DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/23/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Eom et al. (US 20200335690 A1).Regarding claim 1:Eom teaches an information processing method comprising:
providing a magnetic body layer made of one or a plurality of magnetic bodies ([0017]-[0018], [0028], [0030]) on an elastically deformable substrate (PDMS and/or the thin piezoelectric film), a magnetization orientation of the magnetic body responding to strain ([0020], [0022], [0025]); and detecting, by a detection device, a magnetization state including at least the magnetization orientation of the magnetic body constituting the magnetic body layer, and outputting information on the magnetization state as a result of an input of the strain to the substrate (inherent when the device is used as a memory - [0016], [0018]-[0020], [0028])
Regarding claim 4:Eom teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as mentioned above.Eom also teaches:
wherein the substrate is made of a material including synthetic resin, synthetic rubber, or natural rubber(PDMS is a synthetic rubber)
Regarding claim 5:Eom teaches an information processing apparatus comprising:
a magnetic element provided with a magnetic body layer made of one or a plurality of magnetic bodies ([0017]-[0018], [0028], [0030]) on an elastically deformable substrate (PDMS and/or the thin piezoelectric film), a magnetization orientation of the magnetic body responding to strain ([0020], [0022], [0025]); and a detection device for detecting a magnetization state including at least the magnetization orientation of the magnetic body constituting the magnetic body layer of the magnetic element, wherein information on the magnetization state detected by the detection device is output as a result of an input of the strain to the substrate(inherent when the device is used as a memory - [0016], [0018]-[0020], [0028])
Regarding claim 7:Eom teaches all the limitations of claim 5, as mentioned above.Eom also teaches:
wherein the substrate is made of a material including synthetic resin, synthetic rubber, or natural rubber(PDMS is a synthetic rubber)
Regarding claim 8:Eom teaches a magnetic element provided with
a magnetic body layer made of one or a plurality of magnetic bodies ([0017]-[0018], [0028], [0030]) on an elastically deformable substrate (PDMS and/or the thin piezoelectric film), a magnetization orientation of the magnetic body responding to strain ([0020], [0022], [0025])
Regarding claim 10:Eom teaches all the limitations of claim 8, as mentioned above.Eom also teaches:
wherein the substrate is made of a material including synthetic resin, synthetic rubber, or natural rubber(PDMS is a synthetic rubber)
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 2-3, 6, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eom et al. (US 20200335690 A1) in view of Atulasimha et al. (US 20120267735 A1).Regarding claim 2:Eom teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as mentioned above.Eom appears to teach:
wherein the magnetic body layer includes a magnetic body in which the magnetization orientation is maintained in a direction different from a magnetization orientation before the input even after disappearance of the strain that has been input through the substrate and changes the magnetization orientation
See citations in claim 1 rejection above regarding input and magnetization orientation. The limitation of “even after disappearance of the strain that has been input” appears to be inherently met by [0016] of Eom which states that the device may be used as “non-volatile memories”. Non-volatile memory is defined as memory that retains data even when power is turned off.
However, as this is not clearly and explicitly stated by Eom, Atulasimha is provided.
Atulasimha teaches:
wherein the magnetic body layer includes a magnetic body in which the magnetization orientation is maintained in a direction different from a magnetization orientation before the input even after disappearance of the strain that has been input through the substrate and changes the magnetization orientation ([0027], [0037])
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the magnetic body such that the input / set magnetization is maintained, even after disappearance of the strain, as taught by Atulasimha in the method of Eom, to yield stable non-volatile memory.
Regarding claim 3:Eom and Atulasimha teach all the limitations of claim 2, as mentioned above.Eom also teaches:
wherein the magnetization state is detected by the detection device after the input of the strain is completed, and then the information on the magnetization state is output as the result (inherent when the device is used as a memory - [0016], [0018]-[0020], [0028])
Regarding claim 6:Eom teaches all the limitations of claim 5, as mentioned above.Eom appears to teach:
wherein the magnetic body layer includes a magnetic body in which the magnetization orientation is maintained in a direction different from a magnetization orientation before the input even after disappearance of the strain that has been input through the substrate and changes the magnetization orientation
See citations in claim 5 rejection above regarding input and magnetization orientation. The limitation of “even after disappearance of the strain that has been input” appears to be inherently met by [0016] of Eom which states that the device may be used as “non-volatile memories”. Non-volatile memory is defined as memory that retains data even when power is turned off.
However, as this is not clearly and explicitly stated by Eom, Atulasimha is provided.
Atulasimha teaches:
wherein the magnetic body layer includes a magnetic body in which the magnetization orientation is maintained in a direction different from a magnetization orientation before the input even after disappearance of the strain that has been input through the substrate and changes the magnetization orientation ([0027], [0037])
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the magnetic body such that the input / set magnetization is maintained, even after disappearance of the strain, as taught by Atulasimha in the device of Eom, to yield stable non-volatile memory.
Regarding claim 9:Eom teaches all the limitations of claim 8, as mentioned above.Eom appears to teach:
wherein the magnetic body layer includes a magnetic body in which a magnetization orientation is maintained in a direction different from a magnetization orientation before an input even after disappearance of the strain that has been input through the substrate and changes the magnetization orientation
See citations in claim 8 rejection above regarding input and magnetization orientation. The limitation of “even after disappearance of the strain that has been input” appears to be inherently met by [0016] of Eom which states that the device may be used as “non-volatile memories”. Non-volatile memory is defined as memory that retains data even when power is turned off.
However, as this is not clearly and explicitly stated by Eom, Atulasimha is provided.
Atulasimha teaches:
wherein the magnetic body layer includes a magnetic body in which a magnetization orientation is maintained in a direction different from a magnetization orientation before an input even after disappearance of the strain that has been input through the substrate and changes the magnetization orientation ([0027], [0037])
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the magnetic body such that the input / set magnetization is maintained, even after disappearance of the strain, as taught by Atulasimha in the device of Eom, to yield stable non-volatile memory.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 / § 103
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ando et al. (US 20210278292 A1).Regarding claim 11:Ando teaches (FIGS. 1, 5, 8-12) a magnetic element provided with
a magnetic body layer (3) made of one or a plurality of magnetic bodies on an elastically deformable substrate (1), a magnetization orientation of the magnetic body responding to strain (abstract, [0007]-[0020]), wherein the magnetic element is a stress sensor (abstract) that detects the strain input from a detection target through the substrate by attaching the substrate to the detection target (aforementioned citations; also see [0043])
This is made a 102/103 rejection since Ando teaches a stress sensor, but the only recitation as to attachment to a detection target is that it can be used to sense the movement of the human body. However, the examiner holds it obvious and well-known to attach the flexible substrate of a stress sensor, such as that of Ando, to a “detection target” (i.e., that which the stress therein is to be measured by said stress sensor) to detect stress.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Herbert Keith Roberts whose telephone number is (571)270-0428. The examiner can normally be reached 10a - 6p MT.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at (571) 272-2375. 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.
/HERBERT K ROBERTS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855