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 Objections
Claim 48 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim depends from cancelled claim 46. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted to be dependent from claim 45. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 15, 16, 20, 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by He (US 20220136922).
Regarding claim 1, (original) A radiofrequency identification (RFID) tag, comprising: an integrated circuit; (“The present application provides a wireless sensor device that is based on radio frequency identification (RFID) technology. The device comprises an RFID sensor that includes at least one antenna configured to receive an interrogation signal from a reader and to transmit a response signal to the reader; at least one integrated circuit (IC) connected to the at least one antenna; and at least one sensing element between the antenna and the IC” He: paragraph 50)
an environmental indicator material that changes between a conductive state and a nonconductive state responsive to a predetermined environmental exposure; (“The RFID sensor is attached or directly adjacent to one end of the channel. In response to changes caused by the environment the sensing element will switch from a conductive state to a non-conductive state, or from a non-conductive state to a conductive state.” He: paragraph 50)
and an antenna, having a first antenna portion and a second antenna portion; wherein the first antenna portion is electrically connected in a closed circuit with the integrated circuit, and wherein the second antenna portion is electrically connected in the closed circuit with the first antenna portion and with the integrated circuit when the environmental indicator material is in the conductive state and in an open circuit when the environmental indicator material is in the nonconductive state. (“In some embodiments, the RFID wireless sensor device is manufactured such that the sensing element can be replaced. With reference to FIG. 4, RFID wireless sensor device 210 is manufactured with receptacles (such as outlets) 250 designed for removable sensing element 216 (such as a plug-in connector). As in the devices described above, when attached, sensing element 216 is initially in a conductive or non-conductive state and enables or disables a short circuit between IC chip 212 and antenna 214 so that there is no connection or with connection, respectively, between the IC chip 212 and the antenna 214. Once sensing element 216 changes its conductivity state, as a result of corrosion or contact with an indicator of loss of structural integrity, sensing element 216 becomes non-conductive or conductive and the short circuit is disabled or enabled, such that antenna 214 is connected or disconnected, respectively, to IC chip 212, and the sensor 210 can or cannot communicate with the reader 40 when it is interrogated by reader 40.” He: paragraph 85)
Regarding claim 5, (original) The RFID tag of claim 1, wherein the integrated circuit is configured, responsive to the RFID tag being interrogated by an interrogation signal in a predetermined radiofrequency range which is received by the antenna, to cause the antenna to emit a first distinct radiofrequency response when the second antenna portion is in the closed circuit, and a second distinct radiofrequency response when the second antenna portion is in the open circuit. (“In some embodiments, the RFID wireless sensor device is manufactured such that the sensing element can be replaced. With reference to FIG. 4, RFID wireless sensor device 210 is manufactured with receptacles (such as outlets) 250 designed for removable sensing element 216 (such as a plug-in connector). As in the devices described above, when attached, sensing element 216 is initially in a conductive or non-conductive state and enables or disables a short circuit between IC chip 212 and antenna 214 so that there is no connection or with connection, respectively, between the IC chip 212 and the antenna 214. Once sensing element 216 changes its conductivity state, as a result of corrosion or contact with an indicator of loss of structural integrity, sensing element 216 becomes non-conductive or conductive and the short circuit is disabled or enabled, such that antenna 214 is connected or disconnected, respectively, to IC chip 212, and the sensor 210 can or cannot communicate with the reader 40 when it is interrogated by reader 40.” He: paragraph 85; a response when the antenna is connected when the short-circuit is disabled would be a ‘distinct’ response to one where there is no response due to the antenna being disconnected due to the enabled short-circuit)
Regarding claim 6, (original) The RFID tag of claim 5, wherein a distance at which the first distinct radiofrequency response can be detected by an interrogating device is greater than a distance at which the second distinct radiofrequency response can be detected by the interrogating device. (“In some embodiments, the RFID wireless sensor device is manufactured such that the sensing element can be replaced. With reference to FIG. 4, RFID wireless sensor device 210 is manufactured with receptacles (such as outlets) 250 designed for removable sensing element 216 (such as a plug-in connector). As in the devices described above, when attached, sensing element 216 is initially in a conductive or non-conductive state and enables or disables a short circuit between IC chip 212 and antenna 214 so that there is no connection or with connection, respectively, between the IC chip 212 and the antenna 214. Once sensing element 216 changes its conductivity state, as a result of corrosion or contact with an indicator of loss of structural integrity, sensing element 216 becomes non-conductive or conductive and the short circuit is disabled or enabled, such that antenna 214 is connected or disconnected, respectively, to IC chip 212, and the sensor 210 can or cannot communicate with the reader 40 when it is interrogated by reader 40.” He: paragraph 85; a response when the antenna is connected when the short-circuit is disabled would be a ‘distinct’ response to one where there is no response due to the antenna being disconnected due to the enabled short-circuit, furthermore, a signal that is detected would be at a different distance than no signal being detected, being essentially zero distance)
Regarding claim 9, (original) The RFID tag of claim 1, wherein the environmental indicator material is connectively disposed between the first antenna portion and the second antenna portion, such that a length of the antenna that is connected in a closed circuit with the integrated circuit corresponds to whether the environmental indicator material is conductive state or nonconductive state. (He: figure 4, element 216)
Regarding claim 10, (original) The RFID tag of claim 1, wherein the environmental indicator material transitions from the nonconductive state to the conductive state responsive to the predetermined environmental exposure. (“Once the sensing element is affected by the environment and changes its status from conductive to nonconductive, it will switch “off” the sensor” He: paragraph 77)
Regarding claim 11, (original) The RFID tag of claim 1, wherein the environmental indicator material transitions from the conductive state to the nonconductive state responsive to the predetermined environmental exposure. (“Once the sensing element is affected by the environment and changes its status from conductive to nonconductive, it will switch “off” the sensor” He: paragraph 77)
Regarding claim 15, (original) The RFID tag of claim 1, further comprising a battery, wherein the integrated circuit is electrically connected to the battery and powered by the battery. (“The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the reader is distant from the RFID sensor and the RFID sensor comprises a battery.” He: claim 10)
Regarding claim 16, (original) The RFID tag of claim 1, wherein the predetermined environmental exposure is selected from a group consisting of: a temperature excursion above a predetermined temperature, a temperature excursion above a predetermined temperature threshold for at least a predetermined amount of time, a temperature excursion below a predetermined temperature, a temperature excursion below a predetermined temperature for at least a predetermined amount of time, cumulative exposure to temperature over a time period above a predetermined threshold for at least a predetermined amount of time, an exposure to a particular chemical, an oxygen exposure, an ammonia exposure, an exposure to a particular chemical above a threshold concentration, an exposure to a particular chemical above the threshold concentration for at least a predetermined amount of time, an exposure to at least a predetermined amount of radiation of a particular type, an predetermined electromagnetic exposure, a humidity exposure, an exposure to a humidity level above a predetermined threshold, and an exposure to a humidity level above a predetermined threshold for at least a predetermined amount of time. (“The structural integrity of the buried structure can be compromised by, for example, corrosion or physical damage (e.g., cracks or holes), which may lead to the leak of the substance carried within the structure to the environment. The present method monitors structural integrity using a sensing element, within the RFID sensor, that can either indirectly measure the level of corrosion of the structure material, or respond to the presence and/or level of an indicator of loss of structural integrity. The indicator can be, for example, a leaked substance, pH, water, etc.” He: paragraph 92; exposure to a particular chemical would include exposure to water)
Regarding claim 20, (original) The RFID tag of claim 1, wherein the predetermined environmental exposure is an exposure to a predetermined humidity level, and the environmental indicator material includes a hydratable substance that is electrically conductive when hydrated, such that an exposure to the predetermined humidity level is sufficient to hydrate the hydratable substance and transition the environmental indicator material to the conductive state. (“The structural integrity of the buried structure can be compromised by, for example, corrosion or physical damage (e.g., cracks or holes), which may lead to the leak of the substance carried within the structure to the environment. The present method monitors structural integrity using a sensing element, within the RFID sensor, that can either indirectly measure the level of corrosion of the structure material, or respond to the presence and/or level of an indicator of loss of structural integrity. The indicator can be, for example, a leaked substance, pH, water, etc.” He: paragraph 92)
Regarding claim 45, the claim is interpreted and rejected as claims 1 and 5 stated above.
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(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claim 8, (original) The RFID tag of claim 5, wherein the integrated circuit comprises a memory storing a data, and the first distinct radiofrequency response and the second distinct radiofrequency response transmit the data is not specifically disclosed by He. Examiner takes Official Notice that it would have been well known to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to include a memory for storing data of sensed values on an RFID sensor device. Modifying He to include memory would increase the overall utility of the system by providing the user with means to store information that can be retrieved at a later time. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify He according to Official Notice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 4, 7, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 48, and 51 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Related Art:
7336183 – disconnecting an RFID antenna due to environmental factors
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAVIS R HUNNINGS whose telephone number is (571)272-3118. The examiner can normally be reached M: 6-7:30a, 9:30a-4:45p, 8:30-10p; T: 6-7:30a, 12-4p, 7:30p-12a; W: 6-7:30a, 9:30a-4:45p; H: 6-7:30a, 8:15a-4:45p; F: 12:00-4:45p.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/TRAVIS R HUNNINGS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights