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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendments to the claims, filed on 1/20/26, have been entered in the above-identified application.
Any rejections made in the previous action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 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 65-70, 79-85, and 87 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson et al (US 2020/0315273 A1).
Regarding claim 65, Thompson teaches a construction (e.g., moisture wicking material) comprising a composite nonwoven textile comprising a first entangled web of fibers comprising a first outer surface (e.g., moisture transport layer comprising a nonwoven layer) (32), a second entangled web of fibers comprising a second outer surface (e.g. outer layer comprising a nonwoven wicking layer) (33), and an elastomeric layer (e.g., fibrous layer comprising elastomeric fibers) (34) positioned between the first entangled web of fibers and the second entangled web of fibers (abstract, para 1, 19, 28, 40, 43, 60, 66; fig 2).
Regarding the limitation “an elastically resilient structured textile comprising stretch and recovery properties in at least one orientational axis, wherein the elastically resilient structured textile is positioned adjacent the second outer outermost surface of the second entangled web of fibers;” Thompson teaches a surface layer (36) is positioned adjacent the second outer outermost surface of the second entangled web of fibers (33) (para 60; fig 2); but further suggests additional fibrous layers or wicking layers (e.g., formed of the fibers) in any combination or order (para 40-45) which would have suggested or otherwise rendered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention the use of elastomer fibers in and additional fibrous layer or wicking layer (para 28). Therefore, the fibrous surface layer of Thompson would be an elastically resilient structured textile comprising stretch and recovery properties in at least one orientational axis, wherein the elastically resilient structured textile is positioned adjacent the second outer outermost surface of the second entangled web of fibers.
Regarding the limitation “a pleated structure comprising a plurality of pleats formed from the composite nonwoven textile; wherein the plurality of pleats comprise a series of alternating peaks and valleys in the first outer surface of the first entangled web of fibers and the second outer surface of the second entangled web of fibers;” Thompson teaches a lapping process may create a pleated or undulated appearance of the fibers when viewed from its cross-section; wherein the frequency of the pleats or undulations may be varied during the lapping process, e.g., having an increase in pleats or undulations per area may increase the density and/or stiffness of the layer or layers of the material; and reducing the pleats or undulations per area may increase the flexibility of the layer or layers and/or may decrease the density; and the ability to vary the pleat or undulation frequency during the lapping process may allow for properties of the material to be varied or controlled. (para 38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to pleat the composite nonwoven textile a to adjust and optimize its properties (e.g., density, stiffness, and/or flexibility); and therein create a pleated structure comprising a plurality of pleats formed from the composite nonwoven textile; i.e., a pleated structure comprising a plurality of pleats formed from the composite nonwoven textile; wherein the plurality of pleats comprise a series of alternating peaks and valleys in the first outer surface of the first entangled web of fibers and the second outer surface of the second entangled web of fibers.
Regarding claims 66-70, Thompson teaches the layers may be connected via adhesives applied in portions such as strips (i.e., further comprising an adhesive layer that affixes the elastically resilient structured textile to the second entangled web of fibers at one or more first areas and wherein the elastically resilient structured textile is affixed to the second entangled web of fibers at one or more first areas and is unaffixed from the second entangled web of fibers at one or more second areas); wherein portions of strips or a stripped formation would have suggested or otherwise rendered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention wherein each of the one or more first areas has a length and a width, the length being greater than the width at the one or more first areas, and wherein each of the one or more second areas has a length and a width, the length being greater than the width at the one or more second areas; wherein the one or more first areas are spaced apart from each other by the one or more second areas; and, wherein each of the one or more first areas has a longitudinal axis that is in parallel alignment with a longitudinal axis of the one or more second areas.
Regarding claims 85 and 87, Thompson would have suggested or otherwise rendered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention pleating the nonwoven composite (para 38); and therein an embodiment wherein the elastically resilient structured textile is in a tensioned state at one or more first areas of the composite nonwoven textile aligning with the valleys of the pleated construction, and wherein the elastically resilient structured textile is in a non-tensioned state at one or more second areas of the composite nonwoven textile aligning with the peaks of the pleated construction; and wherein the alternating peaks and valleys comprise the first entangled web of fibers, the second entangled web of fibers, and the elastomeric layer.
Regarding claims 79-81, Thompson teaches a construction (e.g., moisture wicking material) comprising a composite nonwoven textile comprising a first entangled web of fibers (e.g., moisture transport layer comprising a nonwoven layer) (32), a second entangled web of fibers (e.g. outer layer comprising a nonwoven wicking layer) (33), and an elastomeric layer (e.g., fibrous layer comprising elastomeric fibers) (34) positioned between the first entangled web of fibers and the second entangled web of fibers (abstract, para 1, 19, 28, 40, 43, 60; fig 2).
Regarding the limitation “a first elastically resilient structured textile that is coupled to a first surface of the first composite nonwoven textile and that comprises stretch and recovery properties in at least one orientational axis;” Thompson teaches a surface layer (36) is positioned adjacent the second outer outermost surface of the second entangled web of fibers (33) (para 60; fig 2); but further suggests additional fibrous layers or wicking layers (e.g., formed of the fibers) in any combination or order (para 40-45) which would have suggested or otherwise rendered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention the use of elastomer fibers in and additional fibrous layer or wicking layer (para 28). Therefore, the additional fibrous layer or wicking layer of Thompson would be a first elastically resilient structured textile that is coupled to a first surface of the first composite nonwoven textile and that comprises stretch and recovery properties in at least one orientational axis.
Regarding the limitation “a first pleated structure comprising a first plurality of pleats formed from the first composite nonwoven textile, wherein a first pleat of the first plurality of pleats comprises a first peak extending away from the first elastically resilient structured textile in a second surface of the first composite nonwoven textile and a first valley extending toward the first elastically resilient structured textile in the second surface of the first composite nonwoven textile;” Thompson teaches a lapping process may create a pleated or undulated appearance of the fibers when viewed from its cross-section; wherein the frequency of the pleats or undulations may be varied during the lapping process, e.g., having an increase in pleats or undulations per area may increase the density and/or stiffness of the layer or layers of the material; and reducing the pleats or undulations per area may increase the flexibility of the layer or layers and/or may decrease the density; and the ability to vary the pleat or undulation frequency during the lapping process may allow for properties of the material to be varied or controlled. (para 38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to pleat the composite nonwoven textile a to adjust and optimize its properties (e.g., density, stiffness, and/or flexibility); and therein create a pleated structure comprising a plurality of pleats formed from the composite nonwoven textile; i.e., a first pleated structure comprising a first plurality of pleats formed from the first composite nonwoven textile, wherein a first pleat of the first plurality of pleats comprises a first peak extending away from the first elastically resilient structured textile in a second surface of the first composite nonwoven textile and a first valley extending toward the first elastically resilient structured textile in the second surface of the first composite nonwoven textile
Regarding the limitations “at least at a first portion of an apparel item;” “wherein the apparel item is an upper body article of apparel;” and “wherein the apparel item is a lower body article of apparel;” Thompson suggest the use of its moisture wicking materials are used in clothing or apparel items such as sports bras and shirts (i.e., upper body) and shorts and pants (i.e., lower body) (para 19).
Regarding claim 82, Thompson teaches a construction (e.g., moisture wicking material) comprising a composite nonwoven textile comprising a third entangled web of fibers (e.g., moisture transport layer comprising a nonwoven layer) (32), a fourth entangled web of fibers (e.g. outer layer comprising a nonwoven wicking layer) (33), and a second elastomeric layer (e.g., fibrous layer comprising elastomeric fibers) (34) positioned between the first entangled web of fibers and the second entangled web of fibers (para 60, 63, fig 6).
Regarding the limitations “a second elastically resilient structured textile coupled to a third surface of the second composite nonwoven textile” and “wherein the second elastically resilient structured textile is in a face-sharing relationship with the first elastically resilient structured textile;” Thompson teaches any of the materials described herein may be combined with other materials described herein (e.g., in the same layer or in different layers of the layered material); all of the layers, may be formed from the same materials (para 28, 40-45, 59, 66). This would have suggested to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention the use of additional fibrous layers comprised of non-woven elastomeric fibers, i.e., a second elastically resilient structured textile coupled to a third surface of the second composite nonwoven textile; wherein the second elastically resilient structured textile is in a face-sharing relationship with the first elastically resilient structured textile.
Regarding the limitation “a second pleated structure second plurality of pleats formed from the second composite nonwoven textile; wherein a second pleat of the second plurality of pleats comprises a second peak extending away from the first elastically resilient structured textile in a fourth surface of the second composite nonwoven textile and a second valley extending toward the second elastically resilient structured textile in the fourth surface of the second composite nonwoven textile;” Thompson teaches a lapping process may create a pleated or undulated appearance of the fibers when viewed from its cross-section; wherein the frequency of the pleats or undulations may be varied during the lapping process, e.g., having an increase in pleats or undulations per area may increase the density and/or stiffness of the layer or layers of the material; and reducing the pleats or undulations per area may increase the flexibility of the layer or layers and/or may decrease the density; and the ability to vary the pleat or undulation frequency during the lapping process may allow for properties of the material to be varied or controlled. (para 38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to pleat the composite nonwoven textile a to adjust and optimize its properties (e.g., density, stiffness, and/or flexibility); and therein create a pleated structure comprising a plurality of pleats formed from the composite nonwoven textile; i.e., a second pleated structure second plurality of pleats formed from the second composite nonwoven textile; wherein a second pleat of the second plurality of pleats comprises a second peak extending away from the first elastically resilient structured textile in a fourth surface of the second composite nonwoven textile and a second valley extending toward the second elastically resilient structured textile in the fourth surface of the second composite nonwoven textile.
Regarding claims 83 and 84, Thompson teaches specifically that pleats may be formed in the fibrous layer during the lapping process; but further teaches is contemplated that the pleat or undulation frequency may be varied throughout the material; adjustment may be made during the lapping of different layers of the material; different layers may be made to have different properties with different pleat frequencies; wherein having an increase in pleats or undulations per area may increase the density and/or stiffness of the layer or layers of the material; and reducing the pleats or undulations per area may increase the flexibility of the layer or layers and/or may decrease the density (para 38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to pleat the construction and adjust the location of the pleats in the construction to adjust and optimize its properties (e.g., density, stiffness, and/or flexibility) and location of the desired properties.
Claim 86 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson as applied to claim 65 above, and further in view of Miyamura et al (US 2009/0169802 A1).
Thompson teaches the pleated construction of claim 65. Thompson further teaches the use of a fiber denier of about 1 denier (D) or greater (para 27); and the use of its pleated constructions in garment or clothing (para 59); and fibrous layers may be tuned to provide a desired weight, thickness, compression resistance, or other physical attributes (para 24).
Thompson fails to suggest wherein the first entangled web of fibers comprises a basis weight from about 20 grams per square meter (gsm) to about 150 gsm
Miyamura teaches stretch non-woven fabrics used in clothing comprising inelastic and elastic fiber or fibrous layers; wherein the fibrous layers have a basis weight of 1 to 60 g/m2 (inelastic) and 5 to 80 g/m 2 (elastic) (abstract, para 61, 64, 65, 75).
Therefore, per the teachings of Miyamura, it would have been obvious to adjust the basis weight of the fibrous layers of Thompson for proper end use in clothing or garments; and therein to adjust the basis weight of the first entangled web of fibers.
Thompson further teaches the use of a fiber denier of about 1 denier (D) or greater (para 27). Miyamura teaches the fibrous layers have a basis weight of 1 to 60 g/m2 (inelastic) and 5 to 80 g/m 2 (elastic). These ranges substantially overlap that of the instant claims. It has been held that overlapping ranges are sufficient to establish prima facie obviousness. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to have selected from the overlapping portion of the range taught by Thompson as modified by Miyamura, because overlapping ranges have been held to establish prima facie obviousness (MPEP § 2144.05).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/20/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the limitation “an elastically resilient structured textile comprising stretch and recovery properties in at least one orientational axis, wherein the elastically resilient structured textile is positioned adjacent the second outer outermost surface of the second entangled web of fibers;” Thompson teaches a surface layer (36) is positioned adjacent the second outer outermost surface of the second entangled web of fibers (33) (para 60; fig 2); but further suggests additional fibrous layers or wicking layers (e.g., formed of the fibers) in any combination or order (para 40-45) which would have suggested or otherwise rendered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention the use of elastomer fibers in and additional fibrous layer or wicking layer (para 28). Therefore, the fibrous surface layer of Thompson would be an elastically resilient structured textile comprising stretch and recovery properties in at least one orientational axis, wherein the elastically resilient structured textile is positioned adjacent the second outer outermost surface of the second entangled web of fibers.
Regarding the limitation “a pleated structure comprising a plurality of pleats formed from the composite nonwoven textile; wherein the plurality of pleats comprise a series of alternating peaks and valleys in the first outer surface of the first entangled web of fibers and the second outer surface of the second entangled web of fibers;” Thompson teaches a lapping process may create a pleated or undulated appearance of the fibers when viewed from its cross-section; wherein the frequency of the pleats or undulations may be varied during the lapping process, e.g., having an increase in pleats or undulations per area may increase the density and/or stiffness of the layer or layers of the material; and reducing the pleats or undulations per area may increase the flexibility of the layer or layers and/or may decrease the density; and the ability to vary the pleat or undulation frequency during the lapping process may allow for properties of the material to be varied or controlled. (para 38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to pleat the composite nonwoven textile a to adjust and optimize its properties (e.g., density, stiffness, and/or flexibility); and therein create a pleated structure comprising a plurality of pleats formed from the composite nonwoven textile; i.e., a pleated structure comprising a plurality of pleats formed from the composite nonwoven textile; wherein the plurality of pleats comprise a series of alternating peaks and valleys in the first outer surface of the first entangled web of fibers and the second outer surface of the second entangled web of fibers.
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 NATHAN L VAN SELL whose telephone number is (571)270-5152. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur, Generally 7am-6pm.
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, M. Veronica Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
NATHAN VAN SELL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1783
/NATHAN L VAN SELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783