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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s response of 8/11/2025 is received. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, and 12 are amended and claim 2 is cancelled. Claims 1 and 3-12 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first portion having a retaining recess as in claim 3, the cover portion provided with two respective parts of a fastening mechanism that can be connected to one another (claim 6), and the cover portion provided with ribs (claim 9) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The 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, 3-9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(2) as being anticipated by Barton et al. (U.S. 2019/0365003). Barton discloses the invention as claimed. Barton teaches a wearable device 10 comprising an elongate first portion 12 and a deployable cover portion 112 connected to the first portion, wherein the first portion has a bi-stable core arranged longitudinally at least partially therethrough (par.33 “Band 12 is preferably one or more layers of bistable spring strips or bands made of metal (preferably stainless steel) or other resilient material, similar to a “slap bracelet.””), so that the wearable device has a first stable state in which the bi-stable core is coiled (“flexible band is configurable in a substantially linear orientation and a substantially coiled orientation” Abstract and par.33) so that the device is wearable on a limb of a person and a second stable state (linear orientation), wherein the cover portion has a stowed state in which the cover portion is stowed in its first stable state and a deployed state in which the cover portion is extended and wherein the cover portion is in the stowed state when the device is in its first stable state and the cover portion is in the deployed state when the device is in its second stable state.
For claim 3, the first portion 12 has a retaining recess (not labelled) but shown in Fig.4 as the cover portion 112 overlies the first portion 12 and the recess 124 of the cover portion is visible in Figure
4. The cover portion 112 is considered as stowed as it is positioned within the recess of the first portion when the cover portion 112 is in its stowed state and wherein the wearable device is in the first stable state.
For claim 4, when the cover portion 112 is in its stowed position, it is wrapped around the first portion 12.
For claim 5, the cover portion extends from the elongate first portion when the cover portion is in its deployed state, as the cover portion overlaps the edges of the elongate first portion such that it extends therefrom.
For claims 6 and 7, Barton teaches the cover portion is provided with two respective parts of a fastening mechanism that, when the cover portion is in the deployed state, can be connected to one another (par.36). When the two respective parts of the fastening mechanism are connected to one another, the bi-stable core is held in a position that bends the bi-stable core against the direction in which it coils, as the bi-stable core is disclosed as formed from resilient flexible material and therefore is considered capable of being reversed or bent against the direction in which it coils such that the fastening mechanisms can secure to one another.
For claim 8, the cover portion comprises a bulge as Barton teaches the cover may include raised or embossed material 126.
For claim 9, the cover portion is provided with ribs (considered as equivalent to raised or embossed material 126).
For claim 11, Barton’s bi-stable core has a first end 20 and second end 22, in the first stable state, the bi-stable core is coiled into an overlapping spiral with the first end located on an inside of the spiral and the second end located on an outside of the spiral (not shown but discussed in par.34 as the respective ends of the band overlap), in the second state, the bi-stable core is extended in an elongated configuration with the first end located on an opposite end of the elongated configuration from the second end (Fig.1).
For claim 12, Barton’s cover portion 112 is configured to wrap around the bi-stable core in a stowed state such that the cover portion is maintained in the stowed state by the bi-stable core in the first stable state and the cover portion is unwrappable from around the bi-stable core into a deployed state in the second stable state, as this recitation doesn’t provide further structural details of the cover portion contributing to the “unwrappable” capability or function. The material of the bi-stable core maintains the cover portion in the stowed state in the first stable state and the cover portion 112 is unwrappable from around the bi-stable core as it transitions to the second stable state, as the core unwinds from the coiled orientation and the previously overlapping portions of the cover portion and bi-stable core are extended away from each other to the second stable state (linear orientation), the cover portion is also unwrapped from around those portions of the bi-stable core which it previously overlapped.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Barton in view of Gibson et al. (U.S. 7,419,922). Barton discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including the cover being formed of fabric or different fabrics combined (par.10). However, Barton doesn’t teach the cover has an inner surface comprising an antistatic material, filter material or an electro-static discharge material. Gibson teaches that it’s known in the art to form an anti-static fabric using a blend of anti-static fibers to protect a wearer from electrostatic discharge. Modifying Barton such that the cover is formed at least partially from antistatic material includes the inner and outer surfaces of the cover and this material would lend an additional protective function to the wearable device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify
Barton such that the cover’s inner surface comprises an antistatic material as taught by Gibson et al. to protect the wearer in situations where they are exposed to electrostatic discharge.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks have been considered. For the rejection of claim 12 under 112a, Applicant submits the published application provides support for the claimed limitations in paragraphs 0017, 0018, and 0020. Upon a review of the claim language and the cited paragraphs, this rejection is withdrawn.
For the prior art rejections, Applicant submits Barton doesn’t anticipate claim 1 as Barton’s device doesn’t disclose a deployable cover section within the meaning of the claimed invention as the covering 112 of Barton cited by the Examiner is used to wrap the core as in Barton’s par.38. Applicant also submits Barton’s covering 112 is not deployable as recited in claim 1 and the position of the cover portion is the same in the first stable state and in the second stable state and the cover portion 112 does not have a deployed and stowed states since the position of cover 112 is the same in both states. Applicant’s remarks are not persuasive. The examiner notes that the claims are interpreted in light of the specification; however, features of the invention are not imported to the claims. Claim 1 doesn’t provide further details of the cover portion in the deployed state other than reciting the cover portion is extended in the deployed state, which is fairly broad, and the deployed state exists when the device is in its second stable state. It is noted that the bi-stable core has degrees of deployment, as when the core is tightly coiled and then is transitioned to a less tightly coiled state. Barton’s cover portion 112 is considered as stowed when the bi-stable core is coiled, as portions of the cover portion are overlapped by other portions of the cover portion and deployed as the core transitions from the tightly coiled state to the extended, elongated configuration (claim 11). Claim 1 could be amended to further detail the “connected” structural relationship between the first portion and the deployable cover portion.
Note that in the rejections of claims 11 and 12, “Jordan” has been replaced by “Barton” as an obvious typo, with the reference numbers provided in the rejection mapping to Barton’s device.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
/KATHERINE M MORAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732