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 .
Applicant’s pre-amendment of 1/23/2025 is received and entered. Claims 3-8, 10, and 15-20 are amended, claims 21 and 22 are cancelled, and claims 1-20 are pending. An amendment to the specification is also received and entered.
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 one or more closures as in claims 8 and 9 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.
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 1-4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Foster (U.S. 2,771,661). Foster discloses the invention as claimed. Foster teaches a textile 10 for use in constructing a garment, the textile comprising: (a) a mesh layer (formed by 11,14); and (b) a plurality of insulated baffles 15 (see annotated drawing), each one of the plurality of insulated baffles 15 defined by a first longitudinal edge and a second longitudinal edge, wherein each one of the plurality of insulated baffles is attached to the mesh layer along the first longitudinal edge of the baffle by tying yarns 13, while the second longitudinal edge of the baffle is left unattached.
For claim 2, Foster teaches the textile 10 according to claim 1 wherein the plurality of insulated baffles 15 are arranged in parallel rows at spaced intervals along a length of the mesh layer as in Fig.5.
For claim 3, Foster teaches the textile 10 according to claim 1 wherein the plurality of insulated baffles 15 is attached to the mesh layer in an overlapping manner (see Figures 3 and 5 where an edge of one baffle overlaps the next baffle).
For claim 4, Foster teaches the textile 10 according to claim 1 wherein the plurality of insulated baffles 15 comprises an upper baffle and a lower baffle adjacent to the upper baffle (see annotated drawing, Fig.5), and wherein the upper baffle and lower baffle 15 are attached to the mesh layer such that the second longitudinal edge of the upper baffle is below the first longitudinal edge of the lower baffle- see Fig.3 and annotated drawing.
For claim 10, Foster teaches apparel incorporating a textile for use in constructing a garment (col.2, lines 60-66 disclose the textile incorporated into rain wear), the textile comprising a mesh layer 11,14 and a plurality of insulated baffles 15, each one of the plurality of insulated baffles defined by a first longitudinal edge and a second longitudinal edge, wherein each one of the plurality of insulated baffles is attached to the mesh layer along the first longitudinal edge of the baffle by tying yarns 13, while the second longitudinal edge of the baffle is left unattached (see annotated drawing).
PNG
media_image1.png
402
562
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster ‘661. Foster discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As previously discussed, Foster teaches the plurality of insulated baffles comprising an upper baffle and a lower baffle adjacent to the upper baffle and each baffle attached to the mesh layer. However, Foster doesn’t explicitly teach the textile according to claim 1 wherein the upper baffle and lower baffle are attached to the mesh layer such that a spacing s between the first longitudinal edge of the upper baffle and the first longitudinal edge of the lower baffle is less than a distance d between the first longitudinal edge and the second longitudinal edge of the upper baffle. It is noted that the specification doesn’t disclose any criticality or unexpected results arising from this configuration. The spacing between the first longitudinal edge of the upper baffle and the first longitudinal edge of the lower baffle relative to the distance between the first longitudinal edge and the second longitudinal edge of the upper baffle is considered as a results effective variable, as the distance between the first and second edge of Foster’s upper baffle must have an adequate length for coverage of the mesh layer and ensure runoff of moisture at its second longitudinal edge, with the spacing between respective first longitudinal edges of each baffle selected to provide the desired degree of overlap and airflow through the mesh layer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to attach Foster’s upper and lower baffle to the mesh layer such a spacing s between the first longitudinal edge of the upper baffle and the first longitudinal edge of the lower baffle is less than a distance d between the first longitudinal edge and the second longitudinal edge of the upper baffle since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a results effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In the present invention, one would have been motivated to optimize the spacing s between the first longitudinal edge of the upper baffle and the first longitudinal edge of the lower baffle as less than a distance d between the first longitudinal edge and the second longitudinal edge of the upper baffle to arrive at a desired degree of overlap between adjacent baffles to optimize airflow through the mesh layer while being rain resistant.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster ‘661 in view of Harris (U.S. 11,700,896). Foster discloses the invention substantially as claimed but doesn’t teach the mesh layer comprises a stretch mesh material. Harris teaches an upper body garment including stretchable mesh portions 316a,b providing enhanced range of motion. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Foster’s mesh layer to form from stretch mesh material, as Harris teaches the stretch mesh provided to an upper body garment to enhance range of motion of the wearer’s arms, particularly as Foster’s mesh layer is disclosed as part of an upper body article of clothing and would improve the clothing in the same manner.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster ‘661 in view of Ly (U.S. 2020/0009828). Foster discloses the invention substantially as claimed including that each one of the plurality of insulated baffles comprises an exterior fabric forming a casing. However, Foster doesn’t teach wherein each one of the plurality of insulated baffles comprises insulation material located within the casing. Ly teaches fabric as part of a garment, the fabric including a base layer 130 and a plurality of insulated baffles 140 defined by an exterior fabric 150, each baffle 140 having a first and second longitudinal edge and each baffle attached to the base layer 130 along the first longitudinal edge at 170 and the second longitudinal edge unattached, with insulation material located within the baffle casing as in par.29, insulation material not labelled or shown. Ly teaches the insulation material provides the composite fabric with thermal insulation as in par.0002. The insulation material can be selected from a number of suitable materials as in par.38, and can be distributed within the cavity of the baffle as evenly or unevenly as desired to vary the degree of thermal insulation provided to the article of apparel as in par.0004. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Foster’s plurality of insulated baffles to comprise insulation material located within the casing to provide the fabric, and articles of apparel made therefrom, with thermal insulation properties for improved warmth.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster ‘661 in view of Banowit (U.S. 9,950,492). Foster discloses the invention substantially as claimed but doesn’t teach the textile according to claim 1 comprising one or more closures for selectively opening and closing the plurality of insulated baffles. Banowit teaches an article of upper body clothing including a plurality of resealable channels 120 and one or more closures 124 at channel end 128 (“one or more channels 120 may have a separate resealable closure” as in col.4, lines 11-14) for selectively opening and closing the plurality of insulated baffles, the closures comprise a zipper/zippers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Foster’s textile to comprise one or more closures for selectively opening and closing the plurality of insulated baffles and one or more closures (zipper/zippers) for selectively opening and closing the plurality of insulated baffles as taught by Banowit, to prevent moisture from entering the baffles’ interior.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster ‘661 in view of Abrams (U.S. 4,408,356). Foster discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Foster doesn’t teach the apparel comprises an outerwear garment and the textile is sewn in as a back panel of the outerwear garment. Abrams teaches a ventilated rain outerwear garment with a back panel formed from shingled sections of fluid impermeable material. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Foster such that the textile is sewn in as a back panel of an outerwear garment as taught by Abrams, as the textile would provide protection from moisture while also providing a ventilative effect.
Claims 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster ‘661 in view of Ly ‘828. Foster discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Foster teaches a method for constructing a textile, comprising: providing a mesh layer (formed by 11,14); providing a plurality of casings 15, each one of the plurality of casings formed from an elongate fabric piece (coated fabric) which is folded longitudinally to form the casing (Fig.5 shows casing is folded before edges are sewn to mesh layer), wherein the casing is defined by a first longitudinal edge and a second longitudinal edge; arranging the plurality of casings at spaced intervals along a length of the mesh layer: attaching each one of the plurality of casings to the mesh layer along the first longitudinal edge of the casing as 16 attaches via tying yarns 13, while leaving the second longitudinal edge of the casing unattached. However, Foster doesn’t teach inserting insulation material into each one of the plurality of casings. Ly teaches fabric as part of a garment, the fabric including a base layer 130 and a plurality of insulated baffles 140 defined by an exterior fabric 150, each baffle 140 having a first and second longitudinal edge and each baffle attached to the base layer 130 along the first longitudinal edge at 170 and the second longitudinal edge unattached, with insulation material inserted into each baffle casing as in par.29, insulation material not labelled or shown. Ly teaches the insulation material provides the composite fabric with thermal insulation as in par.0002. The insulation material can be selected from a number of suitable materials as in par.38, and can be distributed within the cavity of the baffle as evenly or unevenly as desired to vary the degree of thermal insulation provided to the article of apparel as in par.0004. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Foster’s method for constructing a textile comprising a step of inserting insulation material into each casing to provide the fabric, and articles of apparel made therefrom, with thermal insulation properties for improved warmth.
For claims 13 and 14, Foster discloses the invention substantially as claimed including the casings including a longitudinal fold, but doesn’t teach the method according to claim 12, wherein each one of the plurality of casings 15 is formed by bringing opposing lengthwise edges of the elongate fabric piece together to form a longitudinal fold, and sewing along the lengthwise edges. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to form the casings by bringing opposing lengthwise edges together and sewing along the lengthwise edges to form a casing of a desired width with defined first and second longitudinal edges to achieve a desired aesthetic. Turning each one of the plurality of casings inside out subsequent to sewing along the lengthwise edges is known in the art as turning inside out results in the stitched seam oriented interiorly to each casing to protect the structural integrity of the seams. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Foster’s method to include the step of forming the plurality of casings 15 by bringing opposing lengthwise edges of the elongate fabric piece together to form a longitudinal fold, and sewing along the lengthwise edges and turning each one of the plurality of casings inside out subsequent to sewing along the lengthwise edges as the seams would be interior to the casings to prevent fraying.
For claim 15, Foster as modified by Ly teaches the method according to claim 12, wherein each one of the plurality of casings 15 is attached to the mesh layer 11,14 by sewing along the first longitudinal edge of the casing as 16 attaches to tying yarn 13.
For claim 16, Foster as modified by Ly teaches the method according to claim 12 comprising attaching the plurality of casings 15 to the mesh layer in an overlapping manner as in Figure 5.
For claim 17, Foster as modified by Ly teaches the method according to claim 12, wherein the plurality of casings comprises an upper casing and a lower casing adjacent to the upper casing, and wherein the upper casing and lower casing are attached to the mesh layer such that the second longitudinal edge of the upper casing is below the first longitudinal edge of the lower casing (see annotated drawing above showing upper and lower baffles equivalent to upper and lower casings).
For claim 18, Foster as modified by Ly teaches wherein the plurality of casings comprises an upper casing and a lower casing adjacent to the upper casing, and wherein the upper casing and lower casing are attached to the mesh layer 11,14. Foster doesn’t teach that a spacing s between the first longitudinal edge of the upper casing and the first longitudinal edge of the lower casing is less than a distance d between the first longitudinal edge and the second longitudinal edge of the upper casing. As discussed with regard to claim 5, the spacing between the first longitudinal edge of the upper baffle and the first longitudinal edge of the lower baffle relative to the distance between the first longitudinal edge and the second longitudinal edge of the upper baffle is considered as a results effective variable, as the distance between the first and second edge of Foster’s upper baffle must have an adequate length for coverage of the mesh layer and ensure runoff of moisture at its second longitudinal edge, with the spacing between respective first longitudinal edges of each baffle selected to provide the desired degree of overlap and airflow through the mesh layer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to attach Foster’s upper and lower baffle to the mesh layer such a spacing s between the first longitudinal edge of the upper baffle and the first longitudinal edge of the lower baffle is less than a distance d between the first longitudinal edge and the second longitudinal edge of the upper baffle since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a results effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In the present invention, one would have been motivated to optimize the spacing s between the first longitudinal edge of the upper baffle and the first longitudinal edge of the lower baffle as less than a distance d between the first longitudinal edge and the second longitudinal edge of the upper baffle to arrive at a desired degree of overlap between adjacent baffles to optimize airflow through the mesh layer while being rain resistant.
For claim 19, Foster as modified by Ly teaches inserting insulation material into each one of the plurality of casings as in paragraph 0002 of Ly; however, Foster doesn’t teach the step of inserting insulation material occurs after the plurality of casings is attached to the mesh layer. One of ordinary skill would recognize that the step of inserting insulation material occurs before or after the plurality of casings is attached to the mesh layer and inserting the insulation material after the plurality of casings is attached to the mesh layer provides an anchored first longitudinal edge for insertion of the insulation material and prevents any potential interference of the insulation material such as may occur if the insulation material is inserted before the casings are attached to the mesh layer. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Foster’s method for constructing a textile to insert insulation material after the plurality of casings are attached to the mesh layer to prevent interference of the insulation material while sewing the casing to the mesh layer.
For claim 20, Foster as modified by Ly teaches a textile 10 manufactured in accordance with the method of claim 12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications should be directed to Primary Examiner Katherine Moran at (571) 272-4990 (phone). Please note that any internet communication directed to katherine.moran@uspto.gov requires prior submission of an Authorization for Internet Communications form (PTO/SB/439). The examiner can be reached on Monday-Thursday from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm, and alternating Fridays.If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Khoa Huynh, may be reached at (571) 272-4888. The official and after final fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is (571) 273-8300. General information regarding this application and
questions directed to matters of form and procedures may be directed to the PTO Contact
Center/Inventors Assistance Center at (800) 786-9199/571-272-1000. Information regarding the status
of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system.
Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For questions on
access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-
free).
/KATHERINE M MORAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732