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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/12/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment and Arguments
Applicant’s amendment and corresponding arguments, filed 9/12/2025, have been reviewed and considered. Claims 1 and 7 have been amended and claims 3 and 10 have been canceled. Therefore, claims 1-2, 4-9 and 11-15 are currently pending. Applicant’s amendment and corresponsive arguments are considered sufficient in overcoming the prior art rejections of the previous Office Action. This Office Action is a Non-Final Rejection based on the RCE dated 9/12/2025
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 410, 411, 504 and 505 (page 6). 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 605, 607, 701, 702, 801, 802, 803, 804, 901, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1004, 1101, 1102, 1103, 1104, 1201, 1202, 1203, 1204, 1301, 1302 and 1303 (Figures 6-13). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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
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) 1-2 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NETHERY (US 2012/0204437 A1) in view of GRAHAM et al. (US 2009/0113737 A1) and in further view of STRAIN (US 7,568,295 B1) and CORMACK (US 6,460,267 B1).
Regarding claim 1, NETHERY discloses a quilting ruler comprising: a generally polygonal member (400) with a center (where 435 and 436 connect) and a perimeter with opposite sides (401, 404; 402, 403), each side having a midpoint (note where 431-434 connect to respective sides); and a plurality of elongate apertures (560-563) disposed at right angles between the center and the perimeter, each elongate aperture (560-563) generally inline with and between the midpoints of the opposite sides (Fig. 6). However, NETHERY fails to disclose a first non-elongate aperture located at the center.
GRAHAM teaches a quilting ruler comprising a generally polygonal member (10) having a first non-elongate aperture (11) located at a center of the generally polygonal member (10) (Fig. 1). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have provided the generally polygonal member of NETHERY with a first non-elongate aperture at the center thereof, in light of the teachings of GRAHAM, in order to further aid in alignment of the ruler with a material, in order to mark a center point on the material and/or in order to securely hold the ruler to the material during the cutting/marking process.
Note that NETHERY in view of GRAHAM teaches a quilting ruler comprising a plurality of elongated apertures as discussed above. However, NETHERY in view of GRAHAM fails to disclose an elongate aperture within the plurality of elongate apertures terminating in an arrow shape. STRAIN teaches a quilting ruler (10), as is old and known in the art (note US 2009/0288775 for additional reference), which incorporates an arrow shape (part of guidelines as shown in figures 1-3) in order to provide a direction to aid a user in the quilting process. CORMACK teaches incorporating an arrow shape at an end of an aperture in order to transfer a direction onto the material being traced underneath the aperture (Fig. 1). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have provided the quilting ruler of NETHERY in view of GRAHAM with an elongate aperture within the plurality of elongate apertures terminating in an arrow shape, in light of the teachings of STRAIN and CORMACK, in order to provide a direction to aid a user in the quilting process even when the quilting ruler has been removed from the material (direction is traced on material).
Regarding claim 2, NETHERY additionally fails to disclose a second non-elongate aperture located between the center and the perimeter of the generally polygonal member. Not only does GRAHAM disclose the first non-elongate aperture (11) located at a center of the generally polygonal member (10) as discussed above, but GRAHAM also disclose a second non-elongate aperture(s) (20) located between the center and the perimeter of the generally polygonal member in order to define shapes that differ in size to create more quilting options (Fig. 1) (note Disclosure section of spec). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have provided the generally polygonal member with a second non-elongate aperture(s) located between the center and the perimeter thereof, in light of the teachings of GRAHAM, in order to define shapes that differ in size to create more quilting options.
Regarding claim 4, NETHERY discloses the generally polygonal member being formed of a translucent polymer (para 0030).
Regarding claim 5, NETHERY discloses the generally polygonal member being made from a relatively rigid material such as acrylic (para 0030). Note that acrylic is a plastic that is more rigid than other plastics (“relatively”); however, acrylic does have a degree of flexibility (as compared to a material such as glass). Accordingly, the acrylic material of the generally polygonal member of NETHERY can be considered “flexible” as claimed since the applicant has no claimed the degree of flexibility. Additionally, note that acrylics can become even more flexible when heated to allow the bending and shaping thereof.
Regarding claim 6, note that the ability of a quilting ruler to be used outside of an embroidery hoop is considered purely functional language containing no further limiting structure. Since the combination of references teach all of the structure of the quilting ruler as claimed by the applicant, the quilting ruler thereof is considered fully capable of providing the claimed function.
Claim(s) 7-9 and 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NETHERY (US 2012/0204437 A1) in view of GRAHAM et al. (US 2009/0113737 A1) in view of STRAIN (US 7,568,295 B1) and CORMACK (US 6,460,267 B1) and in further view of ANDERSON (US 5,191,716).
Regarding claims 7-9 and 11-13, the combination of NETHERY, GRAHAM, STRAIN and CORMACK teaches a quilting ruler having all the structure as discussed above. However, none of the references within the combination of references disclose a plurality of quilting rulers having different dimensions. ANDERSON discloses a quilting ruler system comprising a plurality of like quilting rulers (10, 20, 30) having different dimensions in order to mark/cut patchwork having different shapes and dimensions (Fig. 1). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have provided the quilting ruler of the combination of NETHERY, GRAHAM, STRAIN and CORMACK as a system comprising a plurality of like quilting rulers having different dimensions, in light of the teachings of ANDERSON, in order to mark/cut patchwork having different shapes and dimensions.
Regarding claims 14-15, the combination of NETHERY, GRAHAM, STRAIN, CORMACK and ANDERSON teaches a plurality of quilting rulers, each having a generally polygonal member as discussed above. However, the combination fails to disclose the generally polygonal member of each quilting ruler being less than 1 mm in thickness or less than .5 mm in thickness. Note that NETHERY does disclose that the general polygonal member (10) of figure 1 is about 1/16 to about 3/16 of an inch thick. It is old and known in the art that using less material is beneficial in reducing costs. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have provided the thickness of the generally polygonal member of each quilting ruler of the combination of NETHERY, GRAHAM, STRAIN, CORMACK and ANDERSON as less than 1 mm or even less than 0.5 mm because it has been held that discovering an optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art and it is old and known that the use of less material is beneficial in reducing costs.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record, as cited on attached PTO-892, and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note that both of US 2004/0049935 A1 and US D549,115 S teach a quilting ruler that incorporates and arrow shape on a guideline.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN E DURHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8642. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Alissa J Tompkins can be reached at 571-272-3425. 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.
NED
/NATHAN E DURHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732