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 Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 10, line 3, “the bulky region” is read as “the at least one bulky region”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lynch (US 2003/0089136).
Regarding claim 1, Lynch teaches a multi-knitted wearable garment (figs. 1-3, sock 1) comprising:
at least one first knitted fabric layer (fig. 2, outer layer 3) including a region formed with a bulky knitted fabric (para. [0087], the outer sock layer is a terry structure), wherein a bulky portion of the bulky knitted fabric is configured to extend to a foot of a user of the garment (para. [0087]), and wherein a pile portion of the bulky knitted fabric faces an inner layer side of the garment (para. [0143], the outer layer sock comprises the foot area comprised of the heel, toe and sole being made with a sandwich terry fabric; para. [0338], the sock has the same construction as a conventional sock, i.e. terry cushion to the inner surface of the outer sock); and
at least one second knitted layer (fig. 2, inner layer 2) including a region formed with a water-absorbing and quick-drying knitted fabric (para. [0228], [0302], the inner layer 2 comprises PTFE, which is hydrophobic so that any moisture will pass through the thin inner Teflon layer into the outer layer); having a higher water-absorbing and quick-drying property than the region formed with the bulky knitted fabric (para. [0228], [0302], PTFE is hydrophobic, while the outer layer is terry knitted structure with hydrophilic yarn).
Regarding claim 2, Lynch teaches the multi-knitted wearable garment can be worn at least on a foot; and the first knitted fabric layer constitutes a bottom covering portion that is configured to cover a bottom side of the foot of the user of the garment (figs. 5-7).
Regarding claim 3, Lynch teaches the first knitted fabric layer is positioned in an outermost layer of the bottom covering portion (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, Lynch teaches at least one fourth knitted fabric layer including a region formed with a moisture absorbent heat-generating knitted fabric having moisture absorbent heat-generating properties (fig. 7, para. [0183], leg portion 25 is terry structure),
the moisture-absorbent heat-generating knitted fabric is knitted with yarn having moisture-absorbent heat-generating properties (fig. 7, para. [0183]),
the water-absorbing and fast-drying knitted fabric is knitted with yarn including water-absorbing and fast-drying yarn (para. [0183], [0244], [0245]), and
one of the second knitted fabric layer and the at least one fourth knitted fabric layer is positioned in an innermost layer (figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 17, Lynch teaches the water-absorbing and quick-drying knitted fabric is an interwoven fabric of yarn having moisture-absorbent heat-generating properties and water-absorbing and quick-drying yarn (para. [0228], [0302], [0244]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lynch (US 2003/0089136), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ward (US 2018/0014578).
Regarding claim 4, Lynch teaches the multi-knitted wearable garment can be worn at least on a foot.
Lynch does not teach the first knitted fabric layer and second knitted fabric layer are provided only in a tip covering portion that is configured to cover a tip portion of the foot of the user of the garment.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ward teaches a sock system is configured to cover a tip portion of the foot (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the sock system Lynch in the form of toe coverlet of Ward for the benefit of providing a toe coverlet for women in wearing high heel shoes (Ward, para. [0003]).
Claims 6-7 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lynch (US 2003/0089136), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Idobata (US 2019/0203390).
Regarding claim 6, Lynch does not clearly teach at least one third knitted fabric layer including a region formed with a partially bulky knitted.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Idobata teaches at least one third knitted fabric layer including a region formed with a partially bulky knitted (fig. 1 shows a knitted fabric layer having thick portion (4) among non-thick portions at the bottom of the sock).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Lynch with a third knitted fabric layer at the bottom of the sock as taught by Idobata for the benefit of providing cushioning for the bottom of the sock (Idobata, para. [0004], [0005]).
Regarding claim 7, the modified structure Lynch-Idobata does not teach a bulky portion of the partially bulky knitted fabric is configured to extend towards a foot of the user of the garment.
However, Idobata teaches a bulky portion of the partially bulky knitted fabric is configured to extend towards a foot of the user (para. [0007], thick portion is formed by continuously repeating a thick portion knitting substep n times, then the bulky portion extends inward to the footwear).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Lynch-Idobata with the teaching that a bulky portion of the partially bulky knitted fabric is configured to extend towards a foot of the user as suggested by Idobata for the benefit of providing cushioning for the bottom of the sock (Idobata, para. [0004], [0005]).
Regarding claim 9, the modified structure Lynch-Idobata teaches the multi-knitted wearable garment can be worn at least on the foot of the user of the garment (fig. 1), and the at least one third knitted fabric layer constitutes a bottom covering portion that is configured to cover a bottom side of the foot of the user of the garment (Idobata, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, the modified structure Lynch-Idobata does not teach the partially bulky knitted fabric includes at least one bulky region and a low-bulk region having a lower bulk than the bulky region.
However, Idobata teaches the partially bulky knitted fabric includes at least one bulky region (fig. 1, thick portion 4) and a low-bulk region (fig. 1, non thick portions 1, 9) having a lower bulk than the bulky region.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Lynch-Idobata with the teaching that the partially bulky knitted fabric includes a bulky region and a low-bulk region having a lower bulk than the bulky region as taught by Idobata for the benefit of providing cushioning for the bottom of the sock (Idobata, para. [0004], [0005]).
Regarding claim 11, the modified structure Lynch-Idobata does not teach the low-bulk region is adjacent to at least two bulky regions.
However, Idobata teaches the low-bulk region (fig. 1, region 9) is adjacent to at least two bulky regions (fig. 1, para. [0041], thick portions 5 and 6).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Lynch-Idobata with the teaching that the low-bulk region is adjacent to at least two bulky regions as taught by Idobata for the benefit of providing cushioning for the bottom of the sock (Idobata, para. [0004], [0005]).
Regarding claim 12, the modified structure Lynch-Idobata does not teach the at least one bulky region and the low-bulk region are both band-shaped, and the low-bulk region is on both sides of the at least one bulky region in a lateral direction.
However, Idobata teaches the bulky region and the low-bulk region are both band-shaped (fig. 1, portions 1, 4, 9 , 5, 6 are band-shaped), and the low-bulk region (fig. 1, portions 1 and 9) is on both sides of the at least one bulky region (4) in a lateral direction.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Lynch-Idobata with the teaching of Idobata that the bulky region and the low-bulk region are both band-shaped, and the low-bulk region is adjacent to the bulky region on both sides in a lateral direction for the benefit of providing cushioning for the bottom of the sock (Idobata, para. [0004], [0005]).
Claims 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lynch (US 2003/0089136) and Idobata (US 2019/0203390), as applied to claims 6 and 12 above, and further in view of Cleveland (US 2021/0047757).
Regarding claim 8, the modified structure Lynch-Idobata teaches core-sheath yarn having stretchability and bulkiness in knitting (Lynch, para. [0049]).
The modified structure Lynch-Idobata does not teach the at least one third knitted fabric layer is knitted by pseudo pile knitting formed by interknitting a plain knitting course and a tuck knitting course.
However, Idobata teaches the third knitted fabric layer is knitted by pseudo pile knitting formed by interknitting a plain knitting course (fig. 1, para. [0040], toe portion 1 is plain knitted) with core-sheath yarn in which sheath yarn covers core yarn (para. [0039]) and a tuck knitting course (fig. 1, para. [0063], the thick portion is tuck knitted).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Lynch-Idobata with the knitting method as suggested by Idobata for the benefit of providing cushioning for the bottom of the sock (Idobata, para. [0004], [0005]).
The modified structure Lynch-Idobata does not teach the knitted fabric has core-sheath yarn and crimped yarn.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Cleveland teaches the knitted fabric layer (para. [0009]) comprises core-sheath yarn and crimped yarn (fig. 1, the fibers 118 are twisted and the strand 117 is wrapped around the core 115).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Lynch-Idobata with the core-sheath yarn and twisted yarn as taught by Cleveland for the benefit of providing strength, durability, comfort, and absorbency to the yarn.
Regarding claim 14, the modified structure Lynch-Idobata teaches the first knitted fabric layer is an interwoven fabric layer of core-sheath yarn having stretchability and bulkiness (Lynch, para. [00234]); the second knitted fabric layer is an interwoven fabric layer of the core-sheath yarn (Lynch, para. [0045], [0049]) and water-absorbing and quick-drying yarn, and the at least one third knitted fabric layer is an interwoven fabric layer of the core-sheath yarn (Idobata, para. [0039]).
The modified structure Lynch-Idobata does not teach the interwoven fabric layer comprises core-sheath yarn and crimped yarn.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Cleveland teaches the interwoven fabric layer (para. [0009]) comprises core-sheath yarn and crimped yarn (fig. 1, the fibers 118 are twisted and the strand 117 is wrapped around the core 115).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Lynch-Idobata with the core-sheath yarn and twisted yarn as taught by Cleveland for the benefit of providing strength, durability, comfort, and absorbency to the yarn.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lynch (US 2003/0089136) and Idobata (US 2019/0203390), as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Ward (US 2018/0014578).
Regarding claim 13, the modified structure Lynch-Idobata teaches the multi-knitted wearable garment can be worn at least on a foot (Lynch, fig. 1).
The modified structure Lynch-Idobata does not teach the first knitted fabric layer, the second knitted fabric layer, and the at least one third knitted fabric layer are provided only in a tip covering portion that is configured to cover the tip portion of the foot of the user of the garment.
However, Ward teaches a sock system is configured to cover a tip portion of the foot (fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the modified structure Lynch-Idobata in the form of toe coverlet of Ward for the benefit of providing a toe coverlet for women in wearing high heel shoes (Ward, para. [0003]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lynch (US 2003/0089136), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Iida (US 2016/0206462).
Regarding claim 16, Lynch does not teach the water-absorbing and quick-drying knitted fabric is knitted with front yarn and back yarn as in the claim.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Iida teaches a sock layer is knitted with front yarn and back yarn, the front yarn includes yarn having moisture-absorbent heat-generating properties and the back yarn includes the water-absorbing and quick-drying yarn (para. [0069]).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the inner sock of Lynch with front yarn and back yarn as taught by Iida for the benefit of providing sweat absorbing and quick drying, a body temperature adjusting function in accordance with the demand of the wearer (Iida, para. [0069]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, dated 11/25/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection to the claims has been withdrawn due to the applicant amendments.
Applicant’s arguments, dated 11/25/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C 112 (b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection to the claims has been withdrawn due to the applicant amendments.
Applicant’s arguments, dated 11/25/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C 102 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 UYEN THI THAO NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 AM-4:30 PM EST.
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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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.
/UYEN T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3732