DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/03/2026 and 3/2/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 8, and 19 is/are amended. Claims 2, 10, and 20 remain canceled. Claims 3-7, 11, and 14-18 remain withdrawn. Claims 1, 8-9, 12-13, and 19 are presented for examination for Species 1: Fig. 1 and Subspecies b: Fig. 2B.
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, 8-9, and 12-13, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nunez (US 2009/0300815 A1), in view Korkor (US 2003/0196242 A1), and in further view of Matsuda (US 2015/0208787 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nunez discloses a securable cover (1) comprising:
an outer layer (16; para. 13, where 16 is on top of 4) comprising an exterior surface (21a, 21b);
an inner layer (4; para. 13, where 16 is on top of 4) comprising an interior surface opposite the exterior surface (Figs. 5A-5B, where the interior surface is adjacent to the wearer and opposite of 21a and 21b), wherein one or both the outer layer and the inner layer comprise an absorbent fabric (para. 13, “The first sheet 4 may be a towel, such as a towel made cotton”, and therefore, one layer- “the inner layer comprise an absorbent fabric”; Examiner notes Applicant’s specification in para. 9 discloses the inner layer comprising a material such as cotton);
at least one attachment mechanism (12, 18) comprising: a first connector (18) disposed at a first location on the securable cover (Fig. 2; where 18 is on a first location as shown on 16); and a second connector (12) disposed at a second location on the securable cover (Fig. 1, where 12 is on a second location as shown on 4), wherein the first connector is configured to removably couple to the second connector to affix the securable cover around the torso of a user (para. 16).
Nunez does not directly disclose a heat-resistant liner comprising silicone removably attached to one of the exterior surface of the outer layer and the interior surface of the inner layer via at least one liner attachment mechanism.
However, Korkor teaches a securable cover (10, 14, 26) with a heat-resistant liner (28; para. 36, where 28 is a backing/liner of 26) comprising silicone (para. 36, where 28 is made of silicone) attached to one of the exterior surface of the outer layer and the interior surface of the inner layer (para. 36, where the bottom edge of the outer layer of 10 is sewn to 26 and 28; Fig. 1 shows the exterior surface of the outer layer as the surface of 10 facing the reader) via at least one liner attachment mechanism (the structures 14, 26, and 28 are sewn, and therefore, the stitching is “at least one liner attachment mechanism” inasmuch as claimed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the securable cover of Nunez to include a heat-resistant liner comprising silicone removably attached to one of the exterior surface of the outer layer and the interior surface of the inner layer via at least one liner attachment mechanism, as taught by Korkor, in order to adjust the level of comfort to the wearer.
Nunez and Korkor do not directly disclose wherein the at least one liner attachment mechanism comprises at least one of: a snap-fit element, a hook, a hook-and-loop fastener, a clip, a clamp, a clasp, a pin, or a hole.
However, Matsuda teaches a securable cover (1) with a liner (10) attached to one of the exterior surface of the outer layer and the interior surface of the inner layer via at least one liner attachment mechanism (Fig. 3, shows 10 is attached to the exterior surface of 1-3 at 6 via 8; para. 14), wherein the at least one liner attachment mechanism comprises at least one of: a snap-fit element, a hook, a hook-and-loop fastener, a clip, a clamp, a clasp, a pin, or a hole (para. 14 discloses a hook-and-loop fastener on 10; Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the securement system of Korkor with the securement system taught by Matsuda, as a simple substitution of one well known securement system for another would yield the predictable result of providing a layered garment that maintains its position when the wearer is moving. When in combination, Nunez, Korkor, and Matsuda disclose a heat-resistant liner comprising silicone removably attached to one of the exterior surface of the outer layer and the interior surface of the inner layer via at least one liner attachment mechanism, wherein the at least one liner attachment mechanism comprises at least one of: a snap-fit element, a hook, a hook-and-loop fastener, a clip, a clamp, a clasp, a pin, or a hole.
Regarding claim 8, modified Nunez further discloses wherein the at least one attachment mechanism comprises at least one of: a snap-fit element, a clip, a clamp, a clasp, a hook, a pin, a hole, or a hook-and-loop fastener (para. 16 & Figs. 5A-5B, hook-and-loop fastener).
Regarding claim 9, modified Nunez further discloses the securable cover of Claim 1, except for wherein the at least one attachment mechanism comprising a plurality of attachment mechanisms.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to add a plurality of attachment mechanisms to the securable cover of Nunez in order to better secure and adjust the securable cover to the wearer, since such a modification would amount to a mere duplication of parts. It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04.
Regarding claim 12, modified Nunez further discloses the securable cover of Claim 1, wherein the securable cover at least partially comprises an absorbent material (para. 13, where 4 is an absorbent material).
Regarding claim 13, modified Nunez further discloses the securable cover of Claim 1, wherein the outer layer at least partially comprises a hydrophobic material (para. 13, where 16 is waterproof).
Regarding claim 19, when in combination, Nunez, Korkor, and Matsuda disclose the securable cover of Claim 1, wherein the heat-resistant liner is removable attached to the exterior surface of the outer layer via the at least one liner attachment mechanism (of Korkor and as evidenced by Matsuda: para. 14 discloses a hook-and-loop fastener on 10; Fig. 3).
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments filed 2/3/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments appear to be directed to the amended limitations, in which additional consideration and reinterpretation has been given for new grounds of rejection, as stated above.
Conclusion
15 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See similar covers cited on the PTO-892 form attached to this Office Action.
15158. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIAO QT HOANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7557. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Khoa Huynh can be reached on 571-272-4888. 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.
/G.Q.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/KHOA D HUYNH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3732
