of the substrate layer, and a portion of the first adhesive layer leaving the antenna attached to the release layer;” ([0028], “The adhesive layer 11 constituting the RFID tag label sheet 1 is a layer for sticking the RFID t ag label 2 peeled off from the RFID tag label sheet 1 to a commodity” reads on “a portion of the metal face layer, a portion of the substrate layer, and a portion of the first adhesive layer leaving the antenna attached to the release layer.”) “And applying an adhesive layer over the antenna so that the adhesive layer adheres to the antenna and the release layer.” ([0027], “covered with a cured resin” reads on “applying an adhesive layer over the antenna.”)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 8 is rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwartz in view of Sannala et al. (Hereinafter, “Sannala”) In the US Application Publication Number US 9794522 B2.
As per claims 8, where Schwartz is silent on, “The system of claim 6, wherein the first antenna and the second antenna share an adhesive layer,” Sannala teaches, “the first antenna and the second antenna share an adhesive layer” ([0115], “placement of antennas” and further discloses, antennas may be integrated into or secured by stickers or tape (or alternatively fixed using a non-conductive adhesive” reads on “share an adhesive layer”). “Which attaches the first antenna and the second antenna to the fluid container.” Here Schwartz teaches, ([0021], “(a “smart label”) 102, which is adhered to a surface 104 of a container 106” reads on “attaches” and “fluid container.”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schwartz in view of Sannala. As one would have been motivated to configure the first and second antennas of Schwartz to share an adhesive layer as taught by Sannala in order to attach multiple antennas to the fluid container. Which in turn, yields predictable results such as efficiently improving communication and data collection by mounting the antennas to containers.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwartz in view of Sazegar et al. (Hereinafter, “Sazegar”) In the Application Publication Number US 10903572 B2.
As per claim 9, Schwartz is silent on, “The system of claim 6, wherein the first antenna comprises parallel plate resonators and the second antenna comprises parallel plate resonators,” Sazegar teaches, “first antenna comprises parallel plate resonators and the second antenna comprises parallel plate resonators,” ([0031], “dual resonator sets” reads on “parallel plate resonators.”) “Wherein the parallel plate resonators of the first antenna are longer than the parallel plate resonators of the second antenna.” ([0033], “RX1 dipole 104 and RX2 dipole which can be of different lengths” reads on first antenna are longer than the parallel plate resonators of the second antenna.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Swartz in view of Sazegar to implement the differing lengths of dipoles in order to tune the antennas to different resonant frequencies, which is a well-known and predictable design in antenna systems.
Claims 11, 13 and 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada in view of Sazegar et al. In the Application Publication Number US 10903572 B2.
As per claim 11, Yamada is silent on, “The antenna sticker of claim 10, wherein the antenna comprises parallel plate resonators.” Wherein Sazegar teaches, “antenna comprises parallel plate resonators” ([0031], “dual resonator sets” reads on “parallel plate resonators.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Yamada in view of Sazegar to combine the dual resonator sets with the teachings of Yamada’s RFID tag label sheet 1 to yield the predictable result of an antenna structure which includes plate resonators to obtain differing frequencies for the first and a second antenna.
PNG
media_image4.png
515
875
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As per claim 13, Yamada is silent on “The antenna sticker of claim 12, wherein the first antenna comprises parallel plate resonators and the second antenna comprise parallel plate resonators.” Sazegar teaches, “first antenna comprises parallel plate resonators and the second antenna comprise parallel plate resonators” ([0031], “first resonator set RX1 can represent the first ring of resonators (radiating cells or radiative elements) and every other ring thereafter, and second resonator sets RX2.” Reads on “first antenna plate resonators” and “second parallel plate resonators.”) See also FIG. 1A and FIG. 1B.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify, Yamada in view of Sazegar to substitute the resonator set (RX1) and the second resonator set (RX2) of Sazegar, with the teachings of Yamada’s RFID tag labels as It is well known to one with ordinary skill in the art that parallel plate resonators is an alternative structure commonly used in antenna systems.
As per claim 14, Yamada is silent on “The antenna sticker of claim 13, wherein the parallel plate resonators of the second antenna are shorter than the parallel plate resonators of the first antenna.” Sazegar teaches, “the parallel plate resonators of the second antenna are shorter than the parallel plate resonators of the first antenna” ([0033], “RX1 dipole 104 and RX2 dipole which can be of different lengths” reads on first antenna are longer than the parallel plate resonators of the second antenna.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify Yamada in view of Sazegar to implement the differing lengths of dipoles in order to tune the antennas to different resonant frequencies, which is a well-known and predictable design in antenna systems. Incorporating this technique would improve the performance of Yamada by allowing different resonant frequencies.
Claims 16, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada in view of Schwartz et al. In the Application Publication Number US 20170328761 A1.
As per claim 16, while Yamada is silent on, “the method of claim 15, wherein the antenna comprises parallel electrodes.” Wherein Sazegar teaches, “antenna comprises parallel electrodes” ([0031], “dual resonator sets” reads on “parallel electrodes.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Yamada in view of Sazegar the dual resonator sets with the teachings of Yamada’s RFID tag label sheet 1. As it is well known that plate resonators and electrodes can be utilized for the same function of detecting resonant frequencies. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill that substituting the dual resonator sets, with the parallel electrodes to yield the predictable capabilities of resonance frequency detection.
As per claim 18, Yamada is silent on, “The method of claim 17, wherein the first antenna comprises parallel electrodes and the second antenna comprises parallel electrodes.” Sazegar teaches, “the first antenna comprises parallel electrodes and the second antenna comprises parallel electrodes” ([0031] “first resonator set RX1 can represent the first ring of resonators (radiating cells or radiative elements) and every other ring thereafter, and second resonator sets RX2.” Reads on “first antenna plate resonators” and “second parallel plate resonators.”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yamada in view of Sazegar. As Sazegar further teaches, ([0033], “the first set and second set of resonators RX1 and RX2 (100) are configured to operate independently with a frequency offset with respect to each other due to different size and placement of dipoles (RX1 dipole 104 and RX2 dipole 105) associated with the resonator sets RX1 and RX2. By using dual resonators (RX1 and RX2) with frequency offset, significant improvement to dynamic bandwidth can be achieved in contrast to a single resonator antenna by expanding the bandwidth range as shown in FIG. 2. In one example, the antennas disclosed herein can be configured to provide a modulation pattern generated using the dual resonator sets RX1 and RX2 for each single band.”) One would have been motivated to combine dual resonator sets RX1 and RX2 In order to improve the network optimization which in turn would produce more accurate readings which is critical especially in the health care industry.
As per claim 19, “The method of claim 18, wherein the parallel electrodes of the first antenna are shorter than the parallel electrodes of the second antenna.” Sazegar teaches, “the parallel electrodes of the first antenna are shorter than the parallel electrodes of the second antenna” ([0033], “RX1 dipole 104 and RX2 dipole which can be of different lengths” reads on “parallel electrodes of the first antenna are shorter than the parallel electrodes of the second antenna.”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yamada in view of Sazegar. Where Sazegar further teaches, ([0033], “dual resonances can be achieved by using RX1 dipole 104 and RX2 dipole which can be of different lengths and stacked for the resonator cell at different layers in superstrate 107. In one example, one dipole can be smaller than the other dipole for RX1 and RX2. “) Antenna systems of differing lengths are well known in the communication industry as the size of the antenna can indeed impact its capabilities on the frequencies it can detect. Therefore, one having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have multiple antennas of different sizes in order to achieve the predictable result of obtaining the desired signal they need to communicate with.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada in view of Schwartz et al. In the Application Publication Number US 20170328761 A1.
As per claim 17, Where Yamada is silent on “The method of claim 15, wherein the antenna comprises a first antenna and a second antenna.” Schwartz teaches, “antenna comprises a first antenna and a second antenna” ([0003], “level sensor label” reads on “first antenna”) furthermore, ([0045], “far field reader” reads on “second antenna.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Yamada in view of Schwartz. Wherein Schwartz further teaches, One would have been motivated to combine the label sensor label and the far field reader as disclosed in Schwartz with the teachings of Yamada’s RFID label sheet. In order to achieve the predictable result of having a system of antennas, communicating with one another to obtain the desired information for the technician.
Closest Prior art
The following relevant prior art of record is not cited in the office action.
Shimada et al (US 12412063 B2) teaches, the present invention provides an RFID tag to be applied to a container for holding liquid. To achieve a good communication distance regardless of the presence or absence of liquid, the RFID is applied to a container for holding liquid, and includes an IC chip on which identification information is recorded, and an antenna made of a loop-shaped conductor connected to the IC chip, and the antenna has a T-shaped opening in which the conductor is not formed.
Prokopuk et al (US 2014018447 W) teaches, Incontinence management systems, methods, and sensors are provided that alert the caregiver when a patient's brief has been soiled. A resonant circuit includes a polyaniline/carbon black (PANI/CB) composite chemiresistor which undergoes a large impedance change upon exposure to the vapor or 'smell' of urine or feces. Due to the impedance change of the PANI/CB resistor, characteristics of the resonant circuit change when the sensor is exposed to urine or feces vapor. The sensor responds to an interrogating signal with a signal based least in part on the sensor's impedance and indicates the condition of the brief as soiled or clean.
Bensen et al (WO 02052302 A2) teaches, Radio frequency based sensor has a plastic or textile substrate folded along a folding axis (F) with a capacitor (C) having capacitor plates (24, 25) arranged in a mutual overlaying relationship, connected electrically to an inductor, to form a resonant circuit. The capacitor plates are mutually displaced to provide a shifted resonance frequency, depending on the resonance conditions.
Xu et al (WO 2015135448 A1) teaches, Disclosed are a radio frequency identification tag and a manufacturing method therefor. The tag comprises a surface mark layer, an upper adhesion layer, a fragile radio frequency identification layer and a lower adhesion layer that are sequentially and mutually combined. The fragile radio frequency identification layer comprises a release layer, a radio frequency identification antenna, a chip, an isolating layer and a conducting layer. The isolating layer is provided with a chip hole and a vertically through bridge hole. The antenna is arranged on one side of the isolating layer, the conducting layer is located on the other side of the isolating layer, the chip is arranged in the chip hole, and the isolating layer is provided with small holes communicated with the chip hole and the bridge hole. The conducting layer penetrates through the bridge conducting hole and is connected to the antenna, and the chip is adhered to the radio frequency identification antenna by means of a conductive adhesive. The tag has good anti-fake performance and is free of the problem that conducting is affected by material rebounding and the like, so that the rate of finished products is greatly increased, and product cost is reduced.
Yang et al (KR 102530780 B1) teaches, The present invention relates to a container-attached volume measuring device that is attached to the outer surface of a container and calculates the volume of liquid in the container, comprising: a first electrode positioned on a substrate and including a plurality of sensing electrodes arranged along a first direction; a second electrode positioned on the substrate, spaced apart from the first electrode, and having a bar shape extending along a second direction perpendicular to the first direction; a processing part that calculates the volume of liquid in the container based on output values output from the plurality of sensing electrodes; and an adhesive layer formed on the substrate and allowing the container-attached volume measuring device to be attached to the outer surface of the container, thereby capable of accurately calculating the volume of liquid in the container by using a change in mutual capacitance detected from electrodes attached to the container.
Hoppe et al (US 11464432 B2) teaches, the invention provides a monitoring device (1) for attachment to a surface of a subject. The device comprises a data collector (2) and a processor (3) as two separate parts which can be detachably joined such that physiological signals which are detected by the data collector can be transferred to the processor for signal processing and provision of monitoring data. At least one of the data collector and the processor comprises a transducer which can convert the physiological signal to a data signal which can be processed electronically. The data collector is adapted for adhesive contact with a skin surface, and may comprise an adapter (6) for the detachable attachment of the processor.
Cheng et al (US 20220192566 A1) teaches, Disclosed are automated urinary output (“UO”)-measuring systems and methods. An automated UO-measuring system can include a container configured to collect a fluid such as urine. The container can include a console, one or more ultrasonic sensors coupled to the console for determining a fluid level within the container, one or more accelerometers coupled to the console for determining a near-zero acceleration state of the container for the determining of the fluid level within the container, and a valve configured to pass fluid therethrough by way of a fluid line coupled to the valve. The automated UO-measuring system can also include a container holder. The container holder can have a pocket for holding the container and a sleeve for securing the container to a user.
Hansen et al (US 20210369488 A1) teaches, A base plate and/or a sensor assembly part for an ostomy appliance and related method is disclosed, the base plate and/or the sensor assembly part comprising: a first adhesive layer with a proximal side configured for attachment of the base plate and/or the sensor assembly part to the skin surface of a user, the first adhesive layer having a stomal opening with a center point; and a plurality of electrodes including a first leakage electrode, a second leakage electrode, and a third leakage electrode, wherein the plurality of electrodes is configured to detect presence of fluid on the proximal side of the first adhesive layer in a primary sensing zone and a secondary sensing zone, the primary sensing zone arranged in a primary angle space from the center point of the first adhesive layer and the secondary sensing zone arranged in a secondary angle space from the center point of the first adhesive layer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARELL W PAXTON whose telephone number is (571)272-0521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at (571)272-4448. 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.
/JARELL W PAXTON/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/EMAN A ALKAFAWI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
1/22/2026