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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Species B and Species D in the reply filed on October 15, 2025 is acknowledged. Examiner notes that the claims have been amended to overcome the restriction requirement between Inventions I and II (this particular restriction requirement therefore has been withdrawn), since claims 15-20 have been changed to be dependent from independent claim 1, with their preambles also amended to match that of the invention of Invention I. The traversal regarding the Species elections is on the ground(s) that “it would not be a serious burden to examine all the claim[s] because they are directed toward similar aspects”. This is not found persuasive because the different species represent mutually exclusive aspects from one another, which would cause the search to have multiple aspects on which to focus, leading to potential numerous different prior art references being applied against the claims. Examiner notes that any withdrawn, non-elected species will be considered for rejoinder upon indication of allowability of any generic claim(s). Claim 3 is withdrawn from further consideration, as being directed to a non-elected species. Examiner further notes that claim 14 appears to be drawn to a non-elected species, because the only part of the disclosure that describes or depicts the seam as projecting out from an outer surface of the shirt is in ¶ 0031 and Figs. 3A and 3B, which are part of non-elected Species A. Accordingly, claim 14 (along with claim 3, as noted above) is withdrawn from further consideration as being directed to a non-elected species.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed with the written response received on October 15, 2025 have been considered and an action on the merits follows. As directed by the amendment, claims 1, 2, 6-8 and 13-20 have been amended; claims 3 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are pending in this application, with an action on the merits to follow regarding claims 1, 2 and 4-13 and 15-20.
Drawings
Several of Applicant’s drawings are grayscale photographs that do not clearly articulate the details of the disclosed invention. See Figs. 2A, 2B and 2C. Black and white photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications. Photographs or photomicrograph printed on sensitized paper are acceptable as drawings, in lieu of India ink drawings, as are photographic images submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, to illustrate inventions which are incapable of being accurately or adequately depicted by India ink drawings, e.g., electrophoresis gels, blots, (e.g., immunological, western, Southern, and northern), autoradiographs, cell cultures (stained and unstained), histological tissue cross sections (stained and unstained), animals, plants, in vivo imaging, thin layer chromatography plates, crystalline structures, metallurgical microstructures, textile fabrics, grain structures and, in a design patent application, ornamental effects. The photographs or photomicrographs must show the invention more clearly than they can be done by India ink drawings and otherwise comply with the rules concerning such drawings. See MPEP 608.02(VII)(B).
Specification (Abstract)
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is too brief (45 words). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 15, 16 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: it is suggested to delete “having a frame system” in line 1, and amending line 3 to recite “a frame system” instead of “the frame system”, for sake of improved clarity of the body of the claim.
Claim 15, line 6: “being” should be added after “the channel”
Claim 15, line 6: “of material” should be added after “the first layer”
Claim 15 is missing a period at the end of the claim
Claim 16, line 2: the colon after “garment” should be changed to a semicolon
Claim 20, lines 4, 7 and 8 (three instances): “strip of material” should recite “strip of bendable material” for sake of consistency
Claim 20, line 9: “of material” should be added after “the first layer”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 1 (and claims 2, 4-13 and 15-20 at least due to dependency from claim 1) is 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 1, Applicant recites “a garment having a seam with a channel therein”. The term “therein” is indefinite. Correction is required. Examiner suggests “a garment having a seam with a channel in the seam”.
Further regarding claim 1, Applicant recites “wherein the frame system is adapted to bend and twist upon application of a force, and return to its original shape upon removal of the force”. The term “its” is indefinite. Correction is required. Examiner suggests “wherein the frame system is adapted to bend and twist upon application of a force, and return to the frame system’s original shape upon removal of the force”.
Regarding claim 7, Applicant recites “a slit in the seam such that the frame system is insertable or removable from the channel therethrough”. The term “therethrough” is indefinite. Correction is required. Examiner suggests “a slit in the seam such that the frame system is insertable or removable from the channel through the slit”.
Regarding claim 8, Applicant recites “wherein the channel is formed by an inner layer and an outer layer, accommodating the frame system therebetween”. The term “therebetween” is indefinite. Correction is required. Examiner suggests “wherein the channel is formed by an inner layer and an outer layer, the frame system being accommodated between the inner layer and the outer layer”.
Regarding claim 16, Applicant recites “the frame system is insertable in a hole in a garment: wherein the frame system reshapes a hole in a garment to form a round hole”. This limitation is confusing because it appears to positively recite “a garment” twice within functional language, while the preamble of the claim is directed to the garment of claim 15. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim is being interpreted as “the frame system is insertable in a hole in the garment; wherein the frame system reshapes the hole in the garment to form a round hole”.
Regarding claim 17, Applicant recites “the frame system is insertable in a slit in a seam of a garment; wherein the frame system reshapes the seam to form a round hole”. This limitation is confusing because it appears to positively recite “a garment” and “a seam” within functional language, while the preamble of the claim is directed to the garment of claim 15, and claim 1, from which claims 15 and 17 depend, already positively recites “a seam”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim is being interpreted as “the frame system is insertable in a slit in the seam of the garment; wherein the frame system reshapes the seam to form a round hole”.
Regarding claim 20, Applicant recites “wherein the strip of material is insertable in a slit in a shoulder seam of a shirt”. Claim 20’s preamble is directed to “the garment in claim 15”. It appears the claim is positively reciting an additional garment (i.e. a shirt) within the functional language of the strip of material. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim is being interpreted as “wherein the garment is a shirt and the seam is a shoulder seam; wherein the strip of material is insertable in a slit in the shoulder seam of the shirt”, as best as can be understood.
Further regarding claim 20, Applicant recites “a channel formed between the first layer and the second layer of material, wherein the strip of bendable material is housed within the channel”. Claim 20 depends from claim 1, which already recites that there is “a channel”. Is “a channel” in claim 1 the same as “a channel” in claim 20? Also, claim 1 already recites that the frame system is embedded within the channel (i.e. “embedded” is already indicative that the frame system and its constituent components are “housed within” the channel). Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim is being interpreted as “the channel formed between the first layer and the second layer of material, wherein the strip of bendable material is housed within the channel”.
An effort has been made to identify all indefinite language with the pending claims. However, Examiner notes the above listing of 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejections may not be conclusive and Applicant is required to review every claim for compliance to 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) so as to facilitate a clear understanding of the claimed invention and proper application of the prior art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 2, 4, 6, 7 and 11-13, as best as can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shamir (WO 2006/077594 A2).
Regarding independent claim 1, Shamir discloses a garment (upper body outer garment (Page 2, Line 30)) having a frame system (support member #500; Fig. 5), the garment comprising: a garment (upper body outer garment (Page 2, Line 30)) having a seam with a channel therein (sleeve and shoulder of a garment may have a joint therebetween, wherein the joint is constructed or two or more elements seamed together (Page 1, Lines 6-10); i.e. there is a seam where the shoulder and the sleeve meet; article of clothing may include a sheath into which the support member may be inserted and from which the member may be removed (Page 1, Lines 26-28; Page 4, Lines 28-32); sheath #502 has a channel therein, the sheath may be sewn into a lining or other fabric in the area of the sleeve head); and the frame system embedded within the channel (as noted above, the member #500 is inserted into/removable from the sheath (i.e. channel)); wherein the frame system is adapted to bend and twist upon application of a force, and return to its original shape upon removal of the force (member may be flexible plastic or include one or more stiff fibers (Page 1, Line 20-21); member may include metal wires or a metallic band, member may be bent, shaped and respaced to conform to the build or desire of a wearer, and restore a shape if the garment is crumpled (Page 3, Lines 23-28); Examiner notes that the emphasized/italicized language does not further structurally define the claimed invention in any patentably-distinguishing sense).
Regarding claims 2 and 4, Shamir discloses that the frame system comprises a loop (claim 2) that is open with two ends (claim 4) (see Fig. 5, which shows that member #500 is an open loop with two opposing ends).
Regarding claim 6, Shamir discloses that the frame system is removable from the channel (Page 1, Lines 26-28 of Shamir; Page 4, Lines 28-32 of Shamir).
Regarding claim 7, Shamir discloses that the garment further comprises a slit in the seam such that the frame system is insertable or removable from the channel therethrough (Page 3, Lines 15-18 disclose that the support member can be inserted into/removed from a slit or sheath that may be sewn into the lining of the garment).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Shamir discloses that the garment comprises a shirt (claim 11) (Examiner notes that the term "shirt" is very broad and has a definition of "[a] garment for the upper part of the body, typically having a collar, sleeves, and a front opening." (Noun Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com); the upper body garment of Shamir is at least a type of shirt, absent any further distinguishing structural language in the claim), wherein the seam is located in a shoulder portion of the shirt (claim 12) (as noted above, the sheath is seamed into the garment to provide a rounded shoulder sleeve head).
Regarding claim 13, Shamir discloses that the seam containing the frame system has a low profile such that the frame system does not project out from an outer surface of the shirt (Page 4, Lines 30-32 recite that the sheath’s seam is sewn into a lining, which would be on an interior of the garment shoulder/sleeve area, and would therefore not project outward from an outer surface of the garment).
Claims 1, 2, 4-6 and 11-13, as best as can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lichti (USPN 5,481,761).
Regarding independent claim 1, Lichti discloses a garment (dress; Figs. 4-5; dress has an upper body component) having a frame system (strip #10), the garment comprising: a garment (as noted above) having a seam with a channel therein (line of stitching #16 defines a pocket #13 (i.e. seam defines a channel therein); Fig. 6); and the frame system embedded within the channel (strip #10 is housed in pocket #13); wherein the frame system is adapted to bend and twist upon application of a force, and return to its original shape upon removal of the force (Col. 2, Lines 42-45 of Lichti; Examiner notes that the emphasized/italicized language does not further structurally define the claimed invention in any patentably-distinguishing sense).
Regarding claims 2 and 4, Lichti discloses that the frame system comprises a loop (claim 2) that is open with two ends (claim 4) (see Figs. 3 and 6, which shows that strip #10 is an open loop with two opposing ends).
Regarding claim 5, Lichti discloses that the loop is oval (see Fig. 6 of Lichti, which shows an oval shape for strip #10).
Regarding claim 6, Lichti discloses that the frame system is removable from the channel (Col. 2, Lines 57-58 describe importance of readily inserting and removing the strip #10).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, Lichti discloses that the garment comprises a shirt (claim 11) (Examiner notes that the term "shirt" is very broad and has a definition of "[a] garment for the upper part of the body, typically having a collar, sleeves, and a front opening." (Noun Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com); the upper body garment of Lichti at least comprises a shirt, absent any further distinguishing structural language in the claim), wherein the seam is located in a shoulder portion of the shirt (claim 12) (see Fig. 4 for example, of Lichti).
Regarding claim 13, Lichti discloses that the seam containing the frame system has a low profile such that the frame system does not project out from an outer surface of the shirt (as shown in Fig. 4, at least, the frame system is internal of the sleeve/shoulder and would not project from an outer surface of the garment).
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.
Claim 5, as best as can be understood is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shamir as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Lichti.
Regarding claim 5, Shamir teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 2, as set forth above, but does not clearly indicate that the loop of the support #500 (i.e. frame system loop) is oval.
Lichti teaches a similar sleeve support (strip #10) that is an open loop shape (#19; Fig. 6 of Lichti) that appears to be oval (similar as Applicant’s open loop oval shape in Applicant’s Figs. 4A/4B).
Shamir and Lichti teach analogous inventions in the field of sleeve supports in garments. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have extended the ends of the support of Shamir to create a more complete oval shape, as taught by Lichti, in order to add support for the shape of the support member to include at least a lower region of the sleeve.
Claims 8-10 and 15-20, as best as can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shamir as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Haring (USPN 3,115,642).
Regarding claim 8, Shamir teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as set forth above, but does not go into detail about the sheath #502, and it cannot be determined whether the sheath (i.e. channel) is formed by an inner layer and an outer layer, accommodating the frame system therebetween.
Haring teaches a covered boning device for use in garments (Col. 1, Line 10 of Haring), wherein there is a frame system (resilient body #11) housed within a channel defined by an upper cover element #12 and a lower cover element #13 (i.e. an inner layer and outer layer; Col. 2, Lines 15-16; Figs. 1-4 of Haring) that are stitched together at their edges (at #56/57).
Shamir and Haring teach analogous inventions in the field of sheathed boning elements in garments. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have formed the sheath of Shamir as two cover elements that surround the support member (i.e. frame system), as taught by Haring, in order to provide the sheath in a secure manner around the support element (via the two stitched-edge cover elements), as the concept of surrounding rigid supports with overlapping, stitched layers of material is well-known in the art.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, the modified garment of Shamir (i.e. Shamir in view of Haring, as applied to claim 8 above) renders obvious all the limitations of claim 8, as set forth above, and further teaches that the inner layer and the outer layer are sealed together with a fastener (claim 9), the fastener including thread (claim 10) (the stitched edges #56/57 of Haring, which are incorporated into the modified garment of Shamir, as explained above, include stitched thread).
Regarding claim 15, the modified garment of Shamir (i.e. Shamir in view of Haring, as such modification is described above with respect to claims 8-10) would render obvious that the frame system further comprises: a strip of bendable material (member may include metal wires or a metallic band, member may be bent, shaped and respaced to conform to the build or desire of a wearer, and restore a shape if the garment is crumpled (Page 3, Lines 23-28 of Shamir, as noted above)) having two ends and forming an open loop (see Fig. 5 of Shamir, which shows that member #500 is an open loop with two opposing ends); a first layer of material covering an interior portion of the strip of material; a second layer of material covering an exterior portion of the strip of material (via the modification of Shamir’s sheath, in view of the teachings incorporated in from Haring, there would be first and second layers covering the support member, with one of the layers covering an interior portion of the member and the other of the layers covering an exterior portion of the member; Examiner notes that the term "portion" is very broad and merely means "a section or quantity within a larger thing; a part of a whole" (Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)); and the channel formed between the first layer and the second layer of material (the channel is between the two layers, and occupied by the support member #500), wherein the strip of bendable material is housed within the channel (as noted above).
Regarding claim 16, the modified garment of Shamir (i.e. Shamir in view of Haring, as applied to claim 15 above) renders obvious that the frame system is insertable in a hole in a garment (Page 3, Lines 15-18 of Shamir disclose that the support member can be inserted into/removed from a slit (i.e. hole) or sheath that may be sewn into the lining of the garment); wherein the frame system reshapes a hole in the garment to form a round hole (Page 1, Lines 7-8 of Shamir describe a rounded joint, which is where the shoulder/sleeve seam is located).
Regarding claims 17-19, the modified garment of Shamir (i.e. Shamir in view of Haring, as applied to claim 15 above) renders obvious that the frame system is insertable in a slit in a seam of a garment (Page 3, Lines 15-18 of Shamir disclose that the support member can be inserted into/removed from a slit or sheath that may be sewn into the lining of the garment); wherein the frame system reshapes the seam to form a round hole (claim 17) (Page 1, Lines 7-8 of Shamir describe a rounded joint, which is where the shoulder/sleeve seam is located), wherein the garment comprises a shirt (Examiner notes that the term "shirt" is very broad and has a definition of "[a] garment for the upper part of the body, typically having a collar, sleeves, and a front opening." (Noun Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com); the upper body garment of Shamir is at least a type of shirt, absent any further distinguishing structural language in the claim), wherein the seam is located in a shoulder portion of the shirt (claim 19) (as noted above, the sheath is seamed into the garment to provide a rounded shoulder sleeve head).
Regarding claim 20, the modified garment of Shamir (i.e. Shamir in view of Haring, as such modification is described above with respect to claims 8-10) would render obvious that the frame system further comprises: a strip of bendable material (member may include metal wires or a metallic band, member may be bent, shaped and respaced to conform to the build or desire of a wearer, and restore a shape if the garment is crumpled (Page 3, Lines 23-28 of Shamir, as noted above)) having two ends and forming an open loop (see Fig. 5 of Shamir, which shows that member #500 is an open loop with two opposing ends); wherein the strip of material is insertable in a slit in a shoulder seam of a shirt (Page 3, Lines 15-18 of Shamir disclose that the support member can be inserted into/removed from a slit or sheath that may be sewn into the lining of the garment; the upper body garment of Shamir is at least a type of shirt, absent any further distinguishing structural language in the claim; as noted above, the sheath is seamed into the garment to provide a rounded shoulder sleeve head; Examiner notes that the term "shirt" is very broad and has a definition of "[a] garment for the upper part of the body, typically having a collar, sleeves, and a front opening." (Noun Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)); wherein the strip of material reshapes the seam to form a round hole (Page 1, Lines 7-8 of Shamir describe a rounded joint, which is where the shoulder/sleeve seam is located); a first layer of material covering an interior portion of the strip of material; a second layer of material covering an exterior portion of the strip of material (via the modification of Shamir’s sheath, in view of the teachings incorporated in from Haring, there would be first and second layers covering the support member, with one of the layers covering an interior portion of the member and the other of the layers covering an exterior portion of the member; Examiner notes that the term "portion" is very broad and merely means "a section or quantity within a larger thing; a part of a whole" (Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)); and a channel formed between the first layer and the second layer of material (the channel is between the two layers, and occupied by the support member #500), wherein the strip of bendable material is housed within the channel (as noted above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. All art cited on the PTO-892 and not relied upon in an art rejection above is deemed relevant in the field of shape-keeping elements in garments.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMESON COLLIER whose telephone number is (571)270-5221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 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, CLINTON OSTRUP can be reached at (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.
/JAMESON D COLLIER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732