SEE’.
`
`‘I3. 2314
`
`i-:53-iii’:
`
`{2} -F:SJ|-iuifiilfil-i1|’iDEi0i\_fi1354289036
`
`NC". 2101
`
`2—_"'
`
`ye-
`
`13 Pm: as P».ICH.IJt.I:IsoN RC.
`
`DOCKET NL'M1IER:29'I}'I1-0002.00}
`
`
`
`
`A -
`
`- iicant Initiated Interview Re - nest Fonn
`
`Alipliflaliflfl NO- 1
`
`'|3a’2?2.9T':'
`
`Fire-t Named Applicant: Susan Walvlus at al.
`
`Examiner: Nicholas F. Polito Art unit.‘ SW3
`
`Status -afApp|ication: Published
`
`
`
`Tentative Participants:
`(1) B?3"1
`
`(2I
`
`Frank L. Gerratana
`
`
`
` (3)
`(4)
`
`
`
`
`Proposed Date of Interview: Se tember 11 2014
`
`Proposed Time: 02:00 EST { PM)
`
`Type of Interview Requested:
`(3) [I Video Conference
`(1) ETelephonic
`(2) I:I Personal
`Exhibit To Be Shown or Demo nstrated: D YES
`NO
`if yes, provide brief description:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Issues To Be Discussed
`
`Discussed
`
`Agreed
`
`Not
`1551-IE9
`Claims!
`Cited
`Agreed
`Rcj-, Obj-g etc)
`Fig. #5
`Art
`
`
`
`|:I
`D
`(I) 102 Rej.
`1:]
`(1)112 1?.¢.i~
`[I
`Cl. 41
`El
`I]
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(3)
`
`(4)
`
`IE Continuation Sheet At-taclied
`U Proposed Amendment or Arguments Attached
`
`Cl
`
`El
`
`E]
`
`III
`
`El
`
`El
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Brief Description of Arguments to be Presented:
`See attached page for a descriptign of the arguments to be grg§gnted_
`
`
`
`.
`An interview was conducted on the above-identified application on
`
`NOTE: This form should lac eompleted by applicant and submitted to the examiner in advance of the interview (see
`
`EVIPEP § 713.01).
`
`
`This application will not be delayed from issue because of applicant '5 failure to submit a written record of this
`interview. Therefore, applicant Is advised to file a statement of the substance of this interview [37-' CPR l.133[b))
`
`as soon as possible.
`
`
`
`
`!Fra.nk L. Gerrata Ila!
`
`
`
`(AppIioentFApplicant's Representative Signature)
`
`(ExamineriSPE Signature)
`
`Frank L. Gerratana
`TypedJPrinted Name of Applicant or Representative
`
`62 653
`Registration Number, if appiicable
`
`
`Attorney Docket Number: 29712—0DD2003
`2323-6590.daI:
`
`
`
`BEDGEAR 1008 (part 6)
`IPR of US. Pat. No. 8,402,580
`1,
`_
`_
`PAGE 20* RC'iD AT 9i1fli2014 3:53:05 PM [Eastern Daylight Time] * SVRIW-PTUFA9-iiiiifll §il|S:2ili|i923" I'.‘S|D:Ei ?54289flE-* DURATION {mm-ss):DD-5t
`
`
`
`

`
`EEF.
`
`‘'3. 2314
`
`3:53:'iili
`
`(334:
`
`(-0
`
`H&?!lCHi.RDEiOli_6l?54289l_.6
`
`LL‘!
`
`® FIsH sc RICHARDSON Inc.
`
`Docimr NL'MlE.1l:19,'h‘.l-OOO10Dj
`
`1) Regarding the 102 and 103 rejections, I would like to discuss the section of the office action
`reproduced below:
`
`Response to Arguments
`they are
`54. applicant‘: arguments filed 1fJ7f20i4 have been fully considered but
`no: neIsua5i‘«'e- P~PP'—'i-‘Jeni:
`-=='e1-‘-ea that the prior art does not teach "elas:icil'.y such that
`the fabric has n tendency to sag by an amount
`that is greater than a threshold amount
`of sag determined by a finishing process. Such that the sag would interfere with the
`fil‘-I-151"-i-'-El Process if the fabric wero Ci:r.‘C:ula:1y lcnit ac crroatcr than a. 72.5 inch
`oirzumference". Applicant's specification describes the above limicacion as an inherent
`Eéituze Of Bbaflfiox in paragraph 55. Brooks et a1. coaches using spandex as a material
`for a bed shoot. Therefore, according to the principles of MPE? 2112.01, since Brooks
`95 31- Eéfifihflfi Bpflndex and Che sag tendency is an inheren: property of spandex, Brooks
`er. al.
`teaches the gag tendency.
`
`In particular, this portion of the office action appears to refer to the lines in claim 1 that say "the fabric has a
`tendencr I0 533 hi’ an amount thai is greater than a threshold amount of sag determined by a finishing
`process, such that the sag would interfere with the finishing process if the fabric were circularly I-:nit at greater
`than a ?2.5 inch circumference."
`
`The reasoning set forth in the office action appears to take as fact that any amount of spandex {or other
`performance fiber) in the fabric would cause sag that would interfere with finishing. However, the claim is
`directed to performance fabric that has specific characteristics, including “at least one of higher breathahility,
`higher heat transfer, and higher moisture wicking characteristics than a cotton fabric," Turning to the an;-inks
`reference, the disclosed mattress cover is described as having sufficient spandex to introduce stretch, but
`there does not appearto be any indication in the Brooks reference that the mattress cover is manufactured
`
`with sufficient spandex (or other performance fiber) to both {1} introduce the claimed sag characteristics, and
`[2l have higher breathability, higher heat transfer, and higher moisture wicking characteristics than cotton.
`
`2) Regarding the 112 Feiefiiioni i would like to discuss the draft proposed amendment to claim 41 shown
`below.
`
`41. (Currently Amended) A bed sheet having a width of greater than 72.5 inches comprising
`
`a circularly knit fabric comprising a. man-made fiber,
`
`the fabric having a gauge of at least 17 gauges,
`
`the fabric having an elasticity such that the fabric has a tendency to sag by an amount that is
`
`greater than a threshold amount of sag determined by a finishing process, such that the sag would
`
`interfere with the finishing process if the fabric were circularly knit at greater than a 72.5 inch
`
`circumference, and
`
`the fabric having at least one of higher broathability, higher heat transfer, and higher moisture
`
`wiclcing characteristics than a cotton fabric.
`
`PAGE 3l1l * RC'iDAT 9l1fll201-l 3:53:05 PM [Easiem Daylight Time] " Siilitill-PTElFAil'l-llllifizdiils:2iilli923" |3S|D:E-ii5il28flllB* DURATION {mm-ss):DD-lili
`
`

`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`LT,‘-|I'l‘J$l) S'TA'l‘l.-S DEPA n'1'n-marl‘ or com :vusiu:i«:
`Lfniln-.d Slate.-5 l-’al:-.nl. and T[‘A'l(IElI'IHl'|i Ollice
`fltlclil-:55: commnssioncn roe PATENTS
`PI). Hm: I450
`r\|c.~:and:ria. \.-'iI'g'Lni.1 2131.1-14.54!
`i\'i\'i\'.'l'lE]'!l|.TI.gU\.'
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`l"|IL|l"<-"G DATE
`
`FIRST .\'AMED I_\lVE.NTOR
`
`ATl"ORl\'E‘n’ DOCKET NO.
`
`CONFDZMATION N0.
`
`]313?;Z__9'i‘7
`
`lml 3120-1 1
`
`Susan WA]-.riu.<:
`
`EOTI Looozoos
`
`49 H
`
`FISH&RIC'HARDSONP.C.‘.(BO)
`P_0_ BOX ](]22
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55441} 1022
`
`mI.1'J'o= N[t.‘no1.As I-'
`
`3073
`
`U»4J0—H201—1
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below andfor attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`l-’A'l'DUC ' I ‘C @ f]'.(}()]I]
`
`P'lUL-90A (Rev. U4.u'fl7"J
`
`

`
`Application No.
`133272.977
`
`AppIicant{s}
`WALVIUS ET AL.
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`AlA.{Flrst|nventorlo File)
`An unit
`Examiner
`:l‘;'““
`3573
`Nicholas Polito
`- The MMUNG DATE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address —
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD EOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE § MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`E:I(‘i6l'|SiOF|S of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.13Bl{e.l.
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`It ND period for reply is specified above. the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX {6} MONTHS Irom the mailing date of this communication.
`Failure to reply within the set or extended period ior reply will. by statixle. cause the application to become ABANDONED l35 LJ.S.-C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Dilice later than three months after the mailing date oi this communication. even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 3? CFR 1.?EI4-lb}.
`
`in no event. howver. may a reply be timely filed
`
`—
`-
`
`Status
`
`HE Flesponsive to communication(s) filed on 1/17/2014.
`El A declaration(s)iaffidavit(sl under 37 CFFI 1.130[b) wasiwere filed on
`
`.
`
`2b)I:I This action is non-final.
`2a)lZ] This action is FINAL.
`3)l:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)i:I Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Ouayie, 1935 CD. 11,453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)E C|airn(s) Eiisiare pending in the application.
`
`5a} Of the above claim(s} it isiare withdrawn from consideration.
`B)EI Claimtsl
`isiare allowed.
`HE Glaimtsl 1'4 16 19-24 27' 33 35-3741-54 56-68 70-72 74 and 75 isiare rejected.
`8) Claim(s]i T5 17 I8 25 25 2332 34 55 69 and 73 israre objected to.
`9)[:| Claims)
`are subject to restriction andior election requirement.
`" If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding appiicatiori. For more information, please see
`
`
`
`htt
`
`:rrwww.us to. ovi atentsiiriit events.’
`
`hr'index.'s or send an inquiry to l-“F’!--itsecibackfwusggtogov.
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)I:I The drawing(s} filed on j isiare: alI:I accepted or biI:I objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85{a).
`
`Ftepiacement drawing sheetisj including the correction is required if the drawingtsl is objected to. See 3? CFFi 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)I:I Acknowledgment is made of a claim tortoreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(aji-(d) or if}.
`
`Certified copies:
`ail] All
`blI:I Some“ c)I:I None of the:
`1.l:| Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`.
`2.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Fiule 17.2{a}).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachrnentts}
`1) E] Notice of References Cited {PTO—B92}i
`_
`‘
`2) E Information Disclosure Stattementisj [F'TDi‘SBi-‘0Ba andror F'TOiSB.r'08b)
`Paper l‘t.|o(s}iMail Date
`.
`L|.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3} [:| interview summary .[pTo.4-13}
`Paper Notsiilvlail Date. j
`4 El Om _
`i
`er‘R
`
`PTDL—326 (Rev. 1 1—t3]
`
`Office Action
`
`Part oi Paper No..’MaJl Date 2014032?
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Specification
`
`1.
`
`The amendment filed 1i'17i2014 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it
`
`introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment
`
`shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material
`
`which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: claim 41 “the fabric
`
`having a width of greater than 72.5 inches”.
`
`Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
`
`Ciaim Objections
`
`2.
`
`Claim 52 is objected to because of the following informalities: please change
`
`"the the" in line 1 to - - the - -. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`3.
`
`Claim 66 is objected to because of the following informalities: please change
`
`"been been” in line 5 to — - been — —. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`4.
`
`Claim 6? is objected to because of the following informalities: please add — - is — —
`
`before “at least" in line 1. Appropriate correction is required.
`
`Cfaim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`5.
`
`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.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 41 -48 and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-
`
`AIA), first paragraph, as falling to comply with the written description requirement. The
`
`000480
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,977
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 3673
`
`c|aim(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 pre-AIA the inventorls), at the time the application was filed, had
`
`possession of the claimed invention. The newly presented limitation of claim 41 "the
`
`fabric having a width of greater than 72.5 inches” does not have support in the
`
`specification as originally filed. Claims 42-48 depend on claim 41. The language of
`
`claim 41 is contradictory in that it later indicates that the fabric cannot be circularly knit
`
`at greater than a 72.5 inch circumference. Claim 51 presents a similar situation to claim
`
`41 .
`
`7.
`
`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.
`
`8.
`
`Claims 41-48 and 51 are 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—AlA
`
`the applicant regards as the invention. The newly presented limitation of claim 41 “the
`
`fabric having a width of greater than 72.5 inches" is contradictory to a later limitation
`
`indicating that the fabric cannot be circularly knit at greater than a 72.5 inch
`
`circumference. Claims 42-48 depend on claim 41. Claim 51 presents a similar situation
`
`to claim 41.
`
`9.
`
`Examiner suggests amending claim 41 to - - the bed sheet having a width of
`
`greater than 72.5 inches - - following applicant's specification that multiple fabric pieces
`
`are necessary to achieve a bed sheet having a width greater than 72.5 inches.
`
`000481
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1'02
`
`10.
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 —
`
`{b} the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country
`or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application
`for patent in the United States.
`
`11.
`
`Claims 14, 16, 19, 21-24, 49, 50, 52, 61 -68, 70-72 and 75 are rejected under pre-
`
`AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Brooks et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,883,193).
`
`12.
`
`Regarding claim 14, Brooks et al. teaches in Figure 1 a bed sheet comprising a
`
`knit fabric comprising a man-made fiber, the fabric having a width of greater than 60
`
`inches (king size), the fabric having an elasticity such that the fabric has a tendency to
`
`sag by an amount that is greater than a threshold amount of sag determined by a
`
`finishing process, such that the sag would interfere with the finishing process if the
`
`fabric were circularly knit at greater than a 72.5 inch circumference, and the fabric
`
`having at least one of higher breathability, higher heat transfer, and higher moisture
`
`wicking characteristics than a cotton fabric (col. 2, line 32 — col. 9, line 11 & MPEP
`
`2112.01 [inherent properties of spandex]).
`
`13.
`
`Regarding claim 16, Brooks et al. teaches in Figure 1 the bed sheet of claim 14,
`
`comprising piping (16, 18).
`
`14.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 14 in which the fabric is knit of the man-made fiber.
`
`15.
`
`Regarding claim 21, the bed sheet of claim 14 in which the fabric is circularly knit.
`
`000482
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`16.
`
`Regarding claim 22, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 14 that is sufficiently stretchable to fit a baby crib and an adult
`
`bed.
`
`17.
`
`Regarding claim 23, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 14 that is sufficiently stretchable to fit a standard rectangular
`
`bed and a smaller, non-rectangular marine bed.
`
`18.
`
`Regarding claim 24, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 14 that is sufficiently stretchable to fit a crib and a standard
`
`adult bed.
`
`19.
`
`Regarding claim 49, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 14 in which the fabric comprises polyurethanepolyurea
`
`copolymer fiber.
`
`20.
`
`Regarding claim 50, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 49 in which the polyurethanepolyurea copolymer fiber is
`
`included in the fabric in a proportion such that, if circularly knit at a high gauge, the
`
`fabric could be knit at no more than a 72.5 inch circumference without losing integrity of
`
`the polyurethanepolyurea copolymer fiber (see also MPEP 2112.01).
`
`21.
`
`Regarding claim 52, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 14 in which the bed sheet is at least 72.5 inches wide (when
`
`stretched to fit a king).
`
`22.
`
`Regarding claim 61, Brook et al. teaches in Figure 1 a bed sheet comprising a
`
`first fabric area (12) where the majority of an individual body rests when the bed sheet is
`
`000483
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`placed on a bed, the first fabric area comprising a fabric that a) includes
`
`polyurethanepolyurea copolymer fiber and b) has been circularly knit at 17 gauges or
`
`higher, the polyurethanepolyurea copolymer fiber included in the fabric in a proportion
`
`such that, if circularly knit at a high gauge, the fabric could be knit at no more than a
`
`72.5 inch circumference without losing integrity of the polyurethanepolyurea copolymer
`
`fiber (col. 2, line 32 — col. 9, line 11 & MPEP 2112.01 [inherent properties of spandex]).
`
`23.
`
`Regarding claim 62, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 in which the polyurethanepolyurea copolymer fiber
`
`included in the fabric in a proportion such that the fabric has at least one of higher
`
`breathability, higher heat transfer, and higher moisture wicking characteristics than a
`
`cotton fabric (see also MPEP 2112.01).
`
`24.
`
`Regarding claim 63, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 in which the first fabric area has a width of a twin size bed.
`
`25.
`
`Regarding claim 64, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 in which the first fabric area has a width of a full size bed.
`
`26.
`
`Regarding claim 55, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 in which the first fabric area has a width of a queen size
`
`bed.
`
`27.
`
`Regarding claim E36, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 in which the first fabric area has a width of a king size bed.
`
`000484
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`28.
`
`Regarding claim 67, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 in which the first fabric area at least 72.5 inches wide
`
`(when stretched to fit a king).
`
`29.
`
`Regarding claim 68, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 that is at least 72.5 inches wide (when stretched to fit a
`
`king).
`
`30.
`
`Regarding claim 70, Brooks et al. teaches in Figure 1 the bed sheet of claim 61
`
`in which the bed sheet comprises at least two portions (12, 14) of the circularly knit
`
`fabric joined to form a finished fabric.
`
`31.
`
`Regarding claim 71, Brooks et al. teaches in Figure 1 the bed sheet of claim 61,
`
`comprising piping (16, 18).
`
`32.
`
`Regarding claim 72, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 being stretchable to fit at least two of a standard
`
`rectangular adult bed, a baby crib, and a marine bed.
`
`33.
`
`Regarding claim 75, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 61 in which the fabric has an elasticity such that the fabric has
`
`a tendency to sag by an amount that is greater than a threshold amount of sag
`
`determined by a finishing process, such that the sag would interfere with the finishing
`
`process if the fabric were circularly knit at greater than a 72.5 inch circumference (see
`
`also MPEP 2112.01).
`
`000485
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1'03
`
`39.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(3) which forms the basis
`
`for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`{a} A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described
`as set forth in section 102 of this title. if the differences between the subject matter sought to
`be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been
`obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the an to which
`said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatlved by the manner in which the
`invention was made.
`
`40.
`
`Claims 20, 33, 35-3?, 53, 54 and 56-60 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`103(a) as being unpatentable over Brooks et al. in view of Taniguchi et al. (U.S. Pub.
`
`No. 2005f0132754). Claim 56 in view of Official Notice as well.
`
`41.
`
`Regarding claim 20, Brooks et al. teaches the bed sheet of claim 14. Brooks et
`
`al. does not teach wherein the fabric has a gauge of at least 1? gauges. Taniguchi et al.
`
`teaches in paragraphs 21, 22 and 35 a bed sheet having been circularly knit at a gauge
`
`of at least 1?’ gauges. In view of Taniguchi et al., it would have been obvious to a
`
`person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to circularly
`
`knit the fabric of Brooks et al. at 17 gauges or higher, as in Taniguchi et al., to increase
`
`softness, elasticity and flexibility.
`
`42.
`
`Regarding claim 33, Brooks et al. teaches in Figure 1 a bed sheet comprising a
`
`first fabric area (12) where a majority of an individual rests when the bed sheet is on a
`
`bed, the first fabric area comprising a fabric including a high performance man—made
`
`fiber, the fabric having an elasticity such that the fabric has a tendency to sag by an
`
`amount that is greater than a threshold amount of sag determined by a finishing
`
`process, such that the sag would interfere with the finishing process if the fabric were
`
`circularly knit at greater than a 72.5 inch circumference (col. 2, line 32 — col. 9 line 11 &
`
`000486
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`MPEP 2112.01 [inherent properties of spandex]).
`
`Brooks et al. does not teach wherein the fabric is circularly knit at 17 gauges or
`
`higher. Taniguchi et al. teaches in paragraphs 21, 22 and 35 a bed sheet having been
`
`circularly knit at 17 gauges or higher. In View of Taniguchi et al., it would have been
`
`obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
`
`circularly knit the fabric of Brooks et al. at 17 gauges or higher, as in Taniguchi et al., to
`
`increase softness, elasticity and flexibility.
`
`43.
`
`Regarding claim 35, Brooks et al. teaches in Figure 1 the bed sheet of claim 33
`
`in which the bed sheet comprises at least two portions (12, 14) of the circularly knit
`
`fabric joined to form a finished fabric.
`
`44.
`
`Regarding claim 36, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 33 in which the fabric comprises polyurethanepolyurea
`
`copolymer fiber.
`
`45.
`
`Regarding claim 3?, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 36 in which the polyurethanepolyurea copolymer fiber is
`
`included in the fabric in a proportion such that, if circularly knit at a high gauge, the
`
`fabric could be knit at no more than a 72.5 inch circumference without losing integrity of
`
`the polyurethanepolyurea copolymer fiber (see also MPEP 2112.01).
`
`46.
`
`Regarding claim 53, Brooks et al. teaches in Figure 1 the bed sheet of claim 33,
`
`comprising piping (16, 18).
`
`000487
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`47.
`
`Regarding claim 54, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 33 being stretchable to fit at least two of a standard
`
`rectangular adult bed, a baby crib, and a marine bed.
`
`48.
`
`Regarding claim 56, Brooks et al. teaches the bed sheet of claim 33. Brooks et
`
`al. does not teach an element that can be cinched to increase tension around an edge
`
`of the bed sheet. The examiner takes Official Notice that it is commonly known in the art
`
`to provide an element to the edge of a bed sheet in order to cinch and increase the
`
`tension around the edge. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in
`
`the art at the time the invention was made to add to the bed sheet of Brooks et al. a
`
`cinching element to provide a tighter fit.
`
`49.
`
`Regarding claim 57, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 33 in which the first fabric area has a width of a twin size bed.
`
`50.
`
`Regarding claim 58, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 33 in which the first fabric area has a width of a full size bed.
`
`51.
`
`Regarding claim 59, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 33 in which the first fabric area has a width of a queen size
`
`bed.
`
`52.
`
`Regarding claim 60, Brooks et al. teaches in column 2, line 32 to column 9, line
`
`11 the bed sheet of claim 33 in which the first fabric area has a width of a king size bed.
`
`53.
`
`Claims 2? and 7'4 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U_S.C_ 103(a) as being
`
`unpatentable over Brooks et al. in view of Official Notice.
`
`000488
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 11
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`54.
`
`Regarding claim 27, Brooks et al. teaches the bed sheet of claim 14. Brooks et
`
`al. does not teach an element that can be cinched to increase tension around an edge
`
`of the bed sheet. The examiner takes Official Notice that it is commonly known in the art
`
`to provide an element to the edge of a bed sheet in order to cinch and increase the
`
`tension around the edge. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in
`
`the art at the time the invention was made to add to the bed sheet of Brooks et al. a
`
`cinching element to provide a tighter fit.
`
`55.
`
`Regarding claim 74, Brooks et al. teaches the bed sheet of claim 61. Brooks et
`
`al. does not teach an element that can be cinched to increase tension around an edge
`
`of the bed sheet. The examiner takes Official Notice that it is commonly known in the art
`
`to provide an element to the edge of a bed sheet in order to cinch and increase the
`
`tension around the edge. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in
`
`the art at the time the invention was made to add to the bed sheet of Brooks et al. a
`
`cinching element to provide a tighter fit.
`
`Allowable Subject‘ Matter
`
`56.
`
`Claims 15, 17, 18, 25, 26, 28-32, 34, 55. 69 and 73 are objected to as being
`
`dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in
`
`independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening
`
`claims.
`
`57.
`
`Regarding claim 15, the prior art does not teach “the bed sheet of claim 14
`
`wherein the fabric comprises a finished fabric of at least 90 inches wide comprising: a
`
`first fabric portion; and a second fabric portion; at least one of the first and second fabric
`
`000489
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 12
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`portions being circularly knit; at least one of the fabric portions comprising a
`
`performance fabric portion; the first and second fabric portions being discrete and joined
`
`to form the finished fabric”. Claims 17, 18, and 28-32 depend on claim 15.
`
`58.
`
`Regarding claim 25, the prior art does not teach “the bed sheet of claim 14 that is
`
`at least 90 inches wide".
`
`59.
`
`Regarding claim 26, the prior art does not teach “the bed sheet of claim 14
`
`having dimensions of approximately 102 inches in length and approximately 91 inches
`
`in width".
`
`60.
`
`Regarding claim 34, the prior art does not teach “the bed sheet of claim 33 that is
`
`at least 90 inches wide”.
`
`61.
`
`Regarding claim 55, the prior art does not teach “the bed sheet of claim 33
`
`having dimensions of approximately 102 inches in length and approximately 91 inches
`
`in width”.
`
`62.
`
`Regarding claim 69, the prior art does not teach “the bed sheet of claim 61 that is
`
`at least 90 inches wide".
`
`63.
`
`Regarding claim 73, the prior art does not teach “the bed sheet of claim 61
`
`having dimensions of approximately 102 inches in length and approximately 91 inches
`
`in width".
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`64.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 1r'1‘/I201-4 have been fully considered but they are
`
`not persuasive. Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach “elasticity such that
`
`the fabric has a tendency to sag by an amount that is greater than a threshold amount
`
`000490
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 13
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`of sag determined by a finishing process, such that the sag would interfere with the
`
`finishing process if the fabric were circularly knit at greater than a 72.5 inch
`
`circumference". Applicant’s specification describes the above limitation as an inherent
`
`feature of spandex in paragraph 55. Brooks et al. teaches using spandex as a material
`
`for a bed sheet. Therefore, according to the principles of MPEP 2112.01, since Brooks
`
`et al. teaches spandex and the sag tendency is an inherent property of spandex, Brooks
`
`et al. teaches the sag tendency.
`
`Conclusion
`
`65.
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TH REE—lvlONTH shortened statutory period, then the
`
`shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any
`
`extension fee 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 Nicholas F'o|ito whose telephone number is (571)270-
`
`5923. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30-6:00.
`
`000491
`
`

`
`Applicationfcontrol Number: 13/272,97?
`
`Page 14
`
`Art Unit: 36?3
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Peter Cuomo can be reached on (571) 272-6856. The fax phone number
`
`for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 5?1-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair—direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
`
`If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OH CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
`
`/Nicholas Polito!
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673
`
`3X28/2014
`
`000492
`
`

`
`Receipt date: 07/22/2013
`
`‘i32?'29??' ~ GAL‘: 3873
`Sheet
`1 Oil
`
`Substitute Disclosure Form
`
`U_S_ Department 01 Commerce Attorney Docket No.
`
`'°3‘e"" 3”“ T'ad‘3"”3“‘ (“"99 29712-0002003
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`by Applicant
`(Use several sheets If necessary)
`
`37 CPR 1_93 b
`
`APP“°9“‘
`Susan Walvius et al.
`Filing Date
`OCT-Db'f:t' 13., 201]
`
`Application No.
`
`13972.97?
`
`Group Ni Unit
`
`3673
`
`U.S. Patent Documents
`
`
`
`Forei n Patent Documents or Published Forei n Patent
`
`Iications
`
`Examiner
`Initial
`
`ID
`
`Number
`
`Publication
`Date
`
`Country or
`Patent Office
`
`Class
`
`Subclass
`
`Translation
`Yes
`No
`