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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on 03/02/2026, in which claims 1-20 were presented for examination, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I (Fig.1-6) in the reply filed on March 2, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5-16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meir (US PG Pub. 2016/0302527).
Regarding claim 1, Meir discloses an article (100, Fig. 1), comprising:
a knitted component (130), comprising:
a knitted base layer (see annotated Fig. 4 below) comprising at least a first yarn (yarn that forms the “base layer” in Fig. 4), the knitted base layer having a first stitch density (as shown in Fig. 4); and
a knitted net layer (see annotated Fig. 4 below) comprising at least a second yarn (combination of 422 and loops in the same course as 422), the knitted net layer having a second stitch density (as shown in Fig. 4) and a plurality of adjacent cells forming a pattern (examiner notes “cells” are shown as loop openings), each cell of the plurality of adjacent cells having a plurality of corners (examiner notes corners are shown around 421 and 423) defined by portions of the second yarn being intertwined with one another (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 3-4);
wherein the first stitch density of the knitted base layer is greater than the second stitch density of the knitted net layer (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 4 below, where the annotated base layer has more stitches than the annotated net layer),
wherein the knitted net layer (see annotated Fig. 4 below) overlaps a first portion of a surface of the knitted base layer in a first zone of the knitted component (examiner notes as shown in zoomed in portion in Fig. 3 and annotated Fig. 4 below),
wherein the knitted net layer (see annotated Fig. 4 below) is secured to the knitted base layer (see annotated Fig. 4 below) with a plurality of tie-down portions (421 and 423) formed from the first yarn of the knitted base layer (Par. 0072, lines: 11-13 and as shown in zoomed in portion in Fig. 3), and
wherein the plurality of tie-down portions (421 and 423) are located at every corner of the plurality of corners of each cell of the plurality of adjacent cells of the knitted net layer (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
714
877
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 4-Examiner Annotated
Regarding claim 2, Meir discloses the knitted net layer further overlaps a second portion of the surface of the knitted base layer in a second zone of the knitted component (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 4 above), wherein the second zone is knitted continuously with the first zone (as shown in annotated Fig. 4 below), and wherein the knitted net layer limits elongation of the knitted base layer when the article is subjected to a tensile load (Par. 0080, “limits elongation…load” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function. Examiner notes occurs due to tensile course, 402).
Regarding claim 5, Meir discloses the knitted net layer further overlaps a third portion of the surface of the knitted base layer in a third zone of the knitted component, wherein the third zone is knitted continuously with the first zone on an opposite side of the first zone (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 4 above).
Regarding claim 6, Meir discloses wherein the third zone further includes an additional knitted net layer (see annotated Fig. 4 above), wherein the additional knitted net layer limits elongation of the third zone of the knitted component (Par. 0080, “limits elongation…component” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function. Examiner notes occurs due to tensile course, 402).
Regarding claim 7, Meir discloses wherein the first yarn comprises a first characteristic different than a second characteristic of the second yarn (examiner notes the characteristic of the second yarn is different from the characteristic of the first yarn, due to the second yarn having a high tensile strength, stretch resistant material, Par. 0080).
Regarding claim 8, Meir discloses wherein the first yarn is primarily disposed on a first side of the knitted base layer in the first zone, and wherein the second yarn is primarily disposed on an opposite second side of the knitted base layer in the first zone (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 4 above).
Regarding claim 9, Meir discloses the knitted net layer includes a first net region and a second net region in the first zone (see annotated Fig. 4 above).
Regarding claim 10, Meir discloses the first net region and the second net region of the knitted net layer are disposed primarily on the same side of the knitted base layer (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 4 above).
Regarding claim 11, Meir discloses the first net region comprises one or more first cells of the plurality of adjacent cells of the knitted net layer, wherein the second net region comprises one or more second cells of the plurality of adjacent cells of the knitted net layer, wherein the one or more first cells in the first net region are larger than the one or more second cells in the second net region (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 4 above where more cells, loop openings, are shown in the first net region when compared to the second net region).
Regarding claim 12, Meir discloses wherein the article is an upper for an article of footwear (as shown in Fig. 1), and wherein the knitted net layer (shown to be middle row in elements 132 and 134 in Fig. 1) extends from a bite line of the article of footwear to a throat area of the article of footwear (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Meir discloses an article of footwear (100, Fig. 1-2), comprising:
a knitted component (130) forming an upper of the article of footwear (104), the knitted component comprising:
a knitted base layer (see annotated Fig. 4 above) comprising at least a first yarn (yarn that forms the “base layer” in Fig. 4), the knitted base layer having a first elasticity (Par. 0057, lines: 9-16, Par. 0063, examiner notes the base layer can comprise elastic material); and
a first knitted net layer (see annotated Fig. 4 above) comprising at least a second yarn (combination of 422 and loops in the same course as 422), the first knitted net layer having a second elasticity (due to stretch resistant material of 402) and a first plurality of adjacent cells forming a pattern (examiner notes “cells” are shown as loop openings), each cell of the first plurality of adjacent cells having a plurality of corners (examiner notes corners are shown around 421 and 423) defined by portions of the second yarn being intertwined with one another (examiner notes as shown in zoomed in portion in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4);
wherein the first elasticity of the knitted base layer is greater than the second elasticity of the first knitted net layer (examiner notes one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the first elasticity of the knitted base layer is greater than the second elasticity of the first knitted net layer, due to the second yarn having a high tensile strength, stretch resistant material, Par. 0080),
wherein the first knitted net layer (see annotated Fig. 4 above) overlaps a first portion of a surface of the knitted base layer in a first zone of the knitted component (examiner notes as shown in zoomed in portion in Fig. 3 and annotated Fig. 4 below, where the net layer overlaps the knitted base layer),
wherein the first knitted net layer (see annotated Fig. 4 above) is secured to the knitted base layer (see annotated Fig. 4 above) with a plurality of tie-down portions (421 and 423) formed from the first yarn of the knitted base layer (Par. 0072, lines: 11-13 and as shown in zoomed in portion in Fig. 3), and
wherein the plurality of tie-down portions (421 and 423) are located at every corner of the plurality of corners of each cell of the plurality of adjacent cells of the first knitted net layer (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 14, Meir discloses wherein the first yarn comprises a first characteristic different than a second characteristic of the second yarn (examiner notes the characteristic of the second yarn is different from the characteristic of the first yarn, due to the second yarn having a high tensile strength, stretch resistant material, Par. 0080).
Regarding claim 15, Meir discloses wherein the first zone further comprises a second knitted net layer that overlaps the first knitted net layer (see annotated Fig. 4 above, examiner notes the “second knitted net layer” overlaps the “first knitted net layer” in the manner shown in zoomed in portion in Fig. 3), wherein a second plurality of adjacent cells of the second knitted net layer are offset from the first plurality of adjacent cells of the first knitted net layer (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 16, Meir discloses wherein the first knitted net layer further overlaps a second portion of the surface of the knitted base layer in a second zone of the knitted component (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 4 above), wherein the second zone is knitted continuously with the first zone on one side of the first zone (as shown in annotated Fig. 4 above).
Regarding claim 18, Meir discloses wherein the knitted base layer comprises a third portion in a third zone of the knitted component, wherein the third zone is knitted continuously with the first zone on an opposite side of the first zone (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 4 above).
Regarding claim 20, Meir discloses an article (100, Fig. 1) comprising a knitted component (130), comprising:
a knitted base layer (layer of 301 and 302); and
an open-meshed knitted layer (layer of 303) that is coextensive with at least a portion of the knitted base layer (examiner notes as shown in zoomed in portion of Fig. 3),
wherein the open-meshed knitted layer is disposed on one side of the knitted base layer (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 3 where the open-meshed layer is on the bottom side of the base layer),
wherein the knitted base layer comprises a first stitch density, wherein the open-meshed knitted layer comprises a second stitch density (examiner notes stitch density is as shown in Fig. 3),
wherein the first stitch density is greater than the second stitch density (examiner notes as shown due to the first stitch density comprising stitches from layers 301 and 302),
wherein the open-meshed knitted layer comprises a plurality of adjacent cells (examiner notes “cells” are shown as loop openings) each having two or more corners (corners shown as areas around 320 and 340) defined by portions of a second yarn (yarn of 302) being intertwined with one another (as shown in Fig. 3),
wherein the open-meshed knitted layer is secured to the knitted base layer with a plurality of tie-down portions (320 and 340), the plurality of tie-down portions comprising one or more knitted loops formed using a first yarn of the knitted base layer (yarn of 301, Par. 0072, lines: 11-13, see Fig. 3), and
wherein the plurality of tie-down portions (320 and 340) are located at each corner of the two or more corners (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 3-4, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meir.
Regarding claim 3, Meir discloses the invention substantially as claimed above.
Meir does not explicitly disclose a second degree of elongation of the second zone of the knitted component is at least 5% greater than a first degree of elongation of the first zone of the knitted component.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
time the invention was made to have a second degree of elongation of the second zone of the knitted component be at least 5% greater than a first degree of elongation of the first zone of the knitted component, since the claimed value is merely an optimum or workable range, in order to achieve an optimal configuration and enhanced structural integrity. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It is noted the applicant did not disclose criticality to the claimed limitation.
Regarding claim 4, Meir disclose the invention substantially as claimed above.
Meir does not explicitly disclose the second degree of elongation of the second zone of the knitted component is at least 20% greater than the first degree of elongation of the first zone of the knitted component.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
time the invention was made to have a second degree of elongation of the second zone of the knitted component be at least 20% greater than the first degree of elongation of the first zone of the knitted component, since the claimed value is merely an optimum or workable range, in order to achieve an optimal configuration and enhanced structural integrity. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It is noted the applicant did not disclose criticality to the claimed limitation.
Regarding claim 17, Meir disclose the invention substantially as claimed above.
Meir does not explicitly disclose a second degree of elongation of the second zone of the knitted component is at least 5% greater than a first degree of elongation of the first zone of the knitted component.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
time the invention was made to have a second degree of elongation of the second zone of the knitted component be at least 5% greater than a first degree of elongation of the first zone of the knitted component, since the claimed value is merely an optimum or workable range, in order to achieve an optimal configuration and enhanced structural integrity. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It is noted the applicant did not disclose criticality to the claimed limitation.
Regarding claim 19, Meir disclose the invention substantially as claimed above.
Meir does not explicitly disclose the third zone comprises a third degree of elongation, wherein the third degree of elongation is at least 20% greater than the first degree of elongation.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the
time the invention was made to have the third zone comprise a third degree of elongation, wherein the third degree of elongation is at least 20% greater than the first degree of elongation, since the claimed value is merely an optimum or workable range, in order to achieve an optimal configuration and enhanced structural integrity. It has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It is noted the applicant did not disclose criticality to the claimed limitation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent (See PTO-892) to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAKOTA MARIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3529. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri., 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, ALISSA TOMPKINS can be reached at (571) 272-3425. 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.
/DAKOTA MARIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/ALISSA J TOMPKINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights