DETAILED ACTION
Claims 21-40 are pending. Claims 21-24, 29, 32, 33, and 38 are amended.
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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on June 10, 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 21-24, 29, 32, 33, and 38 have been amended. Thus, claims 21-40 are presently pending in this application with claims 23, 26, 37, and 39 being withdrawn from consideration.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the claim objections.
Applicant’s filing of a terminal disclaimer has overcome the Non-Statutory double patenting rejections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §112(b) rejections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has not overcome the 35 USC §102(a)(1) and §103 rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Zewde describes combining severed leading end with an unsevered running portion and recites that the claim language for 21 and 38 rear “a severed end of the first yarn segment” is linked with “a severed end of the second yarn segment”. Initially, the Examiner asserts that the severed end of the first and second yarn segment does not require the absolute endpoints of the yarn to be entangled with one another, but rather that the endpoint portions must be entangled. The examiner reads “severed end” broadly because the specification of the parent as originally filed (December 6, 2022) provides no support for the term being read narrowly. That is, the specification does not recite “severed” or “cut” with respect to yarn, and neither does it refer to “end” when referring to yarn. The yarn is recited as having “commingled” portions at a transition junction (para. 0029). The transition junctions are described as joining the yarn sections by any conventional splicing or joining method (para. 0031) but again does not recite that the severed ends of the yarn are joined. Para. 0048 recites that the yarn segments could be leftover yarns or off-specification yarns, but again is silent as to whether they are severed, and how the ends are connected. Fig. 1 provides the best support for the claim language but based on that information “severed end” is interpreted to mean that there are not two strands of yarn extending next to each other, but rather one yarn ends and another begins at a junction. Zewde includes two end portions of yarn that are joined together at a junction, which meets the claimed “severed end” to the extent the term is supported in the specification. A narrower reading of this claim term would introduce new matter rejections.
Next, Applicant argues that Zewde does not teach a “randomly selected” characteristic to provide a random combination. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claims 21 and 33 are product claims and thus how the product came to be is immaterial. Furthermore, it is unclear what would be considered “random” and who or what is doing the selection. Claim 38 has a similar issue in that there is no controller or mechanism described for causing a “random” selection and thus the selection is made when the system begins manufacturing. That is, when the yarn is loaded into the system it is “random” inasmuch as claimed.
The Mallen-Dua combination utilizes the same reasoning. There is no mechanism recited in the claims for “randomly selected” and thus when the colors are chose for the footwear they are considered “randomly selected” by the person or program that selected the colors.
The Examiner called Mr. O’Brien on July 16th indicating that the next communication would not be a Notice of Allowance, no return call was received.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 21, 25, 27, 28, 31, 32, 38 and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zewde et al. (US 20040118098).
Regarding claim 21, Zewde describes engineered yarn structure (spliced yarn 12) comprising:
a first yarn section (see annotated Fig. 7) formed by a first yarn segment (14); and
a second yarn section (see annotated Fig. 7) formed by a second yarn segment (16),
wherein the engineered yarn structure comprises a transition junction (less than 1 mm of the intermingled area, para. 0025) that comprises commingled portions of the first yarn section and the second yarn section (intermingled, para. 0025),
wherein a severed end of the first yarn segment is wrap spliced, mechanically knotted, twisted, or entangled with a severed end of the second yarn segment to form the transition junction (intermingled, para. 0025), and
wherein the first section has a first type of a first aesthetic characteristic (first color),
wherein the second section has a second type of the first aesthetic characteristic that is different from the first type (second color, different, para. 0026); and wherein the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic are randomly selected (the claims is for a yarn structure, the type of color of yarn is “randomly” selected in that someone must load the color spools, and what they pick is considered “random” inasmuch as claimed) to define a random combination of the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic along the engineered yarn structure.
PNG
media_image1.png
469
784
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 25, Zewde describes the engineered yarn structure of claim 21, wherein the first aesthetic characteristic is color, wherein the first type is a first color, and wherein the second type is a second color different than the first color (first and second yarns are differently colored, para. 0026).
Regarding claim 27, Zewde describes the engineered yarn structure of claim 21, wherein the first aesthetic characteristic (color) is uniform along each of the first yarn section and the second yarn section (each has a color from their respective yarn bundle which is uniform inasmuch as claimed).
Regarding claim 28, Zewde describes the engineered yarn structure of claim 21, wherein the first yarn section has a first length, wherein the second yarn section has a second length that is different from the first length (lengths may be different, para. 0083).
Regarding claim 31, Zewde describes the engineered yarn structure of claim 21, wherein the transition junction has a length of less than 1 millimeter (the claim does not state that this is the ONLY place that has commingled threads, thus less than 1 mm of the area where the threads commingle is considered the transition junction, and Zewde includes a commingled area with the first and second yarns).
Regarding claim 32, Zewde describes the engineered yarn structure of claim 21, wherein the engineered yarn structure comprises sequential yarn sections that are joined at respective transition junctions and that alternate between the first and second type of the first aesthetic characteristic (alternating between first and second yarn segment, para. 0010).
Regarding claim 38, Zewde describes a method comprising:
forming a yarn (spliced yarn 12) having an engineered yarn structure comprising:
a first yarn section formed by a first yarn segment (see annotated Fig. 7); and
a second yarn section formed by a second yarn segment (see annotated Fig. 7),
wherein the engineered yarn structure comprises a transition junction (less than 1 mm of the intermingled area, para. 0025) that comprises commingled portions of the first yarn section and the second yarn section (intermingled, para. 0025),
wherein the first yarn section has a first type of a first aesthetic characteristic (first color), and
wherein the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic are randomly selected (the claims is for a yarn structure, the type of color of yarn is “randomly” selected in that someone must load the color spools, and what they pick is considered “random” inasmuch as claimed) to define a random combination of the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic along the engineered yarn structure;
wherein the second yarn section has a second type of the first aesthetic characteristic that is different from the first type (second color, different, para. 0026),
wherein forming the yarn comprises wrap splicing, mechanical knotting, twisting, or entangling (intermingled, para. 0025) respective adjacent severed ends of the first and second yarn segments to form the transition junction.
PNG
media_image1.png
469
784
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 40, Zewde describes the method of claim 38, wherein the first aesthetic characteristic is color, wherein the first type is a first color, and wherein the second type is a second color different than the first color (colors, different, para. 0026).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 33-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zewde et al. (US 20040118098) in view of Blackstone et al. (US 4106416).
Regarding claim 33 Zewde describes an article comprising:
wherein the at least one aesthetic characteristic comprises one or more of luster, color (color, para. 0026), size, physical attribute associated with material type, or texture,
wherein at least one yarn of the plurality of yarns comprises an engineered yarn structure (spliced yarn 12) having:
a first yarn section (see annotated Fig. 7) formed by a first yarn segment; and
a second yarn section (see annotated Fig. 7) formed by a second yarn segment,
wherein the engineered yarn structure comprises a transition junction (less than 1 mm of the intermingled area, para. 0025) that comprises commingled portions of the first yarn section and the second yarn section,
wherein a severed end of the first yarn segment is wrap spliced, mechanically knotted, twisted, or entangled (intermingled, para. 0025) with a severed end of the second yarn segment to form the transition junction, and
wherein the first section has a first type of a first aesthetic characteristic of the at least one aesthetic characteristic (color), and wherein the second section has a second type of the first aesthetic characteristic that is different from the first type (second color, different, para. 0026); and
wherein the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic are randomly selected (the claims is for a yarn structure, the type of color of yarn is “randomly” selected in that someone must load the color spools, and what they pick is considered “random” inasmuch as claimed) to define a random combination of the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic along the engineered yarn structure;
Zewde describes forming a yarn that can be used for forming carpet (para. 0006) but does not explicitly describe actually utilizing the yarn in a carpet and thus does not explicitly describe a backing; and
a plurality of yarns tufted, woven, or knitted through the backing, each yarn defining at least one aesthetic characteristic,
In related art, Blackstone describes
a backing (backing 134); and
a plurality of yarns tufted (includes a plurality of yarns associated with a plurality of needles), woven, or knitted through the backing, each yarn defining at least one aesthetic characteristic (have different colors).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify multiple yarns of Zewde to be utilized in a tufted carpet such as described in Blackstone in order to provide a use for the yarn formed rather than solely be splicing yarn together.
PNG
media_image2.png
342
771
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 34, Zewde as modified describes the article of claim 33, wherein the first aesthetic characteristic is color, wherein the first type is a first color, and wherein the second type is a second color different than the first color (have different colors, para. 0026).
Regarding claim 35, Zewde as modified describes the article of claim 33, wherein the first yarn section of a first yarn of the at least one yarn of the plurality of yarns has a first length (lengths can be different, para. 0083, also Blackstone includes different sized areas of different coloring and also would therefore include sections of different lengths), wherein the first yarn section of a second yarn of the at least one yarn of the plurality of yarns has a second length that is different from the first length (lengths can be different, para. 0083, also Blackstone includes different sized areas of different coloring and also would therefore include sections of different lengths for the yarns).
Regarding claim 36, Zewde as modified describes the article of claim 35, wherein but does not explicitly describe that the article has a first axis along which rows of tufts of the first and second yarns extend, wherein the first section of each of the first and second yarns has a respective starting location along the first axis, and wherein the starting location of the first section of the first yarn is axially offset from the starting location of the first section of the second yarn along the first axis.
In related art, Blackstone describes a tufting machine that dies yarn according to a scan and then tufts a carpet according to that scan to replicate the scanned image (see, e.g., col. 3, ll. 1-31). Thus, colors of adjacent tufts are different in both the axial direction and offset direction (see annotated Fig. 6 which depicts the scanned image which is reproduced as a tufted article, on having ordinary skill would understand that an article would require multiple tufted rows adjacent to one another).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify Zewde to include the scanner and subsequent particular placement of color yarn in order to utilized the spliced yarn in an efficient manner to recreate scanned images (see, e.g., col. 3, ll. 1-31, Blackstone).
Claims 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zewde et al. (US 20040118098).
Regarding claim 29, Zewde describes the engineered yarn structure of claim 33, but is silent as to the actual length of the yarn sections and thus fails to disclose wherein the first and second yarn sections of each yarn of the at least one yarn of the plurality of yarns have respective lengths of between 800 meters and 5000 meters.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the length of the segments as such a modification is simply a change in size which is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior (see MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)). The specification provides no criticality for this particular length and It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify Zewde to have the particular lengths depending on the desired article being formed.
Regarding claim 30, Zewde describes the engineered yarn structure of claim 21, but is silent as to the length of the yarn sections and thus silent as to wherein the first and second yarn sections have respective lengths between 800 meters and 5000 meters.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the length of the segments as such a modification is simply a change in size which is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior (see MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)). The specification provides no criticality for this particular length and It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify Zewde to have the particular lengths depending on the desired article being formed.
Claims 21, 22, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mallen et al. (US 20150237960) in view of Dua et al. (US 20130186054).
Regarding claim 21 Mallen includes an engineered yarn structure (continuous yarn spliced at pre-selected positions, para. 0146) comprising:
a first yarn section (lengths of one, two, three or more kinds or types of yarn, para. 0146) formed by a first yarn segment (one of the kinds or types of yarn); and
a second yarn section (lengths of one, two, three or more kinds or types of yarn, para. 0146) formed by a second yarn segment (one of the kinds or types of yarn).
Mallen does not explicitly describe wherein the first section has a first type of a first aesthetic characteristic, and
wherein the second section has a second type of the first aesthetic characteristic that is different from the first type.
In related art, Mallen does describe that different portions may be different colors (para. 0100). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the yarn to have different colors in the different section in order to provide a particular color or characteristic at a particular locations (para. 0146) for example as suggested by para. 0100 that different colors may be utilized in the upper.
While Mallen describes that the yarn is spliced, it does not explicitly describe how the yarn is spliced and thus fails to explicitly disclose
wherein the engineered yarn structure comprises a transition junction that comprises commingled portions of the first yarn section and the second yarn section,
wherein a severed end of the first yarn segment is wrap spliced, mechanically knotted, twisted, or entangled with a severed end of the second yarn segment to form the transition junction;
wherein the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic are randomly selected to define a random combination of the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic along the engineered yarn structure.
Mallen references that splicing may be accomplished via the techniques in US 20130185054 to Dua which appears to be a typographical error that should be US 20130186054 as the reference publication is not to Dua and does not relate to splicing.
In related art for splicing Dua describes wherein the engineered yarn structure comprises a transition junction that comprises commingled portions of the first yarn section and the second yarn section (frayed ends are joined via intermeshing the ends, para. 0028),
wherein a severed end of the first yarn segment is wrap spliced, mechanically knotted, twisted, or entangled (intermeshed, para. 0028) with a severed end of the second yarn segment to form the transition junction;
wherein the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic are randomly selected (the claims is for a yarn structure, the type of color of yarn is “randomly” selected in that someone must load the color for material A and material B, and what they pick is considered “random” inasmuch as claimed) to define a random combination of the first type and the second type of the first aesthetic characteristic along the engineered yarn structure..
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing the instant application to modify the yarn of Mallen to include the intermeshed areas as described in Dua in order to provide a mechanism by which to join the yarns together. That is, without some sort of splicing technique Mallen would not be able to provide a continuous yarn.
Regarding claim 22, Mallen as modified describes engineered yarn structure of claim 21, further comprising a third yarn section (lengths of one, two, three or more kinds or types of yarn, para. 0146), wherein the engineered yarn structure comprises a second transition junction that comprises commingled portions of the second yarn section and the third yarn section (joined via splicer as modified).
Regarding claim 24, Mallen as modified describes the engineered yarn structure of claim 22, wherein the first aesthetic characteristic of the third yarn section is a third type that is different from the first and second types (as modified, can be different colors as desired).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK J LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-1145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th, Alt F: 8:00 AM-5:00 PM ET.
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, Clint Ostrup can be reached on 571-272-5559. 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.
/PATRICK J. LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights