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
Claims 1-3 read on elected Species I.
Claims 4-14 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bopanna et al (US 2016/0295928) in view of Chou (US 2018/0073169).
Bopanna discloses infant clothes (see Figs. 1A-1C and 1G) including a back piece (110) having a front side thereof being respectively connected to a left front fly (115; Figs. 1B and 1G) and a right front fly (120; Figs. 1B and 1G), wherein at least one part at a back side of said left front fly (115) has a first fastening operation zone (155; Figs. 1B and 1G), and at least one part at a front side of said right front fly (120) has a second fastening operation zone (160; Figs. 1B and 1G) capable of being mutually fastened with said first fastening operation zone [0032-0033; 0035-0036]; wherein, said first fastening operation zone has a restraining material or a terry material (in para. 0035, Bopanna discloses that the securing mechanism is a hook and loop fastener, and teaches that the hook component 155 fastens to the loop component 160; the hook component forms a “restraining” material and the loop component forms “terry” material) and said second fastening operation zone has a terry material or a restraining material [0035-0036]; a surface of said terry material has a plurality of fibriform loops (the loops of the loop component [0035-0036]), and a surface of said restraining material has a plurality of restraining hairs (the hooks of the hook component [0035-0036]); when said restraining material is in contact with said terry material, said plurality of restraining hairs are mutually buckled and restrained with said plurality of fibriform loops for allowing said left front fly and said right front fly to be fastened and positioned [0035-0036].
Bopanna discloses all of the structure of claim 1 except that the hook and loop components are not specifically disclosed as being “fabric”, with the restraining fabric and the terry fabric fabricated with fibriform yarns. It is well known, however, to form hook and loop fastening components out of fabric. Chou discloses a hook and loop fastening structure comprising a restraining fabric (fabric structure 1a in Fig. 4 or Fig. 8) and a mating terry fabric (fabric structure 1b; Figs. 4 and 11), as in claim 1. Chou discloses the surface of the terry fabric has a plurality of fibriform loops (12; Figs. 4 and 8), and the surface of the restraining fabric has a plurality of restraining hairs (11; Figs. 4 and 7-8), wherein when said restraining fabric is in contact with said terry fabric, said plurality of restraining hairs are mutually buckled and restrained with said plurality of fibriform loops for the surfaces to be fastened and positioned [0005-0008, 0021-0024, 0031-0036]. Chou discloses the restraining fabric and the terry fabric are fabricated with fibriform yarns [0007-0008, 0021, 0026].
Specifically, Chou discloses the terry loop fabric (12) comprises fibriform loops, being “fabricated with fibriform yarns” (121) as described in paragraph 0026. The restraining fabric comprises a plurality of retraining hairs (11) and the restraining fabric is fabricated with fibriform yarns (111) as in claim 1 (see paragraph 0021). Chou specifically discloses that this forms a soft fabric structure which prevents damage and injury to the skin [0052], and thus would function to “prevent damage and injury to delicate skin of infants” as in claim 1. Also, the hook and loop structure disclosed by Chou is a soft fabric structure, as described in paragraphs 0051-0052, and one of skill in the art would recognize that this would generate less noise than harder, plastic hook and loop fasteners. Moreover, one of skill in the art would recognize that the amount of noise generated is a factor of the manner of use of the fastener; if separated slowly and carefully, one can avoid generation of noise. Thus, the fastener of Chou is capable of functioning as claimed (“wherein no noise is generated when said restraining fabric and said terry fabric are separated to prevent frightening the infants”).
Chou discloses that the fibriform hook and loop structure may be used as a fastener for an overlapping wrapping structure as shown in Fig. 5 of Chou (see Fig. 5 and para. 0031), and thus one of skill in the art would recognize that it would advantageous for the overlapping flaps of Bopanna in the same manner. Chou teaches that the use of this hook and loop fabric to fasten overlapping fabric parts is advantageous since it is more convenient to use and increases the wrapping surface area [0031]. Chou also teaches that the fastener provides advantages of being softer such that it does not irritate the skin [0052] and prevents snagging during laundering due to the soft structure [0052].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the fibriform hook and loop fabric of Chou for the restraining and terry materials of Bopanna in order to provide a more convenient connection, with a larger fastener surface area, as taught by Chou, and to provide a softer fastener which does not irritate the skin and does not snag during laundering, as also taught by Chou. The garment of Bopanna modified to have the restraining and terry fabric of Chou is capable of functioning as recited in claim 1, since it would prevent damage or injury to the wearer’s skin and is capable of being used in a manner to avoid generation of noise.
Regarding claim 3, Bopanna discloses said first fastening operation zone (155; Fig. 1G) occupies at least one third of an area of said left front fly (115) (see Fig. 1G wherein the zone 155 is shown as being at least one third of an area of front fly 115), and said second fastening operation zone (160; Fig. 1G) occupies at least one third of an area of said right front fly (120) (see Fig. 1G wherein the zone 160 is shown as being at least one third of an area of front fly 120), when said first fastening operation zone and said second fastening operation zone are mutually fastened, an overlapping area of said first fastening operation zone and said second fastening operation zone is decided according to a size of an infant (para. 0035 discloses that the hook and loop components may cover “a large portion” of the wings 115, 120 or may cover “the entire width” of the wing to provide a larger range of adjustability).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bopanna et al in view of Chou as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Senderowicz (US 5,418,979).
Bopanna in view of Chou renders obvious the infant clothes of claim 1, but Bopanna does not disclose sleeves as in claim 2. Bopanna does teach that the garment may be in the form of a jacket of a shirt [0021], and it is well known that jackets and shirts typically have sleeves.
Senderowicz discloses an infant sac which has a left sleeve and a right sleeve formed by the back piece, the left front fly and the right front fly (see Fig. 8; col. 3, lines 16-20; col. 3, line 55 through col. 4, line 27). Senderowicz teaches this provides a comfortable, secure covering for an infant which is easy to use (col. 1, lines 6-8; col. 2, lines 18-36). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide left and right sleeves in the garment of Bopanna in order to provide separate coverage for the arms of the infant while maintaining a comfortable, secure covering which is easy to apply as taught by Senderowicz. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to provide sleeves in the garment of Bopanna since Bopanna specifically discloses that the garment may be formed as a jacket or shirt, and jacket and shirt structures typically have sleeves to cover the arms as shown by Senderowicz.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with respect to Bopanna and Chou.
Applicant argues Bopanna does not disclose the restraining fabric and terry fabric of the infant clothes are fabricated with fibriform yarns to prevent damage or injury to delicate skin of infants or that no noise is generated when said restraining fabric and said terry fabric are separated to prevent frightening the infants. Though this is not disclosed by Bopanna, this is disclosed by Chou.
Applicant argues Chou does not disclose the restraining fabric and terry fabric of the infant clothes are fabricated with fibriform yarns to prevent damage or injury to delicate skin of infants, however the examiner notes Chou does disclose the claimed structure.
Specifically, Chou discloses the terry loop fabric (12) comprises fibriform loops, being “fabricated with fibriform yarns” (121) as described in paragraph 0026. The restraining fabric comprises a plurality of retraining hairs (11) and the restraining fabric is “fabricated with fibriform yarns” (111) as in claim 1 (see paragraph 0021). Chou specifically discloses that this forms a soft fabric structure which prevents damage and injury to the skin [0052], and thus would function to “prevent damage and injury to delicate skin of infants” as in claim 1.
As to the recitation in claim 1 that “no noise is generated when said restraining fabric and said terry fabric are separated to prevent frightening the infants”, this is a functional recitation which does not further distinguish the claimed structure over that of Bopanna modified in view of Chou. The hook and loop structure disclosed by Chou is a soft fabric structure, as described in paragraphs 0051-0052, and one of skill in the art would recognize that this would generate less noise than harder, plastic hook and loop fasteners.
Moreover, one of skill in the art would recognize that the amount of noise generated is a factor of the manner of use of the fastener. If the fasteners are separated slowly and carefully, one can avoid generation of noise. Since the hook and loop fastener of Chou is made of soft fabric, it is capable of functioning as claimed, because a user could separate the fasteners slowly and quietly.
Thus, the hook and loop fasteners of Chou have the claimed structure and are capable of functioning as claimed. As set forth in the rejection above, it would have been obvious to use the fibriform hook and loop fabric of Chou for the restraining and terry materials of Bopanna in order to provide a more convenient connection, with a larger fastener surface area, as taught by Chou, and to provide a softer fastener which does not irritate the skin and does not snag during laundering, as also taught by Chou.
Therefore the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY VANATTA whose telephone number is (571)272-4995. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs and alternate Fridays.
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 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.
/AMY VANATTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732