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 Invention I. Claims 1-13, drawn to a protective undergarment in the reply filed on 10/03/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim 14 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/03/2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A: Figs. 1-3: a protective undergarment in the form of a shirt comprising a front slot and a rear slot constructed as openings in the chest and upper back regions of the garment in the reply filed on 10/03/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-4 and 6-13 are identified in the reply of 10/03/2025 as reading on the elected species.
Claim 5 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10/03/2025.
The present office action treats claims 1-4 and 6-13 on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/24/2025 is being considered by the examiner. It is noted that the document corresponding to Cite No. 8 under U.S. Patents is lined-through and is not considered because the referenced patent number corresponds to a withdrawn patent document.
It is further noted that Examiner cites as relevant prior art not relied upon [Howell, US 2012/0117700] and [Howell, US 8,561,213], which each correspond to application number 12/948,183; the referenced patent number corresponding to Cite No. 8 appears to be a withdrawn patent document corresponding to application number 12/948,183.
Specification
The use of the term KEVLAR®, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized (emphasis provided by Examiner) wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
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 2 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 2 contains the trademark/trade name Kevlar®. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe aramid and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
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) 1-4, 6, and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Andresen, US 2017/0248391] in view of [Andersen, US 2001/0052141].
Regarding claim 1:
Andresen discloses (Fig. 12):
A protective (“protective”; para 63) undergarment 440 (protective jacket 440 is a garment capable of being worn underneath another garment such that it is an undergarment), comprising:
Andresen Fig. 12 does not expressly disclose the protective undergarment 440 is comprising: an outer cotton layer configured to resemble the appearance of conventional undergarments; a twill layer disposed beneath the outer cotton layer; an aramid layer disposed beneath the twill layer, the aramid layer providing resistance to impact, puncture, or abrasion; and a second cotton layer disposed beneath the aramid layer and configured to contact the skin of a wearer, wherein the layers are sewn together to form a flexible, wearable garment.
However and in further view of Andresen:
Andresen Fig. 1A and paras 6-59 teaches a “protective, composite fabric 105” appropriate for use “for wearing in a garment” (para 43) and for an “embodiment of the present invention” (para 42).
Andresen Fig. 1A and paras 6-59 further teach the protective composite fabric 105 is comprising:
an outer cotton (para 81) layer 115 configured to resemble the appearance of conventional undergarments (the present disclosure states “The outermost layer is a cotton fabric, selected for its durability and its ability to resemble the texture and visual appearance of ordinary clothing”; “The outer cotton layer (20) is selected and constructed to resemble common fabric styles used in traditional undergarments”; “The outer cotton layer (10) gives the appearance of conventional clothing and may be dyed or textured to match the visual characteristics of everyday undergarments” see specification as filed; such that layer 115 of Andresen is configured to resemble the appearance of conventional undergarments to the extent that the present disclosure states that an outer cotton layer is so configured; in addition, conventional undergarments are not limited to only those which comprise cotton, and conventional undergarments are available in a variety of appearances such that layer 115 is configured to resemble the appearance of at least some available conventional undergarments);
a woven (para 18) layer 125 disposed beneath (Fig. 1A; para 43) the outer cotton layer 115;
an aramid (para 44) layer 121 disposed beneath (para 43; Fig. 1A) the woven layer 125, the aramid layer providing resistance to impact (“ballistic...protection”; para 16), puncture (“puncture resistance”; para 16), or abrasion; and
a second cotton (para 43) layer 110 disposed beneath the aramid layer (para 58; Fig. 1A) and configured to contact the skin of a wearer (Fig. 1A), wherein the layers are sewn together (“joined...by...stitching”; para 58) to form a flexible (para 6), wearable garment (para 43).
Andresen further teaches the composite fabric results in “problems solved by the invention” (para 10) wherein “What is needed are garments made from a...fabric that provides a combination of high resistance to ballistic puncture or heat or chemical attack as well as to cut and slash attacks and to puncture attacks. It is also desirable that such fabric combinations may be readily used to fabricate light weight, flexible garments such as, but not limited to, gloves and other attack proof garments”; para 6
It 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 to have modified the protective undergarment 440 of Andresen Fig. 12 such that it comprises an outer cotton layer configured to resemble the appearance of conventional undergarments; a woven layer disposed beneath the outer cotton layer; an aramid layer disposed beneath the woven layer, the aramid layer providing resistance to impact, puncture, or abrasion; and a second cotton layer disposed beneath the aramid layer and configured to contact the skin of a wearer, wherein the layers are sewn together to form a flexible, wearable garment in order to provide a combination of high resistance to ballistic puncture or heat or chemical attack as well as to cut and slash attacks and to puncture attacks and/or to fabricate a light weight, flexible garments such as, but not limited to, an attack proof garment, as suggested by Andresen (para 6).
The modified Andresen does not expressly disclose
a twill layer disposed beneath the outer cotton layer;
the aramid layer 121 disposed beneath the twill layer
Rather, as explained above, the layer disposed beneath the outer cotton layer is a woven layer, and Andresen is silent as to the weave of the woven layer. Nevertheless, one of ordinary skill would recognize that a twill weave is one of several weave patterns that a woven layer could have.
Andresen describes the woven layer 125 as “woven from stainless steel fibers” (para 18)
However, Andersen teaches “A protective garment for protection of body parts against cuts or puncture wounds comprising...a protective layer...the protective layer being composed of a wire mesh of woven metal wires” (Abstract) wherein “Mesh B shows one of several examples of a wire mesh of a[]...Twill weaving, which may be used as a protective layer in a protective garment according to the invention. Further examples of suitable, alternative weavings are...Dutch Twill weaving...in the preferred embodiment Applicant utilizes a...Twill weaving, nearly any weaving pattern may be sufficient so long as it permits the wire mesh to flex without undue damage to the wire mesh” (para 42).
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that its woven layer disposed beneath the outer cotton layer is a twill layer in order to permit the layer to flex without undue damage thereto, as suggested by Andersen (para 42).
and/or
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that its woven layer disposed beneath the outer cotton layer is a twill layer in order to yield the predictable result of a woven layer that is capable of protecting a wearer; one of ordinary skill would have been confronted with a choice of which weave pattern(s) to provide the woven layer and would have recognized that a twill weave would be an acceptable pattern therefor based on the teachings of Andersen.
Regarding claim 2:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
As applied to claim 1 above, the modified Andresen does not meet the limitation wherein the aramid layer comprises Kevlar®.
However and in further view of Andresen:
Andresen teaches the aramid layer comprises Kevlar (“para-aramid fibers”; para 44; wherein the present disclosure states that Kevlar is “a para-aramid synthetic fiber”; see the paragraph spanning p. 7-8 of the specification as filed).
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that its aramid layer comprises para-aramid fibers, as in Andresen para 44, in order to achieve the combination of high resistance to ballistic puncture or heat or chemical attack as well as to cut and slash attacks and to puncture attacks and/or to fabricate the light weight, flexible garment such as, but not limited to, an attack proof garment; one of ordinary skill would have been confronted with a decision as to which material(s) to make the aramid layer out of and would have recognized that para-aramid fibers would be acceptable material(s) therefor based on the teachings of Andresen.
In adopting the modification, the limitation “wherein the aramid layer comprises Kevlar®” would be met as best understood.
Regarding claim 3:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
As applied to claim 1 above, the modified Andresen does not meet the limitation wherein the outer cotton layer is formed of a polyester-cotton blend.
However and in further view of Andresen:
Andresen as embodied in para 43 teaches “The inner and outer protective layers may be any fabric suitable for wearing in a garment such as, but not limited to, a fabric formed from cotton,...polyester or some combination thereof” (para 43).
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that its outer cotton layer is formed of a polyester-cotton blend in order to achieve the combination of high resistance to ballistic puncture or heat or chemical attack as well as to cut and slash attacks and to puncture attacks and/or to fabricate the light weight, flexible garment such as, but not limited to, an attack proof garment; one of ordinary skill would have been confronted with a decision as to which material(s) to make the outer cotton layer out of and would have recognized that a blend of polyester and cotton would be acceptable material(s) therefor based on the teachings of Andresen.
Regarding claim 4:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
The modified Andresen further meets the limitation wherein the undergarment is in the form of a shirt.
(Jacket 440 is a shirt as claimed in that it is configured to cover a wearer’s torso and arms as evidenced by Fig. 12 of Andresen).
Regarding claim 6:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
As applied to claim 1 above, the modified Andresen does not meet the limitation further comprising one or more copper fibers integrated into at least one of the layers.
However and in further view of Andresen:
Andresen as embodied in para 55 teaches “metal mesh layer 125 may be made from any metal that may form a useful fiber such as, but not limited to...Copper, ...Iron, ...or some combination thereof, or some alloy thereof” (para 55).
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that its twill layer comprises copper fibers integrated into the twill layer in order to achieve the combination of high resistance to ballistic puncture or heat or chemical attack as well as to cut and slash attacks and to puncture attacks and/or to fabricate the light weight, flexible garment such as, but not limited to, an attack proof garment; one of ordinary skill would have been confronted with a decision as to which material(s) to make the twill layer out of and would have recognized that a combination of steel, which is an iron alloy, and copper fibers would be acceptable material(s) therefor based on the teachings of Andresen.
Regarding claim 10:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
The modified Andresen further meets the limitation wherein the garment is form-fitting (garment is configured to fit a form of at least some wearer thereof) and constructed to allow a full range of motion for the wearer (garment is flexible (see above treatment of claim 1) such that it permits a full range of motion for a wearer; it is further noted the garment will fit wearers of different sizes and of different physical motion ranges such that the limitation is met).
Regarding claim 11:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
The modified Andresen as applied to claim 1 above does not meet the limitation wherein each layer is substantially coextensive with the others to provide uniform protection across the garment.
However and in further view of Andresen:
Andresen Fig. 6 teaches a protective undergarment wherein plural layers thereof are substantially coextensive with each other (Fig. 6) to provide uniform protection across the garment (Fig. 6).
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that each layer is substantially coextensive with the others to provide uniform protection across the garment in order to yield a protective undergarment that is capable of protecting a wearer substantially throughout the extent of the coextensive layers thereof.
Regarding claim 12:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
The modified Andresen as applied to claim 1 above does not meet the limitation wherein two or more of the layers are joined together by stitching around peripheral edges and at selected locations within the body of the garment to maintain alignment and flexibility.
However and in further view of Andresen:
Andresen para 58 teaches two or more layers joined together by stitching around a periphery of the garment piece by stitching (para 58); teaches plural layers joined together by stitching around peripheral edges (Fig. 6; para 82; and in reference to numeral 250); and teaches plural layers joined together at selected locations within a body of a garment (Fig. 6; para 82; and in reference to numeral 255) to maintain alignment (by virtue of plural layers being secured to each other by stitching) and flexibility (such that “flexible garments” are obtained thereby; para 6).
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that two or more of the layers are joined together by stitching around peripheral edges and at selected locations within the body of the garment to maintain alignment and flexibility in order to yield the predictable result of durably securing the layers to each other such that they are not undesirably separated from one another.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Andresen, US 2017/0248391] and [Andersen, US 2001/0052141] as applied to claim 6 above and further in view of [Tsuchiya, US 2022/0061429].
Regarding claim 7:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 6, as set forth above.
Andresen does not expressly disclose wherein the copper fibers are configured to provide antimicrobial properties.
However, Tsuchiya teaches a protective (para 2) undergarment (“Hand coverings”; para 2; wherein said hand coverings are capable of being worn underneath another garment such that they are undergarments) wherein copper fibers are configured to provide antimicrobial properties (para 20, para 27).
Tsuchiya further teaches “The antimicrobial copper fibers may be included...to effect microbial growth” (para 27).
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that its copper fibers are configured to provide antimicrobial properties in order to suppress microbial growth, as suggested by Tsuchiya (para 27).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Andresen, US 2017/0248391] and [Andersen, US 2001/0052141] as applied to claim 6 above and further in view of [Agarwal, US 2019/0184673].
Regarding claim 8:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 6, as set forth above.
Andresen does not expressly disclose wherein the copper fibers are integrated in a manner to minimize heat retention.
However, Agarwal teaches and within a context of undergarments (para 86) and protective undergarments (para 85; wherein the garments and protective garments disclosed therein are capable of being worn underneath another garment such that they are undergarments) thermally conductive copper wires (“thermally-conductive wires or fibers (e.g., copper fibers or copper wires) may be incorporated into the fibrous textile base”; para 53) wherein “with...heat transfer..., body heat can be conducted away...During...conduction” the garment can “cause enhanced...convection, resulting in extra heat dissipation and cooling sensation” (para 6).
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that its copper fibers are integrated in a manner to minimize heat retention in order to provide a cooling sensation to the undergarment, as suggested by Agarwal (para 6).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Andresen, US 2017/0248391] and [Andersen, US 2001/0052141] as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of [Omar, US 5,508,098].
Regarding claim 9:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
Andresen does not expressly disclose wherein the outer cotton layer is dyed in one or more colors to visually resemble conventional clothing.
However, Omar teaches an undergarment (“Active wear, such as T-shirts, sweatshirts, jogging suits and the like”; col. 1 lines 12-13; wherein said wear(s) is/are undergarment(s) in that each is capable of being worn underneath another garment) wherein an outer cotton layer (“outside layer...cotton”; col. 5 line 34) is dyed (“fabric was then dyed in a batch dying machine using standard reactive cotton dyes, and the outer layer of the fabric picked up the dye”; col. 5 lines 37-39) in one or more colors (the one or more color of the cotton dyes) to visually resemble conventional clothing (an outer cotton layer dyed using a standard cotton dye visually resembles at least some conventional clothing).
Omar further teaches “the outer layer will have the color...applied to the cotton”; col. 4 lines 8-9; wherein dyeing results in “aesthetic qualities”; col. 4 line 28.
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that its outer cotton layer is dyed in one or more colors to visually resemble conventional clothing in order to color the outer layer for aesthetics, as suggested by Omar (col. 4 lines 8-9; col. 4 line 28).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Andresen, US 2017/0248391] and [Andersen, US 2001/0052141] as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of [Kibbee, US 6,182,288].
Regarding claim 13:
Andresen in view of Andersen teach The protective undergarment of claim 1, as set forth above.
Andresen does not expressly disclose further comprising one or more slots formed in one of the layers and configured to provide modular access points for the insertion, removal, or replacement of additional protective elements.
However, Kibbee teaches a protective undergarment (Abstract) provided with one or more slots formed in a layer and configured to provide modular access points for the insertion, removal, or replacement of additional protective elements: “protective panels 18 (FIG. 2) of impact absorbing or resisting material, such as the products known as KEVLAR.RTM., SPECTRA.RTM. or TWARON.RTM.. The panels 18 include one or more sections that are usually contained in pockets or compartments 15 in each of the front and back parts 14 and 16 of the vest 12. The panels 18 are insertable into the compartments 15 through slits (not shown) usually accessible from the inside of a conventional vest cover or vest shell 20, which is familiar to vest manufacturers and users. The shell 20 is a washable fabric garment that contains and holds in operative position the panels 18 for protection of the wearer. Such a conventional vest, as well as alternative and improved versions thereof, forms the major part of upper portion of the protective garment 10 of the preferred embodiments of the present invention. The impact resistant material, which will stop, deflect or substantially retard most bullets”; col. 8 lines 2-18.
It 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 to have modified the modified Andresen such that it is provided with one or more slots formed in one of the layers and configured to provide modular access points for the insertion, removal, or replacement of additional protective elements in order to permit the insertion of additional protective elements to protect against bullets, as taught by Kibbee (col. 8 lines 2-18).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: [Howell, US 2012/0117700] and [Howell, US 8,561,213] each disclose a multi-paneled protective undergarment; each corresponds to application number 12/948,183; the referenced patent number corresponding to lined-through Cite No. 8 under U.S. Patent documents on the IDS of 04/24/2025 appears to be a withdrawn patent document corresponding to application number 12/948,183.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRADY A NUNNERY whose telephone number is (571)272-2995. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-F.
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.
/GRADY ALEXANDER NUNNERY/Examiner, Art Unit 3732