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 without traverse of claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 09/02/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09/02/2025.
Specification
The use of the terms LYCRA and CORDURA, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 8 recites “and the first and padded regions”. It appears it should recite --and the first and second padded regions--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a lower fastening region in claim 1.
Claim limitation “lower fastening region” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “region” as a substitute for means coupled with functional language “fastening” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic place holder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the corresponding structure of the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation “lower fastening means” described in the specification includes hook and loop (Applicant’s specification, [0006] ).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a lower fastening region" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, it will be interpreted as --the lower fastening region--.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a lower fastening region configured to receive the distal strap ends, such that when wrapped around the back of a user’s knee” in lines 14-15 which is indefinite. It is not clear what is being wrapped around the user’s knee i.e. a lower fastening region, the distal strap ends or the inner notch of the padded area. For the purposes of examination the limitation will be interpreted as --a lower fastening region configured to receive the distal strap ends, such that when the first and second straps are wrapped around the back of a user’s knee--.
As claims 2-12 depend from claim 1 they are rejected for at least the same reasons as claim 1.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "wherein each of the beveled inner edges" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as --wherein each of the beveled inner surfaces--.
The term “approximately” in claim 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as --a bevel angle of 40-50 degrees…a total angle of 80-100 degrees--.
The term “approximately” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as --an angle of 10-20 degrees--.
The term “approximately” in claim 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as --a thickness of 0.8 – 1.2 inches--.
As claims 6-7 depend from claim 5, they are rejected for at least the same reasons as claim 5.
The term “approximately” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as --beveled at a 45-degree angle and having a depth of 0.25 inches--.
Claims 8 and 11 contain the trademark/trade name LYCRA. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a fabric and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claim 9 and 12 contain the trademark/trade name CORDURA. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a fabric and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
The term “approximately” in claim 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of examination the limitations will be interpreted as – foam core inserts having a thickness of 0.8-1.2 inches…first and second straps extending outward at an angle of 10-20 degrees--.
As claims 11-12 depend from claim 10, they are rejected for at least the same reasons as claim 10.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeToro (US 7122016) in view of Bainbridge (US 5920915).
Regarding claim 1, DeToro discloses a kneepad apparatus (10) (Fig. 1; col. 2, lines 47-50) comprising: a kneepad body (41) having a first side configured to rest against a user's knee (Fig. 4; NOTE: side resting against a knee is implied to be an inner side not seen), and a second side opposite the first side (Fig. 4; Fig. 2); a padded area (Fig. 2 showing first and second padded regions) provided on a first side of the kneepad body (col. 4, lines 13-29), the padded area including a first padded region (annotated Fig. 2 below)
PNG
media_image1.png
794
1162
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and a second padded region (annotated Fig. 2) symmetrically situated on opposite sides of a central axis (annotated Fig. 2); a lower fastening region (13) (annotated Fig. 2; col. 2, lines 47-60; per 112f analysis above a fastening region includes hook and loop and fastening region 13 includes hook and loop thus the limitation is met) extending downward from a bottom end of the padded area along the central axis (annotated Fig. 2; see lower portion of sheath 13 extending from a bottom end [bottom inner side of the pad]); first (45B, 47A, annotated Fig. 2, Fig. 3 shows a first strap segment) and second straps (44B, 47B) (annotated Fig. 2 shows a second strap segment, Fig. 3, Fig. 4) extending outward, at a non-zero angle, from a top end of the padded area (Fig. 2; see the strap 44B extend from a top surface of the pad and the 45B extend from a top surface of the pad), wherein the first and second straps include distal strap ends (47C) (annotated Fig. 5 below);
PNG
media_image2.png
620
719
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and a lower fastening region (annotated Fig. 2 above) configured to receive the distal strap ends (Fig. 4), such that, when wrapped around the back of a user's knee (Fig. 4; Fig. 5; capable of intended use).
DeToro does not disclose a padded area including a first padded region and a second padded region symmetrically situated on opposite sides of a central axis, wherein each of the first and second padded regions include a beveled inner surface adjacent the central axis, such that the first and second padded regions are separated by an inner notch formed by the beveled inner surfaces, and the first and padded regions are hingedly connected at the central axis; the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee.
Bainbridge teaches an analogous kneepad apparatus (10) (Fig. 6, Fig. 7) comprising: an analogous kneepad body having an analogous first side configured to rest against a user's knee (annotated Fig. 7 below),
PNG
media_image3.png
815
933
media_image3.png
Greyscale
and an analogous second side opposite the first side (annotated Fig. 7); an analogous padded area provided on a first side of the kneepad body (Fig. 7), the padded area (col. 4, lines 48-57) including an analogous first padded region (annotated Fig. 7) and an analogous second padded region (annotated Fig. 7) symmetrically situated on opposite sides of an analogous central axis (annotated Fig. 7; Fig. 6; NOTE: along 34 is a central axis as seen in Fig. 6), wherein each of the first and second padded regions include a beveled inner surface adjacent the central axis (Fig. 6; NOTE: along 34 is a central axis as seen in Fig. 6; annotated Fig. 7; NOTE: angled surfaces are beveled), such that the first and second padded regions are separated by an inner notch (annotated Fig. 7) formed by the beveled inner surfaces (annotated Fig. 7), and the first and padded regions are hingedly connected at the central axis (col. 4, lines 48-57; NOTE: as the vertical segment 34 is at the central axis and as it is a fold line that helps the knee pad 10 conform about the knee it follows that the knee pad is hingedly connected at the central axis at either side of the central axis); the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee (capable of intended use as a notch as seen in the annotated Fig. 7 above does not make contact with the knee and thus would not make contact with a scar on a user’s knee).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the kneepad body of the apparatus of DeToro such that a padded area including a first padded region and a second padded region is symmetrically situated on opposite sides of a central axis, wherein each of the first and second padded regions include a beveled inner surface adjacent the central axis, such that the first and second padded regions are separated by an inner notch formed by the beveled inner surfaces, and the first and padded regions are hingedly connected at the central axis; the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee, as taught by Bainbridge, in order to provide an improved kneepad apparatus that helps the knee pad to conform about the knee and to bend with the natural flex of the knee joint (Bainbridge, col. 4, lines 32-57).
DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above.
The combination further discloses a lower fastening region configured to receive the distal strap ends, such that, when wrapped around the back of a user's knee, the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee (DeToro discloses a lower fastening region configured to receive the distal strap ends, such that, when wrapped around the back of a user's knee as described above and Bainbridge teaches the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee thus the combination of the references discloses a lower fastening region configured to receive the distal strap ends, such that, when wrapped around the back of a user's knee, the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee).
Regarding claim 2, DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1.
Bainbridge further teaches wherein each of the beveled inner edges have a bevel angle of approximately 40-50 degrees, such that the inner notch subtends a total angle of approximately 80-100 degrees (see annotated Fig. 7 below where each of the beveled inner edges have a bevel angle of approximately 45 degrees which adds up to a total angle of approximately 90 degrees which is within the range claimed).
PNG
media_image4.png
445
549
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The combination does not explicitly disclose wherein each of the beveled inner edges have a bevel angle of approximately 40-50 degrees, such that the inner notch subtends a total angle of approximately 80-100 degrees.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the beveled inner edges of the kneepad apparatus of DeToro in view of Bainbridge have a bevel angle of approximately 40-50 degrees, such that the inner notch subtends a total angle of approximately 80-100 degrees, as Applicant has appeared to place no criticality on the claimed range (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0006] recites that in an example there are two facing 45-degrees angles combining to form a 90 degree angle) and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220, F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 3, DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1.
DeToro further discloses wherein the first and second straps extend from the top end of the padded area at an angle (Figs. 2-4)
The combination does not disclose wherein the first and second straps extend from the top end of the padded area at an angle of approximately 10-20 degrees.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the first and second straps of the kneepad apparatus of DeToro in view of Bainbridge extend from the top end of the padded area at an angle of approximately 10-20 degrees, as Applicant has appeared to place no criticality on the claimed range (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0006] recites that in an example kneepad that a pair of straps extend outward from the top of padded region 201 at a non zero angled of about 10-20 degrees) and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220, F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 4, DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1.
DeToro further disclose wherein the distal strap ends connect to the lower fastening region via hook-and-loop fastening regions (col. 3, lines 46-61; col. 2, lines 47-60; Fig. 4; NOTE: the straps themselves have hook and loop as well as the plate to which the straps connect which is connected to the lower fastening region via hook and loop).
Regarding claim 5, DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1.
Bainbridge further teaches wherein the first and second padded regions include foam core inserts (col. 3, line 52 to col. 4, line 12; NOTE: the basic structure of the pad is overfilled with closed cell foam beads that may be a variety of shapes and sizes and are within an outer casing [Fig. 7] and are thus foam core inserts) having a thickness (col. 3, line 52 to col. 4, line 12, NOTE: beads could be larger than about 0.5 inches).
DeToro in view of Bainbridge does not explicitly disclose foam core inserts having a thickness of approximately 0.8 - 1.2 inches.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the foam core inserts of the kneepad apparatus of DeToro in view of Bainbridge are having a thickness of approximately 0.8 - 1.2 inches, as Applicant has appeared to place no criticality on the claimed range (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0008] recites “The thickness of insert 300 may vary depending upon the structural characteristics and geometry of the foam core insert. In one embodiment, the insert is a one-inch dense foam core material) and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220, F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 6, DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 5.
Bainbridge further teaches wherein each of the foam core inserts include horizontal troughs (40) (Fig. 8; col. 4, lines 32-57; NOTE: two troughs are formed about the seam 40 as seen in annotated Fig. 8 below and it follows that two troughs would be formed about the other seam 40 [not shown in cross section])
PNG
media_image5.png
452
717
media_image5.png
Greyscale
oriented perpendicular to the central axis (annotated Fig. 6 below).
PNG
media_image6.png
536
693
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 6.
Bainbridge further teaches wherein the horizontal troughs include three troughs beveled at an angle and having a depth (see in annotated Fig. 8 above with regard to the seam 40 there are two horizontal troughs shown thus it would follow that there are two additional horizontal troughs formed at the other horizontal seam 40 as seen in annotated Fig. 6 above with regard to the rejection to claim 6 and thus the limitation of three horizontal troughs is met).
DeToro in view of Bainbridge does not explicitly disclose wherein the horizontal troughs include three troughs beveled at approximately a 45-degree angle and having a depth of approximately 0.25 inches.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the three troughs of DeToro in view of Bainbridge are beveled at approximately a 45-degree angle, as Applicant has appeared to place no criticality on the claimed range (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0006] recites that in an example there are two facing 45-degrees angles combining to form a 90 degree angle) and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220, F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above.
DeToro in view of Bainbridge does not disclose three troughs having a depth of approximately 0.25 inches.
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice for the troughs of the kneepad apparatus of DeToro in view of Bainbridge to have a depth of approximately 0.25 inches as Applicant has not placed any criticality or provided evidence of unexpected results on the claimed depth (Applicant’s specification at [0013] recites that quarter-inch-deep horizontal troughs are gouged out as shown in Figs. 3A and 3B but does not indicate criticality or unexpected results). MPEP 2144.04 IV A. recites:
In Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Here, troughs of approximately 0.25 inches would not perform differently than the prior art device of DeToro in view of Bainbridge and thus the claimed device is not patently distinct from the prior art device.
Regarding claim 10, DeToro discloses a kneepad apparatus (10) (Fig. 1; col. 2, lines 47-50) configured to be worn by a user having a vertical knee scar (capable of intended use), the kneepad apparatus comprising: a kneepad body (41) having a first side configured to rest against a user's knee (Fig. 4; NOTE: side resting against a knee is implied to be an inner side not seen), and a second side opposite the first side (Fig. 4; Fig. 2); a padded area (annotated Fig. 2 above with regard to the claim 1 rejection showing first and second padded regions) provided on a first side of the kneepad body (col. 4, lines 13-29), the padded area including a first padded region (annotated Fig. 2 with regard to the rejection to claim 1) and a second padded region (annotated Fig. 2 with regard to the rejection to claim 1) symmetrically situated on opposite sides of a central axis (annotated Fig. 2 with regard to claim 1); a lower fastening region (13) (annotated Fig. 2 above with regard to the claim 1 rejection; col. 2, lines 47-60; per 112f analysis above a fastening region includes hook and loop and fastening region 13 includes hook and loop itself and via the straps which have hook and loop thus the limitation is met) extending downward from a bottom end of the padded area along the central axis(annotated Fig. 2 above with regard to claim 1; see lower portion of sheath 13 extending from a bottom end [bottom inner side of the pad]); first (45B, 47A, annotated Fig. 2 shows a first strap segment, Fig. 3) and second straps (44B, 47B) (annotated Fig. 2 shows a second strap segment, Fig. 3, Fig. 4) extending outward at an angle from a top end of the padded area (Fig. 2; see the strap 44B extend from a top surface of the pad and the 45B extend from a top surface of the pad), wherein the first and second straps include distal strap ends (47C) (annotated Fig. 5 above with regard to the claim 1 rejection); and a lower fastening region (annotated Fig. 2 above with regard to the claim 1 rejection; Fig. 4) including a hook-and-loop fastener configured to receive the distal strap ends (col. 3, lines 46-61; col. 2, lines 47-60; Fig. 4; NOTE: the straps are received within the slots of the plate 15 and the plate 15 is secured to the fastening region with hook and loop thus the hook-and-loop fastener of the fastening region 13 is configured to receive the distal strap ends via the plate to which the straps connect which is connected to the lower fastening region via hook-and-loop so the hook and loop ), such that, when wrapped around the back of a user's knee ; Fig. 4; Fig. 5; capable of intended use).
DeToro does not disclose wherein each of the first and second padded regions include a beveled inner surface adjacent the central axis, such that the first and second padded regions are separated by an inner notch having an angle of 80-100 degrees formed by the beveled inner surfaces, and the first and padded regions are hingedly connected at the central axis; wherein the first and second padded regions include foam core inserts having a thickness of approximately 0.8 - 1.2 inches; and wherein each of the foam core inserts include at least one horizontal trough oriented perpendicular to the central axis; the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, the vertical scar on the user's knee; first and second straps extending outward at an angle of approximately 10-20 degrees from a top end of the padded area.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the first and second straps of the kneepad apparatus of DeToro in view of Bainbridge extending outward from a top end of the padded area are extending outward at an angle of approximately 10-20 degrees, as Applicant has appeared to place no criticality on the claimed range (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0006] recites that in an example kneepad that a pair of straps extend outward from the top of padded region 201 at a non zero angled of about 10-20 degrees) and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220, F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
DeToro discloses the invention as described above.
DeToro fails to disclose wherein each of the first and second padded regions include a beveled inner surface adjacent the central axis, such that the first and second padded regions are separated by an inner notch having an angle of 80-100 degrees formed by the beveled inner surfaces, and the first and padded regions are hingedly connected at the central axis; wherein the first and second padded regions include foam core inserts having a thickness
Bainbridge teaches an analogous kneepad apparatus (10) (Fig. 6, Fig. 7) comprising: an analogous kneepad body having an analogous first side configured to rest against a user's knee (annotated Fig. 7 above with regard to the claim 1 rejection), and an analogous second side opposite the first side (annotated Fig. 7); an analogous padded area provided on a first side of the kneepad body (Fig. 7), the padded area (col. 4, lines 48-57) including an analogous first padded region (annotated Fig. 7) and an analogous second padded region (annotated Fig. 7) symmetrically situated on opposite sides of an analogous central axis (annotated Fig. 7; Fig. 6; NOTE: along 34 is a central axis as seen in Fig. 6), wherein each of the first and second padded regions include a beveled inner surface adjacent the central axis (Fig. 6; NOTE: along 34 is a central axis as seen in Fig. 6; annotated Fig. 7; NOTE: angled surfaces are beveled), such that the first and second padded regions are separated by an inner notch (annotated Fig. 7) having an angled of 80-100 degrees formed by the beveled inner surfaces (see annotated Fig. 7 above with regard to the rejection to claim 2 which shows a total angle of approximately 90 degrees which is within the claimed range), and the first and padded regions are hingedly connected at the central axis (col. 4, lines 48-57; col. 4, lines 48-57; NOTE: as the vertical segment is at the central axis and as it is a fold line that helps the knee pad 10 conform about the knee it follows that the knee pad is hingedly connected at the central axis at either side of the central axis); the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee (capable of intended use as a notch as seen in the annotated Fig. 7 above does not make contact with the knee and thus would not make contact with a scar on a user’s knee) wherein the first and second padded regions include foam core inserts (col. 3, line 52 to col. 4, line 12; NOTE: the basic structure of the pad is overfilled with closed cell foam beads that may be a variety of shapes and sizes and are within an outer casing [Fig. 7] and are thus foam core inserts) having a thickness (col. 3, line 52 to col. 4, line 12, beads could be larger than about 0.5 inches).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the kneepad body of the apparatus of DeToro such that a padded area including a first padded region and a second padded region symmetrically situated on opposite sides of a central axis, wherein each of the first and second padded regions include a beveled inner surface adjacent the central axis, such that the first and second padded regions are separated by an inner notch having an angle of 80-100 degrees formed by the beveled inner surfaces, and the first and padded regions are hingedly connected at the central axis; wherein the first and second padded regions include foam core inserts having a thickness; the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee, as taught by Bainbridge, in order to provide an improved kneepad apparatus that helps the knee pad to conform about the knee and to bend with the natural flex of the knee joint (Bainbridge, col. 4, lines 32-57).
DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above.
The combination further discloses a lower fastening region configured to receive the distal strap ends, such that, when wrapped around the back of a user's knee, the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee (DeToro discloses a lower fastening region configured to receive the distal strap ends, such that, when wrapped around the back of a user's knee as described above and Bainbridge teaches the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee thus the combination of the references discloses a lower fastening region configured to receive the distal strap ends, such that, when wrapped around the back of a user's knee, the inner notch of the padded area is aligned with, but does not contact, a scar on a user's knee).
DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above.
DeToro in view of Bainbridge does not explicitly disclose an inner notch having an angle of 80-100 degrees formed by the beveled inner surfaces and foam core inserts having a thickness of approximately 0.8-1.2 inches.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the first and second padded regions are separated by an inner notch having an angle of 80-100 degrees formed by the beveled inner surfaces, as Applicant has appeared to place no criticality on the claimed range (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0006] recites that in an example there are two facing 45-degrees angles combining to form a 90 degree angle) and to provide that the foam core inserts of the kneepad apparatus of DeToro in view of Bainbridge are having a thickness of approximately 0.8 - 1.2 inches, as Applicant has appeared to place no criticality on the claimed range (Applicant’s specification paragraph [0008] recites “The thickness of insert 300 may vary depending upon the structural characteristics and geometry of the foam core insert. In one embodiment, the insert is a one-inch dense foam core material) and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 220, F. 2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim(s) 8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeToro (US 7122016) in view of Bainbridge (US 5920915) as applied to claim 1 and 10 respectively above, and in further view of Lee (US 2021/0127867).
Regarding claims 8 and 11, DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as provided above with regard to claim 1 and claim 10 respectively.
Bainbridge further teaches that the kneepad body has a casing (col. 4, lines 32-57).
The combination does not disclose wherein the kneepad body comprises a Lycra fabric material.
Lee teaches analogous pad body (inner cushion, [0101]) having a casing that comprises a Lycra fabric material ([00101]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the casing of the kneepad apparatus of DeToro in view of Bainbridge is a Lycra fabric material, as taught by Lee, in order to provide an improved kneepad apparatus that that is stretchable (Lee, [0010]).
DeToro in view of Bainbridge and in further view of Lee discloses the invention as described above.
The combination further discloses wherein the kneepad body comprises a Lycra fabric material (As the kneepad body of Bainbridge includes a casing and as Lee teaches the casing comprises a Lycra fabric material, it follows that the kneepad body comprises a Lycra fabric material in the combination).
Claim(s) 9 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeToro (US 7122016) in view of Bainbridge (US 5920915) as applied to claim 1 and 10 respectively above, and in further view of Moreno (US 10794664).
Regarding claim 9 and 12, DeToro in view of Bainbridge discloses the invention as described above with regard to claim 1 and 10, respectively above.
DeToro in view of Bainbridge does not disclose wherein the first and second straps comprise a Cordura fabric material.
Moreno teaches an analogous strap comprising a Cordura fabric material (col. 4, lines 6-22).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to provide that the first and second straps of the kneepad apparatus of DeToro in view of Bainbridge comprise a Cordura fabric material as taught by Moreno in order to provide an improved kneepad apparatus that provides an additional cushion (Moreno, col. 4, lines 6-22).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GINA MCCARTHY whose telephone number is (408)918-7594. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00-3:30 PT.
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, Alireza Nia can be reached at 571-270-3076. 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.
/G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3786
/OPHELIA A HAWTHORNE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3786