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 .
Status of the Claims
As directed by the amendment received on December 23, 2025, claims 6, 8, and 11 have been amended. Claims 12-16 are new. Accordingly, claims 1-16 are currently pending in this application with claims 1-5 being previously withdrawn from further consideration.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed with the written response received on December 23, 2025, have been considered and an action on the merits follows. Any objections and rejections previously put forth in the Office Action dated June 23, 2025, are hereby withdrawn unless specifically noted below.
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.
Claims 6-16 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the upper portion and the lower portion are formed from the front material and the back material” at lines 25-26. If meant to recite that each of the portions are formed from both the front and back materials, it is unclear how the upper portion could be formed from the back material which includes both the upper and lower back materials. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “the upper portion being formed from the front material and the upper back material, and the lower portion being formed from the front material and the lower back material”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 6 further recites the limitation “the middle layer has 20 grams per square meter (gsm) to 30 gsm of middle-layer materials formed of the middle textile and the plastic coating” at lines 27-28. It is unclear how the middle layer can have a fabric weight value (i.e., the “20 gsm to 30 gsm”) of materials. Furthermore, the limitation is phrased awkwardly and seems to unnecessarily repeat the components of the middle layer leading to potential confusion. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “the middle layer has a fabric weight of 20 grams per square meter (gsm) to 30 gsm”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “wherein the lower back material has 230 gsm to 300 gsm of collective lower-back materials formed of the inner textile layer, the outer textile layer, and the middle layer” at lines 1-3. It is unclear how the lower back material can have a fabric weight value (i.e., the “20 gsm to 30 gsm”) of collective materials. Furthermore, the limitation is phrased awkwardly and seems to unnecessarily repeat the components of the lower back material leading to potential confusion. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “wherein the lower back material has a fabric weight of 230 gsm to 300 gsm”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “wherein the upper back material has about 210 gsm to about 270 gsm of collective upper-back materials formed of the at least one upper back textile material” at lines 1-3. It is unclear how the upper back material can have a fabric weight value of collective materials. Furthermore, the limitation is phrased awkwardly and seems to unnecessarily repeat the components of the upper back material leading to potential confusion. Additionally, due to the use of “about” with both ends of a claimed range of values and no definition of the term “about” by Applicant, it is unclear where the claimed range is meant to exactly begin and end. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “wherein the upper back material has a fabric weight of 210 gsm to 270 gsm”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “wherein the front material has about 210 gsm to about 270 gsm of collective front materials formed of the at least one front textile layer” at lines 1-3. It is unclear how the front material can have a fabric weight value of collective materials. Furthermore, the limitation is phrased awkwardly and seems to unnecessarily repeat the components of the front material leading to potential confusion. Additionally, due to the use of “about” with both ends of a claimed range of values and no definition of the term “about” by Applicant, it is unclear where the claimed range is meant to exactly begin and end. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, and the claim is rendered indefinite. Based on Applicant’s disclosure, it is suggested that the limitation instead read “wherein the front material has a fabric weight of 210 gsm to 270 gsm”. For the purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as best can be understood according to the suggested language above when applying prior art.
Claims 7-16 are also rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 6-13, as best can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0061407 to Stern et al. (hereinafter, “Stern”), in view of US 2018/0271176 to Harrell (hereinafter, “Harrell”), and in view of US 2022/0411996 to Ward (hereinafter, “Ward”).
Regarding claim 6, Stern teaches a one-piece garment (See Stern, Fig. 7A; one piece-garment) comprising: an upper portion configured to cover an upper body of a child; a lower portion configured to cover a lower body of the child, the upper and lower portions attached to each other at a waist of the one-piece garment (See annotated Figs. 7A & 7B of Stern below; garment includes upper and lower portions capable of covering an upper body and lower body, respectively, of a hypothetical child; upper and lower portions are attached at a waist of the garment; 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)); a front material configured to cover a front of a child's body, the front material including at least one front textile layer (See Stern, Fig. 7A; front of garment is formed of cotton fabric and is capable of covering a front of a hypothetical child’s body; [0030]); and a back material configured to cover a back of the child's body (See Stern, Fig. 7B; back of garment is formed of compound fabric of Fig. 3 and is capable of covering a back of a hypothetical child’s lower body; [0040]-[0041]), the back material including: an upper back material configured to cover a back of the upper body of the child, the upper back material including at least one upper back textile material (See Stern, Fig. 7B; back of garment is formed of compound fabric of Fig. 3 and is capable of covering a back of a hypothetical child’s upper body; [0040]-[0041]); a lower back material configured to cover a back of the lower body of the child (See Stern, Fig. 7B; back of garment is formed of compound fabric of Fig. 3 and is capable of covering a back of a hypothetical child’s lower body; [0040]-[0041]), the lower back material comprising: an inner textile layer; an outer textile layer; and a middle layer disposed between the inner and outer textile layers, the middle layer including a plastic coating (See Stern, Fig. 3; compound fabric includes a middle polyurethane layer (303) disposed between inner and outer layers of cloth (301); [0032]), wherein: the front material and the back material are attached to each other at one or more seams (See Stern, Figs. 7A & 7B; materials forming front and back portions of garment are attached to one another along seams; [0031], [0038]), the front material and the back material are spaced apart, away from the one or more seams, to form a gap configured to receive the child's body (See Stern, Figs. 7A & 7B; materials forming front and back portions of garment are attached to one another with seams along the sides thereby leaving an interior space, i.e., a gap, inside of the formed garment capable of being occupied by a hypothetical wearer), the inner textile layer is closer to the gap than the outer textile layer (See Stern, Fig. 3; inner textile layer (301) of compound fabric is more interior than outer textile layer and therefore closer to the interior space, i.e., the gap, of the formed garment), the upper portion and the lower portion are formed from the front material and the back material (See Stern, Figs. 7A & 7B; upper portion of garment is formed from front material and upper back material; lower portion of garment is formed from front material and lower back material).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
677
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figs. 7A (left) & 7B (right) of Stern
That said, Stern is silent to the middle layer including a middle textile layer and the middle textile layer disposed between the inner textile layer and the plastic coating, the middle textile layer comprising bamboo.
However, Harrell, in a related multi-layer moisture management garment art, is directed to garments that have direct contact with a wearer’s skin and provide layers for moisture management and EMF/EMR protection (See Harrell, Fig. 1; abstract). More specifically, Harrell teaches a middle textile layer, the middle textile layer comprising bamboo (See Harrell, Fig. 1; moisture blocking layer absorbs moisture from wearer’s skin; layer may comprise fabric construction of bamboo and elastane; [0049], [0052]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to include the moisture absorbing layer disclosed by Harrell immediately next to the inner cloth layer of Stern for a variety of reasons including for example, but not limited to, providing a moisture absorbing layer away from immediate contact with a wearer’s skin for holding moisture during use thereby improving wearer comfort. Furthermore, as a result of the above modification, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell, as discussed above) would further teach, the middle textile layer disposed between the inner textile layer and the plastic coating (the moisture absorbing layer of Harrell would be positioned between the inner cloth layer and the plastic coating layer of Stern in the modified garment, plastic coating layer of Stern and the moisture absorbing layer of Harrell together forming the middle layer).
That said, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern view of Harrell, as discussed above) is silent to the middle layer has 20 grams per square meter (gsm) to 30 gsm of middle-layer materials formed of the middle textile layer and the plastic coating.
However, Ward, in a related multi-layer moisture barrier garment art, is directed to a layered fabric construction having an absorbent middle layer for forming garments such as gowns, hats, booties, and masks (See Ward, Fig. 3; abstract). More specifically, Ward teaches the middle layer has 20 grams per square meter (gsm) to 30 gsm of middle-layer materials (See Ward, Fig. 3; middle layer can have fabric weight of 25 gsm; [0191]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to form the middle layer, i.e., the middle textile and plastic coating, of the modified one-piece garment of Stern to have a total fabric weight of 25 gsm as disclosed by Ward for a variety of reasons including for example, but not limited to, producing a lightweight and comfortable overall layered construction. Examiner further notes the absence of a showing of criticality for the specific fabric weight range or value from Applicant’s disclosure.
Regarding claim 7, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claim 6 above) further teaches wherein each of the inner and outer textile layers comprises cotton, bamboo, polyester, and/or rayon (See Stern, Figs. 7A & 7B; inner and outer layers (301) of compound fabric of Fig. 3 can be formed of cotton; [0032]; giving importance to the term “or” in the claim, the prior art meets at least one of the listed alternative limitations and, therefore, meets the limitations of the claim).
Regarding claim 8, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claims 6-7 above) further teaches wherein the middle textile layer comprises elastane (moisture blocking layer of Harrell as applied to the modified one-piece garment of Stern as discussed above comprises a fabric construction of bamboo and elastane; See Harrell, [0049], [0052]).
Regarding claim 9, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claim 6 above) further teaches wherein the at least one front textile layer and/or the at least one upper back textile material comprises cotton, bamboo, polyester, and/or rayon (See Stern, Fig. 7B; upper back of garment is formed of compound fabric of Fig. 3 which may include cotton [0032]; giving importance to the term “or” in the claim, the prior art meets at least one of the listed alternative limitations and, therefore, meets the limitations of the claim).
Regarding claim 10, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claim 6 above) further teaches wherein the plastic coating comprises a water-impermeable material (See Stern, Fig. 3; compound fabric includes a middle polyurethane layer (303) which prevents liquid from passing to exterior of garment; [0039]).
Regarding claim 11, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claim 6 above) further teaches wherein the one-piece garment is one-piece pajamas or a snowsuit (See Stern, Figs. 7A-7B; one-piece garment is capable of being used at least as pajamas; giving importance to the term “or” in the claim, the prior art meets at least one of the listed alternative limitations and, therefore, meets the limitations of the claim).
Regarding claim 12, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claim 6 above) is silent to wherein each of the inner and outer textile layers comprises bamboo.
However, Harrell further teaches wherein each of the inner and outer textile layers comprises bamboo (See Harrell, Fig. 1; layers of fabric construction may include bamboo; [0049]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to form each of the inner and outer textile layers of the modified one-piece garment of Stern to include bamboo fibers as disclosed by Harrell for a variety of reasons including for example, but not limited to, providing a fabric that is both comfortable and environmentally friendly (See Harrell, [0049]).
Regarding claim 13, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claim 6 above) is silent to wherein the at least one front textile layer and/or the at least one upper back textile material comprises bamboo.
However, Harrell further teaches wherein the at least one front textile layer and/or the at least one upper back textile material comprises bamboo (See Harrell, Fig. 1; layers of fabric construction may include bamboo; [0049]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to form one or more of the front textile layer and the upper back textile material of the modified one-piece garment of Stern to include bamboo fibers as disclosed by Harrell for a variety of reasons including for example, but not limited to, providing a fabric that is both comfortable and environmentally friendly (See Harrell, [0049]).
Claims 14-16, as best can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claim 6 above, and further in view of US 2008/0096001 to Emden et al. (hereinafter, “Emden”).
Regarding claim 14, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell and Ward, as discussed with respect to claim 6 above) is silent to wherein the lower back material has 230 gsm to 300 gsm of collective lower-back materials formed of the inner textile layer, the outer textile layer, and the middle layer.
However, Emden, in a related fluid absorbing garment art, is directed to a fabric for absorbing water or fluid, the fabric being usable to form various garments (See Emden Figs. 1; abstract; [0134]). More specifically, Emden teaches wherein the lower back material has 230 gsm to 300 gsm of collective lower-back materials formed of the inner textile layer, the outer textile layer, and the middle layer (Emden teaches an overall fabric weight being 250 gsm; See Emden, [0095]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to configure the overall fabric weight of the modified one-piece garment of Stern to have a fabric weight of 250 gsm as disclosed by Emden for a variety of reasons including for example, but not limited to, providing a garment fabric weight that is comfortable for a wearer of the garment (See Emden, [0095]).
Regarding claim 15, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell, Ward, and Emden, as discussed with respect to claims 6 and 14 above) further teaches wherein the upper back material has about 210 gsm to about 270 gsm of collective upper-back materials formed of the at least one upper back textile material (the overall fabric weight of the modified one-piece garment of Stern as discussed above would have an overall fabric weight being 250 gsm; See Emden, [0095]).
Regarding claim 16, the modified one-piece garment of Stern (i.e., Stern in view of Harrell, Ward, and Emden, as discussed with respect to claims 6 and 14-15 above) further teaches wherein the front material has about 210 gsm to about 270 gsm of collective front materials formed of the at least one front textile layer (the overall fabric weight of the modified one-piece garment of Stern as discussed above would have an overall fabric weight being 250 gsm; See Emden, [0095]).
Response to Arguments
In view of Applicant’s amendment, the search has been updated, and new prior art has been identified and applied. Applicant’s arguments, filed December 23, 2025, with respect to the rejection of the claims under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection, as Applicant’s arguments appear to be drawn only to the newly amended limitations and previously presented rejections.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. US 2005/0144693 to Hagen; US 2017/0290374 to Biodrowski et al.; US 2024/0261155 to Ahmed; US 2023/0157909 to Jeon et al.; and US 2007/0254145 to Sawin et al. are each directed to layered and/or absorbent garment structures.
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 MATTHEW R MARCHEWKA whose telephone number is (571) 272-4038. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM-5:00PM 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, CLINTON T 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.
/MATTHEW R MARCHEWKA/Examiner, Art Unit 3732