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 .
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 1, it is not clear what is meant by the limitation “interwoven by knitting”. Knitting is a process of interlooping yarns while weaving it a process of interlacing yarns. It is not clear how a structure can be interwoven, (interlaced) by knitting, (interlooping).
Also in claim 1, it is not clear what is meant by “sheet-like”. In particular, it is not clear how the textile fabric is the same as and/or different from a sheet.
Also in claim 1, lines 7-8, there is no antecedent basis for “the warp or weft direction”. Also in claim 8, there is no antecedent basis for “the fabric”, (there is antecedent basis for “the textile fabric”). There is no antecedent basis for “the adjacent protrusions” in line 10. There is no antecedent basis for “the side of the textile fabric” or for “the surface of the multiple yarns” in line 12.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rose et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0318266.
Rose discloses a knit fabric having a ribbed knit structure. The ribbed structure provides for protrusions and recesses and can have various patterns. See paragraph 0031. The ribbed structure is formed by knitting one or more yarns. See paragraph 0023-0024. The yarns can have different colors. See paragraph 0016-0018. Suitable colors include red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet, white, black and shades thereof. See paragraph 0027. The yarns can be polyester. See paragraph 0020. In addition to the colored yarns, different areas may be dyed or otherwise colored to provide different designs and appearances to the fabric. See paragraph 0032. The yarns and fabric may be colored or patterned so that the fabric looks different from different angles. See paragraph 0036-0037. The knit fabric can be used to make a shoe component. See paragraph 0050. Dyes which include copper ions can be added to the yarns and/or fabric. See paragraph 0055.
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) 2-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rose et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0318266 in view of Bailey et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0055117.
Rose discloses a knit fabric having a ribbed knit structure. The ribbed structure provides for protrusions and recesses and can have various patterns. See paragraph 0031. The ribbed structure is formed by knitting one or more yarns. See paragraph 0023-0024. The yarns can have different colors. See paragraph 0016-0018. Suitable colors include red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet, white, black and shades thereof. See paragraph 0027. The yarns can be polyester. See paragraph 0020. In addition to the colored yarns, different areas may be dyed or otherwise colored to provide different designs and appearances to the fabric. See paragraph 0032. The yarns and fabric may be colored or patterned so that the fabric looks different from different angles. See paragraph 0036-0037. The knit fabric can be used to make a shoe component. See paragraph 0050. Dyes which include copper ions can be added to the yarns and/or fabric which would result in yarns which included copper ions. See paragraph 0055. The fabric of Rose is capable of being used to form shoes. With regard to the orientation of the protrusions, one of ordinary skill would have been able to situate the protrusion relative to the shoe structure to provide the most comfortable and functional shoe.
Rose differs from the claimed invention because it does not clearly teach that the fabric has two sides with the first yarn on the first side and the second yarn on the second side and does not clearly teach incorporating a third yarn.
However, Bailey teaches incorporating first, second and third yarns into a knit fabric in order to form different properties and appearances on the front, middle and back sides. See paragraph 0035.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have employed additional yarns as taught by Bailey in order to provide a knit fabric having different properties and a different appearance on difference faces of the fabric.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pearce, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0254003. Pearce discloses a knit fabric. See abstract. The knit fabric can include a graphic feature integrally knitted into the knit fabric. See paragraph 0004. The graphic forms a protrusion on the fabric. Pearce does not clearly teach a plurality of protrusions, the recesses or multiple types of yarns.
Blore et al, U.S. Patent No. 3,808,843 teaches a double knit fabric with different colored yarns wherein both faces have a different appearance. Blore does not clearly teach the protrusions.
Balcombe, U.S. Patent No. 3,937,041. Balcombe teaches a textured double knit fabric including bulked and/or unbulked yarns. Balcombe does not clearly teach the first, second and third yarns.
Sytz, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0144221. Sytz teaches a three dimensional knitted fabric having protrusions on one face and corresponding recesses on the other side. The yarns can be polyester. Sytz does not clearly teach using two types of yarns.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH M IMANI whose telephone number is (571)272-1475. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Wednesday 7AM-7:30; Thursday 10AM -2 PM.
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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/ELIZABETH M IMANI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789
Prosecution Insights