DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. In response to the amendment filed 27 July 2026, claims 1, 3-34 and newly added claim 35 remain pending.
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. 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.
5. Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13-16, 26, 30 and 32-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of Woobles - Crocket kits for beginners (hereinafter Woobles Kits) and MK Eco Tube – Crochet Stores Inc. (hereinafter MK Eco Tube).
Regarding claims 1, 8, 13 and 30, Woobles FAQ discloses a kit for making a crochet piece of a character (e.g. a penguin – see page 3), the kit including a length of yarn extening from the pre-started piece as working yarn (see “What comes with a kit? – bottom page 2–page 3), an end of the yarn formed into a pre-started piece including a plurality of crochet stitches (middle page 2); and an article (postcard) including a link to an electronic address with instructions for forming the crochet piece using the length of yarn (top of page 4).
Woobles FAQ further discloses the kit includes a stitch marker (see top of page 3). To the extent that Woobles FAQ does not explicitly disclose the stitch marker “in at least one of the crochet stitches”, Woobles Kits discloses this feature of placing the stitch marker in at least one of the stitches in the piece (see picture on page 2). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the teaching of Woobles FAQ by placing the marker in the stitch, to obtain predictable results of utilizing the marker to mark a stitch.
To the extent that Woobles FAQ and Woobles Kits do not explicitly disclose the yarn is tubular yarn having a tubular shape, MK Eco Tube discloses that the concept and advantages of tubular yarn were well known to those of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention (see page 2). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination of Woobles FAQ and Woobles Kits by utilizing tubular yarn, as suggested by MK Eco Tube. Such a modification would be a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding claims 4, 5, 7, 11, 14-16, 26 and 32-35, the combination of Woobles FAQ and Woobles Kits further disclose:
the link is a URL (FAQ - link to be typed into web browser - top page 4) (as per claim 4),
the article is a tangible instruction card (FAQ - postcard – top page 4) (as per claim 5),
a hook, tapestry needle and stuffing (FAQ - top page 3) (as per claim 7),
the pre-started piece includes a stitch marker (Kits – page 2) (as per claim 11),
an electronic address for accessing the instructions (FAQ - top page 4) (as per claim 14),
the pre-started piece includes at least one stitch marker to prevent unraveling of the pre-started piece (Kits – page 2) (as per claim 15),
the piece is formed using a magic loop crochet technique (as per claims 16 and 32),
plastic or embroidered eyes (Kits – page 2) (as per claim 26),
the instructions include a series of videos (FAQ - quick start and tutorial videos – page 4) (as per claim 33), and
the end of the yarn further includes at least one stitch marker in at least one of the crochet stitches (Kits – picture on page 2) (as per claim 35).
Regarding claim 34, to the extent that the combination of Woobles FAQ, Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube may not explicitly disclose the pre-started piece includes two or more stitch markers, this is represents a mere duplication of parts (the one stitch disclosed by Woobles FAQ and Woobles Kits). This does not appear to provide any unexpected result, and therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination of Woobles FAQ, Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube by including two or more stitch markers, to obtain predictable results associated with the use of stitch markers in a crochet piece. See MPEP 2144.04 VI. B.
6. Claims 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of Woobles - Crocket kits for beginners (hereinafter Woobles Kits) and MK Eco Tube – Crochet Stores Inc. (hereinafter MK Eco Tube), and further in view of Leinicke (US 2012/0292383 A1).
Regarding claims 6 and 9, the combination of Woobles FAQ, Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube does not explicitly disclose the article further includes a code for accessing the instructions, the code being a QR code. However, Leinicke discloses providing instructional packaging (Fig. 1, 4) comprising an article with a QR code that provides a link to instructions for using a product (see Par’s. 19-21, 29). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination of Woobles FAQ, Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube by providing a QR code on the postcard, to obtain predictable results of allowing the user to more quickly reach the instructions.
7. Claims 10, 12 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube, and further in view of Mrs. Micawber – Keep Your WIPs from Unravelling – A Crochet Tip (hereinafter Micawber).
To the extent that the combination of Woobles FAQ, Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube does not explicitly disclose a plurality of crochet stitches and a knot to prevent unraveling of the pre-started piece, wherein the knot prevents unraveling of the working loop, Micawber discloses that such a feature of placing a knot on a plurality of stitches of a pre-started piece and a working loop to prevent unraveling of a pre-started piece was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention (see pages 2-3 – Micawber discloses creating this knot by chaining together several extra stiches, reaching through the working loop, and pulling the extra chains through and tightening the loop around the chains). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the combination of Woobles FAQ, Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube by including this feature of a working loop and knot to prevent unraveling of the loop as taught by Micawber. Such a modification would constitute a use of a known technique to improve similar products in the same way.
8. Claims 17 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of MK Eco Tube.
Woobles FAQ discloses a kit for making a crochet piece of a character including an animal, the kit including a length of yarn, an end of the yarn formed into a pre-started piece that includes a plurality of crochet stitches, and an article including a link to an electronic address with instructions for forming the crochet piece using the length of tubular yarn (see pages 2-3). To the extent that Woobles FAQ does not explicitly disclose the yarn is tubular yarn having a tubular shape, MK Eco Tube discloses that the concept and advantages of tubular yarn were well known to those of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention (see page 2). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Woobles FAQ by utilizing tubular yarn, as suggested by MK Eco Tube. Such a modification would be a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
9. Claims 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of MK Eco Tube, and further in view of Rohlf’s et al. (US 2019/0279527 A1).
Regarding claims 19-23, the combination of Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube does not explicitly disclose, but Rohlf’s does disclose, in a similar system for providing instructions and a series of videos to a user for performing handcrafts, wherein the instructions include a series of steps, selection of each step via a user device causing a video to be displayed in the user device for the selected step (Par’s. 71, 287) (as per claim 19), each of the videos includes an audio-visual tutorial for completing the selected step of the crochet piece (Par. 287) (as per claim 20), the series of steps are organized by different features of the crochet piece (Par’s. 284-287) (as per claim 21), each step of the series of steps is linked to a previous step and a subsequent step (Par’s. 284-287) (as per claim 22), and each step of the series of steps is linked to a help section with additional information about the step (Par’s. 284-287) (as per claim 23). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the combination of Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube by including these features for providing video instructions as a series of steps, as taught by Rohlf’s, to obtain predictable results of helping guide the user through the steps of making the crochet piece.
10. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube, and further in view of Rohlf’s et al. (US 2019/0279527 A1).
Regarding claims 3, the combination of Woobles FAQ, Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube does not explicitly disclose, but Rohlf’s does disclose, in a similar system for providing instructions and a series of videos to a user for performing handcrafts, wherein the instructions include a series of steps, selection of each step via a user device causing a video to be displayed in the user device for the selected step (Par’s. 71, 287). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the combination of Woobles FAQ, Woobles Kits and MK Eco Tube by including these features for providing video instructions as a series of steps, as taught by Rohlf’s, to obtain predictable results of helping guide the user through the steps of making the crochet piece.
11. Claims 18 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of MK Eco Tube, and further in view of Leinicke (US 2012/0292383 A1).
Regarding claims 18 and 28, the combination of Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube does not appear to explicitly disclose the article includes a code or QA code for accessing the instructions. However, Leinicke discloses providing instructional packaging (Fig. 1, 4) comprising an article with a QR code that provides a link to instructions for using a product (see Par’s. 19-21, 29). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination of Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube by providing a QR code on the postcard, to obtain predictable results of allowing the user to more quickly reach the instructions.
12. Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of MK Eco Tube, and further in view of Grafman et al. (US 2015/0059556 A1).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube does not appear to disclose options for left-handed and right-handed instructions, and the user selection of instructions includes options to display left-handed or right-handed instructions. However, Grafman discloses an electronic guitar tutorial with modes for left-handed and right-handed players (Par. 41). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the combination of Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube by including an option for left or right-handed instructions, as suggested by Grafman. Such a modification would be a use of a known technique to improve similar products in the same way.
13. Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of MK Eco Tube, and further in view of Bungee Mini Yarn (hereinafter Bungee).
Regarding claim 27, to the extent that Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube do not explicitly disclose the tubular yarn includes an external casing with a hollow interior and an internal material configured to configured to fill the hollow interior of the external casing, Bungee discloses that this type of tubular yarn was well known before the effective filing date of the invention (cotton tube with filling – page 23). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the combination of Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube by utilizing this type of yarn. Such a modification would involve combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
14. Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woobles FAQ in view of MK Eco Tube, and further in view of Debbie Bliss Dulcie (hereinafter Debbie).
Regarding claim 29, to the extent that Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube do not explicitly disclose the tubular yarn comprises a combination of cotton and nylon, Debbie discloses that this type of tubular yarn was well known before the effective filing date of the invention (see top of page 2). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the combination of Woobles FAQ and MK Eco Tube by utilizing this type of yarn. Such a modification would be a simple substitution of one known element for another to predictable results.
Response to Arguments
15. Applicant's arguments filed 27 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, the person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that various types of yarn could be utilized in different types of projects. Applicant’s own decision to utilize tubular yarn in addition to, or instead of, cotton or acrylic yarn, is evidence of this fact.
Applicant further argues that the proposed use of tubular yarn such as that set forth in MK Eco Tube lacks KSR Predictable Results. However, as discussed above, it is not clear as to how Applicant can argue against the use of tubular yarn in its own prior art, while also arguing that tubular yarn would not produce desirable results.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
Conclusion
16. 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.
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER EGLOFF whose telephone number is (571)270-3548. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Peter R Egloff/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
