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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12 June 2026 has been entered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The phrase “a plurality of unit knot” should read --a plurality of unit knots--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 4, and 6-10 are 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.
In regards to Claim 1, the structure of the invention is unclear; specifically the phrase “crossing of fiber strands”. Claim 1 seems to indicate that multiple strands are used, but the figures only show one strand. One of ordinary skill in the art would not know whether multiple strands, are sections of a single strand, are used to form the knot-architectured fabric actuator.
In regards to Claim 6, the limitations are unclear because the dependency is incorrect. Claim 6 depends form Claim 5, which has been canceled.
In regards to Claim 7, the phrase “the fiber strand” is unclear. Which fiber strand?
The remaining claims inherit the rejection by dependency.
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 and 6 is/are rejected, to the degree definite, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weichelt (6257629).
In regards to Claim 1, Weichelt teaches a knot-architectured fabric actuator (capable of being used to actuator) comprising:
a plurality of unit knots, each unit knot comprising:
two knots each including a node formed at a crossing of fiber strands, and
two petals formed by portions of the fiber strands extending form both ends of each knot to define closed curves,
wherein the plurality of unit knots are connected to one another in a longitudinal direction to form a plurality of columns,
wherein, in each column, each knot of each unit knot is connected to a corresponding knot of an adjacent unit knot, and
wherein the columns are connected to one another in a transverse direction to form a two-dimensional architecture,
whereby the crossing nodes and closed-curve petals form an interlocked structure that resists sliding between the unit knots under tension.
PNG
media_image1.png
352
606
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to Claim 6, Weichelt teaches a distance (d) between adjacent unit knots in the transverse direction is less than or equal to twice a width (w0) of each unit knot (see spacing in annotated figure above).
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, 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) 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weichelt in view of Harrison et al (20220211187).
In regards to Claim 7, while Weichelt essentially teaches the invention as detailed above, it fails to specifically teach the myriad materials which could be used to form the structure. Harrison, however, teaches that when dealing with similar structures, it is well known to utilize a shape memory polymer (Paragraphs 28, 31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized shape memory polymer fiber in the structure of Weichelt, so as to aid in recovery once a load is removed. The ordinarily skilled artisan would understand the properties of shape memory polymer and know to utilize it as taught.
In regards to Claims 8-10, no specific structure is claimed. As such, the device of Weichelt is capable of being used as part of a generic wearable robot, as part of a generic soft gripper, and curved as a generic sleeve.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shaun R Hurley whose telephone number is (571)272-4986. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:00am - 3:00pm.
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, Clinton T Ostrup can be reached at (571) 272-5559. 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.
/SHAUN R HURLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights