DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6-8, 15, 18, and 19 are pending. Claims 1, 6, 8, and 18 are amended. Claims 2, 5, 9-14, 16, 17, and 20 are cancelled.
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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on February 16, 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 6, 8, and 18 have been amended, claims 2, 5, 9-14, 16, 17, and 20 have been cancelled. Thus, claims 1, 3, 4, 6-8, 15, 18, and 19 are presently pending in this application.
Applicant’s amendment to the drawings has overcome the drawing objections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §112(b) rejections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §102(a)(1) and §103 rejections, however many claims remain rejected under §103.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) 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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the recessed texture (claim 1) and the raised texture (claim 6) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 § 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 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 1, 3, and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jasperson (US 2136691) in view of McNamee-Sollars (US 20110088132) and Adeniji (US 20160157526).
Regarding claim 1, Jasperson describes pocket square insert device (see Fig. 2) comprising:
an insert (26) comprised of a vertical opening (slot 48, has a vertical dimension and thus is a vertical opening);
an inner sleeve (stiffening element 24 and cloth 30) comprised of a first opening (opening 40) and a second opening (slot 50);
an outer sleeve (stiffening element 28 and cloth 30) comprised of a third opening (slot 34);
a fabric (cloth 30 around insert 26); and
a fastener (pin 38, 52),
and wherein the fabric is adhesively attached to an exterior surface of the inner sleeve (glued, p. 1, col. 1, ll. 35-39), and
further wherein the outer sleeve further comprises a recessed texture exterior surface (see annotated portion of Fig. 3 below).
Jasperson does not explicitly describe that the adhesive is double-sided tape.
In related art for garment accessories and pertinent to the problem of attaching components to one another, McNamee-Sollars describes attaching components to one another via double-sided tape (para. 0045, double stick tape).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the adhesive to be double stick tape as described in McNamee-Sollars as such a modification is a simple substitution of one known element (adhesive) for another (double-sided tape) with predictable results. That is, one switching the material from adhesive to double side tape would understand the effects of such a modification. Furthermore, McNamee-Sollars describes the materials as equivalent (see list at end of para. 0045 describing that glue and double stick tape are appropriate combinations for joining components together).
Jasperson does not explicitly describe that the cloth is a microfiber.
In related art for garment accessories, Adeniji describes using microfiber (para. 0017).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the material to be of microfiber as such a modification is a simple substitution of one known element (cloth) for another (microfiber fabric) with predictable results. That is, one switching the material to microfiber would understand the affects that the material would have on the pocket square insert.
PNG
media_image1.png
248
438
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Jasperson describes the pocket square insert device of claim 1, wherein the fastener (38, 52) is positioned through the first opening, the second opening, and the third opening (extend through all of these openings).
Regarding claim 4, Jasperson describes the pocket square insert device of claim 1, wherein the outer sleeve (28 and covering cloth 30) is fixedly attached to the inner sleeve and to the fabric (is attached to the sleeve an insert via fastener 38, 52).
Claims 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jasperson (US 2136691) in view of McNamee-Sollars (US 20110088132), Adeniji (US 20160157526) and Crane (0970891).
Regarding claim 6, Jasperson describes a pocket square insert device (see Fig. 2) comprising:
an insert (member 26) comprised of a vertical opening (slot 48, is vertical because it has a vertical dimension);
an inner sleeve (member 24) comprised of a first opening and a second opening (see annotated Fig. 4);
an outer sleeve (member 28 and cloth 30) comprised of a third opening (slot 50);
a fabric (cloth 30) attached to the inner sleeve (24); and
a fastener (pin 38, 52),
wherein the fabric is adhesively attached to an exterior surface of the inner sleeved (glued, p. 1, col. 1, ll. 35-39), and
further wherein the outer sleeve further comprises a raised texture exterior surface (see annotated portion of Fig. 3 below).
Jasperson does not explicitly describe that the adhesive is double-sided tape.
In related art for garment accessories and pertinent to the problem of attaching components to one another, McNamee-Sollars describes attaching components to one another via double-sided tape (para. 0045, double stick tape).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the adhesive to be double stick tape as described in McNamee-Sollars as such a modification is a simple substitution of one known element (adhesive) for another (double-sided tape) with predictable results. That is, one switching the material from adhesive to double side tape would understand the effects of such a modification. Furthermore, McNamee-Sollars describes the materials as equivalent (see list at end of para. 0045 describing that glue and double stick tape are appropriate combinations for joining components together).
Jasperson does not explicitly describe that the cloth is a cashmere.
In related art for garment accessories, Adeniji describes using cashmere (para. 0027).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the material to be of microfiber as such a modification is a simple substitution of one known element (cloth) for another cashmere) with predictable results. That is, one switching the material to cashmere would understand the affects that the material would have on the pocket square insert.
Jasperson does not explicitly describe that the fastener is a brad.
In related are for garment accessories, Crane describes the use of a brads or rivets to secure components together.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the pin of Jasperson to be a brad as described in Crane as such a modification is a simple substitution of one element (pin) for another (brad) with predictable results (replacing one fastener with another provides a predictable result).
PNG
media_image2.png
248
438
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Jasperson as modified describes the pocket square insert device of claim 6, wherein the brad is comprised of a button head (the fastener has a head).
Regarding claim 15, Jasperson as modified describes pocket square insert device of claim 6, wherein the fabric is arranged in a shape (the fabric has a shape, as every physical item does).
Claim 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jasperson (US 2136691) in view of McNamee-Sollars (US 20110088132), Adeniji (US 20160157526), Crane (0970891), and Bertelink (US 3492677).
Regarding claim 7, Jasperson describes the pocket square insert device of claim 6, but does not explicitly describe wherein the insert is comprised of a flexible material.
In related art, Bertelink describes wherein the insert (plate 3) is comprised of a flexible material (col. 3, ll.1-3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the material of the insert to be flexible so that the breast pocket handkerchief can adapt itself to the model of the pocket (col. 3, ll. 1-3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18 and 19 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 18 includes the requirements of three specific components, with a vertical opening, moving the outer sleeve longitudinally, and attaching a removable cover to the fastener. The closest prior art is likely Biederman (US 2269511) which includes many of the features, or could be modified to include such features, however does not include attaching a removable cover to the fastener. Further, it would not be have been obvious to include such a cover as the fastener is covered by a pocket during use. Thus, to modify the fastener to include the removable cover would be the result of improper hindsight reconstruction.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK J LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-1145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th, Alt F: 8:00 AM-5:00 PM ET.
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, Clint Ostrup can be reached on 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.
/PATRICK J. LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732