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 .
Status of Claims
This is a FINAL Rejection to Amendments and Arguments filed by Applicant on 01/01/2026. Claims 1, 9-11, 15-17, 19-26, and 28-30 have been amended. Claims 31-33 have been added. Currently pending for review are Claims 1, 9-11, 15-17, 19-26, and 28-33.
Response to Amendment
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) Rejections made in the Office Action filed on 10/01/2025. Amendments/Remarks & Arguments filed by Applicant on 01/01/2026 correct the rejection and/or are persuasive. Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) Rejections made in the Office Action filed on 10/01/2025 has been withdrawn unless otherwise indicated below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 Line 10 recites “fiber copper” it appears there’s a typographical error and the claim should read --fiber comprises copper--.
Claim 20 no longer exist in the claims. This appears to be a typographical error and Applicant intends to indicate “20. (Cancelled)” between Claims 19 and 21. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 9-11, 15-17, 19, 21-26, and 28-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foss et al (US 20150044449) in view of Zhu et al (US 20030226612), further in view of Holt et al (US 20170319891 A1).
Regarding Claims 1, 21, and 22, Foss et al teaches a strap, comprising: a plurality of interwoven antimicrobial threads forming a flat surface (Refer to Paragraph [0099] After finishing, the fabric can be shipped to an appropriate fabricator and manufactured into finished products, such as fabric articles. Exemplary fabric articles include uniforms, including medical such as nurse uniforms, physician uniforms, surgical operating attire, military uniforms, and laboratory coats, consumer articles, such as those commonly used in medical facilities, for example bed pads, bed sheets, pillow cases, drapes, blankets, window curtains, privacy curtains, hospital gowns, face masks, disposable underwear, and textile or gauze bandages or wound coverings, as well as other types of fabric articles where antimicrobial properties may be useful.”..The Office takes the position that a bandage is considered a flat strap), each thread comprising copper and silver salt fibers interwoven with a non-salt fiber comprising cotton fibers (Refer to Abstract:” High-melting antimicrobial polymer fibers and antimicrobial fabrics comprising such fibers are prepared by preparing a masterbatch of polymer pellets (e.g., PET), silver and copper salts, and a compounding agent which provides free flowing polymer pellets which can be prepared in advance, with a long shelf life”..Paragraph [0053]:”As noted, textiles of the present invention may comprise only fibers according to the present invention, or may be composed of or made from a combination of natural or synthetic fibers with the antimicrobial synthetic fiber(s) of the present invention. A non-limiting list of natural fibers includes wool, cotton, flax, hemp, bamboo fibers, and blends thereof. “…[0051]:”As used herein and as context allows, the terms "textile" and "textiles" are intended to include fibers, filaments, yarns and fabrics, including knits, wovens, non-wovens, and the like. For purposes of this invention, textiles may be composed of or made from synthetic fibers or combinations of synthetic fibers and natural fibers”..[0052]:” The fibers or yarns may be multi- or mono-filament, may be false-twisted or twisted, or may incorporate multiple denier fibers or filaments into one single yarn through twisting, melting and the like. Fabrics may be formed of any of the foregoing fibers and yarns or combinations thereof.”).
Foss et al fails to expressly disclose two ends of the salt fiber and the non-salt fiber comprises one of: two ends of 16/1 English cotton count cotton fiber, or one end of 16/2 English cotton count cotton fiber and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter. Zhu et al teaches textile fabric comprising 16/1 or 16/2 English cotton count cotton fiber (Refer to Paragraph [0047]:” 16/1 cc strands were produced using a 3.5 twist multiplier for each item. The single strand of 16/1 cc was then plied to 16/2 cc to form a stable yarn and the cut resistant yarn component for further weaving..”..The Office takes the position that the cc is English cotton count in so much as Applicant has disclosure for) and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter (Refer To Paragraph [0026]:” Plied yarns are yarns that are brought together with only a small amount of twist, normally in the range of 5 to 10 turns or twists per inch. This low amount of twisting provides for a consolidated and balanced yarn without totally covering or wrapping one yarn with the other yarn.”..The Office takes the position that 10 turns per inch is about 393.7 turns per meter). Zhu et al is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach fabric materials and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the thread of Foss et al to comprise 16/1 or 16/2 cc cotton fiber and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter since Zhu et al teaches that such thread count and turns per meter are known in the art to produce a suitable strength fabric and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Foss et al in view of Zhu et al fails to expressly disclose there are two ends of salt fiber with two ends of the 16/1 English cc or one end of 16/2 English cc cotton fiber, however the Office takes the position that Applicant does not provide criticality to there being one or two ends over other numbers of ends and further Applicant indicates that any number is suitable (Refer to Applicants specification Paragraph [0021]:” In certain embodiments, the antimicrobial thread includes 2 ends of PurThread® (e.g., salt fiber 402) and two ends of 16/1 cotton fiber (e.g., non-salt fiber 404), among other quantities and/or type(s) of fibers that are possible and contemplated herein.” .”..[0025]:” In certain embodiments, the antimicrobial thread 400B includes 2 ends of PurThread® (e.g., salt fiber 402) and one end of 16/2 cotton fiber (e.g., non-salt fiber 406) combined together (e.g., twisted, intertwined, interlaced, etc.), among other quantities and/or type(s) of fibers that are possible and contemplated herein”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the number of ends of the salt fibers and cotton fibers to include the claimed range. One would have been motivated to provide a number that produces the suitable strength/durability and flexibility of the threads for the desired usage through routine experimentation. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II). Foss et al in view of Zhu et al fails to further teach that the strap is an antimicrobial exercise strap, however, Foss et al teaches that such anti-microbial threads may be used for a variety of devices (Refer to Foss et al [0099]:” After finishing, the fabric can be shipped to an appropriate fabricator and manufactured into finished products, such as fabric articles. Exemplary fabric articles include uniforms, including medical such as nurse uniforms, physician uniforms, surgical operating attire, military uniforms, and laboratory coats, consumer articles, such as those commonly used in medical facilities, for example bed pads, bed sheets, pillow cases, drapes, blankets, window curtains, privacy curtains, hospital gowns, face masks, disposable underwear, and textile or gauze bandages or wound coverings, as well as other types of fabric articles where antimicrobial properties may be useful.”). HOLT et al teaches a flat anti-microbial exercise strap (Refer to Paragraph [0034]:” Each of linear-straps 162 may comprise a non-elastic material for strength and durability in use. Additionally, linear-strap 162 may be constructed of an anti-microbial material for sanitary purposes.”) and since Holt et al is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach antimicrobial straps it would have been obvious to modify the fibers of Foss et al in view of Zhu et al to be used in an exercise strap since Holt et al teaches that such antimicrobial exercise straps are common and known in the art for sanitary purposes and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts.
Regarding Claim 9, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to expressly disclose wherein the plurality of interwoven antimicrobial threads comprises one hundred to one thousand antimicrobial threads. Applicant does not provide criticality to such ranges and further indicates other ranges are suitable (Refer to Applicants specifications Paragraph [0021]:” In some embodiments, the antimicrobial fiber includes a quantity of antimicrobial threads in the range of about fifty (50) threads to about one thousand (1000) antimicrobial threads, among other quantity of antimicrobial threads that are greater than 1000 threads or less than 50 threads that are possible and contemplated herein.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the number of threads. One would have been motivated to provide a number that produces the suitable strength/durability and flexibility of the fabric for the desired usage through routine experimentation. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding Claim 10, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to expressly disclose wherein ten percent to twenty-four percent of the plurality of interwoven antimicrobial threads are dyed. Foss et al teaches an anti-microbial substrate wherein the fibers are dyed (Refer to Foss et al Paragraph [0056] The textile substrate may be dyed or colored with any type of colorant, such as pigments, dyes, tints and the like, to provide other aesthetic features for the end user.”). Although Foss et al does not teach 10-24% of the plurality of interwoven antimicrobial threads are dyed the Office takes the position that Applicant does not provide criticality to the range and indicates that any range is suitable (Refer to Applicants Specification Paragraph [0037]:” among other percentages that are greater than 24% and less than 10% that are possible and contemplated herein.”). The Office takes the position that such range lacks criticality over other ranges such as 100% and is a matter of obvious design choice and therefore does not patentable distinguish the invention over prior arts. MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions [R-01.2024].
Regarding Claims 11, 23, and 24, Foss et al teaches textile, comprising: a plurality of interwoven antimicrobial threads (Refer to Paragraph [0099] After finishing, the fabric can be shipped to an appropriate fabricator and manufactured into finished products, such as fabric articles. Exemplary fabric articles include uniforms, including medical such as nurse uniforms, physician uniforms, surgical operating attire, military uniforms, and laboratory coats, consumer articles, such as those commonly used in medical facilities, for example bed pads, bed sheets, pillow cases, drapes, blankets, window curtains, privacy curtains, hospital gowns, face masks, disposable underwear, and textile or gauze bandages or wound coverings, as well as other types of fabric articles where antimicrobial properties may be useful.”), each thread comprising copper and silver salt fibers interwoven with a non-salt fiber comprising cotton fibers (Refer to Abstract:” High-melting antimicrobial polymer fibers and antimicrobial fabrics comprising such fibers are prepared by preparing a masterbatch of polymer pellets (e.g., PET), silver and copper salts, and a compounding agent which provides free flowing polymer pellets which can be prepared in advance, with a long shelf life”..Paragraph [0053]:”As noted, textiles of the present invention may comprise only fibers according to the present invention, or may be composed of or made from a combination of natural or synthetic fibers with the antimicrobial synthetic fiber(s) of the present invention. A non-limiting list of natural fibers includes wool, cotton, flax, hemp, bamboo fibers, and blends thereof. “…[0051]:”As used herein and as context allows, the terms "textile" and "textiles" are intended to include fibers, filaments, yarns and fabrics, including knits, wovens, non-wovens, and the like. For purposes of this invention, textiles may be composed of or made from synthetic fibers or combinations of synthetic fibers and natural fibers”..[0052]:” The fibers or yarns may be multi- or mono-filament, may be false-twisted or twisted, or may incorporate multiple denier fibers or filaments into one single yarn through twisting, melting and the like. Fabrics may be formed of any of the foregoing fibers and yarns or combinations thereof.”).
Foss et al fails to expressly disclose two ends of the salt fiber and the non-salt fiber comprises one of: two ends of 16/1 English cotton count cotton fiber, or one end of 16/2 English cotton count cotton fiber and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter. Zhu et al teaches textile fabric comprising 16/1 or 16/2 English cotton count cotton fiber (Refer to Paragraph [0047]:” 16/1 cc strands were produced using a 3.5 twist multiplier for each item. The single strand of 16/1 cc was then plied to 16/2 cc to form a stable yarn and the cut resistant yarn component for further weaving..”..The Office takes the position that the cc is English cotton count in so much as Applicant has disclosure for) and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter (Refer To Paragraph [0026]:” Plied yarns are yarns that are brought together with only a small amount of twist, normally in the range of 5 to 10 turns or twists per inch. This low amount of twisting provides for a consolidated and balanced yarn without totally covering or wrapping one yarn with the other yarn.”..The Office takes the position that 10 turns per inch is about 393.7 turns per meter). Zhu et al is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach fabric materials and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the thread of Foss et al to comprise 16/1 cc or 16/2 cc cotton fiber and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter since Zhu et al teaches that such thread count and turns per meter are known in the art to produce a suitable strength fabric and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Foss et al in view of Zhu et al fails to expressly disclose there are two ends of salt fiber with two ends of the 16/1 or one end of 16/2 cotton fiber, however the Office takes the position that Applicant does not provide criticality to there being one or two ends over other numbers of ends and further Applicant indicates that any number is suitable (Refer to Applicants specification Paragraph [0021]:” In certain embodiments, the antimicrobial thread includes 2 ends of PurThread® (e.g., salt fiber 402) and two ends of 16/1 cotton fiber (e.g., non-salt fiber 404), among other quantities and/or type(s) of fibers that are possible and contemplated herein.” .”..[0025]:” In certain embodiments, the antimicrobial thread 400B includes 2 ends of PurThread® (e.g., salt fiber 402) and one end of 16/2 cotton fiber (e.g., non-salt fiber 406) combined together (e.g., twisted, intertwined, interlaced, etc.), among other quantities and/or type(s) of fibers that are possible and contemplated herein”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the number of ends of the salt fibers and cotton fibers to include the claimed range. One would have been motivated to provide a number that produces the suitable strength/durability and flexibility of the threads for the desired usage through routine experimentation. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II). Foss et al in view of Zhu et al fails to further teach that the textile is for an antimicrobial exercise strap, however, Foss et al teaches that such anti-microbial threads may be used for a variety of devices (Refer to Foss et al [0099]:” After finishing, the fabric can be shipped to an appropriate fabricator and manufactured into finished products, such as fabric articles. Exemplary fabric articles include uniforms, including medical such as nurse uniforms, physician uniforms, surgical operating attire, military uniforms, and laboratory coats, consumer articles, such as those commonly used in medical facilities, for example bed pads, bed sheets, pillow cases, drapes, blankets, window curtains, privacy curtains, hospital gowns, face masks, disposable underwear, and textile or gauze bandages or wound coverings, as well as other types of fabric articles where antimicrobial properties may be useful.”). HOLT et al teaches a flat anti-microbial exercise strap (Refer to Paragraph [0034]:” Each of linear-straps 162 may comprise a non-elastic material for strength and durability in use. Additionally, linear-strap 162 may be constructed of an anti-microbial material for sanitary purposes.”) and since Holt et al is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach antimicrobial straps it would have been obvious to modify the fibers of Foss et al in view of Zhu et al to be used in an exercise strap since Holt et al teaches that such antimicrobial exercise straps are common and known in the art for sanitary purposes and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts.
Regarding Claim 15, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to expressly disclose wherein the plurality of interwoven antimicrobial threads comprises one hundred to one thousand antimicrobial threads. Applicant does not provide criticality to such ranges and further indicates other ranges are suitable (Refer to Applicants specifications Paragraph [0021]:” In some embodiments, the antimicrobial fiber includes a quantity of antimicrobial threads in the range of about fifty (50) threads to about one thousand (1000) antimicrobial threads, among other quantity of antimicrobial threads that are greater than 1000 threads or less than 50 threads that are possible and contemplated herein.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the number of threads. One would have been motivated to provide a number that produces the suitable strength/durability and flexibility of the fabric for the desired usage through routine experimentation. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding Claim 16, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to expressly disclose wherein ten percent to twenty-four percent of the plurality of interwoven antimicrobial threads are dyed. Foss et al teaches an anti-microbial substrate wherein the fibers are dyed (Refer to Foss et al Paragraph [0056] The textile substrate may be dyed or colored with any type of colorant, such as pigments, dyes, tints and the like, to provide other aesthetic features for the end user.”). Although Foss et al does not teach 10-24% of the plurality of interwoven antimicrobial threads are dyed the Office takes the position that Applicant does not provide criticality to the range and indicates that any range is suitable (Refer to Applicants Specification Paragraph [0037]:” among other percentages that are greater than 24% and less than 10% that are possible and contemplated herein.”). The Office takes the position that such range lacks criticality over other ranges such as 100% and is a matter of obvious design choice and therefore does not patentable distinguish the invention over prior arts. MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges, Amounts, and Proportions [R-01.2024].
Regarding Claims 17, 25, and 26, Foss et al teaches an antimicrobial textile thread, comprising: comprising copper and silver salt fibers interwoven with a non-salt fiber comprising cotton fibers (Refer to Abstract:” High-melting antimicrobial polymer fibers and antimicrobial fabrics comprising such fibers are prepared by preparing a masterbatch of polymer pellets (e.g., PET), silver and copper salts, and a compounding agent which provides free flowing polymer pellets which can be prepared in advance, with a long shelf life”..Paragraph [0053]:”As noted, textiles of the present invention may comprise only fibers according to the present invention, or may be composed of or made from a combination of natural or synthetic fibers with the antimicrobial synthetic fiber(s) of the present invention. A non-limiting list of natural fibers includes wool, cotton, flax, hemp, bamboo fibers, and blends thereof. “…[0051]:”As used herein and as context allows, the terms "textile" and "textiles" are intended to include fibers, filaments, yarns and fabrics, including knits, wovens, non-wovens, and the like. For purposes of this invention, textiles may be composed of or made from synthetic fibers or combinations of synthetic fibers and natural fibers”..[0052]:” The fibers or yarns may be multi- or mono-filament, may be false-twisted or twisted, or may incorporate multiple denier fibers or filaments into one single yarn through twisting, melting and the like. Fabrics may be formed of any of the foregoing fibers and yarns or combinations thereof.”).
Foss et al fails to expressly disclose two ends of the salt fiber and the non-salt fiber comprises one of: two ends of 16/1 English cotton count cotton fiber, or one end of 16/2 English cotton count cotton fiber and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter. Zhu et al teaches textile fabric comprising 16/1 or 16/2 English cotton count cotton fiber (Refer to Paragraph [0047]:” 16/1 cc strands were produced using a 3.5 twist multiplier for each item. The single strand of 16/1 cc was then plied to 16/2 cc to form a stable yarn and the cut resistant yarn component for further weaving..”..The Office takes the position that the cc is English cotton count in so much as Applicant has disclosure for) and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter (Refer To Paragraph [0026]:” Plied yarns are yarns that are brought together with only a small amount of twist, normally in the range of 5 to 10 turns or twists per inch. This low amount of twisting provides for a consolidated and balanced yarn without totally covering or wrapping one yarn with the other yarn.”..The Office takes the position that 10 turns per inch is about 393.7 turns per meter). Zhu et al is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach fabric materials and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the thread of Foss et al to comprise 16/1 cc or 16/2 cc cotton fiber and a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter since Zhu et al teaches that such thread count and turns per meter are known in the art to produce a suitable strength fabric and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts. Foss et al in view of Zhu et al fails to expressly disclose there are two ends of salt fiber with two ends of the 16/1 or one end of 16/2 cotton fiber, however the Office takes the position that Applicant does not provide criticality to there being one or two ends over other numbers of ends and further Applicant indicates that any number is suitable (Refer to Applicants specification Paragraph [0021]:” In certain embodiments, the antimicrobial thread includes 2 ends of PurThread® (e.g., salt fiber 402) and two ends of 16/1 cotton fiber (e.g., non-salt fiber 404), among other quantities and/or type(s) of fibers that are possible and contemplated herein.” .”..[0025]:” In certain embodiments, the antimicrobial thread 400B includes 2 ends of PurThread® (e.g., salt fiber 402) and one end of 16/2 cotton fiber (e.g., non-salt fiber 406) combined together (e.g., twisted, intertwined, interlaced, etc.), among other quantities and/or type(s) of fibers that are possible and contemplated herein”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the number of ends of the salt fibers and cotton fibers to include the claimed range. One would have been motivated to provide a number that produces the suitable strength/durability and flexibility of the threads for the desired usage through routine experimentation. It has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05(II). Foss et al in view of Zhu et al fails to further teach that the textile is for an antimicrobial exercise strap, however, Foss et al teaches that such anti-microbial threads may be used for a variety of devices (Refer to Foss et al [0099]:” After finishing, the fabric can be shipped to an appropriate fabricator and manufactured into finished products, such as fabric articles. Exemplary fabric articles include uniforms, including medical such as nurse uniforms, physician uniforms, surgical operating attire, military uniforms, and laboratory coats, consumer articles, such as those commonly used in medical facilities, for example bed pads, bed sheets, pillow cases, drapes, blankets, window curtains, privacy curtains, hospital gowns, face masks, disposable underwear, and textile or gauze bandages or wound coverings, as well as other types of fabric articles where antimicrobial properties may be useful.”). HOLT et al teaches a flat anti-microbial exercise strap (Refer to Paragraph [0034]:” Each of linear-straps 162 may comprise a non-elastic material for strength and durability in use. Additionally, linear-strap 162 may be constructed of an anti-microbial material for sanitary purposes.”) and since Holt et al is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach antimicrobial straps it would have been obvious to modify the fibers of Foss et al in view of Zhu et al to be used in an exercise strap since Holt et al teaches that such antimicrobial exercise straps are common and known in the art for sanitary purposes and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts.
Regarding Claims 19 and 30, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches wherein the two ends of the non-salt fiber and the two ends of the salt fiber are one of dyed and undyed (Refer to Foss et al Paragraph [0056] The textile substrate may be dyed or colored with any type of colorant, such as pigments, dyes, tints and the like, to provide other aesthetic features for the end user.”).
Regarding Claim 28, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches wherein the two ends of the salt fiber and the non-salt fiber are dyed (Refer to Foss et al Paragraph [0056] The textile substrate may be dyed or colored with any type of colorant, such as pigments, dyes, tints and the like, to provide other aesthetic features for the end user.”).
Regarding Claim 29, Foss et al and Zhu et al teaches the salt fiber and the non-salt fiber are dyed (Refer to Foss et al Paragraph [0056] The textile substrate may be dyed or colored with any type of colorant, such as pigments, dyes, tints and the like, to provide other aesthetic features for the end user.”).
Regarding Claims 31, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches wherein the two ends of the non-salt fiber and the salt fiber are undyed (Refer to Foss et al Paragraph [0056] The textile substrate may be dyed or colored with any type of colorant, such as pigments, dyes, tints and the like, to provide other aesthetic features for the end user.”..The Office takes the position that Applicant teaches that such dying is optional and therefore may be left undyed).
Regarding Claims 32, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches wherein the two ends of the non-salt fiber and the salt fiber are undyed (Refer to Foss et al Paragraph [0056] The textile substrate may be dyed or colored with any type of colorant, such as pigments, dyes, tints and the like, to provide other aesthetic features for the end user.”..The Office takes the position that Applicant teaches that such dying is optional and therefore may be left undyed).
Regarding Claims 33, Foss et al and Zhu et al and Holt et al teaches wherein the two ends of the non-salt fiber and the salt fiber are undyed (Refer to Foss et al Paragraph [0056] The textile substrate may be dyed or colored with any type of colorant, such as pigments, dyes, tints and the like, to provide other aesthetic features for the end user.”..The Office takes the position that Applicant teaches that such dying is optional and therefore may be left undyed).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Wherein Applicant argues that the limitation of “a quantity of turns per meter in the range of one hundred turns per meter to five hundred turns per meter” has criticality in regards to Paragraph [0026] stating that such TPM creates a desired or minimum tensile strength, the Office takes the position that there is a lack of criticality to range as indicated by Applicant of 100-500TPM since Applicant states that other ranges are suitable for establishing such strength depending on a desired tensile strength. However, in a review of Zhu et al, it is found that Zhu et al teaches such turns (Refer To Paragraph [0026]:” Plied yarns are yarns that are brought together with only a small amount of twist, normally in the range of 5 to 10 turns or twists per inch.”… in which 10 turns per inch would be 393.7 turns per meter). And therefore Applicants arguments are not persuasive and the combination of Foss et al in view of Zhu et al teaches such limitation.
Wherein Applicant argues that “modifying the Foss to include the fire-retardant material of Zhu to read on claim 1 would impermissibly change the operation of the gauze bandage of Foss”. The Office takes the position that amendments to Claim 1 have changed the scope of the invention and Foss et al although teaches that one possible use for the antimicrobial thread is a guaze bandage, Foss et al also teaches that such threads may be used for a variety of other fabrics and antimicrobial devices (Refer to Refer to Foss et al [0099]:” After finishing, the fabric can be shipped to an appropriate fabricator and manufactured into finished products, such as fabric articles. Exemplary fabric articles include uniforms, including medical such as nurse uniforms, physician uniforms, surgical operating attire, military uniforms, and laboratory coats, consumer articles, such as those commonly used in medical facilities, for example bed pads, bed sheets, pillow cases, drapes, blankets, window curtains, privacy curtains, hospital gowns, face masks, disposable underwear, and textile or gauze bandages or wound coverings, as well as other types of fabric articles where antimicrobial properties may be useful”). Zhu et al is used to teach that 16/1 and 16/2 cotton count fibers are common and known in the textile arts for antimicrobial fabrics and therefore such modification would be suitable for teaching cotton count fibers in antimicrobial straps such as exercise straps now as modified by Holt et al and therefore Applicants arguments are not persuasive.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NYCA T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7168. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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, Loan Jimenez can be reached at 571-272-4966. 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.
/NYCA T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Prosecution Insights