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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “a six-arm flexible circuit 110”as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claims 6 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Browne et al (US Publication No. 20050200067) in view of Browne et al (US Publication No. 20060186700).
Regarding claim 6, Browne-067 teaches a fatigue testing device (fatigue testing device 28) (fig. 6), comprising: a soft bistable magnetic actuator (soft bistable magnetic actuator 34), wherein the soft bistable magnetic actuator comprises a soft precursor (soft precursor 40) (e.g., Similarly blends or copolymers or composites of an electroactive polymer with an electroactive polymers precursor may also be used; para. [0062]), the soft precursor consisting of a soft deformable portion (soft deformable portion 42) (e.g., see the deformation profile of 42 in fig. 7) and a soft peripheral portion surrounded (i.e., the soft peripheral portion surrounded by the wall of 40/actuator 34); and a flexible electronic device (flexible electronic device shell 36 and wire 38), wherein: the ends of the flexible electronic device are bonded (i.e., bonded with wire 38 inside 40) (e.g., The shell 36 and the wire 38 are in intimate contact with the shape memory polymer matrix 40. The wire 38 is used to deform the shell 36 and the surrounding shape memory polymer matrix 40; para. [0086]) to the soft precursor under an original state (i.e., the original state is the concave profile of shell 36), when the direction of the magnetic field applied (i.e., varying the strength of the applied magnetic field; para. [0045]) to the soft precursor is switched (i.e., actuated; para. [0092]) (e.g., The use of a second actuator element (not shown) alongside the wire 38 that can be actuated in a direction opposite to the direction of actuation of the wire, or the use of an additional set of external biasing spring-like elements can yield a programmable shim 28 that is capable of bi-directional height changes; para. [0092]), and the soft precursor is cast by injection molding (i.e., molding the polymer; para. [0040]), the soft deformable portion is made of magnetic particles and polymer (i.e., electroactive polymers, and magnetorheological elastomers; para. [0095]), the soft peripheral portion is made of magnetic particles (i.e., Other variations in the design of the shell 36, the actuator wire 38, the structural elements 42 and the shape memory polymer matrix 40 are also possible; para. [0095]), a mixture of organic liquid and polymer (i.e., Suitable carrier fluids include organic liquids; para. [0050]), and the soft deformable portion (i.e., The wire 38 can deform the shell 36, and thereby promote the expansion and/or contraction of the programmable shim 28; para. [0086]) is buckled by extracting the organic liquid by an organic solvent (i.e., organic solvents; para. [0052]) to shrink (i.e., that enable polymer films to expand or contract in the in-plane directions in response to applied electric fields or mechanical stresses; para. [0058]) the soft peripheral portion (e.g., In some situations, formulations that may be described as magnetorheological elastomers may also fall under the definition of magnetorheological fluids, and vice versa; para. [0055]).
Browne-067 does not teach the flexible electronic device transits between the folded state and the original state; the ends of the flexible electronic device are folded towards the middle of the flexible electronic device under the folded state.
Browne-700 teaches in a similar field of endeavor in magnetorheological actuators (i.e., panel 10) (fig. 1); wherein the flexible electronic device (i.e., the flexible electronic device 10; fig. 1) transits between the folded state (i.e., the folded state of panel 10 in fig. 2) and the original state (i.e., the original state of panel 10 in fig. 1), the ends (i.e., the ends 12) of the flexible electronic device are folded towards the middle of the flexible electronic device under the folded state (implicit, as seen in fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optionally included the folding mechanism in Browne-067, as taught by Browne-700, as it provides the advantage of optimizing the circuit design.
Regarding claim 11, Browne-067 in view of Browne-700 and the teachings of Browne-067 as modified by Browne-700 have been discussed above.
Browne-067 further teaches wherein: the magnetic particle comprises at least one of rubidium iron boron magnetic powder, alnico magnetic powder, hard ferrite magnetic powder, samarium cobalt magnetic powder, and other magnetic powders (i.e., magnetic powder mixtures; para. [0048]); and/or the polymer comprises at least one of siloxane, polysilsesquioxane, polycarbosiloxaneur, polysilyl carbodiimide, polysilsesquioxane, polysilazane, and polysilsesquiazane (i.e., suitable polymers; para. [0043]); and/or the organic liquid (i.e., Suitable carrier fluids include organic liquids; para. [0050]) comprises silicone oil (i.e., silicone oils; para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 12, Browne-067 in view of Browne-700 and the teachings of Browne-067 as modified by Browne-700 have been discussed above.
Browne-067 further teaches wherein the soft precursor is circular (i.e., actuator 34/40 is a piston-cylinder arrangement; fig. 6).
Claims 7 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Browne et al (US Publication No. 20050200067) in view of Browne et al (US Publication No. 20060186700) and further in view of Lenneman et al (US Publication No. 20100207775).
Regarding claim 7, Browne-067 in view of Browne-700 and the teachings of Browne-067 as modified by Browne-700 have been discussed above.
Browne-067 further teaches wherein the flexible electronic device (flexible electronic device shell 36 and wire 38) (fig. 6) comprises a flexible circuit (i.e., flexible circuit shell 36 and wire 38).
Neither Browne-067 nor Browne-700 teaches wherein the soft bistable magnetic actuator is fixed by a soft annular ring and is in a stable state.
Lenneman teaches in a similar field of endeavor in magnetorheological actuators (i.e., interface 10) (fig. 2B); wherein the soft bistable magnetic actuator (i.e., actuator 22) is fixed (i.e., fixed via element 33) by a soft annular ring (i.e., soft annular ring 32) and is in a stable state (i.e., 10 is in a flat profile/the dashed line; fig. 2A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optionally included the soft annular ring in Browne-067, as taught by Lenneman, as it provides the advantage of optimizing the circuit design.
Regarding claim 13, Browne-067 in view of Browne-700 and further in view of Lenneman and the teachings of Browne-067 as modified by Browne-700 have been discussed above. Also, the teachings of Browne-067 as modified by Lenneman have been discussed above as well.
Lenneman further teaches wherein the soft bistable magnetic actuator (10) (fig. 2B) further comprises: a soft constraint (32) to fix the soft precursor (22) in a preset position (i.e., preset position profile/flat surface of the interface 10 as depicted in fig. 5 the left-side profile), when the direction of the magnetic field applied (applied field; para. [0043]) to the soft bistable magnetic actuator is switched (i.e., actuated; para. [0092]), the soft precursor transferring from concave configuration (i.e., concave surface 44 of the interface 10 as depicted in fig. 5 the right-side profile) to convex configuration (i.e., convex surface 44 of the interface 10 as depicted in fig. 5 the middle-side profile).
Regarding claim 14, Browne-067 in view of Browne-700 and further in view of Lenneman and the teachings of Browne-067 as modified by Browne-700 have been discussed above. Also, the teachings of Browne-067 as modified by Lenneman have been discussed above as well.
Lenneman further teaches wherein the soft constraint is a soft annular sheet (32) (fig. 2B), and the inner ring of the soft annular sheet is bonded (i.e., bonded via element 33) to the soft precursor partially or circumferentially (implicit, as seen in fig. 2B).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Browne et al (US Publication No. 20050200067) in view of Browne et al (US Publication No. 20060186700) and further in view of Gabriel (US Publication No. 20110166566).
Regarding claim 8, Browne-067 in view of Browne-700 and the teachings of Browne-067 as modified by Browne-700 have been discussed above.
Neither Browne-067 nor Browne-700 teaches wherein the flexible electronic device comprises a six-arm flexible circuit; the six-arm flexible circuit comprises six arms, these arms are connected in a center; and the ends of the six flexible circuits are connected to a concave surface of the soft precursor.
Gabriel teaches in a similar field of endeavor in magnetorheological actuators (i.e., guidewire 300) (fig. 12); wherein the flexible electronic device (300) comprises a six-arm flexible circuit (328); the six-arm flexible circuit comprises six arms (328), these arms are connected in a center (326); and the ends (330) of the six flexible circuits are connected to a concave surface (i.e., concave/ball bearing surface 320) of the soft precursor (326) (e.g., In one embodiment, the guidewire 300 further comprises micrometer sized ball bearings between the first portion of the first connector and the second portion of the first connector, or between the first portion of the second connector and the second portion of the second connector to decrease friction; para. [0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have optionally included the six arms in Browne-067, as taught by Gabriel, as it provides the advantage of optimizing the circuit design.
Claims 1-5 and 9-10 are not elected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUAAMAR Q AL-TAWEEL whose telephone number is (571)270-0339. The examiner can normally be reached 0730-1700.
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, Thienvu V Tran can be reached at (571) 270- 1276. 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.
/MUAAMAR QAHTAN AL-TAWEEL/Examiner, Art Unit 2838
/THIENVU V TRAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2838
Prosecution Insights