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 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim1,4,6-7,9,11,13-16 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.
Regarding claim 1, the most recently amended material includes the language of “the capacitive sensing film comprises a sensing film with a head-and-tail built-in pocket, the sensing film comprises a plastic film substrate, the sensing lines are arranged on one surface of the plastic film substrate, the waterproof covering layer is covered on the sensing lines, the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate include a mutually bonded part in the middle section and constitute a sensing area, and include a mutually separable part at both ends of the head and tail and constitute the built-in pocket, the outer surface of the plastic film substrate or the waterproof covering layer is oriented towards the absorbent layer;
Or the capacitive sensing film comprises a sensing film with a through-type built-in pocket, the sensing film comprises a plastic film substrate, the sensing lines are arranged on one surface of the plastic film substrate and constitutes the contact surface, the other surface of the plastic film substrate constitutes the sensing surface, the plastic film substrate constitutes the dielectric layer, the waterproof covering layer is covered on the contact surface, the edge of both sides of the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate includes a part bonded to each other and constitutes a boundary preventing liquid penetration into, a hollow port is further included between the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate and constitutes the through-type built-in pocket.”
The examiner notes that the rejection of claim 1 already requires some of the limitations amended in. For example claim 1 lines 1-3 require a capacitive sensing film and a built in pocket. While the newly amended language above does further limit in that the pocket is either a head-to-tail or through-type pocket, the claim language is again requiring a sensing film with a substate, sensing lines on the substrate, the waterproof covering layer covering the sensing lines and more, all of which is already claimed and thus making the claim indefinite. The examiner notes that for the purpose of examination, the subject matter directed to the new limitations (the pocket structure is detailed in the rejection below). The redundant parts will be detailed with “see rejection above”.
Claim 4,16 requires “an invisible opening”. It is unclear what is meant by the term invisible. The examiner notes that any opening which would not be readily seen while in use is interpreted to be an invisible opening.
Claim 7 is dependent from claim 1 where the absorbent article comprises a topsheet, backsheet, and an absorbent layer. However claim 7 requires that the absorbent article comprises a diaper, pad, napkin, etc. The examiner notes that said claim, as written reads as the absorbent article comprises a topsheet, backsheet, absorbent, and further comprises a diaper, pad, napkin etc. The examiner notes that it is interpreted that the absorbent article is a diaper, napkin, etc., where the diaper, napkin, etc., comprises the topsheet, backsheet, and absorbent.
Claims 6,9,11 are rejected based on dependency
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 9 and 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 9 and 11 fail to include all of the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 9, the claim is directed to “a capacitive sensing film…for making the…article described in claim 1”. However the examiner notes that claim 9 only requires the film and not the article as required by claim 1, and thus claim 9 fails to include all of the limitations of claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, the claim is directed to “a capacitive sensing film…for making the…article described in claim 1”. However the examiner notes that claim 11 only requires the film and not the article as required by claim 1, and thus claim 11 fails to include all of the limitations of claim 1.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
(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) 1,4,6,13-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hellmold et al. US 2019/0167490, hereafter Hellmold.
Regarding Claim 1, Hellmold discloses a smart absorbent article based on a capacitive sensing film and a built-in pocket (abstract), comprising a disposable absorbent article (para. 0053), a capacitive sensing film (substrate (1) comprising sensing lines (101) being a film (para. 0085)), a built-in pocket (16) and a short-circuit protection mechanism (insulating layer (200) provides a barrier to liquid contacting the conductive tracks per para. 0131), the disposable absorbent article comprises a topsheet (para. 0147), an absorbent layer (para. 0147) and a backsheet (para. 0147), and the sensing film comprises a contact surface (the upper side of substate (1) where the sensing lines are located), a sensing surface (the opposite [bottom] side of substrate (1), a dielectric layer (thickness between the defined contact surface and sensing surface) and at least two sensing lines (where sensor tracks (101) further comprise side tracks [7,8] and central track [9]), the outer surface of the dielectric layer constitutes the sensing surface, the dielectric layer separates and insulates the sensing lines and the sensing surface. The examiner notes that as detailed under the same rejection the thickness between the sensing surface and the contact surface is interpreted as the dielectric layer. Thus one outer surface of the dielectric layer forms the contact surface, and the dielectric layer insulates, as in separates through a material, the sensing and contact surfaces. Hellmold further discloses when the sensing surface is soaked by a liquid containing electrolyte (urine per para. 0147), the sensing lines can realize the wetness detection function of the sensing surface through the dielectric layer by means of electrolytic capacitance (para. 0097, where the device comprises a data processing module connected with sensing lines and where said processing module measures capacitance, see also para. 0156).
Hellmold further discloses that the built-in pocket is adapted to insert a sensor (para. 0099, where the pocket is used to insert the clip on module (103) where said module has exposed conductive terminals (33), a processor, and a motion sensor (para. 0152), and where the processor calculates information of the system based on information from the motion sensor (para. 0152) receives and processors data from the sensing lines [para. 0188] (interpreted to be through the terminals as this is the connection point). Therefore it is interpreted that the pocket comprises a sensor inserted into it, where said sensors are incorporated into the data processing module. As detailed above under the same paragraph the module comprises terminal for contact the sensor lines and thus the contact surface facilitates face-to-face contact and electrical connection between the sensor and the sensing lines, as claimed. Hellmold further discloses the short-circuit protection mechanism is adapted to protect the sensing lines from moisture inside and outside the disposable absorbent article (insulating layer (200) provides a barrier to liquid contacting the conductive tracks per para. 0131, as detailed under the same rejection).
Hellmold further discloses wherein at least part of the sensing lines is located within the contact surface (see figure 2b) and includes exposed part (para. 0131, 0140, where the insulating layer covers tracks 4,7,8 but leaves tracks 9 exposed, where tracks 9 extend from side tracks, see claim 4 of Hellmold), the short-circuit protection mechanism comprises a waterproof covering layer which covers the contact surface (para. 0131 where insulating layer (200) previously interpreted to be the protection mechanism is impermeable), and a separable part between the contact surface and the waterproof covering layer constitutes the built-in pocket (para. 0097 where the pocket is formed between the first surface and the insulating layer, and thus the portion in which the pocket is located is located is interpreted to be the separable part, see also figure 17), the sensing lines can realize the wetness detection function of the absorbent article through the dielectric layer by means of electrolytic capacitance (para. 0097, where the device comprises a data processing module connected with sensing lines and where said processing module measures capacitance, see also para. 0156;
The examiner notes that as previously detailed and the capacitive sensing film comprises a sensing film (see rejection above) with a head-and-tail built-in pocket (see figure 2b), the sensing film comprises a plastic film substrate (see rejection above, film per para. 0085), the sensing lines are arranged on one surface of the plastic film substrate (See rejection above), the waterproof covering layer is covered on the sensing lines (see rejection above), the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate include a mutually bonded part in the middle section and constitute a sensing area para. 0097 where the pocket is formed between the first surface and the insulating layer, where the pocket receives the sensor), and include a mutually separable part at both ends of the head and tail and constitute the built-in pocket (see figure 2b where the waterproof layer is seen to be separated from the sensing area and is bonded on at the pocket [where data processing device [103] is located], thus it is interpreted to have a separable part at both end of the head and tail of the pocket) the outer surface of the plastic film substrate or the waterproof covering layer is oriented towards the absorbent layer (claim 17 of Hellmold, where the absorbent is interposed between the pocket and the user’s skin, where the pocket is formed from the waterproof layer) and it is thus interpreted that the outer surface of the waterproof layer is oriented toward the absorbent. Further, the absorbent is sandwiched between the topsheet and backsheet, where the backsheet comprises the substrate, and thus it is also interpreted that the outer layer of the substrate is oriented toward the absorbent (see claim 14 of Hellmold).
The examiner notes that although the claims require a head-to-tail or through-type pocket, in an effort to achieve compact prosecution, the examiner provides and interpretation in which the same rejection reads to the built-in pocket.
Hellmold further teaches the capacitive sensing film comprises a sensing film (see rejection above) with a through-type built-in pocket (figure 2b), the sensing film comprises a plastic film substrate (See above), the sensing lines are arranged on one surface of the plastic film substrate and constitutes the contact surface (See rejection above), the other surface of the plastic film substrate constitutes the sensing surface (see rejection above), the plastic film substrate constitutes the dielectric layer (see rejection above), the waterproof covering layer is covered on the contact surface (see rejection above), the edge of both sides of the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate includes a part bonded to each other and constitutes a boundary preventing liquid penetration into (see rejection above, where said layer provides a barrier to liquid contacting the conductive tracks per para. 0131) a hollow port is further included between the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate and constitutes the through-type built-in pocket (where said pocket is located between said layers are detailed above, and the waterproof layer comprises a slit (15) creating an opening into the pocket. As the pocket is an open space between the layers, where entry is achieved through a slit, it is interpreted to be a hollow port.
Regarding Claim 4, Hellmold discloses the smart absorbent article according to claim 1, wherein the sandwich at the front edge of the disposable absorbent article comprises an invisible opening, which leads to the built-in pocket for inserting a sensor to achieve the wetness detection function (slit [15] for inserting the defined sensor into the pocket, and per para. 0097 where the pocket is formed between the first surface and the insulating layer, where the pocket receives the sensor). Per the 112b rejection above as the slit is only interacted with to place the sensor within and is located on the interior of the article, it is interpreted to be an invisible opening.
Regarding Claim 6, Hellmold discloses the smart absorbent article according to claim 1, wherein the disposable absorbent article comprises an elastic waist circumference (para. 0154, where the article may comprise an elastic waistband), the built-in pocket is arranged on the elastic waist circumference (see figure 10, where slit (15) is an entrance to the pocket and is interpreted to be located on the waistband)), when the smart absorbent article is in a wearing state, the elasticity generated on the elastic waist circumference can be converted into the force of the built-in pocket attached to the user's body, the sensor arranged in the built-in pocket is thus compressed and the contact of the sensor with the sensing lines is made more reliable (the examiner notes that paragraph 0067 does support the concept that a wearer exerts compressive forces while wearing the device, however not specifically with the waistband). However the examiner notes [A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). Therefore as it is known and further disclosed in Hellmold that a user exerts compressive forces while wearing an article, and Hellmold discloses that the device comprises an elastic waistband, where the pocket is located, at least partially at the waistband, it is interpreted that the exertion of forces to compress the sensor to the sensing lines is functional language and thus the device of Hellmold would perform the same function due to Hellmold disclosing all the required structural limitations.
Regarding Claim 13, Hellmold discloses A system device for monitoring the wet state of a smart absorbent article, comprising a sensor and a smart absorbent article as described in claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the sensor comprises at least two contacts for contacting and electrically connecting the sensing lines in the built-in pocket (plurality of terminals para. 0149, where said terminals were previously detailed under the rejection of claim 1), and the sensor also comprises a capacitance detecting device for realizing the wetness detection function of the disposable absorbent article by means of electrolytic capacitance (processor as detailed under the rejection of claim 1, see also para. 0152).
Regarding Claim 14, Hellmold discloses The system device according to claim 13, wherein the sensor comprises at least three contacts, two of which constitute an insertion detection device, when the sensor is inserted into the built-in pocket and the two contacts contact the same sensing line at the same time, the insertion detection device is triggered, and the sensor enters working state. The examiner notes that per para. 0149 a plurality of terminals are used to correspond to the tracks, where the number of terminals is the same as the number of tracks (for example provided in para. 0149, three tracks 4,7,8, would require three terminals). Per the same citation as the terminals are configured to ensure optimal connection with the corresponding tracks, it is interpreted that at least two of the terminals constitute an insertion detection device, as proper alignment with the channels is indicative of proper insertion. See also para. 0099, where the terminals connect to the tracks directly ensuring proper connection.
Regarding Claim 15, Hellmold discloses wherein the sensor also comprises a wireless transmitter and a wireless receiving device for sending and receiving wetness information of the smart absorbent article by wireless means, and the wireless receiving device comprises an audible and visual alarm device, a smart phone, or a personal computer. The examiner notes that per para. 0186 the clip on module, interpreted to at least include the sensors, may be connected to a cloud for data linking. See also para. 0188 where measured data is wirelessly transferred through the cloud. Further per para. 0187, patient information linked from the module wirelessly may be displayed on a device such as a tablet or smart phone.
Regarding Claim 16, Hellmold discloses The smart absorbent article according to claim 4,wherein the sandwich at the front edge of the disposable absorbent article and the back end edge of the disposable absorbent article comprises an invisible opening, each leading to a built-in pocket (slit [15] for inserting the defined sensor into the pocket, and per para. 0097 where the pocket is formed between the first surface and the insulating layer, where the pocket receives the sensor, where both sealed “Sandwich” edges form the pocket as detailed under the rejection of claim 1). Per the 112b rejection above as the slit is only interacted with to place the sensor within and is located on the interior of the article, it is interpreted to be an invisible opening.
Hellmold further discloses wherein the built-in pocket located at the front edge constitutes a functional pocket for inserting a sensor to achieve the wetness detection function (para. 0097), the built-in pocket located at the edge of the back end constitutes a redundant pocket to provide error redundancy for the positioning cut-off during the production of the smart absorbent article (where the space between the inserted defined sensing device and sensing lines is interpreted as the redundant pocket (see figure 2b where there is an empty space [redundant pocket] between 101 and 103).
Claim(s) 9,11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hellmold as evidenced by Circuit Gates Capacitance and Factors Affecting Capacitance Explained. Capacitance and factors affecting capacitance explained. (n.d.). https://www.circuitgates.com/factors-affecting-capacitance, hereafter Circuit Gates. and Builtin https://builtin.com/hardware/dielectric-constant, hereafter Builtin.
.
Regarding Claim 9, Hellmold discloses A capacitive sensing film including a head-and-tail built-in pocket for making the smart absorbent article described in claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), comprising a plastic film substrate (para. 0130), a waterproof covering layer and at least two sensing lines (See rejection of claim 1), the sensing lines are arranged on one side of the plastic film substrate (figure 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the waterproof covering layer covers the sensing lines (figure 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate include a mutually bonded part in the middle part to form a protected sensing area for preventing liquid penetration into the area and causing a short circuit of the sensing lines (figure 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate include a mutually separable part at both ends of the head and tail and constitute a contact area, wherein the contact area located at the front edge constitutes a functional pocket (pocket (16), figure 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the sensing lines are exposed in the functional pocket and constitutes a contact surface for face-to-face contact and electrical connection with the contact points of the sensor inserted into the pocket (see rejection of claim 1, where the defined sensing component comprises terminals 33 for connecting and interfacing with the sensing lines from within the pocket), and the contact area located at the back end edge constitutes a redundant pocket, which can provide error redundancy for the positioning cutting during the production of the smart absorbent article (where the space between the inserted defined sensing device and sensing lines is interpreted as the redundant pocket (see figure 2b where there is an empty space [redundant pocket] between 101 and 103); and the plastic film substrate or the waterproof covering layer constitutes the dielectric layer (where the film substrate constitutes the dielectric layer per claim 1 rejection), the outer surface of which constitutes the sensing surface (see rejection of claim 1), the sensing lines can detect the wetness state of the sensing surface through the dielectric layer and by means of electrolytic capacitance (see rejection of claim 1), and the detection sensitivity is proportional to the dielectric constant of the dielectric layer and inversely proportional to the thickness of the dielectric layer. The examiner notes that Circuit Gates evidences that detection sensitivity is inversely proportional to the thickness of the dielectric layer are known to be inherent concepts and thus as Hellmold teaches the required structural limitations, Hellmold reads to the claimed device. The examiner notes that the detection sensitivity being proportional to the dielectric constant of the dielectric layer as evidence by Builtin, where “A material with a high dielectric constant can store more electrical energy than a material with a low dielectric constant” and thus it is understood that sensitivity is directly proportional to the constant.
Regarding Claim 11, Hellmold discloses A capacitive sensing film including a through-type built-in pocket for making the smart absorbent article described in claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), comprising a plastic film substrate (para. 0130, see rejection of claim 1), a waterproof covering layer (see rejection of claim 1), and at least two sensing lines (fig. 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the sensing lines are arranged on one side of the plastic film substrate (fig. 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the waterproof covering layer covers the sensing lines(fig. 2b, see rejection of claim 1), both sides of the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate include a part at the edge that is bonded to each other and thus generates a boundary that prevents liquid penetration and constitutes a short-circuit protection mechanism(fig. 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the waterproof covering layer and the plastic film substrate comprises a hollow part and constitutes a through-type built-in pocket(fig. 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the sensing lines are exposed in the built-in pocket and constitutes the contact surface for face-to-face contact and electrical connection with the contacts of a sensor inserted into the built-in pocket (see rejection of claim 1, where the defined sensing component comprises terminals 33 for connecting and interfacing with the sensing lines from within the pocket; and the plastic film substrate constitutes the dielectric layer(fig. 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the outer surface of which constitutes the sensing surface(fig. 2b, see rejection of claim 1), the sensing lines can detect the wet state of the sensing surface through the dielectric layer by means of electrolytic capacitance (fig. 2b, see rejection of claim 1), and the detection sensitivity is proportional to the dielectric constant of the dielectric layer and inversely proportional to the thickness of the dielectric layer. The examiner notes that Circuit Gates evidences that detection sensitivity is inversely proportional to the thickness of the dielectric layer are known to be inherent concepts and thus as Hellmold teaches the required structural limitations, Hellmold reads to the claimed device. The examiner notes that the detection sensitivity being proportional to the dielectric constant of the dielectric layer as evidence by Builtin, where “A material with a high dielectric constant can store more electrical energy than a material with a low dielectric constant” and thus it is understood that sensitivity is directly proportional to the constant.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hellmold.
Regarding Claim 7, Hellmold discloses the smart absorbent article according to claim 1, wherein the disposable absorbent article comprises a diaper, an insertion pad, a sanitary napkin, a maternal towel or an urine pad (Abstract, para. 0053), the topsheet comprises a hydrophilic non-woven fabric (para. 0088), the absorbent layer comprises polymer absorbent material (para. 0054), the backsheet comprises a breathable or impermeable PE film (para. 0060), the sensing lines comprise ink lines printed with conductive ink (para. 0130), and the waterproof covering layer comprises a plastic film (para. 0132) and the electrolyte containing liquid comprises urine (per para. 0147).
The examiner notes that while substrate may be a plastic film (para. 0110, where the substrate may be a polymer film), para. 0110 does not specifically disclose that the film comprises a PE, PP, CPP, BOPP or PET film. However, per para. 0132, the substrate suitably comprises the insulating layer, defined as the waterproof layer per the rejection of claim 1, where said insulating layer is a substrate comprising a polyethylene film. Therefore as Hellmold teaches that polyethylene film is a suitable substrate material for use in the device, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use polyethylene as the film material of the substrate housing the sensing lines.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew Wrubleski whose telephone number is (571)272-1150. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00 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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at 571-270-5879. 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.
/MATTHEW WRUBLESKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/ARIANA ZIMBOUSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781