DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-11, 13-21, and 35-37 are pending. Claims 1-6, 18, 19, and 21 are amended.
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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on July 28, 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1-6, 18, 19, and 21 have been amended and claims 35-37 have been added. Thus, claims 1-11, 13-21, and 35-37are presently pending in this application.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §112(b) rejections, and introduced others.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §101 rejections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §103 rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-11, 13-21, and 35-37 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1, line 26 recites “a standing female user”, however “a standing female user is already recited in claim 1, line 11. Thus it is unclear if the claim attempts to introduce another person, and thus perhaps two different garments or if this refers to the same standing female user.
Claim 4, lines 3-4 recites “a standing female user”, however “a standing female user is already recited in claim 1, line 11. Thus it is unclear if the claim attempts to introduce another person, and thus perhaps two different garments or if this refers to the same standing female user.
Claim 15, line 3 recites “a standing female user”, however “a standing female user is already recited in claim 1, line 11. Thus it is unclear if the claim attempts to introduce another person, and thus perhaps two different garments or if this refers to the same standing female user.
Claim 19, line 3 recites “a standing female user”, however “a standing female user is already recited in claim 1, line 11. Thus it is unclear if the claim attempts to introduce another person, and thus perhaps two different garments or if this refers to the same standing female user.
The dependent claims inherit(s) the deficiency by nature of dependency.
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 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 1-6, 10, 11, 14-16, 18-21, 36, and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (US 20210069027) in view of Suga et al. (US 20050197643).
Regarding claim 1, Kashiwagi describes protective garment in the form of a pantie, a pair of trousers or other legwear with or without an upper/torso part (pads 1 attached to underwear, para. 0036) the protective garment being a washable garment arranged for repeated use by a female user (is “arranged” for repeated use inasmuch as claimed, any garment or liner can be washed and reused if desired by the user), comprising:
a crotch part (pad 1) having a leak-proof body,
wherein:
the leak-proof body comprises a central part (see annotated Fig. 4) and a respective side part (regions 14) arranged on either lateral side of the central part, each side part being configured to be arranged on a respective lateral side of the genitals of a standing female user wearing the protective garment (para. 0061);
each side part is an integrated part of the leak-proof body, in that the side part and the central part are formed as respective parts of one and the same connected material body (grooves 13 formed by compressing the sheet 10, para. 0053),
each side part is delimited from the central part by a respective curved fold line (lines 13 can be curved, Fig. 9A, para. 0063) the curved fold line being formed in the connected material body along the curved fold line by a local compression of a material of the connected material body (para. 0053), by an elongated cut-out of one or several material lavers of the connected material body, or by a combination thereof, so as to constitute a pre-formed bending region of the leak-proof body, and the curved fold line being defined by a center of curvature located laterally outside of the leak-proof body (see Fig. 5 depicting curved side part, and thus the center of curvature would be laterally outside the leak-proof body), and
respective end points of each of the curved fold lines are interconnected by a flexible element arranged with an elastic property such that (connected via elastically stretchable member 7, which are part of the pad 1 and thus are connected to each portion of the pad 1), when the protective garment is worn by a standing female user, the flexible element applies a tensile force drawing the end points together and thereby biases the respective side parts upwards relative to the central part (tensile force causes deformation of sheet 4, para. 0057).
Kashiwagi does not explicitly describe a front part; a back part; a waist.
In related are for protective garments, Suga describes a garment that has a front part (see Fig. 1, 11, 20); a back part (see Fig. 2, 18, 12); a waist (top of 17).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify Kashiwagi to include the garment of Suga in order to permit the pad 1 to be inserted into a garment in order to be useful. That is, Kashiwagi by itself without a garment to attach the pad to does not fulfill the purpose of Kashiwagi.
PNG
media_image1.png
797
285
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
421
312
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the tensile force causes the flexible element to be straight when the protective garment is worn by the female user and the flexible element as a result thereof is stretched or at least subjected to a pulling/tensile force (para. 0057 describes tensile force causing rising force).
Regarding claim 3, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein each of the side parts is free to move relative to any part of the protective garment other than the leak-proof body, apart from along the respective curved fold line (can bend along the fold line, in comparison to the body of the garment from Suga).
Regarding claim 4, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the tensile force forces the flexible elements upwards when the protective garment is worn by a standing female user, so as to form a cup-shape configured to cover the genitalia of the standing female user (see para. 0057 and Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 5. Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the protective garment is an undergarment of boxer type, having legs configured to extend somewhat down each leg of the standing female user (see Fig. 3, Suga).
Regarding claim 6, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 5, wherein legs of the protective garment are arranged to fit loosely (this depends on the size of the wearer’s legs, thus a person with thinner legs when wearing the garment would have a loose fit) rather than stretch around the legs of the standing female user.
Regarding claim 10, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the fold line is arranged to compress a material of the leak-proof body along the fold line (compressed, para. 0053).
Regarding claim 11, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the fold line is formed by one or several material layers having lateral end edges running along the fold line (see, e.g., Fig. 6 showing fabric sheets 10, 11 running along groove 13).
Regarding claim 14, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein each of the side parts is made of a material (nonwoven sheets 10, 11, which could be polyethylene, para. 0046, superabsorbent polymer 12) that is stiffer as compared to a liquid barrier layer (polyethylene sheet, para. 0036) of the protective garment (side parts include two layers of the same material as the liquid barrier layer and another material and thus would be stiffer).
Regarding claim 15, Kashiwagi as modified describes protective garment of claim 1, wherein each of the side parts is arranged to spring upwards as the crotch part is forced into a shape that curves upwards both ventrally and dorsally when the protective garment is worn by a standing female user (side parts stand upward when worn, para. 0055).
Regarding claim 16, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the fold line is elastic along its longitudinal direction (all materials have at least some elasticity, and thus the fold lines of Kashiwagi also include at least some elasticity).
Regarding claim 18, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein: the protective garment comprises a dorsal shaping element (elastic member 18), configured to be arranged along the intergluteal cleft of a standing female user wearing the protective garment, fastened to or constituting an integrated part of the leak-proof body (part of the undergarment from Suga which is fastened to the pad of Kashiwagi) and fastened to or constituting an integrated part of the back part (see Fig. 2, Suga), the back part comprises a panel part (hold part 17, Suga) separating the dorsal shaping element from the waist so that the dorsal shaping element does not extend all the way up to the waist of the protective garment (stops short of the waist), and the dorsal shaping element is arranged so that, when a dorsal/upward force is applied to the dorsal shaping element via the panel part as a result of the waist being pulled upwards, the dorsal shaping element in turn forces a part of the crotch part configured to extend along the intergluteal cleft upwards (is attached to the pad and thus pulling up the undergarment of Suga will pull up the pad of Kashiwagi).
Regarding claim 19, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 18, wherein the protective garment further comprises a pair of elongated ventral shaping elements (see annotated Fig. 6 of Suga below), configured to extend on either lateral side of the labia of a standing female user wearing the protective garment (this depends on the shape and size of the particular user, as modified the shaping elements are fully capable of extending as claimed), ventrally from the dorsal shaping element, and arranged so that, when a ventral/upward force is applied to the ventral shaping elements via the front part as a result of the waist being pulled upwards, the ventral shaping elements are in turn forced upwards (if pulled upwards, the shaping elements will also be pulled upwards).
PNG
media_image3.png
387
568
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 19, wherein the dorsal shaping element is directly connected to the ventral shaping elements (is sewn to 18), wherein the dorsal shaping element, together with the ventral shaping elements, form a "Y"-shape (the combined structure has a Y shape).
Regarding claim 21, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the crotch part is configured to extend along a path along the sagittal plane of a standing female user wearing the protective garment (configured to extend along a sagittal plane), at least part of the path being configured to extend along the intergluteal cleft of the standing female user, and the crotch part comprises, in order from an inner part of the crotch part to an outer part of the crotch part:
a flexible first layer (non-woven fabric sheet 10);
a flexible second liquid-absorbing material layer (super absorbent material 12), extending along the path; and
a flexible third liquid barrier layer (leak prevention sheet 2).
Regarding claim 36, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the curved fold line is constituted by a weld line locally compressing the material of the connected material body along the curved fold line (ultrasonic heat, para. 0053).
Regarding claim 37, Kashiwagi describes the protective garment of claim 1, wherein the curved fold line comprises an elongated cut-out (cut-out is deemed a product-by-process, the end result being the patentable feature, not the method of arriving at the end result) of one or several material layers of the connected material body, the cut-out being arranged perpendicularly to the fabric so as to define the curved fold line as an elongated depression (10 and 11 may be perforated and thus would include apertures or areas missing material and be deemed a “cut-out” inasmuch as claimed).
Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (US 20210069027) in view of Suga et al. (US 20050197643) and Hasegawa et al. (US 6807685).
Regarding claim 7, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, but does not explicitly describe wherein the leak-proof body is fastened along the curved fold line, so that the side part forms a parallel layer to another part of the protective garment not being a part of the leak-proof body, the side part and the other part being free to move in relation to one another, apart from along the curved fold line.
Rather, Kashiwagi is silent as to where the body is fastened to the garment.
In related art for protective garments, Hasegawa describes wherein the leak-proof body (crotch piece 5) is fastened along the curved fold line (fastened along 7, which in Hasegawa is where the garment can fold), so that the side part forms a parallel layer to another part of the protective garment (crotch piece 4, see Fig. 9) not being a part of the leak-proof body, the side part and the other part being free to move in relation to one another, apart from along the curved fold line (not bonded, free state, col. 7, ll. 61-67).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify to attach the pad along the folded areas in order to permit the pad to fold without the rest of the garment thereby providing the garment with a fine appearance after mounting the pad (col. 12, ll. 25-27). That is, the garment itself would retain its same visual appearance and not be disturbed or altered by the inclusion of the pad.
Claim 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (US 20210069027) in view of Suga et al. (US 20050197643) and Wexler (US 20130042394).
Regarding claim 8, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, but does not explicitly describe wherein:
a minimum lateral distance between the respective fold lines is at the most 5 cm.
In related art for undergarments, Wexler describes wherein the width of the narrowest point of the crotch region of the body is in the range of 1/2 to 2 inches (1.27 to 5.08 inches). This overlaps or lies inside the range of the claimed invention and thus is prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the garment to have a width at the crotch of 1.27 cm depending on the style of undergarment intended to be utilized (i.e. “thong”, para. 0066, Wexler).
Regarding claim 9, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1, but does not explicitly describe wherein: a minimum lateral distance between the respective fold lines is at least 2 cm.
In related art for undergarments, Wexler describes wherein the width of the narrowest point of the crotch region of the body is in the range of 1/2 to 2 inches (1.27 to 5.08 inches). This overlaps or lies inside the range of the claimed invention and thus is prima facie obvious (MPEP 2144.05).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the garment to have a width at the crotch of 5.08 cm depending on the style of undergarment intended to be utilized (i.e. “thong”, para. 0066, Wexler).
Claim 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (US 20210069027) in view of Suga et al. (US 20050197643) and Chong et al. (US 20240207107).
Regarding claim 13, Kashiwagi as modified describes the protective garment of claim 1 but does not explicitly describe wherein the fold line comprises a flocked area.
In related art, Chong describes a protective garment (moisture management, abstract) wherein the fold line comprises a flocked area (material is formed of brushed or otherwise texture fabrics, paras. 0020, 0050).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the garment to be formed to include flocking along the material and thus also in the fold line in order to prevent slippage and leaking of the garment (Chong, para. 0050).
Claim 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kashiwagi (US 20210069027) in view of Suga et al. (US 20050197643) and Riha-Scott et al. (US 20150290049).
Regarding claim 17, Kashiwagi describes the protective garment of claim 1, but does not explicitly describe wherein:
the fold line is arranged with a friction-enhancing surface comprising a silicone-based printed or coated region configured to increase surface friction relative to adjacent untreated textile surfaces.
In related art for protective garments, Riha-Scott describes wherein:
the fold line is arranged with a friction-enhancing surface comprising a silicone-based printed (silicone ink may be applied along desired zones over seams, para. 0081) or coated region configured to (what follows is a recitation of intended use) increase surface friction relative to adjacent untreated textile surfaces (including silicone in one region would increase friction compared to areas that do not include silicone).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify Kashiwagi to include the silicone printing along the seam between side part 600 and pad 500/ bottom 400 in order to ensure that leaked fluids remain contained in the area (see Riha-Scott, para. 0081 describing that silicone ink is utilized over seams to prevent leaking through the seams).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 35 is rejected via dependency under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims along with the rectification of the 112(b) issues.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK J LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-1145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th, Alt F: 8:00 AM-5:00 PM ET.
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, Clint Ostrup can be reached on 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.
/PATRICK J. LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
