Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/425,512

BED SHEET SYSTEM

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jan 29, 2024
Examiner
GEDEON, DEBORAH TALITHA
Art Unit
3673
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
76 granted / 146 resolved
At TC average
Strong +64% interview lift
Without
With
+63.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
183
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
58.2%
+18.2% vs TC avg
§102
29.1%
-10.9% vs TC avg
§112
11.1%
-28.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 146 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Status of the Application Claims 1, 3—6, 8, 10—13, 15—19 & 21—26 have been examined in this application. Claims 2, 7, 9, 14 & 20 have been canceled. Claims 21—26 are newly added. This communication is a Final Rejection in response to Applicant’s “Amendments/Remarks” filed 10/28/2025. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 07/30/2025 has been acknowledged by the Office. Specification The use of the term Velcro (Applicant Specification para [0024]), which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term. Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 8, 10, 12, 15, 21—26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S Patent Application 2007/0101496 A1 to Ho (Ho hereafter). As per claim 1, Ho teaches: A bed sheet system (10—Fig.1; para [0023]) comprising: a fitted sheet (16—Fig.1; para [0023]) operable for attachment onto a mattress (para [0023]); and a top sheet (18—Fig.1; para [0023]) operable for placement (i) over the fitted sheet and (ii) over the mattress (para [0023]), wherein (a) a distal end of the top sheet is secured to a distal end of the fitted sheet (36—Fig.4; para [0026]) along first and second stitched regions (20—Fig.4; para [0026]), (b) the first and second stitched regions are interleaved with an in stitched region (para [0026]; annotated Fig.4 below), and (c) the distal end of the top sheet is unsecured from the distal end of the fitted sheet along the stitched region (10 –Fig.4: generally shown distal end of fitted sheet unsecured to the top sheet). As per claim 3, Ho teaches The bed sheet system of claim 1, wherein (i) the top sheet defines a vent opening along the stitched region (38—Fig.4; para [0028]: vent formed near 38 via unstitched region formed by element 36 & 20) and (ii) the vent opening is operable to vent air from spaces defined between the fitted sheet and top sheet (para [0028]). As per claim 4, Ho teaches The bed sheet system of claim 3, wherein the vent opening defined along the unstitched region is aligned with the first and second stitched regions along an axis (38—Fig.4; para [0028]: vent formed near 38 via unstitched region formed by element 36 & 20). As per claim 8, Ho teaches A bed sheeting (10—Fig.1; para [0023]) comprising: a first sheet (16—Fig.1; para [0023]) (i) having elastic regions (claim 1) and (ii) configured to conform to a shape of a mattress (para [0023]); and a second sheet (18—Fig.1; para [0023]) (i) disposed over the first sheet (ii) stitched to the first sheet (para [0028]) along spaced-apart regions (20—Fig.4; para [0028]), and (iii) interleaved with secondary regions wherein t first sheet and second sheet are unstitched along the secondary regions the spaced-apart regions and secondary regions are interleaved and aligned along an axis (10—Fig.4; para [0028]: generally shown spaced apart region along an axis). As per claim 10, Ho teaches The bed sheeting of claim 8, wherein (i) the second sheet defines openings along the secondary regions (38—Fig.4; para [0028]: openings formed near 38 via unsecured region formed by element 36 & 20), and (ii) the openings are operable to vent air from spaces defined between the first sheet and second sheet (para [0028]). As per claim 11, Ho teaches The bed sheeting of claim 10, wherein the openings defined along the secondary regions are aligned along the axis (10—Fig.4; para [0028]: generally shown spaced apart region along an axis). As per claim 15, Ho teaches A bedding set (10—Fig.1; para [0023]) comprising: a primary sheet (16—Fig.1; para [0023]) (i) having a first plurality of outer regions (34—Fig.1; para [0025]) and (ii) configured to engage a mattress (16—Fig.1); and a secondary sheet (18—Fig.1; para [0023]) (i) having a second plurality of outer regions (34—Fig.1; para [0025]) and (ii) configured for placement over the primary sheet (para [0025]), PNG media_image1.png 342 545 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein (a) a first region of the first plurality of outer regions is stitched to a first region of the second plurality of outer regions (36 & 20—Fig.4) along spaced-apart stitched regions (36 & 20—Fig.4; para [0028]), (b) the first region of the first plurality of outer regions is unsecured to the first region of the second plurality of outer regions along unstitched regions (annotated Fig.4), and (c) the attached regions are interleaved with the unstitched regions (10—Fig.4). As per claim 16, Ho teaches The bedding set of claim 15, wherein (i) the secondary sheet defines openings along the unstitched regions (annotated 10—Fig.4; para [0028]) and (ii) the openings are operable to vent air from spaces defined between the primary sheet and secondary sheet (annotated 10—Fig.4: para [0028]). As per claim 17, Ho teaches The bedding set of claim 16, wherein the openings defined along the unstitched regions are aligned with the spaced-apart stitched regions along an axis (annotated 10—Fig.4). As per claim 21, Ho teaches The bed sheet system of claim 1, wherein the distal end of the top sheet extends between a first side and a second side of the top sheet and wherein the first and second stitched regions terminate along the distal end of the top sheet in a spaced relation to the first and second sides of the top sheet (annotated Fig.4). As per claim 22, Ho teaches The bed sheet system of claim 1, further comprising a third stitched region between the first and the second stitched regions at the distal end of the top sheet (annotated Fig.4), wherein the first, second, and third stitched regions are interleaved with unstitched regions (annotated Fig.4). PNG media_image2.png 492 680 media_image2.png Greyscale As per claim 23, Ho teaches The bed sheeting of claim 8. wherein the axis extends along a distal end of the top sheet, the distal end of the second sheet extending between a first side and a second side (annotated Fig.4), and the spaced apart regions are positioned along the distal end of the second sheet in a spaced relation to the first and second sides (annotated Fig.4). As per claim 24, Ho teaches The bed sheeting of claim 8, wherein the spaced-apart regions comprise three stitched regions interleaved with two secondary regions (annotated Fig.4). As per claim 25, Ho teaches The bedding set of claim 15, wherein the first region of the second plurality of outer regions extends between first and second side regions (34—Fig.1) of the second plurality of outer regions (annotated Fig.4), and wherein the spaced-apart stitched regions are positioned along the first region of the second plurality of outer regions at a spaced relation to the first and second side regions of the second plurality of outer regions (annotated Fig.4). As per claim 26, Ho teaches The bedding set of claim 15, wherein the first region of the first plurality of outer regions (34—Fig.1) is stitched to the first region of the second plurality of outer regions along three spaced-apart stitched regions (annotated Fig.4), the three spaced-apart stitched regions are interleaved with two unstitched regions (annotated Fig.4). 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. Claim(s) 5, 6, 12, 13, 18 & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent Application 2007/0101496 A1 to Ho in view of U.S Patent Application 2016/0058214 A1 to Preston (Preston hereafter). As per claim 5, Ho (as modified) teaches The bed sheet system of claim 1. Ho does not teach, wherein distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet. Preston teaches, wherein distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet (135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1: top sheet define cutouts). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Ho (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet) and Preston (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet) and arrived at a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide a visually appealing bedsheet with hospital corners by creating the look of angled creases near the cut outs as taught in Preston (para [0015]). As per claim 6, Ho (as modified) teaches The bed sheet system of claim 5. Ho does not teach , wherein the cutouts defined along the distal corners of the top sheet are triangular. Preston teaches, wherein the cutouts defined along the distal corners of the top sheet are triangular (annotated 135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1). PNG media_image3.png 501 589 media_image3.png Greyscale Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Ho (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet) and Preston (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet) and arrived at a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide a visually appealing bedsheet with hospital corners by creating the look of angled creases near the cut outs as taught in Preston (para [0015]). As per claim 12, Ho teaches The bed sheeting of claim 8. Ho does not teach wherein (i) corners of the second sheet define cutouts operable to expose corners of the first sheet, (ii) the cutouts of the second sheet extend radially away from the axis , and (iii) the cutouts are adjacent to the axis. Preston teaches, wherein (i) corners of the second sheet define cutouts operable to expose corners of the first sheet ( 135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1: cutout of second sheet exposing corners of first sheet), (ii) the cutouts of the second sheet extend radially away from the axis (annotated 135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1), and (iii) the cutouts are adjacent to the axis (annotated 135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Ho (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet) and Preston (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet) and arrived at a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide a visually appealing bedsheet with hospital corners by creating the look of angled creases near the cut outs as taught in Preston (para [0015]). As per claim 13, Ho teaches The bed sheeting of claim 12. Ho does not teach, wherein the cutouts defined along the corners of the second sheet are triangular. Preston teaches, wherein the cutouts defined along the corners of the second sheet are triangular (135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Ho (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet) and Preston (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet) and arrived at a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide a visually appealing bedsheet with hospital corners by creating the look of angled creases near the cut outs as taught in Preston (para [0015]). As per claim 18, Ho teaches The bedding set of claim 15. Ho does not teach wherein (i) corners of the secondary sheet define cutouts operable to expose corners of the primary sheet and (ii) the cutouts of the secondary sheet extend from and are adjacent to the first region of the first plurality of outer regions of the primary sheet. Preston teaches, wherein (i) corners of the secondary sheet define cutouts operable to expose corners of the primary sheet (135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1: cutout of secondary sheet exposing corners of primary sheet) and (ii) the cutouts of the secondary sheet extend from and are adjacent to the first region of the first plurality of outer regions of the primary sheet (135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1: cutout of secondary sheet adjacent to outer regions of primary sheet). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Ho (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet) and Preston (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet) and arrived at a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide a visually appealing bedsheet with hospital corners by creating the look of angled creases near the cut outs as taught in Preston (para [0015]). As per claim 19, Ho (as modified) teaches The bedding set of claim 18. Ho does not teach , wherein the cutouts defined along the corners of the secondary sheet are triangular. Preston teaches, wherein the cutouts defined along the corners of the secondary sheet are triangular (135 a, 135b, 125a & 125b—Fig.1). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have combined Ho (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet) and Preston (directed to a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet) and arrived at a bed sheet assembly provided with an attached top and bottom sheet provided with distal corners of the top sheet define cutouts operable to expose distal corners of the fitted sheet. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide a visually appealing bedsheet with hospital corners by creating the look of angled creases near the cut outs as taught in Preston (para [0015]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8 & 15 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S Patent Application 2019/0365123 A1 discloses a mattress assembly and method for applying sheets to a bed mattress, involving partially attached top and bottom sheets for facilitating simulation installation of the two during sheet installation. U.S Patent 7,487,561 B2 discloses a bedding assembly including at least a first sheet, preferably one fitted sheet having a head end and a foot, at least a second sheet, preferably one flat sheet having a head end and a foot end to be placed atop the said second sheet, an elastomeric component either removably attached to the first sheet or the second sheet. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Deborah T Gedeon whose telephone number is (571)272-8863. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30am to 4:30pm 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, Justin Mikowski can be reached at 571-272-8525. 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. /D.T.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3673 02/06/2026 /JUSTIN C MIKOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3673
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 29, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 28, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599258
SUPPORT ELEMENT ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589041
PERSON SUPPORT SURFACES INCLUDING SET BY PREVIEW FUNCTION FOR CONTINUOUS LATERAL ROTATION THERAPY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575989
LATERAL SPINE SURGERY TOP FOR TWO COLUMN OPERATING TABLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569082
PILLOW WITH VARIABLE CUSHIONING CHARACTERISTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569069
A FURNITURE, CONVERTIBLE FROM A SOFA TO A BED
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+63.8%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 146 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month