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 with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on November 24, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims of Groups I-III, as amended by Applicant in the reply, include a common inventive concept that is not known from Vissman (i.e., US 2016/0136452) as cited in the restriction requirement. This is not found persuasive because although the claims of Groups I-III, as amended by applicant, require the shared technical feature identified by Applicant of the legging patternings being formed “by printing with a printing ink compounded with a mineral powder or a blended ore powder”, this technical feature is not a special technical feature, as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of Vissman.
As discussed in additional detail in the rejection of the claims below, Vissman teaches forming tape by printing with a printing ink compounded with a mineral powder or a blended ore powder (See Vissman, [0082], [0114], [0129], [0213], [0220]; articles of apparel, such as tape, includes mineral bioceramics applied to one or more portions of the articles of apparel; powered materials include tourmaline; articles, such as tape, can be formed via printing methods using bioceramic material).
Therefore, the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Status of the Claims
As directed by the amendment received on November 24, 2025, claims 1-3, 5-7, 11-12, 15-19, 22-23 have been amended, and claims 4, 13-14, and 20-21 have been canceled. Accordingly, claims 1-3, 5-12, 15-19, and 22-24 are currently pending in this application with claims 17-19 and 22-24 being withdrawn from further consideration.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because at least Figs. 5-6 and 11-12 as originally filed are not line drawings but photographs that are of insufficient quality to be readable and reproducible for publication. Moreover, Photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications. The Office will accept photographs in utility and design patent applications, however, if photographs are the only practicable medium for illustrating the claimed invention. See: 37 CFR 1.84(b)(1). In the instant case, line drawings can be used to illustrate the claimed invention, as evidenced by the remainder of the figures which are line drawings.
The drawings are further objected to because Figs. 5-6 and 11-12 each include descriptive text that should be removed from the drawings and added to the written description of the specification, if desired, and accompanied by corresponding reference characters.
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 – Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
At lines 2-3, “To make available leggings that […] can improve movement capacity” refers to the purported merits of the invention and should be removed
At line 5, “Leggings 100 involving the present invention” is implied phraseology and should be removed. It is suggested that the sentence instead begin “Leggings are furnished with […]”.
It is suggested that the reference characters be removed from the abstract
At line 12, the formatted text “Selected Drawing: Fig. 1” should be removed from the abstract
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Specification – Disclosure
The disclosure is objected to because at least at [0038], [0049], [0054], [0058], [0077], and [0099], the reference character “84” is used to refer to different parts such as “biceps femoris muscles” and “gastrocnemius muscles”. Additionally, reference character “84” in Fig. 12 also includes the text “peroneus longus muscle”. The reference character “84” should be used consistently throughout the application. Clarification and appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
In general, the use of italicized formatting should be removed from throughout the claims.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
At line 1, “for clothing” should read “configured for clothing”
At line 3, “for covering” should read “configured for covering”
At line 5, “are” should read “are:”
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
At line 1, “for clothing” should read “configured for clothing”
At line 3, “for covering” should read “configured for covering”
At line 4, “are” should read “are:”
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities:
At line 1, “for clothing” should read “configured for clothing”
At line 3, “for covering” should read “configured for covering”
At line 4, “are” should read “are:”
At line 7, “included” should read “including”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 15-16 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 “areas corresponding with an upper side of knees of the wearer […]” at lines 8-10. It is unclear what position on the leggings is intended by the limitation, as the exact position of a knee of a wearer varies from wearer to wearer. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with an upper side of knees of the wearer […]”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 1 further recites the limitation “areas corresponding with the upper side of the knees of the wearer […]” at lines 11-13. It is unclear what position on the leggings is intended by the limitation, as the exact position of a knee and other anatomy of a wearer varies from wearer to wearer. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with the upper side of knees of the wearer […]”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 2 recites the limitation that the patternings are “in a bilateral-symmetrical geometry” at lines 1-4. It is unclear if each of the recited patternings are meant to be in bilateral symmetry with one another or are meant to have bilateral symmetry across some other unrecited structure. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “in a bilateral-symmetrical geometry across the leggings, wherein a respective one of each of the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings are disposed on each of a first leg and a second leg of the leggings main part”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 3 recites the limitation that the patternings “include a taping medium affixed to at least one of an obverse side or a reverse side of the leggings main part” at lines 3-5. It is unclear how the printed patternings (as now recited in claim 1) can have also have a taping medium, as Applicant discloses that these two forms are opposed to one another at [0051] of Applicant’s disclosure. Furthermore, it is unclear which side is considered an “obverse” side, as the obverse side would be dependent on which side an observer is facing. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that “an obverse side or a reverse side” instead read “a front side or a rear side of the leggings main part”. That said, the claim appears to be directed to a mutually exclusive embodiment than the embodiment previously established in claim 1. It is suggested that the claim be canceled. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood when applying prior art. See rejection under 112(d) below for additional discussion.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “areas corresponding with an upper side of knees of the wearer […]” at lines 7-9. It is unclear what position on the leggings is intended by the limitation, as the exact position of a knee of a wearer varies from wearer to wearer. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with an upper side of knees of the wearer […]”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “areas corresponding with the upper side of the knees of the wearer […]” at lines 10-12. It is unclear what position on the leggings is intended by the limitation, as the exact position of a knee and other anatomy of a wearer varies from wearer to wearer. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with the upper side of knees of the wearer […]”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “areas corresponding with a lower side of the knees of the wearer […]” at lines 20-22. It is unclear what position on the leggings is intended by the limitation, as the exact position of a knee and other anatomy of a wearer varies from wearer to wearer. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with a lower side of knees of the wearer […]”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “areas corresponding with a portion of the peroneus brevis muscles of the wearer” at lines 23-24. It is unclear what position on the leggings is intended by the limitation, as the muscles and anatomy of a wearer varies from wearer to wearer. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with a portion of the peroneus brevis muscles of the wearer”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “an area corresponding with Achilles tendons of the wearer […]” at lines 25-27. It is unclear what position on the leggings is intended by the limitation, as the muscles and anatomy of a wearer varies from wearer to wearer. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with Achilles tendons of the wearer […]”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 7 further recites a first, a second, a third, and a fourth legging patternings before then reciting a sixth, a seventh, an eighth, a ninth, and a tenth legging patterning. It is unclear how there can be a sixth legging patterning and beyond without the presence of a fifth legging patterning. It is further unclear if the claim is attempting to imply the presence of some unrecited fifth legging patternings and whether these unrecited fifth patternings are required by the claim or not. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that Applicant either explicitly recite an additional fifth legging patterning or the claimed legging patternings be renumbered in consecutive, numerical order without gaps in counting. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood wherein the sixth legging patternings are the fifth patternings and so forth wherein an unrecited fifth legging patterning is not required by the claim when applying prior art.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “a herringboning-skis-like pattern” at line 2. It is unclear what shape or pattern is exactly being claimed due to the use of indefinite language. It is unclear what is considered herringboning-skis let alone being “like” herringboning-skis. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “a configuration of two lengths extending up and away from one another” or some other alternative language. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “a wedging-skis-like pattern” at line 2. It is unclear what shape or pattern is exactly being claimed due to the use of indefinite language. It is unclear what is considered wedging-skis let alone being “like” wedging-skis. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “a configuration of two lengths extending up and toward one another” or some other alternative language. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 15 recites the limitation that the patternings are “in a bilateral-symmetrical geometry” at lines 1-6. It is unclear if each of the recited patternings are meant to be in bilateral symmetry with one another or are meant to have bilateral symmetry across some other unrecited structure. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “in a bilateral-symmetrical geometry across the leggings, wherein a respective one of each of the [recited legging patternings] are disposed on each of a first leg and a second leg of the leggings main part”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “an area corresponding with Achilles tendons of the wearer […]” at lines 12-14. It is unclear what position on the leggings is intended by the limitation, as the muscles and anatomy of a wearer varies from wearer to wearer. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with Achilles tendons of the wearer […]”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 16 further recites a first legging patterning before then reciting a sixth, a ninth, and a tenth legging patterning. It is unclear how there can be sixth and ninth legging patternings without the presence of the remaining intervening, consecutively numbered legging patternings (i.e., a second, a third, etc.). It is further unclear if the claim is attempting to imply the presence of some unrecited legging patternings and whether these unrecited patternings are required by the claim or not. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. It is suggested that Applicant either explicitly recite the missing, additional legging patternings or the claimed legging patternings be renumbered in consecutive, numerical order without gaps in counting. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood wherein despite the numbering, only four total legging patternings are required by the claim when applying prior art.
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 8-12, and 15 are also rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
An effort has been made to identify all indefinite language with the pending claims. However, Examiner notes the above listing of 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejections may not be conclusive, and Applicant is required to review every claim for compliance to 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) so as to facilitate a clear understanding of the claimed invention and proper application of the prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 3, as best can be understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 3 recites the limitation that the patternings “include a taping medium affixed to at least one of an obverse side or a reverse side of the leggings main part” at lines 3-5. Applicant discloses that printed patternings (as recited in claim 1) and those having a taping medium are mutually exclusive and opposed to one another at [0051] of Applicant’s disclosure. Therefore, claim 3 fails to limit the subject matter of claim 1 from which it depends. It is suggested that the claim be canceled. See rejection under 112(b) above for additional discussion.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claims 1-3, 5-12, and 15-16, as best can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
Claim 1 recites the limitation “areas corresponding with an upper side of knees of the wearer […]” at lines 8-10. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with an upper side of knees of the wearer […]”
Claim 1 recites the limitation “areas corresponding with the upper side of the knees of the wearer […]” at lines 11-13. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with the upper side of knees of the wearer […]”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “areas corresponding with an upper side of knees of the wearer […]” at lines 7-9. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with an upper side of knees of the wearer […]”.
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “areas corresponding with the upper side of the knees of the wearer […]” at lines 10-12. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with the upper side of knees of the wearer […]”.
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “areas corresponding with a lower side of the knees of the wearer […]” at lines 20-22. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with a lower side of knees of the wearer […]”.
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “areas corresponding with a portion of the peroneus brevis muscles of the wearer” at lines 23-24. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with a portion of the peroneus brevis muscles of the wearer”.
Claim 7 further recites the limitation “an area corresponding with Achilles tendons of the wearer […]” at lines 25-27. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with Achilles tendons of the wearer […]”.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “an area corresponding with Achilles tendons of the wearer […]” at lines 12-14. In order to overcome this rejection, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “areas configured to correspond with Achilles tendons of the wearer […]”.
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 8-12, and 15 are also rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-12, and 15-16, as best can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2013/0160189 to Yang (hereinafter, “Yang”) in view of US 2016/0136452 to Vissman et al. (hereinafter, “Vissman”).
Regarding claim 1, Yang teaches leggings for clothing a lower half of the a body of a wearer, the leggings comprising: a leggings main part for covering legs of the wearer; and a leggings opening in an upper end of the leggings main part (See Yang, Figs. 4 & 6; tights (10) with taping patterns and having waist to be worn; [0045]; abstract); wherein formed on the leggings main part are first legging patternings configured to follow a portion of iliotibial bands of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang below; first patternings are capable of following a portion of hypothetical iliotibial bands of a hypothetical wearer; Examiner notes that the term "portion" is very broad and merely means "a section or quantity within a larger thing; a part of a whole" (Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)), second legging patternings in areas corresponding with an upper side of knees of the wearer, along an origin of vastus medialis muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang below; second patternings are capable of corresponding with a hypothetical upper side of knees of a hypothetical wearer as claimed), third legging patternings in areas corresponding with the upper side of the knees of the wearer, along an origin of the vastus lateralis muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang below; third patternings are capable of corresponding with a hypothetical upper side of knees of a hypothetical wearer as claimed), and fourth legging patternings configured to follow a portion of biceps femoris muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang below; fourth patternings are capable of following a portion of hypothetical biceps femoris muscles of a hypothetical wearer).
PNG
media_image1.png
539
614
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang
That said, although Yang teaches the presence of various taping patterns on the leggings, Yang is silent to wherein, contained in each of the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings is a mineral powder of at least one kind, or a blended ore powder of two or more of radium ore, germanium, quartz, terahertz ore, or tourmaline, and wherein each of the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings is formed by printing with a printing ink compounded with the mineral powder or the blended ore powder.
However, Vissman, in a related therapeutic apparel art, is directed to articles of apparel, including tape, that incorporates bioceramic materials therein (See Vissman, abstract). More specifically, Vissman teaches wherein, contained in each of the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings is a mineral powder of at least one kind, or a blended ore powder of two or more of radium ore, germanium, quartz, terahertz ore, or tourmaline (See Vissman, [0082], [0114], [0213], [0220]; articles of apparel, such as tape, includes mineral bioceramics applied to one or more portions of the articles of apparel; powered materials include tourmaline), and wherein each of the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings is formed by printing with a printing ink compounded with the mineral powder or the blended ore powder (See Vissman, [0129]; articles, such as tape, can be formed via printing methods using the bioceramic material; Examiner also notes that “printing with a printing ink” is a product-by-process limitation; the resulting structure of the prior art, i.e., a tape article including the bioceramic material, meets the structural requirements of the claim limitation).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to include the bioceramic material disclosed by Vissman in the taping patterns of Yang for a variety of reasons including for example, but not limited to, including a material capable of radiating infrared energy that can be used in the treatment of various conditions (See Vissman, abstract; [0003]-[0004]).
Regarding claim 2, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 1) further teaches wherein the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings each are in a bilateral-symmetrical geometry (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; all patternings have bilateral symmetry between left and right legs of the leggings).
Regarding claim 3, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 1) further teaches wherein the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings each include a taping medium affixed to at least one of an obverse side or a reverse side of the leggings main part (See Vissman, Figs. 4 & 6; taping includes at least one medium to be attached to a side of the leggings; [0035]).
Regarding claim 6, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 1) further teaches wherein formed on the leggings main part further are fifth legging patternings configured to follow a portion of gastrocnemius muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; fifth patternings are capable of following a portion of hypothetical gastrocnemius muscles of a hypothetical wearer).
Regarding claim 7, Yang teaches leggings for clothing a lower half of a body of a wearer, the leggings comprising: a leggings main part for covering legs of the wearer (See Yang, Figs. 4 & 6; tights (10) with taping patterns and having waist to be worn; [0045]; abstract); wherein formed on the leggings main part are first legging patternings configured to follow a portion of iliotibial bands of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang below; first patternings are capable of following a portion of hypothetical iliotibial bands of a hypothetical wearer; Examiner notes that the term "portion" is very broad and merely means "a section or quantity within a larger thing; a part of a whole" (Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)), second legging patternings in areas corresponding with an upper side of knees of the wearer, along an origin of vastus medialis muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang below; second patternings are capable of corresponding with a hypothetical upper side of knees of a hypothetical wearer as claimed), third legging patternings in areas corresponding with the upper side of the knees of the wearer, along an origin of vastus lateralis muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; third patternings are capable of corresponding with a hypothetical upper side of knees of a hypothetical wearer as claimed), fourth legging patternings situated configured to follow a portion of biceps femoris muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; fourth patternings are capable of following a portion of hypothetical biceps femoris muscles of a hypothetical wearer), sixth legging patternings including psoas major patterning sections configured to follow at least a portion of psoas major muscles of the wearer, and iliacus patterning sections configured to follow at least a portion of iliacus muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; sixth patternings including an inner arm of V-shape capable of following at least a portion of a hypothetical psoas major muscles of a hypothetical wearer, and an outer arm of V-shape capable of following at least a portion of hypothetical iliacus muscles of the wearer), seventh legging patternings in areas corresponding with a lower side of the knees of the wearer, on a portion of extensor digitorum longus muscles of the wearer and/or peroneus longus muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; seventh patternings capable of corresponding with a hypothetical lower side of the knees of a hypothetical wearer as claimed), eighth legging patternings in areas corresponding with a portion of peroneus brevis muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; eighth patternings capable of corresponding with a portion of hypothetical peroneus brevis muscles of a hypothetical wearer), ninth legging patternings extending from an area corresponding with Achilles tendons of the wearer configured to cover soleus muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; ninth patternings capable of extending from an area corresponding with hypothetical Achilles tendons of a hypothetical wearer as claimed), and tenth legging patternings including from gluteus minimus patterning sections configured to follow gluteus minimus muscles of the wearer, piriformis patterning sections configured to follow piriformis muscles of the wearer, and sacrotuberous patterning sections configured to follow sacrotuberous ligaments of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above and annotated portion of Fig. 6 of Yang below; tenth patternings include a first section capable of following hypothetical gluteus minimus muscles of a hypothetical wearer, a second section capable of following hypothetical piriformis muscles of a hypothetical wearer, and a third section capable of following hypothetical sacrotuberous ligaments of a hypothetical wearer; Examiner notes that the term "section" is very broad and merely means "one of several components; a piece" (Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)).
PNG
media_image2.png
401
498
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated portion of Fig. 6 of Yang
That said, although Yang teaches the presence of various taping patterns on the leggings, Yang is silent to wherein each of the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, the fourth legging patternings, the sixth legging patternings, the seventh legging patternings, the eighth legging patternings, the ninth legging patternings, and the tenth legging patternings is formed by printing with a printing ink compounded with mineral powder.
However, Vissman, in a related therapeutic apparel art, is directed to articles of apparel, including tape, that incorporates bioceramic materials therein (See Vissman, abstract). More specifically, Vissman teaches wherein each of the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, the fourth legging patternings, the sixth legging patternings, the seventh legging patternings, the eighth legging patternings, the ninth legging patternings, and the tenth legging patternings is formed by printing with a printing ink compounded with mineral powder (See Vissman, [0082], [0114], [0129], [0213], [0220]; articles of apparel, such as tape, includes mineral bioceramics applied to one or more portions of the articles of apparel; powered materials include tourmaline; articles, such as tape, can be formed via printing methods using bioceramic material; Examiner also notes that “printing with a printing ink” is a product-by-process limitation; the resulting structure of the prior art, i.e., a tape article including the bioceramic material, meets the structural requirements of the claim limitation).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to include the bioceramic material disclosed by Vissman in the taping patterns of Yang for a variety of reasons including for example, but not limited to, including a material capable of radiating infrared energy that can be used in the treatment of various conditions (See Vissman, abstract; [0003]-[0004]).
Regarding claim 8, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 7) further teaches wherein the sixth legging patternings have a V-shaped configuration (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; sixth patternings have V-shape configuration).
Regarding claim 9, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 7) further teaches wherein the seventh legging patternings have a herringboning-skis-like pattern (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; seventh patternings have a configuration of two lengths extending up and away from one another, i.e., a herringboning-skis-like pattern as best can be understood).
Regarding claim 10, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claims 7 and 9) further teaches wherein the second legging patternings and the third legging patternings have a wedging-skis-like pattern (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; second and third patternings have a configuration of two lengths extending up and toward one another, i.e., a wedging-skis-like pattern as best can be understood).
Regarding claim 11, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 7) further teaches wherein the eighth legging patternings have a configuration configured to cover a perimeter of legs of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; eighth patternings are capable of covering at least a perimeter of hypothetical legs of a hypothetical wearer).
Regarding claim 12, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 7) further teaches wherein the ninth legging patternings have a V-shaped configuration (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; ninth patternings have V-shape configuration).
Regarding claim 15, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 7) further teaches wherein the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, the fourth legging patternings, the sixth legging patternings, the seventh legging patternings, the eighth legging patternings, the ninth legging patternings, and the tenth legging patternings each are disposed in a bilateral- symmetrical geometry (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; all patternings have bilateral symmetry between left and right legs of the leggings).
Regarding claim 16, Yang teaches leggings for clothing a lower half of a body of a wearer, the leggings comprising: a leggings main part for covering legs of the wearer (See Yang, Figs. 4 & 6; tights (10) with taping patterns and having waist to be worn; [0045]; abstract); wherein formed on the leggings main part are first legging patternings configured to follow a portion of iliotibial bands of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang below; first patternings are capable of following a portion of hypothetical iliotibial bands of a hypothetical wearer; Examiner notes that the term "portion" is very broad and merely means "a section or quantity within a larger thing; a part of a whole" (Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)), sixth legging patternings included psoas major patterning sections configured to follow at least a portion of psoas major muscles of the wearer, and iliacus patterning configured to follow at least a portion of iliacus muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; sixth patternings including an inner arm of V-shape capable of following at least a portion of a hypothetical psoas major muscles of a hypothetical wearer, and an outer arm of V-shape capable of following at least a portion of hypothetical iliacus muscles of the wearer), ninth legging patternings extending from an area corresponding with Achilles tendons of the wearer configured to cover soleus muscles of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above; ninth patternings capable of extending from an area corresponding with hypothetical Achilles tendons of a hypothetical wearer as claimed), and tenth legging patternings including gluteus minimus patterning sections configured to follow gluteus minimus muscles of the wearer, piriformis patterning sections configured to follow piriformis muscles of the wearer, and sacrotuberous patterning sections configured to follow sacrotuberous ligaments of the wearer (See annotated Figs. 4 & 6 of Yang above and annotated portion of Fig. 6 of Yang above; tenth patternings include a first section capable of following hypothetical gluteus minimus muscles of a hypothetical wearer, a second section capable of following hypothetical piriformis muscles of a hypothetical wearer, and a third section capable of following hypothetical sacrotuberous ligaments of a hypothetical wearer; Examiner notes that the term "section" is very broad and merely means "one of several components; a piece" (Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)).
That said, although Yang teaches the presence of various taping patterns on the leggings, Yang is silent to wherein each of the first legging patternings, the ninth legging patternings, and the tenth legging patternings includes a mineral powder of at least one kind, or a blended ore powder including at least two of radium ore, germanium, quartz, terahertz ore, or tourmaline, and wherein each of the first legging patternings, the ninth legging patternings, and the tenth legging patternings is formed by printing with a printing ink compounded with the mineral powder or the blended ore powder.
However, Vissman, in a related therapeutic apparel art, is directed to articles of apparel, including tape, that incorporates bioceramic materials therein (See Vissman, abstract). More specifically, Vissman teaches wherein each of the first legging patternings, the ninth legging patternings, and the tenth legging patternings includes a mineral powder of at least one kind, or a blended ore powder including at least two of radium ore, germanium, quartz, terahertz ore, or tourmaline (See Vissman, [0082], [0114], [0213], [0220]; articles of apparel, such as tape, includes mineral bioceramics applied to one or more portions of the articles of apparel; powered materials include tourmaline), and wherein each of the first legging patternings, the ninth legging patternings, and the tenth legging patternings is formed by printing with a printing ink compounded with the mineral powder or the blended ore powder (See Vissman, [0129]; articles, such as tape, can be formed via printing methods using the bioceramic material; Examiner also notes that “printing with a printing ink” is a product-by-process limitation; the resulting structure of the prior art, i.e., a tape article including the bioceramic material, meets the structural requirements of the claim limitation).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to include the bioceramic material disclosed by Vissman in the taping patterns of Yang for a variety of reasons including for example, but not limited to, including a material capable of radiating infrared energy that can be used in the treatment of various conditions (See Vissman, abstract; [0003]-[0004]).
Claim 5, as best can be understood, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2019/130610 to Yoshida et al. (hereinafter, “Yoshida”).
Regarding claim 5, the modified leggings of Yang (i.e., Yang in view of Vissman, as applied to claim 1) is silent to wherein the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings each have a width of 30 mm or less.
However, Yoshida, in a related therapeutic apparel art, is directed to therapeutic clothing, including clothing for legs of a wearer, incorporating supportive tape (See Yoshida, Figs. 12-14; abstract). More specifically, Yoshida teaches wherein the first legging patternings, the second legging patternings, the third legging patternings, and the fourth legging patternings each have a width of 30 mm or less (See Yoshida, bottom of page 10 – top of page 11 of translation; width of supportive tape can be 10 mm).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to form the taping of the modified leggings of Yang to have the width disclosed by Yoshida in order to provide concentrated support to the particular underlying muscle groups without blurring of supportive force (See Yoshida, bottom of page 10 – top of page 11 of translation).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. US 2016/0270947 to Cho; US 2019/0239579 to Stricker; US 2015/0306441 to Yao; US 2005/0193461 to Callibotte et al.; US 2017/0354543 to Mazourik et al.; US 2004/0255358 to Ota et al.; US 2011/0209263 to Suzuki et al.; US 2019/0029336 to Collins et al.; and US 2011/0209267 to Rush et al. are each directed to articles of apparel, such as leggings, pants or other lower-body garments, having support bands, taping, or other structures thereon.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW R MARCHEWKA whose telephone number is (571) 272-4038. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM-5:00PM 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, CLINTON T OSTRUP can be reached at (571) 272-5559. 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.
/MATTHEW R MARCHEWKA/Examiner, Art Unit 3732