DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to a filing filed on November 8th, 2024. Claims 1-18 have been examined in this application.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-18 is/are drawn to system (i.e., a manufacture). (Step 1: YES).
Step 2A - Prong One: In prong one of step 2A, the claim(s) is/are analyzed to evaluate whether it/they recite(s) a judicial exception.
Claim 1: A bedding system subscription service, comprising:
providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase;
providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core;
periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover;
and recycling the selected mattress cover after it has been replaced by the new mattress cover.
(Examiner notes: The underlined claim terms above are interpreted as additional elements beyond the abstract idea and are further analyzed under Step 2A - Prong Two)
Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the independent claims is/are directed to the abstract idea of organizing human activity, specifically the claim recites commercial subscription model for periodically replacing a consumable product component (i.e., a mattress cover), including selecting product components, scheduling recurring shipments, sending reminders, and managing returns and recycling. These activities constitute certain methods of organizing human activity, including commercial interactions, subscription-based sales, product replenishment logistics, and post-consumer recycling management. The claims primarily recite business practices involving offering selectable products, automatically shipping replacements at scheduled intervals, notifying customers, and arranging for return and recycling of used items. Such commercial subscription and product lifecycle management practices have long been prevalent in commerce and constitute fundamental economic practices. Thus, the claimed subject matter is directed to an abstract idea falling within the judicial exception category of “certain methods of organizing human activity”. From applicant’s specification, the claimed invention is implemented to “as part of the subscription service and assuming that no modifications (e.g., different stiffness, anti-microbial properties, etc.) to the cover 12 are required by the customer, a new cover 12 may preferably be sent to the customer every year and no less than every two years. This time period is variable, and a new cover 12 may be sent to the customer every six months, every eighteen months, or as deemed fit by the customer, if desired. The time period may be customer dependent, and longer durations may be associated with lower fees. If the customer desires modification to the cover 12 before it is time for replacement, the customer may contact the manufacturer and request a new cover 12 with the desired modifications, at which time the manufacturer will receive in return the used cover 12 for recycling” (see 0059 of instant specification). The claims recite a method of organizing human activity, specifically steps offering selectable products, automatically shipping replacements at scheduled intervals, notifying customers, and arranging for return and recycling of used items and does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical technological improvement. The Examiner notes that although the claim limitations are summarized, the analysis regarding subject matter eligibility considers the entirety of the claim and all of the claim elements individually, as a whole, and in ordered combination.
The dependent claims 2-18 do not add subject matter that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Dependent claims 2-5 further elaborate on this business model by specifying shipment after a predetermined period, inclusion of return packaging, defined replacement intervals (e.g., six months, one year), and sending reminders prior to replacement. These limitations merely refine the timing, logistics, and customer communication aspects of a recurring subscription service and therefore fall within certain methods of organizing human activity, including fundamental economic practices and commercial subscription arrangements. Dependent claims 6-8 and 10 relate to the use of recyclable materials, recycled input materials, and modular spring assemblies. These claims specify the type of product components being offered within the subscription framework but do not alter the underlying commercial concept of selectable product configuration and replacement. They merely define product characteristics within the broader economic model. Dependent claims 9 and 14 recite variations in structural configuration (e.g., different axial spring lengths, tunable density for stiffness adjustment). These limitations describe customization features that enable consumers to select product characteristics according to preference. Such customization options represent variations in product offerings within the same commercial sales framework and do not change the fundamental nature of the claimed activity as a subscription-based sales and replacement model. Dependent claims 11-13 and 15-18 recite layered cover constructions, fiber configurations (e.g., hollow or lobed fibers), flame retardant properties, moisture-wicking characteristics, embossing, and anti-bacterial agents. These limitations define particular material compositions or functional attributes of the replaceable cover product. However, they remain directed to specifying the features of a consumable item within the recurring replacement program and therefore represent product feature refinements within the same commercial transaction structure. Accordingly, when considered as a whole and in grouped categories, the claims are directed to the abstract idea of organizing and managing a subscription-based commercial service for customizable product selection, periodic replenishment, customer notification, and end-of-life recycling, which constitutes a fundamental economic practice and a method of organizing human activity, which is/are directed to the same abstract idea as independent claims and do not add significantly more., which falls within a judicial exception under 35 U.S.C. §101.
As such, the Examiner concludes that claims 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong One: YES).
Step 2A - Prong Two: In prong two of step 2A, an evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. An “addition element” is an element that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception (i.e., an element/limitation that sets forth an abstract idea is not an additional element). The phrase “integration into a practical application” is defined as requiring an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using a mattress core, mattress cover, spring assemblies, bedding subscription, mattress cores, covers, comfort layers, backing layers, fibers, and recycling processing, etc. (Claims 1) is/are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer.
Similarly, the limitations of using a mattress core, mattress cover, spring assemblies, bedding subscription, etc. (Claims 1, and dependent claims 2-18) are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Further, the additional limitations beyond the abstract idea identified above, serves merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Specifically, it/they serve(s) to limit the application of the abstract idea to computerized environments (e.g., provide, replace, recycle, etc. steps performed by a bedding subscription model, etc.). This reasoning was demonstrated in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (Fed. Cir. 2015), where the court determined "an abstract idea does not become nonabstract by limiting the invention to a particular field of use or technological environment, such as the Internet [or] a computer"). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
The recited additional element(s) steps of shipping the new mattress cover, sending reminders or notifications, receiving returned covers, and recycling the replaced mattress cover constitute insignificant extra-solution activity. These steps merely involve data gathering, post-solution activity, or routine logistical implementation of the underlying abstract idea of a subscription-based product replacement model. For example, shipping a replacement cover after a predetermined period of time and providing reminder messages are conventional commercial practices ancillary to the core abstract idea of recurring subscription fulfillment. Similarly, receiving and recycling the used mattress cover represents post-use handling of the product after the commercial transaction has occurred and does not meaningfully limit or transform the claimed abstract idea. Consequently, these additional elements constitute “insignificant extra-solution activity” under MPEP 2106.05(g) because they simply automate steps that could otherwise be performed by a human and do not contribute to a meaningful technological advance. The claim does not recite a specific improvement to computer functionality, a new data structure, or a specialized hardware configuration. Accordingly, the additional elements of independent claims the abstract idea into a practical application and constitute insignificant extra-solution activity and fail to integrate (Independent Claims 1), additionally and/or alternatively simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea). This/these limitation(s) do/does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Dependent claims 2-18 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e., they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A – Prong two: NO).
Step 2B: In step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, is/are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. This analysis is also termed a search for an "inventive concept." An "inventive concept" is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception, and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amounts to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2355, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966).
As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong 2”, the identified additional elements in independent Claims 1, and dependent claims 2-18 are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a generic computer, and/or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Therefore, the claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
The recited additional element(s) involve data gathering, post-solution activity, or routine logistical implementation of the underlying abstract idea of a subscription-based product replacement model. (Independent Claims 1), additionally and/or alternatively simply append insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, (e.g., mere pre-solution activity, such as data gathering, in conjunction with an abstract idea), i.e. shipping a replacement cover after a predetermined period of time and providing reminder messages are conventional commercial practices ancillary to the core abstract idea of recurring subscription fulfillment. Similarly, receiving and recycling the used mattress cover represents post-use handling of the product after the commercial transaction has occurred and does not meaningfully limit or transform the claimed abstract idea, which is similar to “Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data”, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information), “Storing and retrieving information in memory”, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; “Presenting offers to potential customers and gathering statistics generated based on the testing about how potential customers responded to the offers; the statistics are then used to calculate an optimized price”, OIP Technologies, 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93, Determining an estimated outcome and setting a price, OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93, is a well-understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here) (See MPEP 2106.05(d) (II)).
This conclusion is based on a factual determination. Applicant’s own disclosure at paragraph [0061] acknowledges that “The subscription service may then periodically charge the customer for replacement of cover 12. The periodic charges may be monthly or yearly. In any event, the primary aspect to keep in mind is that mattress core 10 is manufactured to have a useful life of at least twenty years such that mattress core 10 does not require annual replacement. It should be understood, however, that mattress core 10 can be replaced and recycled based on customer request. Moreover, to the extent that cover 12 is configured to prevent or at least minimize fluids, dust, debris, and the like from reaching mattress core 10, the useful life of mattress core 10 may be further extended such that only replacement of cover 12 is necessary” This additional element therefore do not ensure the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a generic computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer or/and append the abstract idea with insignificant extra solution activity associated with the implementation of the judicial exception, (e.g., mere data gathering, post-solution activity) and/or simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception.
The dependent claims 2-18 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective independent claims is/are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e., they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
Specifically, claims 2-18 likewise fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The dependent claims 2-5, the additional limitations concerning shipping a replacement cover after a predetermined period, including return packaging, defining specific replacement intervals (e.g., six months, one year), and sending reminder notifications merely reflect well-understood, routine, and conventional subscription fulfillment practices. Automatic periodic shipment, usage-based scheduling, reminder messaging, and return logistics are common features of subscription commerce and do not represent a technological improvement or unconventional implementation. These elements merely apply the abstract idea using conventional business and logistical mechanisms. Dependent claims 6-8 and 10 recite that the mattress cores and covers are recyclable, formed of recycled materials, or include pocketed spring assemblies made from recycled metal and polymeric sleeves. These limitations describe known material choices and conventional mattress construction techniques. The use of recyclable materials, recycled input materials, and pocket spring assemblies was well-established in the mattress industry prior to the effective filing date. Specifying environmentally friendly or recycled materials does not transform the commercial subscription model into a patent-eligible invention, as these features represent routine design choices within the field. Dependent claims 9 and 14 recite structural customization features, including spring assemblies of differing axial lengths and tunable density to adjust stiffness. Variable stiffness zones, modular support members, and density-based firmness adjustment were known mattress design techniques. These features represent predictable variations of mattress construction used to provide ergonomic support and customization. They do not supply an inventive concept because they are conventional mechanical design modifications applied within the broader commercial framework.
Dependent claims 11-13 and 15-18 recite specific cover constructions, including layered backing/comfort/covering layers, hollow or multi-lobal fibers, flame-retardant breathable backing materials, moisture-wicking fabrics, heat embossing, and anti-bacterial or anti-fungal properties. Each of these material and textile features was known in the bedding and textile arts for improving airflow, cooling, hygiene, and durability. These limitations describe routine product enhancements and material selections that perform their expected functions. When viewed individually and as an ordered combination, these features merely define the characteristics of the replaceable product and do not provide a technological improvement to computer functionality, manufacturing machinery, or any other technical field. None of these limitations meaningfully limit the abstract idea or integrate it into a practical application. Accordingly, the additional limitations of the dependent claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea and therefore fail to provide an inventive concept under Step 2B. Because these elements do not solve a specific technical problem or offer a technical improvement over existing systems, they are viewed as merely "applying" the abstract idea on a generic computer, thus failing to provide a practical application that would render the claims patent-eligible, and therefore do not add an inventive concept sufficient to transform the abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter.
When viewed as an ordered combination, the additional elements of claims 2-18 merely instruct to implement the abstract idea using generic computer components to collect, store, represent, and display information. The claims do not recite any unconventional arrangement of elements, nor do they effect an improvement to computer functionality or another technical field and therefore fail to integrate the abstract concept into a practical application and it is recited at a high level of generality and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements is/are sufficient to ensure the claim(s) amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above (Step 2B: NO).
Therefore, claims 1-18 are not eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
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 of this title, 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.
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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 20220039560 (“Roma”) in view of U.S. Pat. 11328333 (“Bifolco”) in view of U.S. Pat. 10258994 (“Cooke”).
As per claims 1, Roma discloses, providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase (The examiner interprets Roma’s disclosure of modular components that can be individually selected and configured as reasonably corresponding to a “selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase”, because the system is expressly designed for customization and individualized component replacement) (“modular mattress systems 100a, 100b, 110c (also referred to as modular mattresses 100a, 100b, 100c, or collectively as modular mattress 100). As will be described below, the modular mattress 100 includes modular components that can be selected, added, removed, and/or replaced individually of the other components of the modular mattress 100. As described above, this can provide one or more of the following advantages, such as, improving customization and personalization of the modular mattress 100, permitting the function and feel of the modular mattress 100 to change over time to adapt to changing user preferences or other conditions, facilitating replacement of old, worn, or damaged components of the modular mattress 100, permitting the modular mattress to be easily cleanable, decreasing waste to landfills, and increasing shipping efficiency, among others.”) (0053-0060, 0102-0104);
providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core (The examiner interprets Roma’s removable, replaceable cover 102 together with its modular/interchangeable design as teaching or at least suggesting a selection of mattress covers for use with a given modular mattress core, given that different covers can be provided for different configurations or preferences) (“modular mattress 100 can include, for example, a removable ticking or cover 102. Example covers are shown in FIGS. 2A-2C and will be described in greater detail below. As shown in FIGS. 1A-1C, in general, the cover 102 is a fabric layer configured to surround and protect the internal components of the modular mattress 100. The internal components may comprise one or more comfort components (e.g., a comfort layer 104) and one or more support components (e.g., a support layer 106)”) (0054, 0063-0067);
and recycling the selected mattress cover after it has been replaced by the new mattress cover (Examiner notes that the underlined limitation is disclosed by another prior art. Examiner interprets support layer replaced to mattress cover) (“a support layer 106 becomes worn and needs to be replaced, the support layer 106 can be removed (leaving the cover 102 and the comfort layer 104), discarded, and replaced with a new support layer 106 …”) (0058).
Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, and recycling the selected mattress cover, however Bifolco discloses, periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover (The examiner relies on Bifolco for the “periodically replacing” aspect, interpreting the subscription‑based periodic shipment of a product as teaching shipment of replacement covers at a predetermined frequency) (“exchange for electronic payment, which is typically performed automatically, a retailer ships a specific product (or provides access to a certain service) at periodic times, such as every three (3) months. With conventional online subscription-based ordering, consumers need not plan to reorder to conveniently replenish supplies of a product.”) (Col. 1 Ln. 51- col. 2 Ln. 41).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, and recycling the selected mattress cover, as taught by Bifolco for the purpose to combine Roma’s modular mattress and removable cover with Bifolco’s subscription‑based periodic shipment model to arrive at periodic replacement of the mattress cover, because both references address ongoing product replacement to maintain performance and convenience, and Bifolco provides a known mechanism (subscription auto‑ship) for doing so.
Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, and recycling the selected mattress cover, however Cooke discloses, and recycling the selected mattress cover (The examiner interprets Cooke’s established practice of recycling separated mattress components as teaching that separable mattress parts—including covers made from recyclable material—can be recycled after removal. The examiner extrapolates from Cooke’s foam/springs recycling to recycling of removed covers) (“the foam retrieved from the mattress is sent for recycling. In this manner, prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale. For example, the foam may be utilised for the purposes of underfloor cushion or the like. Where the foam or other material is ill suited for reuse, such may be employed for the purposes of energy generation and therefore sent for incineration”) (Col. 21 Ln. 26-35).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, and recycling the selected mattress cover, as taught by Cooke for the purpose that the mattress components (including foam and springs, and by extension textiles) are routinely deconstructed and recycled to reduce waste and recover material value.
As per claims 2, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the step of periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with the new mattress cover includes shipping the new mattress cover to the customer after the selected mattress cover has been in use for a predetermined period of time, however Bifolco discloses, wherein the step of periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with the new mattress cover includes shipping the new mattress cover to the customer after the selected mattress cover has been in use for a predetermined period of time (The examiner interprets the “default frequency” and periodic subscription shipments in Bifolco as teaching shipping replacements after a predetermined period of use of the prior item) (“a default frequency may be generated as a predicted frequency of one or more, for example, subsequently-purchased items based on one or more item characteristics in data 102. The one or more subsequently-items may include an initial or original order and/or shipment. In some cases, the default frequency may be, but need not be, based on usage of an item in a predicted depletion of the item based on usage. According to some examples, elements depicted in diagram 160 of FIG. 1B may include structures and/or functions as similarly-named or similarly-numbered elements depicted in other drawings”) (Col. 8 Ln. 34-44).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, wherein the step of periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with the new mattress cover includes shipping the new mattress cover to the customer after the selected mattress cover has been in use for a predetermined period of time, as taught by Bifolco for the purpose to facilitate adaptive scheduling automatically to optimally distribute items, such as shipping an item in accordance with an adapted frequency for a subscription.
As per claims 3, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, shipping a return package to the customer with the new mattress cover for the customer to return the selected mattress cover for the recycling, however Bifolco discloses, wherein the shipping the new mattress cover to the customer further comprises shipping a return package to the customer with the new mattress cover for the customer to return the selected mattress cover for the recycling (Examiner notes that Bifolco’s subscription integration platform 110 manages subscription services and determines delivery characteristics based on adapted frequency) (“Subscription integration platform 110 may provide subscription services to multiple entities, thereby reducing resources that otherwise may be needed to perform subscription management. In some examples, an adapted frequency may be used to determine one or more delivery characteristics, such as a rate of delivery based on, for example, consumption or depletion. A delivery characteristic may describe whether an item is delivered as one-time delivery or as a subscribed item, with variable periods of times between replenishment. A delivery characteristic may describe a variable scheduled shipment of an item based on, for example, usage or consumption. In various examples, an adapted frequency may be determined based on any of a number of item characteristics, which, in turn, may determine a delivery characteristic.”) (Col. 8 Ln. 1-17).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, shipping a return package to the customer with the new mattress cover for the customer to return the selected mattress cover for the recycling, as taught by Bifolco for the purpose to facilitate adaptive scheduling automatically to optimally distribute items, such as shipping an item in accordance with an adapted frequency for a subscription.
As per claims 4, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, predetermined period of time is six months, one year, eighteen months, or two years, however Bifolco discloses, wherein the predetermined period of time is six months, one year, eighteen months, or two years (“Subscription integration platform 110 may provide subscription services to multiple entities, thereby reducing resources that otherwise may be needed to perform subscription management. In some examples, an adapted frequency may be used to determine one or more delivery characteristics, such as a rate of delivery based on, for example, consumption or depletion. A delivery characteristic may describe whether an item is delivered as one-time delivery or as a subscribed item, with variable periods of times between replenishment. A delivery characteristic may describe a variable scheduled shipment of an item based on, for example, usage or consumption. In various examples, an adapted frequency may be determined based on any of a number of item characteristics, which, in turn, may determine a delivery characteristic.”) (Col. 8 Ln. 1-17).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, predetermined period of time is six months, one year, eighteen months, or two years, as taught by Bifolco for the purpose to facilitate adaptive scheduling automatically to optimally distribute items, such as shipping an item in accordance with an adapted frequency for a subscription.
As per claims 5, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, sending a reminder to the customer in advance of periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with the new mattress cover, however Bifolco discloses, further comprising sending a reminder to the customer in advance of periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with the new mattress cover (Examiner notes examiner interprets these integrated electronic messages as reminders/notifications about upcoming subscription shipments) (“merchant computing system 130a, as well as other computing systems, may be configured to generate data 169 to generate electronic message 164 for combination with default frequency shipment management portion 168a in a data portion 168b. Data portion 168b is visually depicted in FIG. 1B as a portion (e.g., an “empty” portion) in which data default frequency shipment management portion 168a may be injected. Note, too, that any number of merchant computing systems 130a to 130n may be configured to produce corresponding electronic messages 164 to form any number of integrated messages 141, which, in turn, may be presented to a specific computing system 142 and/or subscriber 144 in a subset 190 of computing systems) (Col. 8 Ln. 57-67).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, sending a reminder to the customer in advance of periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with the new mattress cover, as taught by Bifolco for the purpose to facilitate adaptive scheduling automatically to optimally distribute items, such as shipping an item in accordance with an adapted frequency for a subscription.
As per claims 6, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, sending a reminder to the customer in advance of periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with the new mattress cover, however Cooke discloses, wherein the selection of mattress cores and the selection of mattress covers include mattress cores and mattress covers that are entirely recyclable (the examiner interprets Cooke’s recycling and reuse of recovered materials as teaching that mattress components are capable of recycling and can be reused/resold, i.e. both recyclability and use of recycled content) (“the spring structure of the mattress is a wireframe assembly, the deconstruction apparatus 400 would be configured such that the wireframe assembly is moved towards the outfeed 430 of the deconstruction apparatus 400. However, should it have been determined during the integrity testing step 110 that the mattress rather comprise a series of stand-alone springs (pocket springs), the bottom grisly bar 440 may be configured to open such that the individual springs are rather ejected beneath the water cutting head … the foam retrieved from the mattress is sent for recycling. In this manner, prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale. For example, the foam may be utilised for the purposes of underfloor cushion or the like. Where the foam or other material is ill suited for reuse, such may be employed for the purposes of energy generation and therefore sent for incineration”) (Col. 20 Ln. 49 57 - Col. 21 Ln. 26-35).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, and recycling the selected mattress cover, as taught by Cooke for the purpose prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale.
As per claims 7, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, selection of mattress cores and the selection of mattress covers include mattress cores and mattress covers that are formed of recycled materials, however Cooke discloses, wherein the selection of mattress cores and the selection of mattress covers include mattress cores and mattress covers that are formed of recycled materials (the examiner interprets Cooke’s recycling and reuse of recovered materials as teaching that mattress components are capable of recycling and can be reused/resold, i.e. both recyclability and use of recycled content) (“the spring structure of the mattress is a wireframe assembly, the deconstruction apparatus 400 would be configured such that the wireframe assembly is moved towards the outfeed 430 of the deconstruction apparatus 400. However, should it have been determined during the integrity testing step 110 that the mattress rather comprise a series of stand-alone springs (pocket springs), the bottom grisly bar 440 may be configured to open such that the individual springs are rather ejected beneath the water cutting head … the foam retrieved from the mattress is sent for recycling. In this manner, prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale. For example, the foam may be utilised for the purposes of underfloor cushion or the like. Where the foam or other material is ill suited for reuse, such may be employed for the purposes of energy generation and therefore sent for incineration”) (Col. 20 Ln. 49 57 - Col. 21 Ln. 26-35).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, and recycling the selected mattress cover, as taught by Cooke for the purpose prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale.
As per claims 8, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, mattress cores include a plurality of individual spring assemblies that each including a spring enveloped in a sleeve, however Cooke discloses, wherein the mattress cores include a plurality of individual spring assemblies that each including a spring enveloped in a sleeve (The examiner reasonably interprets Cooke’s pocket springs as a “plurality of individual spring assemblies each including a spring enveloped in a sleeve.”) (“the spring structure of the mattress is a wireframe assembly, the deconstruction apparatus 400 would be configured such that the wireframe assembly is moved towards the outfeed 430 of the deconstruction apparatus 400. However, should it have been determined during the integrity testing step 110 that the mattress rather comprise a series of stand-alone springs (pocket springs), the bottom grisly bar 440 may be configured to open such that the individual springs are rather ejected beneath the water cutting head … the foam retrieved from the mattress is sent for recycling. In this manner, prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale. For example, the foam may be utilised for the purposes of underfloor cushion or the like. Where the foam or other material is ill suited for reuse, such may be employed for the purposes of energy generation and therefore sent for incineration”) (Col. 20 Ln. 49 57 - Col. 21 Ln. 26-35).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, and recycling the selected mattress cover, as taught by Cooke for the purpose prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale.
As per claims 11, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, mattress covers each include a backing layer, a comfort layer, and a covering layer that are each recyclable, however Cooke discloses, wherein mattress covers each include a backing layer, a comfort layer, and a covering layer that are each recyclable (Examiner interprets that the recycling foam and textile materials after deconstruction is recycled) (“the spring structure of the mattress is a wireframe assembly, the deconstruction apparatus 400 would be configured such that the wireframe assembly is moved towards the outfeed 430 of the deconstruction apparatus 400. However, should it have been determined during the integrity testing step 110 that the mattress rather comprise a series of stand-alone springs (pocket springs), the bottom grisly bar 440 may be configured to open such that the individual springs are rather ejected beneath the water cutting head … the foam retrieved from the mattress is sent for recycling. In this manner, prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale. For example, the foam may be utilised for the purposes of underfloor cushion or the like.”) (Col. 20 Ln. 49 57 - Col. 21 Ln. 26-35).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, and recycling the selected mattress cover, as taught by Cooke for the purpose prior to recycling, the foam may be sanitised, decontaminated, deodorised and the like, including by employing ozone, chemicals radiation and the like, so as to be fit for resale.
Claims 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 2022039560 (“Roma”) in view of U.S. Pat. 11328333 (“Bifolco”) in view of U.S. Pat. 10258994 (“Cooke”) in view of WIPO Pub. WO 2022125435 A1 (“Smiderle”).
As per claims 9, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, plurality of individual spring assemblies include first spring assemblies having a first axial length, second spring assemblies having a second axial length, and third spring assemblies having a third axial length, wherein the first axial length is greater than the second axial length, and the second axial length is greater than the third axial length, however Smiderle discloses, wherein the plurality of individual spring assemblies include first spring assemblies having a first axial length, second spring assemblies having a second axial length, and third spring assemblies having a third axial length, wherein the first axial length is greater than the second axial length, and the second axial length is greater than the third axial length (Examiner interprets variable stiffness zones is associated to differing vertical dimensions/support members corresponding to varying axial spring lengths) (“the system 10 may include or define a plurality of the variable stiffness zones 18 arranged or extending across the width W dimension of the system 10. For example, the system 10 may include at least two variable stiffness zones 18 arranged along the width W of the system 10, at least three variable stiffness zones 18 arranged along the width W of the system 10, at least four variable stiffness zones 18 arranged along the width W of the system 10, at least six variable stiffness zones 18 arranged along the width W of the system 10, at least seven variable stiffness zones 18 arranged along the width W of the system 10, or at least eight variable stiffness zones 18 arranged along the width W of the system 10. …”) (0048).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, and plurality of individual spring assemblies include first spring assemblies having a first axial length, second spring assemblies having a second axial length, and third spring assemblies having a third axial length, wherein the first axial length is greater than the second axial length, and the second axial length is greater than the third axial length, as taught by Smiderle for the purpose to selectively vary the position of the rigid support members along a thickness direction to variably compress zones of the at least one flexible foam layer to vary stiffnesses of the zones.
Claims 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 2022039560 (“Roma”) in view of U.S. Pat. 11328333 (“Bifolco”) in view of U.S. Pat. 10258994 (“Cooke”) in view of WIPO Pub. WO 2012022883 A1 (“Lanza”).
As per claims 10, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, each spring is formed of a recycled metal material and each sleeve is formed of a recycled polymeric material, however Lanza discloses, wherein each spring is formed of a recycled metal material and each sleeve is formed of a recycled polymeric material (Examiner interprets recycling process for springs and consolidated nonwoven sheets interpreted as teaching recycled metal and polymer reuse in mattress components) (“The fifth family essentially comprises the coil springs in the spring mattresses, in the spring mattresses in bags, and in the sommiers, as well as the metal frames of the sommiers … a chemical compound of the list, in an amount less than a predetermined threshold, this material is processed by the recycling process. The grinding and consolidation steps 20 and 26 indeed make it possible to eliminate a large fraction of the chemical compound, and to make the concentration of said chemical compound in the consolidated nonwoven product sheet is within acceptable standards. The consolidation step implements a heat treatment, as explained later, and is particularly effective for the removal of the regulated chemical compounds. The predetermined threshold is specific to each chemical compound. It is a function inter alia of the elimination rate of the chemical compound in the grinding and consolidation steps, and the composition of the consolidated material web (proportion of the material containing the chemical compound in the web). If the material contains an amount of the chemical compound above the predetermined threshold, then this material is not processed by the recycling process”) (pg. 4).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, wherein each spring is formed of a recycled metal material and each sleeve is formed of a recycled polymeric material, as taught by Lanza for the purpose prior to eliminate a large fraction of the chemical compound, and to make the concentration of said chemical compound in the consolidated nonwoven product sheet is within acceptable standards.
Claims 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 2022039560 (“Roma”) in view of U.S. Pat. 11328333 (“Bifolco”) in view of U.S. Pat. 10258994 (“Cooke”) in view of U.S. Pub. 20190014916 (“Wooten”).
As per claims 12, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, comfort layer is formed from a plurality of fibers that are configured to enhance moisture management and increase cooling and breathable properties of the mattress cover, however Wooten discloses, wherein the comfort layer is formed from a plurality of fibers that are configured to enhance moisture management and increase cooling and breathable properties of the mattress cover (Examiner interprets airflow channels, reticulated foams, and breathable ticking layers promote cooling and breathability) (“Surface modified foams in mattresses include foam layers and cores with cuts, contours, channels, and pinholes to improve the amount of airflow that can travel through the layers of the mattress to promote cooling or heating. Vertical or horizontal cores may be used in any of the foam materials to promote airflow. Reticulated foams have been used close to the mattresses outer surface and in the outermost layer of the mattress, known as the ticking layer, when quilted. These also help to promote airflow in the mattress. Some mattresses have fans built into the foundations that blow air into the mattress to promote heating or cooling or both.”) (0013).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, plurality of fibers include hollow elongated fibers and elongated fibers that include a plurality of lobes that extend along a length of the elongated fibers, as taught by Wooten for the purpose to promote airflow in the mattress and also to promote heating or cooling or both.
Claims 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 2022039560 (“Roma”) in view of U.S. Pat. 11328333 (“Bifolco”) in view of U.S. Pat. 10258994 (“Cooke”) in view of U.S. Pub. 20190014916 (“Wooten”) in view of U.S. Pat. 7968480 (“Bishop”).
As per claims 13, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, plurality of fibers include hollow elongated fibers and elongated fibers that include a plurality of lobes that extend along a length of the elongated fibers, however Bishop discloses, wherein the plurality of fibers include hollow elongated fibers and elongated fibers that include a plurality of lobes that extend along a length of the elongated fibers (Examiner interprets multi-lobal an continuous/discontinuous fiber structures correspond to lobed and hollow fiber geometries improving stiffness and airflow) (“nonwoven materials of the present invention can include one or more webs containing filaments or fibers that are either substantially continuous or discontinuous. Either or both of the multi-lobal and non-multi-lobal fibers included in materials of the invention can be continuous or discontinuous. Filaments or fibers useful in the invention can be formed by a spunmelt process. The spunmelt process entails extruding molten polymer under pressure through a large number of orifices in a plate known as a spinneret or die. The resulting substantially continuous fibers or filaments are quenched and drawn by any of a number of methods, such as slot draw systems, attenuator guns, Godet rolls, or a slot push system, which is exemplified by a Reifenhauser system. These fibers or filaments can be collected as a loose web on a moving foraminous surface, such as a wire mesh conveyor belt or can be bundled and incorporated into a yarn, which can be used in whole or in part as yarns of a material of fabric. When more than one extruder is in line for the purpose of forming a multi-layered material or fabric, typically, the subsequent webs are collected upon the topmost surface of the previously formed web. The web is then typically consolidated or stabilized by some means. One method can involve heat and pressure, most preferably, thermal point bonding is used in materials of the present invention, other methods can include chemical bonding, needling or hydraulic entanglement.”) (Col. 6 Ln. 18-65).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, plurality of fibers include hollow elongated fibers and elongated fibers that include a plurality of lobes that extend along a length of the elongated fibers, as taught by Bishop for the purpose allow enhance material stiffness by at least 10-15% compared to a similar item with round fibers instead of multi-lobal.
Claims 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 2022039560 (“Roma”) in view of U.S. Pat. 11328333 (“Bifolco”) in view of U.S. Pat. 10258994 (“Cooke”) in view of U.S. Pub. 20190014916 (“Wooten”) in view of U.S. Pat. 7968480 (“Bishop”) in view of U.S. Pub. 20230404270 (“Nelson”).
As per claims 14, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein a density of the plurality of fibers is tunable to adjust a stiffness of the comfort layer, however Nelson discloses, wherein a density of the plurality of fibers is tunable to adjust a stiffness of the comfort layer (Examiner interprets modular blocks of differing stiffness levels is interpreted to density-based stiffness adjustment within mattress modules) (“pluralities of the mattress modules 204 and 206, which have the same dimensions but may have different stiffness levels, depending upon their placement in the mattress module assembly. The disclosures related to any of the other mattress modules described herein may also be applicable to mattress modules 204 and 206. In one embodiment, for example, each of the mattress modules 204 and 206 are about 3.8″×about 7.6″ blocks that be configured into a shape that simulates many existing mattress sizes within a tolerance of approximately 1 inch. These mattress modules 204 and 206 can be sold in various pluralities in such shapes, e.g., 3.8″×7.6″ blocks to form a variety of different mattresses that closely resemble the profiles of popular existing mattresses …”) (0121).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, wherein a density of the plurality of fibers is tunable to adjust a stiffness of the comfort layer, as taught by Nelson for the purpose allow for the standardization, replacement, and convenient rearrangement of individual mattress modules rather than requiring the purchase of an entirely new mattress each time a portion of a mattress needs to be replaced or a new mattress size is needed.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. 2022039560 (“Roma”) in view of U.S. Pat. 11328333 (“Bifolco”) in view of U.S. Pat. 10258994 (“Cooke”) in view of U.S. Pub. 20230337835 (“Svensrud”).
As per claims 15, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, wherein the backing layer is flame retardant and formed of a breathable moisture absorbent material that is biodegradable and odor resistant, however Svensrud discloses, wherein the backing layer is flame retardant and formed of a breathable moisture absorbent material that is biodegradable and odor resistant (Examiner interprets Lyocell (biodegradable), porous fire barrier layers teach breathable flame-retardant construction) (“The cover 110 is typically constructed of a natural fiber. One example of a natural fiber is Lyocell, which is a biodegradable fabric made from wood pulp cellulose (TENCEL® is a brand of Lyocell). Lyocell is naturally resistant to the growth of bacteria and fungus. It furthermore possesses superior moisture-wicking, breathability and air exchange between cover 110 and lower layers such as first fire barrier 120 and three-dimensional spacer 140 … NANOSPHERE or other breathable water, oil, and stain resistant coatings eliminate the need for a mattress pad. Mattress pads used in other systems are bulky, prone to bacterial growth and limit the breathability of the sleep system. The elimination of the mattress pads allows for the enhanced breathability, temperature regulation, and clean odor free air to circulate in the sleep system and sleeping environment … First fire barrier 120 is typically a non-toxic fire barrier that is very porous, which allows air and moisture flow from cover 110 to lower mattress components. One example of such a barrier is a fiber made of modified rayon and virgin polyester …”) (0030- 0033).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, wherein the backing layer is flame retardant and formed of a breathable moisture absorbent material that is biodegradable and odor resistant, as taught by Svensrud for the purpose prior to provides a healthier sleeping environment and protects against microbial damage on the fibers, which affords longer lasting system components.
As per claims 16, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, covering layer is formed of a recyclable polymeric material that is moisture wicking, however Svensrud discloses, wherein the covering layer is formed of a recyclable polymeric material that is moisture wicking (Examiner interprets Lyocell moisture-wicking fabric interpreted as polymeric and recyclable textile covering) (“The cover 110 is typically constructed of a natural fiber. One example of a natural fiber is Lyocell, which is a biodegradable fabric made from wood pulp cellulose (TENCEL® is a brand of Lyocell). Lyocell is naturally resistant to the growth of bacteria and fungus. It furthermore possesses superior moisture-wicking, breathability and air exchange between cover 110 and lower layers such as first fire barrier 120 and three-dimensional spacer 140”) (0030).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, covering layer is formed of a recyclable polymeric material that is moisture wicking, as taught by Svensrud for the purpose prior to provides a healthier sleeping environment and protects against microbial damage on the fibers, which affords longer lasting system components.
As per claims 17, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, covering layer is embossed by heating, however Svensrud discloses, wherein the covering layer is embossed by heating (Examiner interprets high heat exposure creating raised areas interpreted as heat embossing) (“The cover fabric typically consists of what is commonly referred to as a ‘double knit’ constructed by sandwiching loose yarns, referred to as inlay yarns, between a surface knit and a bottom knit and then weaving the two fabrics together. The inlay yarns are introduced to a temporary high heat environment greater than or equal to 200° F. (e.g., 200° F. to 400° F. or 300° F. to 350° F.), thereby increasing the displacement volume of the fibers by at least 2.0 percent. Such raised areas are typically created in the fabric using a novel knitting technique, whereby fibers are not woven down where a raised area is desired. The inlay yarns, having a greater volume when exposed to high heat, fill the areas where the weaving is not present, which creates a raised area”) (0027).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, covering layer is embossed by heating, as taught by Svensrud for the purpose to enhance the displacement volume of fibers by a minimum of 2.0 percent and made possible through an inventive knitting technique that crafts raised areas in the fabric by leaving some fibers unknit wherever elevation is sought.
As per claims 18, Roma specifically doesn’t disclose, covering layer further comprises an anti-bacterial and anti-fungal agent, however Svensrud discloses, wherein the covering layer further comprises an anti-bacterial and anti-fungal agent (Examiner interpreted natural resistance to bacteria/fungus interpreted as providing anti-microbial functionality) (“The cover 110 is typically constructed of a natural fiber. One example of a natural fiber is Lyocell, which is a biodegradable fabric made from wood pulp cellulose (TENCEL® is a brand of Lyocell). Lyocell is naturally resistant to the growth of bacteria and fungus. It furthermore possesses superior moisture-wicking, breathability and air exchange between cover 110 and lower layers such as first fire barrier 120 and three-dimensional spacer 140”) (0030, 0047).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for providing a selection of mattress cores from which a customer can select for purchase; providing a selection of mattress covers from which the customer can select for use in combination with the selected mattress core; periodically replacing the selected mattress cover with a new mattress cover and replaced by the new mattress cover, as taught by Roma, covering layer further comprises an anti-bacterial and anti-fungal agent, as taught by Svensrud for the purpose prior to provides a healthier sleeping environment and protects against microbial damage on the fibers, which affords longer lasting system components.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US. Pub. 20080098533 (“Erdman”).
Erdman outlines a modular mattress system having at least one mattress block which includes an array of resilient coil springs, along with a foam pad, and a washable/dryable fabric mattress cover. The components of the modular mattress system are compressible into an air evacuable bag for purposes of storing, shipping, and disposal. The size, firmness, type of foam pad, pattern and color of the fabric mattress cover, and type of securable seam available for the fabric mattress cover used in the modular mattress system may be specified by the consumer. Mattress size ranges from Crib size through King size, with custom sizes available as well. Various methods of specifying, ordering, and distributing the modular mattress system are detailed.
26. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GAUTAM UBALE whose telephone number is (571)272-9861. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:00 AM- 6:30 PM PST.
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at (571) 272-6764. 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.
/GAUTAM UBALE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689