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 .
Finality of previous office action
Due to an office oversight, the final office action with mail date 4/28/2026 was sent in error. The final office action is hereby withdrawn and replaced herein with a non-final rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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(s) 7 is/are 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 7, it is unclear what is exactly meant by the term “elongation”. In this context, it could be assumed that the term “elongation” refers to an elastic deformation of the material, although it is not stated that the riding sheath experiences any such forces. It is also unclear whether or not it refers to the total characteristic length of either the dorsal or ventral portions.
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(s) 1-8, 11-12, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foreman (US Pat. 3,130,530) in view of Van Scoyk (US Pub. 20016/0137300 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Foreman discloses a riding sheath, configured to be placed on a body of a horse, comprising:
a main member configured to girdle the body of the horse (Fig. 1, a strap encircles the belly of the horse, no numeral indicated);
a secondary member, independent of the main member, configured to be positioned on a chest of the horse (Fig. 1, an additional strap encircles the chest of the horse, no numeral indicated);
and at least one attachment member configured to cooperate with a connecting member of a riding saddle so as to attach the riding saddle to the riding sheath, the attachment member being connected in a fixed manner to the main member (Fig. 1, the buckle on the main member as referenced in the first limitation of this claim).
However, Foreman fails to disclose as taught by Van Scoyk, similarly drawn to an equestrian device, the secondary member being connected mechanically, in a removable manner, to the main member by at least one mechanical connecting member, the secondary member being configured to hold the main member in a predetermined position on the body of the horse, the main member and the secondary member each comprising at least one extensible material to adapt to the body of the horse (Fig. 1, breastplate 30 comprises multiple straps as well as a fastening means for attaching to the saddle. On the underside of the breastplate is an attachment interface with a strap that encircles the horse’s belly).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the riding sheath of Foreman to include the secondary member of Van Scoyk to better secure the chest strap to the horse.
Regarding claim 2, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, wherein the main member is made in one-part (Fig. 1, the strap encircling the belly is substantially a single piece).
Regarding claim 3, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, wherein the connecting member is adjustable, so as to adapt the position of the secondary member relative to the main member on the horse (Fig. 1, the strap comprises a buckle to allow for length adjustment).
Regarding claim 4, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, wherein the main member comprises at least one indentation to release an arm of the horse (Fig. 1, the device accommodates a horse’s leg).
Regarding claim 5, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, wherein the secondary member comprises at least one indentation to release a tip of a shoulder of the horse (See id).
Regarding claim 6, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Van Scoyk, wherein the main member is made, at least in part, from at least one of a fabric web and neoprene (Pg. 4, [0047], lines 15-17: “The flexible pad 3 is preferably made of relatively soft, pliable material (e.g., denim with a waffled neoprene bottom)”).
Regarding claim 7, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, wherein the main member comprises a dorsal portion, configured to be in contact with a back of the horse and comprising a main structure of the main member (Fig. 1, the back of the horse is covered with a surface), and a ventral portion, configured to be in contact with a barrel of the horse and comprising a main structure of the dorsal portion (Fig. 1, the belly of the horse is covered with a surface).
However, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk fails to disclose wherein the main structure of the dorsal portion is made of a material whose elongation is greater than an elongation of the material of the main structure of the ventral portion. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use materials of differing elasticity as the portion contacting the bag does not have the same rigidity requirements as that on the belly, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
Regarding claim 8, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Van Scoyk, wherein the secondary member comprises a reinforced area defining a Y-shape, so as to form a less extensible and more tensile-resistant area (Fig. 1, breastplate 30 comprises a y-shape).
Regarding claim 11, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, wherein the main member comprises at least a first free attachment end and a second free attachment end configured to cooperate together to form a peripheral riding sheath (Fig. 1, the strap comprises two free ends attached with a buckle).
Regarding claim 12, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, wherein the first free attachment end and the second free attachment end are configured to cooperate with a plurality of connections: wherein the plurality of connections include press studs, a zip closure, a MOLLE system, loop through, adjustment loop, hook and loop textile connection of a hook and loop tape type, and a velvet and hook connection (Fig. 1, the strap encircling the horse body comprises two elongate bodies which could have any number of attachment means retroactively added).
Regarding claim 14, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, a method for placing the riding sheath according to claim 1on the horse, the method comprising the steps: positioning the main member on a back of the horse, girdling the horse with the main member so as to form a peripheral riding sheath, and mechanically connecting the secondary member to the main member (Fig. 1, the device is shown attached to the horse in the previously described configuration).
Regarding claim 15, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention in addition to as taught by Foreman, wherein after the step of connecting the secondary member to the main member, a step of adjusting the connecting members to adapt the riding sheath to a morphology of the horse (Fig. 1, the strap of the belly encircling member would necessarily be adjusted after the saddle is placed on the horse).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foreman (US Pat. 3,130,530) in view of Van Scoyk (US Pub. 20016/0137300 A1), and further in view of Rodriguez Ojeda (US Pub. 2014/0130465 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Foreman in view of Van Scoyk discloses the claimed invention except for as taught by Rodriguez Ojeda, similarly drawn to a safety device for saddles, at least one housing that is formed at least in part in a main structure of a dorsal portion and/or in a main structure of a ventral portion of the main member to allow mounting of one or more electronic sensors (Pg. 2, [0020], lines 1-5: “A sensor which is preferably located in a front part or journal of the securing base and which is electrically connected to the quick closure for release, incorporating a battery for powering same, which can be located in a housing envisaged for that purpose in the securing base itself”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the riding sheath of Foreman in view of Van Scoyk to include the electronic sensor housing of Rodriguez Ojeda to allow for monitoring of the horse’s vitals.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY HOOPER MUDD whose telephone number is (571)272-5941. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Joshua Michener can be reached at 5712721467. 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.
/HENRY HOOPER MUDD/Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights