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 amendment filed on 08/19/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4, 7-13, 15 and 18-20 are currently pending in the application. Claims 7, 9 and 18 have been previously withdrawn from further consideration. Claims 1-2, 4, 8, 10-13, 15 and 19-20 are being treated on the merits.
Any rejection(s) and/or objection(s) made in the previous Office action and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn due to Applicant's amendments and/or arguments in the response filed on 08/19/2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 9, 12 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 3, "farbic" should read "fabric";
The status identifier of claim 9 should be "withdrawn";
In claim 12, line 3, "farbic" should read "fabric";
In claim 20, line 3, "continous" should read "continuous".
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 1-2, 4, 7-13, 15 and 18-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations "a sole of a foot", "a side of a foot at least in a heel area", "a side of a foot", "a side of a lower leg" and "a side of a thigh". It is unclear whether each of the limitations refers to a part of the leg garment or a part of a human body. If the former, it is suggested clearly define the leg garment comprising a corresponding part; for example, the leg garment comprising a sole portion, a foot portion, etc. If the latter, the limitations would be subjected to 101 rejections. The metes and bounds of the claim are unclear and cannot be ascertained.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "a tubular knitted fabric". It is unclear what tubular knitted fabric is being referred to and where it is located. It is noted that claim 2 depends from claim 1, and claim 1 recites "a flat-knitted basic fabric part". For examination purposes, the examiner has interpreted that the flat-knitted basic fabric part forming a tubular knitted fabric after the two transverse edges being sewn together by means of the single longitudinal seam, and the limitation has been construed to be a longitudinal direction of the tubular knitted fabric.
Claim 12 recites the limitations "a side of a foot", "a side of a lower leg" and "a side of a thigh". It is unclear whether each of the limitations refers to a part of the leg garment or a part of a human body. If the former, it is suggested clearly define the leg garment comprising a corresponding part; for example, the leg garment comprising a foot portion, a lower leg portion, etc. If the latter, the limitations would be subjected to 101 rejections. The metes and bounds of the claim are unclear and cannot be ascertained.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "a tubular knitted fabric". It is unclear what tubular knitted fabric is being referred to and where it is located. It is noted that claim 2 depends from claim 1, and claim 1 recites "a flat-knitted basic fabric part". For examination purposes, the examiner has interpreted that the flat-knitted basic fabric part forming a tubular knitted fabric after the two transverse edges being sewn together by means of the single longitudinal seam, and the limitation has been construed to be a longitudinal direction of the tubular knitted fabric.
Claim 20 recites the limitations "a side of a foot", "a side of a lower leg" and "a side of a thigh". It is unclear whether each of the limitations refers to a part of the leg garment or a part of a human body. If the former, it is suggested clearly define the leg garment comprising a corresponding part; for example, the leg garment comprising a foot portion, a lower leg portion, etc. If the latter, the limitations would be subjected to 101 rejections. The metes and bounds of the claim are unclear and cannot be ascertained.
The remaining claims each depend from a rejected base claim and are likewise rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-2, 4, 8, 10-13, 15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 1 recites the limitations "a sole of a foot", "a side of a foot at least in a heel area", "a side of a foot", "a side of a lower leg", "a side of a thigh" and "an ankle zone of a wearer", which appear to be claiming parts of a human body which are not directed to statutory subject matter (i.e. human per se). See MPEP 2106, Section I. For example, claim 1 recites "the longitudinal seam runs around an ankle zone of a wearer of the leg garment." It is respectfully suggested that this rejection may be overcome by including a phrase such as "configured to," "adapted to," "when in use," "capable of" or "while being worn."
Claim 12 recites the limitations "a side of a foot", "a side of a lower leg", "a side of a thigh" and "an ankle zone of a wearer", which appear to be claiming parts of a human body which are not directed to statutory subject matter (i.e. human per se). See MPEP 2106, Section I. For example, claim 12 recites "the longitudinal seam runs around an ankle zone of a wearer of the leg garment." It is respectfully suggested that this rejection may be overcome by including a phrase such as "configured to," "adapted to," "when in use," "capable of" or "while being worn."
Claim 20 recites the limitations "a side of a foot", "a side of a lower leg", "a side of a thigh" and "an ankle zone of a wearer", which appear to be claiming parts of a human body which are not directed to statutory subject matter (i.e. human per se). See MPEP 2106, Section I. For example, claim 20 recites "the longitudinal seam runs around an ankle zone of a wearer of the leg garment." It is respectfully suggested that this rejection may be overcome by including a phrase such as "configured to," "adapted to," "when in use," "capable of" or "while being worn."
The remaining claims each depend from a rejected base claim and are likewise rejected.
Status of Claims
Generic claims 1, 12 and 20 are currently free of prior art within the scope of the elected Species 4. The examiner further notes that withdrawn claims 7 and 18 each depend from a cancelled claim.
Response to Arguments
In view of Applicant's amendment, newly modified grounds of rejection have been identified and applied as necessitated by the amendment. Applicant's arguments with respect to the amended claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as discussed supra.
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 AIYING ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3326. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am - 4:30 pm EST.
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.
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.
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.
/AIYING ZHAO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights