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 .
Withdrawn Rejections
Any rejections and or objections, made in the previous Office Action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendments and/or arguments in the response dated November 19, 2025. However, new rejections may have been made using the same prior art if still applicable to the newly presented amendments and/or arguments.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 21 and 22 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: The newly submitted claims are directed towards a kit containing a patch and a primer applicator having a dispenser body.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 21 and 22 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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.
(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.
Claims 1, 3 – 6, 8 – 13, 24, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Kobe et al. (WO 97/04947).
Kobe et al. disclose garment repair patch (Figures; Abstract; A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Kobe et al may be adhered to a variety of materials including garments. (Page 8, lines 21 – 24)) comprising: a first layer having a first surface and a second surface, wherein the first layer includes a rubber material (Figure 1, #14; Column 8, lines 7 – 30); a second layer disposed onto the second surface of the first layer, wherein the second layer includes an adhesion-promoting primer (Page 14, lines 2 – 7); a third layer disposed onto the second layer such that the second layer is between the first layer and the third layer, wherein the third layer includes a permanent layer of an acrylic-based adhesive (Page 14, lines 2 – 7; Figure 1, #12; Page 11, lines 15 – 23); and a fourth layer disposed onto the third layer such that the second layer and the third layer are between the first layer and the fourth layer, wherein the fourth layer includes a release liner (Figure 2, #16; Page 16, lines 19 – 20) as in claim 1. With respect to claim 3, a shape of the garment repair patch is configured corresponds to be cut into any a shape of conforming to a tear in a damaged garment (Figure 3; Page 3, lines 20 – 27). Regarding claim 4, the acrylic-based adhesive of the third layer of the garment repair patch is configured to adhere adherable toa chlorinated portion of a latex-based garment materials (Page 14, lines 2 – 7; Figure 1, #12; Page 11, lines 15 – 23, wherein the materials of the prior art meet the claimed limitations, and thereby may be adhered to chlorinated materials). For claim 5, the rubber material has a thickness in a range of 0.1 millimeters (mm) to 1.0 mm (Page 5, lines 22 – 24). In claim 6, the rubber material includes latex material (Page 8, lines 25 – 28, which are synthetic latex). With regard to claim 8, the acrylic-based adhesive has a thickness in a range of 0.025 millimeter (mm) to 0.2 mm (Page 14, lines 2 – 7; Figure 1, #12; Page 11, lines 15 – 23; Page 6, lines 3 – 12). As to claim 9, a color of the rubber material is configured to matches a color of a damaged garment (Page 10, lines 9 – 30). With respect to claim 10, the fourth layer is configured to be separated from removably coupled to the third layer of the garment repair patch such that the third layer is exposed prior to application of the garment repair patch onto a surface of a damaged garment (Page 14, lines 9 – 30). Regarding claim 11, the fourth layer comprises a first release liner layer and a second release liner layer (Page 14, lines 9 – 30). For claim 12, the first release liner layer includes a silicone release coating, and wherein the second release liner layer includes a liner material (Page 14, lines 9 – 30). In claim 13, the first release liner layer is disposed on the third layer, and wherein the second release liner layer is disposed on the first release liner layer (Page 14, lines 9 – 30; Figure 2). With regard to claim 23, the garment repair patch has a thickness in a range of 0.5 millimeters (mm) to 1.2 mm (Page 5, line 1 to Page 6, line 12). As to claim 24, a surface area of the garment repair patch is larger than a surface area defined by a tear in a damaged garment (Figure 3). With respect to claim 25, an adhesion strength of the permanent layer of the acrylic-based adhesive allows the garment repair patch to retain a permanent adhesion to a latex-based garment, the latex-based garment being coated with dimethicone or cyclomethicone (Figures; Abstract; A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Kobe et al may be adhered to a variety of materials including garments. (Page 8, lines 21 – 24; Page 14, lines 2 – 7; Figure 1, #12; Page 11, lines 15 – 23, wherein the materials of the prior art meet the claimed limitations, and thereby may be adhered to chlorinated materials).
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 7, 26, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobe et al. (WO 97/04947) in view Schramm et al. (USPN 6,250,587).
Kobe et al. disclose garment repair patch (Figures; Abstract; A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Kobe et al may be adhered to a variety of materials including garments. (Page 8, lines 21 – 24)) comprising: a first layer having a first surface and a second surface, wherein the first layer includes a rubber material (Figure 1, #14; Column 8, lines 7 – 30); a second layer disposed onto the second surface of the first layer, wherein the second layer includes an adhesion-promoting primer (Page 14, lines 2 – 7); a third layer disposed onto the second layer such that the second layer is between the first layer and the third layer, wherein the third layer includes a permanent layer of an acrylic-based adhesive (Page 14, lines 2 – 7; Figure 1, #12; Page 11, lines 15 – 23); and a fourth layer disposed onto the third layer such that the second layer and the third layer are between the first layer and the fourth layer, wherein the fourth layer includes a release liner (Figure 2, #16; Page 16, lines 19 – 20) as in claim 26 and 27. However, Kobe et al. fails to disclose the adhesion- promoting primer comprises cyclohexane, xylene, ethyl alcohol, ethylbenzene, ethyl acetate, toluene, and methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK).
Schramm et al. teach a the use of a primer made with cyclohexane, xylene, ethyl alcohol, ethylbenzene, ethyl acetate, toluene, and methyl isobutyl ketone (MIBK) (Column 4, lines 39 – 45) for the purpose of enhancing the bond between a substrate and an adhesive (Column 4, lines 39 – 45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a primer made with cyclohexane, xylene, ethyl alcohol, ethylbenzene, ethyl acetate, toluene, and methyl isobutyl ketone in Kobe et al. in order to enhance the bond between a substrate and an adhesive as taught by Schramm et al.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3 – 13, and 21 – 27 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.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patricia L Nordmeyer whose telephone number is (571)272-1496. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6:30pm EST, Monday - Friday.
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, Alicia Chevalier can be reached at 571-272-1490. 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.
/Patricia L. Nordmeyer/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1788
/pln/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1788 December 17, 2025