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
Claims 20-32 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on August 1, 2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 11-15 and 19 in the reply filed on August 1, 2025 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim(s) 11-15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. 2007/0226919 to Mheidle in view of “Digital Denim Is a Pretty Good Match for the Real Thing, Experts Say,” to Oleniacz.
Regarding Claim 11, 14-15 and 19
Mheidle teaches an indigo-free fabric comprising piezo ink-jet printed patterns on at least 70% of cellulose fibers containing hydroxyl groups substituted with a moiety of a chromogen originating from a reactive dye linked by a linker to the oxygen of the hydroxyl group (Mheidle, abstract, paragraph [0057], [0133]-[0176], [0255]).
Mheidle does not appear to teach that a region of the front and back sides of the fabric have parallel straight lines with the visual appearance of a front and back side of denim. However, Oleniacz teaches ink jet printing on cotton fabric to replicate the pattern and appearance of denim fabric resulting in a less labor-intensive and less wasteful method of making jean products (Oleniacz, pages 1-3). Oleniacz teaches that the pattern is printed on fabric having the same weight and texture as traditional jeans (Id.). Traditional denim utilizes a twill weave to achieve this texture which necessarily meets the limitations of a woven fabric with a diagonal rib. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the conventional inkjet printed fabric of Mheidle in the form and appearance of denim such as denim jeans, motivated by the desire to form a conventional inkjet printed cellulose fabric for popular applications such as denim and which reduces waste and labor compared to traditionally dyed materials.
Regarding Claims 12 and 13
The prior art combination does not appear to teach the distance between adjacent lines, width of said lines or the angle at which they are printed. However, this is an aesthetic design choice having no mechanical function, it would have been obvious to form the lines of the denim pattern with the claimed size, spacing and angle, since applicant has not disclosed that the specific pattern solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with an alternatively designed denim pattern. Matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function, cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art (See MPEP 2144.04(I)).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINCENT A TATESURE whose telephone number is (571)272-5198. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30AM-4PM EST.
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, Jennifer Chriss can be reached at 5712727783. 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.
/VINCENT TATESURE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1786