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 .
Response to Amendments
The amendments filed with the written response received on 27 October 2025 have been considered and an action on the merits follows. As directed by the amendment, claim(s) 3, 10, and 15 has/have been amended, claim(s) 4 and 16 is/are canceled, and claim(s) 1-2, 5-7, and 17-19 has/have been withdrawn. Accordingly, claim(s) 1-3, 5-15, and 17-20 is/are pending in this application with an action on the merits to follow regarding claim(s) 3, 8-15, and 20.
Because of the applicant's amendment, the following in the office action filed 20 June 2025, are hereby withdrawn:
Claim Objections
Previous 35 USC 112(b) Rejections
35 USC 112(d) Rejections
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “first linear border” and “second linear border” of claims 3 and 15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
Claims 3 and 15 recite the limitation, “the intermediate portion defining a first linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at an upper side of the body and a second linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at a lower side of the body, wherein, when the reconfigurable scarf is worn, the first linear border is configured to, at least partially, overlap with the wearer's neck and the second linear border is configured to partially overlap with the wearer's shoulder and the wearer's upper torso”. There is a lack of antecedence in the Specification for this limitation as there is no recitation of a “first linear border”, “second linear border”, the first second linear border overlapping (at least partially) with the wearer’s neck, nor the second linear border partially overlapping the wearer’s shoulder/upper torso. The Drawings filed 12 September 2025 do not show a linear border on the upper side nor a linear border on the lower side of the reconfigurable scarf.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 3 and 15 (and claims 8-14 and 20 at least for depending from a rejected claim) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 3 and 15 recites the limitation “the intermediate portion defining a first linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at an upper side of the body and a second linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at a lower side of the body, wherein, when the reconfigurable scarf is worn, the first linear border is configured to, at least partially, overlap with the wearer's neck and the second linear border is configured to partially overlap with the wearer's shoulder and the wearer's upper torso” on lines 3-9 which is considered new matter. The written description does not disclose this structure and the structure is not clearly discernable in the drawings. With regards to the written description, there is discussion of “an intermediate portion extending between the first edge and the second edge. The intermediate portion is configured to cover at least a portion of one or more of a wearer's neck, shoulder, and upper torso” in ¶0018, however this statement does not specify what a “first linear border” and a “second linear border” is/are as it is stated that the limitation, “the intermediate portion defining a first linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at an upper side of the body and a second linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at a lower side of the body, wherein, when the reconfigurable scarf is worn, the first linear border is configured to, at least partially, overlap with the wearer's neck and the second linear border is configured to partially overlap with the wearer's shoulder and the wearer's upper torso”. Further, the Applicant’s Drawings do not clarify what a “first linear border” and a “second linear border” is/are. Fig(s). 1, 7-10, and 12-15 show the entire upper edge around the opening at the topmost portion of the garment and a partial view of the lower edge around the opening at the bottom most portion of the garment when the garment, but these edges are not linear (not even nearly linear as they have clear waves, curves, and dips) and the Drawings do not specify which structure is the “first linear border” and the “second linear border” as is recited in the limitation, “the intermediate portion defining a first linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at an upper side of the body and a second linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at a lower side of the body, wherein, when the reconfigurable scarf is worn, the first linear border is configured to, at least partially, overlap with the wearer's neck and the second linear border is configured to partially overlap with the wearer's shoulder and the wearer's upper torso.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim(s) 3 and 15 (and claims 8-14 and 20 at least for depending from a rejected claim) is/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.
Claims 3 and 15, is/are indefinite as it/they recite(s) “the intermediate portion defining a first linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at an upper side of the body and a second linear border spanning between the first edge and the second edge at a lower side of the body”. It is unclear what structures are the “first linear border” and the “second linear border” as there is no recitation of these limitations in the Specification and neither is clearly shown in the Drawings. Therein the metes and bounds of the claim are indefinite. For examination purposes, the claim is being interpreted as the first linear border being the uppermost or topmost opening of the garment, and the “second linear border” being the lowermost or bottommost opening of the garment.
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)(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) 3, 8-15, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Winfield Kmiec US 20180228301 (hereinafter Winfield).
Regarding Independent Claim 3, Winfield discloses a reconfigurable scarf (Figs. 3-4 & 11 #10; ¶0042) comprising: a body (Figs. 3-4 & 11 #10) defining a first edge (Winfield Annot. Fig. 4), a second edge (Winfield Annot. Fig. 4), and an intermediate portion extending between the first edge and the second edge (Winfield Annot. Fig. 4), the intermediate portion configured to cover at least a portion of one or more of a wearer's neck, shoulder and upper torso (Fig. 11), the intermediate portion defining a first linear border (Fig. 5 #12) spanning between the first edge and the second edge at an upper side of the body (Figs. 4-9A) and a second linear border (Fig. 5 #14) spanning between the first edge and the second edge at a lower side of the body (Figs. 4-9A), wherein, when the reconfigurable scarf is worn, the first linear border is configured to, at least partially, overlap with the wearer's neck (Fig. 11) and the second linear border is configured to partially overlap with the wearer's shoulder and the wearer's upper torso (Fig. 11); and a fastening mechanism (Winfield Annot. Fig. 4) disposed along a length of both the first edge and the second edge of the body (Fig. 4), the fastening mechanism configured to selectively and removably fasten at least a part of the length of the first edge (Fig. 4; ¶0041) with at least a part of the length of the second edge (Fig. 4; ¶0041), the fastening mechanism comprising a two-way zipper (Fig. 4 shows a two-way zipper; ¶0041), wherein the reconfigurable scarf is capable of being reconfigured in a plurality of positions and arrangements around at least a portion of the wearer's neck, shoulder and upper torso to create a plurality of accessories (¶0041-0042).
Regarding Claim 8, Winfield discloses the reconfigurable scarf of claim 3, wherein the intermediate portion has a uniform width (¶0040 notes, “cover 10 is approximately tubular” which would make the intermediate portion uniform).
Regarding Claim 9, Winfield discloses the reconfigurable scarf of claim 3, wherein the intermediate portion has a non-uniform width (¶0040 notes #10 is, “preferably slightly conical or frusto-conical in shape”).
Regarding Claim 10, Winfield discloses the reconfigurable scarf of claim 3, wherein the body is made of one or more materials including natural fabrics, synthetic fabrics, and leather (¶0043).
Regarding Claim 11, Winfield discloses the reconfigurable scarf of claim 3, wherein the body is knitted, crocheted, or woven (¶0043).
Regarding Claim 12, Winfield discloses the reconfigurable scarf of claim 3, wherein the body has an inner surface lined with fleece (¶0043).
Regarding Claim 13, Winfield discloses the reconfigurable scarf of claim 3, including a plurality of embellishments on the body (¶0054 notes, “patterned side of the cloth or fabric).
Regarding Claim 14, Winfield discloses the reconfigurable scarf of claim 3, being an infinity scarf (Figs. 4 & 11 show a tubular neck/upper body wrap ¶0049 notes, “infinity scarf”).
Regarding Independent Claim 15, Winfield discloses a reconfigurable scarf (Figs. 3-4 & 11 #10; ¶0042) comprising: a body (Figs. 3-4 & 11 #10) defining a first edge (Winfield Annot. Fig. 4), a second edge (Winfield Annot. Fig. 4), and an intermediate portion extending between the first edge and the second edge (Winfield Annot. Fig. 4), the intermediate portion configured to cover at least a portion of one or more of a wearer's neck, shoulder and upper torso (Fig. 11), , the intermediate portion defining a first linear border (Fig. 5 #12) spanning between the first edge and the second edge at an upper side of the body (Figs. 4-9A) and a second linear border (Fig. 5 #14) spanning between the first edge and the second edge at a lower side of the body (Figs. 4-9A), wherein, when the reconfigurable scarf is worn, the first linear border is configured to, at least partially, overlap with the wearer's neck (Fig. 11) and the second linear border is configured to partially overlap with the wearer's shoulder and the wearer's upper torso (Fig. 11); and a two-way zipper (Fig. 4 shows a two-way zipper; ¶0041) disposed on at least a part of a length of the first edge (Fig. 4; ¶0041) and the second edge of the body (Fig. 4; ¶0041), the two-way zipper having a first and a second zipper pull (Winfield Annot. Fig. 4) movable along an open-ended zipper track running along at least the part of the length of the first and second edge (Fig. 4; ¶0041), the two-way zipper allowing the reconfigurable scarf to be unzipped partially or completely on either side without becoming unattached (¶0041), wherein the reconfigurable scarf is capable of being reconfigured in a plurality of positions and arrangements around at least a portion of one or more of the wearer's neck, shoulder and upper torso to create a plurality of accessories (¶0041-0042).
Regarding Claim 20, Winfield discloses the reconfigurable scarf of claim 15, being an infinity scarf (Figs. 4 & 11 show a tubular neck/upper body wrap ¶0049 notes, “infinity scarf”).
PNG
media_image1.png
892
745
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 27 October 2025, with respect to the 35 USC 102 rejection of claims 3, 8-16, and 20 have been considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding the 35 USC 102 rejections of claims 3, 8-16, and 20, Applicant argues:
“The upper border defines varying gradients with curves/bends therebetween, imparting a characteristic non-linear shape to said upper border. Effectively, and quite contrarily to the present application, the upper border of the winter cover of Winfield is non-linear. Winfield thus fails to disclose an intermediate portion defining a first linear border spanning between first and second edges at an upper side of a body, as required by amended independent claim 3. Neither does Winfield disclose a linear border at least partially overlapping with a wearer's neck, as required by amended independent claim 3. Additionally, a lower side border of the winter cover of Winfield runs around the lower torso of the wearer and/or extends substantially beyond the lower torso of the wearer, as shown in FIG. 11 of Winfield. Winfield does not disclose a lower border to partially overlap with the wearer's shoulder and the wearer's upper torso, as required by independent claim 3,” (Remarks Page 8).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Examiner believes Applicant is unjustifiably narrowing what can be described as a “border” in the art of Winfield as the Applicant’s own claimed invention does not possess the newly recited limitations. As seen in Winfield Fig. 5, there is a clear first linear border at #12 and a clear second linear border at #14. These first and second borders span the distance between the first and second edges, while also covering the body as recited (Fig. 11). See 35 USC 102 rejection above.
Applicant submits that the dependent claims are patentable based on their dependencies from claim(s) 3 and 15; however, as discussed in the rejection and in the arguments above, claim(s) 3 and 15 are not allowable over the prior art. Therefore, these arguments have not been found convincing and the rejections of the independent claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and/or 103 have been maintained.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAQUEL M. WEIS whose telephone number is 571-272-6804. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 0800-1700.
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, ALISSA J. TOMPKINS can be reached on 571-272-3425. 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.
/RAQUEL M. WEIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/HEATHER MANGINE, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732