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 .
Remarks
This communication is in response to the reply received 10/30/2025.
Claims 1-10 are currently pending and have been examined.
The replacement drawing purport to add features recited in the claims but lack any reference numbers so it is unclear what the drawings show. The drawing objection is maintained.
The objection to the specification is withdrawn.
The claim objection is withdrawn.
Drawings
The replacement drawings are not acceptable. Applicant has made alterations to the drawings without adding any corresponding reference numbers to the drawing or specification.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the subject matter of:
claim 1 (“…the heated layer and the first warming layer or the heated layer and the second warming layer are secured by a number of fixing structures, the fixing structures being evenly distributed between the heated layer and the first warming layer or the heated layer and the second warming layer….”);
claim 2 (“a heating switch of the heated layer is connected to a mobile terminal of a user, the mobile terminal being capable of controlling the opening or closing of the heating switch”);
claim 9 (“…in the head and foot zones…”); and
claim 10 (“..wherein the heated quilt is provided with counterweights along its perimeter”)
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0188735 hereinafter D1 (previously presented), in view of WO 0230243 A1, hereinafter D7.
As to claim 1.
D1 discloses a heated quilt (blanket body 10 in fig. 1), comprising:
a first warming layer (C1 in fig. 1), a second warming layer (19) and a heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) sandwiched (see fig. 1) between (17 is between C1 and 19) the first warming layer (C1 in fig. 1) and the second warming layer (19), the heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) being provided with a heating core (heating wire 18);
the heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) and the first warming layer (C1 in fig. 1) or the heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) and the second warming layer (19) are secured by a number of fixing structures (connected by quilting via first sewing threads and form a plurality of quilting regions R to obtain a first component C1 per [0023]), the fixing structures (sewing threads per [0023]) being evenly distributed (per [0023] the use of a quilting technique is illustrated in figs. 2a, 2b which show an even distribution delineated by quilting regions R) between the heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) and the first warming layer (C1 in fig. 1) or the heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) and the second warming layer (19; note that 17 and 19 are also connected into C2 by quilting via second sewing threads [0024]; also note that C1 and C2 are connected via third sewing threads, [0025]).
D1 does not disclose the fixing structures are punching points.
D7 is in a related field of producing mattress coverings and teaches it is known to join different textile layers via punching (translation, page 3, “The aforementioned consolidation of the union of the different layers can be done by punching or by sewing coarse. Punching is preferred since it offers sufficient consolidation of the joint without the use of threads, which is an advantage from both a technical and economic point of view).
Indeed, applicant’s specification provides that “[t]he heated layer and the first warming layer or the heated layer and the second warming layer may be connected by punching points, or may be connected by any other means of connection available” ([0031]) which is interpreted to mean the specific method chosen is not critical.
An invention is obvious where some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. Here the claimed joining technique is well known in the prior art as it provides technical and economic advantages (translation, page 3). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teachings of D7 to modify D1 to use a known technique to join the different layers of D1 as the technique provides known advantages.
As to claim 6.
D1 discloses the first warming layer (C1 in fig. 1) comprising, from top to bottom, a first face fabric layer (11) a first warmth-retaining material filling layer (12) and a first lining fabric layer (13); and/or the second warming layer (19) comprising from top to bottom a second face fabric layer, a second warmth-retaining material filling layer and a second lining fabric layer (turn fig. 1 over then the layers map onto the alternative claim limitation).
As to claim 10.
D1 discloses the heated quilt (blanket body 10 in fig. 1) is provided with counterweights along its perimeter (see annotated figure where the perimeter of weighted beads 14 is indicated).
PNG
media_image1.png
999
952
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D7 as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 2022/0378016 A1, hereinafter D2.
As to claim 2.
D1 as modified does not explicitly disclose: wherein a heating switch of the heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) is connected to a mobile terminal of a user, the mobile terminal being capable of controlling the opening or closing of the heating switch.
However, D2 teaches the use of wireless technology ([0032]) to control a heated blanket which is controlled via a switch (24 in fig. 1 and [0023]).
An invention is obvious where some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. Here, the prior art teaches the use of a switch to control a heated blanket (switch 24 in fig. 1 provides control over the heated blanket functionality per [0031]) and it also discusses using wireless technology (via e.g. an iPhone, a.k.a. “user terminal”) to control the heated blanket functions because doing so provides convenience ([0032]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teachings of D2 to satisfy the requirement for a heating switch of the heated layer is connected to a mobile terminal of a user, the mobile terminal being capable of controlling the opening or closing of the heating switch for the purpose of providing convenient control.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D7 as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US 7,038,170 A1, hereinafter D3.
As to claim 3
D1 does not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by D3:
wherein a heating core (heating element 30) of a heated layer (fig. 1) is threaded (construction of the heating element 30 is shown in figs. 6 and 7, col. 5, lns. 42+) inside a heating core pipe (insulating layer 44).
An invention is obvious where some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. Here, the prior art teaches the use of a heated layer (fig. 1) is threaded (construction of the heating element 30 is shown in figs. 6 and 7, col. 5, lns. 42+) inside a heating core pipe (insulating layer 44) because this provides flexibility and ease of construction (col. 5, lns. 56-65).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teachings of D2 to satisfy the requirement for a heating core of a heated layer is threaded inside a heating core pipe for the purpose of providing a flexible heating member that is easily assembled into a final product.
PNG
media_image2.png
794
649
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 4,5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D7 as modified in view of D3 as applied to claim 3, and further in view of US 2020/0137838 A1, hereinafter D4.
As to claim 4.
D1 does not explicitly disclose wherein the heating core pipe is a double-layer structure. However, D4 is in a related field ([0001]) and teaches using a double layer structure (7 and 9 in fig. 1) around a heating element (wires 5a in the figure below, a.k.a. heating core pipe).
PNG
media_image3.png
607
899
media_image3.png
Greyscale
An invention is obvious where some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. Here, the prior art teaches the use of a heater (5a in fig. 2) inside a heating core pipe with double layer construction (insulating layer 7 and 9) because this provides improved flexibility ([0019]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teachings of D4 to satisfy the requirement for using a double layer structure around a heating element for the purpose of providing a flexible heating member that is easily assembled into a final product and is durable and flexible.
As to claim 5.
D1 as modified does not explicitly disclose: the heating core pipe is made of double layer hydroentangled non-woven fabric.
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the heating core pipe is made of double layer hydroentangled non-woven fabric. Applicant has not disclosed that the heating core pipe is made of double layer hydroentangled non-woven fabric provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with the disclosed insulating layer (44) or the claimed material because both permit heat transfer while protecting the heating element.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine to one of ordinary skill in this art to modify D1 in view of D5 to obtain the invention as specified in claim 5.
Claims 7,8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D7 as applied to claim 6 and further in view of US 5,835,983 A1, hereinafter D5.
As to claim 7.
D1 does not explicitly disclose wherein the amount of warmth-retaining material of the first warmth filling layer is greater than the amount of warmth-retaining material of the second warmth-retaining material filling layer.
However D5 teaches a heated blanket (fig. 6 and [0001]) where wherein the amount of warmth-retaining material of the first warmth filling layer is greater than the amount of warmth-retaining material of the second warmth-retaining material filling layer (see annotated figure 7).
At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an amount of warmth-retaining material of the first warmth filling layer is greater than the amount of warmth-retaining material of the second warmth-retaining material filling layer. It would have been obvious to choose the amount of warmth-retaining material of the first warmth filling layer is greater than the amount of warmth-retaining material of the second warmth-retaining material filling layer because doing so would cause heat to be trapped and reflected back toward the user (i.e. the bottom layer).
PNG
media_image4.png
527
754
media_image4.png
Greyscale
As to claim 8.
D1 as modified teaches wherein the first warmth-retaining material filling layer is filled with polyester blend cotton or polyester cotton (adding material 9 provides a layer of insulation between the heating element 6 and the bottom layer 11 of the outer container 12, and, in the preferred embodiment, is constructed of a cotton/polyester blend, col. 5, ln. 65+), and the second warmth filler layer is filled with glue-free cotton.
Claim 9, as best understood in view of the issues above, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D7 as applied to claim 6 and further in view of US 2004/0026405 A1, hereinafter D6.
As to claim 9.
D1 does not disclose wherein the heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) is set up to be heated independently in left and right zones, and/or the heated layer (heating wire securing layer 17) is set up to be independently heated in a head zone and a foot zone.
An invention is obvious where some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. Here, the prior art teaches a warming fabric that utilizes a multiplex circuit to provide heat to at least two different zones of the warming fabric. This feature allows the consumer to set the blanket to a setting that offers the desired amount of heat for a particular temperature and in accordance with the comfort level of the individual ([0004]).
Therefore it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teachings of D6 to satisfy the requirement for wherein the heated layer is set up to be heated independently in left and right zones, and/or the heated layer is set up to be independently heated in the head and foot zones for the purpose of providing a flexible heating member that is easily assembled into a final product and is durable and flexible.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record on the attached PTOL-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as each further discloses a state of the art.
The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or pointed out by the examiner.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to J. T. Newton, Esq. whose telephone number is (313)446-4899. The examiner can normally be reached 0700-1500 M-F.
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, Justin Mikowski can be reached on (571) 272-8525. 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.
/J. T. Newton/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673
Tue 13-Jan-26