DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to application filed on June 20th, 2025 in which claims 1-19 are presented for examination.
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 Group I (Claims 1-9, 16-17) in the reply filed on 2/13/26 is acknowledged.
Claim(s) 10-15, 18, 19 is/are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected embodiment, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/13/26.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species B (peripheral attaching element is of an outer layer) in the reply filed on 2/13/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no search burden because there are only 3 possible variations. This is not found persuasive because the number of variations is not a persuasive argument as to whether Species are a burden to search. As stated in the requirement and re-summarized in the traversal remarks, the variations in species would require at least a different field of search, such as differing search terms. Short of applicant stating that the 3 possible variations are obvious variants of one another, the burden stands.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 3 Line 9 delete “form” and substitute –foam--
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-9, 16 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 Line 5 before “second” add –the—for proper antecedent basis
Claim 1 Line 7 before “outer fabric” add –the—
Claim 2 Line 7 before “stitching” add –the—
Claim 4 Line 1 before “second” add –the—
Claim 4 Line 4 before “second” add –the—
Claim 4 Line 5 before “second” add –the—
Claim 5 Line 1 before “second” add –the—
Claim 5 Line 2 before “second” add –the—
Claim 5 Line 4 before “second” add –the—
Claim 6 Line 1 before “front outer” add –the—
Claim 6 Line 1 before “inner” delete “front”
Claim 6 Line 1 before “outer” delete “front”
Claim 6 Line 7 before “outer” add –the—
Claim 7 Line 2 before “outer” add –the—
Claim 7 is missing a space in “g/m2to”
Claim 8 Line 3 before “under” delete “a” and substitute –an—
Claim 8 Line 10 before “second” delete “a” and substitute –the—
Claim 9 Line 1 after “claim” delete “9” and substitute –8—based on required antecedent basis for the term “additional material”
Claim 9 Line 2 before “second” add –the—
Claim 16 Line 1 before “front” delete “a” and substitute –the—for proper antecedent basis
Disagreement with any of the aforementioned may warrant at least a 112(b) indefiniteness rejection without constituting a new rejection
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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 16, 17 is/are rejected under U.S.C. 112(b).
The term “the other fabric layer” in Claim 1 Lines 11-12 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. The term does not have antecedent basis. For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, based on the election such that Claim 1 Lines 8-9 indicates that the outer fabric layer comprises a peripheral attaching element, the term “the other fabric layer” will be considered “the inner fabric layer”, including in the dependent claims (ex. Claim 2 Lines 4-5).
The term “optionally” in Claim 1 Line 13 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “and/or” in Claim 2 Line 3 and therefore the recitation of Claim 2 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Based on the positioning of the term “and/or”, it is unclear whether Claim 2 should be interpreted “A and/or B, C, D” or whether it should be interpreted “A and/or B, and further either with C or D”, or some other interpretation, wherein A is Lines 1-3, B is Lines 4-5, C is Lines 6-8, D is Lines 9-12. For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met inasmuch as any of A or B is met.
The term “optionally” in Claim 2 Line 6 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “further optionally” in Claim 2 Line 9 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “for example” in Claim 2 Line 11 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “e.g.” in Claim 2 Line 11 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “and/or” in Claim 3 Line 2 and therefore the recitation of Claim 3 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Based on at least the term “and/or”, it is unclear whether Claim 3 should be interpreted as C belonging to B, or C belonging to both A and B, or some other interpretation, where A is Lines 1-2, B is Lines 3-4, C is Lines 5-9. For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met inasmuch as any of A or B is met.
The term “optionally” in Claim 3 Line 5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “for example” in Claim 3 Line 5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “may be” in Claim 3 Line 6 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “e.g.” in Claim 3 Line 6 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “e.g.” in Claim 3 Line 7 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “optionally” in Claim 3 Line 8 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “optionally” in Claim 4 Line 4 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “the first foam layer and second foam layer are each formed from a foam material” in Claim 5 Lines 1-2 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear how a “foam material” is different from “foam” as established for the first/second foam layers.
The term “optionally” in Claim 5 Line 2 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “for example” in Claim 5 Line 5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “e.g.” in Claim 5 Line 5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The terms of thickness in Claim 5 Lines 4-5 is further unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Especially in light of the indefiniteness with “for example” and “e.g.”, the claim is further indefinite as claims cannot narrow ranges within themselves. See MPEP 2173.05(c)(I).
The term “e.g.” in “e.g. elastane” Claim 6 Line 3 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “e.g.” in “e.g. nylon” Claim 6 Lines 3-4 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “optionally” in Claim 6 Line 4 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “the fabric” in Claim 6 Lines 4-5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the term refers to the front inner layer or the front outer layer. For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the term will be considered met by either.
The term “e.g.” in Claim 6 Line 5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “optionally” in Claim 6 Line 7 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “for example” in Claim 6 Line 8 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The compositions of the inner/outer layer in Claim 6 Lines 7-9 is further unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Especially in light of the indefiniteness with “for example”, the claim is further indefinite as claims cannot narrow ranges within themselves. See MPEP 2173.05(c)(I).
The term “for example” in Claim 7 Line 2 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The weight of the inner/outer layer in Claim 7 Lines 2-3 is further unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Especially in light of the indefiniteness with “for example”, the claim is further indefinite as claims cannot narrow ranges within themselves. See MPEP 2173.05(c)(I).
The term “any one” of Claim 8 and therefore the recitations of Claim 8 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the claim should be interpreted as requiring A B and C, or requiring only A or B or C, or some other interpretation, wherein A is (i), B is (ii), C is (iii).
The term “e.g.” in Claim 8 Line 4 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “optionally” in Claim 8 Line 5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “for example” in Claim 8 Line 5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “optionally” in Claim 8 Line 6 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “e.g.” in Claim 8 Line 8 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “optionally” in Claim 9 Line 3 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “for example” in Claim 9 Line 3 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “may be” in Claim 9 Line 4 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “e.g.” in Claim 9 Line 4 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “e.g.” in Claim 9 Line 5 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(d). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
The term “optionally” in Claim 9 Line 6 is unclear and therefore renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation associated with the term is being positively recited—limitations either are or are not. See MPEP 2173.05(h)(II). For the purposes of applying art and providing rejections, the claim will be considered met with or without the term’s limitations.
Claim 16 is rejected for incorporating rejected subject matter of Claim 1.
Dependent claims are rejected at the least for depending on rejected claims.
Claim Interpretation
Specific Definitions
The term “about” has been specifically defined in the specification on page 2 Lines 11-14 as “within 10%, within 5%, within 1%, within 0.5%, within 0.1%, within 0.05%, within 0.01%, within 0.005%, or within 0.001% of a stated value or of a stated limit of a range, and includes the exact stated value or range.”
The definition is applied to Claims 5-7.
Product-by-Process
Regarding Claim(s) 6, 7-- the recitations are being treated as a product-by-process limitation. It is noted that the determination of patentability in a product-by-process claim is based on the product itself, even though the claim may be limited and defined by the process. That is, the product in such a claim is unpatentable if it is the same as or obvious from the product of the prior art, even if the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 697, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). A product-by-process limitation adds no patentable distinction to the claim, and is unpatentable if the claimed product is the same as a product of the prior art; more specifically:
the structure of Claim(s) 6 is front inner/outer fabric layers each formed from one or more yarns selected from the group consisting of a polyurethane yarn, a polyester yarn, a polyamide yarn, cotton yarn, silk yarn, and a combination of two or more thereof. Any disagreement may warrant a 112(b) indefiniteness rejection for the difference between the term “each” and “independently” without constituting a new rejection
the structure of Claim(s) 7 is inner/outer fabric layers; Any disagreement may warrant a 112(b) indefiniteness rejection for the difference between the term “each” and “independently” without constituting a new rejection
U.S.C. 112(f) 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. Specifically:
The term “bonding means” in Claim 2 Line 5 is considered “means for bonding” and will be limited to the structures on page 6 Line 34 (adhesive) and their equivalents (including and not limited to any of the examples on page 6 Line 34-page 7 Line 2)
The term “bonding means” in Claim 2 Lines 7-8 is similarly interpreted as Claim 2 Line 5
The term “bonding means” in Claim 3 Line 2 is similarly interpreted as Claim 2 Line 5
The term “bonding means” in Claim 3 Line 4 is similarly interpreted as Claim 2 Line 5
The term “bonding means” in Claim 8 Line 8 is similarly interpreted as Claim 2 Line 5
Furthermore, this application also includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
The term “bonding means” in Claim 2 Line 10, as the corresponding structure is immediately recited
The term “bonding means” in Claim 3 Line 5, with corresponding structure
The term “bonding means” in Claim 3 Line 6, with corresponding structure
The term “bonding means” in Claim 9 Line 3, with corresponding structure
The term “bonding means” in Claim 9 Line 6, with corresponding structure
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Examiner Notes
The rejection herein has made best efforts to indicate all U.S.C. 112(b) rejections pertaining to indefinite language as best understood of the pending claims. Since the claims are replete with indefinite language, Examiner notes the above listing 35 U.S.C. § 112 rejections may not be conclusive and Applicant is required to review every claim for compliance to 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) so as to facilitate a clear understanding of the claimed invention and proper application of the prior art. Due to the plethora of issues, any resulting 112(b) rejections that could have been indicated herein that are instead found after applicant amendments will not be considered a new rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
FIRST REJECTION: as best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 1, 16, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu (US Publication 2013/0165017), herein Liu ‘017.
Regarding Claim 1, Liu ‘017 teaches a front panel for a brassiere (it is noted that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations; however, see Fig. 4C as the embodiment utilized herein; [0101] “brassiere 100 comprising of a pair of breast cups 110 intended to cover and support the breasts of the wearer”; Liu ‘017 teaches the cup/panel which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being of a front of a brassiere, especially in light of the recitations; although recitations may be directed to a different embodiment, such as Fig. 1, it is understood that Fig. 4C having the same numerals and concepts as recited for the other Figures as applicable would also have the recitations apply to Fig. 4C), the front panel comprising:
an inner fabric layer with a first and second surface (see Fig. 4C; [0103] "inner fabric layer 298", wherein the existence of the layer indicates first/second surfaces, further shown in Fig. 4C),
and an outer fabric layer with a first and second surface (see Fig. 4C; [0115] "outer panel 205 preferably includes an outer fabric layer 292", wherein the existence of the layer indicates first/second surfaces, further shown in Fig. 4C),
a first foam layer (296) coupled to the first surface of the inner fabric layer (see Fig. 4C for coupled, further in light of lamination; [0104] "inner fabric layer 298 laminated with an inner foam layer 296")
and a second foam layer (294) coupled to the first surface of the outer fabric layer (see Fig. 4C for coupled, further in light of lamination; [0115] "outer panel 205 preferably includes preferably includes an outer fabric layer 292 with an outer foam layer 294 laminated thereto");
wherein the first foam layer and the second foam layer are disposed between the first surface of the inner fabric layer and the first surface of the outer fabric layer (see Fig. 4C),
the inner fabric layer and the outer fabric layer each having an outer perimeter (see Fig. 4C),
wherein the outer perimeter of the inner fabric layer and/or the outer fabric layer comprises a peripheral attaching element that folds over a peripheral edge of the first foam layer and a peripheral edge of the second foam layer ([0114] " or folding at least part of the outer panel's edge over to the concave side of the inner panel and gel pad assembly"),
and wherein the peripheral attaching element is coupled to the outer perimeter of the inner fabric layer ([0114] "affixing the folded-over edge to the concave side of the inner panel by, for example, adhesive tape"),
optionally comprising a cavity between the first foam layer and the second foam layer (see Fig. 4C; existence of gel pad 270 indicates cavity; [0106] "cavity is adapted to receive a gel pad 270").
Regarding Claim 16, Liu ‘017 teaches a garment ([0101] “brassiere 100 comprising of a pair of breast cups 110 intended to cover and support the breasts of the wearer”) comprising
the front panel according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 for Liu ‘017).
Regarding Claim 17, Liu ‘017 further teaches the garment according to claim 16, wherein the garment is a brassiere or bralette (see rejection of Claim 16 for Liu ‘017).
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.
SECOND REJECTION: as best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 1, 4, 16, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (USPN 8419502), herein Liu ‘502, in view of Lin et al (USPN 12389966), herein Lin.
Regarding Claim 1, Liu ‘502 teaches a front panel for a brassiere (it is noted that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations; however, see Fig. 2; Col. 2 Lines 53-56 "pad 10…for supporting a breast B in a garment such as bras…or any other breast covering garment having breast support components therein"; Liu teaches the pad/panel which meets the structural limitations in the claims and performs the functions as recited such as being capable of being a front of a brassiere, especially in light of the recitations), the front panel comprising
an inner fabric layer (26) with a first and second surface (see Fig. 2; Col. 3 Lines 53-54 "fabric lining layer 26 ...adhered to an inner surface of the bottom foam layer 24"; wherein the existence of the layer indicates first/second surfaces),
and an outer fabric layer (12) with a first and second surface (see Fig. 2; Col. Col. 2 Line 67-Col. 3 Line 1 "foam layer 18 is adhered to an inner surface of the top fabric layer 12"; wherein the existence of the layer indicates first/second surfaces),
a first foam layer (24) coupled to the first surface of the inner fabric layer (see Fig. 2; Col. 3 Lines 53-54 "fabric lining layer 26 ...adhered to an inner surface of the bottom foam layer 24"; Col. 3 Lines 49-50 "polyurethane...foam layer 24"; Col. 3 Lines 2-4 "preferred thermoplastic material for the foam layers …is polyurethane"; wherein adhering indicates coupled),
and a second foam layer (18) coupled to the first surface of the outer fabric layer (see Fig. 2; Col. 2 Line 67-Col. 3 Line 1 "foam layer 18 is adhered to an inner surface of the top fabric layer 12"; Col. 3 Lines 2-4 "preferred thermoplastic material for the foam layers …is polyurethane"; wherein adhering indicates coupled),
wherein the first foam layer and the second foam layer are disposed between the first surface of the inner fabric layer and the first surface of the outer fabric layer (see Fig. 2),
the inner fabric layer and the outer fabric layer each having an outer perimeter (see Fig. 2; Col. 3 Lines 51-53 "bottom foam layer 24 also has a perimeter corresponding to the outer perimeter of the pad 10"; Col. 2 Line 67-Col. 3 Line 2 "foam layer 18…has a perimeter corresponding to the outer perimeter of the pad 10"; Col. 2 Lines 59-60 "top fabric layer 12 and…the entire pad 10…has an outer perimeter"; Col. 2 Lines 63-65 "the outer perimeter of the top fabric layer 12 as well as most of the other layers of the pad, correspond to the outer perimeter of the pad"),
a peripheral edge of the first foam layer and a peripheral edge of the second foam layer (see Fig. 2),
optionally comprising a cavity between the first foam layer and the second foam layer (see Fig. 2, wherein cavity exists because 22 exists; Col. 3 Lines 22-24 "fabric layer 22 of woven or knit elastomer containing fibers is adhered to the inner surface of the top foam layer 18").
Liu ‘502 does not explicitly teach wherein the outer perimeter of the inner fabric layer and/or the outer fabric layer comprises a peripheral attaching element that folds over a peripheral edge of the first foam layer and a peripheral edge of the second foam layer,
and wherein the peripheral attaching element is coupled to the outer perimeter of the inner fabric layer.
Lin teaches an outer perimeter of an outer fabric layer (1) comprises a peripheral attaching element that folds over a peripheral edge of middle layer(s) (3) ([examiner notes Fig. 2 of Lin has been annotated incorrectly, where 2 and 3 should be swapped, especially in light of recitations] -- see Figs. 1, 2; Col. 5 Lines 60-62 "Bra 200"; Col. 4 Lines 53-67 "In an embodiment, as shown in FIG. 2, both ends of the outer fabric layer 1 extend towards the inner fabric layer 2 and are folded to contact with the outer surface of the inner fabric layer 2, so as to wrap the inner fabric from both sides of the inner fabric layer 2. Thus, the sandwich piece 3 can be wrapped to avoid that the sandwich piece 3 and the inner fabric layer 2 are exposed from the side and affect the appearance. Moreover, the outer fabric layer 1 is edge-wrapped so that the bra shoulder strap 100 is connected into a whole, which can increase the lifting force, better lift female breasts and meet people's dual needs for comfort and appearance...the joint between the outer fabric layer 1 and the inner fabric layer 2 is bonded by dispensing process 4"; Col. 5 Lines 1-5 "the folded edge of the outer fabric layer 1 is attached to the outer surface of the inner fabric layer 2 to form a new fabric layer, which not only can connect the multiple layers of fabric of the bra shoulder strap 100 into a whole, but also can increase the lifting force")
and wherein the peripheral attaching element (of 1) is coupled to the outer perimeter of the inner layer (2) (see Figs. 1, 2 and recitations above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu ‘502’s outer fabric layer to have a peripheral attaching element (fold/wrap) as taught by Lin in order to connect multiple layers as a whole and increase lifting force (Col. 5 Liens 1-5), as known in bra layers.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that modified Liu ‘502 teaches wherein the outer perimeter of the inner fabric layer and/or the outer fabric layer comprises a peripheral attaching element that folds over a peripheral edge of the first foam layer and a peripheral edge of the second foam layer (modified Liu ‘502 teaches the element folds over the foam layers, because Lin outer layer clearly folds over to the inner, and since Liu ‘502 foams are between the inner/outer layers, the outer layer with the peripheral attaching element of modified Liu ‘502 would also then fold over the foam layers).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Liu ‘502 further teaches wherein the first foam layer and the second foam layer each have a three-dimensional shape that is configured to conform to a user's chest region (the existence indicates 3-D shape, and configured to conform inasmuch as foam is known to be flexible; see Fig. 2),
optionally wherein the three-dimensional shape of the first foam layer and the second foam layer are formed by compression moulding of the first foam layer and second foam layer (Col. 4 Lines 1-8 "As taught in U.S. Pat. No. 7,311,583, a pair of pads 10, 10 as shown in FIG. 6, are formed together in one laminate 40 of foam and fabric layers and disks 20, that are pressed and heated together in a mold set for creating the three dimensional shape of the pads as shown in FIG. 2, but according to the present invention the 100% spandex fabric layer 22 is also included and is integrated by adhesion of the heat adhereable materials into the pad structures", wherein press/heated indicates compression molding).
Regarding Claim 16, Liu ‘502 teaches a garment (see Fig. 5; Col. 4 Lines 55-57 "bra manufactured with…pad of the invention in Fig. 5") comprising.
Modified Liu ‘502 teaches the front panel according to claim 1 (see rejection of Claim 1 for Liu ‘502, modified for similar reasons).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 16.
Liu ‘502 further teaches wherein the garment is a brassiere or bralette (see Fig. 5; Col. 4 Lines 55-57 "bra manufactured with…pad of the invention in Fig. 5").
As best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (USPN 8419502), herein Liu ‘502, in view of Lin et al (USPN 12389966), herein Lin, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Liu (USPN 11839241), herein Liu ‘241, and/or Kandegedara et al (USPN 11633306), herein Kandegedara.
Regarding Claim 2, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Liu ‘502 does not explicitly teach wherein the peripheral attaching element extends along a neckline edge, an underarm edge and an under-breast edge of the inner fabric layer or outer fabric layer;
and/or
wherein the peripheral attaching element is coupled to the outer perimeter of the other fabric layer by stitching or bonding means,
optionally wherein the peripheral attaching element is coupled to the neckline edge, the underarm edge and the under-breast edge of the other fabric layer by stitching or bonding means,
further optionally wherein the peripheral attaching element is coupled to the outer perimeter of the other fabric layer by bonding means selected from an adhesive or ultrasonic bonding,
for example, wherein the bonding means is an adhesive selected from an adhesive tape (e.g., double-sided adhesive tape), liquid glue, or hotmelt powder glue.
However, modified Liu ‘502’s peripheral attaching element is a foldover.
Liu ‘241 teaches wherein a foldover extends along a neckline edge, an underarm edge and an under-breast edge of the inner fabric layer or outer fabric layer (see Figs. 1A, 1B, 2A-2C where 118 is the foldover; Col. 4 Lines 60-61 "front panel 100a of the article of clothing"; Col.5 Line 2 "article of clothing is shown to be a brassiere"; Col. 5 Lines 13-14 "Front panel 100a includes an inner fabric layer 102 and an outer fabric layer 104"; Col. 5 Lines 58-59 "body structure 106...represents...front panel 100a"; Col. 6 Lines 30-35 "body structure 106 has one or more edges 116, such as side edges and top edges in the front panel 100a...also provides an edge 118 extending along a bottom...in the front panel 100a"; for foldover in multiple locations recited-- Col. 10 Lines 17-26 "article of clothing may have multiple elastic portions, using the thermoplastic strips 130 and 140, formed along various edges thereof. For instance...the edge 118 may be any of the other edges 116, such as, a side edge or a top edge, of the body structure 106 without any limitations. These elastic portions formed by the thermoplastic strips 130 and 140 allow the article of clothing 100 to expand and contract").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu '502's peripheral attaching element as provided by Lin to be at the recited edges as taught by Liu '241 as known to have the foldover structure (containing strips 130, 140) at all edges to allow expansion and contraction at desired locations (Col. 10 Lines 17-26).
Furthermore, Lin teaches the peripheral attaching element of an outer fabric layer is coupled to the outer perimeter of the inner fabric layer (see Fig. 2; Col. 5 Lines 6-7 "joint between the outer fabric layer and the inner fabric layer 2 are bonded by dispensing process 4").
Kandegedara teaches wherein a layer is coupled to another layer by stitching or bonding means (see claim interpretation for 112f; abstract "absorbent component (100) for use in a garment"; Col. 4 Lines 22-23 "usable in a...garment such as...bra"; Col. 14 Lines 11-19 "absorbent component 100 includes various layers that are bonded together…by bonding means 110…may be of bonding agent. For example, the adhesive may be an adhesive tape, liquid glue, or hotmelt powder glue...tape is a double-sided adhesive tape").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu '502's coupling as provided by Lin to be that recited by Kandegedara as known bonding means for bra layers (Col. 4 Lines 22-23; Col. 14 Lines 11-19).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that modified Liu ‘502 teaches wherein the peripheral attaching element is coupled to the outer perimeter of the inner fabric layer by stitching or bonding means (see modification with Kandegedara),
optionally wherein the peripheral attaching element is coupled to the neckline edge, the underarm edge and the under-breast edge of the other fabric layer by stitching or bonding means (see modification with Liu ‘241),
further optionally wherein the peripheral attaching element is coupled to the outer perimeter of the other fabric layer by bonding means selected from an adhesive or ultrasonic bonding (see modification with Kandegedara),
for example, wherein the bonding means is an adhesive selected from an adhesive tape (e.g., double-sided adhesive tape), liquid glue, or hotmelt powder glue (see modification with Kandegedara).
As best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (USPN 8419502), herein Liu ‘502, in view of Lin et al (USPN 12389966), herein Lin, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Kandegedara et al (USPN 11633306), herein Kandegedara, and Kelley et al (US Publication 2008/0139084), herein Kelley.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Liu ‘502 already teaches wherein the first foam layer (24) is coupled to the first surface of the inner fabric layer (26) (see Fig. 2; Col. 3 Lines 53-54 "fabric lining layer 26 ...adhered to an inner surface of the bottom foam layer 24"),
wherein the second foam layer (18) is coupled to the first surface of the outer fabric layer (12) (see Fig. 2; Col. 2 Line 67-Col. 3 Line 1 "foam layer 18 is adhered to an inner surface of the top fabric layer 12").
Liu ‘502 does not explicitly teach wherein the first foam layer is coupled to the first surface of the inner fabric layer by a bonding means; and/or
wherein the second foam layer is coupled to the first surface of the outer fabric layer by a bonding means,
optionally wherein the bonding means is an adhesive or ultrasonic bonding,
for example, the bonding means may be an adhesive selected from an adhesive tape (e.g. double-sided adhesive tape), film adhesive (e.g. a thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) adhesive film), liquid glue, or hotmelt powder glue,
optionally wherein the adhesive tape is a dot adhesive or a mesh adhesive.
Kandegedara teaches wherein a layer is coupled to another layer by stitching or bonding means (see claim interpretation for 112f; abstract "absorbent component (100) for use in a garment"; Col. 4 Lines 22-23 "usable in a...garment such as...bra"; Col. 14 Lines 11-19 "absorbent component 100 includes various layers that are bonded together…by bonding means 110…may be of bonding agent. For example, the adhesive may be an adhesive tape, liquid glue, or hotmelt powder glue...tape is a double-sided adhesive tape"),
optionally wherein the bonding means is an adhesive or ultrasonic bonding (see above),
for example, the bonding means may be an adhesive selected from an adhesive tape (e.g. double-sided adhesive tape), film adhesive (e.g. a thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) adhesive film), liquid glue, or hotmelt powder glue (see above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu '502's adhering/coupling to be that recited by Kandegedara as known bonding means for bra layers (Col. 4 Lines 22-23; Col. 14 Lines 11-19).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify wherein the first foam layer is coupled to the first surface of the inner fabric layer by a bonding means (see rejection with Kandegedara); and/or
wherein the second foam layer is coupled to the first surface of the outer fabric layer by a bonding means (see rejection with Kandegedara).
Kelley further teaches optionally wherein the adhesive tape is a dot adhesive or a mesh adhesive (see Fig. 5; [0002] "invention generally relates to…brassiere"; [0023] "the inner fabric layer 12 and the outer fabric layer 14 are made of a fabric material comprising nylon and spandex. Most preferably, inner fabric layer 12 and outer fabric layer 14 are made of a fabric material comprising approximately 76% nylon and approximately 24% spandex. One of the fabric layers, preferably inner fabric layer 12, is a sandwich that includes, as shown in FIG. 5, fabric 16 and an adhesive or adhesive layer 18. It should be understood that the adhesive could be applied or laminated to the outer fabric layer 14"; [0026] "Adhesive layer 18 is preferably a dot-coated adhesive layer").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu ‘502’s adhesive as provided by Kandegedara to be dot adhesive as taught by Kelley as a known arrangement of adhesive in a bra.
As best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (USPN 8419502), herein Liu ‘502, in view of Lin et al (USPN 12389966), herein Lin, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Jagaric et al (USPN 7311583), herein Jagaric.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Liu ‘502 further teaches wherein the first foam layer and the second foam layer are each formed from a foam material (see rejection of Claim 1),
optionally wherein the first foam layer and the second foam layer are each formed from a polyurethane foam (Col. 3 Lines 2-4 "preferred thermoplastic material for the foam layers …is polyurethane").
Liu ‘502 does not explicitly teach and wherein the first foam layer and the second foam layer each have a thickness of from about 2 mm to about 8 mm,
for example from about 3 mm to 5 mm thick (e.g. about 4 mm thick).
Jagaric teaches wherein the first foam layer and the second foam layer each have a thickness of from about 2 mm to about 8 mm (see claim interpretation for the definition of the term “about”, met by see Figs. 5, 8; Col. 5 Lines 36-40 "Fig. 8 illustrates in dotted line …rectangular and graduated sheet 16a, which…already been attached to as second outer cup sheet 32, e.g. 2 mm thick,…which is also made of polyurethane foam"; for before molding, see Fig. 1; Col. 4 Lines 61-62 "thickness of e.g. 7 mm polyurethane foam 16 therebetween"; Col. 5 Lines 42-45 "each of the cup sheets 16a and 32 may also include a laminate or fabric covering 33 and 34, respectively made, for example, of nylon or nylon with spandex").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu ‘502's foam thickness to be as taught by Jagaric as known thickness of foam in a breast-covering garment pad (abstract), such as for providing desired shape (Col. 1 Lines 27-28), while concealing the pad and nipple (Col. 3 Lines 6-9, 26-29; Col. 1 Lines 50-63).
Jagaric at least suggests for example from about 3 mm to 5 mm thick (e.g. about 4 mm thick) (see claim interpretation for the definition of the term “about”, which provides a range of 2.7-3.3 to 4.5 to 5.5, e.g. 3.6 to 4.4 mm with “within 10%”; see Figs. 5, 8; Col. 5 Lines 36-40 "Fig. 8 illustrates in dotted line …rectangular and graduated sheet 16a, which…already been attached to as second outer cup sheet 32, e.g. 2 mm thick,…which is also made of polyurethane foam").
Jagaric discloses the general conditions of the claimed invention except for the express disclosure of about 3 mm (2.7-3.3mm). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jagaric’s 2mm to be 2.7 mm, since the claimed values are merely an optimum or workable range. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Furthermore, even if the range measured did not overlap but was merely close, a prima facie case of obviousness still exists. See MPEP 2144.05, Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu ‘502’s foam thickness to be 2.7 mm (about 3 mm) as taught by Jagaric for similar reasons above without criticality (especially based on range variations recited) or unexpected results.
As best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (USPN 8419502), herein Liu ‘502, in view of Lin et al (USPN 12389966), herein Lin, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of McMurray (USPN 7611999), and Agee et al (USPN 10660375), herein Agee.
Regarding Claim 6, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Liu ‘502 further teaches wherein the front inner fabric layer and the front outer fabric layer are each independently formed from one or more yarns selected from the group consisting of a polyurethane yarn (e.g. elastane), a polyester yarn, a polyamide yarn (e.g. nylon), cotton yarn, silk yarn, and a combination of two or more thereof (Col. 2 Lines 57-58 "top fabric layer 12 of flexible fabric material such a nylon or nylon plus spandex blend"; Col. 3 Lines 56-57 "lining 26 is also make of nylon or nylon spandex blend"; as for independently-- see claim interpretation for product-by-process; the recitation “independently” is being treated as a product-by-process limitation. Therefore, even if “independently formed” results in different structural characteristics of the end product than other formation methods, it still would have been prima facie obvious at the time the invention was made to use the method of Liu ‘502 above as claimed since such a process is a well-known technique in the art; in other words, the front inner/outer fabric layers formed from one or more yarns of the materials listed of Liu ‘502 teaches the independently formed of Claim 6 because it has the structure of Claim 6).
Liu ‘502 does not explicitly teach optionally wherein the fabric is a spacer fabric (e.g. a fabric comprising at least fabric layers connected by spacer yarn and/or pile yarns).
McMurray teaches wherein the fabric is a spacer fabric (e.g. a fabric comprising at least fabric layers connected by spacer yarn and/or pile yarns) (see Fig. 2; Col. 6 Lines 50-51 "spacer yarns 16 are secured within each of the respective knit fabric layers 12, 14"; Col. 6 Line 66-Col. 7 Line 7 "yarns forming the first discrete knitted layer 12…are…nylon or polyester…spandex…or blends or combinations thereof"; Col. 7 Lines 19-23 "second discrete fabric layer 14...desirably knit from the same yarns as described for the first discrete fabric layer"; Col. 7 Lines 33-40 "spacer yarns 16 are made from...polyester or nylon"; Col. 7 Lines 28-32 "multi-layer spacer fabric is the primary substrate used as a molded breast cup for a brassiere...resulting in comfort against the skin of the wearer").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify at least Liu '502's inner fabric layer to be the spacer as taught by McMurray as known substrates known arrangement for a skin-side material of a bra, especially one undergoing heat-molding (Col. 6 Lines 55-60) which Liu is as well (Col. 4 Lines 1-8), in order to provide for desired comfort (Col. 7 Lines 28-32).
Liu ‘502 also does not explicitly teach optionally wherein the inner fabric layer and the outer fabric layer are formed from:
about 74 to about 94 wt% nylon; and about 6 to about 26 wt% elastane
for example, about 84 wt% nylon; and about 16 wt% elastane
Agee teaches optionally wherein the inner fabric layer and the outer fabric layer are formed from:
about 74 to about 94 wt% nylon; and about 6 to about 26 wt% elastane (see claim interpretation for the definition of “about”; Col. 1 Line 14 "disclosure is directed to a brassiere"; Col. 4 Lines 50-56 "inner fabric layer includes fabrics made from nylon spandex fiber blends including in the range of 15 to 25% by weight spandex and in the range of 75 to 85% by weight nylon, wherein the % weight is of the total weight of the fabric"; Col. 5 Lines 38-42 "the outer fabric layer includes nylon spandex blends including in the range of 5 to 15% by weight spandex and in the range of 85 to 95% by weight nylon, wherein the % weight is of the total weight of the fabric"),
for example, about 84 wt% nylon; and about 16 wt% elastane (see claim interpretation for the definition of “about”, wherein page 2 Lines 11-14 indicates 75.6-92.4 nylon; 14.4-17.6 elastane; see above recitations of Agee).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu's nylon/spandex blend to be the wt% as taught by Agee as a known arrangement for a brassiere, especially to provide desired stretch.
As best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (USPN 8419502), herein Liu ‘502, in view of Lin et al (USPN 12389966), herein Lin, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Agee et al (USPN 10660375), herein Agee.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Liu ‘502 does not explicitly teach wherein the weight of the inner fabric layer and the outer fabric layer are each independently from about 200 g/m2 to about 240 g/m2,
for example, about 220 g/m2.
Agee teaches wherein the weight of the inner fabric layer and the outer fabric layer are each independently from about 200 g/m2 to about 240 g/m2 (Col. 1 Line 14 "disclosure is directed to a brassiere"; Col. 4 Lines 59-64 "fabric forming the inner layer…exhibits a basis weight in the range of 150 grams per square meter to 200 grams per square meter"; Col. 5 Lines 60-62 "in alternative embodiments, the inner fabric layer and the outer fabric layer are formed from the same material"; as for independently-- see claim interpretation for product-by-process; the recitation “independently” is being treated as a product-by-process limitation. Therefore, even if “independently formed” results in different structural characteristics of the end product than other formation methods, it still would have been prima facie obvious at the time the invention was made to use the method of Liu ‘502 above as claimed since such a process is a well-known technique in the art; in other words, the inner/outer fabric layers of Liu ‘502 teaches the independently formed of Claim 7 because it has the structure of Claim 7),
for example, about 220 g/m2 (see above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu's inner/outer fabric layers to be the weight as taught by Agee as a known arrangement for a brassiere, such as for comfort.
As best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (USPN 8419502), herein Liu ‘502, in view of Lin et al (USPN 12389966), herein Lin, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of Snyder (USPN 11992067), and Liu (US Publication 2021/0401069), herein Liu ‘069.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 1.
Liu ‘502 further teaches wherein any one of the following applies:(i) further comprising an additional material (22) disposed within the cavity (see Fig. 2; Col. 3 Lines 22-24 "fabric layer 22 of woven or knit elastomer containing fibers is adhered to the inner surface of the top foam layer 18”);
(iii) wherein the first foam layer and a second foam layer are not directly attached to each other (see Fig. 2, where not directly attached at least in a portion with 22).
Liu ‘502 does not explicitly teach wherein under i) the additional material is selected from the group consisting of a power mesh material and an under breast supporting element (e.g. a bra underwire),
optionally wherein the additional material is a power mesh material,
for example a power mesh material formed from polyester and elastane,
and optionally wherein the power mesh material is a 4-way stretch power mesh material.
Snyder teaches i) the additional material is selected from the group consisting of a power mesh material and an under breast supporting element (e.g. a bra underwire) (see Figs. 1, 3; Col. 1 Line 14 "invention is directed to a supportive bra"; Col. 3 Line 61-Col. 4 Line 2 "FIG. 3 depicts an exploded view of the layers of cups 105A and 105B of supportive bra 100. Preferably each cup 105A and 105B has three layers as follows: (1) outer layer 120 (as described herein), (2) middle layer 130, and (3) inner layer 125 (as described herein). Middle layer 130 is preferably a power mesh fabric. For example, the power mesh fabric may be a four-way stretchable yet sturdy fabric. The power mesh fabric is preferably a blend of polyester and spandex"),
optionally wherein the additional material is a power mesh material (see above),
for example a power mesh material formed from polyester and elastane (Col. 4 Lines 1-2 "The power mesh fabric is preferably a blend of polyester and spandex"),
and optionally wherein the power mesh material is a 4-way stretch power mesh material (Col. 3 Lines 66-67 "the power mesh fabric may be a four-way stretchable yet sturdy fabric").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu 502's elastomeric with the power mesh of Snyder, especially as it is known in the art that polyester/spandex power mesh is interchangeable with elastomeric (see extrinsic evidence Kasviki USPN 11219247) in a bra cup, which Liu '502 and Snyder both are, for the purposes of providing the desired level of support (Col. 1 Line 14).
Liu ‘502 also does not explicitly teach ii) wherein a back panel is coupled to the front panel by bonding means (e.g. an adhesive or ultrasonic bonding) or stitching.
Liu ‘069 teaches ii) wherein a back panel is coupled to the front panel by bonding means (e.g. an adhesive or ultrasonic bonding) or stitching (see Fig. 1; [0054] "formed bra cups 14a and 14b may be ...subsequently stitched or fastened by other suitable means such as ultrasonic welding to the side wings 20a and 20b of the body structure 12, to complete the article of clothing 10 (as illustrated in FIG. 1)").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu ‘502’s front/panel cup with the back panel coupling as taught by Liu ‘069 as a known effective arrangement for forming a brassiere.
As best understood in light of the 112(b) rejections--Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (USPN 8419502), herein Liu ‘502, in view of Lin et al (USPN 12389966), herein Lin, Snyder (USPN 11992067) and Liu (US Publication 2021/0401069), herein Liu ‘069, as applied to the SECOND REJECTION above, further in view of and Kandegedara et al (USPN 11633306), herein Kandegedara, and Todaro (USPN 12004576).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Liu '502 teaches all the claimed limitations as discussed above in Claim 8.
Liu ‘502 further teaches wherein the additional material is coupled to one or both the first foam layer and the second foam layer (Col. 3 Lines 22-24 "fabric layer 22 of woven or knit elastomer containing fibers is adhered to the inner surface of the top foam layer 18”).
Liu ‘502 does not explicitly teach wherein the additional material is coupled to one or both the first foam layer and the second foam layer by bonding means.
Kandegedara teaches layer to layer by bonding means (see claim interpretation for 112f; see Kandegedara abstract "absorbent component (100) for use in a garment"; Col. 4 Lines 22-23 "usable in a...garment such as...bra"; Col. 14 Lines 11-19 "absorbent component 100 includes various layers that are bonded together…by bonding means 110…may be of bonding agent. For example, the adhesive may be an adhesive tape, liquid glue, or hotmelt powder glue...tape is a double-sided adhesive tape"),
optionally wherein the bonding means is an adhesive or ultrasonic bonding (see above),
for example, the bonding means may be an adhesive selected from an adhesive tape (e.g. double-sided adhesive tape), film adhesive (e.g. a thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) adhesive film), liquid glue, or hotmelt powder glue (see above; for TPU/film-- Col. 12 Lines 31-40 "the liquid impermeable layers 124,164 may include one or more layers of a thermoplastic or thermoset film, where the thermoplastic or thermoset film is selected from one or more of the group consisting of polyurethane.... Particular examples of liquid impermeable materials include layers made from a liquid impermeable polymer or a thermoplastic polyurethane film. The liquid impermeable layers 124,164 may be thermoplastic polyurethane elastomer tapes"; Col. 12 Lines 54-56 " "one or both liquid impermeable layers 124, 164 is a ...double-sided adhesive layer or film").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu '502's coupling to be that recited by Kandegedara as known bonding means for bra layers (Col. 4 Lines 22-23; Col. 14 Lines 11-19).
Liu ‘502 also does not explicitly teach optionally wherein the adhesive tape is a mesh adhesive tape.
Todaro teaches optionally wherein the adhesive tape is a mesh adhesive tape (see Figs. 1, 3; Col. 5 Lines 7-8 "Fig.1 shows...absorbent bra...has two cups 102"; Col. 5 Lines 50-51 "Fig. 3 shows...layers of an absorbent breast cup 2"; Col. 5 Line 64-Col. 6 Line 3 "outer edge 33 of the one-way transport material 3 is bonded to the outer edge 53 of the foam 5 using a hot melt spray glue. Alternative methods of coupling include stitching, elastomeric heat-activated adhesive tape/film (such as that available from BEMIS™), spray adhesive, printed adhesive, mesh adhesive tape, ultrasonic bonding, and/or liquid glue").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu '502's adhesive tape as provided by Kandegedara to be the mesh as taught by Todaro as a known bonding means for layers in a bra, especially that of a cup (Col. 5 Lines 50-51, Col. 5 Line 64-Col. 6 Line 3), which Liu is as well.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be used to formulate a rejection if necessary: Liu (USPN 8133091), Guo (KR 2002/08702), Liu (US Publication 2008/0153387), Liu (USPN 10849368), Zhang (USPN 8419503), Liu (US Publication 2006/0281389), Liu (US Publication 2008/0153388), Liu (US Publication 2008/0090491), Luk et al (US Publication 2007/0004315), Liu (USPN 7435156), Kobayashi et al (USPN 11432596), Liu (US Publication 2025/0017290), Luk (USPN 6805610), Luk et al (USPN 7179150) directed to front panel for a brassiere having first/second foam layers coupled to outer/inner fabric layers; Zhang (USPN 9149080) directed to foldover at neckline, underarm, under-breast; Heath et al (USPN 8690634) directed to nylon/elastane composition; Zhang et al (USPN 12495843), Munoz-Guzman et al (USPN 11632990), Anvaripour (USPN 8647168), Moulden et al (USPN 9084443) directed to power mesh; Vansia et al (USPN 12096806), Shams (US Publication 2024/0108085) directed to power mesh composition of polyester/elastane; Baran et al (US Publication 2007/0123147) directed to 4-way stretch; Yamauchi et al (USPN 6406354), Allen (USPN 8556677) directed to back panel stitched to front panel.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Grace Huang whose telephone number is (571)270-5969. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30am-5:30pm 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, Khoa Huynh can be reached on 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.
/GRACE HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732