DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to amendment received on 12/17/25. Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10-13, and 17 have been amended. Claims 1-7 and 9-20 are examined herein.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “circumferential fold line extending between the first inside corner and the second inside corner” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: support for “the fold line” language as amended into claim 17 needs to be provided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-13 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 12 and claim 13 depending therefrom, it is unclear how the maximum depth of the front portion is from the base of the collar at a top edge of the shoulder to the lowermost extend of the front collar portion, the shoulder of the garment is located where the back portion of the collar would be located (see figure 7, identifier 154). How can the front portion have a depth that includes the transition and the back portion? It is unclear what structure is required to read on the dimension recited the front portion of the collar or the front and back portion of the collar.
Regarding claim 17, it is unclear what structure is required to read on the “circumferential fold line” as amended into claim 17, the specification is silent as to what the circumferential fold line requires, it is unclear if this is a formed structure (crease, stitch line) or an imaginary line that is produced when a fabric is folded. For examination purposes the examiner is interpreting the fold line to be an imaginary line that is formed when fabric is folded.
Any remaining claims are rejected depending from a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cleghorn et al. (US 11,457,670).
In regard to claim 17, Cleghorn et al. teaches a tactical shirt (shirt: 100), comprising: a body having a neck opening (see neck opening in figure 1); a collar that surrounds the neck opening (collar assembly: 120), the collar defining a height between a first connected edge located at the neck opening and a second free edge opposite the first connected edge (see figures 3 and 4), the collar comprising: a front portion (124b); a rear portion (124a); a first transition between the front portion and the rear portion on a first side of the collar (transition between front and rear collar portions on right side 124a, 124b: see figure 3); and a second transition between the front portion and the rear portion on a second side of the collar (transition between front and rear collar portions on left side 124a, 124b: see figure 3); wherein the second free edge of the collar defines a first collar point and a first inside corner at the first transition and a second collar point and a second inside corner at the second transition (see corner inside corner and points between first and second collar portions: 124a, 124b, figure 3), wherein each of the first collar point, the first inside corner, the second collar point, and the second inside corner define a sharp transition between adjacent portions of the second free edge of the collar (see sharp transition, not gradual between first and second collar portions); wherein the rear portion is configured to be foldable along a circumferential fold line extending between the first inside corner and the second inside corner from a standing orientation to a folded orientation of the collar (capable of as desired); and wherein the collar is configured to be wearable in each of the standing orientation and the folded orientation (capable of being worn folded or standing as desired); wherein, in a standing orientation of the collar, a lateral distance between the first collar point and the second collar point is at least 50 percent of a lateral dimension across the collar (see figures 3 and 4).
In regard to claim 18, Cleghorn et al. teaches wherein the neck opening defines a fixed circumference (see figures 1-3 and column 4, lines 19-28).
In regard to claim 20, Cleghorn et al. teaches wherein the collar is formed by a single piece of fabric (column 6, lines 30-31).
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 9-10, 12 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Minzesheimer (US 26,043).
In regard to claim 1, Minzesheimer teaches a tactical shirt, comprising: a body having a neck opening (see figures 1-3); a collar that surrounds the neck opening (collar: M), the collar defining a width height between a first connected edge located at the neck opening and a second free edge opposite the first connected edge (see figure 1-3), the collar comprising: a front portion (see figure 4 smaller dimensioned ends); a rear portion (large center portion of figure 4), wherein a maximum width height of the rear portion is at least 1.8 times a maximum width height of the front portion (see figure 4, front portion vs. rear portion of collar is at least 1.8 times); a first transition between the front portion and the rear portion on a first side of the collar (transition: edges and corners and points between front and rear collar portions: figure 4); and a second transition between the front portion and the rear portion on a second side of the collar (transition: edges and corners and points between front and rear collar portions: figure 4); wherein the second free edge of the collar defines a first collar point and a first inside corner at the first transition and a second collar point and a second inside corner at the second transition (see inside corner and collar points in transition area: figure 4), wherein each of the first collar point, the first inside corner, the second collar point, and the second inside corner define a sharp transition between adjacent portions of the second free edge of the collar, and wherein the first collar point and the second collar point are spaced apart from one another in a standing orientation of the collar (see figure 4 and figures 1-3).
In regard to claim 2, Minzesheimer teaches wherein the rear portion is configured to be foldable along a circumferential fold line between the first inside corner and the second inside corner to define a folded orientation of the collar (fabric of collar is configured to be folded as desired).
In regard to claim 3, Minzesheimer teaches wherein, in the folded orientation, a lateral distance between the first collar point and the second collar point defines a maximum width of lateral dimension across the collar (see figures 1-4 in folded orientation that back portion defines the lateral dimension across the collar).
In regard to claim 4, Minzesheimer teaches wherein, in the standing orientation, a lateral distance between the first collar point and the second collar point is at least 50 percent of a maximum width of lateral dimension across the collar (see figures 1-3).
In regard to claim 5, Minzesheimer teaches wherein the collar is formed by a single piece of fabric (see figure 4, collar single piece: M).
In regard to claim 7, Minzesheimer teaches wherein a maximum stretch direction of the single piece of fabric is oriented in a circumferential direction of the collar as assembled in the tactical shirt (see figure 4, collar M circumferential direction is the maximum stretch direction).
In regard to claim 9, Minzesheimer teaches wherein each of the first and second transitions is limited to no more than about 10% of an overall circumference of the collar (see figure 4).
In regard to claim 10, Minzesheimer teaches wherein the maximum width height of the rear portion is at least about 2 inches (see figures 1-4, about 2 inches).
In regard to claim 12, Minzesheimer teaches wherein a maximum depth of the front portion as measured from a base of the collar at an intersection with a top edge of a shoulder of the tactical shirt to a lowermost extent of the front portion of the collar is less than or equal to about 7 inches (see dimension from shoulder to lowermost point of front collar portion is less than about 7 inches).
In regard to claim 14, Minzesheimer teaches wherein the front portion includes a right side and a left side (see figures 1-2 and 4).
In regard to claim 15, Minzesheimer teaches wherein the right side and the left side are coupled at a front center of the collar (see figures 1 and 2).
In regard to claim 16, Minzesheimer teaches wherein end portions of the right side and the left side overlap one another (see figure 2).
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 (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 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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minzesheimer (US 26,043) in view of Hart, Jr (US 844,795).
Minzesheimer fails to teach the single piece of fabric is folded to create two overlapping layers connected to one another at a folded edge, wherein the with a folded edge defining of the single piece of fabric is located at the second free edge of the collar.
In regard to claim 6, Hart, Jr. teaches a shirt collar made from a single piece of fabric is folded to create two overlapping layers connected to one another at a folded edge, wherein the with a folded edge defining of the single piece of fabric is located at a second free edge of the collar (see figure 2).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one having ordinary skill in the art to have provided the single fabric piece collar of Minzesheimer with the folded edge as taught by Hart, Jr. since a single pieces of fabric creating the collar would provide a unitary collar that does not have any lines creating a less bulky and streamlined collar structure.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minzesheimer (US 26,043).
In regard to claim 11, Minzesheimer teaches the maximum width of the rear portion (124a) is less than that of the front portion (124b).
Minzesheimer fails to specifically teach the maximum width height of the rear portion is between 2-2.5 inches.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one having ordinary skill in the art and through routine experimentation to have provided the dimensions of the rear width maximum depth to be between 2-2.25 inches, since the claimed relative dimensions of the device would not perform differently than the prior art device to Cleghorn et al. and therefore is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (see MPEP 2144.04 IV A). The rear collar maximum width being between 2-2.25 inches would not destroy the garment design of Minzesheimer and would be a dimension that would fit some user’s body size and proportions.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cleghorn et al. (US 11,457,670).
Cleghorn et al. teaches a tactical shirt as described above in claims 1, 10 and 17. However, Cleghorn et al. fails to specifically teach wherein the lateral distance is at least 4 inches.
In regard to claim 19, Cleghorn et al. teaches the lateral distance.
However, Cleghorn et al. fails to specifically teach the lateral distance being at least four inches.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one having ordinary skill in the art and through routine exprimentation to have provided the dimensions of the lateral distance to be at least four inches, since the claimed relative dimensions of the device would not perform differently than the prior art device to Cleghorn et al. and therefore is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (see MPEP 2144.04 IV A). The lateral distance to be at least four inches would not destroy the garment design of Cleghorn et al. and would be a dimension that would fit some user’s body size and proportions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/17/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Cleghorn et al. (US11,457,670) fails to teach the amendments of claim 17.
Cleghorn et al. teach the amended limitations as detailed above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALISSA L HOEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4985. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00-5:30 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Clinton T Ostrup can be reached at (571)272-5559. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
ALISSA L. HOEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/ALISSA L HOEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights