CTNF 19/058,474 CTNF 94145 DETAILED ACTION The communication dated 2/20/2025 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 1-5 are pending. 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GOMI et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2021/0277600), hereinafter GOMI, in view of UENO (U.S. PGPUB 2016/0068681) . Regarding claim 1 , GOMI teaches: A method for producing garment fabric (GOMI teaches a method for producing a garment [Abstract].) comprising: a removal process . . . (GOMI teaches the mesh belt (46) functions as a separation unit that separates matter to be removes, which is not used in a sheet S, from the defibrated substances [0053; Fig. 1]. GOMI teaches the concept of a removal process and removing chosen substances from a batch. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to rearrange the method steps as the selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. See In re Burhans, 154 F.2d 690, 69 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1946); In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975, 5 USPQ 230 (CCPA 1930) (Selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious.).) ; a defibrating process of defibrating the second layer using a dry method and of extracting the fibers (GOMI teaches the defibration unit (20) defibrates rough-crushed materials roughly crushed by the rough crushing unit (12) [0043]. GOMI teaches the defibration unit (20) preforms a defibrating process on the raw material cut by the rough crushing unit (12) and generates the defibrated substance [0043]. GOMI teaches the defibration unit (20) performs dry defibration [0045] and extracts the fibers [0047].) ; a mixing process of mixing the fibers with a treatment agent to form a mixture containing no coloring agents (GOMI teaches coloring agents are removed in the defibrating process [0043-0044]. GOMI teaches mixing resin with the fibers in the mixer (50) [0063; 0075; Fig. 1].) ; a depositing process for creating a web as a new second layer by depositing, in air, the mixture on an air-permeable fabric that becomes a new first layer (GOMI teaches depositing the fiber mixture in the air [0077; Fig. 1].) ; and a forming process of forming by pressing and heating the fabric and the web (GOMI teaches forming the sheet by pressing and heating the fabric and the web [0091-0092; Fig. 1].). GOMI is silent as to separating : removing a first layer from a used garment fabric having a multilayer structure including the first layer and a second layer, the second layer having fibers and deposing onto an air-permeable material. In the same field of endeavor, fabrics, UENO teaches the concept of using used cloth as the stock material [0072]. UENO further teaches depositing the new material after the mixing process onto an air permeable material [0137]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify GOMI, by having a stock material as a used cloth and depositing the new material onto an air-permeable material, as suggested by UENO, in order to improve adhesion [0073] and to contain the new composite [0137]. Regarding claim 2 , GOMI teaches: wherein the fibers are composed of white fibers (GOMI teaches the fibers may be composed of white fibers [0074; 0035].). Regarding claim 4 , GOMI teaches: further comprising: before the depositing process, a coloring process of coloring the fabric to be the new first layer with a pigment ink (GOMI teaches a coloring agent such as ink or toner is added in the defibrating process [0044].) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GOMI et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2021/0277600), hereinafter GOMI, in view of UENO (U.S. PGPUB 2016/0068681) , as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of YODA et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2021/0363688), hereinafter YODA . Regarding claim 3 , GOMI and UENO teach all of the claimed limitations as stated above, but are silent as to: further comprising: after the depositing process and before the forming process, an adhering process of adhering a fabric, which becomes a third layer, to the surface of the web . In the same field of endeavor, fabric manufacturing, YODA teaches adhering three layers to create a fabric [Fig. 1]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify GOMI and UENO, by having a multilayer structure, as suggested by YODA, in order to laminate the sheets and form a top surface [0044] . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GOMI et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2021/0277600), hereinafter GOMI, in view of UENO (U.S. PGPUB 2016/0068681) , as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Gusky et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2006/0008621), hereinafter GUSKY . Regarding claim 5 , GOMI and UENO teach all of the claimed limitation as stated above, but are silent as to: further comprising: before the coloring process, a pretreatment process of performing pretreatment on the fabric that becomes the new first layer . In the same field of endeavor, fabrics, GUSKY teaches pretreating fibers prior to incorporating into a layer [0033] and prior to coloring [0103]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify GOMI and UENO, by pretreating the material prior to coloring and forming a new layer, as suggested by GUSKY, in order to a multilayer structure, as suggested by YODA, in order to form desired characteristics, such as coarseness of the fibers [0032-0033]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAROLINE BEHA whose telephone number is (571)272-2529. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY - FRIDAY 9:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. 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, ABBAS RASHID can be reached at (571) 270-7457. 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. /C.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1748 /Abbas Rashid/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748 Application/Control Number: 19/058,474 Page 2 Art Unit: 1748 Application/Control Number: 19/058,474 Page 3 Art Unit: 1748 Application/Control Number: 19/058,474 Page 4 Art Unit: 1748 Application/Control Number: 19/058,474 Page 5 Art Unit: 1748 Application/Control Number: 19/058,474 Page 6 Art Unit: 1748 Application/Control Number: 19/058,474 Page 7 Art Unit: 1748
Prosecution Insights