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 .
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 1-12 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.
Re Claim 1, it is unclear whether socks are positively claimed as art of the device. It is also unclear what the metes and bounds of “small” is.
Re Claim 2, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of “sufficiently enough” is. It is also unclear whether “such as” is a required limitation or a preferred example/embodiment. Also, “the metal loop fastener” lacks sufficient antecedent basis.
Re Claim 4, it is unclear whether “such as” is a required limitation or a preferred example/embodiment. It is unclear what “a normal fashion” is.
Re Claim 5, it is unclear whether “such as” is a required limitation or a preferred example/embodiment.
Re Claim 7, it is also unclear whether “such as” is a required limitation or a preferred example/embodiment
Re Claim 8, It is also unclear whether “such as” is a required limitation or a preferred example/embodiment. It is also unclear whether “through means such as” is intended to invoke means plus function language according to 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claims 3-12 are rejected as they depend from Claims 1 and 2 without curing the deficiencies.
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.
Claim(s) 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KASPI (US 2016/0278440).
Re Claim 1, KASPI teaches a loop fastener 40 threaded through holes in socks 20/22.
Re Claims 2 and 6, the intended use of holes which are threaded and the holes will not be damaged are considered intended use capable and expected to be met as all the structural elements claimed are taught.
Re Claims 3-4, the holes are “unobstrusive” and one can wear the socks “normally.”
Re Claim 5, the loop fastener is a cord, which is expected to be rust-proof.
Re Claim 7, a clasp appears to be taught.
Re Claim 8, the fastener may be opened, for example, by cutting it.
Re Claim 9, two socks are taught.
Re Claim 10-12, the socks as expected to stay together via the loop.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON Y KO whose telephone number is (571)270-7451. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00-6:00.
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, Michael Barr can be reached at 571-270-1414. 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.
JASON Y. KO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/JASON Y KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711