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)(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 1-5, 8-16 and 18 -20 I are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Meir (WO 2016/053805 A1).
As seen in at least figures 18 and 22, Meir teaches the knit component (1630) as claimed including a first area; a second area; and a tubular rib knit structure (1632) extending across the first area and the second area, the tubular rib knit structure comprising a first portion (1633) comprising a first yarn (903), a second portion (1634) comprising a second yarn (905), and a third portion (1637) comprising a third yarn (907), wherein the first portion, the second portion, and the third portion each exhibit a distinct visual effect and are arranged about a circumference of the tubular rib knit structure. Regarding claim 2, the tubular rib knit structure extends non-linearly across the first area and the second area as seen in figure 18. Regarding claim 3, the tubular rib knit structure extends in a sinuous-like shape across the first area and the second area as seen in figure 18. Regarding claim 4, a first visual effect associated with the first portion may be visible from a first viewing angle, a second visual effect associated with the second portion may be visible from a second viewing angle, and a third visual effect associated with the third portion may be visible from a third viewing angle as seen in figure 22. Regarding claim 5, the first visual effect comprises a first color, the second visual effect comprises a second color, and the third visual effect comprises a third color. Regarding claims 8-10, the knit component is incorporated in a garment apparel and a shoe. Regarding claim 11, as seen in at least figures 18 and 22, Meir teaches an article apparel comprising: a tubular rib knit structure (1632, 1638) extending across a first area and a second area of the article of apparel, the tubular rib knit structure (1632) comprising a first portion (1633) and a second portion (1634) positioned on opposing sides of the tubular rib knit structure; the first portion (1633) of the tubular rib knit structure comprising different visual effects at the first area and at the second area; and the second portion of the tubular rib knit structure comprising different visual effects at the first area and at the second area, wherein the tubular rib knit structure extends non-linearly across the first area and the second area. Regarding claim 12, the tubular rib knit structure extends in a sinuous-like shape across the first area and the second area as seen in figure 18. Regarding claim 13, the article of apparel may be an upper-body garment as noted in paragraph [0033]. Regarding claims 14 and 15, the article of apparel is incorporated as a lower-body garment, e.g. a shoe (figure 18). Regarding claim 16, the first portion is formed from a first yarn type and the second portion is formed from a second yarn type different from the first yarn type as set forth in Meir’s claim 30. Regarding claim 18, the second yarn type may comprise a polyamide yarn (nylon, [0053]).
Regarding claim 19, the tubular rib knit structure integrally extends across the first area and the second area of the article of apparel. Regarding claim 20, Meir teaches the article of apparel comprising: a tubular rib knit (1632, 1638) structure extending across a first area and a second area of the article of apparel (figure 18), the tubular rib knit structure comprising a first portion (1633) and a second portion (1634) positioned on opposing sides of the tubular rib knit structure; the first portion (1633) of the tubular rib knit structure comprising different visual effects at the first area and at the second area; and the second portion (1634) of the tubular rib knit structure comprising different visual effects at the first area and at the second area, wherein the tubular rib knit structure extends in a sinuous-like shape across the first area and the second area as seen in figure 18.
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 6, 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meir et al. (WO 2016/053805 A 1) in view of Negola (WO 2006/127648).
Meir et al teaches the invention substantially as claimed as indicated above in the rejection to claim 7. Additionally Meir al. teaches using different types of yarns as indicated at [0053] lines 7-9 and [0055] lines 1-6. However the yarns types are not specifically set forth as the first yarn being a cationic-dyeable polyethylene terephthalate (CD PET) yarn, the second yarn comprises a polyamide yarn, and the third yarn comprises a polyethylene terephthalate (PET) yarn with different means for dyeing. Negola teaches at least in claims 10 and 16 that different types of yarns with different mean for dyeing may be used in knitted fabrics. 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 yarn types and dyeing techniques including a first yarn being a cationic-dyeable polyethylene terephthalate (CDPET) yarn, the second yarn comprises a polyamide yarn, and the third yarn comprises a polyethylene terephthalate (PET) yarn with different means for dyeing and wherein the CD-PET yarn is yarn dyed, the polyamide yarn is one of yarn dyed or dope dyed, and the PET yarn is dope dyed for the purpose of enhancing dye pigment pick up in various areas of the knit garment in order to optimize the aesthetic appeal of the variable dyed knit fabric.
.
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
Prosecution Insights