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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The Examiner is no longer relying on the Lambert reference, nor the combination of Lambert and Chen.
Applicant does argue that Chen fails to teach “one of the plurality of welding points is separated [sic] from and disposed a predetermined distance from each end of each first and second plurality of welding lines” because the figure of Chen looks “significantly different” from the instant invention figures. This argument is not persuasive. First of all, this limitation is now being rejected under 35 USC 112(b) as noted below. Second of all, the welding points are spaced from each end of the lines (as shown in the annotated figure in the rejection below), and the Applicant has failed to show how the specific claim language is not taught. Applicant is encouraged to clarify the claim language if they would like the claim to specifically describe their figures.
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 “extension line” from claims 2 and 13 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). It is noted that while this feature may be shown on the drawings, it is not labeled and therefore it is unclear what the structure of “extension line” is meant to be. 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 13 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13, line 5 recites “a first welding point” and “a second welding point” and it is believed that this should read as --a first welding point and a second welding point from the plurality of welding points-- to maintain proper antecedent basis and clarity in the claim.
Claim 13, lines 6-7 recite “a second welding point” and it is believed this should read as --the second welding point-- to maintain proper antecedent basis and clarity in the claim.
Claim 13, line 7 ends with a colon and it is believed this should end in a semi-colon as further limitations are claimed in the claim.
Claim 13, line 9 is missing the semi-colon and the word --and-- at the end to indicate the final claim limitation is about to be recited.
Claim 13, line 10 recites “the weld line” and it is believed this should read as --the welding line-- to maintain proper antecedent basis and clarity in the claim.
Claim 17, line 2 appears to be missing a conjunction. Examiner suggests the wording --…inflatable chamber and is in…---
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 1-17 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.
Claim 1 recites “one of the plurality of welding points is separate from and disposed a predetermined distance from each end of each first and second plurality of welding lines” which renders the scope of the claim indefinite. This limitation appears to be reciting the positional requirement for a single welding point. However, that single welding point is equidistant from four (or more) reference points. The references “each end” (which is two reference points, one reference point for each end) of both at last a first and second welding line (therefore, at least four reference points). The claim does claim each of the plurality, so again, one welding point being spaced from all of the lines is unclear. The claim limitation does appear to capture what the Applicant would like the claim to say (given the presented arguments), but is also unclear how “one” of the welding points meets the required claim limitation as presented currently.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “an extension line of a corresponding welding line” which renders the claim indefinite. In particular light of the above issue with claim 1, it is unclear how one welding point has a single corresponding welding line when the positioning claimed in claim 1 is in reference to two welding lines.
Claims 2 and 13 recite “an extension line” which renders these claims indefinite. It is unclear what the structural limitations of “an extension line” are particular in relation to the claimed welding lines. For the purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret this limitation as referring to an axis of the welding line.
Regarding claim 8, line 2 recites “a plurality of welding points” which has already been recited in claim 1. It is unclear if this limitation is part of the same previously recited plurality or is meant to claim a second, distinct set of welding points.
Claim 9, line 2 recites “the plurality of welding points” which renders the claim indefinite particularly in light of the issue with claim 8 above. It is unclear which plurality of welding points is being referred to (the welding points of claim 1 or the welding points of claim 8, or if they are all the same welding points).
Claims 3-7, 10-12, and 14-17 are rejected as depending on a rejected indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-10 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen US Patent Application Publication 2021/0030165 hereinafter referred to as Chen.
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Chen discloses an inflatable pad (1), comprising: a top piece; a bottom piece comprising an outer periphery welded to an outer periphery of the top piece [0018 - which notes two inflation gaskets that have welded outer edges], thereby defining an inflatable chamber between the top piece and the bottom piece (as shown on Figure 3 and cited above); a plurality of welding points (2) at which the top piece is welded to the bottom piece (see annotated Figure 1 below); a first plurality of welding lines (4) arranged in a first edge region proximate a first edge (11/12) of the inflatable pad (see annotated Figure 1 below); and a second plurality of welding lines (4) arranged in a second edge region proximate a second edge (other of 11/12) of the inflatable pad and arranged opposite the first edge (see annotated Figure 1 below); wherein: the top piece and bottom piece are welded along the welding lines of the first plurality of welding lines and the second plurality of welding lines [0020]; a central region is defined between and separates the first plurality of welding lines and the second plurality of welding lines (see annotated Figure 1 below), the second plurality of welding lines being removed from and unconnected to the first plurality of welding lines (as shown, they are not connected to each other); and one of the plurality of welding points is separate from and disposed a predetermined distance from each end of each of the first and second plurality of welding lines (as shown, the welding points are distinct from the welding lines and each welding line has a welding point on either end of it by a determined distance).
[AltContent: textbox (plurality of welding points)]
[AltContent: textbox (second plurality of welding lines)][AltContent: textbox (first plurality of welding lines)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (central region)]
PNG
media_image1.png
889
298
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 from Chen
Regarding claim 2, Chen further discloses wherein the one of the plurality of welding points disposed a predetermined distance (as shown, a distance exists and is therefore predetermined) from each end of each of the first or second plurality of welding lines is disposed on an extension line of a corresponding welding line (see annotated Figure 1 of Chen below).
[AltContent: textbox (extension line)][AltContent: textbox (extension line)][AltContent: connector][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image2.png
123
431
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 of Chen
Regarding claim 3, Chen further discloses wherein a diameter of each of the plurality of welding points is greater than a width of each of the first or second plurality of welding lines (as shown on the figures).
Regarding claim 4, Chen further discloses wherein the predetermined distance is less than or equal to 3 cm [0021 notes that the predetermined distance ranges from 3mm to 30mm which is equal to 3cm].
Regarding claim 5, Chen further discloses wherein the predetermined distance is less than or equal to 5 mm [0021 notes that the predetermined distance ranges from 3mm to 30mm which is less than 5mm].
Regarding claim 6, Chen further discloses wherein each of the plurality of welding points has a ring shape [0021].
Regarding claim 7, Chen further discloses wherein: each of the welding lines of the first plurality of welding lines is oriented in a parallel arrangement within the first edge region; and each of the welding lines of the second plurality of welding lines is oriented in a parallel arrangement within the second edge region (as shown in the annotated figure above, the lines are arranged in a parallel fashion to each other).
Regarding claim 8, Chen further discloses wherein the central region comprises a plurality of welding points (3) arranged in a matrix (as shown on the figures).
Regarding claim 9, Chen further discloses wherein the first and second plurality of welding lines and the plurality of welding points is arranged such that there is an equal spacing between adjacent ones of the first and second plurality of welding lines, and/or there is an equal spacing between adjacent rows of the plurality of welding points (as shown on the figures, all of the welding lines are equally spaced from one another).
Regarding claim 10, Chen further discloses wherein each of the top piece and the bottom piece is made of thermoplastic polyurethane elastomer [0018].
Regarding claim 12, Chen further discloses wherein: each of the welding lines within the first plurality of welding lines are inclined with respect to a third edge and a fourth edge of the inflatable pad which are disposed between the first edge and second edge; and each of the welding lines within the second plurality of welding lines are inclined with respect to the third edge and the fourth edge of the inflatable pad (as shown on the figures, the lines undulate and therefore are angled in relation to the sides (13) and (14) of the pad).
Regarding claim 13, Chen further discloses wherein: a third edge (13) and a fourth edge (14) of the inflatable pad are disposed between the first edge and second edge and are arranged at opposite ends of the inflatable pad (as shown on the figures); a welding line from the first plurality of welding lines or second plurality of welding lines is arranged along an extension line connecting a first welding point and a second welding point (see below annotated figure); the first welding point is arranged closer to the third edge of the inflatable pad than a second welding point: the second welding point disposed closer to the fourth edge of the inflatable pad than the first welding point the weld line is not connected to either of the first welding point or the second welding point (as shown on the figures).
[AltContent: textbox (extension line)][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image2.png
123
431
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 of Chen
Regarding claim 14, Chen further discloses wherein the plurality of matrix-arranged welding points separates the first plurality of welding lines from the second plurality of welding lines (as shown, the welding points (3) separate the first and second plurality of welding lines).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 11 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al US Patent Application Publication 2016/0166077 hereinafter referred to as Liu.
Regarding claim 11, Chen discloses the inflatable pad according to claim but fails to disclose a thermal insulation layer disposed between the top piece and the bottom piece. Lui teaches an analogous inflatable pad (10) which comprises a top layer (14) and bottom layer (16). Lui further teaches a thermal insulation layer (26 and/or 28) disposed between the top piece and bottom piece [0047]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the pad of Chen to include a thermal insulation layer as taught by Lui in order to maintain a user’s body heat and not lose heat to a potentially cold surface [0059].
Regarding claim 16, as discussed above, Chen and Liu teach a thermal insulation layer, and Liu further teaches wherein the material comprises flocculent polyester fibers [0113 - (26) comprises a matting of elastic fibres].
Regarding claim 15, Liu further teaches wherein the thermal insulation layer (28) comprises aluminized PET (polyethylene terephthalate) film [0113 - (28) comprises exkin platinum].
Regarding claim 17, Liu further teaches wherein the thermal insulation layer is disposed in the inflatable chamber is in contact with both the top piece and the bottom piece [0065, 0067, 0101-0113].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Gammons US Patent Application Publication 2008/0127423 teaches a similarly tufted/welded pad but fails to teach the claimed welding lines.
Fisher US Patent 5,437,068 teaches an inflatable pad with multiple welding lines but fails to teach welding points.
Flick et al US Patent 4,483,030 teaches an inflatable pad with multiple welding points and welding lines, but fails to teach the claimed configuration.
Druck US Patent 2,842,783 teaches a similar inflatable pad but fails to teach the configurations of the welding lines and welding points.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TARA SCHIMPF whose telephone number is (571)270-7741. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am - 3:30pm EST.
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, John Fristoe can be reached at (571) 272-4926. 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.
/TARA SCHIMPF/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights