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 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the different pocket guide shapes as described in claim 15 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.
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 main body structure is a single unitary structure of claim 21 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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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 –
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-6, 9-18 and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nathan et al. (US 2007/0083985).
In regard to claim 1, Nathan et al. teaches an undergarment that can be folded in on itself to form a self-contained pouch and un-folded to form a wearable garment (See figures 1-4B), the undergarment comprising: a front panel comprising an interior side and an exterior side, the exterior side comprising a right portion and a left portion (front panel/waistband: 30); a first layer coupled to the front panel along edges of the right portion of the front panel (first layer: 18 coupled to waistband via top edge 32 stitching, paragraph 0013); a second layer coupled to the front panel along edges of the left portion of the front panel (second layer: 52 coupled via seam 54 and top edge stitching at 32: paragraph 0013 and 0014), the first layer overlapping with the second layer in a central portion of the exterior side of the front panel (first panel 18 overlapping second layer 52: see figure 1); and a circular seam joining the first layer, the second layer, and the front panel, the circular seam located in the central portion of the front panel where the first layer overlaps with the second layer (seam: 54, see figure 1 that joins 18 to 52 to waistband/front panel 30, paragraphs 0013-0014), the circular seam defining a shape of the self-contained pouch when the undergarment is folded in on itself (see figures 1-4B).
For the rejection of claim 2, a different interpretation of the Nathan et al. reference is being used for claim 1.
In regard to claim 1, Nathan et al. teaches an undergarment that can be folded in on itself to form a self-contained pouch and un-folded to form a wearable garment (See figures 1-4B), the undergarment comprising: a front panel comprising an interior side and an exterior side (front panel/waistband: 30), the exterior side comprising a right portion and a left portion (waistband: 30); a first layer coupled to the front panel along edges of the right portion of the front panel (first layer: 52 attached to waistband/front panel: 30 seam 54); a second layer coupled to the front panel along edges of the left portion of the front panel (second layer: 18 coupled to front panel/waistband: 20 along seam at upper edge 32, paragraph 0013), the first layer overlapping with the second layer in a central portion of the exterior side of the front panel (see figure 2); and a circular seam joining the first layer, the second layer, and the front panel (Figure 2: circular seam 54 that attaches to first layer: 52 to the second layer: 18 and the front panel/waistband: 30 via seam 54 and top edge 38 via stitching), the circular seam located in the central portion of the front panel where the first layer overlaps with the second layer (see seam: 54 in figure 2), the circular seam defining a shape of the self-contained pouch when the undergarment is folded in on itself (see figures 2-4B).
In regard to claim 2, Nathan teaches wherein a portion of a leftmost edge of the first layer forms an opening within the circular seam (first layer: 52, see figure 4B and uppermost edge forms an opening with seam 54).
In regard to claim 5, Nathan teaches wherein the circular seam (54) is centered relative to a right side and a left side of the undergarment (See figures 4A).
In regard to claim 6, Nathan teaches wherein the circular seam passes through a portion of the front panel (seam 54 intersects/passes through seam at top edge 32 that attaches to waistband: paragraph 0013-0014).
In regard to claim 9, Nathan teaches wherein the undergarment is a re-usable and washable undergarment configured to absorb menstrual fluids (paragraph 0012).
In regard to claim 10, Nathan et al. teaches a garment comprising: a main body structure comprising a front portion and a back portion (main body/waistband: 30); two layers of fabric coupled to the front portion along outer edges of the front portion (one layer: 18, second layer: 52, see figures 1 and 2); and a pocket guide configured to form a self-contained pouch when the garment is reversibly folded in on itself (see figures 1-4B), the pocket guide comprising a seam or weld that joins the two layers of fabric and the front portion of the main body structure (seam: 54 joins 18, 52 and top edge 32 stitching to waistband: 30, paragraphs 0013-0014).
In regard to claim 11, Nathan teaches wherein a portion of an edge of one of the two layers forms an opening of the pocket guide (see figures 2, 4A and 4B, top edge: 56).
In regard to claim 12, Nathan teaches wherein the portion of the edge comprises a curve (see curve edge 56 in figure 2).
In regard to claim 13, Nathan teaches wherein the two layers of fabric overlap in a central region of the front portion (see figures 1 and 2), or wherein the two layers of fabric do not overlap in a central region of the front portion.
In regard to claim 14, Nathan teaches wherein the two layers of fabric are coupled to an exterior side of the front portion, or wherein the two layers of fabric are coupled to an interior side of the front portion (coupled via seam 32 and 54, see figure 1, coupled to the interior side of waistband: 30).
In regard to claim 15, Nathan teaches wherein the pocket guide is circular, elliptical, rectangular, square-shaped, heart-shaped, teardrop-shaped, or oval-shaped (see figures 1 and 2, guide seam; 54).
In regard to claim 16, Nathan teaches wherein the pocket guide is circular (seam: 54 is circular), and wherein the garment comprises an undergarment, a swim garment, or athletic attire comprising a washable material configured to absorb body fluids (paragraph 0012).
In regard to claim 17, Nathan teaches wherein an opening of the pocket guide forms a chord that does not pass through a center of the pocket guide (see opening in figure 2 that does not pass through a center of the seam/guide: 54), or wherein an opening of the pocket guide forms a diameter of the pocket guide.
In regard to claim 18, Nathan teaches wherein the pocket guide is centered between a right outer edge and a left outer edge of the front portion (see figures 1 and 2), or wherein the pocket guide is not centered between a right outer edge and a left outer edge of the front portion.
In regard to claim 20, Nathan teaches wherein the seam or weld (54) passes through the front portion (30) to an interior-most side of the front portion (see seam in figures 1 and 2 extending through the interior and exterior of the garment including at the waistband seam along edge 32), or wherein the seam or weld does not pass through the front portion to an interior-most side of the front portion.
In regard to claim 21, Nathan teaches wherein the main body structure is a single unitary structure, or wherein the main body structure comprises a plurality of portions joined together (see figures 1 and 2, paragraphs 0011-0012).
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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathan et al. (US 2007/0083985) in view of Thomas (US 7,191,720).
Nathan teaches a undergarment as described above in claim 1. However, Nathan fails to teach the circular seam not passing through the interior side of the front panel.
In regard to claim 7, Thomas teaches an adhesive seam that would not pass through an interior side of garment panels being attached together (figures 1 and 2, column 4, lines 10-20).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one having ordinary skill in the art to have provided the seam of Nathan as an bonded seam as taught by Thomas, since the seam of Nathan provided as a bonded seam would provide a seam that attaches garment panels together without passing through the panels (like stitching) and provides a less bulky attachment means (Thomas: column 4, lines 10-20).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nathan et al. (US 2007/0083985) in view of Rabinowicz (US 6,622,312).
Nathan teaches a undergarment as described above in claim 1. However, Nathan fails to teach wherein the front panel comprises at least an exterior front panel layer and an interior front panel layer, and wherein the circular seam passes through the exterior front panel layer but not the interior front panel layer.
In regard to claim 8, Rabinowicz teaches a waistband/front panel that comprises at least an exterior front panel layer and an interior front panel layer (elastic element/interior front panel layer: 52, figure 6 and exterior front panel surrounding the elastic), and wherein the circular seam passes through the exterior front panel layer but not the interior front panel layer (figure 6, column 6, lines 20-38).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one having ordinary skill in the art to have provided the waistband/front panel of Nathan et al. with the elastic interior layer and seam attachment not extending through the interior layer as taught by Rabinowicz, since the waistband/front panel of Nathan et al. provided with an interior elastic layer and seam attachment of just the exterior layer would provide a waistband/front panel that allows for stretch of the elastic interior layer without being limited by a seam attachment.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be found cited in PTO-892 form submitted herewith. The cited prior art to King (US 3,844,282) is of particular relevance to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALISSA L HOEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4985. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00-5:30 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, 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.
ALISSA L. HOEY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/ALISSA L HOEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732