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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group 1 (Claims 1-9) in the reply filed on 08/04/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the examination of all claims would not be an undue burden on the examiner. This is not found persuasive because all groups are drawn to distinct inventions, as one would not search for a glove structure in the same area that one would search for a chemical composition or for apparatuses for forming gloves.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 08/04/2025.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ortolivo (US 5676092) in view of Hull (US 2010/0257656).
Regarding Claim 1, Ortolivo teaches an elastomeric glove (10) (col. 2 ll. 32-33, “The glove 10 (see FIG. 1) may be made as an integral molded rubber sleeve,” therein the glove is clearly elastomeric) comprising: a superimposed texture (22, 24) provided on a surface of the elastomeric glove (fig. 3 shows the texture (22, 24) on the surface of the glove), including front of a palm region, a thumb region and fingers region (fig. 1 shows the texture on the front of the palm region, on the thumb region, and on a fingers region); wherein the superimposed texture comprises multiple units of a stellate convex polygon distributed on the surface of the elastomeric glove, with a tip at the center and folded at intersects of the polygon for gripping, diverting and channelling fluid away from the surface of the elastomeric glove (figs. 2 and 4 show the texture including unites of a stellate convex polygon that is distributed on the surface, the polygon having a top (30) at the center and having folds that could clearly grip and diver and channel fluid from the surface of the glove).
Ortolivo does not teach the texture being providing on a back of a palm region
Attention is drawn to Hull, which teaches an analogous glove. Hull teaches an elastomeric glove (10) (paragraph [0016] teaches “Glove 10 preferably is therefore manufactured from natural rubber latex,” and therein is clearly elastomeric) comprising: a superimposed texture (34) provided on a surface of the elastomeric glove, including front and back of a palm region, a thumb region and fingers region (figs. 1-3 show the texture (34) provided on the front and back of the palm region (14), the fingers region (18) and the thumb region (16)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ortolivo to include the teaching of Hull such that the texture is providing on a back of a palm region so as to allow the glove to be ambidextrous and used the same on either hand (paragraph [0015], “there is shown a first embodiment of an ambidextrous or reversible glove”).
Regarding Claim 2, Ortolivo teaches all of the limitations of the glove of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above. Ortolivo further teaches wherein a non-superimposed texture portion (see annotated Fig.) is provided on a region between the palm region and the thumb region (annotated fig. 1 shows a non-superimposed texture portion between the palm and thumb regions).
Regarding Claim 3, Ortolivo teaches all of the limitations of the glove of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above.
Ortolivo does not teach wherein the superimposed texture provided on the thumb region is divided into a left texture region and a right texture region, encompassing a front surface and a back surface of the elastomeric glove.
Attention is drawn to Hull, which teaches an analogous glove. Hull teaches an elastomeric glove (10) (paragraph [0016] teaches “Glove 10 preferably is therefore manufactured from natural rubber latex,” and therein is clearly elastomeric) comprising: a superimposed texture (34) provided on a surface of the elastomeric glove, including front and back of a palm region, a thumb region and fingers region (figs. 1-3 show the texture (34) provided on the front and back of the palm region (14), the fingers region (18) and the thumb region (16)). Hull further teaches wherein the superimposed texture provided on the thumb region is divided into a left texture region and a right texture region, encompassing a front surface and a back surface of the elastomeric glove (figs. 1 and 3 show the left texture region encompassing a front and back of the glove, while the figs. do not show the right texture region, paragraph [0031] teaches “The surface of glove 10 in areas 40 preferably is substantially smooth. Nonetheless, if desired, these areas 40 may also be provided with the pattern 34 embossed thereon,” therein the right texture region could also be formed so as to provide the wearer grip on the outer edge of their thumbs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ortolivo to include the teachings of Hull such that the superimposed texture provided on the thumb region is divided into a left texture region and a right texture region, encompassing a front surface and a back surface of the elastomeric glove so as to provide the wearer sufficient grip when using their thumbs to grasp an object and/or to brace their hand.
Regarding Claim 5, Ortolivo teaches all of the limitations of the glove of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above. Ortolivo further teaches wherein the stellate convex polygon is a four-pointed stellate shape (figs. 2 and 4 show the stellate convex polygon being a four pointed stellate shape).
Regarding Claim 6, Ortolivo teaches all of the limitations of the glove of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above. Ortolivo further teaches wherein channels (see annotated Fig.) are formed between the multiple units of the stellate convex polygon (annotated fig. 2 shows channels formed between the multiple units of the stellate convex polygon).
Regarding Claim 7, Ortolivo teaches all of the limitations of the glove of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above.
Ortolivo does not teach wherein the stellate convex polygon comprises a protruding textured pattern that corresponds to a depressed textured pattern on an inner surface of the elastomeric glove.
Attention is drawn to Hull, which teaches an analogous glove. Hull teaches an elastomeric glove (10) (paragraph [0016] teaches “Glove 10 preferably is therefore manufactured from natural rubber latex,” and therein is clearly elastomeric) comprising: a superimposed texture (34) provided on a surface of the elastomeric glove, including front and back of a palm region, a thumb region and fingers region (figs. 1-3 show the texture (34) provided on the front and back of the palm region (14), the fingers region (18) and the thumb region (16)). Hull further teaches wherein the texture (34) comprises a protruding textured pattern that corresponds to a depressed textured pattern on an inner surface of the elastomeric glove (paragraph [0029] teaches “This gripping surface 34 takes the form of a textured pattern that is either embossed or molded into surfaces 10a, 10b …This pattern preferably is a raised fan-shape pattern 34,” wherein molding or embossing the pattern would clearly form the mirror of the texture on the inner surface of the glove, meaning that the inner surface of the glove would be depressed where the outer surface is raised).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Orto olio to include the teachings of Hull such that the stellate convex polygon comprises a protruding textured pattern that corresponds to a depressed textured pattern on an inner surface of the elastomeric glove so as to enhance the wearer’s grip and further to as to provide a tactile guide for the wearer to ensure that the gloves are properly positioned on the hand (paragraph [0029], “Gripping surface 34 aids the person in gripping objects, especially wet or moist objects.”).
Regarding Claim 8, Ortolivo teaches all of the limitations of the glove of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above.
Ortolivo does not teach wherein a non-superimposed textured portion is provided on a central region of a thumb tip, a finger tips region, a region between a thumb and an index finger, a region between each of four fingers, and a region that a little finger facing away from the four fingers.
Attention is drawn to Hull, which teaches an analogous glove. Hull teaches an elastomeric glove (10) (paragraph [0016] teaches “Glove 10 preferably is therefore manufactured from natural rubber latex,” and therein is clearly elastomeric) comprising: a superimposed texture (34) provided on a surface of the elastomeric glove, including front and back of a palm region, a thumb region and fingers region (figs. 1-3 show the texture (34) provided on the front and back of the palm region (14), the fingers region (18) and the thumb region (16)). Hull further teaches wherein a non-superimposed textured portion (40) is provided on a central region of a thumb tip, a finger tips region, a region between a thumb and an index finger, a region between each of four fingers, and a region that a little finger facing away from the four fingers (figs. 2 and 3 show each of the recited regions being a non-superimposed textured portion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ortolivo to include the teachings of Hull such that a non-superimposed textured portion is provided on a central region of a thumb tip, a finger tips region, a region between a thumb and an index finger, a region between each of four fingers, and a region that a little finger facing away from the four fingers so as to avoid including texture on areas that do not need it, minimizing the surface area of the glove and therein material needed to produce the glove (paragraph [0031] “there are areas 40 of wrist region 12, palm region 14, thumb region 16 and digit regions 18 that do not necessarily need to be provided with the textured pattern as these areas are not located in areas that will touch an object when the person is gripping the same using the glove. The surface of glove 10 in areas 40 preferably is substantially smooth.”)
PNG
media_image1.png
637
594
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 9 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HALEY A SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-6597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at (571)272-4888. 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.
/HALEY A SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732