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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to amendment received on 05/14/26. Claim 1 has been amended and claims 2-3 and 7-11 are cancelled. Claims 1 and 4-6 are examined herein. The drawing and specification amendments are sufficient to overcome the objections as indicated in the non-final office action.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: support needs to be provided for “in a state of being”, “in a state of standing”, “central side”, and “sides of the edge stitch” as provided in claim 1.
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 and 4-6 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.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what structure is required of the “tuck” when in “a state of being pushed up” and a “state of standing”, is the tuck still present? It is unclear if the final garment structure of the apparatus claim has a surplus/tuck, or if that is just the method of forming. It is unclear what structure is required to read on the final apparatus as claimed. Further, the specification fails to mention these states and what is required of each state.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what “a central side between the adjacent side edge portions” is referring to. The specification is silent to this a central side and it is unclear what this would requires structurally. The only mention in the specification is to a central portion, but no central sides as amended into claim 1.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what “to sides of the edge stitch” are, what would be the sides, are you referring to the sides of the stitch itself, a stitch line, or something else. Further, the specification fails to mention sides of the edge stitch and define what they would be structurally of the apparatus.
Regarding claim 1, there is a lack of antecedent basis for “edge stitch” in line 19.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what “an alignment direction” would be and how it relates to the cloth product. Further, the specification fails to mention an alignment direction. It is unclear what is required to read on this direction.
Any remaining claims are rejected depending from a rejected base claim.
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 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maud (US 2015/0201683).
In regard to claim 1, Maud teaches a filling-material filled cloth product comprising: a plurality of cloth pieces sewn with joining stitch (see garment in figures 8a, 89b, different sections of filling stitched together and paragraph 0041), each having a pair of fabrics layered together and sewn at a plurality of seam lines of partition stitch defining therebetween a plurality of bag-shaped accommodation spaces (see annotated figure below, identifier 450 and paragraph 0128); and a thermally insulating filling material accommodated within each of the plurality of bag-shaped accommodation spaces (paragraph 0055); wherein, for each cloth piece, a front fabric to be positioned so as to face a wearer’s body side when worn (see annotated figure below), out of the pair of fabrics is cut so as to be larger than a lining fabric to be positioned so as to be opposite to the wearer’s body side when worn, out of the pair of fabrics, such that the front fabric including a plurality of surplus portions each having a tuck formed in proximity to each of the plurality of seam lines of partition stitch is in a state of being pushed up by the thermally insulating filling material, and such that each surplus portion having each tuck is in a state of standing up in a three-dimensional manner from the lining fabric (product-by-process limitation see MPEP 2113, the method of forming the product is not needed to be taught by the prior art, if the prior art teaches the final cloth product structure, Maud teaches the front fabric layer having a surplus portion and is cut larger than the lining fabric layer: see annotated figure 4 below), and thereby, each of the plurality of accommodation spaces is three-dimensionally shaped so as to accommodate the thermally insulating filling material having a substantially uniform thickness in proximity to each of the plurality of seam lines of partition stitch (see stitch: 450 and height of filling material accommodation space next to the stitching: annotated figure 4 below); wherein the plurality of cloth pieces are sewn together as a result of sewing between adjacent side edge portions thereof with the joining stitch along an alignment direction of the plurality of the bag-shaped accommodation spaces such that a seam line of the joining stitch is positioned to be closer to a central side between the adjacent side edge portions than to sides of the edge stitch (see figures 8a, 8b along with figure 4 below and paragraph 0128, joining stitch is the stitching joining garment portions together back center and sides; the edge stitching is the stitching of the baffles that surrounds the center and side back portions along the perimeter of the garment).
PNG
media_image1.png
402
830
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 4, Maud teaches wherein the filling-material accommodation space includes a plurality of filling-material accommodation spaces adjacent to each other (see annotated figure above).
In regard to claim 5, Maud teaches wherein said filling-material filled cloth product is a jacket (paragraph 0145).
In regard to claim 6, Maud teaches wherein the filling material is made of down (paragraph 055).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/14/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant remarks that Maud (US 2015/0201683) fails to teach the amendments as provided in independent claim 1.
Maud teaches the limitations as amended into independent claim 1 as detailed above, and as best understood.
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 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
Prosecution Insights