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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Applicant needs to update the “Related Application Information” to include any allowed Patent Applications with their Allowed Patent Numbers.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 2-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Mitchell (US 2005/0136797 A1).
In regard to claim 2, Mitchell et al discloses an athletic bra comprising a plurality of sections, wherein at least one section has a Poisoon’s ratio that differs in relation to at least one other section such that a different stretch pattern of the bra is provided between the sections that differ in Poisson’s ratio when the bra is subjected to a stretching force .
The definition of a “Poisson’s ratio” is the phenomenon in which a material when compressed in one direction such as a vertical direction then expands in the opposite lateral direction- perpendicular to that first vertical direction.
Therefore, in regard to claim 2, Mitchell et al discloses an athletic bra 10 in para. (0026) and in figure 1, and that is wearable in and during athletic activities and is therefore an athletic bra as broadly claimed. The Mitchell et al bra further is comprising a plurality of sections of a bra body 20, a front portion 22 and a rear portion opposite the front portion 22- or wings. And cup sections 26 all in figure 1 with a central section 22 and , wherein at least one section has a Poisoon’s ratio that differs in relation to at least one other section such that a different stretch pattern of the bra is provided between the sections that differ in Poisson’s ratio when the bra is subjected to a stretching force . The sections of the front portion are oriented such that a gradient of elasticity 24 is imparted along the front portion between the plurality of sections. Each section has a different stretch or elasticity and therefore, each section when stretched laterally will shorten vertically a certain amount . And, since each section has a different level of elasticity- they will length a different manner laterally and then also shorten in height- in the vertical direction as well. Therefore, because of their differing elasticity and stretchability they will also have a different Poisson’s ratio in regard to each of the sections when pulled or compressed.
The Mitchell reference does not specifically disclose the term Poisson’s ratio within the reference but the ability of the Mitchell bra to perform as claimed in regard to the Poisson’s ratio is inherent with the bra and the materials that make up the bra itself.
The first and second cup sections have a degree of elasticity that is greater than the elasticity in the central area 2 that is the baseline elasticity as stated in para. (0039) between the cups that is adjacent with the cups 26, Mitchell also discloses the plurality of sections that surround the first and second cups 26 that are adjacent thereto that includes the first and second peripheral side sections (side panels 28 with sections 29 and 30, as in para. (0031) disposed along a side portion of the second cup section. The first and second peripheral side sections numbered 29 and 30 as in figure 1 have the same degree of elasticity. In regard to claims 3 -5, Mitchell et al discloses a knit material and wherein the knit material is formed by a flat knitting process as in claim 4 and as a single knit process as in claim 5as discussed in para. (0026)-(0033) and figure 1. In regard to claim 6 the at least one section of the brassiere front would have the negative Poisson’s ratio as claimed when stretched laterally and the vertical center would lower causing a negative ratio between the wings and the center area section.
In regard to claim 7 Mitchell et al discloses the breast cup 26 with an extending portion that extends up into the shoulder strap but that is of a zero point stretch or negative stretch or Poissons ratio as claimed tht extends into the shoulder straps that are added to the knitted cup and strap portion as in figure 3. This would provide the auxetic properties as claimed in claims 7 and 8 in the cups and as discussed in paras. (0033-0038) and as in figure 3. The Mitchell et al athletic bra as claimed in claim 2, further discloses the plurality of sections that comprises the first and second cup sections 26 , the mid section 24 disposed between the first and second cup sections; the first and second peripheral side sections 29,30, the bridging section 24, cradle section 34 (in figures 1 and 2, below the first and second cup sections and wherein each of the fist and second cup sections possess a Poisson’s ratio tat is les than a Poisson’s ratio for each of the midsection, the first and second peripheral side sections(29,30) and the bridging section and cradle section since the first and second cup sections, bridging section and cradle section include the elasticity that allows the Poisson’s ratios to function as claimed in claim 9 and wherein the Poisson’s ratios for each of the first and second cup sections 26 as in claim 10 are negative and the sections in claim 11 have the same degree of elasticity as claimed. (See Mitchell et al paras. (0030-0338).
Claims 12 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. None of the cited references, alone or in combination, disclose the first and second outer layers and intermediate section therebetween as claimed in claim 12 and the intermediate layer as having a corrugated shape as claimed in claim 13.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLORIA M HALE whose telephone number is (571)272-4984. The examiner can normally be reached MON.-THURS..
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, Alissa Tompkins can be reached at 1-571-272-3425. 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.
/GLORIA M HALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732