DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-27, 29, and 30 are pending. Claims 1-3 and 26 are amended. Claim 28 is cancelled.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 27, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on January 27, 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1-3 and 26 have been amended, claim 28 has been cancelled, and claims 29 and 30 have been added. Thus, claims 1-27, 29, and 30 are presently pending in this application with claims 6, 7, and 16-25 being withdrawn from consideration.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §112(a) rejections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §112(b) rejections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §102(a)(1) and §103 rejections however most claims remain rejected under §103.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding withdrawn claim 5 are persuasive. Claim 5 is rejoined.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the width are not found persuasive. Initially, Applicant provides no support for the assertion that the average width of a human hand is 3.5”. Furthermore, as Hertle depicts, and describes, the receptacle does not correspond to the width of a hand, but rather is designed to “ensure maximum freedom of movement” (paras. 0006-0007). If Hertle were designed as the alleged width of a hand (3.5”) the user’s fingers would be stacked next to each other with no movement permitted which is against what Hertle discloses.
Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 13, which are exactly the same as the arguments submitted on August 14, 2025 are unpersuasive for the same reasons as stated in the Final Rejection of August 27, 2025.
Applicant’s arguments regarding Hertle alone and Vinokurov 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 27, and 29 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3 line 5 and claim 29 line 5 recite ‘steams” would should be “seams”. Claim 27 lacks a transitional phrase such as “wherein”. 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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8-15, 26, and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilhelmsen et al. (US 20190049419) in view of Hertle et al. (DE 202020104724) as evidenced by Boyle (URL in PTO-892).
Regarding claim 1 Wilhelmsen describes a sampler (sampler 1100) for food safety sampling, the sampler comprising:
one or more sheets (sheet may undergo folding and seaming, para. 0082) of a sampling material (non-woven polyolefin cloth, para. 0056) disposed atop one another or folded (folding, para. 0082) wherein each of the one or more sheets consists of a single sheet of an absorbent non-woven synthetic fabric suitable for food contact (non-woven polyolefin cloth, para. 0056); and
wherein the sampler is provided sterile (sterile, para. 0078) and configured for obtaining microbial sampling and testing for food safety: and wherein the sampler is configured for food safety sampling (food sampling, abstract), to facilitate manual handling and sampling by contacting the plurality of food items (food sampling, abstract).
While Wilhelmsen describes that the food sampling could be a glove or mitten, it does not describes the structure of the glove or mitten and thus does not explicitly describe one or more edge seams between engaged surfaces of the one or more sheets, wherein the one or more edge seams are disposed along one or more edges of the one or more sheets to define a pocket having an open side for receiving at least a part of a hand of a user to facilitate manual sampling of a surface; the width dimension extending laterally across the hand when worn thereon, to facilitate manual handling and sampling by contacting the plurality of food items.
In related art for hand protecting devices, Hertle describes one or more edge seams (see annotated Fig. 2) between engaged surfaces of the one or more sheets (4, 8), wherein the one or more edge seams are disposed along one or more edges of the one or more sheets to define a pocket (receptacle 14) having an open side (opening 10) for receiving at least a part of a hand of a user to facilitate manual sampling of a surface; wherein the sheet is rectangular (is rectangular) and the width dimension extending laterally across the hand when worn thereon.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the sampling of Wilhelmsen to be of the structure of Hertle (shape and assembly) in order to provide an inexpensive product to produce (see Hertle, para. 0003) and easy to store (para. 0012).
Wilhelmsen as modified does not explicitly describe has a width dimension of about 10 inches.
Such a modification is a mere change in size. Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not have performed differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (MPEP 2144.04(V)(A)). The examiner submits that a change in size does not change how the sampler would perform.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the width to be about 10 inches depending on the size of the hand that the sampler is designed to fit (see Boyle including that span of hand can be larger than 10 inches).
PNG
media_image1.png
466
940
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 1, wherein the pocket is sized so as to accommodate a user's entire hand and over the user's wrist, thereby comprising a mitt sampler (depending on the size of the user’s hand, the modified glove of Wilhelmsen can accommodate a user’s hand and wrist).
Regarding claim 4, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 1, further comprising:
one or more interior seams (see annotated Fig. 2 above, Hertle) extending from a distal edge of the sampler to an interior region of the pocket so that the one or more interior seams engage one or more digits of the user's hand during sampling.
Regarding claim 5, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 4, wherein the one or more interior seams comprise a single seam (includes multiple seams and thus comprises a single seam) extending in a lengthwise direction from at or near mid-point of the distal edge.
Regarding claim 8, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 1, wherein the one or more sheets is a single sheet folded over on itself (folded, para. 0082) (folded, para. 0010, Hertle).
Regarding claim 9, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 8, wherein the single sheet is rectangular (as modified is rectangular).
Regarding claim 10, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 8, wherein after folding, the folded single sheet is about 10 inches by 10 inches (as modified, the width is about 10 inches and item from Hertle is an approximate square, so as modified the sampler is about 10 inches by 10 inches).
Regarding claim 11, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 1, wherein the one or more sheets comprise a non-woven polyolefin (para. 0056).
Regarding claim 12, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 1, wherein the one or more seams comprise an ultrasonic weld (ultrasonic welding, para. 0009, Hertle).
Regarding claim 13, Wilhelmsen as modified sampler of claim 12, but does not explicitly describe wherein at least some of the one or more seams comprise a double ultrasonic weld.
A use of a double ultrasonic weld is a mere duplication of parts. A mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)). The examiner submits that doubling the ultrasonic welds does not produce an unexpected result.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the welds to be duplicated in order to provide additional strength at the weld points.
Regarding claim 14, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 1, wherein the one or more sheets comprise two sheets of same or similar size laid atop one another (two layers stacked, para. 0010, Hertle).
Regarding claim 15, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 1, wherein the pocket sampler is square or rectangular (is a square).
Regarding claim 26, Wilhelmsen describes a sampler (sampler 1100) for food safety sampling, the sampler comprising:
one or more sheets (sheet may undergo folding and seaming, para. 0082) of a sampling material (non-woven polyolefin cloth, para. 0056) disposed atop one another or folded (folding, para. 0082) wherein each of the one or more sheets consists of a single sheet of an absorbent non-woven synthetic fabric suitable for food contact (non-woven polyolefin cloth, para. 0056); and
wherein the sampler is provided sterile (sterile, para. 0078) and configured for food safety sampling.
While Wilhelmsen describes that the food sampling could be a glove or mitten, it does not describes the structure of the glove or mitten and thus does not explicitly describe a plurality of seams, each comprising an ultrasonic weld between opposing surfaces of the one or more sheets, wherein the plurality of seams comprises:
one or more edge seams between engaged surfaces of the one or more sheets, wherein the one or more edge seams are disposed along one or more edges of the one or more sheets to define a pocket having an open side for receiving at least a part of a hand of a user to facilitate manual sampling of a surface, wherein the pocket is sized so as to accommodate a user's entire hand up to the user's wrist, thereby comprising a mitt sampler;
one or more entry seams disposed along edges and/or surfaces adjacent the open side of the pocket to retain the sampler on the user's hand with the one or more entry seams along the user's wrist when worn on the user's hand;
one or more interior seams extending from a distal edge of the sampler to an interior region of the pocket so that the one or more interior seams engage one or more digits of the user's hand during sampling, wherein the one or more interior seams comprise a seam extending in a lengthwise direction from at or near mid-point of the distal edge, wherein the sheet is rectangular and has a lateral width-wise dimension.
In related art for hand protecting devices, Hertle describes a plurality of seams (see annotated Fig. 2), each comprising an ultrasonic weld (ultrasonic welding, para. 0009) between opposing surfaces of the one or more sheets (4, 8), wherein the plurality of seams comprises:
one or more edge seams (see annotated Fig. 2) between engaged surfaces of the one or more sheets (4, 8), wherein the one or more edge seams are disposed along one or more edges of the one or more sheets to define a pocket (receptacle 14) having an open side (opening 10) for receiving at least a part of a hand of a user to facilitate manual sampling of a surface, wherein the pocket is sized so as to accommodate a user's entire hand up to the user's wrist (fully capable of accommodating the hand up to the user’s wrist, depending on the particular user’s hand), thereby comprising a mitt sampler;
one or more entry seams (see annotated Fig. 2) disposed along edges and/or surfaces adjacent the open side of the pocket to retain the sampler on the user's hand with the one or more entry seams along the user's wrist when worn on the user's hand;
one or more interior seams (see annotated Fig. 2) extending from a distal edge of the sampler to an interior region of the pocket so that the one or more interior seams engage one or more digits of the user's hand during sampling (see Fig. 2), wherein the one or more interior seams comprise a seam extending in a lengthwise direction from at or near mid-point of the distal edge (are at or near a mid-point), wherein the sheet is rectangular (is rectangular) and has a lateral width-wise dimension.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the sampling of Wilhelmsen to be of the structure of Hertle (shape and assembly) in order to provide an inexpensive product to produce (see Hertle, para. 0003) and easy to store (para. 0012).
Wilhelmsen as modified does not explicitly describe has a width dimension of about 10 inches.
Such a modification is a mere change in size. Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not have performed differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (MPEP 2144.04(V)(A)). The examiner submits that a change in size does not change how the sampler would perform.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the width to be about 10 inches depending on the size of the hand that the sampler is designed to fit (see Boyle including that span of hand can be larger than 10 inches).
PNG
media_image1.png
466
940
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 27, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 26, the sampler is about 10 inches by 10 inches (as modified, the width is about 10 inches and item from Hertle is an approximate square, so as modified the sampler is about 10 inches by 10 inches).
Claims 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilhelmsen et al. (US 20190049419) in view of Bradfield et al. (US 4928322) as evidenced by Boyle (URL in PTO-892).
Regarding claim 1 Wilhelmsen describes a sampler (sampler 1100) for food safety sampling, the sampler comprising:
one or more sheets (sheet may undergo folding and seaming, para. 0082) of a sampling material (non-woven polyolefin cloth, para. 0056) disposed atop one another or folded (folding, para. 0082) wherein each of the one or more sheets consists of a single sheet of an absorbent non-woven synthetic fabric suitable for food contact (non-woven polyolefin cloth, para. 0056); and
wherein the sampler is provided sterile (sterile, para. 0078) and configured for obtaining microbial sampling and testing for food safety: and wherein the sampler is configured for food safety sampling (food sampling, abstract), to facilitate manual handling and sampling by contacting the plurality of food items (food sampling, abstract).
While Wilhelmsen describes that the food sampling could be a glove or mitten, it does not describes the structure of the glove or mitten and thus does not explicitly describe one or more edge seams between engaged surfaces of the one or more sheets, wherein the one or more edge seams are disposed along one or more edges of the one or more sheets to define a pocket having an open side for receiving at least a part of a hand of a user to facilitate manual sampling of a surface; the width dimension extending laterally across the hand when worn thereon, to facilitate manual handling and sampling by contacting the plurality of food items.
In related art for hand protecting devices, Bradfield describes one or more edge seams (see annotated Fig. 2) between engaged surfaces of the one or more sheets (sheets 12), wherein the one or more edge seams are disposed along one or more edges of the one or more sheets to define a pocket (pocket 15) having an open side (opening 30) for receiving at least a part of a hand of a user to facilitate manual sampling of a surface; wherein the sheet is rectangular (is rectangular) and the width dimension extending laterally across the hand when worn thereon.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the sampling of Wilhelmsen to be of the structure of Bradfield (shape and assembly) in order to provide a convenient roll of mittens to the user (col. 2, ll. 26-30).
Wilhelmsen as modified does not explicitly describe has a width dimension of about 10 inches.
Such a modification is a mere change in size. Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not have performed differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (MPEP 2144.04(V)(A)). The examiner submits that a change in size does not change how the sampler would perform.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the width to be about 10 inches depending on the size of the hand that the sampler is designed to fit (see Boyle including that span of hand can be larger than 10 inches, thus it would be obvious to design the cover to be able to encompass the span of a hand).
PNG
media_image2.png
405
704
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 1, further comprising: a first pair of entry seams extending inward in a widthwise direction from each lateral side and disposed along edges and/or surfaces adjacent the open side of the pocket to retain the sampler on the user's hand (see annotated Fig. 2); and
a second pair of entry steams extending in a lengthwise direction from an inner end of the first pair of entry seams so as to engage the user's wrist to retain the sampler on the user's hand during sampling (see annotated Fig. 2 below, configured to engage a user’s wrist inasmuch as claimed).
PNG
media_image3.png
413
586
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 26 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilhelmsen et al. (US 20190049419) in view of Bradfield et al. (US 4928322) and Brown et al. (US 6530108) as evidenced by Boyle (URL in PTO-892).
Regarding claim 26 Wilhelmsen describes a sampler (sampler 1100) for food safety sampling, the sampler comprising:
one or more sheets (sheet may undergo folding and seaming, para. 0082) of a sampling material (non-woven polyolefin cloth, para. 0056) disposed atop one another or folded, wherein each of the one or more sheets consists of an absorbent non-woven polyolefin suitable for food contact (non-woven polyolefin cloth, para. 0056); and
wherein the sampler is provided sterile (sterile, para. 0078) and configured for food safety sampling.
While Wilhelmsen describes that the food sampling could be a glove or mitten, it does not describes the structure of the glove or mitten and thus does not explicitly describe:
a plurality of seams, each comprising an ultrasonic weld between opposing surfaces of the one or more sheets, wherein the plurality of seams comprises:
one or more edge seams between engaged surfaces of the one or more sheets, wherein the one or more edge seams are disposed along one or more edges of the one or more sheets to define a pocket having an open side for receiving at least a part of a hand of a user to facilitate manual sampling of a surface, wherein the pocket is sized so as to accommodate a user's entire hand up to the user's wrist, thereby comprising a mitt sampler;
one or more entry seams disposed along edges and/or surfaces adjacent the open side of the pocket to retain the sampler on the user's hand with the one or more entry seams along the user's wrist when worn on the user's hand;
one or more interior seams extending from a distal edge of the sampler to an interior region of the pocket so that the one or more interior seams engage one or more digits of the user's hand during sampling, wherein the one or more interior seams comprise a seam extending in a lengthwise direction from at or near mid-point of the distal edge, wherein the sheet is rectangular and has a lateral width-wise dimension (is rectangular).
In related art for hand protecting devices, Bradfield describes
a plurality of seams (see annotated Fig. 2), between opposing surfaces of the one or more sheets, wherein the plurality of seams comprises:
one or more edge seams (see annotated Fig. 2) between engaged surfaces of the one or more sheets (sheets 12), wherein the one or more edge seams are disposed along one or more edges of the one or more sheets to define a pocket (pocket 15) having an open side (opening 30) for receiving at least a part of a hand of a user to facilitate manual sampling of a surface, wherein the pocket is sized so as to accommodate a user's entire hand up to the user's wrist, thereby comprising a mitt sampler (can accommodate a user’s hands and wrist depending on the size of the user’s hands and wrist);
one or more entry seams (see annotated Fig. 2) disposed along edges and/or surfaces adjacent the open side of the pocket to retain the sampler on the user's hand with the one or more entry seams along the user's wrist when worn on the user's hand;
one or more interior seams (see annotated Fig. 2) extending from a distal edge of the sampler to an interior region of the pocket so that the one or more interior seams engage one or more digits (configured to engage with the pointer finger) of the user's hand during sampling, wherein the one or more interior seams comprise a seam extending in a lengthwise direction from at or near mid-point of the distal edge (extends lengthwise at is at least near the mid-point of the distal edge inasmuch as claimed), wherein the sheet is rectangular and has a lateral width-wise dimension (is rectangular).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the sampling of Wilhelmsen to be of the structure of Bradfield (shape and assembly) in order to provide a convenient roll of mittens to the user (col. 2, ll. 26-30).
Such a modification is a mere change in size. Where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not have performed differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (MPEP 2144.04(V)(A)). The examiner submits that a change in size does not change how the sampler would perform.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the width to be about 10 inches depending on the size of the hand that the sampler is designed to fit (see Boyle including that span of hand can be larger than 10 inches, thus it would be obvious to design the cover to be able to encompass the span of a hand).
Wilhelmsen as modified does not explicitly describe that the method of sealing is ultrasonic.
In related art for hand protective devices, Brown describes wherein the seals are ultrasonic (claim 6).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the method of sealing to be ultrasonic welding as such a modification is a simple substitution of one element (heat sealing) for another (ultrasonic welding) with predictable results. As evidenced by claim 6 of Brown, heat sealing and ultrasonic welding may be interchanged.
PNG
media_image4.png
434
845
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 29, Wilhelmsen as modified describes the sampler of claim 26, further comprising:
a first pair of entry seams (see annotated Fig. 2 above, Bradfield) extending inward a widthwise direction from each lateral side and disposed along edges and/or surfaces adjacent the open side of the pocket to retain the sampler on the user's hand; and
a second pair of entry steams (see annotated Fig. 2 above, Bradfield) extending in a lengthwise direction from an inner end of the first pair of entry seams so as to engage the user's wrist to retain the sampler on the user's hand during sampling.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 30 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK J LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-1145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th, Alt F: 8:00 AM-5:00 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, Clint Ostrup can be reached on 571-272-5559. 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.
/PATRICK J. LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights