DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-4, 6, 8, 9, 11-20 are pending. Claims 1, 6, 8, 9, 11-13, and 18 are amended. Claims 5, 7, and 10 are cancelled.
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 April 22, 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 6, 8, 9, 11-13, and 18 have been amended, claims 5, 7, and 10 have been cancelled. Thus, claims 1-4, 6, 8, 9, 11-20 are presently pending in this application with claims 16, 17, and 20 being withdrawn from consideration.
Applicant’s amendment to the specification has the specification and drawing objections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the claim objections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §112(b) rejections.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims has overcome the 35 USC §102(a)(1) and §103 rejections, however all claims remain rejected under 102(a)(1) and §103.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claims 16, 17, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 16, 17, and 20 are withdrawn from consideration but do not include the appropriate claim status identifier. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites “further comprising a needle bar shifter used with the backing shifter” however a “backing shifter” has not been positively claimed as it is only a possibility in claim 12 because a needle bar shifter may be utilized instead. It is further unclear if “a needle bar shifter” is the same “a needle bar shifter” recited in claim 11, or if this is an additional “needle bar shifter”.
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 64734form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Itoh (US 4831948).
Regarding claim 1, Itoh describes a tufting machine (see Fig. 1) comprising:
backing fabric feed mechanism (rewinder 2) supporting and directing backing fabric (fabric 3) in a feeding direction through the tufting machine;
first and second needle bars (cylinder bed 16 supporting cylinders 19 which support needles 17) each supporting a plurality of needles in respective parallel longitudinal rows (see Fig. 4 depicting location of needles along line C, col. 3, ll. 540-41) extending transversely of the feeding direction,
wherein the first and second needle bars are spaced apart in the feeding direction from one another (see Fig. 1, are spaced);
first and second loopers (loopers 10 for left and right) below the backing fabric cooperating with needles of the first and second needle bars, said first and second loopers driven by spaced apart looper drives (means for driving looper 12, left and right) in the feeding direction from one another, and said first and second loopers oriented in the same direction (are oriented in the same direction);
a first push rod connected to the first needle bar (rods 13, left);
a second push rod connected to the second needle bar (rods 13, right);
wherein the first and second push rods are mechanically linked (connected by driving means 8) providing synchronous simultaneous vertical motion of the first and second needle bars relative to the backing fabric (when driving means 8 is put into operation, needle blocks 6 and 7 are moved up and down by rods 13, col. 5, ll. 3-6).
PNG
media_image1.png
554
412
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9, 13-15, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Crossley (US 6263811) in view of Lynch (GB 1188551).
Regarding claim 1, Crossley describes A tufting machine (tufting machine 10) comprising:
backing fabric feed mechanism (roller member 24, 26) supporting and directing backing fabric (backing material 22) in a feeding direction through the tufting machine;
first and second needle bars (second and first needle bars, 54, 48) each supporting a plurality of needles (needles 52, 58) in respective parallel longitudinal rows extending transversely of the feeding direction, wherein the first and second needle bars are spaced apart in the feeding direction from one another (see Fig. 2);
first and second looper (loopers 18 and 20) below the backing fabric cooperating with needles of the first and second needle bars, said first and second loopers oriented in the same direction (see Fig. 1, are oriented in the same direction)
a first push rod (bracket 44) connected to the first needle bar (54);
a second push rod (bracket 46) connected to the second needle bar (48);
wherein the first and second push rods are mechanically linked (connected via bridge member 34) providing synchronous simultaneous vertical motion of the first and second needle bars relative to the backing fabric.
Crossley does not explicitly describe said first and second loopers driven by spaced apart looper drives in a feeding direction from one another.
In related art for tufting machines, Lynch describes said first and second loopers (hooks 25, 10) driven by spaced apart looper drives (rocking shaft 41, rocking shaft 11) in a feeding direction from one another (see Fig. 4, Lynch).
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 arrangement of Crossley to include independent rocking shafts as described in Lynch as such a modification is simply a substitution of one known element (single drive shaft) for another (multiple drive shafts) predictable results. Lynch specifically describes that some embodiments have single loop drives (see Fig. 2, p. 3, ll. 35-45) and other embodiment include different shafts without departing from the invention (p. 3, ll. 90-92). Thus, switching the single drive to multiple drive is within the bounds of one having ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, such a modification would reduce energy usage because when the needles are not deployed in the rear or front of the machine, the respective looper could maintain its place.
PNG
media_image2.png
556
631
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 1 wherein at least some of the plurality of needles are evenly spaced apart (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 2 wherein the first needle bar (54) further comprises staggered longitudinal rows of needles (for example, when extended differently the rows are staggers, see Fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
472
759
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 1 further comprising a pattern control yarn feed (pattern controller 70) selectively feeding needles of the first and second needle bars (col. 4, ll. 16-24).
Regarding claim 9, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 1 further comprising a needle selectors (pattern controller 70 in conjunction with pneumatic cylinder 60 and compressor 66), said needle selectors assists in selecting which, if any, needles of the first and second needle bars penetrate backing fabric on a specific stroke (col. 4, ll. 25-29).
Regarding claim 13, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 1 further comprising a main drive shaft (drive mechanism, col. 3, ll. 15-23, see Smith et al. US 3986465 which is recited as a type of drive mechanism included and includes a drive shaft 56), said main drive shaft which moves at least the first push rod.
Regarding claim 14, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 1 further comprising bridges (bridge member 34, attached to respective push rods 14, col. 3, ll. 34-36) extending in the direction of feed securing the first needle bar relative to the second needle bar.
Regarding claim 15, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 14 wherein the bridges (34) extend intermediate the first to the second push rods (extend between 44 and 46).
Regarding claim 18, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 1 further comprising operator controls (pattern controller 70, patterns must be inputted by an operator at some point) permitting input of at least one from the group consisting of looper drive operation, yarn feed to selected needles, needle selection (controlled by controller 70, col. 4, ll. 11-13), needle bar shifting, backing shifting and backing feed operation for each stroke of the first and second needle bars; and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 19, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 1 wherein the first needle bar is downstream in the feeding direction relative to the second needle bar (is downstream).
Claims 6, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crossley (US 6263811) in view of Lynch (GB 1188551) and Hall (US 20160289880) as evidenced by Gebert (US 3025807).
Regarding claim 6, Crossley describes the tufting machine of claim 1 and that the piles may be cut (col. 2, l. 21) but does not explicitly describe further comprising knives which selectively cut selected loops formed by the first looper.
In related art for tufting machines, Hall describes further comprising knives (knives 45) which selectively cut selected loops formed by the first looper (cutting loops captured on cut pile hook 40/41, para. 0029).
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 Crossley to include the knives as described in Hall in order to permit the fabric to have any desired pattern effect in the pile (col. 4, ll. 25-28, Gebert).
Regarding claim 8, Crossley as modified describes the tufting machine of claim 6 further comprising knives (knives 45, Hall) which selectively cut selected loops formed by the second looper.
Claims 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crossley (US 6263811) in view of Lynch (GB 1188551) and Beatty et al. (US 20210198826).
Regarding claim 11, Crossley describes tufting machine of claim 1 further comprising transverse movement (bars can be moved transversely, col. 3, ll. 60-64) of the backing fabric relative to the first and second needle bars.
Crossley describes that the bars can be moved transversely but does not describe how this movement occurs and thus does not explicitly describe at least one from the group consisting of: a backing shifter and a needle bar shifter; and combinations thereof.
In related art for tufting machines, Beatty describes at least one from the group of a backing shifter (backing shifter, para. 0014) and a needle bar shifter; and combinations thereof (shifting relative to the needles, para. 0014).
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 Crossley to include a backing shifter in order to permit shifting not simply in gauge increments, but in a fashion that allows the creation of variable gauge and novel fabrics which allows the tufting machine to create patterns similar to those created on a number of different tufting machines and it can be utilized to provide additional capacity for many desired product lines in the event of the need for extra capacity (para. 0014, Beatty).
Regarding claim 12, Crossley as modified describes the tufting machine of claim 11 further comprising a needle bar shifter (reciprocating needle plate 143, Beatty) used with the backing shifter.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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