DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed with the written response received on 06/03/2026 have been considered and an action on the merits follows. As directed by the amendment, claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 11, and 18 have been amended; claims 9-10 are canceled. Accordingly, claims 1-8 and 11-20 are pending in this application. Because of the applicant's amendment, the following in the office action filed 03/05/2026, are hereby withdrawn: the prior claim objections and rejection of claims under 35 USC § 112(b).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 06/03/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 USC § 102 and § 103 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the current grounds of rejection. Applicant's arguments, which appear to be drawn only to the newly amended limitations and previously presented rejections, have been considered but are moot in view of the updated ground of rejection.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-8 and 11-20 are is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8, 13-15, and 18 recites “the padded hand elements.” It is suggested the claims are rephrased to recite “the plurality of padded hand elements” for consistency with the rest of the claim and/or for antecedent basis purposes. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims depending from claims rejected to under this section are similarly rejected to for their dependence on a claim rejected to under this section.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8, 11, 12, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2021/0378332 A1 to Tyner in view of US 4,497,073 to Deutsch.
For claim 1, Tryner discloses a protective glove system (420), comprising:
a hand component that includes a hand fitted glove (424 and 428) having a plurality of padded hand elements disposed along a surface of the hand fitted glove (454, fig. 13), wherein the padded hand elements are configured to separately protect different finger parts of a hand (see fig. 13 wherein pads are disposed on the finger stalls); and
a forearm component (540) coupled to the hand component (glove and forearm component are unitarily coupled to each other, see fig. 13 and para 0036), wherein the forearm component includes a sleeve (body of sleeve 540), wherein the forearm component is configured to wrap around a forearm and extend at least halfway to an elbow (see fig. 13 wherein the sleeve 540 is configured to extend downwardly along a wearer’s forearm) and, wherein the sleeve includes an upper flap and lower flap configured to be opened and closed along a separatable edge with a first fastener (see annotated fig. 12 below and para 0093); and
PNG
media_image1.png
457
420
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a wrist strap (480) coupled to the lower flap (480 on opposite side of slit 450 and coupled to lower flap through glove material), wherein the wrist strap includes a second fastener for securing the wrist strap to a top portion of the glove system, and for positioning the lower flap around a portion of the forearm (see fig. 15 wherein the secured 480 to portion 478 decreases gap of 562), and wherein an outer edge of the wrist strap is substantially aligned with an outer edge of the lower flap (as best understood by applicant’s disclosure, securement panel 480 is configured to extend along a wrist portion of the glove and aligned with the “lower flap” when in a closed configuration).
Tryner does not specifically disclose the sleeve has a plurality of transverse pads disposed along an outer surface of the sleeve.
However, attention is directed to Deutsch teaching an analogous protective glove (abstract of Deutsch). Specifically, Deutsch teaches the cuff portion (30) (analogous to a wrist sleeve) comprises padding means (17) stitched thereon (col. 2, lines 53-55 of Deutsch) and extending transversely and securely attached to essentially cover the entire outer surface of the cuff portion providing protection below the wrist of the wearer (col. 2, lines 18-25 and col. 3, lines 1-8 of Deutsch). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein Tryner would be modified to comprise a plurality of transverse pads stitched along an outer surface of the sleeve for purposes of providing protection and flexibility to the back of the cuff and forearm of the wearer, as taught by Deutsch (col. 2, lines 18-25 and col. 3, lines 1-8 of Deutsch).
For claim 2, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim t, wherein the padded hand elements are independently glued or sewn to an outer surface of the hand fitted glove (para 0074).
For claim 3, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, wherein the transverse pads are independently glued or sewn to an outer surface of the sleeve (see discussion for claim 1 above, col. 2, lines 53-55 of Deutsch).
For claim 4, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, wherein the hand fitted glove and sleeve are formed from a unitary piece of material (glove and forearm component are unitarily coupled to each other, see fig. 13 and para 0036 wherein the single piece of material comprises both sections)
For claim 5, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, wherein the padded hand elements include a plurality of individual pads that are configured to separately protect a distal phalanx, a middle phalanx, and a proximal phalanx (see fig. 15 wherein the pads 437 are arranged on each section of the finger portions).
For claim 8, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, wherein the padded hand elements further comprise a metacarpal pad attached to a surface of the hand fitted glove that is configured to cover a metacarpal bone proximate a wrist (454).
For claim 11, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, wherein the upper flap and lower flap include a hook and loop fastener (paras 0088 and 0093).
For claim 12, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, wherein the hand fitted glove comprises one a leather or a synthetic material (para 0042).
For claim 17, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of transverse pads are configured to each separately wrap around a portion of a forearm (see figs. 1 and 2 of Deutsch, modifying Tryner, wherein the plurality of transverse pads are configured to each separately wrap around a portion of a forearm).
For claim 18, the modified Tryner teaches a glove system (420), comprising:
a unitary piece of material (glove and forearm component are unitarily coupled to each other, see fig. 13 and para 0036 wherein the single piece of material comprises both sections) having a hand fitted glove (424 and 428) and a sleeve (540) configured to wrap around a forearm and extend at least half way to an elbow (see fig. 13 wherein the sleeve 540 is configured to extend downwardly along a wearer’s forearm); a plurality of padded hand elements individually attached to an outer surface of the hand fitted glove (454, fig. 13), wherein the padded hand elements are configured to separately protect different finger parts of a hand and move independently of each other (see fig. 13 wherein pads are disposed on the finger stalls); and
Tryner does not specifically disclose the sleeve has a plurality of transverse pads independently attached to an outer surface of the sleeve wherein the plurality of transverse pads extend at least half to the elbow.
However, attention is directed to Deutsch teaching an analogous protective glove (abstract of Deutsch). Specifically, Deutsch teaches the cuff portion (30) (analogous to a wrist sleeve) comprises padding means (17) stitched thereon (col. 2, lines 53-55 of Deutsch) and extending transversely and securely attached to essentially cover the entire outer surface of the cuff portion providing protection below the wrist of the wearer (col. 2, lines 18-25 and col. 3, lines 1-8 of Deutsch). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein Tryner would be modified to comprise a plurality of transverse pads independently attached to an outer surface of the sleeve wherein the plurality of transverse pads extend at least half to the elbow for purposes of providing protection and flexibility to the back of the cuff and forearm of the wearer, as taught by Deutsch (col. 2, lines 18-25 and col. 3, lines 1-8 of Deutsch).
For claim 19, the modified Tryner teaches the glove system of claim 18, wherein the sleeve includes a separatable edge configured to be opened and closed with an upper flap and a lower flap (see annotated fig. 12 below and para 0093); and
PNG
media_image1.png
457
420
media_image1.png
Greyscale
For claim 20, the modified Tryner teaches the glove system of claim 19, further comprising a wrist strap (480) coupled to the lower flap (480 on opposite side of slit 450 and coupled to lower flap through glove material), wherein the wrist strap includes a fastener for securing the wrist strap to a top portion of the glove system (see fig. 15 wherein the secured 480 to portion 478 decreases gap of 562) (as best understood by applicant’s disclosure, securement panel 480 is configured to extend along a wrist portion of the glove and aligned with the “lower flap” when in a closed configuration).
Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tryner in view of Deutsch as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of US 2011/0067165 A1 to Fream.
For claim 6, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 5, but does not specifically disclose wherein padded hand elements are further configured to cover at least one edge side and a top side of a thumb.
However, in a separate embodiment, Tryner does teach the thumb portion of the glove comprises padding (37) for purposes of providing protection to the top part of the thumb (fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified embodiment of Tryner is further modified to comprise padding on the top side of a thumb part of the thumb stall for purposes of providing protection to the top part of the thumb as illustrated by fig. 1 of Tryner.
As modified, Tryner does not specifically disclose wherein padded hand elements are configured to cover at least one edge side of the thumb.
However, attention is directed to Fream teaching an analogous protective glove (abstract of Fream). Specifically, Fream teaches, in addition to padded elements configured for protecting the top side of a thumb, additional padded element are configured for protecting a least one side edge of the thumb (para 0074 and fig. 18 of Fream). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified Tryner would be further modified to comprise an additional padded elements along the side part of the thumb region of the glove for purposes of providing protection to a least one side of the thumb, as taught by Fream (para 0074 and fig. 18 of Fream).
For claim 13, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein the padded hand elements and transverse pads each include at least one of polyethene, polyurethane, ethylene vinyl acetate or styrene butadiene rubber.
However, attention is again directed to Fream teaching the covering material of each pad can be polyurethane (para 0073) for providing durable and resilient material to the padding elements. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the padded hand elements and transverse pads of the modified Tryner each include polyurethane, as taught by Fream (para 0073 of Fream), for purposes of providing durable and resilient material to the padding elements.
For claim 14, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein the padded hand elements and transverse pads each include at least one of rubber, foam, plastic, metal, or carbon fiber.
However, attention is again directed to Fream teaching the covering material of each pad can be polyurethane (para 0073) for providing durable and resilient material to the padding elements. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the padded hand elements and transverse pads of the modified Tryner each include polyurethane, a plastic, as taught by Fream (para 0073 of Fream), for purposes of providing durable and resilient material to the padding elements.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tryner in view of Deutsch as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of US 9,839,831 B2 to Brown.
For claim 7, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 5, wherein padded hand elements are further configured to cover a top side of a pinky (see fig. 14 and pinky finger stall).
The modified Tryner does not specifically disclose wherein padded hand elements are configured to cover an edge side of a pinky
However, attention is directed to Brown teaching an analogous protective glove (abstract of Brown). Specifically, Brown teaches, in addition to padded elements configured for protecting the top side of a pinky, additional padded element are configured for protecting a least one side edge of the pinky (col. 4, lines 32-37 of Brown). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified Tryner would be further modified to comprise an additional padded elements along the side part of the pinky region of the glove for purposes of providing protection to a least one side of the pinky, as taught by Brown (col. 4, lines 32-37 of Brown).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tryner in view of Deutsch as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2014/0026280 A1 to Clark.
For claim 15, the modified Tryner teaches the protective glove system of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein the padded hand elements and transverse pads each have a thickness of between 0.5 and 1.5 inches.
However, attention is directed to Clark teaching an analogous glove (abstract of Clark). Specifically, Clark teaches the pads of the glove comprise a thickness of about 25 mm (paras 0060-0061 of Clark) for providing adequate protection against impacts (para 0068 of Clark). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the padded hand elements and transverse pads of the modified Tryner each have a thickness of between 0.5 and 1.5 inches (about 1 inch) for providing adequate protection against impacts as taught by Clark (paras 0060-0061 and 0068 of Clark).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tryner in view of Deutsch as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2008/0229477 A1 to McGough.
For claim 16, the modified Tryner discloses the protective glove system of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein a palm region of the hand fitted glove is comprised of a material less than 1/10 inch in thickness.
However, attention is directed to McGough teaching an analogous glove (abstract). Specifically, McGough teachings the glove is a tight-fitting glove having a thickness typically in the range 0.008 to 0.020 inches (para 0030) for purposes of providing improved tactile feedback and grip (para 0024-0025). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified Tryner would be further modified wherein a palm region of the hand fitted glove is comprised of a material thickness in the range 0.008 to 0.020 inches for purposes of providing improved tactile feedback and grip, as taught by McGough (paras 0024-0025 and 0030 of McGough).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICK I LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3262. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9:00am - 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 at (571) 272-4888. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERICK I LOPEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights