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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 7 and 12-15 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ellwood (2,436,507).
Ellwood discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, i.e., a gaiter shield 1 for use with a tool utensil having a handle e.g., 12, Figs. 5, 6, the gaiter 1 comprising:
a main body 10 having opposing first annotated Fig. 1, RT and second LF ends and first defined by opening at the recess 2, Fig. 2 and second openings the large opening defined by the 2nd end respectively disposed proximal to the first and second ends RT, LF, Fig. 1, wherein the first opening defined by recess 2 of the shield 10, annotated Fig. 5 is adapted to receive insertion of the handle shank 12 of the tool utensil through the first opening defined by the shield 10 @ the recess and the second end annotated above is adapted to receive insertion of a hand of a user to allow the user to directly interact with the handle manipulate the handle 12 via 11, Fig. 5 within the main body 10, 01:1-3;
a first gaiter coupling cylindrical recess, dotted line @2 defined by the handle 11 of the gaiter coupled to the first end; and
PNG
media_image5.png
171
425
media_image5.png
Greyscale
a tool coupling handle 3 of the gaiter including a tool coupling opening elongated recess 2 adapted to receive insertion of the handle 4, 5 therethrough the opening and the tool coupling 3 is adapted to frictionally couple to the tool fork and removably mate tight coupling of handle 3 with recess 2, 01:51-54, forming a removal coupling 02:12-15 with the first gaiter coupling 2 to removably couple the tool to the main body when the handle 3,4 is inserted in the first opening through the shield opening @ recess 2.
PNG
media_image6.png
117
308
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, PA (prior art, Ellwood) meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1, further comprising a second gaiter coupling lip @ LF/second end coupled to the second end at least capable of coupling the gaiter.
Regarding claim 7, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1, wherein the main body comprises an insulating material protective covering 01:25.
Regarding claim 12, PA meets the limitations, i.e., wherein the main body has a middle size @1 that tapers to a reduced first size @2 at the first end.
Regarding claim 13, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1 or 2, wherein the first gaiter coupling lip 6 is made of a non- conducting material shield protecting against the heat.
Regarding claim 14, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1, wherein the first gaiter coupling cylindrical recess 2 defined by the handle 3 is made of a non- conducting material shield protecting against the heat.
Regarding claim 15, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1, wherein the first tool coupling 3 is made of a non- conducting material shield protecting against the heat.
Claims 1, 2, 7 and 12-15 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gustafsson (2012/0240301).
PNG
media_image7.png
481
511
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Gustafsson discloses all of the limitations of claim 1, i.e., a gaiter protective device for use with a tool 1 or 3 having a handle Fig. 2, the gaiter comprising:
a main body having opposing first LF and second RT ends and first 6 Fig. 2 and second openings 10 respectively disposed proximal to the first and second ends Fig. 2, wherein the first opening 6 is adapted to receive insertion of the handle Fig. 2 of the tool 3 through the first opening Fig. 2 and the second end @10 is adapted to receive insertion of a hand of a user to allow the user to interact with the handle manipulate the handle, Fig. 2 within the main body 10;
a first gaiter coupling channel at opening 6 coupled to the first end; and
a tool coupling 7 including a tool coupling opening i.e., opening of the loop adapted to receive insertion of the handle Figs. 1, 2 therethrough the opening and the tool coupling channel and opening is adapted to frictionally couple to the tool 1, 3 and removably mate [0033] with the first gaiter coupling 6 to removably couple the tool to the main body when the handle of tools 1 or 3 is inserted in the first opening 6.
Regarding claim 2, PA (prior art, Gustafsson) meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1, further comprising a second gaiter coupling channel @ RT/second end coupled to the second end.
Regarding claim 7, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1, wherein the main body comprises an insulating material protective covering 01:25.
Regarding claim 12, PA meets the limitations, i.e., wherein the main body has a middle size main body that tapers to a reduced first size @first opening at the first end Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 13, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 2, wherein the first gaiter coupling channel at 6 is made of a non- conducting material shield protecting against the heat.
Regarding claim 14, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1, wherein the first gaiter coupling channel at 6 is made of a non- conducting material shield protecting against the heat.
Regarding claim 15, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 1, wherein the first tool coupling 7 is made of a non-conducting material string electrically non-conducting.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action
Claims 2-5 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellwood in view of Stedman (1,010,199).
Ellwood meets all of the limitations of claim 2, as described above, however in the alternative and in order to expedite the prosecution, except for providing a second coupling coupled to a second gaiter coupling.
PNG
media_image8.png
299
333
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Stedman teaches a glove having a cuff coupling 2 at the proximal end adapted to couple with a second coupling provided on the cuff 3. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to modify the second end of the body of Ellwood with a second coupling to couple with a coupling on a cuff as taught by Stedman forming a gauntlet to extend the protection over the forearm.
Regarding claim 3, PA (prior art, Ellwood modified by Stedman) meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 2, further comprising cuff coupling 4 adapted to removably mate with the second gaiter coupling 2, Figs. 1 and 2 Stedman.
Regarding claim 4, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 3, further comprising an arm cuff portion 3, wherein the cuff coupling is integrated into an arm cuff portion Fig. 2 Stedman.
Regarding claim 5, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 3, wherein the cuff coupling 3 is integrated into a piece of personal protective equipment (PPE) or clothing protective glove and gauntlet modified gaiter.
Claims 8-11 are finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PA in view of Fournier (2005/0223470).
PNG
media_image9.png
184
198
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PA (prior art, either Ellwood or Gustafsson) meets all of the limitations of claim 8, as described above, except for the main body to include first, second, and third material layers.
Fournier teaches a protective sleeve to be worn on the user’s forearms to be utilized with an electrically insulated glove protecting user’s hand and wrist. The protective sleeve is comprised of an inner comfort layer made of denim or other comfortable material laminated to an outer electrically insulated layer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of the invention, to augment the invention of PA with the two-part covering as taught by Fournier to provide comfort and protect the user from electric shock when the glove and gauntlet is utilized on applications with danger of electric shock.
Regarding claim 9, PA (prior art, either Ellwood or Gustafsson modified by Fournier) meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 8, wherein the first material layer protective cover Ellwood or comfort layer, Fournier forms an internal side of the main body, the third material layer outer covering as modified by Fournier forms an external side of the main body.
Regarding claim 10, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 8, wherein the second material layer is non-conductive. Note that providing the comfort layer on the inner side, to provide comfort for the user and apply the electric insulation on the external side with the heat non-conductive covering Ellwood in the middle, to protect against electric shock first external layer, Fournier, heat second layer Ellwood and comfort inner comfort layer, Fournier, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, requiring routine experimentations with predictable results and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikes, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 11, PA meets the limitations, i.e., the gaiter of claim 8, wherein the third material layer external layer is non-conductive electrically and abrasion resistant rubber with some degree of abrasion resistant.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 16, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The newly added limitation that “to allow the user to directly interact” does not overcome the pending rejections, since this limitation does not require, e.g., a directly touching the handle, and accordingly, directly manipulating a handle is considered met by the art applied. Examiner is not suggesting an allowable subject matter, e.g., by reciting directly touching an outer surface of the handle. Prior art shields would not operate if the user could not directly or operationally use the handle of a tool being used.
Regarding previously presented arguments; Applicant is directed to previously presented response set below.
Applicant argues that “Examienr incorrectly asserts that the handle 4 of Ellwood corresponds to a handle of a tool, cylindrical recess 2 of Ellwood corresponds to the claimed first opening and also to the claimed first gaiter coupling, and the handle 3 of Ellwood corresponds to the claimed tool coupling. However, the cylindrical recess 2 of Ellwood is not a first opening that is adapted to receive insertion of a handle of a tool through the first opening, as claimed. Rather, the cylindrical recess 2 of Ellwood merely receives the handle 3 of Ellwood when the handle 3 of Elwood is inserted into the hand shield 1 from an opposite side of the hand shield 1 of Ellwood. Applicant further argues that the shank 4 of a cooking utensil of Ellwood is not a handle of a tool that a user interacts with. Rather, a user would interact with the handle 3 of Ellwood, not the shank 4 of Ellwood. Further yet, the handle 3 of Ellwood does not include a tool coupling opening adapted to receive insertion of the handle therethrough, or frictionally couple to a tool and removably mate with a first gaiter coupling to removably couple the tool to the main body when the handle is inserted through the first opening, as claimed”.
PNG
media_image10.png
364
433
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Examienr, respectfully disagrees. The first opening e.g., 104 of instant application is an opening defined by the gaiter. Similarly, the first opening in Ellwood, is defined by the opening of the shield at recess 2, i.e., a hole/opening defined by the shield. The tool coupling in general is defined by the element 3, which Ellwood defines as handle, since it allows manipulation of the handle or shank 4 of the tool. Claim 1 requires for the “…a tool coupling 3 including a tool coupling opening recess 2 adapted to receive insertion of the handle 4 therethrough, and the tool coupling 3 is adapted to frictionally couple to the tool via tight coupling and removably mate 02:12-15 with the first gaiter coupling shield opening @2 to removably couple the tool utensil to the main body when the handle 4 is inserted into the first opening inserted in the opening of the shield at 2 and through recess 2 coupling the tool to the shield”. The fact that Ellwood terms the tool coupling a handle, since it directly contacts a user’s hand, does not exclude it from reading on the claim, since the tool coupling or handle 3 allows the user to interact with the handle of the tool inserted in the recess 2. Use of different terminology, i.e., “handle” instead of “tool coupling”, cannot overcome the rejection, since claim’s recitation is met. It is also noted that the shank/handle 4 is not part of the claimed gaiter but the workpiece and that the handle 3 is part of the shield disclosed and defines a coupling for a tool’s handle, as in shank 4 of the utensil.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HADI SHAKERI whose telephone number is (571)272-4495. The fax phone number for forwarding unofficial documents for discussion purposes only is (571) 273-4495. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F.
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, Brian Keller can be reached on 571 272 8548. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Hadi Shakeri/
May 31, 2026 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights