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 .
Drawings
The drawings received on 21 April 2025 are now acceptable, due to the specification amendments filed 15 December 2025.
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 1-3 and 5 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.
Specifically in regards to Claim 1, the phrase “via the hinge” is unclear. Is this the first hinge or the second hinge? The remaining claims inherit the rejection by dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5 is/are rejected, to the degree definite, under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu (CN 203268452).
In regards to Claim 1, Yu teaches a device capable of use as a garment drawstring manipulation device (See annotated Figure 1 below), comprising:
a connecting member comprising a first hinge;
a first member attached to the connecting member via the hinge; and
a second member comprising a second hinge for movably attaching the second member to the connecting member opposite to the first member; and
wherein the first and second members are configured to engage opposing sides of a drawstring within a garment so that the drawing string is contacted through the garment and is movable through the garment when the garment drawstring manipulation device is moved towards an opening in the garment to push the drawstring through the opening (intended use; the structure of Yu is capable of being used in this manner).
PNG
media_image1.png
283
677
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to Claim 2, Yu teaches the first member is comprised of a cylindrical shape (illustrated as cylindrical).
In regards to Claim 3, Yu teaches the second member is comprised of a cylindrical shape (illustrated as cylindrical).
In regards to Claim 5, Yu teaches the firs member can rotated 180 degrees or less around the first hinge of the connecting member (the hinge is taught as movable, to allow the insertion of a toothpaste tube therebetween, which would be 180 degrees or less. It should also be noted, if the hinge is not rotated, the angle would be 0 degrees, which is less than 180 degrees.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 15 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues: “… Yu does not teach a pair of hinges, or that the first and second members are hingedly attached to the connecting member on opposite sides”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, as the annotated Figure 1 above shows a first and second hinge, each on opposite sides of the connecting member. Applicant’s argument seems to be based on the previous interpretation of Yu.
Applicant further argues: “…Yu does not teach that the first and second members are configured to engage opposing sides of a drawstring within a garment so that the drawstring is contacted through the garment and is movable through the garment when the garment drawstring manipulation devices is moved towards an opening in the garment to push the drawstring through the opening, as now required”.
Again, Examiner respectfully disagrees. The first and second hinges of Yu would allow the first and second members of Yu to be spaced as pictured in Figure 2 of the instant application. This spacing of the members is what allows for the indirect contact and movement of the drawstring through the garment, as seen in Figure 3 of the instant application. In other words, the device of Yu is capable of performing the intended use of Claim 1. It should also be noted that Claim 1 is a product claim, not a method claim.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shaun R Hurley whose telephone number is (571)272-4986. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 8:00am - 3:00pm.
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 T Ostrup can be reached at (571) 272-5559. 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.
/SHAUN R HURLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732