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 .
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 drawings must show wherein the anti-slip member is arranged on a front surface of the outermost finger sack of the finger portion (claims 7-12), the outer most finger sack (claims 7-12), and the anti-slip member also simultaneously arranged on the back surface of a palm side of the finger portion).
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.
wherein the anti-slip member is arranged on a front surface of the outermost finger sack of the finger portion. In combination, the anti-slip material of Green would be positioned on a front surface (palm surface) of the outermost finger sack (as best understood) of the finger portion.
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.
Claims 1-12 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.
Claim 1, recites that “The center portion being at least partially covered”. It is unclear what element is covered by what. The claim has been construed to mean that the center portion is capable for use to cover the users hand. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 1 recites “on finger cushion parts” is unclear what applicant is referring to. What are finger cushion parts? Is applicant talking about the finger cushions parts of the user? Of the glove? Is this an additional cushion element on the surface of the glove apparatus? Appropriate clarification required.
Claim 3 depends from claim 1, claim 1 requires a fingertip part covering a fingertip. Claim 3 recites that the finger portion has no fingertip part covering the fingertip. It is unclear how the device can be both covering and not covering. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 7 -12 recites the limitation "the" in reference to “the outermost finger sack of the finger portion” .There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further it is unclear what an outermost finger sack is. For purposes of examination, this has been construed to mean the sack that is in the outer position (such as either the thumb or the middle finger). Appropriate clarification is required.
Claims 7-12, depend from claim 1. Claim 1 recites that the anti-slip material covers the back surface of the palm side of the finger portion. Claims 7-12 recite that the anti-slip material is arranged on the front surface of the outermost finger sack. It is unclear how the same element is positioned on a front surface of the finger sack and on the back surface of the palm side of the finger portion. It is unclear if the anti-slip material is multiple elements located in various locations of the glove. Or a single material covering both of the claimed areas. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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) 1-12is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karkanen (US 4,507,807) in view of Green (US 8,458,815). The device of Karkanen teaches,
With respect to claim 1, An athletic glove comprising: a glove body (4) including a plurality of finger portions (8) and a center portion (palm area), the center portion being at least partially covered, as best understood,, the center portion being connected to the finger portions (Figure 1) wherein the finger portion comprises a knit fabric or an elastic-stretch material (4) at least on finger cushion parts (area covering the base area of the finger) of the finger portion, finger portion has a fingertip part (area at the distal end of 8) covering a fingertip (at least a portion of a fingertip as defined is covered); and a finger sack (6) comprising a rubber elastic material (Column 2, line 15) is formed on a front surface of the fingertip part of the finger portion and fixed to the front surface of the fingertip part of the finger portion (Figures 3-4). The device of Karkanen substantially discloses the claimed invention but is lacking an anti-slip member.
The device of Green teaches, an anti-slip member (Column lines 62-27)) is arranged on a back surface of a palm-side of the finger portion (Figure 2) to prevent the finger portion and a finger from shifting, it is noted that the language “to prevent the finger portion and finger from shifting” is a functional recitation. The prior art teaches an anti-slip member and therefore meets the claim as currently recited since the protuberances would provide the function of preventing shifting as claimed, see MPEP 2114., the anti-slip member partially covers the back surface (Figure 2) of the palm-side of the finger portion (figure 2) to provide breathability of the finger portion. The language “to provide breathability” is functional. The prior art teaches the anti-slip member only covering a portion of the finger and therefore would provide the function as “providing breathability” meeting the claim as currently recited, see MPEP 2114.
With respect to claim 2, wherein a finger sack backing (rear portion of 6) comprising the rubber elastic material (column 2, line 15) is fixed to a back surface of the fingertip part of the finger portion (Figures 2-4).
With respect to claim 3, as best understood, wherein the finger portion has no fingertip part covering (Figures 2-4) the fingertip (the very end portion of the fingertip is not covered), and the finger sack (6) comprising the rubber elastic material is fixed to a perimeter of an end of the finger portion (Figures 2-4).
With respect to claim 4, wherein the finger sack comprising the rubber elastic material is detachably attached to the front surface of the fingertip part of the finger portion.
With respect to claim 5, wherein the finger sack comprising the rubber elastic material is detachably attached to the front surface of the fingertip part of the finger portion (Figure 1). The stitching 11 is capable of being removed, therefore meets the functional language of “is detachably attached” see MPEP 2114.
With respect to claim 6, wherein the finger sack (6) comprising the rubber elastic material is detachably attached to the front surface of the fingertip part of the finger portion (Figure 1). The stitching 11 is capable of being removed, therefore meets the functional language of “is detachably attached” see MPEP 2114.
With respect to claims 7, wherein the anti-slip member is arranged on a front surface of the outermost finger sack of the finger portion. In combination, the anti-slip material of Green would be positioned on a front surface (palm surface) of the outermost finger sack (as best understood) of the finger portion.
With respect to claim 8, wherein the anti-slip member is arranged on a front surface of the outermost finger sack of the finger portion. In combination, the anti-slip material of Green would be positioned on a front surface (palm surface) of the outermost finger sack (as best understood) of the finger portion.
With respect to claim 9, wherein the anti-slip member is arranged on a front surface of the outermost finger sack of the finger portion. In combination, the anti-slip material of Green would be positioned on a front surface (palm surface) of the outermost finger sack (as best understood) of the finger portion.
With respect to Claim 10, wherein the anti-slip member is arranged on a front surface of the outermost finger sack of the finger portion. In combination, the anti-slip material of Green would be positioned on a front surface (palm surface) of the outermost finger sack (as best understood) of the finger portion.
With respect to claim 11, wherein the anti-slip member is arranged on a front surface of the outermost finger sack of the finger portion. In combination, the anti-slip material of Green would be positioned on a front surface (palm surface) of the outermost finger sack (as best understood) of the finger portion.
With respect to claim 12, wherein the anti-slip member is arranged on a front surface of the outermost finger sack of the finger portion. In combination, the anti-slip material of Green would be positioned on a front surface (palm surface) of the outermost finger sack (as best understood) of the finger portion.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO892
Please Note, the art of recorded cited in the PTO-892 may be relevant to the features of the invention both claimed and unclaimed or are relevant to the overall inventive concept. The best art has been set forward in the office action, as determined by the examiner and the art references provided are to establish other significant and relevant art and to promote compact prosecution.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHALE L QUINN whose telephone number is (571)272-8689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am -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, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at 5712725559. 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.
RICHALE LEE. QUINN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3765
/RICHALE L QUINN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
