DETAILED ACTION
The preliminary amendment filed on 12/9/2024 has been entered canceling claims 7, 14-15, 17-18, 22, 25-27, 29 and 31-69.
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 12 and 19 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 12, it is not possible to determine the scope of the limitation that the sequin has a dimmed appearance characterized by a lustrous appearance. First, the appearance of a sequin is in the eye of the beholder. Second, depending on the lighting condition, orientation of the sequin relative to the viewer and the movement of the sequin, the dimmed and luster appearance of the sequin would change. Therefore, the metes and bonds of the limitation is indeterminable.
Regarding claim 19, it is not possible to determine the scope of the limitation that the sequin has a dimmed appearance characterized by a matte appearance. First, the appearance of a sequin is in the eye of the beholder. Second, depending on the lighting condition, orientation of the sequin relative to the viewer and the movement of the sequin, the dimmed and matte appearance of the sequin would change. Therefore, the metes and bonds of the limitation is indeterminable.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-11, 20-21, 23 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Misaki, US 2011/0005038 A1.
Regarding claims 1, and 20-21, Misaki discloses a biodegradable button ([0020]), i.e., the applicant’s specification defines a sequin as “paillettes, buttons, zippers, trimmings” ([0044], buttons are inherently known to be circular in shape (claims 20-21). Misaki’s button comprises a polymeric component ([0008], polylatic acid) and a decorative component ([0019]) combined with the polymeric component. The decorative component is used “whereby the quality of color, a glossiness degree etc. of the obtained button can be adjusted.”, i.e., the button has a dimmed appearance when desired and compared to a button with a higher glossiness degree.
Regarding claim 2, Misaki discloses polylactic acid as one of many different types of polymers that can be used to form the button ([0008]).
Regarding claims 3-6, Misaki discloses that the polymeric component is made from a biomass material ([0008]) that is biodegradable ([0020]). The polymeric component, polylactic acid ([0008]), is a thermoplastic polyester. From Wikipedia:
“Polylactic acid, also known as poly(lactic acid) or polylactide (PLA), is a plastic material. As a thermoplastic polyester (or polyhydroxyalkanoate) it has the backbone formula (C3H4O2)n or [–C(CH3)HC(=O)O–]n. PLA is formally obtained by condensation of lactic acid C(CH3)(OH)HCOOH with loss of water (hence its name). It can also be prepared by ring-opening polymerization of lactide [–C(CH3)HC(=O)O–]2, the cyclic dimer of the basic repeating unit. Often PLA is blended with other polymers. PLA can be biodegradable or long-lasting, depending on the manufacturing process, additives and copolymers.”
Regarding claim 8, Misaki discloses that the decorative component can be any combination of “titanium oxide white, iron oxide red, iron oxide yellow, iron oxide brown, ultra marine blue, phthalocyanine blue, carbon black, tartrazing yellow, zinc oxide, disperse dye, mica, aluminum oxide, silica, glass, basic lead carbonate, pearl essence, bismuth oxychloride, bamboo powder and coconut powder.”, which are biodegradable pigments, i.e., “The mixture is molded, and whereby quality of color, a glossiness degree etc. of the obtained button can be adjusted.” Many of the recited pigments are biodegradable, e.g., bamboo and coconut powder, glass, pearl essence.
Regarding claims 9 and 11, Misaki discloses that the decorative component is a biodegradable pigment derived from agriculture waste, i.e. pearl essence is derived from agricultural/fishery waste from the scales of fish being processed by the fishery farm. Also, bamboo powder is derived from agricultural waste from bamboo stalks, chips or sawdust (waste products) from a bamboo farm. And, coconut powder is derived from agricultural waste from the husks of coconuts (waste product) from a coconut farm.
Regarding claim 10, Misaki discloses the decorative component being compostable, i.e., coconut powder, bamboo powder, and pearl essence.
Regarding claim 23, Misaki discloses that the pigment is carbon black ([0019]).
Regarding claim 30, Misaki discloses the method of making the biodegradable button by mixing a polymeric component, polylatic acid, with a decorative component/pigment ([0018-0019]) to form a molding material to be placed in a metal mold, i.e., a surface, to produced a button with a dimmed appearance, i.e., most buttons have a dimmed appearance.
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 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Misaki, US 2011/0005038 A1. Misaki fails to disclose the brightness value of the button being less than 80 CIE L. Misaki does disclose that the color and glossiness degree of the button can be adjusted ([0019]). The examiner takes official notice of the fact that buttons are made in an array of dimmed appearances based on the shininess finish and color of the button. Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to form Misaki’s button with a dimmed appearance with a brightness value of less than 80 CIE L or less than 250 Gu to produce the desired aesthetic appearance of the button to match the garment’s aesthetics.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen, US 2007/0248635 A1 in view of Misaki, US 2011/0005038 A1. Jensen discloses, in paragraph [0019], that jewelry can include sequins as decorative accents. The sequins are made from a biodegradable material.
Misaki discloses a biodegradable ornament product, such as, buckles, clamps, accessories, or buttons ([00190],[0020]), i.e., the applicant’s specification defines a sequin as “paillettes, buttons, zippers, trimmings” ([0044]. Misaki’s sequin, i.e., button/ornament product, comprises a polymeric component ([0008], polylatic acid) and a decorative component ([0019]) combined with the polymeric component. The decorative component is used “whereby the quality of color, a glossiness degree etc. of the obtained button can be adjusted.”, i.e., the button has a dimmed appearance when desired and compared to a button with a higher glossiness degree. Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to form Jensen’s sequin from Misaki’s biodegradable ornament product material to be able to produce Jensen’s sequin of the desired quality of color and degree of glossiness.
The claim requires that the sequin be a paillette having a thickness of 0.2mm. Jensen discloses a sequin, which is slightly different that a paillette. A paillette is a type of sequin. The difference is in the way the paillette is attached. The sequin is stitched down onto a garment’s fabric. Whereas, a paillette is held to the fabric with stitching in a single hole at the top. This allows the paillette to freely dangle and pivot about the attachment hole. This is all old and well known to a person having ordinary skill in the art. It is also old and well known that sequins and paillettes are produced in a very small range of thicknesses, i.e., .15mm-0.3mm. Also, the specification fails to disclose any criticality associated with the thickness or use of the paillette as the sequin. Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use a paillette in place of Jenson’s sequin to produce a different, more eye catching and aesthetically pleasing effect to a wearer or viewer of the Jensen’s jewelry.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Misaki, US 2011/0005038 A1.
Regarding claim 28, Misaki discloses a button. The examiner takes official notice of the fact that some buttons have an outer annual ridge, which would make the button have an uneven surface. Some other buttons have an outer cloth surface, which would be considered an uneven surface. Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to form Misaki’s button with an uneven surface to produce a button with the desired aesthetic appearance to match the garment’s aesthetics.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK W LAVINDER whose telephone number is (571)272-7119. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday 9-4pm (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, Jason 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.
JACK W. LAVINDER
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3677
/JACK W LAVINDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3677