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 .
Disposition of Claims
Claims 1-15 are pending in the application. Claims 14-15 are withdrawn from consideration due to Applicant’s election.
Amendments to claims 1-13, filed on 5/14/2026, have been entered in the above-identified application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
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.
Claims 1-13 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “said thermoforming” in line 9 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 2-13 are rejected because they depend from claim 1.
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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) 1-2 and 4-10 is is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fallon et al. (US 2015/0047227 A1) in view of Ohnishi et al. (US 2008/0289616 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 4, 7 and 10, Fallon teaches footwear including an upper connected to a sole structure (Abstract). The upper includes two portions formed via compression molding in which textile layers are compressed to form a fabric laminate (Abstract). In the embodiment shown in FIG. 2, the upper 105 is formed of two portions, a first or planum portion 205 coupled (e.g., connected) to a second or dorsum portion 210 via a seamless coupling member 215 ([0027]). The heel cup 340 of the planum portion 205 is seamless ([0029]). In a further embodiment, the entire planum portion 205 is seamless, with the heel cup 315A and the planum support 315B forming a unitary and/or one-piece structure ([0029]). In an embodiment, the dorsum portion 210 possesses a unitary (one piece) construction ([0037]). The toe cage 150, furthermore, may be a stitchless, contoured (three-dimensional) structure ([0037]). In a further embodiment, the toe cage 150 is seamless ([0037]). Therefore, Fallon teaches a segment being free of connection points in its surface, as claimed.
An exemplary compression molding apparatus is illustrated in FIG. 6 ([0057]). As shown, the compression molding apparatus 605 includes a first or female molding portion 610 configured to receive a second or male molding portion 615 possessing a shape complementary to the shape of the first molding portion ([0057]). The apparatus 605 may be utilized to shape a single layer, or may be utilized to shape a multilayered structure ([0057]). In the embodiment shown in FIG. 6, the formed upper 105 includes three layers—an outer or exterior layer 620, a middle or intermediate layer 625, and an inner or interior layer 630 ([0057]). By way of example, the exterior layer 620 may be a breathable, synthetic fabric (e.g., a polyester fabric), the intermediate layer 625 may be open-celled foam (e.g., ethylene vinylacetate), and the interior layer 630 may be a breathable, synthetic fabric (e.g., a polyester fabric) ([0057] and [0064]). In embodiments, the outer 620 and/or inner 630 layers may be formed of leather, GORETEX, etc. ([0060]). Upon compression (and the application of heat), the layers 620, 625, 630 adhere, forming a fabric laminate ([0061]). Additionally, the fabric laminate conforms to the shape of the molding portions 610, 615, permanently holding its shape ([0061]). In this manner, the planum portion 205 and dorsum portion 210 of the upper 105 may be formed, possessing the shape of the mold ([0061] and FIG. 2). This formation process enables the creation of the macrostructure of the upper 105 (the general shape of the planum 205 and dorsum 210 portions of the upper), but also the microstructure of the upper (the toe guide structure) ([0062] and FIG. 2). The examiner notes that the claimed deep-drawing limitation is met by the fabric laminate being conformed to the shape of the molding portions 610, 615 to permanently hold its shape and to form the planum portion 205 and dorsum portion 210 (FIG. 2). Fallon teaches an upper that includes two portions formed via compression molding in which textile layers are compressed to form a fabric laminate (Abstract). Compression molding permits formation of a textile laminate having unique geometries (e.g., predetermined macrostructures and microstructures) ([0038]). Upon compression (and the application of heat), layers 620, 625, 630 adhere, forming a fabric laminate ([0061]). The examiner notes that this is reasonably interpreted as meaning that the layers are not adhered prior to compression, as a laminate is only formed upon compression during the disclosed compression molding process. The examiner further notes that, as the layers are not adhered prior to compression, relative movement between the layers would be permitted during the compression molding process. In the alternative, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have expected that the layers would be free to move relative to each other during the compression molding process, as a laminate is only formed upon compression and as the layers are therefore not adhered to each other prior to compression.
In an embodiment, one or more portions 205, 210 of the upper 105 may include perforations to permit the flow of fluid (e.g., air and/or water) therethrough ([0034]). The examiner notes that a portion 205, 210 that permits the flow of air but not water would meet the claimed water-tight, water-vapour-permeable segment limitation. In addition, Fallon teaches that specifically, the upper 105 or portions thereof may be formed of, for example, knit, woven or non-woven material made using fibers such as, but not limited to, nylon, polyester, polyurethane and or spandex, with elastomeric properties ([0080]). The fabric may be breathable (permitting the passage of fluid such as air or water therethrough), or may be non-breathable (preventing passage of fluid therethrough) ([0080]). As noted above, in embodiments, the outer 620 and/or inner 630 layers may be formed of leather, GORETEX, etc. ([0057]). The examiner notes that GORETEX is a waterproof, breathable fabric membrane and would meet the claimed limitation “whereby the first sheet structure forms a watertight, water vapour-permeable functional layer.” The combination of GORETEX in outer 620 and/or inner 630 layers with an intermediate layer 625 of open-celled foam would also (or alternatively) meet the claimed water-tight, water-vapour permeable segment limitation.
Fallon does not explicitly disclose an adhesion of at least 1.0 N, measured according to DIN 53530:1981-02 with a test piece width of 25 mm.
However, Ohnishi teaches a disposable warmer that has a bag including a bag member (A) and a bag member (B) (Abstract). With reference to FIG. 1, in a heat-sealed portion 6, a porous film 1b and a nonwoven fabric layer 1a are preferably firmly bonded ([0076]). The adhesive strength (peel force) between the porous film 1b and the nonwoven fabric layer 1a in the heat-sealed portion 6 is preferably 3.0 N/25-mm or more, and more preferably 5.0 to 20.0 N/25-mm ([0076]). A disposable warmer having the adhesive strength in the heat-sealed portion 6 of less than 3.0 N/25-mm may suffer from delamination between the porous film 1b and the nonwoven fabric layer 1a in the heat-sealed portion 6 when used as a disposable warmer ([0076]). In an embodiment, a disposable warmer preferably has a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer, and this is preferably used as a disposable warmer to be attached to the body, cloth, or footwear ([0113]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the footwear segment of Fallon with an adhesive strength (peel force) of preferably 3.0 N/25-mm or more, and more preferably 5.0 to 20.0 N/25-mm, in at least one portion thereof in order to avoid delamination between the layers in the segment when the segment is used in or as a footwear product (see [0076] and [0113] of Ohnishi).
Regarding claims 2, 6 and 9, as applied above, Fallon teaches that by way of example, the exterior layer 620 may be a breathable, synthetic fabric (e.g., a polyester fabric), the intermediate layer 625 may be open-celled foam (e.g., ethylene vinylacetate), and the interior layer 630 may be a breathable, synthetic fabric (e.g., a polyester fabric) ([0057]). In embodiments, the outer 620 and/or inner 630 layers may be formed of leather, GORETEX, etc. ([0060]). The examiner notes that GORETEX is composed of ePTFE. (Also see [0034]).
Regarding claim 5, the examiner notes that GORETEX has a microporous structure.
Regarding claim 8, Fallon teaches that, additionally, the exterior layer 620 and/or the interior layer 630 may further include an elastic fiber (e.g., spandex or elastane) to provide the layers with elastic properties ([0058]).
Claim(s) 3 and 11-13 is is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fallon et al. (US 2015/0047227 A1) in view of Ohnishi et al. (US 2008/0289616 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Bacino et al. (US 2017/0049170 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Fallon in view of Ohnishi remains as applied above.
Fallon in view of Ohnishi does not explicitly disclose whereby thermoforming is assisted by applying a vacuum between the mould body and the stack or the deformed stack.
However, Bacino teaches wherein a conforming step adheres textile layer(s) to a ePTFE membrane, and in certain embodiments pressure and/or vacuum may be utilized ([0073]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have applied vacuum in combination with pressure in a thermoforming/laminating step in order to easily and successfully conform and adhere textile layers to the shape of a mold for the production of garments such as waders, as suggested by Bacino (Abstract, [0073] and [0076]).
Regarding claims 11-12, modified Fallon does not explicitly disclose whereby the first sheet structure is a pre-laminate comprising a functional layer and at least one further ply, which are connected by means of a hot-melt adhesive or a reactive adhesive, the adhesive being applied continuously or discontinuously to the functional layer and/or the at least one further ply.
However, Bacino teaches that garments may comprise ePTFE membranes or film materials, whether single or multi-layer in configuration ([0066]). In an embodiment, an adhesive may be a layer of a thermally activating adhesive where activation of the adhesive can be affected by a heating device ([0067]). The examiner notes that Bacino also teaches using adhesives to form additional layers ([0025], [0066]-[0067] and [0072]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the layers within the multi-layer ePTFE membranes or films with thermally activating adhesives in order to securely form multilayer ePTFE films that can be further combined with additional layers for the formation of garments, as suggested by Bacino ([0025], [0066]-[0067] and [0072]).
Regarding claim 13, Bacino teaches that, in certain embodiments, the extensible ePTFE tape and/or film has a minimum elongation at break of 200% or more in at least one direction, e.g., 300% or more, or 500% or more, according to ASTM D 638 (2003) ([0032]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends the following: “A feature of claim 1 as amended is that in the stack at least two sheet structures contained in the stack adjacent to one another and lying directly on top of one another are not connected to one another, thereby permitting relative movement between said at least two sheet structures during said thermoforming. At least this feature distinguishes the claimed invention over the cited references. As explained in the present application, this relative movement between the at least two sheet structures is a critical advantage of the claimed invention. By allowing the individual, unconnected layers to shift relative to one another during the deformation process, the buildup of internal stresses is minimized. This, in turn, reduces the "elasticity and resetting forces" that cause an undesirable "spring-back" effect after the segment is removed from the mold. See specification at paragraph [0066] (referring to the pre-grant publication). The technical result provided by this feature is a three-dimensional segment that is significantly more dimensionally stable and accurately conforms to the desired contour. This effect, as well as how to achieve this effect, are not disclosed or suggested by the cited references. Fallon describes a compression molding process where layers "adhere, forming a fabric laminate." See Fallon at paragraph [0061]. This describes a static bonding event. Fallon is entirely silent about enabling or utilizing any relative movement between the layers during this process”
Regarding these contentions, although Fallon in view of Ohnishi does not specifically describe relative movement between the layers during the disclosed compression molding process, Fallon teaches a compression molding process in which textile layers are compressed to form a fabric laminate, with the fabric laminate conforming to the shape of molding portions 610, 615 (Abstract and [0061]). Fallon teaches that the compression molding permits formation of a textile laminate having unique geometries (e.g., predetermined macrostructures and microstructures) ([0038]). For instance, upon compression (and the application of heat), layers 620, 625, 630 adhere, forming a fabric laminate ([0061]). The examiner notes that this is reasonably interpreted as meaning that the layers are not adhered prior to compression, as a laminate is only formed upon compression during the disclosed compression molding process. As the layers are not adhered prior to compression, the layers would be free to move relative to each other during the compression molding process. Although Fallon does not disclose the effects and technical results disclosed by applicant, these effects and technical results are not claimed. In addition, as the layers are not adhered prior to compression in the method of Fallon, it is unclear why the method of Fallon would not have the same effects and lead to the same technical results.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Worrell whose telephone number is (571)270-7728. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/Kevin Worrell/Examiner, Art Unit 1789
/MARLA D MCCONNELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights