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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-12) in the reply filed on 2/10/2026 is acknowledged. Note that the applicant has cancelled claims 13-20 and added claims 21-28 within the response dated 2/10/2026. Accordingly, claims 1-12 and 21-28 are currently pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “pin rollers” (claims 11, 12, 21 and 27) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8, 11-12, 21 and 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CHRISTMAN, Jr. (US 7,216,598 B1).
Regarding claim 1, CHRISTMAN discloses a system (10) comprising: at least one tufting machine (12), each tufting machine of the at least one tufting machine defining a respective tufting zone (22) and comprising a plurality of needles (17, 18) that are configured to deliver yarn (32, 33) into a backing (11) to form a plurality of tufts (34) that extend through at least a portion of the backing, the backing having a length along a first axis and a width along a second axis that is perpendicular to the first axis (Fig. 1); at least one tensioning apparatus (51, 52, 61, 62) that is configured to guide the backing (11) through the at least one tufting machine (12) while applying tension to the backing (11), wherein a first tensioning apparatus (51) of the at least one tensioning apparatus is configured to draw the backing (11) from a backing feed roll (60) so that the backing (11) extends from the backing feed roll to the first tensioning apparatus (51) while the at least one tufting machine (12) delivers yarn (32, 33) into the backing (11) (Figures 1-2); and at least one controller (24, 25), wherein each controller of the at least one controller is communicatively coupled with each tufting machine (12) of the at least one tufting machine (12) (Fig. 1), wherein the at least one controller (24, 25) is configured to cause the at least one tufting machine (12) to selectively control delivery of yarn (32, 33) into the backing to produce a plurality of patterned regions (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, CHRISTMAN discloses wherein the controller (24) comprises: at least one processor (25; figure 1) (described as a processor within col. 2, lines 46-47); and a memory (inherent based the controller being described as “capable of storing” within col. 4, lines 15-28) in communication with the at least one processor (25), wherein the memory comprises instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor (25) to cause the at least one tufting machine (12) to form the plurality of patterned regions (col. 4, lines 15-28) (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 8, CHRISTMAN discloses wherein the at least one tensioning apparatus drives movement of the backing (11) in a serpentine pattern (note “serpentine” movement of backing 11 between rollers 61, 61, 51, 62 and 52 as shown in figure 1) comprising peak sections and valley sections (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, CHRISTMAN discloses each tensioning apparatus of the at least one tensioning apparatus comprises a plurality of pin rollers (51, 52) that are configured to control application of longitudinal tension to the backing (11) (Figures 1-2) (also note 75 of figure 3).
Regarding claim 12, CHRISTMAN discloses wherein the plurality of pin rollers (51, 52; 75) operate independently of one another (note that each comprises its own motor 53, 54 and 77) (Figures 1-3).
Claims 21 and 27 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) by CHRISTMAN for the same reasons as addressed above (particularly, note the previous rejections of claims 1, 11 and 12).
Regarding claim 26, CHRISTMAN discloses wherein the first tensioning apparatus is configured to draw the backing (11) from the backing feed roll (60) so that the backing (11) extends from the backing feed roll (60) to the at least one tufting machine (12) while the at least one tufting machine delivers yarn (32, 33) into the backing (11) (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 28, CHRISTMAN discloses at least one controller (24; 25), wherein each controller (24) of the at least one controller (24) is communicatively coupled with each tufting machine (12) of the at least one tufting machine (12) (Fig. 1).
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.
Claim(s) 2-6 and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHRISTMAN, Jr. (US 7,216,598 B1) in view of BEARDEN et al. (US 8,968,502 B1).
Regarding claim 2, CHRISTMAN discloses a system as discussed above. However, CHRISTMAN fails to disclose a coating machine as claimed. BEARDEN discloses a coating machine (62, 66, 68, 68) that is configured to apply a coating (30; 34) over backstitches (50) of a plurality of tufts after the plurality of tufts have been delivered through a backing (20) in order to bond the tufts to the backing with lock strength sufficient to withstand the everyday stresses on the tufted article (i.e., dimensional stability) (Fig. 7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have provided the system of CHRISTMAN with a coating machine, in light of the teachings of BEARDEN, in order to bond the tufts to the backing with lock strength sufficient to withstand the everyday stresses on the tufted article (i.e., dimensional stability).
Regarding claims 3-5 and 22-23, the tensioning apparatus (51, 52, 61, 62) of CHRISTMAN is controlled by the controller (24, 25) and corresponding independent motors (53, 54, 63) and is therefore considered fully capable of functioning to “maintain at least one [width] dimension of the backing within a selected tolerance after the coating is applied” and to “maintain the at least one dimension of the backing within the selected tolerance as the backing is advanced from the at least one tufting machine to the coating machine”.
Regarding claim 6, CHRISTMAN the backing feed roll (60) being configured (within the aid of 51, 52) to feed the backing (11) to the at least one tufting machine (12) (Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 24 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHRISTMAN, Jr. (US 7,216,598 B1) in view of KAJU (US 5,392,723).
CHRISTMAN discloses a system (10) comprising a tufting machine (12) as discussed above. CHRISTMAN further discloses the tufting machine (12) comprising a needle bar assembly (16) having a plurality of needles (17, 18) (Fig. 1). However, CHRISTMAN fails to disclose each of the plurality of needles being independently controlled. The use of independently-controlled needles (ICN) is old and known in the art in order to create more complex and colorful tufting patterns. KAJU discloses an ICN tufting machine (fig. 1) comprising a needle bar assembly (18) having a plurality of needles (41) that are each independently movable relative to other needles of the plurality of needles (41), wherein the tufting machine can function to form a plurality of tufts using a selected number of needles (less than a total number of needles of the needle bar assembly) to deliver yarn to a backing (Figures 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have provided the tufting machine of CHRISTMAN with independently-controlled needles, in light of the teachings of KAJU, in order to produce a more complex and colorful tufting patterns.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 10 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record, as cited on attached PTO-892, and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note that BEARDEN (US 2012/0222606 A1) discloses the use of a plurality of tufting machines on respective gantries (2) to form large sections of athletic turf having a plurality of pattern regions (Figures 1-2 and 4-10).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN E DURHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8642. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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 J 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.
NED
/NATHAN E DURHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights