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 .
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments are persuasive in that Leotta et al. does not anticipate or render obvious amended claim 1. However, the claims contain new matter and are not enabled. See the new grounds of rejection below necessitated by amendment. Prior art is not applied at this time due to the recitations of the indivisible fabric portions. The prior art fabrics are, like applicants, actually divisible and not indivisible. Applicant simply does not have support, nor has applicant enabled, fabric portions which are incapable of being divided / which are indivisible.
Attention is drawn to the cited reference Smith which is highly relevant to applicant’s disclosed invention. See the 892. See Smith (US Patent No. 12660951).
It is noted that applicant argues that the claim requires “only two indivisible fabric portions.” The argument is not commensurate with the claim. The claim does not limit the scope to only two fabric portions and it does not consist of only two fabric portions.
The claims are not allowable for the reasons set forth above and for the reasons detailed below. Refer to the rejections below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
a first indivisible fabric portion
a second indivisible fabric portion
the first stitching pattern comprises at least three seams
the second stitching pattern comprises at least one seam
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “a first indivisible fabric portion” and “a second indivisible fabric portion.” Both recitations constitute new matter. The subject matter was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The term “indivisible” does not appear in the original disclosure at all. The disclosure supports “individual” fabric portions, but the scope of individual and indivisible is vastly different and it is noted that neither one supports the other. There is no support for the recitations of “indivisible.” The fabric portions can plainly be divided, e.g. with a line or other notation, with a fold, with cutting, etc.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the first stitching pattern comprises at least three seams” and additionally recites “the second stitching pattern comprises at least one seam.” Referring to figure 1, the intent appears directed toward 130a and 130b. The original disclosure identifies these as stitches, however, not seams. See paragraph [0025]. Support does not exist in the original disclosure for the limitations as claimed. The recitations are therefore new matter.
Claim 1-2, 7-8, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement.
The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a first indivisible fabric portion” and “a second indivisible fabric portion.” The term “indivisible” does not appear in the original disclosure at all. The disclosure supports “individual” fabric portions, but the scope of individual and indivisible is vastly different and it is noted that neither one enables the other. There is no support for the recitations of “indivisible.” The fabric portions can plainly be divided, e.g. with a line or other notation, with a fold, with cutting, etc. The original disclosure does not enable one skilled in the art to make and/or use indivisible fabric portions.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the first stitching pattern comprises at least three seams” and additionally recites “the second stitching pattern comprises at least one seam.” The original disclosure does not enable one skilled in the art to make and/or use the invention which includes the limitations as quoted above. Note that the original disclosure does not describe stitching patterns which comprise at least one seam / at least three seams. Referring to figure 1, the intent appears directed toward 130a and 130b. The original disclosure identifies these as stitches, however, not seams. See paragraph [0025].
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 DAVID E SOSNOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-7944. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 3:30 PM and 9 PM through 11:59 PM Monday through Friday, generally.
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, Justin Mikowski can be reached at (571)272-8525. 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.
/DAVID E. SOSNOWSKI/
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3673
/David E Sosnowski/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3673
Prosecution Insights