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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
1. 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.
2. Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 6,7,8,9,14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mokos, US 20160345678 A1.
The published patent application issued to Mokos teach a footwear that includes an upper and mesh material (title and abstract). Said mesh can be a woven or knit material made from high tensile strength stands and non-high tensile strength strands (title and abstract).
With regard to claims 1 and 14, Mokos teaches that the upper can be made from a woven textile formed from yarns that interweave at right angles to teach other (paragraph 0045 and figure 1- 0058). The Examiner considers such a configuration and teaching sufficient to meet claim 1.
With regard to claims 6,8 and 9 Mokos teach an upper region (110), a sole structure (120), a lateral side (111), a medial side (112). Mokos teaches that footwear 100, may be divided into three general regions (a forefoot region (101), a midfoot region (102) and a heel region (103) (paragraph 0070). The Examiner is of the position, that Mokos reads on the claimed regions.
With regard to claim 4, Mokos teach that the strands used to make the woven or knit meshes can have thickness that vary from .03-5mm (paragraph 0052). The Examiner is of the position that strands of varying thicknesses would results in woven or knit meshes with varying thicknesses.
With regard to claim 5,6 and 7 the claimed rectangular through hole surrounded by the first bundle body and the second bundle body is depicted in figure 2, The Examiner interprets this limitation to mean where the foot is placed inside the shoe.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mokos, US 20160345678 A1.
Mokos teaches that the upper can be made from a woven or knit textile formed from yarns that interweave at right angles to teach other (paragraph 0045 and figure 1- 0058).
With regard to claims 1,14 and 20, Mokos teaches an upper region (110), a sole structure, a lateral side (111), a medial side (112). Mokos teaches that footwear 100, may be divided into three general regions (a forefoot region (101), a midfoot region (102) and a heel region (103) (paragraph 0070).
With regard to claim 4, Mokos teach that the strands used to make the woven or knit meshes can thickness that vary from .03-5mm (paragraph 0052). The Examiner is of the position that strands of varying thicknesses would results in woven or knit meshes with varying thicknesses.
With specific regard to claim 15, Mokos does not teach specifically teach a knit comprising a non-knitted area. However, Mokos teaches that mesh material that is incorporated into an article of footwear may have a structure that is breathable due to the woven or knitted structure of the mesh material. Such a woven or knitted structure is open to a degree and permits some air to pass through the mesh material. As a result, the mesh material, may advantageously make the mesh material incorporated more breathable. The mesh material that is incorporated into an article of footwear may have a structure that is breathable due to the woven or knitted structure of the mesh material. Such a woven or knitted structure is open to a degree and permits some air to pass through the mesh material. As a result, the mesh material, may advantageously make an upper that the mesh material is incorporated into more breathable. In addition, the structure of the mesh material can also be semi-transparent or translucent and permit a degree of light to pass through the mesh material. As a result, the mesh material may permit an observer to see materials or layers underneath the mesh material. Such an effect can be used, for example, to add styles or designs to an article of footwear by incorporating layers underneath the mesh material that can be viewed through the mesh material to a degree. Based on this disclosure, the Examiner is of position that knitted mesh of Mokos would have have non-knitted areas for purposes of breathability of transparency.
With regard to claims 5, 6 ,and 7, the claimed rectangular through hole surrounded by the first bundle body and the second bundle body is depicted in figure 2, The Examiner interprets this limitation to mean where the foot is placed inside the shoe.
With regard to claim 10, 13,16 and 19, Mokos does not teach forming the bundle body by parallelling. It is noted that as set for form above, Mokos does teach forming a knitted structure. Mokos does teach that strands may be utilized to modify properties of an article of footwear other than stretch-resistance. For example, strands may be utilized to provide additional wear-resistance in specific areas of an upper. For example, strands may be concentrated in areas of upper that experience wear, such as in a forefoot region of the upper and adjacent to a sole structure. If utilized for wear resistance, strands may be selected from materials that exhibit relatively high wear-resistance properties. Strands may also be utilized to modify the flex characteristics of an upper. For example, areas with relatively high concentrations of strands may flex to a lesser degree than areas with relatively low concentrations of strands. Similarly, areas with relatively high concentrations of strands may be less air permeable than areas with relatively low concentrations of strands. Further, strands may be used to connect or affix an upper to a sole structure while using less weight than a conventional upper which uses, for example, leather or other textile panels connected to a sole structure. Strands may also strengthen such a connection between an upper and sole structure (paragraph 0053). Absent unexpected results it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to form the first bundle body in the woven or knit structure by parallelling and /or varying the tensile strength of the filaments and yarns used to form the knit or woven mesh as claimed as a function of desired flex, wear and aesthetics. Applicants are invited to prove otherwise.
With regard to claims 11 and 17, noted above that Mokos also teach forming knitted structures. Mokos teaches using ropes and cables (typically twisted during formation) and further teaches twisting processes to produce a strand of a suitable length (paragraph 0051).
With specific regard to claim 12 and 18, Mokos teach that the strands can be monofilament or multi-filament such as a bicomponent filament (paragraph 0052). Typically, bicomponent filaments consists of a core with a sheath covering or wrapping. The Examiner is of the position that a bicomponent filament would meet the limitation of a covered yarn.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LYNDA SALVATORE whose telephone number is (571)272-1482. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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 571-272-7692. 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.
/LYNDA SALVATORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789