DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed December 29th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-10 are amended. Claim 11 is cancelled.
The Section 112, 2nd paragraph rejections made in the Office action mailed August 15th, 2025 have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
The Section 103 rejections over Yamane (as the primary reference) made in the Office action mailed August 15th, 2025 have been maintained due to Applicant’s arguments being unpersuasive.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 29th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that since the claim is directed to a top seating surface material that it prevents Yamane from making claim 1 obvious due to the design layer above the base fabric. The Examiner disagrees.
The term “top seating surface material” alone would not prevent the “skin material” of Yamane as set forth from anticipating the claimed subject matter. The skin material is still an outer or top layer to an interior material comprising seating [0083-0086, 0089, Fig. 3]. While the front-side surface fabric (All Figs. [121]) is not an outermost layer, that is not required by the claim or set forth within the specification. At most, the specification references abrasion resistance/slipperiness [0031] and resistance to fluff from fasteners [0007, 0021, 0031, 0039, 0042, 0114] and being in contact with a human body/buttocks [0031-0032, 0066, 0073], but none of these features are required by the currently claimed top seating surface material.
Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
Claims 1, 6, & 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamane et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0219322 A1) (hereinafter “Yamane”), which has a fully supporting foreign application filed June 3rd, 2020.
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Yamane teaches a skin (surface) material usable for a seat covering [0083-0086, 0089, Fig. 3] comprising a three-dimensional knitted fabric base cloth layer (All Figs. [2]) comprising a front-side surface fabric (All Figs. [121]) and a back-side fabric (All Figs. [122]) spaced and united at a distance/gap by a plurality of binding (connecting) yarns (All Figs. [123]), wherein a three-dimensional design is embossed, such as by heat-pressing such that that the binding yarns thermally deform such that the gap is narrowed and a concavity is formed, wherein the concavity preferably comprises a deformed concavity thickness (D15) being a ratio in relation to the thickness of the remaining non-deformed fabric (D0) of greater than or equal to 1.1 and less than or equal to 8.0, preferably greater than or equal to 1.6 and less than or equal to 3.5, wherein a thickness of the non-deformed base cloth layer is 1 mm or more and 20 mm or less, preferably 2 mm or more and 10 mm or less, wherein the front and back fabrics comprise a course yarn density of 10 to 100 yarns/inch (2.54 cm), preferably 15 to 70 yarns/inch and a wale yarn density of 5 to 50 yarns/inch, preferably 15 to 40 yarns/inch and a yarn (stitch) fineness of 50 to 1500 dtex, particularly 70 to 1200 dtex or 150 to 1200 dtex, such as 70 to 500 dtex and the binding yarns comprise a course yarn density of preferably 15 to 70 yarns/inch and a wale yarn density of 5 to 50 yarns/inch, preferably 8 to 30 yarns/inch and a yarn (stitch) fineness of 10 to 1500 dtex, more preferably 20 to 350 dtex [0004, 0027, 0056-0057, 0061-0062, 0064-0065, 0069, 0071-0072, 0075, 0077-0079], wherein the course density and D0/D15 values are such that parameter A comprises an overall estimated range of about 1 to about 91 and an estimated preferred range of about 4 to about 44, wherein when the prior art disclosure does not anticipate the claimed range(s), where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). MPEP 2144.05 I.
Furthermore, an example comprises a non-deformed fabric thickness of 3.5 mm [0106] and a course density of 45 yarns/inch and a wale density of 35 yarns/inch (assumed to apply to each of the front, back, and binding layers since fineness is specified) [0107], and although a concave portion thickness is not disclosed, applying the broad range gives a possible parameter A of about 6 to about 41, and applying the preferred range gives a likely parameter A of about 13 to about 28, wherein “when, as by a recitation of ranges or otherwise, a claim covers several compositions, the claim is anticipated if one of them is in the prior art" Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2131.03 I.
Regarding claim 9, applying the formula for stitch density (as recited above) to the broad and preferred ranges for course/wale yarn density and yarn fineness for the front (and back) layer(s) gives a possible stitch density range of about 353 to about 193649, and a likely stitch density of about 1882 to about 62610, wherein the example comprising a course density of 45 yarns and a wale density of 30 yarns and a front/back fabric yarn/stitch fineness of 84 dtex gives a calculated stitch density of about 12373.
Claims 2-5 & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamane, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Yoshimura (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/00393346 A1) (hereinafter “Yoshimura”) AND/OR Maekawa et al. (JP 2003-326598 A) (hereinafter “Maekawa”) OR Kamide et al. (JP 2018-199264 A) (hereinafter “Kamide”).
Regarding claims 2-5, while a pattern of elongated/linear rectangular/rod-shaped concavities is depicted (Fig. 5) which would be inherently along course and/or wale directions of both the front layer and the binding layers (Fig. 4), but explicit measurements regarding the width and/or length and/or spacing thereof is not taught.
Yoshimura teaches a similar composite material as a chair/seat covering [0002, 0063] having front and back surface fabrics flanking a cushioning layer and having embossments formed therein, wherein a recessed thickness (T0) is preferably 0.5 to 2.0 mm, more preferably 0.7 to 1.5 mm [0041] from a similar overall calculated thickness of about 4 to 21 mm [0019, 0030], wherein the pattern is 1 mm wide lines at intervals of 25 mm and 5 mm [0076], wherein as applied to the elongated recesses several times in length to the width having a pattern that is formed across five or more wales due to the wale density being 30 yarns/inch (about 1 wale yarns/mm; assuming a length at least 5 times the width, which is clearly depicted) and/or across sixty or less courses on the same wale depending on orientation and length of the linear depression due to the course density being 45 yarns/inch (about 2 courses/mm) or as applied to the preferred ranges about 1 to 2 wale yarns/mm or about 1 to about 3 course yarns/mm.
AND/OR
Maekawa teaches a covering material for seats in vehicles [00001] comprising rectangular or square-shaped depressions, wherein depressions are preferably 5 to 30% of the surface area to provide a three-dimensional effect and design effect without deteriorating the texture of the surface material [0020] and having an average distance between embossed portions of 2 to 50 mm [0022], wherein each embossed portion comprises a surface area of less or equal to 2 cm2 (200 mm2) [0020], wherein examples of patterns include an embossed surface area of 0.5 cm2 (7.1 mm side for a square) or 0.16 cm2 (4 mm side for a square), OR as applied to that of Yoshimura would provide long lengths of 50 mm and 16 mm, respectively.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to look to the art of similar embossments of seat cushioning skins/coverings for linear patterns and/or other exemplary patterns having an area and/or spacing within or near the claimed range. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look for similar linear patterns [Yoshimura] AND/OR other patterns or providing an area for the embossed portions to prevent the pattern from fading and improve durability and would enable the surface area percentage and density of embossed portions to be within the ranges as set forth [0020].
OR
Kamide teaches a three-dimensional sheet material usable as a seat cover in automobiles and the like [0019, 0022], which may comprise a double raschel knitted (spacer) fabric as the cushion material [0025], comprising a plurality of embossments/recesses, including a linear, rod-shaped recessed pattern (Figs. 5-6), wherein generally the shape of the recessed comprises a long length of 10 to 150 mm, preferably 20 mm or more and 130 mm or less and a short length of 5 mm or more and 50 mm or less, preferably 10 to 30 mm, and a depth of 1 mm or more and 20 mm or less, preferably 3 mm to 7 mm [0031-0032, 0037] on an overall sheet thickness of 1 to 100 mm, more preferably 2 mm to 40 mm [0020] and having a spacing (KL) of 8 mm or more and 100 mm or less, more preferably 5 mm to 60 mm [0048], wherein the rod-shaped pattern is formed on a 4 mm thickness at a depth of 3.5 mm having a longitudinal length of 85 mm (across 5 or more continuous wales) and a lateral/short length of 3 mm (less than 60 courses along a wale) [0063-0064] and a spacing of 50 mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to look to the art of similar embossments of seat cushioning skins/coverings for linear patterns and/or other exemplary patterns having an area and/or spacing within or near the claimed range. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look for similar linear patterns AND/OR other patterns or providing exemplary dimensions for the embossed portions to provide distinct, sharp impressions that can be easily recognized at various angles [0010-0011].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamane, as applied to claim 1 above, as evidenced by Fujita et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0145230 A1) OR, alternatively, in view of Mueller et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0340152 A1) (hereinafter “Mueller”) OR Shirasaki et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2003/0101776 A1) (hereinafter “Shirasaki 2003”) OR Shirasaki et al. (JP 2007-084965 A) (hereinafter “Shirasaki 2007”).
Regarding claim 8, although the concavities of Yamane are not taught to be formed by embroidery/sewing, it is considered a product-by-process type limitation, wherein absent a showing to the contrary, it is Examiner's position that the article of the applied prior art is identical to or only slightly different than the claimed article. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Fujita evidences that concave/recessed portions can be formed via thermal welding or a suture means by a sewing machine [0142].
Alternatively, Mueller teaches a composite spacer fabric as a seat cover [0002, 0006, 0050], wherein compressed areas are formed with the assistance of a connecting sewing/stitching thread providing a good three-dimensional design and additional fixation [0051-0052, 0055-0058, 0060].
OR
Shirasaki 2003 teaches a three-dimensional knitted spacer fabric for seats in automobiles [0005, 0011-0012], wherein the recesses formed by integral sewing are improved over the prior art heat pressing [0007, 0009] by providing a lighter weight structure, higher compression elasticity, higher air permeability, and a softer texture with a greater volume of voids as opposed to decreased texture and a hardened surface [0009, 0012].
OR
Shirasaki 2007 teaches a three-dimensional knitted spacer fabric for seats for automobiles [0001-0002, 0008, 0055], wherein the recesses formed by insertion sewing/stitching/embroidery are improved over the prior art heat pressing/embossing [003-0005, 0007, 0028] by providing superior cushioning properties, compression recovery properties, stuffiness, and texture/touch as opposed to decreased texture and a hardened surface [0028, 0051, 0054].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a recessed deformation portion by sewing/embroidery in addition to or as a replacement of fusion of fibers. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to provide a good three-dimensional design and additional fixation [Muller] OR a lighter weight structure, higher compression elasticity, higher air permeability, and a softer texture with a greater volume of voids as opposed to decreased texture and a hardened surface [Shirasaki 2003] OR superior cushioning properties, compression recovery properties, stuffiness, and texture/touch as opposed to decreased texture and a hardened surface [Shirasaki 2007].
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamane, as applied to claim 1 above, optionally in view of Nakajima et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0282884 A1) (hereinafter “Nakajima”) and Johnson et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0047453 A1) (hereinafter “Johnson”).
Regarding claim 10, applying the formula for stitch density (as recited above) to the broad and preferred ranges of Yamane for course/wale yarn density and yarn fineness for the front (and back) layer(s) gives a possible stitch density range of about 353 to about 193649, and a likely stitch density of about 1882 to about 62610, wherein the example comprising a course density of 45 yarns and a wale density of 30 yarns and a front/back fabric yarn/stitch fineness of 84 dtex gives a calculated stitch density of about 12373.
While the broader and preferred ranges provide an overlapping prima facie obvious range, but in regard the example, a stitch density of 13000 or greater and 23000 or less is not taught.
Nakajima teaches a seat skin cushioning material, wherein recesses/concaves are formed therein by pressing, wherein when a first/upper decorative layer is a knit layer a wale yarn density of 25/inch to 85/inch and a course yarn density of 25/inch to 85/inch such that it improves the embossing processability and maintaining its texture [0032] and a yarn fineness is 84 to 504 dtex, such that shine in the concave portion is avoided while also being easily formed, wherein the preferred range is 84 to 167 dtex, such that the embossing operation may easily formed into a surface having the corresponding shape [0031].
Johnson further teaches a knitted durable fabric for use on vehicle seats, wherein the stitch density is at least 12 wales and/or courses per inch, such as at least twenty wales, such that repeated abrasive movement of an occupant is withstood and an aesthetically pleasing appearance is maintained after prolonged and/or repeated use [0042-0044, 0052, 0055], wherein another characteristic that can contribute to the ability of the knitted fabric to resist snagging, pulling, tearing, and breaking is the linear mass density of yarn, such as one example being greater than 300 denier (333 dtex) or 500 denier (555 dtex) [0061].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide the exemplary embodiment of a front fabric comprising a course density of 45 yarns/inch, a wale density of 35 yarns/inch, and a yarn fineness of 84 dtex with a slightly increased or maintained course/wall density and a yarn fineness closer to the upper end of the preferred range of 167 dtex, which provides a stitch density of about 17445 or slightly greater. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to provide a less abradable and more snag/tear resistant seat fabric that maintains its aesthetic appearance after prolonged and/or repeated use [Johnson], while still maintaining preferred ranges of a front fabric in a seat cover that benefits its shape-ability [Nakajima]
Claims 1 & 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Tsumura et al. (JP 2003-013346 A) (hereinafter “Tsumura”).
Regarding claims 1 and 8, Tsumura teaches a seat comprising a spacer knit fabric seat cover intended as a body-contacting top seating surface [0002-0004, 0011, 0026, 0031, 0070] having at least one recessed portion formed therein via integral knitting processing, wherein a course density should be in the range of 8 to 30 courses/2.54 cm, preferably 8 to 28 courses/2.54 cm [0027-0028], wherein in an example the course density is 12 yarns/inch, a fabric thickness (Fig. 3 [t]) of 13.5 mm, and a recess depth on both sides (Fig. 3 [h]) of 2 mm (for a total thickness of 9.5 mm) [0056], such that a calculated parameter A is about 8.4, wherein since the recesses extend continuously both parallel and perpendicular to the wales (Figs. 1 & 4), the recessed deformation extending perpendicularly to would be inherently formed across 5 or more wales.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Tsumura et al. (JP 2003-013346 A) (hereinafter “Tsumura”).
Regarding claims 6-7, while the recessed deformation portions are not said to be formed by the fusion of fibers, although product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). The burden has been shifted to Applicant to show unobvious difference between the claimed product and the prior art product. In re Marosi, 218 USPQ 289 (Fed. Cir. 1983). The applied prior art either anticipates or strongly suggests the claimed subject matter.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsumura et al. (JP 2003-013346 A) (hereinafter “Tsumura”), as applied to claim 1 above, alone or optionally in view of Shirasaki et al. (JP 2007-084965 A1) (hereinafter “Shirasaki 2007”).
Regarding claims 4-5, the recessed portions are demonstrated as extending both along and orthogonal to the wales in the example in a grid pattern as set forth [Figs. 1-4, 0055], wherein for a continuous wale extending along the longitudinal direction of the protrusions and recessed portions, given an exemplary rectangular protruding portion area of 1.27 cm2 [0056], comprising a length being greater than a square to about two times the length gives an approximate distance between recessed portions of greater than about 11.3 mm to about 16 mm.
Or, regarding claims 3-5, the protruding portions can be staggered [Fig. 5], such that along a wale in the longitudinal direction of the protruding portions, assuming a similar size to the embodiment as set forth above, the recessed portions would comprise greater than about 5.3 to about 7.5 courses in a recessed deformation portion spaced about the same distance as a rectangular length as estimated above.
Alternatively, Shirasaki 2007 teaches a three-dimensional knitted spacer fabric for seats for automobiles [0001-0002, 0008, 0055], wherein the recesses formed by insertion sewing/stitching/embroidery are improved over the prior art of JP 2003-13346 A [0007] by providing superior cushioning properties, compression recovery properties, stuffiness, and texture/touch [0008, 0028, 0051, 0054], wherein the recessed portions can be 6 to 15,000 mm2, preferably 8 to 7,500 mm2 [0033], wherein the insertion locking stitch is formed across 2 or more wales and across 2 to 50 courses [0012, 0031], depicted as five in both directions (Figs. 4-5), and is inserted at intervals such as 6 courses [0010, 0022, 0024], wherein it would have been obvious to use similar intervals to that as recited above for a reversed but similar staggered pattern.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsumura et al. (JP 2003-013346 A) (hereinafter “Tsumura”), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Johnson et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0047453 A1) (hereinafter “Johnson”).
Regarding claims 9-10, in the example, the course and wale densities 12 courses/inch and between 2 and 5 wales/inch with a dtex of 1450 provide a stitch density of about 914 to about 2285 [0056]. However, the full ranges of course density is 8 to 30 courses/2.54 cm, preferably 8 to 28 courses/2.54 cm [0027-0028] and the yarns used are of 120 to 2800 dtex [0046], but a range for wale density is not set forth.
Johnson teaches a knitted durable fabric for use on vehicle seats that withstand repeated abuse and abrasion from fasteners such as zippers [0004, 0042, 0053], wherein the stitch density is at least 12 wales and/or courses per inch, such as at least twenty wales, such that repeated abrasive movement of an occupant is withstood and an aesthetically pleasing appearance is maintained after prolonged and/or repeated use [0042-0044, 0052, 0055], wherein another characteristic that can contribute to the ability of the knitted fabric to resist snagging, pulling, tearing, and breaking is the linear mass density of yarn, such as one example being greater than 300 denier (333 dtex) or even greater than 500 denier (555 dtex) [0061].
Applied to the example of Tsumura, a minimum stitch density of 12 wales/inch would result in approximate 1.5x to 3x of value, wherein the 1.5x to largest available values for course density and fineness provides ranges of about 24 to 28 courses/inch and 2125 to 2800 dtex, respectively for an estimated stitch density of about 13276 to about 17780.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a seat cover surface knit that has increased durability but is able to stay within the workable ranges set forth by Tsumura. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a seat surface knit fabric that maintains an aesthetically pleasing appearance after prolonged and/or repeated use and resists snagging, pulling, tearing, and breaking [Johnson].
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takagi et al. (JP 2009-262407 A) (hereinafter “Takagi”) in view of Nakajima et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0282884 A1) (hereinafter “Nakajima”), Kamide et al. (JP 2018-199264 A) (hereinafter “Kamide”), and optionally Yamane et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0219322 A1) (hereinafter “Yamane”), wherein claims 2-5 & 8 are alternatively in view of Shirasaki et al. (JP 2007-084965 A1) (hereinafter “Shirasaki”).
Regarding claims 1 and 6-7, Takagi teaches a surface material that is usable as an interior surface material of an automobile, such as a seat [0003, 0006, 0008, 0026], improved over nonwoven and foam-core and other multilayer laminates [0005, 0008], the surface material consisting of a three-dimensional knitted fabric having a knitted front-side surface fabric and a knitted back-side fabric connected via a knitted fabric connecting portion [0006-0007], wherein the knitted front-side surface fabric comprises a course density of 10 to 100/inch, preferably 25 to 85/inch, a wale density of 15 to 40/inch, preferably 20 to 35/inch, and a yarn fineness of 6 to 1000 decitex, preferably 10 to 200 decitex [0013], wherein an exemplary knitted surface fabric comprises 42 courses/inch, 27 wales/inch and a yarn fineness of 56 decitex [0030].
However, at least one recessed deformation portion on the front side is not taught:
Nakajima teaches a decorative seat skin cushioning material, wherein well-known embossed recesses/concaves are formed therein by pressing [0003] such that the embossed concave portion has a slanted/inclined surface [0022, 0088], wherein when a first/upper decorative layer is a knit fabric layer comprising a wale yarn density of 25/inch to 85/inch and a course yarn density of 25/inch to 85/inch, such that it improves the embossing processability and maintains its texture [0032].
Kamide teaches a three-dimensional sheet material usable as a seat cover in automobiles and the like [0019, 0022], which may comprise a double raschel knitted (spacer) fabric as the cushion material [0025] which may or may not be laminated with an additional skin layer [0022], comprising a plurality of embossments/recesses, including rectangular-shaped recessed pattern (Figs. 3-4), wherein generally the shape of the gently sloped recessed comprises a long length of 10 to 150 mm, preferably 20 mm or more and 130 mm or less and a short length of 5 mm or more and 50 mm or less, preferably 10 to 30 mm, and a depth of 1 mm or more and 20 mm or less, preferably 3 mm to 7 mm [0031-0032, 0037] on an overall sheet thickness of 1 to 100 mm, more preferably 2 mm to 40 mm [0020] and having a spacing (KL) of 8 mm or more and 100 mm or less, more preferably 5 mm to 60 mm [0048], wherein the staggered-shaped pattern is formed on a 4 mm thickness at a depth of 3.5 mm having a longitudinal length/spacing of about 28 mm and a lateral spacing/short length of about 15 mm [0063-0064], wherein as applied to the exemplary seat fabric of Takagi gives an estimated parameter A of 8.4, and as applied to the preferred course density range of Takagi/Nakajima gives an estimated parameter A range of about 5 to about 17.
Furthermore, Yamane teaches a skin (surface) material usable for a seat covering [0083-0086, 0089, Fig. 3] comprising a three-dimensional knitted fabric base cloth layer (All Figs. [2]) comprising a front-side surface fabric (All Figs. [121]) and a back-side fabric (All Figs. [122]) spaced and united at a distance/gap by a plurality of binding (connecting) yarns (All Figs. [123]), wherein a three-dimensional design is embossed, such as by heat-pressing such that that the binding yarns thermally deform such that the gap is narrowed and a concavity is formed, wherein the concavity preferably comprises a deformed concavity thickness (D15) being a ratio in relation to the thickness of the remaining non-deformed fabric (D0) of greater than or equal to 1.1 and less than or equal to 8.0, preferably greater than or equal to 1.6 and less than or equal to 3.5, wherein as applied to the exemplary seat fabric of Takagi gives an estimated parameter A range of 5 to 38, preferably 12 to 26, and as applied to the preferred course density range of Takagi/Nakajima gives an estimated preferred parameter A range of about 7 to about 53.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to look to the art adapting a non-multilayer surface covering consisting of a three-dimensionally knitted fabric for automobile interiors and modified it to most benefit seat covers, not ceiling covers, which are known to comprise decorative and functional embossments such that the parameter A would be within or substantially near that as claimed. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look for preferred seat embossment patterns for fabrics having an identical preferable course density range, wherein to provide distinct, sharp impressions that can be easily recognized at various angles [Kamide].
Regarding claims 2-5, the staggered rectangular recesses in the exemplary embodiment of Kamide comprising a longitudinal length/spacing of about 28 mm and a lateral spacing/short length of about 15 mm [0063-0064] would have provided a number of wales (about 16/46) and courses along a wale (about 46/16) that would have been within the claimed ranges in either direction, with both spacings also being within the claimed range(s).
Alternatively, regarding claims 2-5 and 8, Shirasaki 2007 teaches a three-dimensional knitted spacer fabric for seats for automobiles [0001-0002, 0008, 0055], wherein the recesses formed by insertion sewing/stitching/embroidery are improved over the prior art heat pressing/embossing [003-0005, 0007, 0028] by providing superior cushioning properties, compression recovery properties, stuffiness, and texture/touch to that of hardened/decreased texture [0008, 0028, 0051, 0054], wherein the recessed portions can be 6 to 15,000 mm2, preferably 8 to 7,500 mm2 [0033], wherein the insertion locking stitch is formed across 2 or more wales and across 2 to 50 courses [0012, 0031], depicted as five in both directions (Figs. 4-5), and is inserted at intervals such as 6 courses [0010, 0022, 0024], wherein it would have been obvious to use similar intervals to that as recited above for a similar staggered pattern.
Regarding claims 9-10, Takagi teaches the exemplary knitted surface fabric as comprising 42 courses/inch, 27 wales/inch and a yarn fineness of 56 decitex [0030], gives a stitch density of 8486.
However, Nakajima further teaches the embossed surface fabric for a seat skin cushioning material as comprising a yarn fineness is 84 to 504 dtex, such that shine in the concave portion is avoided while also being easily formed, wherein the preferred range is 84 to 167 dtex, such that the embossing operation may easily formed into a surface having the corresponding shape [0031].
As applied to the exemplary embodiment of Takagi defines an estimated stitch density of about 10393 to about 25458, preferably an upper value of about 14655, and as applied to the preferred range of Takagi/Nakajima defines an estimated preferred stitch density of about 4583 to about 38445.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide yarn as comprising a dtex (along with the course/wale density) such that the stitch density falls within or obviously near the claimed range. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide improved, non-shiny texture and design of the embossed portions with easy formability [Nakajima].
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 JEFFREY A VONCH whose telephone number is (571)270-1134. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:00.
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, Frank J Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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.
/JEFFREY A VONCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 March 18th, 2026