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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4, 8-12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penfield (US 2022/0151308) in view of McClean (US 2017/0027240) and Strocker (US 1312459).
Regarding claim 1, Penfield teaches a garment comprising:
a front panel having an outer fabric layer (fig. 1 shows a front panel of outer garment 14) and an inner fabric layer (fig. 3, a front panel of the inner garment 16), wherein the front panel inner fabric layer comprises lining material (fig. 3, para. [0024], the inner garment comprises a chest portion made of a different material) in a pectoral portion of the front panel inner fabric layer and a compression layer material (fig. 3, para. [0065], portions 26a-c) in a torso portion of the front panel inner fabric layer coupled to the lining material;
a back panel having an outer fabric layer (fig. 2 shows a back panel of outer garment 14) and an inner fabric layer (fig. 4, a back panel of the inner garment 16), wherein the back panel is coupled to the front panel such that the respective inner surfaces of each of the respective inner fabric layers face each other (fig. 3), and wherein the back panel comprises:
a torso portion (fig. 4) of the back panel inner fabric layer comprising:
a right compressive panel (fig. 4, portion 26a) formed from the compression layer material (para. [0065]) extending front a first edge towards a centerline;
a left compressive panel (fig. 4, portion 26b) formed from the compression layer material extending from a second edge towards the centerline; and
lining material (fig. 4, portion 26d) extending between the right compressive material and the left compressive panel, wherein the lining material of the inner fabric layer of the back panel is coupled to the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel; and
wherein the compression layer material has a higher elastic modulus than a respective elastic modulus of each of the front panel outer fabric layer, the back panel outer fabric layer, and the lining material of the front panel inner fabric layer and the back panel inner fabric layer (para. [0004], [0067]); and
the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are each independently configured to extend to at least a bottom portion of the torso portion (fig. 4).
Penfield does not explicitly teach the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are each independently configured to extend from a location proximate to a shoulder blade region of a wearer.
However, the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are stretchable material. It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel to extend to the location proximate to a shoulder blade region for the benefit of providing support to the shoulder region. Further, as the garment is stretchable, the garment fits differently with different user’s sizes. Therefore, “the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are each independently configured to extend from a location proximate to a shoulder blade region of a wearer” is an intended use of the invention.
Penfield does not teach first and second seams, third and fourth seams as in the claim.
However, in the same field of endeavor, McClean teaches the body of the shapewear garment is made from multiple overlapping layers of at least one elastic material and includes a plurality of seams which attach the multiple layers along the seams thereby defining the perimeter of the various zones (para. [0031]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Penfield with the back panel coupled to the front panel at first and second seams, and the left compressive panel and the right compressive panel coupled to the lining material by a third seam and a fourth seam as suggested by McClean for the benefit of connecting different zones of different compression together (McClean, para. [0007]).
The modified structure Penfield-McClean does not teach lacing extending across the centerline of the back panel configured to adjust a waist to hip ratio of the wearer.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Strocker teaches lacing extending across the centerline of the back panel configured to adjust a waist to hip ratio of a wearer (fig. 7, the lacing adjusts the waist line opening at 26).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Penfield-McClean with the lacing as taught by Strocker for the benefit of providing a perfect fit and support and yet will readily yield to all movements of the wearer without undue pressure and restraint (Strocker, first page, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 2, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker teaches the front panel and the back panel are coupled such that a bottom section of the garment has a bottom edge that is configured to extend to proximate to a hip or waist region of the wearer (Penfield, fig. 3). It is noted that “a bottom section of the garment has a bottom edge that is configured to extend to proximate to a hip or waist region of a wearer” is an intended use of the invention and the garment fits differently with different users.
Regarding claim 3, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker teaches the front panel and the back panel are coupled such that the outer fabric layers of the front panel and the back panel are configured to extend to below a bottom of a wearer (Penfield, figs. 1-2). It is noted that “the outer fabric layers of the front panel and the back panel are configured to extend to below a bottom of a wearer” is an intended use of the invention and the garment fits differently with different users.
Regarding claim 4, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker teaches the front panel comprises boning in a torso section of the front panel (Penfield, fig. 3, a line connecting compression portions 26a, 26b, 26c).
Regarding claim 8, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker does not teach the lacing of the back panel is coupled to the torso portion of the back panel along a fifth seam and a sixth seam of the back panel.
However, Strocker teaches the lacing of the back panel is coupled to the torso portion along a fifth seam and a sixth seam of the back panel (fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker with the teaching that the lacing of the back panel is coupled to the torso portion along a fifth seam and a sixth seam of the back panel as taught by Strocker for the benefit of providing a perfect fit and support and yet will readily yield to all movements of the wearer without undue pressure and restraint (Strocker, first page, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 9, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker does not teach a front closeable opening.
However, Strocker teaches a front closeable opening (fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker with the front closeable opening as taught by Strocker for the benefit of providing a better fit and support and yet will readily yield to all movements of the wearer without undue pressure and restraint (Strocker, first page, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 10, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker does not teach the front closeable opening of the front panel comprises at least of a zipper, a lacing, and a clasp configured to close and open the front closable opening of the garment.
However, Strocker teaches the front closeable opening comprises a lacing configured to close and open the front opening of the garment (fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker with a lacing a the front closeable opening as taught by Strocker for the benefit of providing a better fit and support and yet will readily yield to all movements of the wearer without undue pressure and restraint (Strocker, first page, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 11, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker teaches a bottom edge of the garment comprises an asymmetric hemline such that at least a portion of a hem of the front panel has a different length than at least a portion of a hem of the back panel (Penfield, fig. 3, at least a portion of a hem of the front panel of the inner garment has a different length than at least a portion of a hem of the back panel of the inner garment).
Regarding claim 12, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker teaches the front panel comprises a non-stretch panel configured to restrict stretching of the front panel of the garment (Penfield, fig. 3, para. [0050]).
Regarding claim 20, the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker does not clearly teach the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are each independently configured to extend to a location proximate to a bottom edge of the back panel.
However, Penfield teaches the panels 28a, 28b comprise elastic material (para. [0048]).
Further, McClean teaches the elastic panels (fig. 12A, panels 1301) extend to a location proximate to a bottom edge of the back panel.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Penfield-McClean-Strocker with the teaching that the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are each independently configured to extend to a location proximate to a bottom edge of the back panel as suggested by McClean for the benefit of providing shaping effect to the back areas.
Claims 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Penfield (US 2022/0151308) in view of Callahan (US 2015/0208734) and Strocker (US 1312459).
Regarding claim 13, Penfield teaches a garment comprising:
a front panel having an outer fabric layer (fig. 1 shows a front panel of outer garment 14) and an inner fabric layer (fig. 3, a front panel of the inner garment 16), wherein the front panel inner fabric layer comprises lining material (fig. 3, para. [0024], the inner garment comprises a chest portion made of a different material) in a pectoral portion of the front panel inner fabric layer and a compression layer material (fig. 3, para. [0065], portions 26a-c) in a torso portion of the front panel inner fabric layer coupled to the lining material;
a back panel having an outer fabric layer (fig. 2 shows a back panel of outer garment 14) and an inner fabric layer (fig. 4, a back panel of the inner garment 16), wherein the back panel is coupled to the front panel such that the respective inner surfaces of each of the respective inner fabric layers face each other (fig. 3), and wherein the back panel comprises:
a torso portion (fig. 4) of the back panel inner fabric layer comprising:
a right compressive panel (fig. 4, portion 26a) formed from the compression layer material (para. [0065]) extending front a first edge towards a centerline;
a left compressive panel (fig. 4, portion 26b) formed from the compression layer material extending from a second edge towards the centerline; and
wherein the compression layer material has a higher elastic modulus than a respective elastic modulus of each of the front panel outer fabric layer, the back panel outer fabric layer, and the lining material of the front panel inner fabric layer (para. [0004], [0067]); and the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are each independently configured to extend to at least a bottom portion of the torso portion (fig. 4).
Penfield does not explicitly teach the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are each independently configured to extend from a location proximate to a shoulder blade region of a wearer.
However, the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are stretchable material. It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel to extend to the location proximate to a shoulder blade region for the benefit of providing support to the shoulder region. Further, as the garment is stretchable, the garment fits differently with different user’s sizes. Therefore, “the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel are each independently configured to extend from a location proximate to a shoulder blade region of a wearer” is an intended use of the invention.
Penfield does not teach first and second seams, wherein an upper end of right compressive panel and an upper end of the left compressive panel extend to a position higher than an upper end of the compression layer material in the front panel as in the claim.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Callahan teaches the inner shaping layer comprises a front panel and back panel, connected at the side seams (para. [0007]); wherein an upper end of the back compressive panel extends to a position higher than an upper end of the compression layer material of the front panel (figs. 1C, 1D).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Penfield with the back panel coupled to the front panel at first and second seams, and an upper end of right compressive panel and an upper end of the left compressive panel extend to a position higher than an upper end of the compression layer material in the front panel as suggested by Callahan for the benefit of securing panels together and providing a slim and smooth appearance to the upper back area (Callahan, para. [0005], [0007]).
The modified structure Penfield-Callahan does not teach lacing extending across the centerline of the back panel configured to adjust a waist to hip ratio of the wearer.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Strocker teaches lacing extending across the centerline of the back panel configured to adjust a waist to hip ratio of a wearer (fig. 7, the lacing adjusts the waist line opening at 26).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Penfield-Callahan with the lacing as taught by Strocker for the benefit of providing a perfect fit and support and yet will readily yield to all movements of the wearer without undue pressure and restraint (Strocker, first page, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 14, the modified structure Penfield-Callahan-Strocker does not teach the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel having a lower end that extends to a bottom edge of the back panel.
However, Callahan teaches the back compressive panel having a lower end that extends to a bottom edge of the back panel (fig. 1D).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Penfield-Callahan-Strocker with the right compressive panel and the left compressive panel having a lower end that extends to a bottom edge of the back panel as suggested by Callahan for the benefit of providing a slim and smooth appearance to the upper back area (Callahan, para. [0005]).
Regarding claim 15, the modified structure Penfield-Callahan-Strocker teaches the front panel and the back panel are coupled such that a bottom section of the garment has a bottom edge that is configured to extend to proximate to a hip or waist region of a wearer (Penfield, fig. 3). It is noted that “a bottom section of the garment has a bottom edge that is configured to extend to proximate to a hip or waist region of a wearer” is an intended use of the invention and the garment fits differently with different users.
Regarding claim 16, the modified structure Penfield-Callahan-Strocker teaches the front panel comprises boning support in a torso section of the front panel (Penfield, fig. 3, a line connecting compression portions 26a, 26b, 26c).
Regarding claim 17, the modified structure Penfield-Callahan-Strocker teaches a bottom edge of the garment comprises an asymmetric hemline such that at least a portion of a hem of the front panel has a different length than at least a portion of a hem of the back panel (Penfield, fig. 3, at least a portion of a hem of the front panel of the inner garment has a different length than at least a portion of a hem of the back panel of the inner garment).
Regarding claim 18, the modified structure Penfield-Callahan-Strocker teaches the front fabric panel comprises a non-stretch panel configured to restrict stretching of the front panel of the garment (Penfield, fig. 3, para. [0050]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 and 19 are allowed over the prior art of record.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, dated 01/23/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C 112 (b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection to the claims has been withdrawn due to the applicant amendments.
Applicant’s arguments, dated 01/23/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on reasonings applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the amended limitations. However, this argument is not commensurate with the rejected claims, as the limitations have not been previously presented. Thus, the amended limitations have been addressed as analyzed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UYEN THI THAO NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 AM-6 PM 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, 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.
/UYEN T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights