DETAILED ACTION
Drawings
Figure 5 of the drawings is objected to because it is confusing and missing details for understanding what is being shown in this figure. 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 § 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 18 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 claims 12 and 18, it is misdescriptive to claim that the first and second magnets are magnets of opposite polarities to enhance the magnetic attraction between the first and second clasp components. As disclosed in the applicant’s specification ([0017]), the first and second magnets (104, 105) are of the same polarity. The third and fourth magnets (124, 125) are of the same polarity and oriented in opposite polarity to the first and second magnets to enhance the magnetic attraction between the first and second clasp components.
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 1-5 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Greenberg, US 9101185 B1.
Regarding claim 1, Greenberg discloses a magnetic clasp system (figures 14-16) comprising a first clasp component (40A). The first clasp component including a first housing (40A), a first magnet (42) and a plurality of holes (18, figure 3 shows a single hole, figures 14-16 show a plurality of holes embodiment) configured to enable a material (cord of necklace (12) figures 1-4) to be threaded through the first clasp component. The magnetic clasp system includes a second clasp component (40B) including a second housing (40B), a second magnet (42) and a plurality of holes configured to enable the material to be threaded through the second clasp component. The first magnet and the second magnet are configured to attract each other to secure the first and second clasp components together.
PNG
media_image1.png
812
889
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the magnets are of oriented in the clasp components to be of opposite polarities in order to attract one another to hold the clasp in the attached configuration.
Regarding claim 3, as can be seen in the annotated drawing on the previous page, the holes are aligned when the magnets are engaged.
Regarding claim 4, Greenberg discloses the magnets being embedded within the clasp components.
Regarding claim 5, Greenberg discloses holes of a size to receive fabric, leather, chains, yarn, string or a cord.
Regarding claim 7, Greenberg discloses magnets configured to generate a magnetic force to ensure secure attachment.
Regarding claim 8, Greenberg discloses jewelry material, a cord, which can be threaded through the first and second clasp components.
Regarding claim 9, Greenberg discloses that a clothing material, such as a cord, can be threaded through the first and second clasp components.
Regarding claim 10, Greenberg discloses that a hair accessory material, such as a cord, can be threaded through the first and second clasp components.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg, US 9101185, B1 in view of Friedman, US 2017/0108598 A1. The claim requires that the clasp components be coated with a protective layer to enhance durability and corrosion resistance. Greenberg fails to disclose a protective layer on the clasp components. However, Friedman discloses that it is old and well known to coat jewelry clasps and their magnets with protective surface treatments such as gold, nickel, zinc and tinplating and epoxy resin coating to provide corrosion protection ([0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to coat Greenberg’s clasp components to provide corrosion protection.
Claims 11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg, US 9101185, B1. Greenberg discloses the use of a single magnet (42) on each clasp component. Greenberg fails to disclose the use of two magnets on each clasp component.
The applicant’s specification ([0014]) states that “Alternatively, the clasp 100 can function with only a single magnet 104 and not include a second magnet or magnetically attractable material.” Therefore, the specification fails to attribute any criticality to the use of two magnets on each clasp component. Both embodiments work equally as well as the other as stated in the applicant’s specification.
Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to add additional magnets to Greenberg’s clasp components as an alternate design to either increase the magnetic force to hold the clasp components together or to reduce the size of the magnets, i.e., two smaller magnets as compared to using a single large magnet, to reduce the cost of the clasp.
Regarding claim 13, Greenberg discloses magnets configured to generate a magnetic force to ensure secure attachment.
Regarding claim 14, Greenberg discloses jewelry material, a cord, which can be threaded through the first and second clasp components.
Regarding claim 15, Greenberg discloses that a clothing material, such as a cord, can be threaded through the first and second clasp components.
Claims 16-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg, US 9101185, B1 in view of Chung, US 2004/0107547 A1.
Greenberg discloses the use of a single magnet (42) on each clasp component. Greenberg fails to disclose the use of two magnets on each clasp component.
The applicant’s specification ([0014]) states that “Alternatively, the clasp 100 can function with only a single magnet 104 and not include a second magnet or magnetically attractable material.” Therefore, the specification fails to attribute any criticality to the use of two magnets on each clasp component. Both embodiments work equally as well as the other as stated in the applicant’s specification.
Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to add additional magnets to Greenberg’s clasp components as an alternate design to either increase the magnetic force to hold the clasp components together or to reduce the size of the magnets, i.e., two smaller magnets as compared to using a single large magnet, to reduce the cost of the clasp.
Greenberg also fails to disclose the claimed first and second handles connected to the first and second housings, respectively. However, Chung discloses the use of handles (see annotated drawing) for assisting the user in grasping and separating the clasp components.
PNG
media_image2.png
498
624
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to add handles to Greenberg’s first and second clasp components to assist the user in disconnecting the magnetically held clasp components.
Regarding claim 17, the combination fails to disclose the claimed third and fourth handles that would all the material to be guided between the handles on each clasp. Chung discloses first and second handles, as illustrated in the above drawing, for improving the ability of the wearer to grasp and detach the clasp components. It would be obvious, prior to the earliest effective filing date, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to add a third and fourth handle to the bottom surface of each clasp component opposite the first and second handles on the top surface of each clasp component to further improve the graspability of the two clasp components when connecting and disconnecting the components.
Regarding claim 19, Greenberg discloses jewelry material, a cord, which can be threaded through the first and second clasp components.
Regarding claim 20, Greenberg discloses that a clothing material, such as a cord, can be threaded through the first and second clasp components.
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