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
Applicant’s amendment, filed 05 January 2026, is reviewed and entered. This Office Action is a final rejection.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Status of Claims
Amended
1, 4-6, 8-11, 13-15, 17-20
Pending
1-20
Presented for Examination
1-20
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
112(b) Rejections
Overcome by the claim amendments and withdrawn.
103 Rejections
The arguments are drawn to amended subject matter and are addressed in the rejections below.
Applicant argues it would not be obvious to modify the Blackburn sleeves and chest panel to have additional layers of fabric. As set forth in the rejections below, Blackburn discloses areas of additional fill including the chest panel 242 and the sleeves in para. 0030. Furthermore, Blackburn discloses the additional fill may be layers of fabric. Therefore, even though Blackburn does not disclose a single embodiment where the sleeves and chest panel each have a plurality of layers of fabric, Blackburn does disclose both features and both features are within the scope of the reference. The Howard reference discloses a plurality of layers of fabric in the chest panel and the Shekhani reference discloses a plurality of layers of fabric in the sleeves. Blackburn is obviously modifiable to achieve the garment claimed in 1, 8, and 15.
Please note that although claims 1 and 15 recite “support layers of fabric,” the term “support” does not lend any inherent structure to the layers of fabric and there is no additional claim structure that renders the layers of fabric “support” layers and the prior art fabric layers have all the same structure as the support layers of fabric and so are considered to be support layers of fabric.
Applicant argues the prior art references cannot be combined because they are each using a different approach. All three prior art references are using plural layers of fabric on select portions of the garment to enhance the wearer’s sleep. Howard uses additional layers to provide a swaddling effect (Howard abstract), Shekhani uses additional layers to mimic swaddling (Shekhani abstract), and Blackburn uses additional layers to mimic pressure (Blackburn para. 0031). The examiner is not persuaded that these are three different approaches, but even so, all three references use the same structure: a plurality of layers of fabric.
In light of the above, the rejection is believed to be proper.
Claim Interpretation in light of the Specification
Para. 0028 defines “approximately” plus or minus 10%.
Claim 11 recites “a thickness of greater than or equal to approximately 3.0 mm.” In light of para. 0028, this limitation is interpreted thusly:
any value between 2.7 and 3.3 mm because of the closed range “equal to approximately 3.0 mm”, and/ or
any value greater than 2.7-3.3 mm (i.e., any value greater than 2.7 mm) because of the open ended range “greater than approximately 3.0 mm.”
Claim 11 recites “a thickness of less than or equal to approximately 1.5 mm.” In light of para. 0028, this limitation is interpreted thusly:
any value between 1.35 and 1.65 mm because of the closed range “equal to approximately 1.5 mm”, and/ or
any value less than 1.35-1.65 mm (i.e., any value less than 1.65 mm) because of the open ended range “less than approximately 1.5 mm.”
Claims 5 and 18 recite the sleeve thickness and second thickness are “approximately equal.”
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 sleeve thickness and the second thickness (claims 5 and 18; although FIG 9 shows cross-sections of the sleeve and chest panel, it is not clear which of these “portions” has the sleeve and second thickness, nor is it clear if FIG 9 is drawn to scale) 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: the subject matter of claims 5 and 18. There is no disclosure in the specification of the sleeve thickness and second thickness being approximately equal.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 5-6 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The new matter is the subject matter of claims 5 and 18. There is no disclosure in the specification of the sleeve thickness and second thickness being approximately equal.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-7 and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackburn (US 20190069609 A1) in view of Shekhani (US 20210022414 A1), Grose (US 6076186 A), and Howard (US 8943615 B2).
As to claim 1, Blackburn discloses a sleep sack (“INFANT SLEEP SUITS,” title) comprising:
a front outer layer (FIG 16; para. 0030 discloses an inner layer, and outer layer, and one or more layers of filling between the inner and outer layers; the outer layer disclosed in Blackburn para. 0030 corresponds to Applicant’s claimed outer layer);
a rear outer layer (FIG 16; para. 0030 discloses an inner layer, and outer layer, and one or more layers of filling between the inner and outer layers; the outer layer disclosed in Blackburn para. 0030 corresponds to Applicant’s claimed outer layer);
a closure positioned along the front outer layer (232);
sleeves (FIG 16); and
a chest panel positioned on the front outer layer and separated into a left portion and a right portion by the closure (242; para. 0043 discloses “additional fill/weighting 242 added to the upper torso”), the chest panel defined superiorly by a neck opening (236).
Blackburn does not expressly disclose the “sleeves comprising a first plurality of support layers of fabric.”
Blackburn FIG 16, upon which the rejection of this claim relies, shows two sleeves, and Blackburn para. 0030 discloses the suit, including the portions over the wearer’s arms which would correspond to sleeves, “may include one or more inner (lining) layer and one or more outer (shell) layer separated by one or more layers of filling” and that the filling layers are from materials that include fabrics, such as flannel. Therefore, Blackburn discloses sleeves (FIG 16) and sleeves comprising a first plurality of support layers of fabric (the “one or more layers of filling” described in para. 0030 correspond to the plurality of support layers of fabric), but does not expressly disclose the FIG 16 embodiment has sleeves comprising a first plurality of support layers of fabric. The para. 0030 disclosure demonstrates that a sleeve having a first plurality of support layers of fabric is within the scope of the Blackburn reference.
Shekhani teaches a similar sleep suit (“INFANT SLEEP GARMENT WITH WEIGHTED SLEEVES AND METHODS THEREOF,” title) including sleeves that are weighted by providing a plurality of support layers of fabric (para. 0051). Shekhani para. 0051 teaches one to six sleeve support layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide sleeves comprising a first plurality of support layers of fabric as taught by Shekhani, such as two support layers/ filling layers, in order “to help reduce the startle reflexes of the infant when around the infant's arm while the infant is sleeping and exerting the benefits of deep pressure touch stimulation (DPST)” (Shekhani para. 0013).
Blackburn does not expressly disclose the chest panel defined superiorly by two shoulder seams and defined inferiorly by an inferior boundary seam.
Constructing garments by seaming panels together at shoulder seams, an inferior boundary seam, and side seams is known in the art.
Grose teaches a similar sleep sack (“Crib climbing restraint garment for toddlers,” title), including combining panels with seams (FIGS 1-2 and 5-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the garment with seams, for the purpose of providing a known means of constructing a garment.
Blackburn does not disclose “the chest panel comprising a second plurality of support layers of fabric, such that the sleeves and the chest panel comprise more layers of fabric than a front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel.”
Blackburn FIG 16, upon which the rejection of this claim relies, discloses 242 comprises additional fill/ weighting added to the upper torso to “provide an infant with a feeling of security by simulated touch allowing for better, deeper sleep… [and] to dampen the Moro and/or startle reflexes of the infant” (para. 0043). Furthermore, Blackburn claim 5 discloses “wherein the torso portion as an anterior side and a posterior side, and the at least one portion of fill layer which has a greater weight is positioned over the anterior side of the torso portion,” which implies chest panel is weighted and the posterior/ rear outer layer (where the posterior/ rear outer layer is “other portions of the sleep sack”) is not. Therefore, Blackburn FIG 16 discloses the chest panel comprising “fill material,” such that the sleeves and the chest panel comprise more “fill material” than a front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel.
Blackburn para. 0030 discloses the suit, including the portions over the wearer’s torso which would correspond to the chest panel, “may include one or more inner (lining) layer and one or more outer (shell) layer separated by one or more layers of filling” and that the filling layers are from materials that include fabrics, such as flannel. Therefore, Blackburn discloses a chest panel comprising fill material (FIG 16 and para. 0043) and fill material comprising a plurality of support layers of fabric (the “one or more layers of filling” described in para. 0030 correspond to the plurality of support layers of fabric), but does not expressly disclose the FIG 16 chest panel’s fill material is a second plurality of support layers of fabric.
Blackburn does not expressly disclose the additional fill is a plurality of layers of fabric, but as set forth in Blackburn para. 0030, the additional fill being a plurality of layers of fabric is within the scope of the Blackburn reference.
Howard teaches a similar sleep suit (title) including strategically weighting portions of the suit to “reduce neurological twitches and provides a swaddling effect to infants helping them to fall asleep and remain sleeping when on their backs” (col 2 line 1-10), which is the same reason Blackburn provides additional fill/ weighting. Furthermore, Howard achieves weighting with additional layers of fabrics (col 2 line 10-20). Howard FIGS 2-4 teaches two to three chest support layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Blackburn’s chest panel comprising a second plurality of support layers of fabric as taught by Howard, such as two support layers/ filling layers, for the purpose of reducing “neurological twitches and provides a swaddling effect to infants helping them to fall asleep and remain sleeping when on their backs” (Howard col 2 line 1-10).
When Blackburn is modified to have a sleeves comprising a first plurality of support layers of fabric and a chest panel comprising a second plurality of support layers of fabric, the resulting structure is “the sleeves and the chest panel comprise more layers of fabric than a front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel.”
As to claim 2, Blackburn as modified discloses the sleep sack of Claim 1 further comprising side seams disposed between the front outer layer and the rear outer layer, wherein the chest panel is defined, at least partially, laterally by the side seams (see the modification presented in the rejection of claim 1 above).
As to claim 3, Blackburn as modified discloses the sleep sack of Claim 2 further comprising a left arm seam and a right arm seam, wherein the chest panel is defined, at least partially, laterally by the left arm seam and the right arm seam (Blackburn FIG 16).
As to claim 4, Blackburn as modified discloses the sleep sack of Claim 3 wherein the sleeves comprise outer sleeve layers attached to the front outer layer and the rear outer layer by one of the left arm seam or the right arm seam (this is the result of the modification presented in the rejection of claim 1 above, where Blackburn’s sleeves are modified to have “one or more inner (lining) layer and one or more outer (shell) layer separated by one or more layers of filling” as described in Blackburn para. 0030 and the “outer layer” corresponds to Applicant’s “outer sleeve layers” and Blackburn FIG 16 shows the outer sleeve layers attached by the arm seams).
As to claim 5, Blackburn as modified does not disclose the sleep sack of Claim 4, wherein (i) a sleeve thickness of a portion the sleeves adjacent to a respective arm seam, and (ii) a second thickness of a portion of the chest panel adjacent to the arm seams, are approximately equal.
As set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above, the sleeves and chest panel are modified to have the same number of layers of fabric. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would expect their thicknesses to be “approximately equal.”
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the thicknesses to be “approximately equal,” since discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the sleeve and second thicknesses to be approximately equal in order to achieve the desired effect in dampening the wearer’s startle reflex while providing the desired degree of insulation for temperature regulation.
As to claim 6, Blackburn as modified discloses the sleep sack of Claim 5, wherein a first quantity of the first plurality of support layers of fabric is equal to a second quantity of the second plurality of support layers of fabric (this is the result of the modification presented in the rejection of claim 1 above).
As to claim 7, Blackburn does not disclose the sleep sack of Claim 1, wherein the left portion and the right portion are approximately three times thicker than the rear outer layer.
As set forth in the modification presented in the rejection of claim 1 above, Blackburn as modified discloses the left and right portions have additional layers. One of ordinary skill would expect that the additional layers would result in thicker left and right portions. Furthermore, the combination of references discloses varying the thickness or quantity of layers to achieve the desired weight. Providing left and right portions approximately three times thicker than the rear outer layer would be within the scope of the references.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the Blackburn left and right portions to be approximately three times thicker than the rear outer layer for the purpose of providing the desired cushioning, insulation, and weight.
As to claim 15, Blackburn discloses a method of manufacturing a sleep sack (“INFANT SLEEP SUITS,” title) comprising:
Forming a front outer layer (FIG 16) and a rear outer layer (FIG 16);
Positioning a closure along the front outer layer (232).
Creating a chest panel on the front outer layer, the chest panel being separated into a left portion and a right portion by the closure (242; para. 0043 discloses “additional fill/weighting 242 added to the upper torso”), the chest panel defined superiorly by a neck opening (236);
forming a left arm seam and a right arm seam (the left and right armscyes in FIG 16 correspond to the claimed left and right arm seams);
defining the chest panel, at least partially, laterally by the left arm seam and the right arm seam (FIG 16);
attaching sleeves to the sleep sack (FIG 16), the sleeves comprising outer sleeve layers attached to the front outer layer and the rear outer layer by one of the left arm seam and the right arm seam (FIG 16).
Blackburn does not expressly disclose the chest panel defined superiorly by two shoulder seams and defined inferiorly by an inferior boundary seam.
Constructing garments by seaming panels together at shoulder seams, an inferior boundary seam, and side seams is known in the art.
Grose teaches a similar sleep sack (“Crib climbing restraint garment for toddlers,” title), including combining panels with seams (FIGS 1-2 and 5-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the garment with seams, for the purpose of providing a known means of constructing a garment.
Blackburn does not disclose incorporating a first plurality of support layers of fabric into the sleeves; and
incorporating a second plurality of support layers of fabric into the chest panel such that the sleeves and the chest panel are thicker than a front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel.
Blackburn para. 0030 does disclose the garment “may include one or more inner (lining) layer and one or more outer (shell) layer separated by one or more layers of filling” and the filling layer may be fabric such as flannel.
Blackburn uses portions of increased fill to weight portions of the wearer’s body to “to enhance the quality of sleep, regulate temperature, and/or improve the duration of restful sleep” (para. 0029). Para. 0030 discloses providing the sleeves/ portions over the wearer’s arms with two fill layers and para. 0043 discloses providing the chest panel with additional fill material than the remainder of the garment. Therefore, providing the sleeves with a first plurality of support layers of fabric and the chest panel with a second plurality of support layers of fabric is within the scope of the reference.
Shekhani teaches a similar sleep suit (“INFANT SLEEP GARMENT WITH WEIGHTED SLEEVES AND METHODS THEREOF,” title) including sleeves that are weighted by providing a plurality of support layers of fabric (para. 0051). Shekhani para. 0051 teaches one to six sleeve support layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide sleeves comprising a first plurality of support layers of fabric as taught by Shekhani, such as two support layers/ filling layers of fabric, in order “to help reduce the startle reflexes of the infant when around the infant's arm while the infant is sleeping and exerting the benefits of deep pressure touch stimulation (DPST)” (Shekhani para. 0013).
Howard teaches a similar sleep suit (title) including strategically weighting portions of the suit to “reduce neurological twitches and provides a swaddling effect to infants helping them to fall asleep and remain sleeping when on their backs” (col 2 line 1-10), which is the same reason Blackburn provides additional fill/ weighting. Furthermore, Howard achieves weighting with additional layers of fabrics (col 2 line 10-20). Howard FIGS 2-4 teaches two to three chest support layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Blackburn’s chest panel comprising a second plurality of support layers of fabric as taught by Howard, such as two support layers/ filling layers of fabric, for the purpose of reducing “neurological twitches and provides a swaddling effect to infants helping them to fall asleep and remain sleeping when on their backs” (Howard col 2 line 1-10).
As set forth in the modification presented above, Blackburn as modified discloses the left and right portions have additional layers. One of ordinary skill would expect that the additional layers would result in the sleeves and the chest panel are thicker than a front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel, because the sleeves and chest each have at least an outer layer and two fill layers, and the remaining portions of the garment do not have additional fill layers. Furthermore, the combination of references discloses varying the thickness or quantity of layers to achieve the desired weight. Providing sleeves and chest panel thicker than an inferior portion of the of the front portion would be within the scope of the references.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the Blackburn the sleeves and the chest panel are thicker than a front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel for the purpose of providing the desired cushioning, insulation, and weight.
As to claim 16, Blackburn as modified discloses the sleep sack of Claim 15, further comprising side seams disposed between the front outer layer and the rear outer layer, wherein the chest panel is defined, at least partially, laterally by the side seams (see the modification presented in the rejection of claim 15 above).
As to claim 17, Blackburn as modified discloses wherein the sleeves and the chest panel comprise more layers of fabric than (i) the front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel and (ii) the rear outer layer (this is the result of the modification presented in the rejection of claim 15 above).
As to claim 18, Blackburn as modified does not disclose wherein (i) a sleeve thickness of a portion the sleeves adjacent to a respective arm seam, and (ii) a second thickness of a portion of the chest panel adjacent to the arm seams, are approximately equal.
As set forth in the rejection of claim 15 above, the sleeves and chest panel are modified to have the same number of layers of fabric. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would expect their thicknesses to be “approximately equal.”
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the thicknesses to be “approximately equal,” since discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the sleeve and second thicknesses to be approximately equal in order to achieve the desired effect in dampening the wearer’s startle reflex while providing the desired degree of insulation for temperature regulation.
As to claim 19, Blackburn as modified does not disclose wherein the sleeves and the chest panel are more rigid than the front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel.
Blackburn does disclose another embodiment (FIG 11 and para. 0038) that provides portions of the garment with greater rigidity than other portions in order to achieve the desired effect.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the sleeves and the chest panel are more rigid than the front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel such as by providing stays within the materials as Blackburn discloses in para. 0038, in order to “reduce/muffle an infant's movement or startle reflex to improve sleep quality” (Blackburn para. 0038).
As to claim 20, Blackburn as modified discloses the sleep sack of Claim 19, wherein a first quantity of the first plurality of support layers of fabric is equal to a second quantity of the second plurality of support layers of fabric (this is the result of the modification presented in the rejection of claim 15 above).
Claim(s) 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackburn (US 20190069609 A1) in view of Shekhani (US 20210022414 A1) and Howard (US 8943615 B2).
As to claim 8, Blackburn discloses a garment for a child (“INFANT SLEEP SUITS,” title) comprising:
a body section having a front portion and a rear portion (FIG 16); and
a chest area defined on the front portion of the body section (at 242), the chest area comprising one or more fabric layers (242; para. 0043 discloses “additional fill/weighting 242 added to the upper torso”); and
sleeves comprising outer sleeve layers attached to the chest area on one side and the rear portion on another side (FIG 16).
Blackburn does not disclose the chest area comprising a first plurality of layers of fabric; and
the sleeves comprising a second plurality of layers of fabric,
wherein the sleeves and the chest area are thicker than a portion of the front portion adjacent and inferior to the chest area.
Blackburn para. 0030 does disclose the garment “may include one or more inner (lining) layer and one or more outer (shell) layer separated by one or more layers of filling” and the filling layer may be fabric such as flannel.
Blackburn uses portions of increased fill to weight portions of the wearer’s body to “to enhance the quality of sleep, regulate temperature, and/or improve the duration of restful sleep” (para. 0029). Para. 0030 discloses providing the sleeves/ portions over the wearer’s arms with two fill layers and para. 0043 discloses providing the chest panel with additional fill material than the remainder of the garment. Therefore, providing the sleeves with a first plurality of support layers of fabric and the chest panel with a second plurality of support layers of fabric is within the scope of the reference.
Shekhani teaches a similar sleep suit (“INFANT SLEEP GARMENT WITH WEIGHTED SLEEVES AND METHODS THEREOF,” title) including sleeves that are weighted by providing a plurality of support layers of fabric (para. 0051). Shekhani para. 0051 teaches one to six sleeve support layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide sleeves comprising a first plurality of support layers of fabric as taught by Shekhani, such as two support layers/ filling layers of fabric, in order “to help reduce the startle reflexes of the infant when around the infant's arm while the infant is sleeping and exerting the benefits of deep pressure touch stimulation (DPST)” (Shekhani para. 0013).
Howard teaches a similar sleep suit (title) including strategically weighting portions of the suit to “reduce neurological twitches and provides a swaddling effect to infants helping them to fall asleep and remain sleeping when on their backs” (col 2 line 1-10), which is the same reason Blackburn provides additional fill/ weighting. Furthermore, Howard achieves weighting with additional layers of fabrics (col 2 line 10-20). Howard FIGS 2-4 teaches two to three chest support layers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Blackburn’s chest panel comprising a second plurality of support layers of fabric as taught by Howard, such as two support layers/ filling layers of fabric, for the purpose of reducing “neurological twitches and provides a swaddling effect to infants helping them to fall asleep and remain sleeping when on their backs” (Howard col 2 line 1-10).
As set forth in the modification presented above, Blackburn as modified discloses the left and right portions have additional layers. One of ordinary skill would expect that the additional layers would result in the sleeves and the chest panel are thicker than a front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel, because the sleeves and chest each have at least an outer layer and two fill layers, and the remaining portions of the garment do not have additional fill layers. Furthermore, the combination of references discloses varying the thickness or quantity of layers to achieve the desired weight. Providing sleeves and chest panel thicker than an inferior portion of the of the front portion would be within the scope of the references.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the Blackburn the sleeves and the chest panel are thicker than a front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel for the purpose of providing the desired cushioning, insulation, and weight.
As to claim 9, Blackburn does not disclose wherein the sleeves and the chest area are more rigid than the portion of the front portion adjacent and inferior to the chest area.
Blackburn does disclose another embodiment (FIG 11 and para. 0038) that provides portions of the garment with greater rigidity than other portions in order to achieve the desired effect.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the sleeves and the chest panel are more rigid than the front portion of the sleep sack adjacent and inferior to the chest panel such as by providing stays within the materials as Blackburn discloses in para. 0038, in order to “reduce/muffle an infant's movement or startle reflex to improve sleep quality” (Blackburn para. 0038).
As to claim 10, Blackburn does not disclose the garment of Claim 8, wherein the sleeves and the chest area comprise more layers of fabric than the portion of the front portion adjacent and inferior to the chest area (this is the result of the modification presented in the rejection of claim 8 above, where 242 is provided with additional fill/ layers of fabric than the inferior portion of the front portion).
As to claim 11, as best understood, Blackburn as modified does not disclose the garment of Claim 8, wherein the sleeves and the chest area have a thickness of greater than or equal to approximately 3.0 mm, and wherein the rest of the body section has a thickness of less than or equal to approximately 1.5 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the sleeves and the chest area have a thickness of greater than or equal to approximately 3.0 mm, and wherein the rest of the body section has a thickness of less than or equal to approximately 1.5 mm, since discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.
As to claim 12, Blackburn as modified discloses the garment of Claim 8, wherein the chest area is further defined by a left portion and a right portion separated by a closure (Blackburn FIG 16).
As to claim 13, Blackburn as modified discloses wherein (i) a sleeve thickness of a portion the sleeves adjacent to a respective arm seam, and (ii) a second thickness of a portion of the chest panel adjacent to the arm seams, are approximately equal (this is the result of the modification presented in the rejection of claim 8 above).
As to claim 14, Blackburn as modified does not disclose the garment of Claim 8, wherein the chest area is three times thicker than the portion of the front portion adjacent and inferior to the chest area.
Shekhani teaches a similar sleep suit (“INFANT SLEEP GARMENT WITH WEIGHTED SLEEVES AND METHODS THEREOF,” title) including areas that are weighted by providing areas of greater thickness (para. 0057).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to weight the chest area by making it thicker, in order accomplish the desired weighting in each area of the garment (Shekhani para. 0057).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the chest area three times thicker, e.g. by providing three layers of fabric in the chest area and one layer in the remainder of the body section, since discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.
Further still, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the chest area three times thicker, e.g. by providing three layers of fabric in the chest area and one layer in the remainder of the body section, in order to provide the desired cushioning, insulation, and weight.
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 SALLY HADEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6731. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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.
SALLY HADEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/SALLY HADEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732