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 .
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 32-34 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: they include features previously withdrawn by applicant in the reply filed November 11, 2025 (directed to claims 22, 24 and 25).
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 32-34 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claims 13-14, 22, 24 and 25 be found allowable, claims 30-34 (since they depend from claim 7) will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim(s) 7-9, 12, 14, 26-29 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fleming et al., US 2019/0090595.
Regarding claim 7, Fleming discloses a fastener comprising: a base (102); a plurality of hooks (108) extending from the base (102), the plurality of hooks (108) defining a longitudinal row of hooks (108), adjacent hooks (108) of the longitudinal row of hooks (108) spaced apart by a spacing interval measured between centerlines of the adjacent hooks (see figure 1), the adjacent hooks (108) defining a hook-receiving area therebetween (figure 1), [the hook-receiving area sized to receive a corresponding hook of a plurality of hooks of another fastener (since each hook 108 has a stem and a hook length, and the engagement portion 112 has a hook geometry which can self-engage with an identical hook structure)]; and a plurality of ribs (126) extending from the base (102), the plurality of ribs (126) defining two longitudinal rows (figure 1) of ribs (126), adjacent ribs (126) of each of the two longitudinal rows of ribs (126) spaced apart by a spacing interval (see figure 1) measured between centerlines of the adjacent ribs (126), the adjacent ribs (126) defining a rib-receiving area therebetween (figure 1), the longitudinal row of hooks (108) positioned in a lateral direction between the two longitudinal rows of ribs (126), [the rib-receiving area sized to receive a corresponding rib of a plurality of ribs of the other fastener;] wherein the plurality of hooks (108) of the row of hooks (108) are offset (see an annotated figure 1 below) in a longitudinal direction (104) from a position of a closest adjacent hook (108) of an adjacent row of hooks (108) and from a position of a closest adjacent rib (126) of an adjacent row of ribs (126).
Claim language set in brackets [] set forth above and below in this office action are considered by the examiner to be intended use that fails to further limit the structure of the claimed invention. Since the claimed invention is directed solely to that of the fastener, the prior art must only be capable of performing the functional recitations in order to be applicable, and in the instant case, the examiner maintains that the fastening tape disclosed by Fleming et al. (US 2019/0090595), is indeed capable of the intended use statements. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations.
PNG
media_image1.png
489
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, wherein the plurality of ribs (126) [are sized to be received within a plurality of rib-receiving areas defined by the other fastener], [a shape of each of the plurality of rib-receiving areas as viewed along the lateral direction being an inverse of a shape of a corresponding rib of the plurality of ribs].
Regarding claim 9, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, wherein a rib-hook-rib pattern (figure 1) defined by the fastener of the longitudinal row of hooks (108) being positioned in the lateral direction between the two longitudinal rows of ribs (126) is repeated as a repeat pattern (see figure 1) at least once in the lateral direction of the fastener (figure 1).
Regarding claim 12, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, wherein the row of hooks (108) is a first row of hooks (along one row), the fastener further comprising a second row of hooks (108), the second row of hooks (another row of hooks) offset in the lateral direction of the fastener (see figure 1) from each of the first row of hooks (108), the first row of ribs (126), and the second row of ribs (126).
Regarding claim 14, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, wherein each rib (126) defines a flat facing surface (see figure 2), the facing surface being aligned with the lateral direction of the fastener (figure 2).
Regarding claim 26, Fleming discloses a fastener comprising: a base (102); a plurality of hooks (108) extending from the base (102), the plurality of hooks (108) defining a longitudinal row of hooks (see figure 1), adjacent hooks (108) of the longitudinal row of hooks (108) spaced apart (figure 1) by a spacing interval measured between centerlines of the adjacent hooks (108), the adjacent hooks (108) defining a hook-receiving area therebetween (said hooks 108), [the hook-receiving area sized to receive a corresponding hook of a plurality of hooks of another fastener]; and a plurality of ribs (126) extending from the base (102), the plurality of ribs (126) defining two longitudinal rows of ribs (126), adjacent ribs (126) of each of the two longitudinal rows of ribs (126) spaced apart by a spacing interval (figure 1) measured between centerlines of the adjacent ribs (126), the adjacent ribs (126) defining a rib-receiving area therebetween (said ribs 126), the longitudinal row of hooks (108) positioned in a lateral direction between the two longitudinal rows of ribs (126), [the rib-receiving area sized to receive a corresponding rib of a plurality of ribs of the other fastener]; and a spacer (see the annotated figure 1) positioned between the longitudinal row of hooks (108) and at least one longitudinal row of ribs (126) of the two longitudinal rows of ribs (126), lateral sides of the plurality of hooks (108) of the longitudinal row of hooks (108) offset in the lateral direction (106) from directly facing lateral sides of the plurality of ribs (126) of the at least one longitudinal row of ribs (126) by a width of the spacer (see the annotated figure 1; the spacer represents a portion of the base 102 that extends between the adjacent rows of hooks 108).
Regarding claim 27, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, [wherein the plurality of ribs (126) are sized to be received within a plurality of rib-receiving areas defined by the other fastener], [a shape of each of the plurality of rib-receiving areas as viewed along the lateral direction (106) being an inverse of a shape of a corresponding rib of the plurality of ribs].
Regarding claim 28, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, wherein a rib-hook-rib pattern (see the annotated figure 1) defined by the fastener of the longitudinal row of hooks (108) being positioned in the lateral direction between the two longitudinal rows of ribs (126) is repeated as a repeat pattern at least once in the lateral direction (106) of the fastener (see the annotated figure 1).
Regarding claim 29, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, wherein the row of hooks (108) is a first row of hooks (108), the fastener further comprising a second row of hooks (108), the second row of hooks (108) offset in the lateral direction (106) of the fastener from each of the first row of hooks (108), the first row of ribs (126), and the second row of ribs (126).
Regarding claim 31, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, wherein each rib (126) defines a flat facing surface (on its lateral side), the facing surface being aligned with the lateral direction (106) of the fastener (see figure 1).
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.
Claim(s) 13 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fleming et al., US 2019/0090595.
Regarding claims 13 and 30, Fleming discloses the fastener of claim 7, wherein the fastener is monolithically formed from a resin (see resin 852 that is fed through an extruder for making the fastener). Fleming does not explicitly disclose the resin is plastic. However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider plastic as the resin, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known (commercially available) material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 18, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has argued that the reference by Fleming (US 2019/0090595), specifically figure 4, fails to show the amended features of claim 7. As argued, figure 4 of Fleming shows the hooks (108) overlaps with the closest adjacent rib (126) of the adjacent row of “ribs” and is not offset in “a longitudinal direction” (104). The argument is found not persuasive in view of the rejection of the claim 7 above wherein the hooks (108) of the row of hooks are offset in the longitudinal direction (104) from a position of the closest adjacent hook (108) of the adjacent row of hooks and from a position of the closest adjacent rib (126) of the adjacent row of ribs in the annotated figure 1. Regarding newly added claim 26, the rejection as set forth above advances how the prior art by Fleming reads on the claimed offset feature.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROWLAND DO whose telephone number is (571)270-5737. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30 - 7:00 PT.
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, Jason San can be reached at (571) 272-6531. 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.
/R.D./ Examiner, Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/ SPE, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights