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 .
This action is in response to the documents received on May 14, 2026.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 14, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed May 14, 2026 with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejections of the pending claims as amended have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of CODOS and COHEN as detailed below.
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, 4, 6-8, 12-15, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CODOS (US 10,617,224) in view of COHEN (US 9,060,616).
In reference to claims 1 and 6, CODOS discloses a method of making a string of springs comprising: wrapping a first ply of a piece of fabric 405 to oppose a second ply of the piece of fabric 405 around a plurality of springs 422, 424 and joining 412 a first ply of the piece of fabric to a second ply of the piece of fabric with a longitudinal seam to define a plurality of pockets 408 joined by transverse seams (figure 16), at least one spring 422, 424 in each pocket; welding 419 the first and second plies to create mini-pockets 414; inserting foam 426 through (an opening of) the fabric into each of the mini-pockets 414. Figures 5 & 11 of CODOS discloses an embodiment wherein the string of springs are formed by extending the longitudinal seam 31 from a top edge to a bottom edge of the fabrics surfaces joined together, such that the mini pocket and the pocket containing the spring share a common longitudinal seam.
CODOS does not disclose injecting chemicals into the mini-pockets that react to form the foam. COHEN teaches a method of making a string of packages (figure 1A) comprising: welding (column 3 lines 7-11) a first and second ply of material to form a longitudinal seam 5 that defines a pocket 4; injecting 28 liquid chemicals through an opening 3 defined by a closed end (figure 3A) of the pocket and allowing the chemicals to react to create a foam pad (column 5 lines 52-66). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified the method of CODOS by replacing the step of inserting a solid foam with the step of injecting (foam) chemicals since packaging prior art, such as CODOS and COHEN, recognizes the selection of any of these known steps to package foam within plies of film would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, figure 16 of CODOS further discloses the springs 422 in the spring pockets 408 are separated 420 from the mini-pockets 414.
With respect to claims 7 and 14, Figure 7 illustrates an embodiment of strings formed from the disclosed process; wherein a second/different foam is pocketed in the string of pockets. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have further modified the method of CODOS, particularly the embodiment of inserting a second foam into a mini-pocket, by injecting a second/different foam into a mini-pocket since
In reference to claims 8, 12 and 13, CODOS discloses a method of making a string of springs comprising: wrapping a first ply of a piece of fabric 405 to oppose a second ply of the piece of fabric 405 around a plurality of springs 422, 424 and joining 412 a first ply of the piece of fabric to a second ply of the piece of fabric with a transverse seam 410 to define a plurality of pockets 408 (figure 16), at least one spring 422, 424 in each pocket; welding the plies of fabric along a longitudinal seam 434 extending along a side of the plies; welding 419 the first and second plies along a seam 420 parallel to the longitudinal seam 434 to create mini-pockets 414; inserting foam 426 through (an opening of ) the fabric into each of the mini-pockets 414. Although the embodiment of CODOS illustrated in figures 15 and 16 provides mini-pockets having a width that is smaller than the width of the pockets housing the springs, figure 5 and column 7 lines 2-20 discloses an alternative embodiment where the transverse seam forming the pockets of the springs is shared with the transverse seam forming the mini-pocket housing the foam. As such, CODOS supports the knowledge in the art to form a mini-pock having the same width as that of the pocket housing the spring.
CODOS does not disclose injecting chemicals into the mini-pockets that react to form the foam. COHEN teaches a method of making a string of packages (figure 1A) comprising: welding (column 3 lines 7-11) a first and second ply of material to form a longitudinal seam 5 that defines a pocket 4; injecting 28 liquid chemicals through an opening 3 defined by a closed end (figure 3A) of the pocket and allowing the chemicals to react to create a foam pad (column 5 lines 52-66). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified the method of CODOS by replacing the step of inserting a solid foam with the step of injecting (foam) chemicals since packaging prior art, such as CODOS and COHEN, recognizes the selection of any of these known steps to package foam within plies of film would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claims 15, 18 and 19, CODOS discloses a method of making a string of springs comprising: wrapping a first ply of a piece of fabric 404 to oppose a second ply of the piece of fabric 404 around a plurality of springs 422, 424 such that the first ply is on an opposite side of the springs 422, 424 as the second ply; joining 412 the first ply of the piece of fabric to the second ply of the piece of fabric with a transverse seam 410 to define a plurality of (oversized) pockets 408 (figure 16), at least one spring 422, 424 in each pocket 408; further welding 444 the plies of fabric along a separating seam 420 to create mini-pockets 414; inserting foam through (an opening of) the fabric 426 into each of the mini-pockets 414. Figures 5 & 11 of CODOS discloses an embodiment wherein the string of springs are formed by extending the longitudinal seam 31 from a top edge to a bottom edge of the fabrics surfaces joined together, such that the mini pocket and the pocket containing the spring share a common longitudinal seam.
CODOS does not disclose wrapping the springs into pockets formed by the plies prior to forming the mini-pockets in-which the foam is inserted. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to wrap the springs and join the webs prior to forming the mini-pockets and inserting the foam therein; such that, the mini-pockets would be empty as claimed when the springs are wrapped within the pockets. It has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts or steps involves only routine skill in the art.1
CODOS also does not disclose injecting chemicals into the mini-pockets that react to form the foam. COHEN teaches a method of making a string of packages (figure 1A) comprising: welding (column 3 lines 7-11) a first and second ply of material to form a longitudinal seam 5 that defines a pocket 4; injecting 28 liquid chemicals through an opening 3 defined by a closed end (figure 3A) of the pocket and allowing the chemicals to react to create a foam pad (column 5 lines 52-66). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to have modified the method of CODOS by replacing the step of inserting a solid foam with the step of injecting (foam) chemicals since packaging prior art, such as CODOS and COHEN, recognizes the selection of any of these known steps to package foam within plies of film would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 2, 3, 5, 9, 10, 11, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CODOS (US 10,617,224) in view of COHEN (US 9,060,616), and further in view of PARKER et al. (US 8,623,931).
Regarding claims 2, 3, 9, 10, 11 and 16, CODOS in view of COHEN discloses injecting foam chemicals into a closed end of pockets to form a packaged string of springs and foam; however, there is no disclosure of what chemicals create the foam.
PARKER et al. teaches packaging foam (column 1 lines 22-30) wherein the foam is formed from chemicals including blowing agents, polyols, silicone surfactant, water, amine catalyst, isocyanate, and tin additives (column 1 lines 36-44; column 3 lines 52-67; column 21 lines 42-65). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to further modified the method of CODOS to provide a foam including the claimed chemicals since column 1 lines 22-35 of PARKER et al. suggests such compositions are known in the packaging art for purpose of various densities of foam and column 5 lines 11-15 states the inclusion of additives provides various advantages, including fire resistance and reinforcement. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (i.e. packaging).2
With respect to claims 5 and 17, CODOS in view of COHEN discloses injecting foam chemicals through an open end of fabric wrapped/folded and welded to form pockets; however, there is no disclosure of what chemicals create the foam.
PARKER et al. teaches packaging foam (column 1 lines 22-30) wherein the foam is formed from chemicals additives (column 5 lines 11-15; column 21 lines 42-65). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the invention to further modified the method of CODOS to provide a foam including an additive since column column 5 lines 11-15 states the inclusion of additives provides various advantages, including fire resistance and reinforcement. Furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (i.e. packaging).3
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to the attached PTO-892 for a notice of references cited and recommended for consideration based on their disclosure of limitations related to the claimed invention of wrapping spring elements and foam within a string of pockets .
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLORIA R WEEKS whose telephone number is (571)272-4473. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-2pm & 5pm-7pm 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, Shelley Self can be reached at 571-272-4524. 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.
Other helpful telephone numbers are listed for applicant's benefit:
Allowed Files & Publication (888) 786-0101
Assignment Branch (800) 972-6382
Certificates of Correction (703) 305-8309
Fee Questions (571) 272-6400
Inventor Assistance Center (800) PTO-9199
Petitions/special Programs (571) 272-3282
Information Help line 1-800-786-9199
/GLORIA R WEEKS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
May 29, 2026
1 In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
2 In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
3 In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Prosecution Insights