DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species E, O and Y (citing that claims 1-20 read on all elected species) in the reply filed on June 27, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would be no serious search burden to search and examine all of the species together, that such a serious search burden has not been established by Examiner, that classifications would be shared among the identified species, and that the pending claims are all generic to the identified species. This is not found persuasive because the Restriction Requirement mailed on May 7, 2026 includes explanations as to how all of the identified species were different and mutually exclusive of one another, regardless of whether the claims, as pending at the time of the mailing, were generic. The Restriction requirement is proper because the application as a whole is searched, not only the pending claims. The future scope of any potential amendments during the course of prosecution cannot be predicted by Examiner, and the Restriction requirement maintains the scope of the subject matter of the claims to be focused during the course of prosecution so that updated searches are limited to the elected subject matter, as opposed to requiring searches on different subject matter that were not elected, in subsequent stages of prosecution. While it is true that classifications of different species may overlap, the searches of these classifications would be unduly burdensome if the different, mutually exclusive species all had to be searched together, as opposed to focusing on the elected embodiment(s), such as having to go through the same classification multiple times in order to focus on all of the different species (if not restricted from one another). Applicant’s identification of claims 1-20 as being directed to all of the elected species E, O and Y is acknowledged.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because they contain reference numerals with a leading line that does not lead to any structure (for example: 100 in Figs. 3a, 3c, 7a, 7b; 110, 120 in Figs. 3b, 4d; Examiner notes that these are merely examples in the elected figures, and there are numerous other examples of leading lines that do not lead to a structural element throughout the remainder of the figures). If these leading lines are intended to be pointing to a structure/area, then Applicant should use an arrow instead.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 8, 13, 14, 19 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8, line 2: “each” needs to be clarified to recite “each of the two or more laterally elongated shapes”
Claim 8, line 3: “arranged a the” should probably recite “arranged at the”
Claim 13, line 3: “ventral shapes each” needs an added comma and should be clarified to recite “ventral shapes, each of the one or more laterally elongated ventral shapes”
Claim 14, line 2: “shape” should recite “shapes”
Claim 19, line 3: “the crotch part,” should recite “the crotch part:”
Claim 20, line 3: “the crotch part,” should recite “the crotch part:”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 1 (and claims 2-20 at least due to dependency from independent claim 1) is 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 1, Applicant recites in the preamble “[a] protective garment in the form of a pantie, a pair of trousers or other legwear with or without an upper/torso part”. It is unclear how the garment would not have a torso part and accomplish all of the remaining features in the body of the claim and in the dependent claims, because a torso part would be understood to include the equivalent of the “front part”, “back part”, “crotch part” and the “waist” that are structurally required in the claims. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as best as can be understood when applying any prior art thereagainst.
Further regarding claim 1, Applicant recites the word “it” (line 16) which is indefinite. Correction is required. Examiner suggests “the dorsal shaping element” instead of “it”.
Regarding claim 8, Applicant recites “the crotch part comprises two or more laterally elongated shapes”. As best as can be understood, the existing “laterally elongated shape” of the dorsal shaping element is already on the crotch part, and it is unclear whether the “two or more laterally elongated shapes” includes the existing laterally elongated shape, or there are two or more additional laterally elongated shapes. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the two of more laterally elongated shapes are being interpreted as including the existing laterally elongated shape already recited in claim 1, from which claim 8 depends.
Regarding claim 11, Applicant recites “different sets of several liquid-absorbing layers”. This statement implies there are at least four liquid-absorbing layers (i.e. “sets” would require at least two, and combined with “several” also requiring at least two), although at most in the drawings, it appears there are three liquid-absorbing layers 124 and 125 (see elected Fig. 3b). It is unclear whether claim 11 actually intends to require at least four liquid-absorbing layers to be present when interpreting the claim in light of the specification and the elected embodiments. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as best as can be understood when applying any prior art thereagainst.
Regarding claim 16, Applicant recites “the flexible liquid-absorbing layer” (line 5), which lacks clear antecedent basis in the claims. Claim 16 depends from claim 1, which positively recites “a liquid-absorbing layer”, but never “a flexible liquid-absorbing layer”. Correction is required. It appears that claim 16 should recite “the liquid-absorbing layer”, or claim 1 should be amended to define that the liquid-absorbing layer is flexible.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Applicant (in each claim) positively recites “an inner part of the crotch part” and “an outer part of the crotch part”. Claims 19 and 20 each depend from claim 16, which already positively recites “an inner part of the crotch part” and “an outer part of the crotch part”. It is indefinite as to whether claims 19 and 20 are reciting additional inner and outer parts of the crotch part, or should reference the existing inner part and outer part of the crotch part.
Further regarding claims 19 and 20, Applicant positively recites “a first distribution layer having relatively large pores; a second distribution layer having relatively small pores; the liquid-absorbing layer; and a liquid barrier” (emphasis added; in claim 19) and “a first distribution layer being arranged with higher liquid transportation capacity in a direction perpendicular to the skin of the standing user wearing the protective garment as compared to in a direction parallel to the skin; a second distribution layer being arranged with a higher liquid transportation capacity in a direction parallel to the skin as compared to in a direction perpendicular the skin; the liquid-absorbing layer; and a liquid barrier” (emphasis added; in claim 20). Claim 16 positively recites “a flexible first layer; the flexible liquid-absorbing layer; and a flexible third liquid barrier layer” (emphasis added). Are claims 19 and 20 reciting additional 4 layers, or should 3 of the 4 layers in claims 19 and 20 the same as the existing 3 layers positively recited in claim 16? Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claims will be interpreted as best as can be understood when applying any prior art thereagainst, such that the 3 layers of claim 16 are the same as 3 of the layers of each of claims 19 and 20, for example.
An effort has been made to identify all indefinite language with the pending claims. However, Examiner notes the above listing of 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejections may not be conclusive and Applicant is required to review every claim for compliance to 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) so as to facilitate a clear understanding of the claimed invention and proper application of the prior art.
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.
Claim 1 (and claims 2-20 at least due to dependency from independent claim 1) is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter for the reason(s) below:
Regarding claim 1, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body, which is not directed to statutory subject matter (i.e. human per se). For example, the claim recites “a dorsal shaping element, arranged along the intergluteal cleft of a standing user wearing the protective garment”, which is actively reciting structure in relation to a user/person, rather than reciting that the structure is configured/adapted to be used in such a manner. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “a dorsal shaping element, arranged along the intergluteal cleft of a standing user when wearing the protective garment”.
Further regarding claim 1, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “a panel part separating the dorsal shaping element from the waist so that the dorsal shaping element does not extend all the way up the waist of the protective garment worn by the standing user”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “a panel part separating the dorsal shaping element from the waist so that the dorsal shaping element does not extend all the way up the waist of the protective garment when worn by the standing user”.
Further regarding claim 1, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “the dorsal shaping element is arranged so that, when a dorsal/upward force is applied to the dorsal shaping element via the panel part as a result of the waist being pulled upwards in relation to the user wearing the protective garment”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “the dorsal shaping element is arranged so that, when a dorsal/upward force is applied to the dorsal shaping element via the panel part as a result of the waist being pulled upwards in relation to the user when wearing the protective garment”.
Further regarding claim 1, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “a part of the crotch part extending along the intergluteal cleft of the user upwards”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “a part of the crotch part extending along the intergluteal cleft of the user upwards, when worn by the user”.
Further regarding claim 1, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “the crotch part comprises a dorsal joining area, extending laterally in relation to the standing user wearing the protective garment”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “the crotch part comprises a dorsal joining area, extending laterally in relation to the standing user when wearing the protective garment”.
Further regarding claim 1, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “the elongated shape comprises a direction change, the direction change being located at the intergluteal cleft of the user and defining an angle pointing upwards/dorsally in relation to the user”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “the elongated shape comprises a direction change, the direction change being located at the intergluteal cleft of the user, when worn by the user, and defining an angle pointing upwards/dorsally in relation to the user, when worn by the user”.
Regarding claim 4, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “the inner layer of the crotch part is a non-interior layer of the crotch part, arranged to directly contact the skin of the standing user wearing the protective garment”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “the inner layer of the crotch part is a non-interior layer of the crotch part, arranged to directly contact the skin of the standing user when wearing the protective garment”.
Regarding claim 5, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “the inner layer being an interior layer of the crotch part, not arranged to directly contact the skin of the standing user wearing the protective garment”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “the inner layer being an interior layer of the crotch part, not arranged to directly contact the skin of the standing user when wearing the protective garment”.
Regarding claim 6, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “the inner layer is arranged closer to the skin of the standing user wearing the protective garment than the liquid-absorbing layer”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “the inner layer is arranged closer to the skin of the standing user when wearing the protective garment than the liquid-absorbing layer”.
Regarding claim 8, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “a respective direction change arranged [at] the intergluteal cleft of the user and defining a respective angle pointing upwards/dorsally in relation to the user”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “a respective direction change arranged at the intergluteal cleft of the user and defining a respective angle pointing upwards/dorsally in relation to the user, when the user is wearing the garment”.
Regarding claim 9, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “the two or more laterally elongated shapes are arranged at a distance from each other in a dorsal-ventral direction of the user”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “the two or more laterally elongated shapes are arranged at a distance from each other in a dorsal-ventral direction of the user, when the garment is worn by the user”.
Regarding claim 20, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “a first distribution layer being arranged with higher liquid transportation capacity in a direction perpendicular to the skin of the standing user wearing the protective garment”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “a first distribution layer being arranged with higher liquid transportation capacity in a direction perpendicular to the skin of the standing user when wearing the protective garment”.
Further regarding claim 20, Applicant appears to claim parts of the human body by reciting “a second distribution layer being arranged with a higher liquid transportation capacity in a direction parallel to the skin as compared to in a direction perpendicular the skin”. Correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as “a second distribution layer being arranged with a higher liquid transportation capacity in a direction parallel to the skin of the standing user, when the user is wearing the garment, as compared to in a direction perpendicular the skin”.
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.
Claims 1-7, 10, 16 and 19, as best as can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (KR 10-1956752 B1).
Regarding independent claim 1, Lee discloses a protective garment (see Fig. 1; “sanitary panty having a pad” (Title of Lee)) in the form of a pantie, a pair of trousers or other legwear with or without an upper/torso part (as noted above), the protective garment being a washable garment arranged for repeated use (the panty is capable of being washed and used repeatedly, inasmuch as the claim has structurally defined the garment; “The first absorbent layer 72 is a nonwoven fabric having a plurality of pores, and liquid is introduced into the pores to store the liquid. At this time, the pore size of the first absorbent layer 72 may be such that the absorbed liquid can sufficiently remain and the liquid can easily escape when it comes into contact with water during washing.” (middle of Page 4 of English machine translation of Lee)), the protective garment comprising: a front part (see Fig. 1; Examiner notes that the term "part" is very broad and merely means "a portion, division, piece, or segment of a whole" (Defn. No. 1 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)); a back part (see Fig. 2); a waist (top edge portion of the garment is a waist of the garment); and a crotch part (see Fig. 6, which shows a general crotch part) having a leak-proof body (page 4, second paragraph of English machine translation states “the absorbent pad 20 is disposed on the inner surface of the panty body 10 to prevent the liquid absorbed in the absorbent pad 20 from leaking”), wherein: the protective garment comprises a dorsal shaping element (see annotated Fig. 6 below, which identifies an arbitrary dorsal shaping element; Examiner notes that the term "element" is very broad and merely means "a component or constituent of a whole or one of the parts into which a whole may be resolved by analysis". (Noun defn. No. 1 of "Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)), arranged along the intergluteal cleft of a standing user wearing the protective garment (see Fig. 6, representative of a center line which would be along a hypothetical standing user’s intergluteal cleft), the back part comprises a panel part separating the dorsal shaping element from the waist so that the dorsal shaping element does not extend all the way up the waist of the protective garment worn by the standing user (see annotated Fig. 6, identifying an arbitrary back panel part that separates the identified dorsal shaping element from the waist), the dorsal shaping element is arranged so that, when a dorsal/upward force is applied to the dorsal shaping element via the panel part as a result of the waist being pulled upwards in relation to the user wearing the protective garment, it in turn forces a part of the crotch part extending along the intergluteal cleft of the user upwards (since all of the components are mechanically secured to one another, any hypothetical dorsal/upward force that would be acted on the identified dorsal shaping element would also act on a part of the crotch part that extends along the hypothetical user’s intergluteal cleft, upwards), the crotch part comprises a dorsal joining area (see annotated Fig. 6 below, which identifies an arbitrary dorsal joining area; Examiner notes that the term "area" is very broad and merely means "a section, portion, or part". (Defn. No. 3 of "Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)), extending laterally in relation to the standing user wearing the protective garment (the area is capable of extending laterally relative to a hypothetical user, since it is a three-dimensional area), the dorsal shaping element comprises a laterally elongated shape of the dorsal joining area fastening a dorsal end edge of a liquid-absorbing layer of the crotch part to a different layer of the crotch part (the top edge of the dorsal shaping element has a measurable laterally-aligned length and a portion of a vertical length connected thereto at the corner, so it is elongated laterally, at least to some extent, inasmuch as the claim has defined; Lee discloses that #30 and #32 are suture/sew lines, which at least serves to fasten the dorsal end edge of a liquid absorbing layer of the absorbent pad #20 to another of the crotch part’s layers (see Figs. 5 and 8)), and the elongated shape comprises a direction change (see annotated Fig. 6 below, showing the solid-line representative of the laterally-elongated shape, which has a direction change), the direction change being located at the intergluteal cleft of the user and defining an angle pointing upwards/dorsally in relation to the user (the direction change points an angle that is partially upwards and partially horizontal at about a 45° angle relative to a vertical center line of the garment; Examiner notes that the garment’s structures are flexible and manipulable such that the direction change could be pointed upwards/dorsally relative to a hypothetical user, depending on the manner in which the user is wearing the garment).
PNG
media_image1.png
438
820
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses that the laterally elongated shape runs along the dorsal end edge of the liquid-absorbing layer (the identified laterally elongated shape runs along the dorsal end edge of the liquid absorbing layer, at least to some extent, absent further distinguishing limitations in the claim; Examiner notes that the term "along" is very broad and has a definition of "on a line or course parallel and close to; continuously beside" (Defn. No. 2 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com)).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses that the laterally elongated shape of the dorsal joining area fastens the dorsal end edge of the liquid-absorbing layer to an inner layer of the crotch part (the stitching lines #30/32 join layers of the absorbent pad together (see Fig. 5), including fastening the liquid-absorbing layer’s dorsal end edge to a layer that is “inner” relative thereto, at least through intermediate structure if not directly fastened).
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses that the inner layer of the crotch part is a non-interior layer of the crotch part, arranged to directly contact the skin of the standing user wearing the protective garment (layer #76 is a non-interior layer that is positioned to directly contact the user’s skin, when the garment is worn).
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses that the inner layer being an interior layer of the crotch part, not arranged to directly contact the skin of the standing user wearing the protective garment (layer #74 is an interior layer disposed between other layers (liquid-absorbing layer being layer #72) and is not configured to directly contact the user’s skin, when worn).
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses that the inner layer is arranged closer to the skin of the standing user wearing the protective garment than the liquid-absorbing layer (in Fig. 8, mesh layer #76 is the layer to be directly against the skin; therefore, layer #74 is closer to the skin than layer #72, when worn).
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses that a liquid barrier layer of the crotch part is arranged to extend dorsally and/or ventrally further than the liquid-absorbing layer (see Fig. 6, wherein waterproof sheets #52 and #54 extend further ventrally and dorsally, respectively, than the liquid-absorbent layer’s extent of the absorbent pad #20).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses that the laterally elongated shape ends at a distance from a side edge of the crotch part (as shown in annotated Fig. 6 above; the identified laterally elongated shape has a terminal end that is spaced away from a side edge of the crotch part of the garment).
Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses that the crotch part comprises, in order from an inner part of the crotch part to an outer part of the crotch part: a flexible first layer (#76); the flexible liquid-absorbing layer (#72); and a flexible third liquid barrier layer (#70).
Regarding claim 19, Lee discloses that the crotch part comprises, in order from an inner part of the crotch part to an outer part of the crotch part, a first distribution layer having relatively large pores (#76; see Fig. 8 order of arrangement); a second distribution layer having relatively small pores (#74; Page 4 of English machine translation discloses that the mesh layer #76 has a pore size larger than that of the second absorbent layer #74); the liquid-absorbing layer (#72); and a liquid barrier (#70).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 8, 9 and 11-15, as best as can be understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Redwine et al. (hereinafter “Redwine”) (WO 99/25298 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Lee teaches all the limitations of claim 1, as set forth above, but is silent to the crotch part comprising two or more laterally elongated shapes, each comprising a respective direction change arranged [at] the intergluteal cleft of the user and defining a respective angle pointing upwards/dorsally in relation to the user (although, as noted above when addressing claim 1, there is an existing laterally elongated shape, as identified in annotated Fig. 6 above).
Redwine teaches a panty garment with a crotch part that has sets of angled stretch control members #54 (Figs. 1, 2, 11 of Redwine). Redwine teaches that the angled stretch control members provide the crotch panel with resistance to narrowing on application of a longitudinally directed force, resulting in a reduction of relative motion of the crotch panel during movement by the wearer (Page 21 of Redwine). Redwine teaches that the orientations of the members #54 can be differed (Page 22, Lines 16-17 of Redwine). Redwine teaches that differing numbers of pairs of members #54 are contemplated (Page 22, Line 9 of Redwine).
Lee and Redwine teach analogous inventions in the field of panty garments. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have added stitch patterns to the dorsal shaping element of Lee (see annotated Fig. 6 of Lee above) both on the front side and on the rear side (as taught by Redwine, see Figs. 1 and 2 thereof) in the quantity and shape forms taught by Redwine in order to add a benefit of reducing the relative motion of the crotch panel relative to the wearer during movement by the wearer, as taught by Redwine. As a result of the modification, the crotch part would comprise two or more laterally elongated shapes, each comprising a respective direction change arranged [at] the intergluteal cleft of the user and defining a respective angle pointing upwards/dorsally in relation to the user (see the pointed end in Fig. 11 of Redwine; as noted above, Redwine teaches that the orientation of the angled members can be changed if desired).
Regarding claim 9, the modified garment of Lee (i.e. Lee in view of Redwine, as applied to claim 8 above) renders obvious all the limitations of claim 8, as set forth above, and further that the two or more laterally elongated shapes are arranged at a distance from each other in a dorsal-ventral direction of the user (see Fig. 11 of Redwine, showing that the shapes are distanced from one another in the sagittal plane (i.e. along dorsal-ventral direction of wearer)).
Regarding claim 11, the modified garment of Lee (i.e. Lee in view of Redwine, as such a modification is applied to address claim 8 above) would result in structure that meets the limitations of the crotch part comprising two or more separated laterally elongated shapes (as taught by Redwine and incorporated into Lee’s garment via the modification) arranged to join together different sets of several liquid-absorbing layers to an inner layer of the crotch part (the stitch patterns of the modified shapes are used to join together all of the layers, as indicated in Fig. 5 of Lee).
Regarding claim 12, the modified garment of Lee (i.e. Lee in view of Redwine, as applied to claim 11 above) renders obvious all the limitations of claim 11, as set forth above, and further that the joining together of each of the different sets of the several liquid-absorbing layers is along a dorsal end edge of a respective one of the liquid-absorbing layers (the stitch patterns are “along” a dorsal end edge of respective one of the interior liquid-absorbing layers, given the breadth of the term “along”).
Regarding claim 13, the modified garment of Lee (i.e. Lee in view of Redwine, as such a modification is applied to address claim 8 above) would result in structure that meets the limitations of the crotch part comprising a ventral joining area, comprising one or more laterally elongated ventral shapes each joining together an inner layer of the crotch part to one or more liquid-absorbing layers of the crotch part along a respective ventral end edge of the liquid-absorbing layer (in the modification described above, the angled shaped stretch limit members #54, taught by Redwine and incorporated into Lee, are applied both to the rear and the front of the garment, which would include a ventral (i.e. front) joining area that has one or more of the shapes that join all the layers together, including joining an inner layer of the crotch part to one or more liquid absorbing layers therewith along a ventral end edge of the liquid-absorbing layer, given the breadth of the term “along”).
Regarding claim 14, the modified garment of Lee (i.e. Lee in view of Redwine, as applied to claim 13 above) renders obvious all the limitations of claim 13, as set forth above, and further that the one or more laterally elongated ventral shape end at a distance from a side edge of the crotch part (see Fig. 11 of Redwine, wherein the members #54 terminate prior to the sidemost edge of the crotch part, which would apply to the modified form of Lee as well).
Regarding claim 15, the modified garment of Lee (i.e. Lee in view of Redwine, as applied to claim 13 above) renders obvious all the limitations of claim 13, as set forth above, and further that the ventral joining area comprises at least two laterally elongated ventral shapes, and different ones of the laterally elongated ventral shapes join together different sets of the liquid-absorbing layers to the inner layer (the same resulting structure that applied to the dorsal side post-modification when addressing claim 12 above likewise applies to the modified front (i.e. ventral) side).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17, 18 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. All art cited on the PTO-892 and not relied upon in an art rejection above is deemed relevant in the field of panty garments and/or crotch-worn devices for absorption.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMESON COLLIER whose telephone number is (571)270-5221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, CLINTON 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.
/JAMESON D COLLIER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights