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
Claims 6-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on May 22, 2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I and Species 1: Fig.1 in the reply filed on May 22, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the set of knitted fabrics shown in FIG. 1 corresponds to a broader mesh knitted fabric that includes, as subsets thereof, the sets of knitted fabrics shown in FIGS. 2 and 3. FIGS. 2 and 3 correspond to variations of the first embodiment shown in FIG.1, in which additional elements are added to the knitted fabric of FIG. 1. As described in the Brief
Description of Drawings, para. [0049] of the original disclosure, FIG.2 illustrates 'a first
variation of the first embodiment' and FIG.3 illustrates 'a second variation of the first
embodiment'. Applicant also argues that Claim 1 is generic to all the Species and there is no serious burden in examining the identified Species 1-3. This is not found persuasive because the entire application contains a number of species that are patentably distinct from one another and including divergent claimed subject matter that separate the species and, such recognized divergent subject matter separating the species is a burden to examination. Each Species depicts a separate and patentably distinct knit pattern; as cited in Applicant’s Specification they are “variations of the first embodiment”, which are distinct patterns that include different areas of searching. Additionally, whether or not Claim 1 is generic to all Species has no bearing on the Species being distinct, unless Claim 1 is generic upon allowance, and Claim 1 is not allowable at present.
After a full review of Applicant’s disclosure, Claims 2-5 are also withdrawn from consideration. Claim 2 is drawn to Species 2: Fig.2, as the elected Species 1 does not contain a medium mesh loop. Claim 3 is drawn to Species 3: Fig.3, as the elected Species 1 does not contain a pile loop. Claims 4 and 5 are drawn to a Species that is not shown, as the elected Species 1 only has yarns 2 & 3, with 2 & 3 sometimes plated, and Species 1 does not contain a spandex yarn.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mitchell (US 9,232,823).
Regarding Claim 1, Mitchell discloses a mesh knitted fabric (Fig.2) formed by a combination of: a ground loop (wales of 30) formed by a first yarn (12) and a second yarn (32) in an overlapped state (as seen in Fig.2); and a mesh loop formed by the first yarn without including the second yarn (see annotated Figure below), wherein the mesh loop includes a large mesh loop having a circumference longer than a circumference of the ground loop (as seen in Fig.2).
PNG
media_image1.png
643
536
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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