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 § 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) 1-3 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Iwata (US 5724818 A).
Regarding claims 1-3, 9, and 10, Iwata discloses a flexible thermoelectric generator device (see Figs. 1-4, note that substrates 10 and 14 are formed of polyimide which is flexible and therefore the thermoelectric generator has a degree of flexibility, see C8/L37-65) comprising:
a thermoelectric generator network (see Fig. 1) that includes a first thermoelectric unit (13 and/or 12 or any pair of 13 and 12) comprising:
a top electrode (11 and 11a) having a first spacer (11) extending a first length therefrom, the top electrode being defined by an area A3 (fins portions of 11a);
a bottom electrode (15 portion in through hole 20, and 15 covering through hole see Fig. 3) having a second spacer (15 portion in through hole 20) extending a second length therefrom towards the first spacer (11), the bottom electrode being defined by an area A1 and being a distance h1 apart from the top electrode;
and a pillar (13 and/or 12 or any pair of 13 and 12) disposed between the first spacer (11) and the second spacer (15 portion in through hole 20) to separate the
first spacer from the second spacer, the first and second spacers separating the pillar from the top electrode and the bottom electrode (see Fig. 1), the pillar being configured to transmit thermal energy (C7/L7-20) between the top (11 and 11a) and bottom electrodes (15 portion in through hole 20, and 15 covering through hole see Fig. 3), the pillar being defined by an area A2 (area of pillar) and a height h2 (distance between interface of top and bottom spacer portion and pillar) that is independent of the distance h1;
wherein the area A3 (fins on 15a will make area of A3 larger) is larger than the area A1, and wherein a ratio of the areas A2/ A1 is based on the height h2 (A2 is proportional to h2) of the pillar or the height h2 of the pillar is based on the ratio of the areas A2/A1 (A2 is proportional to h2, and therefore h2 is dependent on A2/A1).
Regarding claim 11, Iwata discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Iwata discloses the same structure as instantly claimed.
With regards to the functional limitation “wherein a temperature difference defined across the distance h1 is lower than a temperature difference defined across the distance h1 in the absence of the first spacer or the second spacer” regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 7, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwata (US 5724818 A).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Iwata discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
Iwata discloses that the copper electrodes (11 and 15) serve to transfer heat (C7/L53-60).
However, Iwata does not explicitly state wherein an optimal area ratio of the areas A2/ A1 is based on the distance h1, the height of thermoelectric pillar h2, thermal properties of the materials used in the thermoelectric generator network, thermal contact resistance between the thermoelectric material and the electrodes, and heat transfer coefficients at the surfaces of the top and bottom electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to optimize the ratios of the areas of A2/A1 of Iwata based on is based on the distance h1, the height of thermoelectric pillar h2, thermal properties of the materials used in the thermoelectric generator network, thermal contact resistance between the thermoelectric material and the electrodes, and heat transfer coefficients at the surfaces of the top and bottom electrodes since these properties will determine the amount of heat transferred and the amount of thermal energy converted.
Regarding claim 7, Iwata discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
The amount of power produced by thermoelectric module is dependent on the number of thermoelectric elements present.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the number of thermoelectric elements in the claimed network of modified Iwata to achieve the claimed power because it will allow for optimization of power and cost.
Regarding claim 8, Iwata discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Iwata does not explicitly disclose that the height h2 of the pillar is substantially equal to one or more of the first length or the second length.
The amount of power produced by thermoelectric module is dependent on the size of thermoelectric elements present.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the height of the thermoelectric elements in the claimed network of modified Iwata to be within the claimed size to achieve a user preference of power because it will allow for optimization of power and cost.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwata (US 5724818 A) as applied to claims 1-5 and 7-11 above, and further in view of Arnold (US 2005/0193742 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Iwata discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
However, Iwata does not disclose that the thermoelectric generator network is in a wearable device.
Arnold discloses a thermoelectric generator network (104) can be embedded into an enclosure added to a wearable device ([0047]-[0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Iwata by incorporating it into a wearable device as disclosed by Arnold because it will allow for the device to be used for personal cooling.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwata (US 5724818 A) as applied to claims 1-5 and 7-11 above, and further in view of Oh (KR 20150116187 A, Machine Translation).
Regarding claim 6, Iwata discloses all of the claim limitations as set forth above.
In addition, Iwata discloses a second thermoelectric unit (any other neighboring one of 13 and/or 12 or any pair of 13 and 12 to the first thermoelectric unit), the second thermoelectric unit (any other neighboring one of 13 and/or 12 or any pair of 13 and 12 to the first thermoelectric unit) comprising:
a top electrode (11 and 11a) having a third spacer (11) extending therefrom;
a bottom electrode (15 portion in through hole 20, and 15 covering through hole see Fig. 3) having a fourth spacer (15 portion in through hole 20) extending therefrom towards the third spacer (11); and a pillar (13 and/or 12 or any pair of 13 and 12) disposed between the top and bottom electrodes.
However, Iwata does not disclose wherein one or more of the top electrode of the second thermoelectric unit is connected to the top electrode of the first thermoelectric unit via a wire, or the bottom electrode of the second thermoelectric unit is connected to the bottom electrode of the first thermoelectric unit via a wire.
Oh discloses that flexible wiring (23) can be used to interconnect electrodes (22/71) (see Fig. 1, 2 or Fig. 7/8, see pgs. 3-5) and this type of wiring allows for an increase in flexibility (see last paragraph of pg. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace the interconnection between top/bottom electrodes of neighboring thermoelectric elements so that they are interconnected with wires as disclosed by Oh because it will allow for a greater degree of flexibility and be able to withstand repeated contraction and expansion.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVINA PILLAY whose telephone number is (571)270-1180. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
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, Jeffrey T Barton can be reached at 517-272-1307. 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.
DEVINA PILLAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1726
/DEVINA PILLAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1726
Prosecution Insights