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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 are presented and are original claims.
The present office action treats claims 1-20 on the merits.
The present office action is a non-final rejection.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by [Halbower-Fenton, US 2021/0330032, hereinafter “Halbower”].
Regarding claim 1:
Halbower discloses (Figs. 1-8):
An article of footwear 100, comprising:
an upper 110, comprising:
a knit textile 110 (i.e. the “knit textile upper portion 110...a continuous textile”; para 66) forming at least part of a forefoot region, a midfoot region, a heel region, a lateral side, and a medial side of the upper (Figs. 1-8), the knit textile comprising an outer-facing surface 320 and an inner-facing surface 420;
a first area 210a of the knit textile comprising a first thickness measured between the outer-facing surface and the inner-facing surface (para 73), the first area extending through at least part of the forefoot region (see annotated Figs. 2-3 – a below), through at least part of a throat area located in the midfoot region (see annotated Figs. 2-3 – a below), and through at least part of the medial side (see annotated Figs. 2-3 – a below) and at least part of the lateral side (see annotated Figs. 2-3 – a below);
and a second area 210d of the knit textile having a second thickness measured between the outer-facing surface and the inner-facing surface (para 73), wherein the second thickness is less than the first thickness (210a...increased...thickness compared to...region[] 210[]d”; para 49), the second area 210d extending through at least part of the midfoot region (as in annotated Figs. 2-3 – a below) and through at least part of the heel region on the lateral side of the upper (as in annotated Figs. 2-3 – a below), and the second area extending adjacent to the first area in at least the midfoot region (as in annotated Figs. 2-3 – a below).
PNG
media_image1.png
854
1177
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4:
Halbower discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Halbower further discloses wherein the knit textile further comprises a third area 210b extending through at least part of the midfoot region and through at least part of the heel region on the medial side of the upper (as in annotated Figs. 2-3 – a presented in above addressing of claim 1), the third area 210b extending adjacent to the first area 210a in at least the midfoot region (as in annotated Figs. 2-3 – a presented in above addressing of claim 1), wherein the knit textile has a third thickness (“thickness”; para 49) in the third area measured between the outer-facing surface and the inner-facing surface, wherein the third thickness is less than the first thickness (“region 210 a...have increased ...thickness compared to one or more of the other regions 210 b-d”; para 49).
Claim(s) 1 and 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by [Davis, US 2017/0196303].
Regarding claim 1:
Davis discloses (Figs. 51-52):
An article of footwear 800, comprising:
an upper 820, comprising:
a knit (“textile elements 826 may...be...knitted textile 400”; para 174) textile 826 forming at least part of a forefoot region (Fig. 51), a midfoot region (Fig. 51), a heel region (Figs. 51-52), a lateral side (Fig. 52), and a medial side (Fig. 52) of the upper, the knit textile comprising an outer-facing surface (see annotated Fig. 52 – a below) and an inner-facing surface (see annotated Fig. 52 – a below);
a first area (see annotated Fig. 52 – a below) of the knit textile comprising a first thickness (see annotated Fig. 52 – a below) measured between the outer-facing surface and the inner-facing surface, the first area extending through at least part of the forefoot region (Fig. 51), through at least part of a throat area (as in annotated Fig. 51-52 – a below wherein the throat area includes lace apertures 824) located in the midfoot region (Fig. 51), and through at least part of the medial side (Fig. 52) and at least part of the lateral side (Fig. 52); and
a second area (see annotated Figs. 51-52 – a below) of the knit textile having a second thickness (see annotated Figs. 51-52 – a below) measured between the outer-facing surface and the inner-facing surface, wherein the second thickness is less than the first thickness (Fig. 2; “During the thermal bonding process that forms fused regions 828, areas of textile elements 826 are heated and compressed...the heating and compression may...cause fused regions 828 to compress or reduce in thickness. More particularly, processes that form a fused regions 828 may effectively cause thinning in the areas of fused regions 828. This effect may be seen in FIG. 52”; para 175), the second area extending through at least part of the midfoot region (Fig. 51) and through at least part of the heel region (Figs. 51-52) on the lateral side of the upper (Fig. 52), and the second area extending adjacent to the first area in at least the midfoot region (Fig. 51).
PNG
media_image2.png
840
1648
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4:
Davis discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Davis further discloses wherein the knit textile further comprises a third area (see annotated Figs. 51-52 – b below) extending through at least part of the midfoot region (Fig. 51) and through at least part of the heel region on the medial side of the upper (Fig. 52), the third area extending adjacent to the first area in at least the midfoot region (Fig. 51; it is noted the term “adjacent” means “Close to; lying near”; adjacent. (n.d.) American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. (2011). Retrieved December 18 2025 from https://www.thefreedictionary.com/adjacent), wherein the knit textile has a third thickness (see annotated Figs. 51-52 – b below) in the third area measured between the outer-facing surface and the inner-facing surface, wherein the third thickness is less than the first thickness (as in annotated Figs. 51-52 – b below; para 175).
PNG
media_image3.png
840
1648
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5:
Davis discloses The article of footwear of claim 4, as set forth above.
Davis further discloses wherein the knit textile further comprises a fourth area (see annotated Figs. 51-52 – c below) extending at least partially around (as in annotated Figs. 51-52 – c below where fourth area is at least partially around the ankle opening identified) an ankle opening (see annotated Figs. 51-52 – c below), wherein the fourth area comprises a fourth thickness that is greater than the second thickness (as in annotated Figs. 51-52 – c below; para 175).
PNG
media_image4.png
840
1648
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by [Davis, US 2017/0196303].
Regarding claim 15:
Davis discloses (Figs. 51-52):
An article of footwear 800, comprising:
an upper 820, comprising:
a knit (“textile elements 826 may...be...knitted textile 400”; para 174) textile 826 extending at least partially through a forefoot region (Fig. 51), a midfoot region (Fig. 51), a heel region (Figs. 51-52), a lateral side (Fig. 52), and a medial side (Fig. 52) of the upper, the knit textile comprising an outer-facing surface (see annotated Fig. 52 – d below) and an inner-facing surface (see annotated Fig. 52 – d below);
a first area (see annotated Fig. 52 – d below) of the knit textile comprising a first thickness (see annotated Fig. 52 – d below) measured between the outer-facing surface and the inner-facing surface; and
a second area (see annotated Fig. 52 – d below) of the knit textile comprising a second thickness (see annotated Fig. 52 – d below) measured between the outer-facing surface and the inner-facing surface, wherein the second thickness is less than the first thickness (Fig. 2; “During the thermal bonding process that forms fused regions 828, areas of textile elements 826 are heated and compressed...the heating and compression may...cause fused regions 828 to compress or reduce in thickness. More particularly, processes that form a fused regions 828 may effectively cause thinning in the areas of fused regions 828. This effect may be seen in FIG. 52”; para 175),
wherein the first area has a first stiffness (“have a tendency to stretch during walking, running, or other ambulatory activities”; para 174) and the second area has a second stiffness (the “greater stretch-resistance” imparted by 828; para 174), the second stiffness being greater than the first stiffness (via the “stretch-resistance” thereof; para 174; and in the manner generally described in para 112 directed to stretch-resistance of woven textile 300, wherein it is noted that Davis discloses “Although the above discussion focused upon woven textile 300, similar concepts apply to knitted textile 400...knitted textile 400 may be engineered, designed, or otherwise structured to have particular properties in different areas, including the properties of...stretch-resistance.”; para 115).
PNG
media_image5.png
840
1067
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16:
Davis discloses The article of footwear of claim 15, as set forth above.
Davis further discloses wherein the second area is contiguous with the first area (as in annotated Fig. 52 – d presented in above addressing of claim 15.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Halbower-Fenton, US 2021/0330032, hereinafter “Halbower”] in view of [Meir, US 2013/0239625], [Durrell, US 2020/0022447] and [Liu, US 2019/0203388].
Regarding claim 2:
Halbower discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Halbower does not expressly disclose wherein at least a portion of the first area has a double knit construction that comprises a high-tenacity yarn and a yarn comprising a thermoplastic elastomer.
In Halbower, the second thickness of the second area is less than the first thickness of the first area (see above treatment of claim 1).
Meir ‘625 teaches (Figs. 13-15) a knit upper (Abstract) wherein a knit textile 1412 comprises a second area 1412 having a second thickness wherein said second thickness is less than a first thickness of a first area 1410 (“first knit structure 1410...have a greater thickness than second knit structure 1412”; para 95; see also Figs. 14-15). In Meir, the “first knit structure 1410 may be a double-knit jersey structure and second knit structure 1412 may be a single-knit jersey structure” (para 95).
It 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Halbower such that at least a portion of the first area has a double knit construction and at least a portion of the second area has a single knit construction in order to yield the predictable result of providing the relative thicknesses of the two areas—the double knit area having a greater thickness than the single knit area—as suggested by Meir (Figs. 13-15; para 95).
Regarding the limitation that comprises a high-tenacity yarn and a yarn comprising a thermoplastic elastomer:
Durrell teaches a knitted component (Abstract) appropriate for footwear (para 2) wherein an area comprises “a high-tenacity yarn” “to provide...strength” (para 26).
It 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 to have modified the modified Halbower such that its portion of the first area has a double knit construction that comprises a high-tenacity yarn in order to provide strength to the portion of the first area, as suggested by Durrell (para 26).
Liu teaches a fabric appropriate for “footwear uppers” (Figs. 24-25; paras 58 and 63) comprising a knit fabric (para 12; para 28; para 34; Figs. 1B-1C) comprising a yarn comprising a thermoplastic elastomer (“yarn...comprising...thermoplastic elastomer”; para 55). Liu further teaches “thermoplastic elastomer...is known for...superior tensile strength and thermo-stability” (para 55).
It 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 to have modified the modified Halbower such that its portion of the first area has a double knit construction that comprises a high-tenacity yarn and also a yarn comprising a thermoplastic elastomer in order to render the portion fo the first area strong and/or thermostable, as suggested by Liu (para 55).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Halbower-Fenton, US 2021/0330032, hereinafter “Halbower”] in view of [Meir, US 2013/0239625], and [Durrell, US 2020/0022447].
Regarding claim 3:
Halbower discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Halbower does not expressly disclose wherein at least a portion of the second area has a single knit construction comprising a high-tenacity yarn.
In Halbower, the second thickness of the second area is less than the first thickness of the first area (see above treatment of claim 1).
Meir teaches (Figs. 13-15) a knit upper (Abstract) wherein a knit textile 1412 comprises a second area 1412 having a second thickness wherein said second thickness is less than a first thickness of a first area 1410 (“first knit structure 1410...have a greater thickness than second knit structure 1412”; para 95; see also Figs. 14-15). In Meir ‘625, the “first knit structure 1410 may be a double-knit jersey structure and second knit structure 1412 may be a single-knit jersey structure” (para 95).
It 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Halbower such that at least a portion of the first area has a double knit construction and at least a portion of the second area has a single knit construction in order to yield the predictable result of providing the relative thicknesses of the two areas—the double knit area having a greater thickness than the single knit area—as suggested by Meir (Figs. 13-15; para 95).
Regarding the limitation comprising a high-tenacity yarn:
Durrell teaches a knitted component (Abstract) appropriate for footwear (para 2) wherein an area comprises “a high-tenacity yarn” “to provide...strength” (para 26).
It 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 to have modified the modified Halbower such that its portion of the second area has a single knit construction comprising a high-tenacity yarn in order to provide strength to the portion of the second area, as suggested by Durrell (para 26).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Halbower-Fenton, US 2021/0330032, hereinafter “Halbower”] in view of [Zavala, US 2017/0258169] and [Minami, US 2008/0127524].
Regarding claim 7:
Halbower discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Halbower does not expressly disclose wherein the outer-facing surface of the knit textile has a first coefficient of friction in at least the first area and has a second coefficient of friction in at least the second area, the first coefficient of friction being greater than the second coefficient of friction.
Zavala teaches providing an outer surface of a knit textile with aesthetic and functional characteristics including increased friction (emphasis provided by Examiner): “loops exposed on the outer surface of the knit element 240 (e.g., the loops formed on the front needle bed 562 of FIG. 5) may form a textured surface of the knit element 240 that produce a desirable visual effect on the outer surface of the upper 220. It is contemplated that these loops may be formed of multiple yarns with a variety of colors. Each color may be specifically located to thereby form an aesthetically pleasing pattern. Further, these loops exposed on the outer surface of the knit element 240 may provide the upper 220 with desirable functional characteristics (e.g., increased friction when gripping or contacting another object, such as a ball)”; para 58.
Thus Zavala at least teaches providing a knit textile outer surface with increased friction. However, Zavala is silent as to relative friction between two areas.
Minami teaches an upper 102 wherein said upper is provided with an increased coefficient of friction at portions thereof (i.e. provided with “gripping members” which are “made of a material with a higher coefficient of friction than upper 102”; para 54). Minami further teaches a “gripping region 576 may be disposed on side portion 582 of upper 502” (para 79) whereby “if a wearer wishes to curl the ball for a pass or a curved shot, the wearer may kick a ball with side portion 582 where...gripping region 576 is disposed” (para 81).
It 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Halbower such that the outer-facing surface of the knit textile has a first coefficient of friction in at least the first area and has a second coefficient of friction in at least the second area, the first coefficient of friction being greater than the second coefficient of friction in order to permit a wearer to kick a ball with a high-friction-side portion of the first area for the purpose of permitting a wearer to curl a ball for a pass and/or a curved shot, as taught by Minami (para 81).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Halbower-Fenton, US 2021/0330032, hereinafter “Halbower”] in view of [Fahmi, US 2014/0130376].
Regarding claim 8:
Halbower discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Halbower does not expressly disclose wherein the second thickness is about one- third of the first thickness.
Fahmi teaches a knit upper (Abstract) wherein a knitted component 130 has two thicknesses wherein one of said two thicknesses is less than the other of said two thicknesses: “a...portion of knitted component 130 has a first thickness and...areas 133 have a second thickness, with the first thickness being less than the second thickness. Depending upon the knit structures and knitting techniques that are utilized to form knitted component 130, as well as the yarns utilized in knitted component 130, the difference between the first thickness and the second thickness may range from one to ten millimeters or more. In many configurations, the first thickness is less than four millimeters, and the second thickness is at least two millimeters greater than the first thickness” (para 84). Fahmi therefore teaches a range of relative thicknesses of a knitted component wherein said range includes values wherein one of the thicknesses is about one-third of the other thickness—e.g. Fahmi teaches one thickness can be three millimeters (which is “less than four millimeters”) and the other thickness can be nine millimeters (which is between “one to ten millimeters” greater than three millimeters). In like manner, the range of Fahmi includes other pairs of thicknesses that would be within the claimed range; e.g. two millimeters (also “less than four millimeters) and six millimeters (which is between “one to ten millimeters” greater than two millimeters). In Fahmi, the areas having the greater thickness 133 “may enhance the strength of upper 120 or impart a variety of different properties to upper 120” (para 78).
Because Fahmi is concerned with desired strength and properties of knit upper and provides a range (i.e. one thickness being “less than four millimeters” and the other thickness being “one to ten millimeters” greater than the one thickness) encompassing the claimed limitation, the claimed range is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at the claimed relative thicknesses through routine experimentation in order to provide desired footwear properties. The claimed relative thickness is merely an optimum or workable percent and the relative thickness of the knit upper is expected to affect the strength within the first area relative to the second area.
Therefore, it 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Halbower such that its second thickness is about one- third of the first thickness in order to afford a degree of strength to its first area relative to its second area that is desirable by some users and in some use conditions.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Davis, US 2017/0196303].
Regarding claim 6:Davis discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Davis Figs. 51-52 does not expressly disclose wherein the second area extends from the first area to a biteline where the upper is secured to a sole structure.
However and in further view of Davis:
Davis Fig. 53 teaches providing a second area 828 extending to a biteline (the line between midsole 811 and upper 820; Fig. 53) where an upper is secured to a sole structure. Davis further teaches and in relation to the embodiment of Fig. 53: “region 828 is located in the forefoot area and adjacent to sole structure 810, which adds greater durability to the forefoot area. More particularly, the forefoot area of upper 820 may experience greater abrasive-wear than other portions of upper 820, and the addition of fused region 828 in the forefoot area may enhance the abrasion-resistance of footwear 800 in the forefoot area” (para 178).
It 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Davis such that its second area extends from the first area to a biteline where the upper is secured to a sole structure in order to add greater durability at the location of the biteline in the forefoot area, as suggested by Davis (para 178).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Davis, US 2017/0196303] in view of [Zavala, US 2017/0258169] and [Minami, US 2008/0127524].
Regarding claim 7:
Davis discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Davis does not expressly disclose wherein the outer-facing surface of the knit textile has a first coefficient of friction in at least the first area and has a second coefficient of friction in at least the second area, the first coefficient of friction being greater than the second coefficient of friction.
Zavala teaches providing an outer surface of a knit textile with aesthetic and functional characteristics including increased friction (emphasis provided by Examiner): “loops exposed on the outer surface of the knit element 240 (e.g., the loops formed on the front needle bed 562 of FIG. 5) may form a textured surface of the knit element 240 that produce a desirable visual effect on the outer surface of the upper 220. It is contemplated that these loops may be formed of multiple yarns with a variety of colors. Each color may be specifically located to thereby form an aesthetically pleasing pattern. Further, these loops exposed on the outer surface of the knit element 240 may provide the upper 220 with desirable functional characteristics (e.g., increased friction when gripping or contacting another object, such as a ball)”; para 58.
Thus Zavala at least teaches providing a knit textile outer surface with increased friction. However, Zavala is silent as to relative friction between two areas.
Minami teaches an upper 102 wherein said upper is provided with an increased coefficient of friction at portions thereof (i.e. provided with “gripping members” which are “made of a material with a higher coefficient of friction than upper 102”; para 54). Minami further teaches a “gripping region...may be disposed on instep portion 580 of upper 502” (para 79) whereby “if a player wishes to keep the trajectory of a ball low, they may kick a ball with instep portion 580 where first gripping region 574 is disposed” (para 80).
It 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Davis such that the outer-facing surface of the knit textile has a first coefficient of friction in at least the first area and has a second coefficient of friction in at least the second area, the first coefficient of friction being greater than the second coefficient of friction in order to permit a wearer to kick a ball with a high-friction-instep portion of the first area for the purpose of permitting a ball trajectory low, as suggested by Minami (para 80).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Davis, US 2017/0196303] in view of [Fahmi, US 2014/0130376].
Regarding claim 8:
Davis discloses The article of footwear of claim 1, as set forth above.
Davis does not expressly disclose wherein the second thickness is about one- third of the first thickness.
Fahmi teaches a knit upper (Abstract) wherein a knitted component 130 has two thicknesses wherein one of said two thicknesses is less than the other of said two thicknesses: “a...portion of knitted component 130 has a first thickness and...areas 133 have a second thickness, with the first thickness being less than the second thickness. Depending upon the knit structures and knitting techniques that are utilized to form knitted component 130, as well as the yarns utilized in knitted component 130, the difference between the first thickness and the second thickness may range from one to ten millimeters or more. In many configurations, the first thickness is less than four millimeters, and the second thickness is at least two millimeters greater than the first thickness” (para 84). Fahmi therefore teaches a range of relative thicknesses of a knitted component wherein said range includes values wherein one of the thicknesses is about one-third of the other thickness—e.g. Fahmi teaches one thickness can be three millimeters (which is “less than four millimeters”) and the other thickness can be nine millimeters (which is between “one to ten millimeters” greater than three millimeters). In like manner, the range of Fahmi includes other pairs of thicknesses that would be within the claimed range; e.g. two millimeters (also “less than four millimeters) and six millimeters (which is between “one to ten millimeters” greater than two millimeters). In Fahmi, the areas having the greater thickness 133 “may enhance the strength of upper 120 or impart a variety of different properties to upper 120” (para 78).
Because Fahmi is concerned with desired strength and properties of knit upper and provides a range (i.e. one thickness being “less than four millimeters” and the other thickness being “one to ten millimeters” greater than the one thickness) encompassing the claimed limitation, the claimed range is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at the claimed relative thicknesses through routine experimentation in order to provide desired footwear properties. The claimed relative thickness is merely an optimum or workable percent and the relative thickness of the knit upper is expected to affect the strength within the first area relative to the second area.
Therefore, it 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Davis such that its second thickness is about one- third of the first thickness in order to afford a degree of strength to its first area relative to its second area that is desirable by some users and in some use conditions.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Zavala, US 2017/0258169] in view of [Minami, US 2008/0127524].
Regarding claim 9:
Zavala discloses (Fig. 1):
An article of footwear 110, 120 (i.e. the combined “sole 110” and “upper 120”; para 32), comprising:
an upper 120, comprising:
a knit textile 140 forming at least part of a forefoot region 101, a midfoot region 102, a heel region 122, a lateral side 104, and a medial side 105 of the upper, the knit textile comprising an outer- facing surface (para 35; Fig. 1) and an inner-facing surface (the “surface facing the void 128”; para 35; Fig. 1);
Zavala Fig. 1 does not expressly disclose:
a first area of the knit textile extending through at least part of the forefoot region and through at least part of a throat area in the midfoot region, and extending at least partially through the medial side and the lateral side; and
a second area of the knit textile having a different knit construction than the first area and extending through at least part of the midfoot region and through at least part of the heel region on the lateral side of the upper, and extending adjacent to the first area through at least the midfoot region.
However and in further view of Zavala:
Zavala Fig. 2 teaches an upper 220 of an “article of footwear” (para 36) wherein said upper 220 comprises:
a first area 232 of a knit textile 240 extending through at least part of the forefoot region 201 (as evidenced in Fig. 4 wherein a portion of 232 extends into forefoot region 201) and through at least part of a throat area 207 in a midfoot region (the region between 201 and 222; Fig. 2), and extending at least partially through the medial side (Fig. 2; para 25) and the lateral side (first area 232 “include[s] the cuff 230” (para 37) wherein said cuff 230 is “configured to surround an ankle” (para 36) such that first area extends at least partially through both medial side and lateral side); and
a second area 234 of the knit textile having a different knit construction than the first area 232 (para 38) and extending through at least part of the midfoot region (the region between 201 and 222; Fig. 2) and through at least part of the heel region 222 on the lateral side of the upper (“to the heel region 222 on the lateral side (not shown)”; para 38), and extending adjacent to the first area 232 through at least the midfoot region (the region between 201 and 222; Fig. 2).
Zavala further teaches the upper of Fig. 2 is appropriate for “providing additional support to the ankle and/or lower leg (e.g., to prevent or reduce ankle inversion), by providing protection from harsh conditions (e.g., when the article of footwear is a boot for rugged outdoor use), by providing a foot with a comfortable and secure fit, and/or by providing desirable aesthetics” (para 36).
It 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Zavala Fig. 1 such that the knit textile of its upper is provided with a first area of the knit textile extending through at least part of the forefoot region and through at least part of a throat area in the midfoot region, and extending at least partially through the medial side and the lateral side; and a second area of the knit textile having a different knit construction than the first area and extending through at least part of the midfoot region and through at least part of the heel region on the lateral side of the upper, and extending adjacent to the first area through at least the midfoot region, as in Zavala Fig. 2, in order to provide additional support to the ankle and/or lower leg (e.g., to prevent or reduce ankle inversion); provide protection from harsh conditions (e.g., when the article of footwear is a boot for rugged outdoor use); to providing a foot with a comfortable and secure fit, and/or to provide desirable aesthetics, as taught by Zavala (para 36).
The modified Zavala does not meet the limitation:
wherein the outer-facing surface of the knit textile has a first coefficient of friction in at least the first area and has a second coefficient of friction in at least the second area, the first coefficient of friction being greater than the second coefficient of friction.
However and in further view of Zavala:
Zavala teaches two areas 232, 234 of a knit textile may differ in terms of elasticity: “the knit structure of the second portion 234...may be relatively inelastic at least when compared to the first knit structure forming the first portion 232”; para 58.
In addition, Zavala further teaches providing the outer surface of a knit textile with aesthetic and functional characteristics including increased friction (emphasis provided by Examiner): “loops exposed on the outer surface of the knit element 240 (e.g., the loops formed on the front needle bed 562 of FIG. 5) may form a textured surface of the knit element 240 that produce a desirable visual effect on the outer surface of the upper 220. It is contemplated that these loops may be formed of multiple yarns with a variety of colors. Each color may be specifically located to thereby form an aesthetically pleasing pattern. Further, these loops exposed on the outer surface of the knit element 240 may provide the upper 220 with desirable functional characteristics (e.g., increased friction when gripping or contacting another object, such as a ball)”; para 58.
Thus Zavala at least teaches providing a knit textile outer surface with increased friction. However, Zavala is silent as to relative friction between two areas.
Minami teaches an upper 102 wherein said upper is provided with an increased coefficient of friction at portions thereof (i.e. provided with “gripping members” which are “made of a material with a higher coefficient of friction than upper 102”; para 54). Minami further teaches a “gripping region...may be disposed on instep portion 580 of upper 502” (para 79) whereby “if a player wishes to keep the trajectory of a ball low, they may kick a ball with instep portion 580 where first gripping region 574 is disposed” (para 80).
It 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 to have modified the modified Zavala such that the outer-facing surface of the knit textile has a first coefficient of friction in at least the first area and has a second coefficient of friction in at least the second area, the first coefficient of friction being greater than the second coefficient of friction in order to permit a wearer to kick a ball with a high-friction-instep portion of the first area for the purpose of permitting a ball trajectory low, as suggested by Minami (para 80).
Regarding claim 10:
Zavala in view of Minami teach The article of footwear of claim 9, as set forth above.
As applied to claim 9 above, the modified Zavala does not meet the limitation wherein the first area has a double knit construction, and the second area has a single knit construction.
However and in further view of Zavala:
Zavala teaches “The knit element 240 may include more than one type of knit structure, such as ...a single or double jersey knit structure”; para 37.
It 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 to have modified the modified Zavala such that its first area has a double jersey knit construction and its second area has a single jersey knit construction in order to yield the predictable result of an article of footwear appropriate for the activity of soccer and/or football. One of ordinary skill would have been confronted with a choice of knit construction(s) to provide to each area and would have recognized that providing the first area has a double jersey knit construction and the second area has a single jersey knit construction would be one of a plurality of acceptable choices of knit structure assignment based on the teachings of Zavala.
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Zavala, US 2017/0258169] and [Minami, US 2008/0127524] as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of [Durrell, US 2020/0022447] and [Frazier, US 2021/0030117].
Regarding claim 11:
Zavala in view of Minami teach The article of footwear of claim 9, as set forth above.
Zavala does not expressly disclose wherein the first area comprises a high-tenacity yarn and a yarn comprising a thermoplastic elastomer.
Durrell teaches a knitted component (Abstract) appropriate for footwear (para 2) wherein an area comprises “a high-tenacity yarn” “to provide...strength” (para 26).
It 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 to have modified the modified Zavala such that its first area comprises a high-tenacity yarn in order to provide strength to the first area, as suggested by Durrell (para 26).
Frazier teaches yarn (para 88) comprising a thermoplastic elastomer (para 95) further wherein an outer-facing surface of an article of footwear comprises a skin that comprises the thermoplastic elastomer (“forming a skin having high abrasion-resistance and/or traction across an entire surface of the textile or just within a region of the textile”; para 22).
It 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 to have modified the modified Zavala such that its first area comprises a high-tenacity yarn and a yarn comprising a thermoplastic elastomer; wherein the outer-facing surface comprises a skin that comprises the thermoplastic elastomer in order to provide abrasion resistance and/or traction to the first area, as suggested by Frazier (para 22).
Regarding claim 12:
Zavala in view of Minami, Durrell, and Frazier teach The article of footwear of claim 11, as set forth above.
The modified Zavala further meets the limitation wherein the outer-facing surface comprises a skin that comprises the thermoplastic elastomer.
(Refer to above treatment of claim 11 where the limitation is addressed.)
Regarding claim 13:
Zavala in view of Minami, Durrell, and Frazier teach The article of footwear of claim 11, as set forth above.
The modified Zavala does not meet the limitation wherein the thermoplastic elastomer is absent from the second area.
However and in further view of Frazier:
Frazier teaches yarn (para 88) comprising a thermoplastic elastomer (para 95) further wherein an outer-facing surface of an article of footwear comprises a skin that comprises the thermoplastic elastomer (“forming a skin having high abrasion-resistance and/or traction across an entire surface of the textile or just within a region of the textile”; para 22; emphasis provided by Examiner).
It 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 to have modified the modified Zavala such that the thermoplastic elastomer is absent from the second area in order to provide abrasion resistance and/or traction only to the first area and not to the second area, as suggested by Frazier (para 22).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Zavala, US 2017/0258169] and [Minami, US 2008/0127524] as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of [Dua, US 2010/0154256].
Regarding claim 14:
Zavala in view of Minami teach The article of footwear of claim 9, as set forth above.
Zavala does not expressly disclose wherein the first area has a greater knit density than the second area.
However, Dua teaches a footwear upper (Abstract, title) wherein areas thereof are provided with different knit densities (para 44) such that a first area has a greater knit density than a second area: to “impart greater stiffness and wear-resistance to those areas,...increase the knit density in specific areas”; para 44; “dense areas...may impart greater stiffness...may impart greater wear-resistance...may be utilized to reinforce..., provide areas of decreased flex, or decrease permeability” (para 44).
It 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 to have modified the modified Zavala such that the first area has a greater knit density than the second area in order to impart greater stiffness, greater wear-resistance, reinforcement, decreased flex, and/or decreased permeability to the first area, as taught by Dua (para 44).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Davis, US 2017/0196303].
Regarding claim 17:
Davis discloses The article of footwear of claim 15, as set forth above.
Davis Figs. 51-52 does not expressly disclose wherein a translucency of the second area is greater than a translucency of the first area.
However and in further view of Davis:
Davis “A variety of other properties may also be varied through the addition or the configuration of fused regions...For example, the...transparency of...textile 300 may...be increased as the degree of fusing increases... Fused regions...may...contrast visually with other areas.” (para 114). In addition, Davis teaches “Various aesthetic properties may also be modified by forming fused regions 828, including the transparency...and contrast in textile elements 826. Utilizing this change in aesthetic properties, fused regions 828 may be utilized to form indicia in areas of footwear 800. That is, fused regions 828 may be utilized to form a name or logo of a team or company, the name or initials of an individual, or an esthetic pattern, drawing, or element” (para 179).
It 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Davis such that a translucency of the second area is greater than a translucency of the first area in order to provide visual contrast to the article of footwear for aesthetics, as suggested by Davis (paras 114, 179).
(It is noted the term “translucency” as described in the present specification (see para [0034] as filed) refers to the ability to let light through openings and/or “through translucent or transparent material” (see para [0034] as filed) such that the “transparency” (as described by Davis in paras 114 and 179 of Davis) is translucency as claimed).
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Davis, US 2017/0196303] in view of [Frazier, US 2021/0030117].
Regarding claim 18:
Davis discloses The article of footwear of claim 15, as set forth above.
Davis does not expressly disclose wherein the first area comprises a thermoformed network of yarns comprising a thermoplastic elastomer that is softened and solidified.
However, Frazier teaches a thermoformed network of yarns (para 88) comprising a thermoplastic elastomer (para 95) that is softened and solidified (para 88) further wherein the thermoplastic elastomer forms a film at least partially covering an outer-facing surface of an article of footwear (“define an externally-facing surface of the article of footwear...is a component of an upper for an article of footwear”; para 95).
Frazier further teaches “The thermoformed film component can be used to provide abrasion resistance or traction or both to at least a portion of the article of footwear” (para 95).
It 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 to have modified the article of footwear of Davis such that its first area comprises a thermoformed network of yarns comprising a thermoplastic elastomer that is softened and solidified; wherein the thermoplastic elastomer forms a film at least partially covering the outer-facing surface of the knit textile in the first area in order to provide abrasion resistance and/or traction to the first area, as suggested by Frazier (para 95).
Regarding claim 19:
Davis in view of Frazier teaches The article of footwear of claim 18, as set forth above.
The modified Davis further meets the limitation wherein the thermoplastic elastomer forms a film at least partially covering the outer-facing surface of the knit textile in the first area.
(Refer to above treatment of claim 18 where the limitation is addressed).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Davis, US 2017/0196303] and [Frazier, US 2021/0030117] as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of [Zavala, US 2017/0258169] and [Minami, US 2008/0127524].
Regarding claim 20:
Davis in view of Frazier teaches The article of footwear of claim 19, as set forth above.
Davis does not expressly disclose wherein the outer-facing surface of the knit textile has a first coefficient of friction in at least the first area and has a second coefficient of friction in at least the second area, the first coefficient of friction being greater than the second coefficient of friction.
Zavala teaches providing an outer surface of a knit textile with aesthetic and functional characteristics including increased friction (emphasis provided by Examiner): “loops exposed on the outer surface of the knit element 240 (e.g., the loops formed on the front needle bed 562 of FIG. 5) may form a textured surface of the knit element 240 that produce a desirable visual effect on the outer surface of the upper 220. It is contemplated that these loops may be formed of multiple yarns with a variety of colors. Each color may be specifically located to thereby form an aesthetically pleasing pattern. Further, these loops exposed on the outer surface of the knit element 240 may provide the upper 220 with desirable functional characteristics (e.g., increased friction when gripping or contacting another object, such as a ball)”; para 58.
Thus Zavala at least teaches providing a knit textile outer surface with increased friction. However, Zavala is silent as to relative friction between two areas.
Minami teaches an upper 102 wherein said upper is provided with an increased coefficient of friction at portions thereof (i.e. provided with “gripping members” which are “made of a material with a higher coefficient of friction than upper 102”; para 54). Minami further teaches a “gripping region 576 may be disposed on side portion 582 of upper 502” (para 79) whereby “if a wearer wishes to curl the ball for a pass or a curved shot, the wearer may kick a ball with side portion 582 where...gripping region 576 is disposed” (para 81).
It 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 to have modified the modified Davis such that the outer-facing surface of the knit textile has a first coefficient of friction in at least the first area and has a second coefficient of friction in at least the second area, the first coefficient of friction being greater than the second coefficient of friction in order to permit a wearer to kick a ball with a high-friction-side portion of the first area for the purpose of permitting a wearer to curl a ball for a pass and/or a curved shot, as taught by Minami (para 81).
(It is noted the first area identified in annotated Fig. 52 – d in above treatment of claim 15 is in the heel region of the article of footwear; however, the first area identified in claim 1 is not limited to only the heel region and extends forward to midfoot and forefoot regions as evidenced in Fig. 51 such that providing the higher first coefficient of friction to the first area would result in the capability described by Minami in the midfoot and/or forefoot regions thereof when a wearer kicks a ball.)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRADY A NUNNERY whose telephone number is (571)272-2995. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-F.
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, 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 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.
/GRADY ALEXANDER NUNNERY/Examiner, Art Unit 3732