`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`www .uspto.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`
`
`
` FILING DATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKETNO.
`
`CONFIRMATIONNO.
`
`14/695,909
`
`04/24/2015
`
`Gerard Prendergast
`
`GRPET-1108751
`
`4193
`
`101 WEST BROADWAY
`SUITE 1600
`
`
`
`
`ZEC, FILIP
`
`3744
`
`12/08/2017
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or 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):
`ipdocket @ gordonrees.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`
`
` . oa: . 14/695,909 PRENDERGAST, GERARD
`
`
`
`
`Applicant-initiated Interview Summary
`_
`_
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`
`FILIP ZEC
`
`3744
`
`All participants (applicant, applicant's representative, PTO personnel):
`
`(1) FILIPZEC.
`
`(2) K. Hull.
`
`Date of Interview: 04 December 2017.
`
`(3)R. Dammann.
`
`(4)
`
`Type:
`
`[-] Video Conference
`|X] Telephonic
`[J Personal [copy given to: [] applicant
`
`(FJ applicant’s representative]
`
`Exhibit shown or demonstration conducted:
`If Yes, brief description:
`
`[] Yes
`
`IX] No.
`
`[]101 (112 [102 103 [others
`Issues Discussed
`(For each of the checked box(es) above, please describe below the issue and detailed description of the discussion)
`
`Claim(s) discussed: 7.
`
`Identification of prior art discussed: U.S 4064835 to Rabenbauer and US PGPUB 2005/0288749 to Lachenbruch.
`
`Substance of Interview
`(Foreachissue discussed, provide a detailed description and indicate if agreement was reached. Some topics may include: identification or clarification of a
`reference or a portion thereof, claim interpretation, proposed amendments, arguments of any applied referencesetc...)
`
`The Examiner disclosed the results of the further search, per requirements of AFCP 2.0 request submitted on
`11/14/2017. Newly found reference to Lachenbruch indeed teaches an elastic material (air, foam, gel or elastomercells
`8, FIG. 7; which are comprised within the matress 16, which, in turn, encloses thermally conductive strips 9) that
`deforms and reforms upon the application and release of pressure, respectively
`(par 0062;
`par 0081-0083) in order to
`rovide comfort to the user when applying coolin
`ar 0062;
`par 0084). The enclosed advisory action provides details
`how said newly addedlimitations in claims 1-4 and 17-20 would be rejected. The Examiner also addressed the
`applicant's inquiry about how the newly added reference would be incorporated into Rabenbauer(foam mattress 16
`would be substituted instead of plastic/woodlayer 1, to inclose insulation material 2 and ice-packs 3). The Examiner
`finally stated thatif all the components of the system are claimed in a manner wherien once assembied, they are
`structurally indivisible, the current rejection may be circumvented.
`
`Applicant recordation instructions: The formal written reply to the last Office action must include the substanceofthe interview. (See MPEP
`section 713.04). If a reply to the last Office action has already beenfiled, applicant is given a non-extendable period of the longer of one month or
`thirty days from this interview date, or the mailing date of this interview summary form, whichever is later, to file a statement of the substance of the
`interview
`
`Examinerrecordation instructions: Examiners must summarize the substanceof any interview of record. A complete and proper recordation of the
`substanceof an interview should include the itemslisted in MPEP 713.04 for complete and proper recordation including the identification of the
`general thrust of each argumentor issue discussed, a general indication of any other pertinent matters discussed regarding patentability and the
`general results or outcomeofthe interview,to include an indication as to whether or not agreement was reached onthe issuesraised.
`
`&X Attachment
`/FILIP ZEC/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 3744 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`PTOL-413 (Rev. 8/11/2010)
`
`Interview Summary
`
`Paper No. 20171204
`
`

`

`Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP), Section 713.04, Substanceof Interview Must be Made of Record
`A complete written statement as to the substance of any face-to-face, video conference, or telephone interview with regard to an application must be madeof record in the
`application whether or not an agreement with the examiner was reachedat the interview.
`
`Summary of Record of Interview Requirements
`
`Title 37 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 1.133 Interviews
`Paragraph (b)
`
`In every instance where reconsideration is requested in view of an interview with an examiner, a complete written statement of the reasons presented at the interview as
`warranting favorable action must befiled by the applicant. An interview does not removethe necessity for reply to Office action as specified in §§ 1.111, 1.135. (35 U.S.C. 132)
`
`37 CFR §1.2 Businessto be transactedin writing.
`All business with the Patent or Trademark Office should be transacted in writing. The personal attendance of applicants or their attorneys or agents at the Patent and
`Trademark Office is unnecessary. The action of the Patent and Trademark Office will be based exclusively on the written record in the Office. No attention will be paid to
`any alleged oral promise, stipulation, or understanding in relation to which there is disagreement or doubt.
`
`The action of the Patent and Trademark Office cannot be based exclusively on the written record in the Office if that recordis itself
`incomplete through the failure to record the substanceof interviews.
`It is the responsibility of the applicant or the attorney or agent to make the substanceof an interview of record in the application file, unless
`the examiner indicates he or she will do so.
`It is the examiner’s responsibility to see that such a record is made andto correct material inaccuracies
`which bear directly on the question of patentability.
`
`Examiners must complete an Interview Summary Form for each interview held where a matter of substance has been discussed during the
`interview by checking the appropriate boxes andfilling in the blanks. Discussions regarding only procedural matters, directed solely to restriction
`requirements for which interview recordation is otherwise provided for in Section 812.01 of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, or pointing
`out typographical errors or unreadable script in Office actions or the like, are excluded from the interview recordation procedures below. Where the
`substanceof an interview is completely recorded in an Examiners Amendment, no separate Interview Summary Record is required.
`
`The Interview Summary Form shall be given an appropriate Paper No., placed in the right hand portion ofthe file, and listed on the
`“Contents” section ofthe file wrapper.
`In a personalinterview, a duplicate of the Form is given to the applicant (or attorney or agent) at the
`conclusion of the interview.
`In the case of a telephone or video-conferenceinterview, the copy is mailed to the applicant’s correspondence address
`either with or prior to the next official communication. If additional correspondencefrom the examineris not likely before an allowanceorif other
`circumstances dictate, the Form should be mailed promptly after the interview rather than with the next official communication.
`
`The Form provides for recordation of the following information:
`— Application Number (Series Code and Serial Number)
`—Name ofapplicant
`—Name of examiner
`— Date ofinterview
`— Type of interview (telephonic, video-conference, or personal)
`—Name of participant(s) (applicant, attorney or agent, examiner, other PTO personnel, etc.)
`—Anindication whether or not an exhibit was shownor a demonstration conducted
`—Anidentification of the specific prior art discussed
`—
`Anindication whether an agreement was reachedand if so, a description of the general nature of the agreement (may be by
`attachmentof a copy of amendments or claims agreed as being allowable). Note: Agreementasto allowability is tentative and does
`not restrict further action by the examinerto the contrary.
`— The signature of the examiner who conductedthe interview (if Form is not an attachmentto a signed Office action)
`
`It is desirable that the examinerorally remind the applicant of his or her obligation to record the substance of the interview of each case. It
`should be noted, however, that the Interview Summary Form will not normally be considered a complete and proper recordation of the interview
`unlessit includes, or is supplemented by the applicant or the examiner to include, all of the applicable items required below concerning the
`substanceofthe interview.
`A complete and proper recordation of the substance of any interview should include at least the following applicable items:
`1) A brief description of the nature of any exhibit shown or any demonstration conducted,
`2) an identification of the claims discussed,
`8) an identification of the specific prior art discussed,
`4) an identification of the principal proposed amendmentsof a substantive nature discussed, unless these are already described on the
`Interview Summary Form completed by the Examiner,
`5) a brief identification of the general thrust of the principal arguments presented to the examiner,
`(The identification of arguments need not be lengthy or elaborate. A verbatim or highly detailed description of the argumentsis not
`required. The identification of the argumentsis sufficient if the general nature or thrust of the principal arguments madeto the
`examiner can be understood in the context of the application file. Of course, the applicant may desire to emphasize andfully
`describe those arguments which heor she feels were or might be persuasive to the examiner.)
`6) a general indication of any other pertinent matters discussed, and
`7) if appropriate, the general results or outcomeofthe interview unless already described in the Interview Summary Form completed by
`the examiner.
`Examiners are expected to carefully review the applicant's record of the substanceofan interview.
`accurate, the examinerwill give the applicant an extendable one month time period to correct the record.
`
`If the record is not complete and
`
`Examiner to Check for Accuracy
`
`If the claims are allowable for other reasons of record, the examiner should sendaletter setting forth the examiner's version of the
`statementattributed to him or her.
`If the record is complete and accurate, the examiner should placethe indication, “Interview Record OK” on the
`paper recording the substanceof the interview along with the date and the examiner'sinitials.
`
`

`

`would be allowable if submitted in a separate, timely filed amendment canceling the non-
`
`NONOTICEOFAPPEALFILED
`1. LZ] Thereply wasfiled after a final rejection. No Notice of Appeal has beenfiled. To avoid abandonmentofthis application, applicant musttimelyfile
`one of the following replies: (1) an amendment, affidavit, or other evidence, which places the application in condition for allowance;
`(2) a Notice of Appeal (with appeal fee) in compliance with 37 CFR 41.31; or (3) a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) in compliance with
`37 CFR 1.114 if this is a utility or plant application. Note that RCEs are not permitted in design applications. The reply mustbefiled within one of
`the following time periods:
`a) XX The period for reply expires 3months from the mailing date of the final rejection.
`b) Cc The period for reply expires on: (1) the mailing date of this Advisory Action; or (2) the date set forth in the final rejection, whicheveris later.
`In no event, however,will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final rejection.
`Cc) Cc A prior Advisory Action was mailed more than 3 monthsafter the mailing date of the final rejection in responsetoafirst after-final reply filed
`within 2 monthsof the mailing date of the final rejection. The current period for reply expires
`months from the mailing date of
`the prior Advisory Action or SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final rejection, whicheveris earlier.
`ExaminerNote: |f box 1
`is checked, check either box (a), (b) or (c). ONLY CHECK BOX (b) WHEN THIS ADVISORY ACTION IS THE
`FIRST RESPONSE TO APPLICANT’S FIRST AFTER-FINAL REPLY WHICH WAS FILED WITHIN TWO MONTHS OF THE FINAL
`REJECTION. ONLY CHECK BOX(c) IN THE LIMITED SITUATION SET FORTH UNDER BOX (c). See MPEP 706.07(f).
`Extensions of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). The date on which the petition under 37 CFR 1.136(a) and the appropriate
`extension fee have beenfiled is the date for purposes of determining the period of extension and the corresponding amountof the fee. The
`appropriate extension fee under 37 CFR 1.17(a) is calculated from: (1) the expiration date of the shortened statutory period for reply originally
`set in the final Office action; or (2) as set forth in (b) or (c) above, if checked. Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the
`mailing date of the final rejection, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`NOTICE OF APPEAL
`. Abrief in compliance with 37 CFR 41.37 mustbefiled within two monthsof the dateoffiling the
`2. L] TheNotice of Appeal wasfiled on
`Notice of Appeal (37 CFR 41.37(a)), or any extension thereof (37 CFR 41.37(e)), to avoid dismissal of the appeal. Since a Notice of
`Appeal has been filed, any reply must befiled within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 41.37(a).
`AMENDMENTS
`3. X The proposed amendmentsfiled after a final rejection, but prior to the date offiling a brief, will not be entered because
`a) Xx They raise new issues that would require further consideration and/or search (see NOTE below);
`b) Cc Theyraise the issue of new matter (see NOTE below);
`Cc) Cc They are not deemed to place the application in better form for appeal by materially reducing or simplifying the issues for
`appeal; and/or
`d) C They present additional claims without canceling a corresponding numberoffinally rejected claims.
`NOTE: See Continuation Sheet. (See 37 CFR 1.116 and 41.33(a)).
`4.[] The amendments are notin compliance with 37 CFR 1.121. See attached Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment (PTOL-324).
`5. | Applicant's reply has overcomethefollowing rejection(s):
`6. CL] Newly proposed or amended claim(s)
`allowable claim(s).
`7. X For purposesof appeal, the proposed amendment(s): (a) Bi) will not be entered, or (b) (] will be entered, and an explanation of how the
`new or amendedclaims would be rejected is provided below or appended.
`AFFIDAVIT OR OTHER EVIDENCE
`:
`8. LIA declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`9. Theaffidavit or other evidencefiled after final action, but before or on the date offiling a Notice of Appeal will not be entered because
`applicant failed to provide a showing of good and sufficient reasons whythe affidavit or other evidence is necessary and was not earlier
`presented. See 37 CFR 1.116(e).
`10. DJ The affidavit or other evidencefiled after the date offiling the Notice of Appeal, but prior to the date offiling a brief, will not be entered
`becausethe affidavit or other evidence failed to overcomeall rejections under appeal and/or appellant fails to provide a showing of good
`and sufficient reasons whyit is necessary and was not earlier presented. See 37 CFR 41.33(d)(1).
`11. DJ The affidavit or other evidence is entered. An explanation of the status of the claims after entry is below or attached.
`REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION/OTHER
`12. KJ The request for reconsideration has been considered but does NOTplacethe application in condition for allowance because:
`See Continuation Sheet.
`
`Advisory Action
`Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief
`
`Application No.
`14/695,909
`Examiner
`FILIP ZEC
`
`Applicant(s)
`PRENDERGAST, GERARD
`Art Unit
`AIA(First Inventorto File) Status
`3744
`Yes
`
`--The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`THE REPLY FILED 14 November 2017 FAILS TO PLACE THIS APPLICATION IN CONDITION FOR ALLOWANCE.
`
`13. KJ Note the attached AFCP 2.0 form 2323, Search history and interview summary.
`14. [J Other:
`.
`STATUS OF CLAIMS
`
`15. The status of the claim(s)is (or will be) as follows:
`Claim(s) allowed:
`Claim(s) objected to:
`Claim(s) rejected: 1-16.
`Claim(s) withdrawn from consideration:
`
`/FRANTZ JULES/
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3744
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-303 (Rev. 08-2013)
`
`/FILIP ZEC/
`Examiner, Art Unit 3744
`
`Advisory Action Before the Filing of an Appeal Brief
`
`Part of Paper No. 20171204
`
`

`

`Continuation Sheet (PTOL-303)
`
`Application No. 14/695,909
`
`Continuation of 3. NOTE: per provisions of AFCP 2.0, a new search was performed regarding the added limitations "an elastic material
`that deforms and reforms upon the application and release of pressure, respectively".
`
`the arguments are not persuasive.
`Continuation of 12. does NOT place the application in condition for allowance because:
`In reference to claims 1 and 3, Rabenbauer teaches a pressure activated recharging cooling platform for cooling an object or an animal(air
`conditioned pet bed, FIG. 1-5), the platform comprising a temperature regulation layer (2, FIG. 3), the temperature regulation layer having a
`support layer (1, FIG. 3), but does not teach a plurality of angled segments, wherein angled segments within a sealed perimeter of the
`temperature regulation layer are formed by a top side and a bottom side at a predefined distance, and channels, wherein the channels
`substantially form sides by contacting the top side with the bottom side at a distance lesser than the predefined distance. Gatten teaches a
`cooling mattress for sunbathing (FIG. 8) comprising a plurality of angled segments (318, FIG. 8), wherein angled segments within a sealed
`perimeter (inherent in the structure to prevent leaks in FIG. 8) of the temperature regulation layer (812, FIG. 8) are formed by a top side
`(top side of 312, FIG. 8) and a bottom side (bottom side of 312, FIG. 8) at a predefined distance, and channels (spaces formed by angled
`portions 318, FIG. 3), wherein the channels substantially form sides by contacting the top side (top side of 312, FIG. 8) with the bottom side
`(bottom side of 312, FIG. 8) at a distance lesser than the predefined distance (smaller than the thickness of the pad 312, FIG. 8) in order to
`enable the portions of the liner carrying the cavities to be folded to place the mattress in a compact configuration (col 4, lines 33-36).
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of
`Rabenbauer, to include a plurality of angled segments, wherein angled segments within a sealed perimeter of the temperature regulation
`layer are formed by a top side and a bottom side at a predefined distance, and channels, wherein the channels substantially form sides by
`contacting the top side with the bottom side at a distance lesser than the predefined distance, as taught by Gatten, in order to enable the
`portions of the liner carrying the cavities to be folded to place the mattress in a compact configuration.
`Rabenbauer also doesnot teach that the support layer is comprised of an elastic material that deforms and reforms upon the application
`and release of pressure, respectively. Lachenbruch indeed teachesan elastic material (air, foam, gel or elastomer cells 8, FIG. 7; which
`are comprised within the matress 16, which, in turn, encloses thermally conductive strips 9) that deforms and reforms upon the application
`and release of pressure, respectively (par 0062; par 0081-0083) in order to provide comfort to the user when applying cooling (par 0062;
`par 0084).
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of
`Rabenbauer, to include an elastic material that deforms and reforms upon the application and release of pressure, respectively, within the
`support layer, as taught by Lachenbruch, in order to provide comfort to the user when applying cooling.
`In reference to claim 2 and 4, Rabenbauer teaches a pressure activated recharging cooling platform for cooling an object or an animal (air
`conditioned pet bed, FIG. 1-5), the platform comprising a temperature regulation layer (2, FIG. 3), the temperature regulation layer having a
`support layer (1, FIG. 3), but does not teach a plurality of angled segments, wherein angled segments within a sealed perimeter of the
`temperature regulation layer are formed by a top side and a bottom side at a predefined distance, and channels, wherein the channels
`substantially form sides by contacting the top side with the bottom side at a distance lesser than the predefined distance. Gatten teaches a
`cooling mattress for sunbathing (FIG. 8) comprising a plurality of angled segments (318, FIG. 8), wherein angled segments within a sealed
`perimeter (inherent in the structure to prevent leaks in FIG. 8) of the temperature regulation layer (312, FIG. 8) are formed by a top side
`(top side of 312, FIG. 8) and a bottom side (bottom side of 312, FIG. 8) at a predefined distance, and channels (spaces formed by angled
`portions 318, FIG. 3), wherein the channels substantially form sides by contacting the top side (top side of 312, FIG. 8) with the bottom side
`(bottom side of 312, FIG. 8) at a distance lesser than the predefined distance (smaller than the thickness of the pad 312, FIG. 8) in order to
`enable the portions of the liner carrying the cavities to be folded to place the mattress in a compact configuration (col 4, lines 33-36).
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of
`Rabenbauer, to include a plurality of angled segments, wherein angled segments within a sealed perimeter of the temperature regulation
`layer are formed by a top side and a bottom side at a predefined distance, and channels, wherein the channels substantially form sides by
`contacting the top side with the bottom side at a distance lesser than the predefined distance, as taught by Gatten, in order to enable the
`portions of the liner carrying the cavities to be folded to place the mattress in a compact configuration.
`Rabenbauer also doesnot teach that the support layer is comprised of an elastic material that deforms and reforms upon the application
`and release of pressure, respectively. Lachenbruch indeed teaches an elastic material (air, foam, gel or elastomer cells 8, FIG. 7; which
`are comprised within the matress 16, which, in turn, encloses thermally conductive strips 9) that deforms and reforms upon the application
`and release of pressure, respectively (par 0062; par 0081-0083) in order to provide comfort to the user when applying cooling (par 0062;
`par 0084).
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of
`Rabenbauer, to include an elastic material that deforms and reforms upon the application and release of pressure, respectively, within the
`support layer, as taught by Lachenbruch, in order to provide comfort to the user when applying cooling.
`In reference to claims 17-20, Lachenbruch teachesthat the elastic material is foam (par 0062, 0081-0084).
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.

We are unable to display this document.

PTO Denying Access

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket