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 1-14 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.
Regarding claim 1, the recitation “when viewed from a wearer of the compression garment” has no clear and definite meaning as to the specific structural relationship being claimed.
Regarding claim 3, lines 3-4, the recitation “an unchanged number of stitches at a first end and a reduced number of stitches at a second end” is indefinite as to what the stitches are unchanged from or reduced from. Also note similar indefinite recitations in lines 6, 8, and 10. Additionally, it is unclear as to what is considered a “reversal point”. Claim 4 contains comparable indefinite recitations.
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 1-4, 7 and 9-10 insofar as definite are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Perron et al. (US 5,787,732).
As seen at least in annotated figure 3, Perron teaches the knitted compression garment (1) as claimed including a knitted (column 2, line 62) fabric defining at least one indentation, wherein the at least one indentation is a concave indentation, and wherein, in the intended use, the knitted fabric forms an inwardly curved surface at the indentation when viewed from a wearer of the compression garment. The preamble statement as “flatknitted” is a method of making recitation that does not provide any specific knit structure and therefor is not germane to the patentability of the product itself. Additionally the recitation of intended use,“the knitted fabric forms an inwardly curved surface at the indentation when viewed from a wearer of the compression garment”, does not provide any specific structure. Even so Perron’s knitted compression garment of is capable of such use.
PNG
media_image1.png
572
552
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the recitation of intended use, “lies against a concave body shape of the wearer”, does not provide any specific structure. Even so Perron’s knitted compression garment of is capable of such use. Regarding claim 3, insofar as definite Perron teaches knitted fabric forming the concave indentation in a first row of stitches comprises an unchanged number of stitches at a first end and a reduced number of stitches at a second end, wherein the knitted fabric forming the concave indentation in a second row of stitches comprises an unchanged number of stitches at both the first and second ends, wherein the knitted fabric forming the concave indentation in a third row of stitches comprises a reduced number of stitches at both the first and second ends, and wherein the knitted fabric forming the concave indentation comprises, up to a reversal point, a decreasing number of stitches per row of stitches over several rows of stitches. Regarding claim 4, the knitted fabric forming the concave indentation comprises a number of stitches per row of stitches which increases again from the reversal point over several rows of stitches. Regarding claim 7, the compression garment (1) is a compression pants (figures 1-3), wherein the knitted fabric comprises a leg part (7), a front body part (figure 1) and a rear body part (figure 2), wherein the leg part and the front body part are knitted in one piece without a seam running between them, wherein the concave indentation is knitted in a groin area of the compression pants at a transition between the leg part and the front body part, such that the knitted fabric lies against a groin of the wearer in the intended use, and wherein the rear body part is connected to the front body part and the leg part by a seam (8). Regarding claim 9, the shape of the indentation is adapted to the shape of the groin of the wearer as seen at least in figure 1. Regarding claim 10, the recitation of intended use as a “treatment of medical conditions such as lipedema, lymphedema and phlebedema” does not provide any specific structure. Even so Perron’s knitted compression garment of is capable of being used in such a manner. Regarding claim 11, the recitation “knitted right-left” is a method of making limitation that does not provide any specific knit structure.
Claims 1-5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gaither et al. (US 2023/0027589).
As seen at least in annotated figure 1, Gaither teaches the knitted compression garment (10) as claimed including a knitted (figure 9) fabric defining at least one indentation, wherein the at least one indentation is a concave indentation, and wherein, in the intended use, the knitted fabric forms an inwardly curved surface at the indentation when viewed from a wearer of the compression garment. The preamble statement as “flatknitted” is a method of making recitation that does not provide any specific knit structure and therefor is not germane to the patentability of the product itself. Additionally the recitation of intended use,“the knitted fabric forms an inwardly curved surface at the indentation when viewed from a wearer of the compression garment”, does not provide any specific structure. Even so Gaither’s knitted compression garment of is capable of such use.
PNG
media_image2.png
778
1034
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the recitation of intended use, “lies against a concave body shape of the wearer”, does not provide any specific structure. Even so Gaither’s knitted compression garment of is capable of such use. Regarding claim 3, insofar as definite Gaither teaches knitted fabric forming the concave indentation in a first row of stitches comprises an unchanged number of stitches at a first end and a reduced number of stitches at a second end, wherein the knitted fabric forming the concave indentation in a second row of stitches comprises an unchanged number of stitches at both the first and second ends, wherein the knitted fabric forming the concave indentation in a third row of stitches comprises a reduced number of stitches at both the first and second ends, and wherein the knitted fabric forming the concave indentation comprises, up to a reversal point, a decreasing number of stitches per row of stitches over several rows of stitches. Regarding claim 4, the knitted fabric forming the concave indentation comprises a number of stitches per row of stitches which increases again from the reversal point over several rows of stitches. Regarding claim 5, the knitted fabric comprises a knitting thread (B) and a weft thread (E) inserted in at least every second row of stitches, wherein the knitting thread and the weft thread are elastic (given their knit loop construction), and wherein at least the knitting thread and the weft thread comprise at least a single-coated elastane core (E). Regarding claim 11, the recitation “knitted right-left” is a method of making limitation that does not provide any specific knit structure.
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, 12, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perron et al. (US 5,787,732).
Perron teaches the knitted compression garment (1) substantially as claimed as seen at least in annotated figure 3 and as set forth in the rejection to claim 7, including a leg part (7), a front body part (figure 1) and a rear body part (figure 2), wherein the leg part and the front body part are knitted in one piece, wherein the concave indentation is knitted in a groin area of the compression pants. Perron does not expressly set froth the angle of between about 100 degrees and about 150 degrees or 110 degrees and about 130 degrees. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose from different angle for the concave indentation for the purpose of optimizing the compression is specific areas of the garment including the groin and upper leg.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaither et al. (US 2023/0027589).
Gaither teach the invention substantially as claimed as indicated previously in the rejection to claim 5. Gaither further teaches the knitted fabric comprises a plating yarn (P1, P2). However, it is not specifically set forth as a texturized polyamide yarn. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose from different yarn materials including texturized polyamide, e.g. textured nylon, for the purpose of providing well-known textured nylon properties of softness, durability and abrasion resistance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant is reminded that all business with the Patent and Trademark Office should be transacted in writing. The action of the Patent and Trademark Office will be based exclusively on the written record in the Office. No attention will be paid to any alleged oral promise, stipulation, or understanding in relation to which there is disagreement or doubt. 37 C.F.R. 1.2
Further it is noted that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.111, including:
-The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references.
-A general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section.
-Moreover, The prompt development of a clear issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims. Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06, MPEP 714.02. The "disclosure" includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANNY WORRELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4997. The examiner can normally be reached on M, W-F.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Khoa Huynh can be reached at 571-272-4888. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANNY WORRELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
ldw