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 .
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.
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being
Unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US9625330B2to Park et al. that is assigned to Leland University and that was filed on 7-31-15 (hereinafter "Park") and in view of U.S. Patent No.: 5028355 A to Cope that was filed in 1989.
PNG
media_image1.png
412
740
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Park discloses “...11. (Original) A seat cushion comprising: (see FIG. 2b where there is an elastomer and the electro device is placed on the top and bottom of the elastomer pad)
PNG
media_image2.png
708
736
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Park is silent but Cope teaches “...a polyurethane (PU) foam pad,” (See abstract where an electrically conductive polyurethane foam product is made by a combination of the polyurethane and the charge transfer materials)
Park discloses “...a pressure sensing system placed on top of the PU foam pad, (see FIG. 2b where there is an elastomer and the electro device is placed on the top and bottom of the elastomer pad)
the pressure sensing system comprising: (see col. 5,
line 25 to col. 6, lines 35 where the circuit has flexible nano wires that are
also flexible and the pressure can be applied and the device can determine
1. The pressure reading and 2. The location of the pressure being applied)
PNG
media_image3.png
500
802
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a flexible printed circuit comprising: (see claim 1-2 where the mechanical
stimulus on the skin can indicate a pressure; and the circuit includes a flexible circuit with an elastomer and electrodes)
a flexible substrate; and (see element 218)
N horizontal sensing wires and
M vertical sensing wires securely placed on a top surface of the flexible substrate,
wherein the horizontal sensing wires intersect with the vertical sensing wires and form (NXM) intersections; (see col. 5,
line 25 to col. 6, lines 35 where the circuit has flexible nano wires that are
also flexible and the pressure can be applied and the device can determine
and 1. The pressure reading and 2. The location of the pressure being applied)
PNG
media_image4.png
590
684
media_image4.png
Greyscale
a layer of an electrically conductive foam placed on top of
the N horizontal sensing wires and
the M vertical sensing wires, (see FIG. 1-6 where there is an elastomeric foam that includes two electrodes that can determine the change in 1.
Capacitance 2. Change in the top electrode resistance and 3. A change in
the bottom electrode resistance to provide a pressure indication and a location of the pressure)
PNG
media_image5.png
474
782
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Park discloses “..wherein when an occupant sits on the seat cushion, a pressure is applied to the layer” (see col. 10,
lines 1-30 and see claim 12-18 where the lateral stress and the pressure, bending and flexing from the change in impedance is measured to determine the internal and external load and lateral stress)
Park is silent but Cope teaches “...of the electrically conductive foam, (see abstract).
Park discloses “...each intersection generates in real time
an electric flux density value to reflect (see col. 10,
lines 1-30 and see claim 12-18 where the lateral stress and the pressure, bending and flexing from the change in impedance is measured to determine the internal and external load and lateral stress)
PNG
media_image6.png
732
852
media_image6.png
Greyscale
a degree of a compression caused by the pressure to a corresponding point of the electrically conductive foam. (see col.
6, where the pressure applied to the sensor is determined and a location of
the pressure is determined from the first and second electrode and the dielectric region)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of COPE with the disclosure of PARK with a reasonable expectation of success to replace the urethane cushion with the polyurethane electrically conductive foam to provide dissipation of static electricity and also shielding to protect components such as the pressure sensing devices within the cushion. See col. 1, lines 1-10 of Cope.
Park discloses “...12. (Original) The seat cushion of claim 11, further comprising an electronic control unit configured to receive the electric flux density value from each intersection of the flexible printed circuit and to derive a weight group of the occupant.” (see col 3, lines 1-20 and col. 6, lines 1-36 and col. 11, lines 1-10 and col. 12, lines 1-14) (see col 2, lines 65 to col. 3, lines 1-20 and col. 6, lines 1-36 and col. 11, lines 1-10 and col. 12, lines 1-14)
Park discloses “...13. (Original) The seat cushion of claim 11, further comprising a PU foam slab placed on top of the layer of the electrically conductive foam. (see FIG. 2 where the elastomer 218 is placed on the top of the electro device and the bottom of the electrode 214 and see col 3, lines 1-20 and col. 6, lines 1-36 and col. 11, lines 1-10 and col. 12, lines 1-14) (see col 2, lines 65 to col. 3, lines 1-20 and col. 6, lines 1-36 and col. 11, lines 1-10 and col. 12, lines 1-14; see where the combined elastomeric and electro composite can provide a 1k pa when compressed and 20 k pa when released in pressure )
Park discloses “..14. (Original) The seat cushion of claim 11, wherein the flexible printed circuit is between the polyurethane (PU) foam pad and the layer of the electrically conductive foam”. (see FIG. 2 where the elastomer 218 is placed on the top of the electro device and the bottom of the electrode 214 and see col 3, lines 1-20 and col. 6, lines 1-36 and col. 11, lines 1-10 and col. 12, lines 1-14) (see col 2, lines 65 to col. 3, lines 1-20 and col. 6, lines 1-36 and col. 11, lines 1-10 and col. 12, lines 1-14; see where the combined elastomeric and electro composite can provide a 1k pa when compressed and 20 k pa when released in pressure )
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being
unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.:
US9625330B2 to Park et al. that is assigned to Leland and that was
filed on 7-31-15 (hereinafter "PARK") and in view of Cope and Japanese Patent Pub. No.: JP H0938982 A to Koyama that was filed in 1997.
PNG
media_image7.png
558
600
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Park is silent but Koyama teaches “...15. (Original) The seat cushion of claim 11, wherein the flexible printed circuit is insert-molded inside the polyurethane (PU) foam pad or the layer of the electrically conductive foam”. (see Fig. 27 where the mold has pins 252 that can enter and provide a space 251 in the mold to prevent the material from the entering of the space 251 so a second sensor or the like can enter the space later post production; As shown in FIG. 27 (b), the molding apparatus of this embodiment has a cylindrical hollow magnet 251 having a through hole and a detecting device 2 press-fitted into the through hole of the hollow magnet 251.
The insert product 205 is formed by insert molding using an integrated product including
This is to manufacture a magnetic detection device in which is sealed with resin.
As shown in FIG. 27A, the insert 205 is press-fitted until the datum A of the detecting device 252 is aligned with the datum B of the hollow magnet 251, thereby detecting the detecting device 15
2 has the structure that determines the distance e (the distance from the magnetized surface of the hollow magnet 251 to the tip surface of the detection device 252) e with the best output characteristics.
As shown in FIG. 26, the molding apparatus according to the present embodiment is equipped with a mold 201 composed of a fixed mold 211 and a movable mold 212 that can be opened and closed in the left and right directions, and a heating means. The main elements are four holding pins 202 that are movable back and forth, and two support pins 207 that are provided in the mold 201 and that are provided with a heating means and are movable back and forth.) (see Fig. 21-28 where the die machine includes a first and a second pins that can extend on the sides and on the top in FIG. 27 and protrude through and can be heated so an aperture remains so a sensor or element can be added to the finished product)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of KOYAMA with the disclosure of PARK before the effective filing date of the present disclosure was made with a reasonable expectation of success since KOYAMA teaches that an improved molding can be made using a machine that has a first upper member and a second lower member and a third and fourth lateral pressing member. The device can include four locking pins 252 shown in FIG. 26-28. These locking pins can be heating to a high temperature and pierce the molded resin material to leave holes in the resin and then retreat back from the resin into the machine. This can cause the molded resin to not stick to the pins. Then an insert can be added to the hole for a waterproof assembly. After that, the entire molten resin 106 filled in the cavity 113 is cooled and solidified to form a highly waterproof molded product in which the insert 105 is sufficiently sealed with the resin. For example, a magnetic sensor device 251 can be added to the hole for a magnetic device sealed in the resin.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being
unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.:
US9625330B2 to Park et al. and in view of Cope and German
Patent Pub. No.: DE102011056371A1 to Abele that was filed in 2011.
Abele teaches “...16. (Original) The seat cushion of claim 11, wherein the seat cushion is an automotive seat cushion”. (see
paragraph 29-30 and element 5 where it is used as a conductive mat on a vehicle that can return to an original shape)”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the
disclosure of Park with the teachings of ROSE with a reasonable
expectation of success since ROSE teaches that a relative permittivity
and/or resistivity may be used to identify the composition of an object by
comparing the determined/measured value to known values for various
materials or to previously measured values for various objects. Once the
material of the object is known, properties of the object or the weight of the
object may be predicted from the material. This can provide an
identification of the type of material and the resistance to determine the
pressure.
The office takes official notices that pressure sensors in an automotive seat cushion are well known in the art. See European Patent Pub. No.: EP 1712403A1 to Orlewski.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 11-16 are rejected under obviousness double patenting in view of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No.: 12083989 that recites “.. [a] pressure sensing system for a seat cushion, comprising: a flexible printed circuit comprising: a flexible substrate; and N horizontal sensing wires and M vertical sensing wires securely placed on a top surface of the flexible substrate, wherein the N horizontal sensing wires intersect and electrically connect with the M vertical sensing wires and form (NXM) intersections wherein each one of the wires; and a layer of an electrically conductive foam placed on top of the N horizontal sensing wires and the M vertical sensing wires and operatively connected with the N horizontal sensing wires and the M vertical sensing wires, wherein in response to a pressure being applied to the layer of the electrically conductive foam, each intersection between the electrically connected N horizontal sensing wires and M vertical sensing wires generates in real time an electric flux density value to reflect a degree of a compression caused by the pressure to a corresponding point of the electrically conductive foam.”.
The only difference is in claim of the present claims it recites a polyurethane pad. The claims are otherwise identical. It would have been obvious to use a pad that is water proof for protection of the components.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN PAUL CASS whose telephone number is (571)270-1934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 am to 7 pm; Saturday 10 am to 12 noon.
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, Scott A. Browne can be reached at 571-270-0151. 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.
/JEAN PAUL CASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666