DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 2, “to” should be removed.
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.
Claims 13 and 14 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. Specifically, claim 13 recites the limitation “the layer in line 2 and claim 14 recites the limitation "the layer" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in each claim. It appears Applicant intended claims 13 and 14 to depend from claim 12.
Claim 27 is 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. Specifically, claim 27 recites the limitation “the first end portion" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation.
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)(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.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Blondeau (US20240366975).
1: A harness component (Figs. 1-7) comprising: at least one panel (Fig. 1, 3) of fabric having longitudinal warp yarns (Fig. 4, 6), the at least one panel of fabric comprising: at least one longitudinal fold ([0054], 8); a first end portion having a first transverse width (3a or Y-Y); a second end portion having a second transverse width (3b or Y-Y); and a central portion (3c, 3d) between the first end portion and the second end portion, the central portion having a third transverse width greater than the first transverse width and greater than the second transverse width (see also [0075]); at least one stitch pattern ([0091]) crossing the warp yarns along the first end portion and along the second end portion wherein the at least one panel of fabric comprises: a first portion (3’); a second portion (3’’) folded with respect to the first portion along a first longitudinal fold and overlapping the first portion (3’); and a third portion folded with respect to the first portion along a second longitudinal fold and overlapping the second portion ([0070]: “It is possible to provide for the narrow portion 3e or another narrow portion 3e to be formed by two folds with two fold lines 8. The choice between a single fold line 8 or two fold lines 8 depends on the shape of narrow portion 3e and on the ease of making the cuts and folds”), wherein the stitching pattern passes through the first portion, the second portion and the third portion ([0090] and [0091]: “A stitching yarn passes through the multiple thicknesses of the fabric woven layer 3 in the thickness direction. Stitching of the two folds of woven material enables the position of the two folds to be fixed, thereby enabling the spatial configuration of the first yarns 6a to be fixed”).
3: The harness component of claim 2, wherein the second portion and the third portion have bias shifts so as to lay flat ([0116]: “supple”, also note that this feature is also inherent to the mechanical performance and folds of the disclosed fabric, see e.g., [0117]).
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 8-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blondeau (US20240366975) in view of Martin (US7743885).
8: Blondeau fails to disclose a first line having first splayed strands overlying portions of the first end portion; and a second line having second splayed strands overlying portions of the second end portion. Martin teaches, in the context of climbing harnesses, a line (Fig. 7, the line within portion 10) having first splayed strands (12) overlying portions of an end portion (col. 5, lines 22-23: “FIG. 7 illustrates an embodiment in which the non-woven portion is an end portion of the strap).
It 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 to have included a first line having first splayed strands overlying portions of the first end portion; and a second line having second splayed strands overlying portions of the second end portion in the harness component of Blandeau according to the teachings of Martin in order to further strengthen the ends of the harness component for load bearing purposes (see Martin, col. 5, lines 26-29).
9: Blondeau in view of Martin disclose the harness component of claim 8, wherein the at least one stitch pattern crosses the first splayed strands and the second splayed strands (see Blondeau [0091]: “The width of the webbing corresponds to the width of narrow portion 3e so as to stress all the first yarns 6a. Preferentially, the webbing is fastened by stitching. A stitching yarn passes through the multiple thicknesses of the fabric woven layer 3 in the thickness direction. Stitching of the two folds of woven material enables the position of the two folds to be fixed, thereby enabling the spatial configuration of the first yarns 6a to be fixed).
11: Blondeau in view of Martin disclose the harness component of claim 8, wherein the first splayed strands are sandwiched between the first portion and the third portion along the first end portion and wherein the second splayed strands are sandwiched between the first portion and the third portion along the second end portion (note that this feature is inherent to Blondeau in view of Martin as the splayed strands being located at the end portions would necessarily be captured within the folds and thus sandwiched, see also, (Blondeau [0116]: “There are then four layers of fabric superposed on one another”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-28 are allowed.
Claims 4-7, 12, and 21-22 are 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.
Claims 13-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant initially argues in part V.A., with respect to amended claim 1, that Blondeau fails to “disclose or even remotely suggest an additional or second ‘overlap portion 3’”. However, Blondeau discloses at [0070]: “It is possible to provide for the narrow portion 3e or another narrow portion 3e to be formed by two folds with two fold lines 8. The choice between a single fold line 8 or two fold lines 8 depends on the shape of narrow portion 3e and on the ease of making the cuts and folds”. Blondeau’s two fold lines 8 will necessarily result in the second and third portions overlapping, particularly since Blondeau explicitly recites at [0090] and [0091] that “A stitching yarn passes through the multiple thicknesses” and “stitching of the two folds of woven material enables the position of the two folds to be fixed”. It is further noted that the feature upon which applicant relies (i.e., the second longitudinal fold being disposed in the first portion of the panel) is not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant’s argues, in section V.B. on pages 23 and 24 of the Amendment filed 5 June 2026, with respect to the “bias shift” of claim 3 that “Nowhere does Blondeau remotely disclose anything about any bias shift”. However, as shown in Fig. 4 of Blondeau, fold 8 (and subsequent folds) is/are angled with respect to the longitudinal axis of the fabric and thus, the fabric when oriented in that direction is bias shifted. This interpretation of claim 3 comports with the definition of bias shift provided by Applicant: “diagonal stretching that occurs when a woven fabric is pulled across its diagonal axis” – thus, when Blondeau’s harness is worn the second and third portions are pulled on the diagonal.
With regard to part V.C., Applicant’s arguments, see pages 23 and 24 of the Amendment filed 5 June 2026, with respect to the “second panel” of claim 4 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 4 has been withdrawn.
With regard to part V1.A., Applicant’s arguments, see pages 28-30 of the Amendment filed 5 June 2026, with respect to the “comfort foam” not corresponding to a layer sandwiched between the first portion and the second portion or the third portion according to claim 12 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 12 has been withdrawn.
Further with regard to part IX, Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 23 (former claim 15) have been fully considered and are persuasive.
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 Ben Pezzlo whose telephone number is (571)272-9656. The examiner can normally be reached M to Th 7 to 5.
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, Daniel Cahn can be reached at (571) 270-5616. 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.
/BAP/Examiner, Art Unit 3634
/Johnnie A. Shablack/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3634
Prosecution Insights