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 without traverse of Species 2: Fig.4 in the reply filed on April 9, 2026 is acknowledged.
After a full review of Applicant’s disclosure, Claims 3, 6-8, 11, 19 and 22 are withdrawn. Claims 3 and 22 are drawn to Species 10: Fig.21. Claim 6 is drawn to Species 8: Fig.19 or Species 9: Fig.20. Claims 7 & 8 are drawn to one of Species 3-Species 11. Claim 11 is drawn to Species 11: Fig.22. Claim 19 is drawn to one of Species 1, Species 3, Species 5-7, or Species 9-10. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 9-10, 12-18 and 20-21 are currently pending examination.
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 (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 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.
1. Claim(s) 13-14 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huffa (US 2012/0233882).
Regarding Claim 13, Huffa discloses a knitted component (130) configured to form part of an upper (120) of an article of footwear, the knitted component comprising: a first end (i.e. toe end); a second end (i.e. heel end); an inner perimeter edge (135) extending between the first end and the second end; an outer perimeter edge (133) extending between the first end and the second end (as seen in Fig.5); and a plurality of radially-knitted courses extending from the inner perimeter edge to the outer perimeter edge (para.39; as seen in Fig.5), the plurality of radially-knitted courses integrally extending between the first end and the second end of the knitted component (as seen in Fig.5), wherein the first end and the second end are configured to be joined together at a seam (at 134) to form a dimensional shape of the upper (para.41; as seen in Fig.4C).
Regarding Claim 14, Huffa discloses a knitted component of claim 13, wherein the inner perimeter edge (135) comprises a throat region of the upper (as seen in Fig.5).
Regarding Claim 16, Huffa discloses a knitted component of claim 13, wherein a distance between the inner perimeter edge and the outer perimeter edge is larger adjacent to the first end and adjacent to the second end compared to a middle portion of the knitted component located between the first end and the second end (see annotated Figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
701
602
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 17, Huffa discloses an article of footwear comprising a sole structure (110) secured to an upper comprising the knitted component of claim 13 (para.33-34; as seen in Fig.1).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
2. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 9-10, 12, 15, 18, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huffa (US 2012/0233882) in view of Toone (GB 547,900).
Regarding Claim 1, Huffa discloses an upper (120), comprising: a knitted component (130), comprising: an inner perimeter edge (135); an outer perimeter edge (133); and a plurality of radially-knitted courses extending from the inner perimeter edge to the outer perimeter edge (para.39; as seen in Fig.5). Huffa does not disclose wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses extend at an angle to each other, such that a spacing between them increases towards the outer perimeter edge, and wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses integrally extend around at least a forefoot region of the upper. However, Toone teaches a knitted component having a plurality of radially-knitted courses extending from an inner perimeter edge (i.e. throat portion of 10) to a bottom area in at least the forefoot region (as seen in Fig.1 & 3), the plurality of radially-knitted courses extend at an angle to each other, such that a spacing between them increases towards the outer perimeter edge, and wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses integrally extend around at least a forefoot region of the upper (as seen in Fig.1 & 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the course
knitting direction of Huffa to extend in a radial direction from the outer perimeter towards
a throat region of the upper, as taught by Toone, in order to provide the toe region of the
upper with a shape that ergonomically and comfortably fits a user's toe region. When in
combination, Huffa and Toone a plurality of radially-knitted courses extending from the
throat region to the outer perimeter edge in at least the forefoot region.
Regarding Claim 2, Huffa discloses an upper of claim 1, wherein the knitted component (130) is formed as an integral one-piece knitted element (para.37; as seen in Fig.5).
Regarding Claim 4, Modified Huffa discloses an upper of claim 1, wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses integrally extend through a lateral side of the upper, through the forefoot region, and through a medial side of the upper, and into opposite heel regions of the upper (Huffa: as seen in Fig.5 & Toone: as seen in Fig.1).
Regarding Claim 5, Huffa discloses an upper of claim 1, wherein the knitted component (130) comprises a single knit layer (para.37; as seen in Fig.5).
Regarding Claim 9, Modified Huffa discloses an upper of claim 1, wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses (Huffa as modified by Toone) extend outward from a central portion (i.e. toe portion of 130 forward of 135) of the upper (as seen in Fig.2 & 5).
Regarding Claim 10, Huffa discloses an upper of claim 9, wherein the central portion comprises (i.e. toe portion of 130 forward of 135) at least a forward portion of a throat region of the upper (as seen in Fig.2 & 5).
Regarding Claim 12, Huffa discloses an article of footwear comprising a sole structure (110) secured to the upper of claim 1 (para.33-34; as seen in Fig.1).
Regarding Claim 15, Toone further teaches a knitted component of claim 13, wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses are arranged into a plurality of wedges each comprising a combination of longer knitted courses and shorter knitted courses (as seen in Fig.2 & 3).
Regarding Claim 18, Huffa discloses an article of footwear, comprising: an upper (120), comprising: a knitted component (130), comprising: an inner perimeter edge (135); an outer perimeter edge (133); a plurality of radially-knitted courses extending from the inner perimeter edge to the outer perimeter edge (para.39; as seen in Fig.5); a first edge (left 134) extending between the inner perimeter edge and the outer perimeter edge and located at a first end (i.e. left end of 130 at heel) of the knitted component; and a second edge (right 134) extending between the inner perimeter edge and the outer perimeter edge and located at a second end (i.e. right end of 130 at heel) of the knitted component opposite to the first end, wherein the first edge and the second edge are joined together at a seam (para.41; as seen in Fig.4C). Huffa does not disclose wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses extend at an angle to each other, such that a spacing between them increases towards the outer perimeter edge, and wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses integrally extend around at least a forefoot region of the upper. However, Toone teaches a knitted component having a plurality of radially-knitted courses extending from an inner perimeter edge (i.e. throat portion of 10) to a bottom area in at least the forefoot region (as seen in Fig.1 & 3), the plurality of radially-knitted courses extend at an angle to each other, such that a spacing between them increases towards the outer perimeter edge, and wherein the plurality of radially-knitted courses integrally extend around at least a forefoot region of the upper (as seen in Fig.1 & 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the course
knitting direction of Huffa to extend in a radial direction from the outer perimeter towards
a throat region of the upper, as taught by Toone, in order to provide the toe region of the
upper with a shape that ergonomically and comfortably fits a user's toe region. When in
combination, Huffa and Toone a plurality of radially-knitted courses extending from the
throat region to the outer perimeter edge in at least the forefoot region.
Regarding Claim 21, Huffa discloses an article of footwear of claim 18, wherein the knitted component (130) is formed as an integral one-piece knitted element (para.37; as seen in Fig.5).
3. Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huffa (US 2012/0233882) and Toone (GB 547,900) in view of Dealey (US 2016/0058100).
Regarding Claim 20, Huffa and Toone disclose the invention substantially as claimed above. Huffa does not disclose wherein the seam is a side seam located on one side of the upper. However, Dealey teaches a knit upper having a side seam located on one side of the upper (as seen in Fig.5; para.40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the location of the seam of Huffa for the seam location of Dealey, as a simple substitution of one well known knit upper seam location for another, in order to yield the predictable result of forming a flat knit upper into a three-dimensional, useable shoe upper.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN E LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-3267. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00am-4:00pm 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.
/MEGAN E LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights