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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 07/28/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3-5 and 7-14 are currently pending in the application. Claims 7-13 have been previously withdrawn from further consideration. Claims 1, 3-5, and 14 are being treated on the merits.
Any rejection(s) and/or objection(s) made in the previous Office action and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn due to Applicant's amendments and/or arguments in the response filed on 07/28/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: "3" in Fig. 1. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
In claims 1, 3-5, and 14, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for "first multifilament yarn", "second multifilament yarn", and "third multifilament yarn" and "first, second and third multifilament yarns";
In claim 1, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for "the first, second and third multifilament yarns being identical to or different from one another";
In claim 1, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for "the non- elastic region is knitted with a third multifilament yarn into a non-mesh knit structure";
In claim 1, there is no antecedent basis in the specification for "an elastic layer provided only on the elastic region".
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-5 and 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first, second and third multifilament yarns being identical to or different from one another". The limitation indicates that the first, second and third multifilament yarns are separate yarns due to "identical to or different". However, the original disclosure does not set forth the feature. Therefore, the claim limitation appears to be new matter.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "an elastic layer provided only on the elastic region". However, the original disclosure does not set forth the feature as to the term "only". The specification does not have the term "only", and the drawings do not have sufficient support for the elastic layer being provided only on the elastic region either. Therefore, the claim limitation appears to be new matter.
The remaining claims each depend from a rejected base claim and are likewise rejected.
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, 3-5 and 7-14 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first, second and third multifilament yarns being identical to or different from one another". The claim previously set forth the elastic region being knitted with a second multifilament yarn and the non-elastic region being knitted with a third multifilament yarn. If the second and third multifilament yarns are identical, the two regions knitted with the second and third multifilament yarns respectively should be both elastic or both non-elastic. How can the second multifilament yarn form an elastic region and the third multifilament yarn form a non-elastic region? Is any other yarn included in the elastic region and/or non-elastic region? The limitation appears to be self-conflicting. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear and cannot be ascertained.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a layer of the mesh structure", which renders the claim indefinite. Claim 1 has previously set forth a jacquard layer comprising an elastic region, the elastic region being knitted into a mesh structure. It is unclear whether "a layer" in the limitation refers to the previously defined jacquard layer or a different layer. For examination purposes, the limitation has been construed to be "the mesh structure in the jacquard layer".
The remaining claims each depend from a rejected base claim and are likewise rejected.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 3-5, and 14 appear to be free of prior art but are questioned under objections and rejections as stated above. However, the claims should not be construed as reciting allowable subject matter. It is noted that all the pending claims are subjected to 35 USC 112(a) and 112(b) rejections as discussed above; and substantive amendments to the claims may result in prior-art-based rejections in a future Office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the amended claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as discussed supra.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
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.
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.
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.
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
Prosecution Insights