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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election of Invention I (drawn to a fiber structure), Species 1 and Subspecies 1 (as depicted in Fig. 2) in the reply filed on 01/06/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 3-5 and 7-14 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claims 1-2 and 6 are being treated on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-2 and 6 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
The preamble of the claim 1 recites "A fiber structure comprising a knitted structure and a woven structure", which renders the claim indefinite. The instant disclosure does not define the term "fiber structure". One of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that a "fiber structure" commonly refers to a structure of a fiber. Per Oxford Languages, the term "fiber" is defined as "a thread or filament from which a vegetable tissue, mineral substance, or textile is formed". How can a structure of a fiber comprise a knitted structure and a woven structure? Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear and cannot be ascertained. For examination purposes, "fiber structure" has been construed to be "fabric structure".
The preambles of claims 2 and 6 each recite "fiber structure", which renders the claim indefinite for the same reason as discussed above. For examination purposes, "fiber structure" has been construed to be "fabric structure" in the claims as well.
Claim 2 recites the limitations "vertical direction" and "horizontal direction", which renders the claim indefinite. The claim is a product claim drawn to a fabric structure, and a fabric can be oriented in various ways. As such, it is unclear which direction is "vertical direction" and which direction is "horizontal direction" as to the fabric structure. For examination purposes, "vertical direction" has been construed to be "warp direction" and "horizontal direction" has been construed to be "weft direction".
The remaining claims each depend from a rejected base claim and are likewise rejected.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Palange (EP 0487462 A2).
Regarding claim 1, Palange discloses a fiber structure (a fabric structure; figs. 24-25; col. 6, ll. 32-58; col. 7, ll. 1-13) comprising a knitted structure (chain stitch loops 8 in fig. 24, chain stitch loops 6 in fig. 25; col. 6, ll. 32-35; col. 7, ll. 8-13) and a woven structure (woven structure formed of warp yarns 1 and weft yarns 13; figs. 24-25; col. 6, ll. 35-39, 55-58; col. 7, ll. 1-5, 8-13) adjacent to each other (figs. 24-25),
wherein the knitted structure is formed by a plurality of first linear bodies (warp yarns 1; figs. 24-25; col. 6, ll. 35-39; col. 7, ll. 8-13), and
the woven structure is formed continuously with the knitted structure by the plurality of first linear bodies (warp yarns 1; figs. 24-25; col. 6, ll. 35-39; col. 7, ll. 8-13) and a plurality of second linear bodies (weft yarns 13; figs. 24-25; col. 6, ll. 35-39; col. 7, ll. 8-13) that intersect with the plurality of first linear bodies (see figs. 24-25) and are different from the plurality of first linear bodies (figs. 24-25).
Regarding claim 2, Palange discloses the fiber structure according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the knitted structure is formed by warp knitting (figs. 24-25),
the plurality of first linear bodies (warp yarns 1; figs. 24-25) extend along a vertical direction (a warp direction; figs. 24-25), and
the plurality of second linear bodies (weft yarns 13; figs. 24-25) extend along a horizontal direction (a course direction; figs. 24-25).
Regarding claim 6, Palange discloses the fiber structure according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the knitted structure and the woven structure are continuously formed by a same device (abstract; claim 1). In addition, the limitation "wherein the knitted structure and the woven structure are continuously formed by a same device" is deemed a product-by-process limitation in the claim. Determination of patentability is based on the product itself, not on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process limitation is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. See MPEP 2113, I. In this case, the fiber structure of Palange has the fiber structure as claimed, therefore meets the structure requirements of the fiber structure.
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 1-2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rakos (US 2005/0240261 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Rakos discloses a fiber structure (a composite textile; fig. 5, 41; paras. 0072, 0095, 0102) comprising a knitted structure (knitted portion 24, 98; fig. 5, 41; paras. 0072, 0095, 0102) and a woven structure (woven portion 26a, 100; fig. 5, 41; paras. 0072, 0095, 0102) adjacent to each other (fig. 5, 41; paras. 0072, 0095, 0102),
wherein the knitted structure is formed by a plurality of first linear bodies (yarns 108; fig. 41; para. 0102), and
the woven structure is formed continuously with the knitted structure by at least the plurality of first linear bodies (yarns 108 transferred to a weaving machine and integrated in the woven portion 100; fig. 41; para. 0102).
Rakos does not explicitly disclose wherein the woven structure is formed continuously by the plurality of first linear bodies and a plurality of second linear bodies that intersect with the plurality of first linear bodies and are different from the plurality of first linear bodies. However, Rakos, in Fig. 41, does depict the configuration of the fabric structure, including the orientation of the yarns in the knitted portion 98 and the woven portion 100, where the yarns 108 are parallel with yarns 110 in a warp direction (paras. 0090-0091). One of ordinary skill of the art would recognize that the simplest and most straightforward method to continuously form the woven portion using the yarns 108 is weaving the yarns 108 in the warp direction with a plurality of second linear bodies in the weft direction to intersect the yarns 108. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have configured the fiber structure as disclosed by Rakos, with wherein the woven structure is formed continuously by the plurality of first linear bodies and a plurality of second linear bodies that intersect with the plurality of first linear bodies and are different from the plurality of first linear bodies, in order to provide a composite fabric comprising a knitted portion seamlessly connected with a woven portion via an easy method. Such a configuration is within the level of one of ordinary skill of the art.
PNG
media_image1.png
403
865
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 41 from US 2005/0240261 A1
Regarding claim 2, Rakos discloses the fiber structure according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the knitted structure is formed by warp knitting (paras. 0090-0091),
the plurality of first linear bodies extend along a vertical direction (along a warp direction; see figs. 30-31 and annotated fig. 41), and
the plurality of second linear bodies extend along a horizontal direction (along a weft direction; see figs. 30-31 and annotated fig. 41).
Regarding claim 6, Rakos discloses the fiber structure according to claim 1. The limitation "wherein the knitted structure and the woven structure are continuously formed by a same device" is deemed a product-by-process limitation in the claim. Determination of patentability is based on the product itself, not on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process limitation is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. See MPEP 2113, I. In this case, the fiber structure of Rakos has the fiber structure as claimed, therefore meets the structure requirements of the fiber structure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional relevant references cited on attached PTO-892 form(s) can be used to formulate a rejection if necessary. Mohelnicky (US 3,746,051 A) can be another 102 reference.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIYING ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3326. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am - 4:30 pm EST.
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 on (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.
/AIYING ZHAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732