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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 2 and Subspecies D in the reply filed on December 15, 2025 is acknowledged.
After a full review of Applicant’s disclosure, Claims 7-9 and 17-19 are withdrawn from prosecution as they are drawn to a non-elected embodiment. Applicant’s disclosure does not disclose a second embedded structure being included in the compressible component of Species 2: Fig.2 and Subspecies D: Fig.7A-7D. Claims 1-6, 10-16, and 20 are currently pending.
Drawings
1. 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 “central longitudinal axis” in Claims 4 and 14 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.
2. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "226d", “208d”, and "206d" have all been used to designate a single layer of material. 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. 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 § 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.
3. Claim 6 is 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.
Claim 6 recites “the second end of the first embedded structure is disposed at an interior location of the compressible component”. The claim limitation is indefinite as it is highly unclear how the second end of the first embedded structure is disposed at an interior location of the compressible component, when it appears the embedded structure and the compressible component are the same structure. Claim 6 is rejected as best understood by examiner.
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.
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.
4. Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 10-12, 16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner (US 2013/0025035) in view of Lee (US 6,080,037).
Regarding Claim 1, Turner discloses an adjustment element (Fig.14C) for an article of apparel, the adjustment element comprising: a bladder (210,220) forming an interior void (as seen in Fig.9A); and a compressible component (230; para.29 & 34) disposed within the interior void (as seen in Fig.9A) and including a first embedded structure (i.e. 230 is an embedded structure, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant) tapering in a direction from a first end (i.e. wide bottom end of 230) located at an outer perimeter edge of the compressible component to a second end (i.e. top peak end of 230)(as seen in Fig.14C). Turner does not disclose the compressible component movable from a first configuration having a first shape to a second configuration having a second shape in response to fluid being removed from the interior void. However, Lee discloses a bladder (10a) with a compressible component (20a), the compressible component movable from a first configuration (as seen in Fig.10A) having a first shape to a second configuration (as seen in Fig.10B) having a second shape in response to fluid being removed from the interior void (Col.6, lines 35-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bladder of Turner such that it can be pressurized with air or depressurize, as taught by Lee, in order to provide the optimum level of cushioning and support to the user.
Regarding Claim 2, Turner discloses an adjustment element of Claim 1, wherein the first embedded structure (230) includes a series of peaks (see annotated Figure below) and valleys (234,235)(as seen in Fig.7 & 14C).
PNG
media_image1.png
404
431
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Turner discloses an adjustment element of Claim 1, wherein the second end (i.e. top peak end of 230) of the first embedded structure is disposed at an interior location of the compressible component (i.e. the top peak end of 230 is disposed at an interior location, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant, as it is directionally situated interior to the bottom end of 230).
Regarding Claim 10, Turner discloses an article of apparel incorporating the adjustment element of Claim 1 (para.23).
Regarding Claim 11, Turner discloses an adjustment element (Fig.14C) for an article of apparel, the adjustment element comprising: a bladder (210,220) forming an interior void (as seen in Fig.9A); and a compressible component (230; para.29 & 34) disposed within the interior void (as seen in Fig.9A) and including a first embedded structure (i.e. 230 is an embedded structure, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant) having a series of peaks (see annotated Figure below) and valleys (234,235) (as seen in Fig.7 & 14C). Turner does not disclose the compressible component movable from a first configuration having a substantially planar profile to a second configuration having a curved profile in response to fluid being removed from the interior void. However, Lee discloses a bladder (10a) with a compressible component (20a), the compressible component movable from a first configuration having a substantially planar profile (as seen in Fig.10A) to a second configuration having a curved profile (as seen in Fig.10B) in response to fluid being removed from the interior void (Col.6, lines 35-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the bladder and compressible component of Turner such that it can be pressurized with air or depressurize, as taught by Lee, in order to provide the optimum level of cushioning and support to the user.
Regarding Claim 12, Turner discloses an adjustment element of Claim 11, wherein the compressible component is formed from foam (para.34).
Regarding Claim 16, Turner discloses an adjustment element of Claim 11, wherein the first embedded structure tapers in a direction from a first end (i.e. wide bottom end of 230) located at an outer perimeter edge of the compressible component to a second end (i.e. top peak end of 230)(as seen in Fig.14C).
Regarding Claim 20, Turner discloses an article of apparel incorporating the adjustment element of Claim 11 (para.23).
5. Claim(s) 3-5 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner (US 2013/0025035) and Lee (US 6,080,037) in view of Reinhard (US 2007/0226881).
Regarding Claims 3, 5, 13, and 15, Turner and Lee disclose the invention substantially as claimed above. Turner does not disclose wherein peaks and valleys of the series of peaks and valleys are positioned into individual V-shaped segments; wherein the V-shaped segments are nested with one another. However, Reinhard teaches a cushioning element having peaks (9) and valleys (8/7) positioned into individual V-shaped segments (para.24 & 26; as seen in Fig.3); wherein the V-shaped segments are nested with one another (as seen in Fig.3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the embedded structure of Turner to have V-shaped segments that are nested with one another, as taught by Reinhard, in order to provide the optimum shape for conforming to a user’s body part in a comfortable way, so that a user can move comfortably.
Regarding Claims 4 and 14, When in combination, Turner, Lee, and Reinhard teach an adjustment element of Claim 3, wherein the V-shaped segments (of Reinhard; as seen in Fig.3) are aligned with one another along a central, longitudinal axis of the first embedded structure (Turner: i.e. center axis through triangle of 230 & as seen in annotated Figure below), the central, longitudinal axis of the first embedded structure extending through the first end (Turner: i.e. wide bottom end of 230) of the first embedded structure and the second end of the first embedded structure ( Turner:i.e. top peak end of 230; as seen in Fig.14C).
PNG
media_image2.png
341
456
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN E LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-3267. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00am-4:00pm 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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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.
/MEGAN E LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732