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
Applicant’s amendment, filed 20 July 2026, is reviewed and entered. This Office Action is a final rejection.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Status of Claims
Amended
1, 10-11, 13-16, 18-20
Withdrawn
6-11, 13-16, 18-20
Canceled
12, 17
Pending
1-11, 13-16, 18-20
Presented for Examination
1-5
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I, an accessory corresponding to claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 03 April 2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A as shown in FIGS 1-4 and corresponding to claims 1-5 in the reply filed on 03 April 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dale (US 5341514 A).
As to claim 1, Dale discloses a detachable decorative accessory for a zippered garment (16, which is for jacket 10), comprising:
a fabric panel having a first longitudinal side, a second longitudinal side, a top side, and a bottom side collectively defining a rectangular shape (16in FIG 14 has an outer layer and an inner layer, and col 3 line 20-30 discloses either one may be fabric), the first longitudinal side is parallel to the second longitudinal side (FIG 4), and the top side is parallel to the bottom side (FIG 4);
a first zipper element disposed along the first longitudinal side of the fabric panel (36; col 3 line 30-35 discloses “releasable connector strip 36, known as a zipper”); and
a second zipper element disposed along the second longitudinal side of the fabric panel (second releasable connector assembly strip 38),wherein:
the fabric panel is configured to be removably coupled to the zippered garment (capable of being removably coupled to a zippered garment such as jacket 10), and the zippered garment is a member selected from a group consisting of a jacket and a hoodie (capable of being removed from a jacket or hoodie, such as jacket 10).
As to claim 2, Dale discloses the detachable decorative accessory of Claim 1, wherein each of the first zipper element and the second zipper element include a plurality of teeth disposed along a portion of a length of the fabric panel (FIGS 1 and 3-4; this is a known structure of zippers).
As to claim 3, Dale discloses the detachable decorative accessory of Claim 2, wherein the plurality of teeth is disposed along an entirety of the length of the fabric panel (FIGS 1 and 3-4).
As to claim 4, Dale discloses the detachable decorative accessory of Claim 3, wherein the second zipper element includes a slider element slidably coupled to the plurality of teeth (combination 29 and 31), the slider element includes a pull tab (31).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dale (US 5341514 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Garner (US 20170079345 A1).
As to claim 5, Dale does not disclose the detachable decorative accessory of Claim 1, wherein a surface of the fabric panel includes indicia.
Garner teaches a similar accessory (100) including a surface of the panel includes indicia (tassels or other design features 170).
One of ordinary skill would recognize that the indicia is a design choice that would not affect the function of the panel, and that the panel would work equally well with or without the panel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a surface of the Dale fabric panel with indicia as taught by Garner, in order to “provide an additional aesthetic appeal or to better coincide with existing design features of the garment” (Garner para. 0017).
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 SALLY HADEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6731. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at 571-272-5559. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
SALLY HADEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/SALLY HADEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights