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.
The applicant has stated in their response that figure 5 is canceled. However, there were no drawing sheets submitted showing the cancelation of figure 5.
INFORMATION ON HOW TO EFFECT DRAWING CHANGES
Replacement Drawing Sheets
Drawing changes must be made by presenting replacement sheets which incorporate the desired changes and which comply with 37 CFR 1.84. An explanation of the changes made must be presented either in the drawing amendments section, or remarks, section of the amendment paper. 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). A replacement sheet must 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 the amended drawing(s) must not be labeled as “amended.” If the changes to the drawing figure(s) are not accepted by the examiner, applicant will be notified of any required corrective action in the next Office action. No further drawing submission will be required, unless applicant is notified.
Identifying indicia, if provided, should include the title of the invention, inventor’s name, and application number, or docket number (if any) if an application number has not been assigned to the application. If this information is provided, it must be placed on the front of each sheet and within the top margin.
Annotated Drawing Sheets
A marked-up copy of any amended drawing figure, including annotations indicating the changes made, may be submitted or required by the examiner. The annotated drawing sheet(s) must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheet” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings.
Timing of Corrections
Applicant is required to submit acceptable corrected drawings within the time period set in the Office action. See 37 CFR 1.85(a). Failure to take corrective action within the set period will result in ABANDONMENT of the application.
If corrected drawings are required in a Notice of Allowability (PTOL-37), the new drawings MUST be filed within the THREE MONTH shortened statutory period set for reply in the “Notice of Allowability.” Extensions of time may NOT be obtained under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136 for filing the corrected drawings after the mailing of a Notice of Allowability.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the term “archway” found in amended claim 16 must be added to the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 16-20, in claim 16, the newly added limitation “wherein the archway is configured to anchor the material threaded through the plurality of holes” has no support in the original specification or drawings. This limitation is not supported by the originally filed application. Therefore, it is considered as new subject matter and must be considered from claim 16.
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 16-20 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 16-20, in claim 16, in paragraph ‘g’, “each handle forms an archway over its respective housing” is indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation be changed to “ the first handle forms an archway over the first housing and the second handle forms an archway over the second housing” to correct the problem.
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 1-5, 7-10, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg, US 9101185, B1 in view of Chung, US 2004/0107547 A1.
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
The claim requires that the first and second housing each have a handle, which is not specifically disclosed in Greenberg. 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 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.
Regarding claim 16, Greenberg discloses the use of a single magnet (42) on each clasp component. The claim requires that each clasp component has two magnets. However, 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 larger magnet, to reduce the cost of the clasp.
Greenberg also fails to disclose the claimed archway-shaped first and second handles connected to the first and second housings, respectively. However, Chung discloses the use of archway-shaped 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 18, Greenberg discloses magnets that attract the clasp components to one another.
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg, US 9101185, B1 in view of Chung, US 2004/0107547 A1 and further 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-15 are allowed. The prior art fail to disclose magnetic clasp system, comprising: a) a first clasp component including: i) a first housing; ii) a first magnet and a second magnet; iii) a plurality of holes configured to enable a material to be threaded through the first clasp component, wherein the plurality of holes are disposed between the first magnet and the second magnet; b) a second clasp component including: i) a first housing; ii) a third magnet and a fourth magnet; iii) a plurality of holes configured to enable the material to be threaded through the second clasp component, wherein the plurality of holes are disposed between the third magnet and the fourth magnet; c) wherein the first magnet and the third magnet are configured to attract each other to secure the first and second clasp components together; and, d) wherein the second magnet and the fourth magnet are configured to attract each other to secure the first and second clasp components together.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 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.
Applicant's arguments filed 5/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with regards to claims 16-20.
The applicant argues, with regard to the rejection of claim 16, that the rejection “overlooks the functional synergy between Applicant’s handles and holes. Chung’s handles are solid protrusions designed for finger placement. In contrast, Applicant’s handles are arches designed for ‘different ways you can attach material’”.
First, the claim does not recite a synergy that was originally disclosed (see the 112(a) rejection set forth previously), i.e., there is no disclosure of the handles receiving and anchoring material threaded through the plurality of holes. Second, Chung’s handles are considered to be arch-shaped protrusions that function as handles for improving the ease of manipulation of the clasp when connecting and disconnecting the housing parts of the clasp. Due to the 112(a) rejection, it will be assumed that the claim, to overcome the 112a rejection, would not include the offending subject matter. The claim is considered to not incorporate the limitation “the archway is configured to anchor the material threaded through the plurality of holes”.
If the applicant corrects the claims to overcome the 112(a) and 112(b) rejections, the claim would be considered to be allowable over the prior art.
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 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
Prosecution Insights