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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I , Claims 1-13, in the reply filed on 10/7/2025 is acknowledged.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph 30 should read “highly absorbent bio-degradable material”.
Appropriate correction is required.
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
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 1-13 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 the limitation “a soft bamboo fibre, a cotton material, a nylon material, and a stitching material.” When looking at the specification, the nylon material is the stitching. It is unclear how there can be a stitching material and a nylon material. Although a small issue, the dependent claims exacerbate this issue. As such the claim is determined to be indefinite. For Examination purposes, the claim is to be interpreted as ‘a soft bamboo fibre, a cotton material, a nylon materialas a stitching material.”
Claim 4 recites the limitation “wherein the entire glove and arm portions being made of a soft, highly absorbent bio-gradable material, a waterproof liner coextensive with said glove.” It is unclear what is consider “bio-gradable”. The Examiner believes this is a typographical error and it should read “biodegradable”. Biodegradable is not in the specification and it is unknown what is meant by biogradable. Further, please delete the word “entire”, since the presence of the nylon thread, not the entire glove is biodegradable. Since the claim is unclear, the claim is determined to be indefinite. For Examination purposes it will be interpreted as biodegradable.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “wherein the absorbent bio-gradable material is a stretchy natural soft bamboo towelling and cotton material.” It is unclear what “biogradable” is. As such the claim is determined to be indefinite. For Examination purposes it will be interpreted as biodegradable. Further, the claim should be rewritten to with proper antecedent basis. The Examiner suggests “wherein the absorbent bio-gradable material is a stretchy natural soft bamboo towelling of the bamboo fibre and the cotton material.”
Claim 7 recites the limitation “wherein the absorbent bio-gradable material is a nylon material.” It is unclear what “biogradable” is. “A nylon” should be “the nylon”. Further, nylon is neither absorbent or biodegradable. As such the claim is determined to be indefinite. The Examiner recommends cancelling the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “wherein the stretchy natural soft bamboo towelling is about 70% of the material.” It is unclear what is meant by “the material”. As such the claim is determined to be indefinite. For Examination purposes, the claim is to be interpreted as ““wherein the stretchy natural soft bamboo towelling is about 70% of the material composition of the bathing glove.”
Claim 10 recites the limitation “wherein the said glove is made by placing two layers of bamboo towelling on top of each other, the right sides of fabric are facing each other and overlocked by stitching the sides to the sizes of the fingers and folding the hem of the cut off fingers and straight stitching them before folding over the bottom of the glove and hem and further stitching.” It is unclear what is meant by “folding the hem of the cut off fingers and straight stitching them before folding over the bottom of the glove and hem and further stitching.” Is applicant trying to claim the fingers have a flat cut at the end, then folded and sewn over? Cut off fingers has not previous been discussed in the claims, as such it should be at least “at plurality of cut off fingers”. “The hem” has also not been discussed, so should be “a hem”. As such the claim is determined to be indefinite, and should be revised appropriately.
Applicant is advised to review the claims for antecedent issues and other 112 issues before resubmitting.
Any claim not specifically rejected above is rejected due to its dependency on a claim rejected above.
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 1-4, 6, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamper (WO 2024105124) in view of Prouty (US 2007/000018).
Regarding claim 1 (as best understood) Kamper discloses an anti-slip baby bathing glove, comprising: a soft bamboo fibre, a cotton material (Paragraph 27), a nylon Material, and a stitching material (Paragraph 29 discusses sewing).
Kamper fails to discuss a nylon material as the stitching material.
Prouty teaches a glove wherein a nylon material as the stitching material (Paragraph 30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kamper with the nylon thread of Prouty. As discussed in Prouty Paragraph 30, the use of nylon as a stitching element is common standard in the industry to join fabric materials like cotton.
Regarding claim 2 Kamper in view of Prouty disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 1, wherein the said glove is crafted for holding a baby in arms while being bathed (this is viewed as intended use), further comprising a glove portion (Kamper Item 6) and an elongated arm portion for covering the forearm of the wearer (Kamper Item 33).
Regarding claim 3 Kamper in view of Prouty disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 2, wherein the said arm portion being an integral extension of said glove portion (Kamper Figure 3).
Regarding claim 4 Kamper in view of Prouty disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 3, wherein the entire glove and arm portions being made of a soft, highly absorbent bio-gradable material (Kamper Item 7), a waterproof liner coextensive with said glove (Kamper Item 4).
Regarding claim 6 Kamper in view of Prouty disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 4, wherein the absorbent bio-gradable material is a stretchy natural soft bamboo towelling and cotton material (Kamper Paragraph 27).
Regarding claims 8 and 9 Kamper in view of Prouty disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 6. Kamper fails to explicitly disclose wherein the stretchy natural soft bamboo towelling is about 70% of the material OR wherein the cotton component is about 30%.
As shown in Figure 2, Item 10 is on a much smaller portion of the overall glove. 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 size of item 10 to be bigger or smaller in comparison to the overall glove size, since different people have different sized hands and soaps or gels (intended to fit in the pouch made by Item 10) have varying sizes. Such a modification would lead to the outcome of Item 10 being about 30% of the overall fabric in comparison to the 70% of bamboo used on the rest of the glove material. Such a modification is viewed as a change in size, which has been held to be of routine by one skilled in the art (see MPEP 2144.04). Further in the instant application, there is no criticality or unexpected result to the claimed quantities.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamper (WO 2024105124) in view of Prouty (US 2007/000018) in view of Antonious (US 4,042,977).
Regarding claim 5 Kamper in view of Prouty disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 4, wherein the arm portions on the inside of said glove and arm portions, there exists an elastic element (Kamper Paragraph 42) near the juncture of said glove portion and said arm portion to aid arm portion.
Kamper fails to disclose a stitching securing said elastic element to the inside of said absorbent material.
Antonious teaches a glove wherein a stitching securing said elastic element to the inside of said absorbent material (Column 2 Line 65- Column 3 Line 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kamper with the elastic element to be on the interior of the absorbent material as taught by Antonious. Kamper gives very little detail on how the elastic element is attached and relies on known knowledge in the art to attach the element properly. By placing the elastic element inside the absorbent material, it would ensure a continuous cleaning surface that would not an area that might lead to unnecessary abrading, which might happen if the elastic element is on the outside.
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kamper (WO 2024105124) in view of Prouty (US 2007/000018) in view of Joosten (EP 2921096a1).
Regarding claim 10 Kamper in view of Prouty disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 8. Kamper fails to explicitly disclose wherein the said glove is made by placing two layers of bamboo towelling on top of each other, the right sides of fabric are facing each other and overlocked by stitching the sides to the sizes of the fingers and folding the hem of the cut off fingers and straight stitching them before folding over the bottom of the glove and hem and further stitching.
Joosten teaches a glove wherein the said glove is made by placing two layers of bamboo towelling (Item 10a and 10b; Paragraph 28) on top of each other, the right sides of fabric are facing each other (at Item 2) and overlocked by stitching (Paragraph 22) the sides to the sizes of the fingers and folding the hem of the cut off fingers and straight stitching them before folding over the bottom of the glove and hem and further stitching (Item 3a). 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 overall shape of Kamper to be constructed as taught by Joosten. Such a shape is a good fit for all hand shapes and sizes (Joosten Paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 11 Kamper in view of Prouty in view of Joosten disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 10, wherein the said material is stitched with nylon material which is utilized to overlock thread for durability (Prouty Paragraph 30).
Regarding claim 12 Kamper in view of Prouty disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 9. Kamper fails to explicitly disclose wherein the stretchy bamboo towelling is designed to fit all sizes of human fingers.
Joosten teaches a glove wherein the stretchy bamboo towelling is designed to fit all sizes of human fingers (Paragraph 7). 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 shape of Kamper to be similar as that taught by Joosten. Such a modification is viewed as a change in shape, which has been held to be of routine by one skilled in the art (see MPEP 214.04). Joosten further teaches that “An unfitting glove is either not used, may involve the risk of slipping off the hand during use, and/or is uncomfortable or unhandy.” (Paragraph 4).
Regarding claim 13 Kamper in view of Prouty in view of Joosten disclose the baby bathing glove as in claim 10, wherein the glove is finished off to the size of cutoff fingers, wherein the folded hem is overlocking the cut-off fingers (Joosten Figure 1; paragraph 34).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOM R RODGERS whose telephone number is (313)446-4849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8AM-5PM 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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/TOM RODGERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723