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 Invention I, claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 3/12/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “the three groups of claims are not patentably distinct and do not constitute independent or distinct inventions requiring a serious search burden if examined together.”
This is not found persuasive because the Inventions, when given their broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, are distinct and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden should restriction not be required.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 8-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 3/12/2026.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the election of species have been considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the requirement for an election of species is withdrawn.
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 3 is 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 3 recites “wherein at least one parameter is predetermined, the at least one parameter selected from the group consisting of: dimensions of a zig-zag shape, length between neighboring pairs of the modules, a height between the sandwich planes, target vectors, dimensions of a lower base plane, inclination angle of rectangular faces, and any combinations thereof” which is unclear and renders the claim indefinite. Specifically, it is unclear what structure the “at least one parameter” is attributed to. Additionally, it is unclear what is required by “predetermined” and how such a “predetermined” parameter would differ from all of the other parameters of a functioning product.
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.
(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 and 3-4, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Calisch et al. (USPN 11,433,633).
Calisch discloses a structure comprising: a core (Figs. 7A-7D, Column 7, line 25) assembled from modules (Figs. 22A-22B) having Kirigami expanded Miura crease patterns (Column 11, lines 5-17); and sandwich planes (Column 7 lines 21-25, Figs 7A-7D) with the core positioned therebetween and joined thereto; wherein at least one parameter is predetermined, the at least one parameter selected from the group consisting of: dimensions of a zig-zag shape (as best understood, Column 11, lines 5-17), length between neighboring pairs of the modules, a height between the sandwich planes, target vectors, dimensions of a lower base plane, inclination angle of rectangular faces, and any combinations thereof; wherein at least a portion of the modules exhibit double curvature (Fig. 17B depicts a module showing what is considered double curvature).
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) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calisch et al. (USPN 11,433,633) in view of Gogoana (US 2023/0270615 A1).
Calisch discloses the claimed invention, except for steel wire tendons routed across a surface of the core and/or at least one of the sandwich planes or further comprising at least one closed-loop brushed DC motor and a PID position controller, operative to tension the steel wire tendons.
The use of steel cable tendon actuators in robotic applications are old and well known in the art. Similarly, the use of PID control to control such actuators is old and well known in the art.
Gogoana discloses a steel cable tendon (222, Paragraph [0111]) routed across a surface of a core, driven by a DC motor (112) and PID controller (1012, Paragraph [0145]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application as filed to have modified the structure of Calisch to have a steel wire tendon routed across a surface of the core and driven by a DC motor controlled by a PID controller, in order to allow for the structure to be selectively bent, effectively forming an actuator.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Calisch et al. (USPN 11,433,633) in view of Rubio et al. (US 2023/0158692 A1).
Calisch discloses the claimed invention, except for wherein the core is formed of polypropylene and the sandwich planes are formed of aluminum.
The selection of a known material suitable for a given intended use is within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Rubio discloses a material having a polypropylene core sandwiched between aluminum (Paragraph [0214]) is a composite material already produced and available, as well as demonstrating its use in a similar device (Figs. 6A-6B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to have modified the structure of Calisch to have a polypropylene core and aluminum sandwich planes, as such a material is known to be suitable for the given intended use, and such a selection only requires routine skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAKE COOK whose telephone number is (571)272-5968. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00 PM.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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.
JAKE COOK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3618
/Jake Cook/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights