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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 27, 2025, has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 6, 21, and 23 and the cancellation of claim 2-5 and 22 in the response filed March 27, 2025, are acknowledged by the Examiner.
Claims 1, 6, 21, and 23 are pending.
Invention I remains the elected embodiment.
Response to Arguments
In response to “Objection to Drawings”
Applicant’s cancellation of claim 22 rendered the claim objection moot, the previous objection is withdrawn.
In response to “Rejection of Claims 22-23 Under 35 U.S.C. §112”
Applicant’s cancellation of claim 22 has rendered the 112a rejection moot, it is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments to claim 23 has overcome the current 112a rejection, it is withdrawn.
In response to “Rejection of Claim 1 Under 35 U.S.C. §103(a)”
With respect to claim 1, Applicant argues that Krespi in view of Roffe and Barklow does not meet each limitation of the amended claim. As necessitated by the amendments, new grounds of rejection have been made.
In response to “Rejection of Claims 1-3 Under 35 U.S.C. §103(a)”
With respect to claim 1, Applicant argues that Krespi in view of Roffe, Barklow, and Gautreaux does not meet each limitation of the amended claim. As necessitated by the amendments, new grounds of rejection have been made.
In response to “Rejection of Claim 4 Under 35 U.S.C. §103” and “Rejection of Claim 6 Under 35 U.S.C. §103”
The arguments are directed to claim 1, addressed above.
In response to “Rejection of Claim 21 Under 35 U.S.C. §103(a)”
With respect to claim 21, Applicant argues that Kaminski II in view of Gautreaux and in view of Finch does not meet each limitation of the amended claim. As necessitated by the amendments, new grounds of rejection have been made. Kaminski III remains the primary reference in the current rejection as it continues to share structural and functional characteristics with the instant application.
In response to “Rejection of Claims 22-23 Under 35 U.S.C. §103”
The arguments are directed to claim 21, addressed above.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “wherein the remaining edges are finished edges devoid of the plurality of evenly spaced holes” of claims 1 and 21 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 6, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With respect to claim 1 and 21, Applicant does not have support in the Specifications nor is it shown clearly in the Drawings: a shirt extension comprised of mesh fabric having an interior portion with a plurality of evenly spaced holes. There is no detail regarding the spacing of the mesh holes in the Specifications. Further, the Drawings may not be relied upon for specific dimensions that are not supported within the Specifications. For the sake of compact prosecution Examiner will interpret the mesh fabric to have a series of spaced holes.
With respect to claim 1 and 21, Applicant does not have support in the Specifications nor is it shown clearly in the Drawings: wherein the remaining edges are finished edges devoid of the plurality of evenly spaced holes. There is no detail regarding the spacing of the mesh holes in the Specifications; the Drawings may not be relied upon for specific dimensions that are not supported within the Specifications. Further, there is no support in the Specifications nor Drawings regarding the absence of evenly spaced holes in the finished edges, on the contrary the finished edges appear made of the mesh material and therefore also have holes therein. For the sake of compact prosecution, Examiner will interpret the edges to be finished.
Claims 6 and 23 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim above.
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.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaminski III (US 2021/0345704)(priority to May 2020) in view of Barklow (US 2016/0213959) and in view of Abedinzadeh Kivi (US 2021/0045472)(priority to May 2019).
With respect to claim 1, Kamiski, III discloses A garment apparatus (Fig 1), comprising: a shirt (Fig 3, shirt 12); … the shirt extension having a first edge affixed to an inside portion of the shirt and remaining edges free from the shirt (Fig 3, shirt extension is panel 280, first edge 60 affixed to shirt 12, remaining edges are free)…
Kaminski III is silent on and a shirt extension comprised of mesh fabric having an interior portion with a plurality of evenly spaced holes (Kaminski III Fig 3, shirt extension is panel 280, panel is a fabric but not detailed mesh), wherein the remaining edges are finished edges devoid of the plurality of evenly spaced holes, and the shirt extension further comprising a mask attachment mechanism configured to facilitate attaching and detaching a mask, wherein mask attachment mechanism is a strip of a hook and loop fastener mechanism that extends from a first finished edge of the remaining edges of the shirt extension to a second finished edge of the remaining edges of the shirt extension.
Barklow teaches an analogous extension member connecting to a mask that is mesh material ([0025], extension 100 is a mesh)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the extension material of Kaminski III to be a mesh as taught by Barklow in order to improve user comfort (Barklow [0025]).
Kaminski III/Barklow is silent on wherein the remaining edges are finished edges devoid of the plurality of evenly spaced holes, and the shirt extension further comprising a mask attachment mechanism configured to facilitate attaching and detaching a mask, wherein mask attachment mechanism is a strip of a hook and loop fastener mechanism that extends from a first finished edge of the remaining edges of the shirt extension to a second finished edge of the remaining edges of the shirt extension.
Abedinzadeh Kivi teaches an analogous mesh fabric neck and face covering system comprised of multiple attached elements (Fig 4A-4B, [0074]) wherein the remaining edges are finished edges devoid of the plurality of evenly spaced holes ([0079], stitched edges, a stitch is a form of a finished edge), and the shirt extension further comprising a mask attachment mechanism configured to facilitate attaching and detaching a mask ([0083], Fig 2A, hook material along side 13), wherein mask attachment mechanism is a strip of a hook and loop fastener mechanism that extends from a first finished edge of the remaining edges of the shirt extension to a second finished edge of the remaining edges of the shirt extension ([0083], Fig 2A, hook material along side 13, compared to the other attachment method edge 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the panel of Kaminski III/Barklow to be detachable with hook and loop as taught by Abedinzadeh Kivi in order to allow the system to be more customizable to the user (Abedinzadeh Kivi [0006]).
With respect to claim 6, Kaminski III/Barklow/Abedinzadeh Kivi discloses The garment apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first edge of the shirt extension is sewn onto the inside portion of the shirt (Kaminski III Fig 6, first edge of shirt extension/panel sewn at 40).
Claims 21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaminski III in view of Serber (US 2,444,381) and in view of Abedinzadeh Kivi.
With respect to claim 21, Kaminski, III discloses A garment apparatus (Fig 1), comprising: a shirt (Fig 3, shirt 12); …the mesh fabric having a first edge affixed to an inside portion of the shirt and finished edges free from the shirt (Fig 3, shirt extension is panel 280, first edge 60 affixed to shirt 12, remaining edges are free relative to the shirt),
Kaminski III is silent on and a mesh fabric having an interior portion with a plurality of evenly spaced holes (Kaminski III Fig 3, shirt extension is panel 280, panel is a fabric but not detailed mesh), the mesh fabric having a first edge affixed to an inside portion of the shirt and finished edges free from the shirt (Kaminski III Fig 3, shirt extension is panel 280, first edge 60 affixed to shirt 12, remaining edges are free relative to the shirt btu not detailed to be finished), wherein the finished edges are connection fabric edges devoid of the plurality of evenly spaced holes, and the mesh fabric further comprising a mask attachment mechanism configured to facilitate attaching and detaching a mask, wherein the mask attachment mechanism extends from a first finished edge of the shirt extension to a second finished edge of the shirt extension.
Serber teaches an analogous extension from a shirt to cover a neck (Fig 1, Fig 3) with a mesh fabric having an interior portion with a plurality of evenly spaced holes (col 4 ll 00-15, mesh fabric), the mesh fabric having a first edge affixed to an inside portion of the shirt and finished edges free from the shirt (col 3 ll 30-45, one end sewn to shirt and other end stitched at edges to the other layers, stitching an edge is a form of finish), wherein the finished edges are connection fabric edges devoid of the plurality of evenly spaced holes (col 3 ll 30-45, one end sewn to shirt and other end stitched at edges to the other layers, stitching an edge is a form of finish, see 112 rejection above regarding interpretation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the extension material of Kaminski III to be a mesh as taught by Serber in order to allow for material manipulation and to have a fabric known to be usable around a neck (Serber col 1 ll 50-55).
Kaminski III/Serber is silent on and the mesh fabric further comprising a mask attachment mechanism configured to facilitate attaching and detaching a mask, wherein the mask attachment mechanism extends from a first finished edge of the shirt extension to a second finished edge of the shirt extension.
Abedinzadeh Kivi teaches an analogous mesh fabric neck and face covering system comprised of multiple attached elements (Fig 4A-4B, [0074]) wherein the finished edges are connection fabric edges devoid of the plurality of evenly spaced holes ([0079], stitched edges, a stitch is a form of a finished edge), and the mesh fabric further comprising a mask attachment mechanism configured to facilitate attaching and detaching a mask ([0083], Fig 2A, hook material along side 13), wherein the mask attachment mechanism extends from a first finished edge of the shirt extension to a second finished edge of the shirt extension ([0083], Fig 2A, hook material along side 13, compared to the other attachment method edge 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the panel of Kaminski III/Serber to be detachable with hook and loop as taught by Abedinzadeh Kivi in order to allow the system to be more customizable to the user (Abedinzadeh Kivi [0006]).
With respect to claim 23, Kaminski III/Serber/Abedinzadeh Kivi discloses The garment apparatus according to claim 21, wherein the mask attachment mechanism is a strip of a hook and loop fastener mechanism (Abedinzadeh Kivi [0083], Fig 2A, hook material along side 13, compared to the other attachment method edge 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the panel of Kaminski III/Serber to be detachable with hook and loop as taught by Abedinzadeh Kivi in order to allow the system to be more customizable to the user (Abedinzadeh Kivi [0006]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM D BAKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3333. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-5:30.
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, Rachael E Bredefeld can be reached on (571)270-5237. 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.
/ADAM BAKER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3786