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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to Claims 1-16, filed June 18, 2025, which are pending in this application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Figs. 1A, 1B, and 1C need further separation between each other as it is unclear what structures belongs to each of the figures;
In Fig. 6, 221 (lower concave edge) is generically pointing to the brim sleeve and this should be updated to 212 (brim sleeve);
In Fig. 8, along the bottom left, there is 206 (brim) and 212 (brim sleeve) pointing to essentially the same structure making it unclear as to the different between each.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “363” (para. 0062).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “362” (Fig. 11).
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.
Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it recites, “ An interchangeable brim sleeve that slides over a cap’s brim is disclosed” which is a phrase that can be implied. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Specification
The use of the term “Velcro” (para. 0054), 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 wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term, for example “VELCRO® (hook and loop fastener)”.
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 Objections
Claims 1 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 12 should recite, “the opening”;
Claim 9, line 20 should recite, “the opening”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 7-9, and 15-16 (and claims 2-6 and 10-14 at least for depending from a rejected claim) 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.
Claims 1 and 9 are indefinite as each recites, “the cavity being defined as the inner side of the upper section and the inner surface of the lower section”. As the cavity is defined as the inner side of the upper section and the inner surface of the lower section, it is unclear if how the brim of the cap can slide within the inner side and the inner surface as neither of these structures have an opening. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to recite, “the cavity being defined as in-between the inner side of the upper section and the inner surface of the lower section”.
Claims 7 and 15 are indefinite as each recites, “the mounting channel further comprising a pocket.” As it can be seen in Figs. 10-11, the mounting channel appears to be the channel created by a pocket or by straps as there would be no channel without there being a pocket or straps. Therefore, it is unclear how the channel “further” comprises a pocket/or straps thus suggesting there is a channel structure without the pocket or straps. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to remove the term “further”.
Claims 8 and 16 are indefinite as each recites, “the mounting channel further comprising one or more straps.” As it can be seen in Figs. 10-11, the mounting channel appears to be the channel created by a pocket or by straps as there would be no channel without there being a pocket or straps. Therefore, it is unclear how the channel “further” comprises a pocket/or straps thus suggesting there is a channel structure without the pocket or straps. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to remove the term “further”.
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) 1-5 and 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LaMantia (US 5956773).
Regarding claim 1, LaMantia discloses a brim sleeve (20) configured to engage a cap (8) , comprising: an upper section (32) comprising an upper convex edge (36) and an upper concave edge (42, understood to be concave from Figs. 1-2 as it matches the bottom edge of the hemispherical crown), the upper section further comprising an inner side (side facing upper surface 50 of the visor 12) and an outer side (side facing away from the visor 12) opposite the inner side (see Fig. 2); a lower section (34) comprising a lower convex edge (38) and a lower concave edge (44, understood to be concave from Figs. 1-2 as it matches the bottom edge of the crown and attaches to 60), the lower section further comprising an inner surface (surface facing lower surface 52 of the visor 12 ) and an outer surface (surface facing away from the visor 12) opposite the inner surface (see Fig. 2), wherein the lower convex edge is coupled to the upper convex edge (stitched together at 40 as disclosed in col. 2, lines 35-40); an opening (46), formed by the upper concave edge and the lower concave edge (as seen in Figs. 2 and 5), wherein the opening is configured to slide over a brim (12) of the cap (8) and cover said brim within a cavity (30) of the brim sleeve (see Figs. 1-2 and col. 2, lines 5-15), the cavity being defined as the inner side of the upper section and the inner surface of the lower section (as seen in Figs. 2 and 5, cavity 30 is formed in between these); and an anchoring tab (60/62) coupled to the lower section (see col. 2, lines 60-65), the anchoring tab comprising a terminal end (rear edge of 62 in Fig. 5) extending rearwardly from the open(ing) (as seen in Fig. 5), wherein the terminal end is configured to nest within a sweatband (13) of the cap (as shown in Fig. 2 and disclosed in Col. 3, lines 1-15).
Examiner notes that italicized limitations in the prior art rejections are functional and do not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead require an ability to so perform and/or function. As the prior art discloses the structure of the brim sleeve, there would be a reasonable expectation for the brim sleeve to perform such functions, as Examiner has explained after each functional limitation.
Regarding claim 2, LaMantia discloses wherein the anchoring tab (60/62) is coupled to the inner surface of the lower section (as 60 is attached at the rear edge 44 of the lower section 34, see col. 2, lines 60-65, then it is coupled to both the inner and outer surfaces either directly or indirectly).
Regarding claim 3, LaMantia discloses wherein the anchoring tab (60/62) is disposed at a center of the lower section (34) (as seen in Fig. 5, the tab is entirely across the lower section and therefore disposed at the center).
Regarding claim 4, LaMantia discloses wherein the upper section (32) and the lower section (34) each comprise a fabric (terry cloth, see Abstract, col. 2, lines 30-33, and claim 2).
Regarding claim 5, LaMantia wherein the anchoring tab (60/32) comprises a fabric (as at least portion 60 is disclosed as a sweatband and can also be terry cloth, see col. 2, lines 60-67).
Regarding claim 9, LaMantia discloses a brim sleeve system, comprising: a cap (8), the cap comprising a crown portion (10) and a brim (12), wherein the brim is coupled to the crown portion at a lower edge of a front region of said crown portion (as can be seen in Fig. 1), the crown portion further comprising a cap interior (inside of crown, see Fig. 2) and a sweatband (13) hingedly coupled to the cap interior (since there is a space between the sweatband and the crown to insert 60/62, the sweatband is only coupled to the crown at the bottom of the sweatband), the sweatband forming a flap compartment between sweatband and the crown portion (as the sweatband acts as a flap so that 60/62 can be inserted in a space between the sweatband and the inside surface of the crown, see col. 4, lines 8-14); and a brim sleeve (20) , the brim sleeve comprising: an upper section (32) comprising an upper convex edge (36) and an upper concave edge (42, understood to be concave from Figs. 1-2 as it matches the bottom edge of the hemispherical crown), the upper section further comprising an inner side (side facing upper surface 50 of the visor 12) and an outer side (side facing away from the visor 12) opposite the inner side (see Fig. 2); a lower section (34) comprising a lower convex edge (38) and a lower concave edge (44, understood to be concave from Figs. 1-2 as it matches the bottom edge of the crown and attaches to 60), the lower section further comprising an inner surface (surface facing lower surface 52 of the visor 12 ) and an outer surface (surface facing away from the visor 12) opposite the inner surface (see Fig. 2), wherein the lower convex edge is coupled to the upper convex edge (stitched together at 40 as disclosed in col. 2, lines 35-40), an opening (46) formed by the upper concave edge and the lower concave edge (as seen in Figs. 2 and 5), wherein the opening receives the brim covers said brim within a cavity (30) of the brim sleeve (see Figs. 1-2 and col. 3, lines 5-15), the cavity being defined as the inner side of the upper section and the inner surface of the lower section (as seen in Figs. 2 and 5, cavity 30 is formed in between these); and an anchoring tab (60/62) coupled to the lower section (see col. 2, lines 60-65), the anchoring tab comprising a terminal end (rear edge of 62 in Fig. 5) extending rearwardly from the open(ing) (as seen in Fig. 5), wherein the anchoring tab is wrapped around the sweatband and the terminal end is disposed within the flap compartment (as shown in Fig. 2 and disclosed in Col. 3, lines 1-15).
Regarding claim 10, LaMantia discloses wherein the anchoring tab (60/62) is coupled to the inner surface of the lower section (as 60 is attached at the rear edge 44 of the lower section 34, see col. 2, lines 60-65, then it is coupled to both the inner and outer surfaces either directly or indirectly).
Regarding claim 11, LaMantia discloses wherein the anchoring tab (60/62) is disposed at a center of the lower section (34) (as seen in Fig. 5, the tab is entirely across the lower section and therefore disposed at the center).
Regarding claim 12, LaMantia discloses wherein the upper section (32) and the lower section (34) each comprise a fabric (terry cloth, see Abstract, col. 2, lines 30-33, and claim 2).
Regarding claim 13, LaMantia wherein the anchoring tab (60/32) comprises a fabric (as at least portion 60 is disclosed as a sweatband and can also be terry cloth, see col. 2, lines 60-67).
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) 6-8 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LaMantia as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Gnoza (US 2020/0107603).
Regarding claim 6, LaMantia discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above, but does not expressly disclose further comprising a mounting channel coupled to the lower section at the outer surface, the mounting channel configured to releasably secure an elongated accessory in a position parallel to a longitudinal axis of the brim sleeve, the longitudinal axis defined as extending from the opening to a junction of the upper convex edge and the lower convex edge.
Gnoza teaches a storage cap system comprising a brim structure (20) comprising a mounting channel (70) coupled to the lower section at the outer surface (as disclosed in para. 0014, 70 can be on the lower surface), the mounting channel configured to releasably secure an elongated accessory (such as 80, see para. 0013) in a position parallel to a longitudinal axis of the brim structure, the longitudinal axis defined as extending from the opening to a junction of the upper convex edge and the lower convex edge (as shown in Fig. 2, a longitudinal axis can be defined from the rear edge to the front edge of the brim that is parallel to the mounting channel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a mounting channel to the brim sleeve of LaMantia, as taught by Gnoza, in order to “permit easy access to the items at a moment’s notice with relative ease” (see para. 0003 of Gnoza).
Regarding claim 7, the modified brim sleeve of LaMantia discloses the mounting channel (70 of Gnoza) further comprising a pocket (as best as can be interpreted to mean that the channel is a pocket, 70 of Gnoza can be considered a pocket as the term "pocket" is very broad and has a definition of " A receptacle, cavity, or opening" (Defn. No. 3 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com).
Regarding claim 8, the modified brim sleeve of LaMantia discloses the mounting channel (70 of Gnoza) further comprising one or more straps (as best as can be interpreted to mean that the channel is created by one or more straps, 70 of Gnoza can be considered a strap as it is a flexible stretchable material connected to the brim structure, see para. 0013 of Gnoza).
Regarding claim 14, LaMantia discloses all the limitations of claim 9 above, but does not expressly disclose further comprising a mounting channel coupled to the lower section at the outer surface, the mounting channel configured to releasably secure an elongated accessory in a position parallel to a longitudinal axis of the brim sleeve, the longitudinal axis defined as extending from the opening to a junction of the upper convex edge and the lower convex edge.
Gnoza teaches a storage cap system comprising a brim structure (20) comprising a mounting channel (70) coupled to the lower section at the outer surface (as disclosed in para. 0014, 70 can be on the lower surface), the mounting channel configured to releasably secure an elongated accessory (such as 80, see para. 0013) in a position parallel to a longitudinal axis of the brim structure, the longitudinal axis defined as extending from the opening to a junction of the upper convex edge and the lower convex edge (as shown in Fig. 2, a longitudinal axis can be defined from the rear edge to the front edge of the brim that is parallel to the mounting channel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a mounting channel to the brim sleeve system of LaMantia, as taught by Gnoza, in order to “permit easy access to the items at a moment’s notice with relative ease” (see para. 0003 of Gnoza).
Regarding claim 15, the modified brim sleeve system of LaMantia discloses the mounting channel (70 of Gnoza) further comprising a pocket (as best as can be interpreted to mean that the channel is a pocket, 70 of Gnoza can be considered a pocket as the term "pocket" is very broad and has a definition of " A receptacle, cavity, or opening" (Defn. No. 3 of "American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition" entry via TheFreeDictionary.com).
Regarding claim 16, the modified brim sleeve system of LaMantia discloses the mounting channel (70 of Gnoza) further comprising one or more straps (as best as can be interpreted to mean that the channel is created by one or more straps, 70 of Gnoza can be considered a strap as it is a flexible stretchable material connected to the brim structure, see para. 0013 of Gnoza).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. For example, Murray (US D904770 and US D917183) shows a brim sleeve with holder straps on the bottom surface, Baldwin (US 2008/0016602
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEATHER MANGINE, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-0673. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4PM.
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 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.
/HEATHER MANGINE, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732