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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I (claims 1 – 19) in the reply filed on August 14, 2023 is acknowledged. Applicant’s election is with traverse. However, because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claim 20 is drawn to a nonelected group, and therefore withdrawn from consideration.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specification, Pgs. 4 & 21: Applicant’s specification states “silicon grip.” However, pg. 1 refers to a “silicone grip.” Additionally, the other materials listed for the material on pg. 21 of the specification are known polymer materials with gripping properties similar to silicone. Silicon alone does not possess gripping properties. Therefore, it is assumed the term “silicon” is a typographical error. However, clarification is requested.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant’s claim 8 recites “silicon grip.” Applicant’s specification, pg. 1, teaches “silicone grips” (pg. 1). It is assumed claim 8 is a typographical error and Applicant intended to claim “silicone,” not silicon. Please clarify. Appropriate correction is required.
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 7 – 8 are 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.
Claims 7 – 8 recite the limitation "the grip locations" in claim 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the current action, it has been assumed Applicant intended for claims 7 – 8 to depend upon claim 6.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
With regard to claim 13, Applicant claims the mass of the at least one weighted region is greater than the mass of the at last one non-weighted region. By definition, weight is determined by the mass of an object and the force of gravity on said object. For the intended purpose disclosed in the specification, gravity is not a variable. In this case, “mass” and “weight” are synonyms. A weighted region would inherently have greater mass (i.e. weight) than a non-weighted region. Therefore, dependent claim 13 does not further limit claim 1 that it depends upon.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 – 2 & 10 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Itch-to-Stitch.com, “How to Make Your Skirt Drape Beautifully | Itch to Stitch” (May 2016).
With regard to claim 1, Itch-to-Stitch (I-t-S) teaches a fabric of a skirt weighed down using coins as weights (weighted region). As can be seen the image below, the fabric contains weighted and non-weighted regions, and a plurality of surface areas.
PNG
media_image1.png
545
812
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, as discussed above, I-t-S teaches the fabric is a skirt (“an article of clothing”), wherein the skirt has an external surface (“first surface area”) and an internal surface (“second surface area”).
With regard to claim 10, I-t-S teaches the weighted region is made of coins (metal alloys) and the non-weighted region is made of fibrous material, such as cotton or silk.
With regard to claim 11, I-t-S teaches a plurality of weighted regions disposed on different surface areas of the hem of the skirt.
With regard to claim 12, I-t-S teaches a plurality of non-weighted regions of the fabric forming the skirt. Therefore, I-t-S teaches at least one non-weighted region disposed on a first surface area and at least one non-weighted region disposed on a second surface area.
With regard to claim 13, for the intended purpose disclosed in the specification, “mass” and “weight” are synonyms. As such, a weighted region would inherently have greater mass than a non-weighted region.
MPEP 2112 [R-3] states:
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. “The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness.” In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
With regard to claim 14, as shown in the image above, I-t-S teaches the weighted region (coin) and the fabric (non-weighted region) are positioned in a layering manner.
With regard to claim 15, I-t-S teaches adding coins (weights) at the hem of the fabric at specific locations, such as sides, center front, and center back (i.e. a pattern).
With regard to claim 16, I-t-S teaches the use of coins as weights. Coins have a disc-shape.
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 4 – 5, & 11 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Washington, Sr. et al. (US 2010/0319099 A1).
With regard to claim 1, Washington, Sr. et al. teach a garment made of fabric comprising an external side (“first surface area”) and an internal side (“second surface area”) (Fig. 1). The fabric comprises one or more weight cells that support a weight (“weighted regions”) and areas without a weight cells (“one or more non-weighted regions”) (paragraphs [0010], [0015] – [0017], ‘099 claim 1, & Figs. 1 & 6 shown below).
PNG
media_image2.png
621
444
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
645
306
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, as discussed above for claim 1, Washington, Sr. et al. teach the fabric is incorporated into an article of clothing, wherein the first surface area is the external surface of the article of clothing and the second surface area is the internal surface of the article of clothing.
With regard to claim 4, as shown in Figs. 1 & 6 above, Washington, Sr. et al. teach the article of clothing is athletic pants, further wherein one or more of the weighted regions are located at the thigh region of the athletic pants, and wherein one or more of the weighted regions are located at the ankle region of the athletic pants.
With regard to claim 5, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Washington, Sr. et al. teach all of the weighted regions are positioned on the fabric so when the fabric is worn all of the weighted regions stay positioned on the anterior body surface of the user.
With regard to claim 11, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Washington, Sr. et al. teach two surface area regions comprising weights (weighted regions).
With regard to claim 12, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Washington, Sr. et al. teach at least two regions of the fabric (a first surface area and a second surface area) without any weights (non-weighted region).
With regard to claim 13, for the intended purpose disclosed in the specification, “mass” and “weight” are synonyms. As such, a weighted region would inherently have greater mass than a non-weighted region.
MPEP 2112 [R-3] states:
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. “The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness.” In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
With regard to claim 14, weighted cells and non-weighted regions are layered (Fig. 4).
With regard to claim 15, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Washington, Sr. et al. teach one or more weighted regions and one or more non-weighted regions are positioned in a manner creating a pattern.
Claim(s) 1 – 5, 9, & 11 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wilkinson (U.S. Patent No. 6,047,405).
With regard to claim 1, Wilkinson teaches a garment comprising a base fabric comprising an external surface (“first surface area”), am internal surface (“second surface area”), and one or more resistance means (24/26/28), such as weighted regions (70 of Fig. 9) in various suitable locations, such as limbs (Col. 4, Line 51 – Col. 5, Line 14), and one or more non-weighted regions (14 of Fig. 1, 20 of Figs. 2 – 3, shown below) (abstract, Col. 2, Lines 30 – 46, Col. 4, Lines 56 – 67, & Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image4.png
329
431
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
548
350
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
208
265
media_image6.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Wilkinson teaches the fabric is incorporated into an article of clothing, wherein the first surface area is the external surface of the article of clothing and the second surface area is the internal surface of the article of clothing.
With regard to claim 3, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Wilkinson teaches the article of clothing is athletic shirt, wherein one or more of the weighted region are located at the wrist region of the athletic shirt. Additionally, Fig. 1 shows the resistance (weight) element (24) extends up the arms and to the body portion of the shirt (12), such that the resistance element extends over the elbow region of the shirt (Col. 2, Lines 31 – 40).
With regard to claim 4, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Wilkinson teaches the article of clothing is athletic pants, further wherein one or more of the weighted regions are located at the thigh region of the athletic pants, and wherein one or more of the weighted regions are located at the ankle region of the athletic pants.
With regard to claim 5, as shown in Figs. 1 & 8 above, Wilkinson teaches all of the weighted regions are positioned on the fabric so when the fabric is worn all of the weighted regions stay positioned on the anterior body surface of the user.
With regard to claim 9, as shown in Figs. 1 & 8 above, Wilkinson teaches the article of clothing is athletic pants, further wherein all of the weighted regions are positioned on the fabric so when the fabric is worn all of the weighted regions are positioned on the fabric so when the fabric is worn all of the weighted regions stay positioned at the knees and the anterior body surface of the user.
With regard to claim 11, as discussed above Wilkinson et al. teach the weights may be used as resistance materials on regions of the fabric covering the limbs. Figs. 1 & 8 above show resistance region 16 (right leg) and resistance region 34 (left leg) disposed on a first surface area and a second surface area of a fabric.
With regard to claim 12, as shown in Figs. 1 & 8 above, Wilkinson teaches regions of the fabric, such as the abdominal region, do not contain weights on a first surface area or a second surface area of a fabric. Therefore, Wilkinson teaches at least one non-weighted region is disposed on the first surface area and at least one non-weighted region is disposed on the second surface area.
With regard to claim 13, for the intended purpose disclosed in the specification, “mass” and “weight” are synonyms. As such, a weighted region would inherently have greater mass than a non-weighted region.
MPEP 2112 [R-3] states:
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. “The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness.” In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
With regard to claim 14, as shown in Figs. 2 – 4 & 9 above, the weighted regions (70) and non-weighted region (20) are layered.
With regard to claim 15, as shown in Figs. 1 & 8 above, one or more weighted regions and one or more non-weighted regions are positioned in a manner creating a pattern.
Claim(s) 1 – 2 & 10 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Garcia (US 2004/0221355 A1).
With regard to claim 1, Garcia teaches a two piece full body weighted swimsuit comprising fabric and pockets for encasing removable weights (abstract). As shown in Figure 1 below, the fabric contains multiple surface areas, weighted regions (pockets) and non-weighted regions.
PNG
media_image7.png
771
561
media_image7.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, Garcia teaches the fabric is incorporated into a two piece swimsuit (article of clothing) comprising an external surface (first surface area) and an internal surface (second surface area).
With regard to claim 10, Garcia teaches the weight device can be made of a gel or rubber imbedded with pieces of metal (paragraph [0018]). The fabric (non-weighted regions) between the pockets for holding the weights is made of neoprene (paragraph [0015]). Therefore, Garcia et al. teach the weighted region and the non-weighted region of the fabric are composed of different materials.
With regard to claim 11, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Garcia teaches the weighted pockets are positioned at multiple (first and second) surface area locations.
With regard to claim 12, as shown in Fig. 1 above, Garcia teaches the non-weighted regions (without weighted pockets) are positioned at multiple (first and second) surface area locations.
With regard to claim 13, for the intended purpose disclosed in the specification, “mass” and “weight” are synonyms. As such, a weighted region would inherently have greater mass than a non-weighted region.
MPEP 2112 [R-3] states:
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. “The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness.” In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
With regard to claim 14, as shown in Figure 5 below, Garcia teaches the pockets for holding the weights are formed of a fabric (non-weighted region) and the weight (weighted region) positioned in a layered manner.
PNG
media_image8.png
504
684
media_image8.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 15, as shown in Figure 1 above, Garcia teaches the weighted pockets and non-weighted regions create a pattern across the fabric of the swimsuit.
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 5 – 6, 10 – 14, 16, & 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Blakely et al. (US 2015/0000003 A1).
With regard to claim 1, Blakely teach an athletic arm warmer comprising a sleeve and shoulder pad region formed of a fabric material (paragraph [0051]). The arm warmer may contain weights (461) retained on the torso portion (paragraph [0060]), shoulder, and arm (paragraph [0088], & [0107] – [0122] & Fig. 13 below).
PNG
media_image9.png
393
354
media_image9.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, as discussed above for claim 1, the fabric is incorporated into an arm warmer (i.e. article clothing).
With regard to claim 5, as discussed above for claim 1, weights retained on the torso portion (paragraph [0060] & Figs. 23 – 24). The torso is the anterior body surface of the user.
With regard to claim 6, the shoulder pad 154 comprises a grippy material that provides a surface with a relatively high coefficient of friction, for gripping an interior of the shoulder portion that is configured to contact the shirt of a user and prevent slippage of the torso portion on the use (paragraph [0058]).
PNG
media_image10.png
406
329
media_image10.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 13, for the intended purpose disclosed in the specification, “mass” and “weight” are synonyms. As such, a weighted region would inherently have greater mass than a non-weighted region.
MPEP 2112 [R-3] states:
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. “The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness.” In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (affirmed a 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection based in part on inherent disclosure in one of the references). See also In re Grasselli, 713 F.2d 731, 739, 218 USPQ 769, 775 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
With regard to claim 14, as shown in Fig. 24 below, the one or more weighted regions (980) and one or more non-weighted regions of fabric (950) are positioned in a layering manner.
With regard to claim 16, as shown in Fig. 24 below, the weighted plate member (980) is a rounded flat plate (i.e. a disc). All of the weighted regions have the shape of a rounded flat plate.
PNG
media_image11.png
233
366
media_image11.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 19, Blakely teach an athletic arm warmer comprising a sleeve and shoulder pad region formed of a fabric material (paragraph [0051]). The shoulder pad 154 (Fig. 1 below) comprises a grippy material that provides a surface with a relatively high coefficient of friction, for gripping an interior of the shoulder portion that is configured to contact the shirt of a user and prevent slippage of the torso portion on the use (paragraph [0058]).
PNG
media_image12.png
381
325
media_image12.png
Greyscale
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) 3 & 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Washington, Sr. et al., as applied to claim 2 above.
With regard to claim 3, Washington, Sr. et al. teach the article of clothing is athletic shirt, wherein one or more weighted region are located at the wrist region of the athletic shirt. However, Washington et al., Sr. fail to teach the article of clothing is athletic shirt, wherein one or more of the weighted region are located at the elbow region of the athletic shirt.
With regard to claim 9, as shown Fig. 1, Washington, Sr. et al. teach the article of clothing is athletic pants, further wherein all of the weighted regions are positioned on the fabric so when the fabric is worn all of the weighted regions are positioned on the fabric so when the fabric is worn all of the weighted regions stay positioned at the anterior body surface of the user. However, Washington et al., Sr. fail to teach one or more of the weighted region are located at the knees region of the athletic pants.
However, the courts have held that rearrangement of parts were unpatentable because shifting the position would not have modified the operation and an obvious matter of design choice. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). MPEP 2144.04.VI.C.
Claim(s) 3, 5, & 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garcia, as applied to claim 2 above.
With regard to claim 3, Garcia teaches the article of clothing is a swimsuit (i.e. athletic shirt). However, Garcia. fails to teach wherein one or more of the weighted region are located at the wrist & elbow region of the athletic shirt.
With regard to claim 5, Garcia teaches the weighted portions are removable from pockets via a Velcro enclosure (paragraph [0015]). Therefore, the position of the weights is determined by the user. The garment is inherently capable of a configuration such that all the weighted regions of the stay positioned on the anterior body surface of the user.
With regard to claim 9, as shown Fig. 1, Garcia teaches the article of clothing is athletic pants, further wherein all of the weighted regions are positioned on the fabric so when the fabric is worn all of the weighted regions are positioned on the fabric so when the fabric is worn all of the weighted regions stay positioned at the anterior body surface of the user. However, Garcia fails to teach one or more of the weighted region are located at the knees region of the athletic pants.
However, the courts have held that rearrangement of parts were unpatentable because shifting the position would not have modified the operation and an obvious matter of design choice. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975). MPEP 2144.04.VI.C.
Claim(s) 6 – 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Washington, Sr. et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Webb (US 2017/0013888 A1).
Claim(s) 6 – 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilkinson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Webb (US 2017/0013888 A1).
Claim(s) 6 – 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garcia, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Webb (US 2017/0013888 A1).
Washington, Sr. et al., Wilkinson, & Garcia fail to teach the fabric further comprises one or more grip locations (claim 6), wherein the grip locations are embodied as one or more lines (claim 7), and the one grip locations are silicon grip and wherein all of the grip locations are disposed on the first surface area (claim 8).
Webb teaches garment comprising gripping area located on the back or front for reducing slipping and sliding between the garment and an object when performing exercises (abstract, paragraphs [0008], & [0063]). The gripping areas 101 applied to the outer surface of the fabric garment 100. Suitable gripping materials include silicone (paragraph [0064]). Gripping shapes and patterns may vary, but includes lines (paragraph [0064] & Figs 4 - 5).
Therefore, based on the teachings of Webb, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to form gripping areas on the surface of a fabric for reducing slipping and sliding between the garment and an object when performing exercises.
Claim(s) 10 & 16 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Washington, Sr. et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Brockway, Jr. et al. (US 2018/0111016 A1).
Claim(s) 10 & 16 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilkinson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Brockway, Jr. et al. (US 2018/0111016 A1).
Claim(s) 10 & 16 – 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garcia, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Brockway, Jr. et al. (US 2018/0111016 A1).
With regard to claim 16, Washington, Sr. et al. fail to teach all of the weighted regions are in the shape of a disc.
With regard to claim 16, Wilkinson teaches the weights take any suitable form such as heavy blocks or bars (Col. 4, 63 – 65 & Col. 5, Lines 10 – 14), but do not teach all of the weighted regions are in the shape of a disc.
With regard to claim 16, Garcia teaches the weights are shaped following the curves of the muscle it lays upon (claim 9), but do not teach all of the weighted regions are in the shape of a disc.
Brockway, Jr. et al. teach apparel formed of weighted fabric comprising weighted resistance elements impregnated or provided with material (paragraph [0041]). The weighted elements 42 may have a circular shape that are flat-topped (i.e. disc shaped) (paragraph [0046]). If all the elements of a particular integrated fabric system have the same shape and are in a regular pattern, it may be more efficient to stencil or mold the weighted and/or elastic resistance elements onto the fabric material during manufacturing (paragraph [0047]). Each weighted element preferably has a flat (i.e. disc) upper surface (paragraphs [0046] – [0047]), such that the flat element faces inwardly towards the person wearing the clothing (paragraph [0057]).
Therefore, based on the teachings of Brockway, Jr et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to form the weight having a circular shape and a flat top (i.e. disc shape) for efficient manufacturing and for the weight to easily lay flat against the body of the person wearing the fabric.
With regard to claim 10, Washington, Sr. et al. & Wilkinson fail to teach the weighted regions and the non-weighted regions are made of different materials.
With regard to claim 17, Washington, Sr. et al., Wilkinson, & Garcia fail to teach all of the weighted regions are made of tungsten.
Brockway, Jr. et al. teach weighted resistance elements are substances, such as silicone, rubber, or gel, impregnated or provided with heavy material, such as tungsten particles/powders (paragraphs [0018], [0041], [0067] – [0068]), in order to provide a weighted static amount of resistance to targeted musculature independent of movement (Brockway’s claim 6).
Therefore, based on the teachings of Brockway, Jr et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to form the weighted fabric comprising non-weighted fabric regions composed of lightweight fibers and weighted regions composed of tungsten metal (i.e. different materials) in order to provide a weighted static amount of resistance to targeted musculature independent of movement.
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Washington, Sr. et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chambliss (U.S. Patent No. 11,617,361 B1), Brockway, Jr. et al. (US 2018/0111016 A1), and Ward (US 2022/0023700 A1).
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilkinson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chambliss (U.S. Patent No. 11,617,361 B1), Brockway, Jr. et al. (US 2018/0111016 A1), and Ward (US 2022/0023700 A1).
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garcia, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chambliss (U.S. Patent No. 11,617,361 B1), Brockway, Jr. et al. (US 2018/0111016 A1), and Ward (US 2022/0023700 A1).
*Plastemart.com.
With regard to claim 18, the references cited above fail to teach at least one of the weighted regions are shaped like a disc, wherein at least one of the weighted regions comprises of tungsten, high gravity compound and rubber, further wherein the tungsten is encapsulated by the high gravity compound, and further wherein the tungsten encapsulated by high gravity compound is further encapsulated with rubber.
Chambliss teaches a weighted lure (100) comprising a body material, such as plastisol or silicone, that may encase (“encapsulate”) a weighted insert (300) and/or a weighted portion (1000) comprising a weighting substance, such as tungsten (Col. 13, Lines 49 – 63, Col. 14, Lines 36 – 41, Col. 15, Lines 17 – 46, Col. 17, Line 32 – Col. 18, Line 3, Fig. 10 shown below). The weighting substance can be purchased in slabs, which can be broke, and/or crushed into granules, dust or powder (Col. 5, Lines 3 – 6). However, the reference’s use of the term “can be” suggests crushing the weighting substance into dust or powder is a preferred embodiment, and thus, not a required form. The size and/or dimensions of the weighted lure may be adjusted and the shape of the lure is not limited (Col. 5, Lines 59 – 65, Col. 13, Lines 6 – 14 & 49 – 63, & Col. 18, Line 30 – 43). Weighted lures of this composition are preferable over toxic lead weights (Col. 1, Lines 41 – 45), and durable (Col. 14, Lines 1 – 6).
PNG
media_image13.png
198
610
media_image13.png
Greyscale
Therefore, based on the teachings of Chambliss, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to from the weights taught in the references cited above as tungsten, high gravity compound and rubber, further wherein the tungsten is encapsulated by the high gravity compound, and further wherein the tungsten encapsulated by high gravity compound is further encapsulated with rubber, to avoid the use of toxic lead materials and form a durable weight.
The embodiment described above of the weighted lure (100) taught by Chambliss et al. comprises a weighted portion (1000) which contains an arbitrarily chosen single tungsten granule (Applicant’s “tungsten”), wherein the single tungsten granule is encapsulated by a matrix of silicone rubber and other tungsten particulates (dust, powder, granules, etc.) (Applicant’s “high gravity compound”). As evidenced by *Plastemart.com, high-gravity compounds consist of thermoplastics containing 40 – 96% by weight of a mineral or metal filler/powder. Therefore, tungsten particulates in a silicone matrix (“rubberized tungsten”) would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art as a “high gravity compound.”* The weighted portion (1000) of high gravity compound discussed above is further encapsulated in a silicone (rubber) body (non-weighted portion) (Applicant’s claimed “encapsulating rubber”)(see Fig. 10 above).
Furthermore, as discussed above, Chambliss et al. teach the size and/or dimensions of the weighted lure may be adjusted, but do not explicitly teach the weights are shaped like a disc.
Brockway, Jr. et al. teach apparel formed of weighted fabric comprising weighted resistance elements impregnated or provided with material (paragraph [0041]). The weighted elements 42 may have a circular shape that are flat-topped (i.e. disc shaped) (paragraph [0046]). If all the elements of a particular integrated fabric system have the same shape and are in a regular pattern, it may be more efficient to stencil or mold the weighted and/or elastic resistance elements onto the fabric material during manufacturing (paragraph [0047]). Each weighted element preferably has a flat (i.e. disc) upper surface (paragraphs [0046] – [0047]), such that the flat element faces inwardly towards the person wearing the clothing (paragraph [0057]).
Therefore, based on the teachings of Brockway, Jr et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to form the weight having a circular shape and a flat top (i.e. disc shape) for efficient manufacturing and for the weight to easily lay flat against the body of the person wearing the fabric.
Chambliss teaches the weighted lure is used as a fishing weight, but not as a weight applied to clothing.
Ward teaches a flexible worn weight device comprising tungsten powder suspended within silicone rubber substrate for balanced weight distribution (paragraphs [0012] – [0014]). Tungsten particles are slim and have a high density, which allows for heavier weights than iron or lead (without the extra volume) (paragraph [0017]). Silicon rubber substrate is flexible, stretchable, waterproof, skin safe, and has an antifungal characteristic (paragraph [0016]).
Therefore, based on the teachings of Ward, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to use any known configuration of silicone rubber and tungsten used as a weighted object (lure, ballast, etc.) in other applications, such as clothing, where tungsten/silicone weights are commonly used.
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Washington, Sr. et al., in view of Webb (US 2017/0013888 A1).
With regard to claim 19, Washington, Sr. et al. teach a garment made of fabric comprising an external side (“first surface area”) and an internal side (“second surface area”) (Fig. 1). The fabric comprises one or more weight cells that support a weight (“weighted regions”) and areas without a weight cells (“one or more non-weighted regions”) (paragraphs [0010], [0015] – [0017], ‘099 claim 1, & Figs. 1 & 6
Washington, Sr. et al.fail to teach the presence of one or more grip locations.
Webb teaches garment comprising gripping area located on the back or front for reducing slipping and sliding between the garment and an object when performing exercises (abstract, paragraphs [0008], & [0063]). The gripping areas 101 applied to the outer surface of the fabric garment 100. Suitable gripping materials include silicone (paragraph [0064]). Gripping shapes and patterns may vary, but includes lines (paragraph [0064] & Figs 4 - 5).
Therefore, based on the teachings of Webb, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to form gripping areas on the surface of a fabric for reducing slipping and sliding between the garment and an object when performing exercises.
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilkinson, in view of Webb (US 2017/0013888 A1).
With regard to claim 19, Wilkinson teaches a garment comprising a base fabric comprising an external surface (“first surface area”), am internal surface (“second surface area”), and one or more resistance means (24/26/28), such as weighted regions (70 of Fig. 9) in various suitable locations, such as limbs (Col. 4, Line 51 – Col. 5, Line 14), and one or more non-weighted regions (14 of Fig. 1, 20 of Figs. 2 – 3) (abstract, Col. 2, Lines 30 – 46, Col. 4, Lines 56 – 67, & Fig. 1).
Wilkinson fails to teach the presence of one or more grip locations.
Webb teaches garment comprising gripping area located on the back or front for reducing slipping and sliding between the garment and an object when performing exercises (abstract, paragraphs [0008], & [0063]). The gripping areas 101 applied to the outer surface of the fabric garment 100. Suitable gripping materials include silicone (paragraph [0064]). Gripping shapes and patterns may vary, but includes lines (paragraph [0064] & Figs 4 - 5).
Therefore, based on the teachings of Webb, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to form gripping areas on the surface of a fabric for reducing slipping and sliding between the garment and an object when performing exercises.
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garcia, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Webb (US 2017/0013888 A1).
With regard to claim 19, Garcia teaches a two piece full body weighted swimsuit comprising fabric and pockets for encasing removable weights (abstract). As shown in Figure 1 below, the fabric contains multiple surface areas, weighted regions (pockets) and non-weighted regions.
Garcia fail to teach the presence of one or more grip locations.
Webb teaches garment comprising gripping area located on the back or front for reducing slipping and sliding between the garment and an object when performing exercises (abstract, paragraphs [0008], & [0063]). The gripping areas 101 applied to the outer surface of the fabric garment 100. Suitable gripping materials include silicone (paragraph [0064]). Gripping shapes and patterns may vary, but includes lines (paragraph [0064] & Figs 4 - 5).
Therefore, based on the teachings of Webb, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to form gripping areas on the surface of a fabric for reducing slipping and sliding between the garment and an object when performing exercises.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE T GUGLIOTTA whose telephone number is (571)270-1552. The examiner can normally be reached M - F (Noon to 10 p.m.).
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, Frank Vineis can be reached on 571-270-1547. 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.
/NICOLE T GUGLIOTTA/Examiner, Art Unit 1781
/FRANK J VINEIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1781