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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to amendment received on 10/15/25. Claims 1, 5, 6, 11, 13, 16 and 19 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are examined herein.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the title is repeated in the abstract paragraph. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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: support needs to be provided for “the conduit section is positioned on a terminating edge of the upper part of the body section” (claim 1), “wherein at least a portion of a side edge of the body section located between the lower part and the upper part is free from the at least one conduit” (claims 1, 11 and 16), “a conduit section having lateral sides is positioned along a terminating edge of the upper part and extending laterally from the upper part” (claim 11), and “the conduit section positioned on a terminating edge of the upper part” (claim 14).
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 3-4 and 15 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 3, 4 and 15 it is unclear what the hammock panels body section requires in terms of side edges and lateral edges, are these different edges of the same edges? Claims 1 and 11 from which claims 3, 4, and 5 depend require a side edge between the upper part and the lower part to be free from the conduit section, while claims 3, 4, and 5 require a lateral side of the hammock panel body section to have the conduit section extending an entirely of the lateral sides length. It is unclear what structure is required to read on the claim in terms of the conduit section, side and lateral edges.
Any remaining claims are rejected depending from a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 3, 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claims 3, 4 and 15 require the conduit section to extend the entirely of a length of each lateral side of the hammock panel, while independent claims 1 and 11 require the conduit section to be free along the body section of the hammock panel’s side edge/lateral edge between the upper part and the lower part. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Georgis, Jr. (US 2011/0173741).
In regard to claim 16, Georgis, Jr. teaches an adjustable undergarment apparatus for supporting male genitalia (support device: 10) comprising: a plurality of panels forming the undergarment (panels: waistband 11 and Velcro fasteners: 126A, 126B, figure 1 and 4; paragraph 0020 and 0034); and a support panel (support device 12) having a body section and a conduit section see figures 1-3 body section and conduit section: 12A1, 12A2 and 12A), wherein the body section has an upper part and a lower part (see figures 1-3), wherein the lower part is connected to at least one of a center panel or a fly panel of the plurality of panels forming the undergarment at a location substantially proximate to a seam between the fly panel and the center panel (lower part is connected via attached seam of body section to waistband/center panel which is at a location substantially proximate to the seam between the fly panel (126A, 126B) and center panel (11)), and the upper part is extended away from the fly panel (126A, 126B) and the center panel (11) (see figure 3) with the conduit section positioned on a terminating edge of the upper art wherein at least a portion of a side edge of the body section located between the lower part and the upper part is free from the conduit section (conduit section is 12A2 and/or 12A, paragraph 0026), wherein the body section is a supportive hammock panel configured to move anteriorly in an anterior direction to contact a posterior side of a scrotum (see figure 3, paragraphs 0024, 0025), wherein the conduit section has a conduit path positioned therein (see figures 1 and 3), the conduit path configured to receive a cord (14) movable between at least a tensioned state and an un-tensioned state (paragraphs 0024-0025).
In regard to claim 17, Georgis, Jr. teaches wherein the body section (12) of the support panel has a substantially trapezoidal shape (see figures 1-3).
In regard to claim 18, Georgis, Jr. teaches wherein when the cord (14) is moved to the tensioned state, the support panel is positioned to contact a bottom of the scrotum (paragraph 0024).
In regard to claim 19, Georgis, Jr. teaches wherein the conduit path is formed within the conduit section by a piece of the at least one fold-over support panel folded upon itself (paragraph 0026).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 5-14 and 20 are allowed over prior art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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.
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 ALISSA L HOEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4985. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00-5:30 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.
ALISSA L. HOEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/ALISSA L HOEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732