Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/019,019

KNITTED COMPONENT WITH AN ANGLED RAISED STRUCTURE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 13, 2025
Examiner
WORRELL JR, LARRY D
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nike, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
1190 granted / 1441 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
1460
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
32.9%
-7.1% vs TC avg
§102
35.9%
-4.1% vs TC avg
§112
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1441 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 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)(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 1-3, 5, 7-9, 11, 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Terai er al. (US 9,637,847). Regarding claims 1, 9, and 17, Terai teaches the knitted component for an article of footwear (figure 1), the knitted component comprising: a base portion (3); a tubular knit (40) structure comprising: a raised structure (40i) comprising a first yarn (Figure 3, yarn introduced at S2 by feeder 9) and comprising a plurality of angled raised courses that are each angled relative to a course-wise direction of the knitted component (column 7, paragraph 4); and a margin extending along a longitudinal edge of the raised structure as seen in figure 1, the margin comprising a second yarn (figure 3, yarn initially shown at S0 forming (3) and subsequently shown at S1 and S2), wherein the first yarn and the second yarn are different. Note the second margin extending along a second longitudinal edge of the raised structure at least in figure 1. Regarding claim 2, the plurality of angled raised courses comprise a first course, a second course, and a third course, wherein the first course is interlooped with the second course, and wherein the second course is interlooped with the third course (S2, S3, S4). Regarding claim 3, a first loop couples a first end of the raised structure to the base portion, wherein a second loop couples a second end of the raised structure to the base portion, and wherein the first loop and the second loop are offset in a wale-wise direction, the wale-wise direction being perpendicular to the course-wise direction as indicated by the inclination angle set forth at least at column 7, paragraphs 4-5. Regarding claims 5, 11 and 19, the first yarn and the second yarn are different colors as indicated at column 5, lines 3-9. Regarding claims 7 and 8, wherein the margin is depressed relative to the base portion as seen in at least figure 1 and forms a cavity at a bottom of the raised structure. Regarding claim 11, 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 4, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terai er al. (US 9,637,847) in view of Manos-Gully et al. (US 2018/0042333). Terai teaches the invention substantially as claimed as indicated previously in the rejection to claim 1. Terai does not teach wherein at least one of the first loop and the second loop is formed with the second yarn which comprises a tenacity greater than about 5 g/D. Gully teaches a similar knitted shoe component which has yarns having a tenacity of at least about 5 g/D (abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the knitted shoe component of Terai with higher tenacity yarns including at least about 5 g/D for the purpose of providing an optimized strength in the specific second yarn areas of the knitted shoe component. Claims 6, 10, 12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terai er al. (US 9,637,847) Regarding claim 6 and 15, Terai teaches the invention substantially as claimed as previously set forth in the rejection to claim 1. Terai does not expressly set forth the raised structure is elevated at least 2 mm or 3 mm from the base portion of the knitted component. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose from different heights of the raised portion including at least 2 mm or 3 mm from the base portion for the purpose of optimizing the aesthetic appeal of the shoe upper. Regarding claim 10 and 12, Terai does not expressly set forth the first yarn is a first color, the second yarn is a second color, and the third yarn comprises a third color, wherein each of the first color, the second color, and the third color, are different. It would have been obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose from different colors for the first, second and third yarns in order to enhance the ornamental design of the shoe upper. Regarding claim 14, each angle raised course forms a pocket having an opening on a surface of the knitted component. Regarding claim 16, the first margin is substantially flush with the base portion. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is reminded that all business with the Patent and Trademark Office should be transacted in writing. The action of the Patent and Trademark Office will be based exclusively on the written record in the Office. No attention will be paid to any alleged oral promise, stipulation, or understanding in relation to which there is disagreement or doubt. 37 C.F.R. 1.2 Further it is noted that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.111, including: -The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. -A general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. -Moreover, The prompt development of a clear issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims. Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06, MPEP 714.02. The "disclosure" includes the claims, the specification and the drawings. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANNY WORRELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4997. The examiner can normally be reached on M, W-F. 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 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. /DANNY WORRELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732 ldw
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 13, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601094
SEWING MACHINE ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595604
Sewing Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595605
SEWING MACHINE FRAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595599
MULTI-COMB JACQUARD THREE-DIMENSIONAL JACQUARD MESH FABRIC AND ITS PREPARATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584250
KNITTED ARTICLE, IN PARTICULAR FOR AN ORTHOPAEDIC BRACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+9.8%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1441 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month