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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/30/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. No. 5,421,044 to Steensen.
Claim 15, Steenson discloses a method of producing an inflatable product comprising connecting a supplemental layer defined by an upper rectangular ring 24a and an inflatable body (31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,42,45) by sewing (col. 3 lines 20-51), thereby producing sewing holes at locations where the upper rectangular ring and the inflatable body are connected wherein the sewing holes do not communicate with an interior of the inflatable body so as to avoid air leakage from the interior of the inflatable body through the sewing holes (fig. 2 & 5).
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) 1-4, 14, and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. No. 5,421,044 to Steensen in view of U.S. Pub No. 2013/0230671 to Lin.
Claim 1, Steensen discloses an inflatable product, comprising an inflatable body 10 comprising a first wall defined by a lower rectangular ring 24b and a first auxiliary sheet defined by a reinforcing strip 24c joined/fused with each other [Fused is customarily defined as to join together to form a single entity, or to become joined]; and a supplemental layer defined by an upper rectangular ring 24a capable of covering the first wall and fixed to the reinforcing strip of the inflatable body by sewing (col. 3 lines 20-51). Steensen is silent to gluing the first wall and first auxiliary sheet. Lin discloses a plurality of means for mechanically joining and affixing materials together for an inflatable structure such as an adhesive device or a sewing machine to join strands to weld strips (i.e. any strip of material suitable for affixation to another material, whether by application of heat, application of adhesive, mechanical joining methods such as sewing)[0087]. Selecting from a plethora of known means of joining/affixing/fusing is considered an obvious modification and it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the fusing/joining/affixing means disclosed in Lin with the inflatable product of Steensen with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided an equivalent and alternative means to fuse/affix/join the first wall and first auxiliary sheet of Steensen.
Claim 2, Steenson discloses the inflatable product wherein the inflatable body further comprises a second wall defined by a vertical panel 18 joined with the reinforcing strip; and lower rectangular ring and the vertical panel do not overlap each other.
Claim 3, Steenson discloses the inflatable product wherein the lower rectangular ring is substantially perpendicular to the vertical panel when the inflatable body is inflated to expand.
Claims 4, 14, and 18-19, Steenson discloses all of the limitations as stated above and a method of producing wherein the upper rectangular ring 24a and the reinforcement strip 24c are sewn by sewing threads, the lower rectangular ring 24b and the reinforcement strip 24c are joined along a first joining line defined by the overlapped edges of the reinforcement outer edges with the sewing threads illustrated by the (X) disposed inside the first joining line to form a closed shape, and the vertical panel 16 and the reinforcing strip 24c are joined along via a second joining line defined the outer edge of the upper rectangular ring 24a with the first joining line disposed inside the second joining line (fig. 5) (col. 3 lines 20-51).
Claims 16-17, Steensen, as modified, discloses the method of producing the inflatable product, but is silent to a first portion connected to the first wall by fusion or gluing. Lin discloses a plurality of means for mechanically joining and affixing materials together for an inflatable structure such as joining a first portion defined by weld strips 31 to strands defining second portions by utilizing a sewing machine to mechanically join first portions to second portions wherein the weld strip refers to any strip of material suitable for affixation to another material whether by application of heat, application of adhesive, or mechanical joining methods such as sewing [0087]. Selecting from a plethora of known means of joining/affixing/fusing is considered an obvious modification and it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the fusing/joining/affixing means disclosed in Lin with the inflatable product of Steensen with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided an equivalent and alternative means to fuse/affix/join the first wall and first auxiliary sheet of Steensen.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 7-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0226912 to Mileti et al. in view of U.S. Pub No. 2013/0230671 to Lin.
Claim 1, Mileti discloses an inflatable product, comprising an inflatable body 15 comprising a first wall defined by an upper surface of a support 17 and a first auxiliary sheet defined by a side rail sheet 39 fused via seal (C) with each other [0045]; and a supplemental layer defined by a top sheet 23 capable of covering the first wall and fixed to the first auxiliary sheet of the inflatable body. Mileti is silent to joining layers by sewing and/or gluing. Lin discloses a plurality of means for mechanically joining and affixing materials together for an inflatable structure such as an adhesive device or a sewing machine to join strands to weld strips (i.e. any strip of material suitable for affixation to another material, whether by application of heat, application of adhesive, mechanical joining methods such as sewing)[0087]. Selecting from a plethora of known means of joining is considered an obvious modification and it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the sewing disclosed in Lin with the inflatable product of Mileti with
a reasonable expectation of success because it would have provided an equivalent and alternative means to join the top sheet and the auxiliary sheet of Mileti.
Claim 2, Mileti discloses the inflatable product wherein the inflatable body further comprises a second wall defined by a side rail 19 fused with the seal (C); and the upper surface and the side rail do not overlap each other.
Claim 3, Mileti discloses the inflatable product wherein the upper surface of the support is substantially perpendicular to a vertical surface of the side rail when the inflatable body is inflated to expand.
Claim 7, Mileti discloses the inflatable product, but is silent to a tension element. Lin discloses tensioning elements 3 [0020]-[0022]. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the tensioning elements in Lin with the inflatable product of Mileti with a reasonable expectation of success because it would have maintained the inflatable product in a desired geometric arrangement when the product of Mileti is pressurized.
Claim 8, Mileti, as modified, discloses the inflatable product wherein the tension element of Lin is made of fabric [0062].
Claim 9, Mileti, as modified, discloses the inflatable product wherein Lin further comprises a fusible element defined by weld strips 31 wherein the weld strips are fused with the inflatable body, and the tension element 32 is connected to the weld strips to pull the inflatable body through the weld strips when the inflatable body is inflated. Claim 10, Mileti, as modified, discloses the inflatable product wherein the tension element of Lin is capable of being connected to the fusible element by sewing or adhesion [0087].
Claim 11, Mileti, as modified, discloses the inflatable product, wherein the tension element of Lin is connected to the inflatable body by fusion [0087].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Contrary to the Applicant’s arguments that the use of fusing or sewing are not equivalent means of connecting, Lin explicitly discloses a plurality of means of connecting portions of an inflatable product such as employing a thermos-fusion device such as a welder that uses heat to join two plastic materials together, a high-frequency welder, in which electromagnetic waves take advantage of excitable chemical dipoles in the plastic material to soften and join the materials to one another, or any suitable welding method for a particular material and process, an adhesive to join strands 32 to weld strips 31, or a gluing device, a sewing machine to mechanically join weld strips 31 to strands 32 wherein a "weld strip" is referred to any strip of material suitable for affixation to another material, whether by application of heat, application of adhesive, mechanical joining methods such as sewing and riveting [0087]. Similarly, the Applicant also establishes the plurality of widely known means to connect components together such as "fusion bonding," or "welding," that refer to joining fabric components by applying heat, pressure, ultrasonic energy, radio-frequency energy, or a thermoplastic or adhesive layer, film, tape, or resin, so that adjacent material surfaces or an intermediate bonding material soften, melt, activate, cure, or otherwise bond the components together (pages 6 and 7 of Remarks). However, the Applicants’ original specification fails to provide any support for welding or joining fabric components by an application of heat as a means of connecting. The Applicant’s original specification merely supports the means of connecting as sewing or fusion by way of gluing. Once again, the original specification fails to provide any support for welding or joining fabric components by an application of heat as a means of connecting as argued by the Applicant. As previously stated, merely selecting from a plethora of known means of joining is considered an obvious modification and one having ordinary skill in the art would not have found it novel or inventive to combine the fusing/joining/affixing means disclosed in Lin with the inflatable product of Steensen or Mileti that would have yielded predictable results that provide an equivalent and alternative means to fuse/affix/join the first wall and first auxiliary sheet of Steensen or Mileti.
Contrary to the alleged assertion that the Applicant's invention produces unexpected and superior results. The evidence relied upon does not compare any unexpected or superior results with the closest prior art. The article produced by a manufacturer of welding machines for inflatable products does not rise to the level of a declaration because it does not provide factual evidence establishing a nexus to patentability. To be given substantial weight in the determination of obviousness or nonobviousness, evidence of secondary considerations must be relevant to the subject matter as claimed. It is well settled that unexpected results must be established by factual evidence. However, the Applicant has not presented any independent experimental or empirical data showing that the Applicant’s methods perform unexpectedly better than the inflatable product of Steensen or Mileti in view of Lin. Due to the absence of tests comparing Applicant' s methods with those of the combination of Steensen in view of Lin or Mileti et al. in view of Lin, the Examiner has concluded that Applicant' s assertions of unexpected results constitute mere argument and establish no factual evidence. Therefore, the arguments of counsel and the statements from a variety of expert' s opinion cannot take the place of evidence in the record. The factual evidence is preferable to opinion and does not sufficiently weigh on the ultimate legal conclusion at issue nor is it considered evidence in the case. The submission of objective beliefs, statements, or opinions of patentability does not mandate a conclusion of patentability. Without any comparative data being evaluated in the evidence, the Applicant' s evidence of secondary considerations fails to establish a factual and legally sufficient connection between the objective evidence of nonobviousness and the claimed invention. The evidence relied upon in the form of statements and opinions do not establish that the differences in results of comparative data are in fact unexpected and unobvious and of both statistical and practical significance. The evidence relied on are mere conclusions and preferences and are not entitled to the weight of conclusions with no accompanying factual evidence in the specification. The Applicant' s evidence does not compare the claimed subject matter with the inflatable support of Steensen with the connecting means of Lin and is not effective to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness.
The Examiner agrees that the secondary evidence does establish that both industrial sewing and fabric welding are common methods that are well known to one skilled in the art. However, the opinions expressed in the article produced by a manufacturer of welding machines do not factually and legally provide a sufficient connection between the secondary evidence of fabric welding being preferred for waterproof products as compared with that of the inflatable product of Steenson or Mileti with the merely selecting an equivalent and alternative connection means of Lin. Therefore, the opinions and preferences expressed in the article do not rise to the level of declarations because they do not provide factual evidence establishing a nexus to patentability since the opinions are not relevant to the subject matter as claimed. Furthermore, the Applicant' s evidence fails to compare the claimed subject matter with the inflatable product of Steenson or Mileti with the connecting means in Lin and is not effective to rebut a prima facie case of obviousness. The secondary evidence does not rise to the level of declarations because they are merely statements the expert' s belief and preference and not factual evidence. The arguments of counsel or the statements of an expert's opinion cannot take the place of evidence in the record in claiming unexpected results, commercial success, or long-felt but unsolved needs. To be given substantial weight in the determination of obviousness or nonobviousness, evidence of secondary considerations must be relevant to the subject matter as claimed, and that there is a nexus between the merits of the claimed invention and the evidence of secondary considerations. The term “nexus” designates a factually and legally sufficient connection between the objective evidence of nonobviousness and the claimed invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 12-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0169274 to Boso et al. discloses having a layer connected to an inflatable product by adhesives, electronic welding, or sewing.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,694,372 to Boyd discloses members of an inflatable product being connected by sewing, sonic welding, dielectric seaming, or other known methods.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FREDRICK C CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-7040. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached on (571) 270-3654. 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.
/FREDRICK C CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights