Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/827,374

IN-SITU FORMATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL (2D) NANOPARTICLES WITHIN ELASTOMERS FOR ELECTROCHEMICAL SENSING

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Sep 06, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, HAIDUNG D
Art Unit
1761
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
The Board Of Regents Of The University Of Texas System
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allow Rate
401 granted / 616 resolved
At TC average
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+28.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
655
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
46.4%
+6.4% vs TC avg
§102
27.2%
-12.8% vs TC avg
§112
19.3%
-20.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 616 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant's election with traverse of group II (claims 12-15) in the reply filed on 12/1/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no added burden on the examiner to also search other groups as each of the groups requires, inter alia, the same electrochemical sensor technology in elected group II. This is not found persuasive because all these groups are independent or distinct from the elected Groups due to their separate classification thereof, which shows that each invention has attained recognition in the art as a separate subject for inventive effort, and also a separate field of search, where it is necessary to search for one of the groups in a manner that is not likely to result in finding art pertinent to the other groups (e.g. searching different classes/subclasses of electronic resources, or employing different search queries), a different field of search is shown, even though the two are classified together. The indicated different field of search must in fact be pertinent to the type of subject matter covered by the claims. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 1, 16-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Groups III-V, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/6/2024 has been considered by the examiner. Initialed copies accompany this action. Drawings The Drawings filed 12/19/2024 are approved by the examiner. Claim Interpretation The law held that “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). In re Marosi 710 F.2d 799,218 USPQ 289 (Fed. Cir. 1983). The elastomer composite recited in claim 12 is limited by and defined by the process of claim 1. If the product in claim 12 is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. 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 22, 28 and 29 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. Claim 22 recites the limitation "the exfoliated 2D nanoparticles" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 28 recites the limitation "the exfoliated 2D nanoparticles" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 29 recites the limitation "wherein forming the elastomeric composite comprises casting the elastomer precursor containing the exfoliated layered material onto the substrate and curing the elastomer precursor". This recitation is directed to the process of making the product. A claim that attempts to claim both a product and the method steps of using or making it in the same claim is considered indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), second paragraph. See MPEP 21730.5 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. Claims 12, 15, 22, and 24-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lynch-Branzoi et al (WO2021154903). Regarding claim 12, Lynch-Branzoi discloses a sensor, comprising: a substrate; an elastomeric filled with conductive 2D nanoparticles, formed by filling elastomer polymer precursors and/or corresponding elastomer polymer curing agents or their precursors with conductive 2D nanoparticles by shear exfoliation of a layered material, followed by mixing the two components and curing to form the elastomer filled with conductive 2D nanoparticles (abstract; page 13, ln 21-22); and a plurality of electrodes suitable for electrochemical sensing (page 12, ln 9-30). Regarding claim 15, Lynch-Branzoi discloses the substrate includes at least one of fabrics, rubbers, plastics, metal, wood, electronic components, gloves, wrist bands, shoe soles, and belts (page 12, pages 11-13). Regarding claim 22, Lynch-Branzoi discloses the layered material is graphite and the exfoliated 2D nanoparticles are graphene (page 13, line 21). Regarding claim 24, Lynch-Branzoi discloses the elastomer is a silicone (page 9, ln 28; ECOFLEX/Dragon Skin Part A, page 13, line 22). Regarding claim 25, Lynch-Branzoi discloses the silicone is polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) (page 9, ln 28). Regarding claim 26, Lynch-Branzoi discloses the layered material is graphite and the elastomer is a silicone (page 13, line 21-22). Regarding claim 27, Lynch-Branzoi discloses the at least one layered material is present in a concentration of about 35% to about 50% by weight of the elastomeric composite (page 13, line 21-22; page 16, ln 7). Regarding claim 28, Lynch-Branzoi discloses the exfoliated 2D nanoparticles (graphene nanoflakes GNFs) are obtained through shear mixing the layered material with the elastomer precursor (page 13, ln 21-22). 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. 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. Claims 13, 14 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lynch-Branzoi et al (WO2021154903) as applied above, further in view of Yang et al (US2019/0271659). Regarding claims 13, 14, Lynch-Branzoi discloses a sensor described above and is incorporated herein by reference. Lynch-Branzoi does not disclose the plurality of electrodes includes a counter electrode formed from platinum (Pt) and a reference electrode formed from silver/silver chloride (Ag/AgCl). Yang discloses an electrochemical sensor comprising the plurality of electrodes includes a counter electrode formed from platinum (Pt) and a reference electrode formed from silver/silver chloride (Ag/AgCl), wherein the working electrode comprises graphene (para 0070-72). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the invention to fabricate the electrochemical sensor according to Yang using the elastomer filled with graphene of Lynch-Branzoi in place of the graphene of the working electrode, which can be used to detect pressure, force, stretch, displacement, touch, temperature, humidity and chemicals that are advantageous for the production of various types of sensors as well as health monitoring devices to detect pulse, blood pressure, breathing, temperature, and strain (motion or deflection) with a reasonable expectation of success for use in applications include medical sensors such as those that measure patient movement, medical and laboratory PPE, electronic sensors for heat and exposure, health monitoring devices for measuring posture, activity and vital signs, and biosensing devices for measuring frailty, balance and posture. Products incorporating the devices include medical devices, laboratory PPE, health and fitness devices, and various electronics (page 13, ln 10-18). Regarding claim 30, Yang discloses the working electrode is configured to detect dopamine (para 0065), therefore a person skilled in the art would expect the modified working electrode formed on the elastomer filled with graphene of Lynch-Branzoi would also detect dopamine. Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lynch-Branzoi et al (WO2021154903) as applied above, further in view of Nosker et al (US2021/0403326). Lynch-Branzoi discloses a sensor described above and is incorporated herein by reference. Lynch-Branzoi does not disclose the graphite is in the form of graphite flakes having an average length within the range from about 800 µm to about 2000 µm. Nosker discloses graphite flakes of about 1000 microns in length are used in material for biosensors (para 0069). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filling date of the invention to use the graphite flakes of about 1000 microns in length to fabricate the elastomer filled with graphene of Lynch-Branzoi, with a reasonable expectation of success for use in applications include medical sensors such as those that measure patient movement, medical and laboratory PPE, electronic sensors for heat and exposure, health monitoring devices for measuring posture, activity and vital signs, and biosensing devices for measuring frailty, balance and posture. Products incorporating the devices include medical devices, laboratory PPE, health and fitness devices, and various electronics. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAIDUNG D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5455. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 10a-3p. 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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. /HAIDUNG D NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761 3/19/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 06, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583749
TITANIUM-ZIRCONIUM CO-DOPED CARBON-COATED LITHIUM IRON PHOSPHATE MATERIAL AND PRODUCTION METHOD AND USE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580094
OVERHEAD CONDUCTORS WITH HIGH-TEMPERATURE RESISTANT CURED COATINGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575248
ZINC OXIDE NANOMATERIAL AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF AND SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12545834
LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE, DISPLAY DEVICE, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, ORGANIC COMPOUND, AND LIGHTING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12521709
PROCESS FOR PURIFYING ORGANIC SOLVENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+28.1%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 616 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month