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 .
This is a non-final Office action responsive to the reply filed on 07/07/2026.
Claims 15 and 16 have been amended.
Claims 1-52 are pending.
Amended drawing changes to Figs. 51 and 52 were filed for entry.
Claim Objections
Claims 17, 18, 21 and 25 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 17, line 3 “wherein the compression” should be - - wherein compression - -.
Claim 17, line 3 “the first tape” should be - - the first tape segment - -.
Claim 17, line 3 “the second tape” should be - - the second tape segment - -.
Claim 17, line 6 “the third tape” should be - - the third tape segment - -.
Claim 17, line 6 “the fourth tape” should be - - the fourth tape segment - -.
Claim 18, line 2 “the first tape” should be - - the first tape segment - -.
Claim 21, line 2 “the first tape” should be - - the first tape segment - -.
Claim 21, line 4 “the second tape” should be - - the second tape segment - -.
Claim 21, line 5 “the third tape” should be - - the third tape segment - -.
Claim 21, line 6 “the fourth tape” should be - - the fourth tape segment - -.
Claim 25, line 2 “the length” should be - - a length - -.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 15-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Myerscough et al. (US Patent No. 11,033,081), in view of Matsuda et al. (US Patent No. 9,265,308).
Regarding claim 15, Myerscough et al. discloses a slide fastener sealing system comprising:
(a) a slide fastener comprising:
(i) a first slide fastener segment comprising a first tape segment, a second tape segment, fastening elements positioned along the first and second tape segments (see annotated Fig. 9),
(ii) a second slide fastener segment comprising a third tape segment, a fourth tape segment, fastening elements positioned along the third and fourth tape segments (see annotated Fig. 9),
(iii)wherein the first slide fastener segment overlaps the second slide fastener segment (see annotated Fig. 9), and
wherein a sealing zone forming a passage is located between the overlap of the first and second slide fastener segments (see annotated Fig. 9); and
(b) a sealing member comprising a sealing body positionable in the passage to resist fluid movement through the passage when the fastening elements engage the first and second tape segments together and engage the third and fourth tape segments together (see annotated Fig. 9);
(c) wherein, when the sealing member is positioned in the passage and the fastening elements engage the first and second tape segments together and engage the third and fourth tape segments together (see annotated Fig. 9).
Myerscough et al. does not disclose,
a first element fill on the first tape segment between at least some of the fastening elements;
a second element fill on the second tape segment between at least some of the fastening elements;
a third element fill on the third tape segment between at least some of the fastening elements;
a fourth element fill on the fourth tape segment between at least some of the fastening elements; and
the first, second, third, and fourth element fills block a fluid flow path along the passage in gaps between the fastening elements.
However, Matsuda et al. teaches element fills (9) on the tape segments (3) between at least some of the fastening elements (10), and gap between the fastening elements (10) (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first, second, third, and fourth tape segments from Myerscough et al. by adding element fill on each tape segment as taught by Matsuda et al. in order to seal between the tape segments when the tape segments are together and engage.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein:
(a) when the fastening elements (10) engage the first and second tape segments together, the first element fill (9) compresses against the fastening elements (10) of the second tape segment and the second element fill (9) compresses against the fastening elements (10) of the first tape segment (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.); and
(b) when the fastening elements (10) engage the third and fourth tape segments together, the third element fill (9) compresses against the fastening elements (10) of the fourth tape segment and the fourth element fill (9) compresses against the fastening elements (10) of the third tape segment (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.);
wherein the compression of each of the first element fill (9), the second element fill (9), the third element fill (9), and the fourth element fill (9) against the fastening elements resists penetration of fluid along a length of the passage (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein:
(a) when the fastening elements (10) engage the first and second tape segments together, an inner edge of the first tape compresses against an inner edge of the second tape to resist penetration of fluid through the first slide fastener segment (1) (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.); and
(b) when the fastening elements (10) engage the third and fourth tape segments together, an inner edge of the third tape compresses against an inner edge of the fourth tape to resist penetration of fluid through the second slide fastener segment (1) (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein an inner edge of the first element fill (9) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the first tape (see annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein a height of the first element fill (9) from the first tape segment is less than a height of the fastening elements (10) from the first tape segment that are positioned along the first tape segment (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein fastening elements of the second tape segment extend over the first element fill when the fastening elements engage the first and second tape segments together; wherein fastening elements (10) of the first tape segment extend over the second element fill (9) when the fastening elements (10) engage the first and second tape segments together; wherein fastening elements (10) of the fourth tape segment extend over the third element fill (9) when the fastening elements (10) engage the third and fourth tape segments together; and wherein fastening elements (10) of the third tape segment extend over the fourth element fill (9) when the fastening elements (10) engage the third and fourth tape segments together (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein: (a) an inner edge of the first element fill (9) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the first tape; (b) an inner edge of the second element fill (9) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the second tape; (c) an inner edge of the third element fill (9) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the third tape; and (d) an inner edge of the fourth element fill (9) is coextensive with or inset relative to the inner edge of the fourth tape (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses, wherein, when the sealing member is positioned in the passage and the fastening elements (10) engage the first and second tape segments together and engage the third and fourth tape segments together, the first, second, third, and fourth element fills (9) compress against heads of the fastening elements (10) (see annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the first, second, third, and fourth element fills (9) are only located along part of a length of the first and second slide fastener segments (1) (see Fig. 1 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the first, second, third, and fourth element fills (9) are a deformable material molded onto the first, second, third, and fourth tape segments between the fastening elements (10) in the sealing zone (see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al.).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the fluid flow path comprises a tortious fluid flow path between opposing fastening elements (10) along the length of the passage (spaces between (10) see Fig. 1 from Matsuda et al).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the fluid flow path comprises a first tortious fluid flow path between opposing fastening elements (10) of the first and second tape segments and a second tortious fluid flow path between opposing fastening elements (10) of the third and further fourth tape segments (spaces between (10) see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al).
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Myerscough et al. in view of Matsuda et al. discloses wherein the first tortious fluid flow path is bounded by and in between the first and second tape segments and the sealing body; and wherein the second tortious fluid flow path is bounded by and in between the third and fourth tape segments and the sealing body (spaces between (10) see Fig. 1 and annotated Fig. 4 from Matsuda et al).
PNG
media_image1.png
320
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
357
884
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 15-27 have been considered but are moot because this second non-final Office action is to correct typographic errors from the previous Office action.
The element fill (5), the first element fill (5), the second element fill (5), the third element fill (5), and the fourth element fill (5) has been corrected to the element fills (9), the first element fill (9), the second element fill (9), the third element fill (9), and the fourth element fill (9). Also, annotated figure 4 from Matsuda et al. was added for clarification.
Examiner’s Comment
In view of applicant’s amendments to the drawings and claims submitted in the reply filed on 07/07/2026, the drawing objections indicated in the prior Office action have been withdrawn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOUIS A MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-5388. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Jason W. San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
/LOUIS A. MERCADO/
Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/SPE, Art Unit 3677
