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 amendments filed with the written response received on 03/31/2026 have been considered and an action on the merits follows. As directed by the amendment, claims 6-12, 23-45, and 69-75 are withdrawn from further consideration. Accordingly, claims 1-75 are pending in this application, with an action on the merits to follow regarding claims 1-5, 13-22, and 46-68.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 7, Sub-Species A in the reply filed on 03/31/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that sub-species D (fig. 16) does not introduce any additional structural features recited in the pending claims beyond those already required by sub-species A. This is found persuasive. The requirement for election of species mailed on 02/03/2026 is hereby modified wherein Sub-Species A is now directed to figs. 1a, 2-4, and 16. Sub-Species D is eliminated from the requirement for election of species mailed on 02/03/2026. Claims 6-12, 23-45, and 69-75 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 03/31/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “the first knit spacer textile.” It is suggested the claim is rephrased to recite “the knit spacer textile” for consistency with the rest of the claim and/or for antecedent basis purposes.
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 58 and 59 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “about” in claims 58 and 59 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear to what degree above or below the claimed range is considered “about” the claimed distance and therefore the claim is considered indefinite.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 13-15, 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,630,414 B1 to Matsumoto.
For claim 1, Matsumoto discloses a garment (clothing, col. 13, line 64 to col. 14, line 3) comprising: a first area of the garment (see annotated fig. 2 below)
PNG
media_image1.png
702
483
media_image1.png
Greyscale
comprising a knit spacer textile (A); and a second area (see annotated fig. 2 above) of the garment comprising the knit spacer textile, wherein the first knit spacer textile comprises a first knit layer (1) formed from a first plurality of yarns (fig. 6, yarns formed by guide bars L1-L3), a second knit layer (2) formed from a second plurality of yarns (fig. 6, yarns formed by guide bars L5-L7), and a plurality of tie yarns (3) that interconnect the first knit layer and the second knit layer (fig. 3), wherein the first knit layer comprising a first set of apertures in the first area (12, in annotated first area of fig. 2), the first set of apertures having a first opening size (size of 12), the first knit layer comprising a second set of apertures in the second area (12, in annotated second area of fig. 2), the second set of apertures having a second opening size (size of 12), wherein the second knit layer comprising a third set of apertures in the first area (22 in annotated first area of fig. 2), the third set of apertures having a third opening size (size of 22), the second knit layer comprising a fourth set of apertures in the second area (22 in annotated second area of fig. 2), the fourth set of apertures having a fourth opening size (size of 22).
The above embodiment of Matsumoto does not specifically disclose wherein the first opening size being greater than the second opening size, and wherein the third opening size being greater than the fourth opening size.
However, Matsumoto does teach the opening sizes on the front and back sides can be freely selected according to uses, for improving balance under compressive loads and for creating a certain desirable aesthetic appearance (col. 4, lines 35-37 and col. 7, lines 8-19). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the first opening size being greater than the second opening size, and wherein the third opening size being greater than the fourth opening size for purposes of optimizing balance and cushioning under compressive loads and for creating a certain desirable aesthetic appearance (col. 4, lines 35-37 and col. 7, lines 8-19). It is noted that a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (See MPEP 2144.04).
For claim 13, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, wherein a portion of the plurality of tie yarns extend from a first position adjacent a first aperture of the first set of apertures to a third position adjacent a third aperture of the third set of apertures such that the portion of the plurality of tie yarns are visible through the first aperture, wherein a second portion of the plurality of tie yarns extend from a second position adjacent a second aperture of the second set of apertures to a fourth position adjacent a fourth aperture of the fourth set of apertures such that the second portion of the plurality of tie yarns are visible through the second aperture (see figs. 2 and 3).
For claim 14, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, wherein the first opening size is greater than the third opening size and the second opening size is greater than the fourth opening size (see figs. 2 and 3).
For claim 15, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, wherein each first aperture of the first set of apertures is respectively aligned with a respective third aperture of the third set of apertures in the first area, wherein each aperture of the second set of apertures is respectively aligned with a respective fourth aperture of the fourth set of apertures in the second area (see figs. 2 and 3).
For claim 19, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, wherein each of the first plurality of yarns, the second plurality of yarns, and the plurality of tie yarns comprises one or more of natural fibers and semi-synthetic fibers (col. 21, line 62 to col. 22, line 8).
For claim 20, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, wherein the first plurality of yarns comprises one or more of cotton and wool (col. 21, line 62 to col. 22, line 8).
For claim 21, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, wherein the first opening size is equal to the third opening size and the second opening size is equal to the fourth opening size (see fig. 2).
For claim 22, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, wherein the first area has a first stiffness and the second area has a second stiffness (one skilled in the art would understand that areas of the knit spacer textile comprise inherent stiffnesses).
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2017/0340037 A1 to Bailey.
For claim 2, Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, wherein the garment comprises a garment (clothing, col. 13, line 64 to col. 14, line 3).
Matsumoto does not specifically disclose wherein the garment is an upper-torso garment.
However, attention is directed to Bailey teaching a garment with openings (para 0082 of Bailey). Specifically, Bailey teaches the garment with openings may comprise one-quarter sleeves, a shirt having full-lengths sleeves, or three-quarter sleeves within openings on the sleeves for purposes of providing both coverage and ventilation to the wearer (paras 0072 and 0083 of Bailey). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein Matsumoto would be further modified wherein the garment is a upper torso garment comprising full length sleeves for purposes of providing both full arm coverage and ventilation to the wearer, as taught by Bailey (paras 0072 and 0083 of Bailey).
For claim 3, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 2, wherein the upper-torso garment comprises one of a shirt, a tank top, or a sleeveless top (shirt with sleeves, see discussion for claim 2 above).
For claim 4, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 2, but does not specifically disclose wherein the first area is associated with a chest region of the upper-body garment and the second area is associated with a sleeve region of the upper-body garment.
However, as explained in the discussion for claim 1 above, Matsumoto does teach the sizes on the front and back sides can be freely selected according to uses, for improving balance under compressive loads and for creating a certain desirable aesthetic appearance (col. 4, lines 35-37 and col. 7, lines 8-19 of Matsumoto). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the first area is associated with a chest region of the upper-body garment and the second area is associated with a sleeve region of the upper-body garment purposes of improving balance under compressive loads at the chest or sleeve regions of the garment, and for creating a certain desirable aesthetic appearance at the chest or sleeve regions of the garment depending on the preferences of the wearer (col. 4, lines 35-37 and col. 7, lines 8-19 of Matsumoto).
For claim 5, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 2 further comprising a central region and a perimeter edge, wherein the first area is located in the central region and the second area is positioned between the first area and the perimeter edge (see annotated fig. 2 below).
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2016/0227845 A1 to Hurd.
For claim 16, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein the second plurality of yarns is more hydrophobic than the first plurality of yarns.
However, attention is directed to Hurd teaching a upper torso includes tie yarns extending from an inner layer to an outer layer (paras 0008 and 0048 of Hurd). Specifically, Hurd teaches the outer layer is hydrophilic, the tie yarns transfer moisture outwardly away from the skin of the wearer, and the inner layer is hydrophobic for purposes of creating a hydrophilic gradient that wicks sweat away from the skin of the user (paras 0007, 0022, and 0048 of Hurd). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein, the second plurality of yarns is more hydrophobic than the first plurality of yarns, wherein the first plurality of yarns is more hydrophilic than the second plurality of yarns, and wherein the plurality of tie yarns is moisture wicking for purposes of creating a hydrophilic gradient that wicks sweat away from the skin of the user, as taught by Hurd (paras 0007, 0022, and 0048 of Hurd).
For claim 17, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein the first plurality of yarns is more hydrophilic than the second plurality of yarns.
However, attention is directed to Hurd teaching a upper torso includes tie yarns extending from an inner layer to an outer layer (paras 0008 and 0048 of Hurd). Specifically, Hurd teaches the outer layer is hydrophilic, the tie yarns transfer moisture outwardly away from the skin of the wearer, and the inner layer is hydrophobic for purposes of creating a hydrophilic gradient that wicks sweat away from the skin of the user (paras 0007, 0022, and 0048 of Hurd). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein, the second plurality of yarns is more hydrophobic than the first plurality of yarns, wherein the first plurality of yarns is more hydrophilic than the second plurality of yarns, and wherein the plurality of tie yarns is moisture wicking for purposes of creating a hydrophilic gradient that wicks sweat away from the skin of the user, as taught by Hurd (paras 0007, 0022, and 0048 of Hurd).
For claim 18, the modified Matsumoto teaches the garment of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein the plurality of tie yarns is moisture wicking.
However, attention is directed to Hurd teaching a upper torso includes tie yarns extending from an inner layer to an outer layer (paras 0008 and 0048 of Hurd). Specifically, Hurd teaches the outer layer is hydrophilic, the tie yarns transfer moisture outwardly away from the skin of the wearer, and the inner layer is hydrophobic for purposes of creating a hydrophilic gradient that wicks sweat away from the skin of the user (paras 0007, 0022, and 0048 of Hurd). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein, the second plurality of yarns is more hydrophobic than the first plurality of yarns, wherein the first plurality of yarns is more hydrophilic than the second plurality of yarns, and wherein the plurality of tie yarns is moisture wicking for purposes of creating a hydrophilic gradient that wicks sweat away from the skin of the user, as taught by Hurd (paras 0007, 0022, and 0048 of Hurd).
Claims 46-49 and 51-59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2017/0071275 A1 to Darby in view of Matsumoto and US 2018/0271187 A1 to Mullings.
For claim 46, Darby discloses an upper-body garment (100) comprising: a torso portion (para 0041); a left arm portion extending from the torso portion; and a right arm portion extending from the torso portion (top having full-length sleeves, para 0040), wherein the torso portion, the left arm portion, and the right arm portion each comprise a knit textile (para 0041), having openings of different sizes at different locations of the garment (paras 0042-0043).
Darby does not specifically disclose wherein the knit textile is a knit spacer textile, wherein the knit spacer textile comprises a first knit layer formed from a first plurality of yarns, the first knit layer comprising a first set of apertures having a first opening size, a second knit layer formed from a second plurality of yarns, the second knit layer comprising a second set of apertures, each aperture in the second set of apertures axially aligned with a corresponding aperture in the first set of apertures, the second set of apertures having a second opening size different from the first opening size, and a plurality of tie yarns that interconnect the first knit layer and the second knit layer, and wherein the left arm portion and the right arm portion each include a stress relief zone.
However, attention is directed to Matsumoto teaching an analogous perforated and knitted garment (clothing, col. 13, line 64 to col. 14, line 3 of Matsumoto). Specifically, Matsumoto teaches the textile is a knit spacer textile (A) comprising a first knit layer (1) formed from a first plurality of yarns (fig. 6, yarns formed by guide bars L1-L3 of Matsumoto), the first knit layer comprising a first set of apertures having a first opening size (12 in fig. 2 of Matsumoto), a second knit layer (2) formed from a second plurality of yarns (fig. 6, yarns formed by guide bars L5-L7 of Matsumoto), the second knit layer comprising a second set of apertures (22 in fig. 2 of Matsumoto), each aperture in the second set of apertures axially aligned with a corresponding aperture in the first set of apertures (see fig. 3 of Matsumoto), the second set of apertures having a second opening size different from the first opening size (size of 12 is larger than the size of 22), and a plurality of tie yarns (3) that interconnect the first knit layer and the second knit layer (see fig. 3). Matsumoto provides the three-dimensional textile configuration provides spacing of the fabric with provides a cushioning type of material and a soft touch or texture for clothing (col. 2, lines 1-8; and col. 20, lines 11-24 of Matsumoto). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein Darby would be modified wherein the knit textile is a knit spacer textile, wherein the knit spacer textile comprises a first knit layer formed from a first plurality of yarns, the first knit layer comprising a first set of apertures having a first opening size, a second knit layer formed from a second plurality of yarns, the second knit layer comprising a second set of apertures, each aperture in the second set of apertures axially aligned with a corresponding aperture in the first set of apertures, the second set of apertures having a second opening size different from the first opening size, and a plurality of tie yarns that interconnect the first knit layer and the second knit layer, as taught by Matsumoto (citations above), for purposes of providing a three-dimensional textile configuration which provides spacing of the fabric with provides a cushioning type of material and a soft touch or texture for clothing (col. 2, lines 1-8; and col. 20, lines 11-24 of Matsumoto).
As modified Darby does not specifically teach wherein the left arm portion and the right arm portion each include a stress relief zone.
However, attention is directed to Mullings teaching an garment formed as a sleeve and comprising an analogous multi-layered and breathable knit construction (paras 0027-0028 and 0031 of Mullings). Specifically, Mullings teaches the garment comprises a lacuna (3) at the crease of a user's elbow when the sleeve is being worn for purposes of allowing the user to flex their arm at the elbow to allow easy arm movement without stretching the fabric (stressing the garment) (paras 0024 and 0057 of Mullings). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified Darby would be further modified wherein the left arm portion and the right arm portion each include a stress relief zone, at the inner crease of the elbow when worn, in the form of lacuna-type openings, for purposes of allowing the user to flex their arm at the elbow to allow easy arm movement without stretching the device (stressing the garment), as taught by Mullings (also see paras 0024 and 0057 of Mullings).
For claim 47, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 46, wherein each stress relief zone is positioned on each of the left arm portion and the right arm portion proximate an area associated with a crook of the elbow of a wearer when the garment is donned (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of Mullings).
For claim 48, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 47, wherein each stress relief zone is configured to relieve compression experienced at the area associated with a crook of the elbow of the wearer when the wearer bends or flexes their arm (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of Mullings).
For claim 49, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 47, wherein each stress relief zone comprises a cut-out formed in each of the left arm portion and the right arm portion (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of Mullings).
For claim 51, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 46, wherein each stress relief zone comprises an opening integrally formed in each of the left arm portion and the right arm portion (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of Mullings).
For claim 52, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 51, but does not specifically disclose wherein the opening is at least five times larger than any of the apertures of the knit spacer textile. However, Matsumoto does teach the aperture sizes on the front and back sides can be freely selected according to uses, for improving balance under compressive loads and for creating a certain desirable aesthetic appearance (col. 4, lines 35-37 and col. 7, lines 8-19 Matsumoto). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the opening is at least five times larger than any of the apertures of the knit spacer textile for improving balance under compressive loads and for creating a certain desirable aesthetic appearance (col. 4, lines 35-37 and col. 7, lines 8-19 Matsumoto), and for optimizing the size of the sleeve opening relative the wearer of the garment (See MPEP 2144.05(II).
For claim 53, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 51, wherein the opening is integrally formed in both the first knit layer and the second knit layer of the knit spacer textile (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of Matsumoto).
For claim 54, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 47, but does not specifically disclose wherein each stress relief zone extends across at least 50% of the circumference of the left arm portion and the right arm portion. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein each stress relief zone extends across at least 50% of the circumference of the left arm portion and the right arm portion as a matter of routine optimization, namely for reliving bunching of the fabric and improving flexibility. Adjusting the size of the opening relative to the circumference would predicably optimize the range of motion during arm flexing (also see MPEP 2144.05(II)).
For claim 55, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 47, wherein each stress relief zone is positioned on the anterior side of the left arm portion and the right arm portion (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of Mullings).
For claim 56, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 47, wherein a center line extending in the lateral to medial direction of each stress relief zone is positioned adjacent to a location associated with a crease of the elbow of the wearer (see figs. 1 and 3 of Mullings, modifying Darby, wherein an arbitrary center line at the opening is positioned adjacent to a location associated with a crease of the elbow of the wearer).
For claim 57, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 56, wherein each stress relief zone comprises a proximal half and a distal half divided by the center line (see figs. 1 and 3 of Mullings, modifying Darby, wherein an arbitrary center line at the opening divides the opening into halves).
For claim 58, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 57, but does not specifically disclose wherein a most proximal point of the proximal half is from about 0.5 inches to about 2 inches up the arm portion from the center line.
However, the modified Darby teaches a distance between an arbitrary centerline and an edge of each side of the opening (see figs. 1 and 3 of Mullings, modifying Darby). The modified Darby therefore discloses the general conditions of the claim. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified Darby would be modified wherein a most proximal point of the proximal half is from about 0.5 inches to about 2 inches up the arm portion from the center line since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable range by routine experimentation (See MPEP 2144.05(II)). In this case, there are relevant facts for supporting a modification to the claimed range by routine optimization. Specifically, varying the distance from said centerline would simply optimize bunching relief of the fabric and would improve flexibility based on the size of the wearer.
For claim 59, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 58, but does not specifically disclose wherein a most distal point of the distal half is from about 0.5 inches to about 2 inches up the arm portion from the center line.
However, the modified Darby teaches a distance between an arbitrary centerline and an edge of each side of the opening (see figs. 1 and 3 of Mullings, modifying Darby). The modified Darby therefore discloses the general conditions of the claim. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified Darby would be modified wherein a most distal point of the distal half is from about 0.5 inches to about 2 inches up the arm portion from the center line since it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable range by routine experimentation (See MPEP 2144.05(II)). In this case, there are relevant facts for supporting a modification to the claimed range by routine optimization. Specifically, varying the distance from said centerline would simply optimize bunching relief of the fabric and would improve flexibility based on the size of the wearer.
Claim 50 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Darby in view of Matsumoto and Mullings, as applied to claim 49 above, and further in view of US 2006/0070165 A1 to Nordt.
For claim 50, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 49, but does not specifically disclose wherein the cut-out has one of a circular or elliptical shape.
However, attention is directed to Nordt teaching an elbow sleeve type garment (para 0142) with an analogous opening (see fig. 20 below of Nordt) constructed as a curved and substantially elliptical shape for purposes of also minimizing bunching or gathering of the sleeve in the bend or fold of a flexed joint in order to promote comfort of the wearer of the support (para 0129 of Nordt). Therefore, openings of the modified Darby and Nordt have the same function and are known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified Darby would be further modified wherein shape of the cut-out is substituted for Nordt’s curved and substantially elliptical shape opening since the modification would amount to a simple substitution of known shaped components for a predictable result. In this case, the substitution would yield the predictable result of minimizing bunching or gathering of the sleeve in the bend or fold of a flexed joint in order to promote comfort of the wearer of the support without requiring more than ordinary skill in the art to accomplish (see MPEP 2143(I)(B)). Further, the modification would amount to matter of design choice because the minor change in shape would yield the same predictable benefits and similar functional advantages (see MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(B)).
Claims 60-62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Darby in view of Matsumoto and Mullings, as applied to claim 46 above, and further in view of US 4,608,716 A to Brumfield.
For claim 60 the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 46, but does not specifically disclose further comprising a second textile panel joined to the right arm portion at the perimeter of the stress relief zone and a third textile panel joined to the left arm portion at the perimeter of the respective stress relief zone.
However, attention is directed to Brumfield teaching a garment comprising analogous stress relief type zones at the crease of the joint made of elastic material forming a give segment (312) to provides coverage and maximum flexibility and moment of the back of the wearer’s joint (col. 12, lines 20-24 and fig. 1 of Brumfield). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein the modified Darby would be further modified to comprise a second textile panel joined to the right arm portion at the perimeter of the stress relief zone and a third textile panel joined to the left arm portion at the perimeter of the respective stress relief zone, formed of elastic material, to provides coverage and maximum flexibility and moment of the back of the wearer’s joint (col. 12, lines 20-24 and fig. 1 of Brumfield).
For claim 61, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 60, wherein the second textile panel and the third textile panel each comprise the same type of textile (elastic material).
For claim 62, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 60, wherein the second textile panel and the third textile panel have a lower stiffness than the knit spacer textile (elastic material is considered as having lower stiffness which imparts the flexibility and movability).
Claims 46 and 63-68 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Darby in view of Matsumoto and US 2,554,380 A to Olrich.
For claim 46, Darby discloses an upper-body garment (100) comprising: a torso portion (para 0041); a left arm portion extending from the torso portion; and a right arm portion extending from the torso portion (top having full-length sleeves, para 0040), wherein the torso portion, the left arm portion, and the right arm portion each comprise a knit textile (para 0041), having openings of different sizes at different locations of the garment (paras 0042-0043).
Darby does not specifically disclose wherein the knit textile is a knit spacer textile, wherein the knit spacer textile comprises a first knit layer formed from a first plurality of yarns, the first knit layer comprising a first set of apertures having a first opening size, a second knit layer formed from a second plurality of yarns, the second knit layer comprising a second set of apertures, each aperture in the second set of apertures axially aligned with a corresponding aperture in the first set of apertures, the second set of apertures having a second opening size different from the first opening size, and a plurality of tie yarns that interconnect the first knit layer and the second knit layer, and wherein the left arm portion and the right arm portion each include a stress relief zone.
However, attention is directed to Matsumoto teaching an analogous perforated and knitted garment (clothing, col. 13, line 64 to col. 14, line 3 of Matsumoto). Specifically, Matsumoto teaches the textile is a knit spacer textile (A) comprising a first knit layer (1) formed from a first plurality of yarns (fig. 6, yarns formed by guide bars L1-L3 of Matsumoto), the first knit layer comprising a first set of apertures having a first opening size (12 in fig. 2 of Matsumoto), a second knit layer (2) formed from a second plurality of yarns (fig. 6, yarns formed by guide bars L5-L7 of Matsumoto), the second knit layer comprising a second set of apertures (22 in fig. 2 of Matsumoto), each aperture in the second set of apertures axially aligned with a corresponding aperture in the first set of apertures (see fig. 3 of Matsumoto), the second set of apertures having a second opening size different from the first opening size (size of 12 is larger than the size of 22), and a plurality of tie yarns (3) that interconnect the first knit layer and the second knit layer (see fig. 3). Matsumoto provides the three-dimensional textile configuration provides spacing of the fabric with provides a cushioning type of material and a soft touch or texture for clothing (col. 2, lines 1-8; and col. 20, lines 11-24 of Matsumoto). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein Darby would be modified wherein the knit textile is a knit spacer textile, wherein the knit spacer textile comprises a first knit layer formed from a first plurality of yarns, the first knit layer comprising a first set of apertures having a first opening size, a second knit layer formed from a second plurality of yarns, the second knit layer comprising a second set of apertures, each aperture in the second set of apertures axially aligned with a corresponding aperture in the first set of apertures, the second set of apertures having a second opening size different from the first opening size, and a plurality of tie yarns that interconnect the first knit layer and the second knit layer, as taught by Matsumoto (citations above), for purposes of providing a three-dimensional textile configuration which provides spacing of the fabric with provides a cushioning type of material and a soft touch or texture for clothing (col. 2, lines 1-8; and col. 20, lines 11-24 of Matsumoto).
As modified Darby does not specifically teach wherein the left arm portion and the right arm portion each include a stress relief zone.
However, attention is directed to Olrich teaching a garment comprising inserts (13) interposed between the inner lower portion of the sleeve and body of the garment adapted to overlie the arm pits to prevent any pulling in the fabric constituting the body of the garment, when the arms are raised to a position above the head (col. 3, lines 45-60 and figs. 1, 3 and 7 of Olrich). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date wherein Darby would be further modified wherein the left arm portion and the right arm portion each include inserts interposed between the inner lower portion of the sleeve and body of the garment adapted to overlie the arm pits to prevent any pulling in the fabric constituting the body of the garment, when the arms are raised to a position above the head, as taught by Olrich (col. 3, lines 45-60 and figs. 1, 3 and 7 of Olrich).
For claim 63, the modified Darby teaches the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 46, wherein stress relief zones are positioned on each of the left arm portion and the right arm portion proximate an area associated with an underarm region of a wearer when the garment is donned (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of figs. 1 and 7 of Olrich).
For claim 64, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 63, wherein stress relief zones are positioned on the torso portion adjacent to the left arm portion and the right arm portion (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of figs. 1 and 7 of Olrich).
For claim 65, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 64 wherein respective stress relief zones positioned on the torso portion are aligned with the stress relief zones positioned on the left arm portion and the right arm portion (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of figs. 1 and 7 of Olrich).
For claim 66, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 64, wherein the stress relief zones comprise seam openings at a first seam joining the left arm portion to the torso portion and a second seam joining the right arm portion to the torso portion (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of figs. 1 and 7 of Olrich).
For claim 67, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 64, wherein each stress relief zone is configured to relieve tension experienced at the area associated with an underarm region of the wearer when their arm is lifted overhead (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of figs. 1 and 7 of Olrich).
For claim 68, the modified Darby teaches the garment of claim 64, wherein each stress relief zone extends across at least 50% of the circumference of the left arm portion and the right arm portion (see discussion for claim 46 above and teachings of fig. 3 of Olrich).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICK I LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-3262. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9:00am - 5:30pm 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 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.
/ERICK I LOPEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights