Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/651,276

LASER-BONDED NON-WOVEN TEXTILE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Apr 30, 2024
Examiner
SHEWAREGED, BETELHEM
Art Unit
1785
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Nike, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
720 granted / 1007 resolved
+6.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1051
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
61.2%
+21.2% vs TC avg
§102
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
§112
7.7%
-32.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1007 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1, 13, 23 and 30 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,516,456 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 corresponds to claim 1 of ‘456 where a composite nonwoven textile comprising: a first fiber web comprising first fibers and second fibers, the first fiber web comprising a machine direction, a cross-machine direction, and a thickness, wherein: the first fibers, as compared to the second fibers, comprise a higher amount of an ERA material {see “a first plurality of fibers having a first propensity to absorb electromagnetic radiation emitted by a laser; a second plurality of fibers having a second propensity to absorb the electromagnetic radiation, the second propensity to absorb the electromagnetic radiation is lower than the first propensity to absorb the electromagnetic radiation” of claim 1 of ‘456}; the first fiber web comprises a homogenous blend of first fibers to second fibers distributed in one or more of the machine direction, the cross-machine direction, and the thickness {see “a plurality of discrete bonding structures positioned between the inner-facing surface and the outer-facing surface of the nonwoven textile within the volume of the nonwoven textile” of claim 1 of ‘456}; and the first fiber web comprises a plurality of amorphous polymer agglomerates that include material from one or more fibers of the first fibers encapsulating one or more fibers of the second fibers {see “at least some of the plurality of discrete bonding structures including an amorphous polymer agglomerate and fibers from one or more of the first plurality of fibers and the second plurality of fibers in a fiber form, wherein portions of the fibers from one or more of the first plurality of fibers and the second plurality of fibers are at least partially encapsulated by the amorphous polymer agglomerate” of claim 1 of 456}. Claim 13 corresponds to claim 1 of ‘456 where the composite nonwoven textile comprises {see article of apparel of claim 1 of ‘456} at least a portion of a wearable article, and wherein the first fiber web comprises at least one of an outermost surface of the wearable article or an innermost surface of the wearable article. Claim 23 corresponds to claim 1 of ‘456 where a machine direction, a cross-machine direction, and a thickness {see “a plurality of discrete bonding structures positioned between the inner-facing surface and the outer-facing surface of the nonwoven textile within the volume of the nonwoven textile” of claim 1 of ‘456}; first fibers and second fibers, wherein the first fibers, as compared to the second fibers, comprise a higher amount of an ERA material {see “a first plurality of fibers having a first propensity to absorb electromagnetic radiation emitted by a laser; a second plurality of fibers having a second propensity to absorb the electromagnetic radiation, the second propensity to absorb the electromagnetic radiation is lower than the first propensity to absorb the electromagnetic radiation” of claim 1 of ‘456}; and a homogenous distribution of amorphous polymer agglomerates in one or more of the machine direction, the cross-machine direction, and the thickness, wherein the amorphous polymer agglomerates comprise material from one or more fibers of the first fibers encapsulating one or more fibers of the second fibers {see “at least some of the plurality of discrete bonding structures including an amorphous polymer agglomerate and fibers from one or more of the first plurality of fibers and the second plurality of fibers in a fiber form, wherein portions of the fibers from one or more of the first plurality of fibers and the second plurality of fibers are at least partially encapsulated by the amorphous polymer agglomerate” of claim 1 of 456}. Claim 30 corresponds to claim 1 of ‘456 where the amorphous polymer agglomerates comprise first amorphous polymer agglomerates comprising a first property and second amorphous polymer agglomerates comprising a second property; and wherein the first amorphous polymer agglomerates are different from the second amorphous polymer agglomerates based on the first property and the second property {see “at least some of the plurality of discrete bonding structures including an amorphous polymer agglomerate and fibers from one or more of the first plurality of fibers and the second plurality of fibers in a fiber form, wherein portions of the fibers from one or more of the first plurality of fibers and the second plurality of fibers are at least partially encapsulated by the amorphous polymer agglomerate” of claim 1 of 456}. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 17-22 are allowed. Claims 2-12, 14-16 and 24-29 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Closest prior art Stein (US 2012/0157904 A1) fails to teach or suggest: (i) the claimed the first fibers, as compared to the second fibers, comprise a higher amount of an ERA material as recited in claims 1, 17 and 23; (ii) the claimed the first fiber web comprises a plurality of amorphous polymer agglomerates that include material from one or more fibers of the first fibers encapsulating one or more fibers of the second fibers as recited in claims 1 and 17; (iii) the claimed a second fiber web that comprises third fibers and fourth fibers, wherein: the third fibers, as compared to the fourth fibers, comprise a higher amount of the ERA material; the second fiber web comprises second amorphous polymer agglomerates that include material from one or more fibers of the third fibers encapsulating one or more fibers of the fourth fibers; and the second fiber web comprises, as compared to the first fiber web, a higher amount by weight of the ERA material as recited in claim 17; and (iv) the claimed a homogenous distribution of amorphous polymer agglomerates in one or more of the machine direction, the cross-machine direction, and the thickness, wherein the amorphous polymer agglomerates comprise material from one or more fibers of the first fibers encapsulating one or more fibers of the second fibers as recited in claim 23. Correspondence Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BETELHEM SHEWAREGED whose telephone number is (571)272-1529. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 7am-4:30pm. 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, Mark Ruthkosky can be reached at 571-272-1291. 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. BS February 2, 2026 /BETELHEM SHEWAREGED/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 1785
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 30, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12570076
FILM AND LAMINATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12565022
Insulative Material
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12558913
RECORDING MATERIAL FOR DYE SUBLIMATION PRINTING HAVING IMPROVED TRANSPORT PROPERTIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12533866
INFRARED ADAPTIVE TRANSPARENT CAMOUFLAGE FILM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12534636
EXTERIOR WINDOW FILM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+8.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1007 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month