PTAB

IPR2014-00509

Target Corp v. Destination Maternity

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: BELLY COVERING GARMENT
  • Brief Description: The ’531 patent discloses a maternity garment, such as pants or a skirt, featuring two main portions. It includes an expansible upper belly panel designed to cover a growing abdomen and a lower portion with a downward-receding front circumference to accommodate the expansion of the upper panel.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Anticipation of Claims 1, 2, 5, 10, 17, 19, 24, 25, 28, and 29 under §102 by Asada

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Asada (Japanese Utility Model No. 3,086,624).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Asada discloses every element of the challenged claims. Asada teaches maternity pants with a lower pants portion and an upper abdomen-covering portion made of stretch-knit material. This upper portion is an expandable belly panel that covers the abdomen from pregnancy to postpartum. The lower portion has a downward-receding, parabolic circumference to allow for the expansion of the belly panel. Petitioner asserted that Asada’s upper portion is a tubular, foldable band that encircles the torso beneath the breast area, is formed as a straight-sided cylinder in its residual shape (when not worn), and is made of elastic fabric, thereby meeting the limitations of independent claim 1 and the various dependent claims.
    • Key Aspects: Petitioner emphasized that unlike other prior art shown on models, Asada illustrates the garment's "residual shape" when not worn, which is critical for meeting the "formed as a straight-sided cylinder" limitation of claim 19.

Ground 2: Obviousness of Claims 6, 11, 26, and 27 over Asada in view of JCP Catalog

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Asada (Japanese Utility Model No. 3,086,624) and JCP (J.C. Penney ontrend Maternity Catalog, Fall/Winter 2005).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner contended that Asada teaches the base garment of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose that the lower portion includes a partial waistband, is made of denim, or has a zipperless fly. The JCP catalog, specifically its description of Levi's® bootcut maternity jeans, explicitly discloses these missing features: a rear yoke functioning as a partial waistband (claims 6, 11), construction from denim (claim 26), and a "faux fly" front (claim 27).
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine Asada's full-coverage, foldable belly panel with the familiar and desirable features of the JCP maternity jeans. Consumers desire comfortable maternity wear that resembles ordinary clothing, such as denim jeans. A POSITA would be motivated to substitute the pants portion of Asada with the denim jeans portion from JCP to meet this market demand, providing a more fashionable and conventional appearance while retaining the functional belly panel.
    • Expectation of Success: The combination involved substituting one type of pants bottom for another and one type of belly panel for another, both well-known components in maternity wear. A POSITA would have a high expectation of success, as this constitutes a predictable and routine design choice.

Ground 3: Obviousness of Claim 18 over Asada in view of Summers or Stern

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Asada (Japanese Utility Model No. 3,086,624), Summers (Patent 8,185,970), and Stern (Patent 4,506,390).

  • Core Argument for this Ground:

    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground targets claim 18, which requires the tubular upper portion to be shaped and formed as a "hyperboloid cylinder" (i.e., hourglass-shaped) to fit a tapered torso. While Asada discloses a straight-sided cylinder, both Summers and Stern disclose belly panels with an hourglass shape. Summers teaches a maternity girdle with a "silhouette contour," which Petitioner argued a POSITA would understand as corresponding to a woman's naturally hourglass-shaped torso. Stern explicitly illustrates a tapered waistband portion that is wider at the top and bottom than in the middle, creating an hourglass shape in its residual form.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would be motivated to modify the shape of Asada's belly panel to incorporate the hourglass shape taught by Summers or Stern to better fit wearers with a tapered or hourglass-shaped torso. Both Asada and the secondary references relate to maternity support garments, and modifying the panel shape to improve fit for different body types would have been an obvious design improvement.
    • Expectation of Success: Modifying the contour of an elastic fabric panel to better conform to a user's body shape was a well-known and predictable technique in garment design.

  • Additional Grounds: Petitioner asserted additional challenges, including that claim 1 is anticipated by the JCP catalog. Further obviousness grounds were asserted combining Asada with Stangle (Application # 2004/0049834) to add a hem stitch to the belly panel, and combining the JCP catalog with Summers or Asada for claims 18 and 19.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

  • hyperboloid cylinder (claim 18): Petitioner adopted the Board’s prior construction of this term as "an hourglass-shaped cylinder." This construction was central to the obviousness arguments for claim 18, as Petitioner argued that Summers and Stern teach this specific shape.
  • shaped and formed (claims 18, 19): Petitioner relied on the Board's prior construction indicating that these terms refer to the "residual shape" of the belly panel when not being worn. This was critical for distinguishing Asada, which shows a residual straight-cylinder shape, from references like the JCP catalog that only show the garment on a model.

5. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requested institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 10, 11, 15-19, and 24-29 of the ’531 patent as unpatentable.