DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a first office action on the merits. Claims 1-20, as filed are currently pending and have been considered below.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention and Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09 January 2026.
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 1-18 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.
Applicant’s usage of the phrase “geometric component” in claims 1, 2, 5, 7-9, 12 and 13 is considered vague and unclear. While Applicant provides examples of geometric components in the disclosure it is unclear what else could or could not be considered a geometric component. The remaining claims not explicitly mentioned here depend from at least claim 1 and inherit these issues under 112.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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.
Claim(s) 1-14, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gahleitner (US 2019/0255761).
Regarding claim 1, Gahleitner discloses an apparatus comprising:
a first side (22) extending across a width of the strap;
a second side (22) opposite the first side and extending across the width of the strap; and
a thickness (21) extending between the first and second sides,
wherein the first side is embossed and includes a base surface (30) and a raised pattern (32) extending from the base surface,
wherein the raised pattern defines multiple cells (Fig. 3 as annotated shows an outline of a single cell that is repeated throughout the base surface), and
wherein a first one of the cells is defined by a first perimeter component (Fig. 3 as outlined below) of the raised pattern and a first geometric component (raised interstitial surfaces surrounding recesses 28) of the raised pattern positioned within the first perimeter component so part of the base surface extends between the first perimeter component and the first geometric component.
PNG
media_image1.png
880
816
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 3 of Gahleitner as annotated
Regarding claim 2, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the first perimeter component surrounds the first geometric component (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 3, Gahleitner further discloses wherein a second one of the cells is defined by a second perimeter component of the raised pattern, wherein the first and second cells are adjacent, and wherein a segment of the raised pattern is shared by the first perimeter component and the second perimeter component (Fig. 3 as annotated above).
Regarding claim 4, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the raised pattern includes a tessellation, and wherein the first perimeter component is part of the tessellation (the pattern as shown in Fig. 3 is considered a tessellation).
Regarding claim 5, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the shape of the first geometric component is unique from the shape of any portion of the tessellation (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 6, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the first perimeter component is hexagonal (Fig. 3 as annotated above).
Regarding claim 7, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the part of the base surface that extends between the first perimeter component and the first geometric component surrounds the first geometric component (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 8, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the first geometric component intersects the first perimeter component (the raised surfaces surrounding the recesses 28 intersects with the perimeters as shown in Fig. 3 as annotated above).
Regarding claim 9, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the first geometric component is a non-linear path (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 10, Gahleitner further discloses wherein ends of the non-linear path intersect the first perimeter component (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 11, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the shape of each of the cells is the same (Fig. 3 as annotated above).
Regarding claim 12, Gahleitner further discloses wherein a geometric component is included in each of a group of the cells (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 13, Gahleitner further discloses wherein a geometric component is included in each of the cells (Fig. 3 as shown).
Regarding claim 14, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the strap comprises polypropylene (Paragraph 46).
Regarding claim 17, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the strap is coiled in a roll (40).
Regarding claim 18, Gahleitner further discloses wherein the second side is embossed (Fig. 2 shows embossing of both sides).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gahleitner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tajika et al. (US 2007/0014971).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Gahleitner discloses the invention except for wherein the strap has a width in a range from 2 mm to 25 mm and a thickness in a range from 0.40 mm to 0.60 mm.
Tajika et al. teach wherein embossed straps have a width of 5mm and a width of 0.45 mm (Paragraph 23, line 5).
From this teaching of Tajika et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to apply these dimensions to the band of Gahleitner. It has been held that wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Furthermore, the selected dimensions would be sufficient for binding objects with optimal strength and pliability.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-5735. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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.
/M.S.L/Examiner, Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/ SPE, Art Unit 3677
Prosecution Insights