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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09-24-2025 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 17, 9-10, 12, 16-17, 19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minkow et al. (6,098,200) in view of DeBlasis et al. (2008/0263747).
Regarding claim 1, Minkow teaches a glove (figs 1-4) for protection of a hand and wrist during sports activities comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
664
434
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a dorsal glove base connected to a palmar glove base to form a glove body configured to cover a hand of a user, the dorsal glove base comprising a metacarpal impact protector dimensioned to extend to a metacarpal region of the hand and around an outer ulnar border of the hand and around a portion of the palmar side of the hand, wherein the metacarpal impact protector (members 210, 310, and 410, col 3, lines 60-68);
a metacarpal impact protector pocket affixed to the dorsal glove base and extending to a metacarpal region of the hand and the ulnar side of the hand around an outer ulnar border of the hand and around a portion of the palmar side of the hand, wherein the metacarpal impact protector is disposed in the metacarpal impact protector pocket (members 210 and 220, col 3, lines 10-15);
a wrist cuff assembly affixed to the glove body and a dorsal cross-over stabilizer (fig 4 annotated above).
Minkow does not teach a metacarpal impact system dimensioned to extend across a metacarpal region of the hand; and a first end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer attached to the dorsal side of the glove body along a thumb sleeve attachment, where the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted and dimensioned to wrap around a back of the hand and the palmar side of the wrist cuff assembly, and a second end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted to affix to the wrist cuff assembly.
DeBlasis teaches a glove having a metacarpal impact system dimensioned to extend across a metacarpal region of the hand (fig 2, para 0038); and a first end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer (member 114) attached to the dorsal side of the glove body along a thumb sleeve attachment, where the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted and dimensioned to wrap around a back of the hand and the palmar side of the wrist cuff assembly, and a second end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted to affix to the wrist cuff assembly (figs 3-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the Minkow glove by using the pad and pocket dimensions and the stabilizer of DeBlasis in order to protect the user better.
Regarding claim 2, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the metacarpal impact protector further comprises an energy absorbing material disposed on an underside of the metacarpal impact protector (DeBlasis, para 0038).
Regarding claim 3, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the energy absorbing material comprises one or more of ethylene vinyl acetate foam (EVA), polyurethane gel, polyurethane gel foam, silicone gel, and neoprene (DeBlasis, para 0044 and 0045).
Regarding claim 4, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis teaches all limitation and DeBlasis further teaches a hamate protector disposed on the palmar glove base, the hamate protector dimensioned to be located over a hamate bone in the hand (fig 4, member 132).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the Minkow glove by adding hamate protector, as taught by DeBlasis, in order to protect the user better.
Regarding claim 5, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the hamate protector comprises a central depression (DeBlasis, fig 4, the gap between the pads) or hole, the central depression or hole dimensioned to be located over the hamulus in the hand.
Regarding claim 6, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses an energy absorbing material affixed to the dorsal glove base over a knuckle region of the glove body (DeBlasis, members 119 and 108).
Regarding claim 7, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the energy absorbing material is a polyurethane gel or polyurethane gel foam (DeBlasis, para 0027).
Regarding claim 9, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the wrist cuff assembly affixed to the glove body comprises an energy absorbing material disposed over at least a dorsal wrist region of the wrist cuff assembly (DeBlasis, para 0044).
Regarding claim 10, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the energy absorbing material comprises one or more of ethylene vinyl acetate foam (EVA), polyurethane gel, polyurethane gel foam (DeBlasis, para 0027), silicone gel, and neoprene.
Regarding claim 12, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the wrist cuff assembly comprises an outer layer of loop neoprene.
Regarding claim 16, Minkow teaches a glove (figs 1-4) for protection of a hand and wrist during sports activities comprising:
a dorsal glove base connected to a palmar glove base to form a glove body configured to cover a hand of a user, the dorsal glove base comprising a metacarpal impact protector dimensioned to extend to a metacarpal region of the hand and around an outer ulnar border of the hand and around a portion of the palmar side of the hand, wherein the metacarpal impact protector comprises a thermoplastic shield (members 210, 310, and 410, col 3, lines 2-10 and 60-68);
a metacarpal impact protector pocket affixed to the dorsal glove base and extending to a metacarpal region of the hand and around an outer ulnar border of the hand and around a portion of the palmar side of the hand, wherein the metacarpal impact protector is disposed in the metacarpal impact protector pocket (members 210 and 220, col 3, lines 10-15);
a wrist cuff assembly affixed to the glove body and a dorsal cross-over stabilizer (fig 4 annotated above).
Minkow does not teach a hamate protector disposed on the palmar glove base, the hamate protector dimensioned to be located over a hamate bone in the hand; a first energy absorbing material affixed to the dorsal glove base over a knuckle region of the glove body; and a first end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer connected to the dorsal side of the glove body along a thumb sleeve attachment, where the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted and dimensioned to wrap around a back of the hand and the palmar side of the wrist cuff assembly and to stabilize placement of the metacarpal impact protector, and a second end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted to affix to the wrist cuff assembly.
DeBlasis teaches a glove having a hamate protector disposed on the palmar glove base, the hamate protector (fig 4, member 132) dimensioned to be located over a hamate bone in the hand; a first energy absorbing material affixed to the dorsal glove base over a knuckle region of the glove body (para 0027); and a first end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer (member 114) connected to the dorsal side of the glove body along a thumb sleeve attachment, where the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted and dimensioned to wrap around a back of the hand and the palmar side of the wrist cuff assembly and to stabilize placement of the metacarpal impact protector, and a second end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted to affix to the wrist cuff assembly figs 3-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the Minkow glove by adding pads and pocket dimensions and the stabilizer of DeBlasis in order to protect the user better.
Regarding claim 17, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the metacarpal impact protector further comprises a second energy absorbing material disposed on an underside of the metacarpal impact protector (DeBlasis, para 0038).
Regarding claim 19, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the hamate protector comprises a central depression (DeBlasis, fig 4, the gap between the pads) or hole, the central depression or hole dimensioned to be located over the hamulus in the hand.
Regarding claim 21, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis discloses the wrist cuff assembly affixed to the glove body comprises a second energy absorbing material disposed over at least a dorsal wrist region of the wrist cuff assembly (DeBlasis, para 0044 and 0045).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minkow et al. (6,098,200) and DeBlasis et al. (2008/0263747) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Akinyemi (2018/0235292).
Regarding claim 13, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis teaches all limitations of the claim except the metacarpal impact protector comprises a folded-over lip along an entrance to the metacarpal impact protector pocket. Akinyemi teaches a glove having the metacarpal impact protector having a folded-over lip along an entrance to the metacarpal impact protector pocket (fig 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the glove of Minkow by adding Akinyemi pocket in order to allow a user inserting a cushioning pad as needed.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minkow et al. (6,098,200) and DeBlasis et al. (2008/0263747) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Grilliot et al. (2010/0235962).
Regarding claim 14, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis teaches all limitation of the claim except the dorsal glove base is connected to the palmar glove base via a fourchette material disposed in at least a finger region of the glove body. Grilliot teaches a glove having the dorsal glove base is connected to the palmar glove base via a fourchette material disposed in at least a finger region of the glove body (fig 2B, member 22). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the glove of Minkow by using a fourchette material technique, as taught by Grilliot, as the technique is well-known in the art to provide more flexibility.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minkow et al. (6,098,200) and DeBlasis et al. (2008/0263747) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Van Hale (2009/0229035).
Regarding claim 15, the modified glove Minkow-DeBlasis teaches all limitation of the claim except at least the palmar glove base comprises a natural or synthetic leather. Hale teaches a glove having the palmar glove base comprises a natural or synthetic leather (para 0026). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention modify the material of DeBlasis by using Hale material in order to add comfortable to wear.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minkow et al. (6,098,200) in view of DeBlasis et al. (2008/0263747) and Hale (2009/0229035).
Regarding claim 22, Minkow teaches a glove (figs 1-4) for protection of a hand and wrist of a user during sports activities comprising:
a dorsal glove base connected to a palmar glove base to form a glove body configured to cover a hand of a user, the dorsal glove base comprising a metacarpal impact protector pocket affixed to the dorsal glove base and extending to a metacarpal region of the hand and around an outer ulnar border of the hand and around a portion of the palmar side of the hand, and a metacarpal impact protector disposed in and removable from the metacarpal impact protector pocket (members 210, 310, and 410, col 3, lines 2-24 and 60-68);
a wrist cuff assembly affixed to the glove body and a dorsal cross-over stabilizer (fig 4 annotated above).
DeBlasis teaches a glove having a first end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer (member 114) connected to the dorsal side of the glove body along a thumb sleeve attachment, where the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted and dimensioned to wrap around a back of the hand and the palmar side of the wrist cuff assembly and to stabilize placement of the metacarpal impact protector, and a second end of the dorsal cross-over stabilizer is adapted to affix to the wrist cuff assembly figs 3-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the Minkow glove by adding pads and pocket dimensions and the stabilizer of DeBlasis in order to protect the user better.
Hale teaches prior to placement of the metacarpal impact protector within the metacarpal impact protector pocket, the metacarpal impact protector is made of a thermoplastic material and is dimensioned, by successively heating, molding and cooling the metacarpal impact protector, to extend across a metacarpal region of the hand and bend around to cover an outer ulnar border of the hand and a portion of the palmar side of the hand of the user (fig 2, para 0029). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to modify the glove of DeBlasis by adding a pocket for the removeable pad, as taught by Hale, in order to add another layer of protection of the pad. Furthermore, the examiner respectfully reminds that the lack of physical description in a product-by-process claim makes determination of the patentability of the claim more difficult, since in spite of the fact that the claim may recite only process limitations, it is the patentability of the product claimed and not of the recited process steps which must be established. We are therefore of the opinion that when the prior art discloses a product which reasonably appears to be either identical with or only slightly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, date 09-24-2025, with respect to the rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C §103 have been fully 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 BAO-THIEU L NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0476. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-4pm.
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, KHOA D. HUYNH can be reached at (571)272-4888. 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.
BAO-THIEU L. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/BAO-THIEU L NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732