`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________
`
`
`SKECHERS U.S.A., Inc.,
`“Petitioner”
`
`v.
`
`NIKE, INC.,
`“Patent Owner”
`___________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`
`Title:
`Article of Footwear Having a Textile Upper
`___________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,266,749
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop: PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 13
`
`OVERVIEW OF THE CHALLENGED PATENT .................................... 17
`
`A. Overview of the ’749 Patent ............................................................. 17
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Prosecution History of the ’749 Patent ............................................ 19
`
`Prior IPRs ......................................................................................... 20
`
`III.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE AND GROUNDS ....................... 22
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ........................................ 23
`
`V.
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ....................................................................... 24
`
`VI. GROUND 1A: CLAIMS 1-6, 8, 10-16, 18, AND 20-21 ARE
`ANTICIPATED, OR ALTERNATIVELY, OBVIOUS OVER
`OREI ........................................................................................................... 28
`
`A. Overview of the Prior Art ................................................................. 28
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`I.
`
`Claim 1 ............................................................................................. 32
`
`Claim 2 ............................................................................................. 47
`
`Claims 3-4 ........................................................................................ 48
`
`Claim 5 ............................................................................................. 49
`
`Claim 6 ............................................................................................. 51
`
`Claim 8 ............................................................................................. 55
`
`Claim 10 ........................................................................................... 55
`
`Claim 11 ........................................................................................... 55
`
`
`
`
`- i -
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(Cont’d)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`J.
`
`K.
`
`L.
`
`Claim 12 ........................................................................................... 58
`
`Claim 13 ........................................................................................... 62
`
`Claims 14-18 and 20-21 ................................................................... 66
`
`VII. GROUND 1B: CLAIMS 7, 12, 17 AND 18 ARE OBVIOUS
`OVER OREI IN VIEW OF MCDONALD ................................................ 67
`
`A. Overview of the Prior Art ................................................................. 67
`
`B. McDonald Discloses Claims 7, 12, 17, and 18 ................................ 68
`
`VIII. GROUND 1C: CLAIMS 9 AND 19 ARE OBVIOUS OVER OREI ........ 70
`
`IX. GROUND 2A: CLAIMS 1-8, 11-18, AND 21 ARE
`ANTICIPATED BY NISHIDA .................................................................. 71
`
`A. Overview of the Prior Art ................................................................. 71
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`I.
`
`J.
`
`Claim 1 ............................................................................................. 76
`
`Claim 2 ............................................................................................. 88
`
`Claims 3-4 ........................................................................................ 89
`
`Claim 5 ............................................................................................. 91
`
`Claim 6 ............................................................................................. 92
`
`Claim 7 ............................................................................................. 94
`
`Claim 8 ............................................................................................. 95
`
`Claim 11 ........................................................................................... 96
`
`Claim 12 ........................................................................................... 98
`
`
`
`
`- ii -
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(Cont’d)
`
`Page
`
`
`
`K.
`
`L.
`
`Claim 13 ......................................................................................... 100
`
`Claims 14-18 and 21 ...................................................................... 105
`
`X. GROUND 2B: CLAIMS 1-8, 11-18, AND 21 ARE OBVIOUS
`OVER NISHIDA IN VIEW OF GUENTHER ........................................ 105
`
`XI. GROUND 2C: CLAIMS 9-10 AND 19-20 ARE OBVIOUS
`UNDER EITHER GROUND 2A OR 2B ................................................. 108
`
`XII. DISCRETIONARY FACTORS ............................................................... 108
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`§ 314(a) Does Not Favor Denial .................................................... 108
`
`§ 325(d) Does Not Favor Denial .................................................... 109
`
`XIII. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS .......................................................... 110
`
`A. Notice of Real Party-In-Interest (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)) ............. 110
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`Notice of Related Matters (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)) ....................... 110
`
`Designation of Lead And Back-Up Counsel (37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.8(b)(3)) ................................................................................... 110
`
`Service Information (37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)) ................................ 111
`
`Fees ................................................................................................. 111
`
`Grounds for Standing ..................................................................... 111
`
`XIV. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................... 111
`
`
`
`
`- iii -
`
`

`

`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
` Page(s)
`
`Cases
`AG v. Nike, Inc.,
`IPR2016-00922 ............................................................................................. 16, 17
`Nike, Inc.,
`IPR2024-00460 ................................................................................................. 107
`Nike, Inc. v. Lululemon USA, Inc.,
`Case No. 1:23-cv-00771-AS (S.D.N.Y) ........................................................... 107
`Nike, Inc. v. New Balance Athletics, Inc.,
`Case No. 1:23-cv-12666-JEK (D. Mass) .......................................................... 107
`Nike, Inc. v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc.,
`Case No. 2:23-cv-09346-AB-PVC (C.D. Cal.) ................................................ 107
`SAS Inst., Inc. v. Iancu.
`EX1019, 28-50 .................................................................................................... 17
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. §102(e) .............................................................................................. 18, 20
`Other Authorities
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ............................................................................................ 107
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ............................................................................................ 108
`
`
`
`
`- iv -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`EX1005
`
`EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Document
`Exhibit No.
`EX1001 U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749 (the “’749 patent”)
`EX1002 Declaration of Sabit Adanur, Ph.D.
`EX1003 Declaration of Grant Delgatty
`EX1004 Declaration of Ingrid Hsieh-Yee
`Joint Claim Construction and Prehearing Statement (May 15,
`2024)
`Proposed Construction of Disputed Terms (May 15, 2024)
`EX1006
`EX1007 Nike’s Opening Claim Construction Brief (May 24, 2024)
`EX1008
`Skechers’ Opening Claim Construction Brief (May 24, 2024)
`EX1009 Nike’s Responsive Claim Construction Brief (June 7, 2024)
`EX1010
`Skechers’ Responsive Claim Construction Brief (June 7, 2024)
`EX1011 Nike’s Supplemental Infringement Contentions for the ’749
`Patent (March 1, 2024)
`EX1012 Vidal Guidance Memorandum (June 21, 2022)
`EX1013
`File history of the ’749 Patent
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of US 8,266,749 (IPR2016-
`00922)
`EX1015 Decision Institution of Inter Partes Review of IPR2016-00922
`EX1016
`Patent Owner Response for IPR2016-00922
`EX1017
`Final Written Decision for IPR2016-00922
`EX1018 U.S. Patent No. 9,961,954 (“Dua-954”)
`EX1019 Decision on Remand for IPR2016-00922
`EX1020 U.S. Patent No. 7,051,460 (“Orei”)
`EX1021 WIPO Patent Publication No. WO 98/43506 (“McDonald”)
`EX1022 U.S. Patent No. 5,345,638 (“Nishida”)
`EX1023 DE000000627878A (“Guenther”)
`EX1024 DE000000627878A (“Guenther”) (English Translation)
`
`EX1014
`
`- v -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`Document
`Exhibit No.
`EX1025 William A. Rossi, The Complete Footwear Dictionary,
`KRIEGLER PUBLISHING COMPANY (2000), 186
`EX1026 Ardis Koester, Analyzing the Color, Design and Texture of
`Fabric,
`EX1027 Karl Mayer, Double Needle Bar Raschel Machine For Sports
`Shoe Fabrics, January 2, 2001
`EX1028 LIBA1-Double Needle Bar Raschel Machine, November 2001
`EX1029 LIBA2-Double Needle Bar Raschel Machine, February 2000
`EX1030 LIBA3-Double Needle Bar Raschel Racop Machine For Sports
`Shoes, January 2000
`EX1031 LIBA5-Double Needle Bar Raschel Machine-Shoe Application,
`September 2003
`EX1032 Textile information, kettenwirk praxis with English translations
`EX1033 Textile information, kettenwirk praxis with English translations
`EX1034 Bernadette Marshall, Patent Drawings: Shading, when and
`where to use it
`EX1035 The Patent Experts, Design Patent Drawings: Elevate Your
`Innovation with The Patent Experts, March 13, 2024
`EX1036 The Subtle Art of Shading in Design Patent Drawings
`EX1037 U.S. Patent No. 3,985,003 (“Reed”)
`EX1038 U.S. Patent No. 2,047,724 (“Zuckerman”)
`EX1039 D.L. Bailey & J.L. Grow, Textile Progress, Knitting Overview
`K.H. Leong, The potential of knitting for engineering
`composites – a review, Elsevier, Composites: Part A 31 (2000),
`197-220
`Yanzhong Zhang, Tensile Behaviour of Multilayer Knitted
`Fabric Composites with Different Stacking Configuration,
`Applied Composite Materials 8: 27-295, 2001
`Japanese Patent Publication No. JP H3-003203 (“Horii”)
`Japanese Patent Publication No. JP H3-003203 (“Horii”) -
`Translation
`
`EX1040
`
`EX1041
`
`EX1042
`
`EX1043
`
`- vi -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`EX1049
`
`EX1050
`
`Document
`Exhibit No.
`EX1044 Chinese Patent Publication No. CN2187379Y (“Li”)
`EX1045 Chinese Patent Publication No. CN2187379Y (“Li”) –
`Translation
`EX1046 The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language,
`Fourth Edition (defining Texture)
`EX1047 Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (defining Texture)
`EX1048 The New Oxford American Dictionary, Second Edition
`(defining Texture)
`Fairchild’s Dictionary of Textiles, 7th Edition (defining
`Texture)
`David J. Spencer, KNITTING TECHNOLOGY: A COMPREHENSIVE
`HANDBOOK AND PRACTICAL GUIDE (3rd ed.) (Woodhead
`Publishing Limited, Cambridge, England 2001)
`EX1051 U.S. Patent No. 1,803,5554 (“Knilans”)
`EX1052 U.S. Patent No. 2,047,724 (“Zuckerman”)
`EX1053 U.S. Patent No. 2,675,631 (“Doughty)
`EX1054 Excerpts of Sandy Black, KNITWEAR IN FASHION (Thames &
`Hudson 2002)
`EX1055 Chinese Patent Publication No. CN2187379Y (“Li”)
`EX1056 Chinese Patent Publication No. CN2187379Y (“Li”) –
`Translation
`EX1057 Excerpts of Man-Made Fiber and Textile Dictionary (4th ed.)
`(Celanese Corporation, December 1978)
`M. Legner, 3D-Products for Fashion and Technical Textile
`Applications from Flat Knitting Machines, MELLIAND
`INTERNATIONAL (September 2003), 238-241
`EX1059 KNITTING INTERNATIONAL (February 2004), 35-39
`EX1060 Oswald Rieder, Flat and Circular Knitting Machine Trends,
`INTERNATIONAL TEXTILE BULLETIN (December 2003), 49-51
`EX1061 Derek T. Ward, The Future of Knitting, INTERNATIONAL
`TEXTILE BULLETIN (May 2023), 46-50
`
`EX1058
`
`- vii -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit No.
`
`EX1062
`
`Document
`Sabit Adanur, WELLINGTON SEARS HANDBOOK OF INDUSTRIAL
`TEXTILES (Johnston Industries Group 1995)
`EX1063 Wikipedia, Puma (brand)
`International Standard, Textile machinery- Knitting machines –
`Nominal diameters of circular machines
`
`EX1064
`
`- viii -
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Claim
`Element
`1[pre]
`
`1[a1]
`
`1[a2]
`
`1[b]
`
`1[c]
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`CLAIM LISTING
`
`LIMITATION
`
`1[pre]. A method of manufacturing an article of footwear, the
`method comprising:
`
`simultaneously knitting a textile element with a surrounding textile
`structure,
`
`the knitted textile element having at least one knitted texture that
`differs from a knitted texture in the surrounding knitted textile
`structure;
`
`removing the knitted textile element from the surrounding knitted
`textile structure;
`
`incorporating the knitted textile element into the article of footwear.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein simultaneously knitting a textile
`element with a surrounding textile structure includes simultaneously
`knitting a plurality of textile elements.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein simultaneously knitting a textile
`element with a surrounding textile includes knitting an outline of the
`knitted textile element
`
`The method of claim 3, wherein the outline has the shape and
`proportion of the knitted textile element.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein the knitted textile element has a
`substantially planar configuration upon removal from the
`surrounding knitted textile structure.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein the knitted textile element includes
`longitudinal edges formed when the knitted textile element is
`removed from the surrounding knitted textile structure.
`
`The method of claim 6, wherein the longitudinal edges are joined
`together to define at least a portion of a void for receiving a foot.
`
`- ix -
`
`

`

`Claim
`Element
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11[a]
`
`11[b]
`
`12
`
`
`
`LIMITATION
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein the knitted textile element has a
`plurality of different knitted textures formed by varying at least one
`of the stitch type and the yarn type.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein simultaneously knitting a textile
`element with a surrounding textile structure includes utilizing a
`wide-tube circular knitting machine.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein simultaneously knitting a textile
`element with a surrounding textile structure includes utilizing a
`jacquard double needle-bar raschel knitting machine.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein simultaneously knitting a textile
`element with a surrounding textile structure includes forming the
`knitted textile element to include a first area and a second area with
`a unitary construction,
`
`the first area being formed of a first stitch configuration, and the
`second area being formed of a second stitch configuration that is
`different from the first stitch configuration to impart varying textures
`to a surface of the knitted textile element.
`
`The method of claim 1, wherein incorporating the knitted textile
`element into the article of footwear includes securing edges of the
`knitted textile element to form a seam that extends along a lower
`region of an upper and securing the upper to a sole structure.
`
`13[pre] A method of manufacturing an article of footwear, the method
`comprising:
`
`13[a1] knitting a first textile element and a second textile element
`simultaneously with knitting a surrounding textile structure,
`
`13[a2]
`
`13[b]
`
`
`
`
`the first knitted textile element located within a first portion of the
`knitted textile structure, the second knitted textile element located
`within a second portion of the knitted textile structure,
`varying at least one of the types of stitches or the types of yarns in the
`knitted textile structure to impart a texture to the first and second
`knitted textile elements different from a texture of the knitted textile
`structure extending between the first and second portions;
`- x -
`
`

`

`Claim
`Element
`13[c]
`
`13[d]
`
`
`
`LIMITATION
`removing the first and second knitted textile elements from the knitted
`textile structure;
`incorporating at least one of the first and second knitted textile
`elements into the article of footwear.
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein knitting a first textile knitted
`element simultaneously with a surrounding knitted textile structure
`includes knitting an outline of the first knitted textile element.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein the first and second textile knitted
`elements have substantially planar configurations upon removal
`from the surrounding knitted textile structure.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein the first knitted textile element
`includes longitudinal edges formed when the first knitted textile
`element is removed from the surrounding knitted textile structure.
`
`The method of claim 16, wherein the longitudinal edges are joined
`together to define at least a portion of a void for receiving a foot.
`
` The method of claim 16, wherein incorporating the first knitted
`textile element into the article of footwear includes securing the
`longitudinal edges of the first knitted textile element to form a seam
`that extends along a lower region of an upper.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein knitting the first and second
`knitted textile elements simultaneously with a surrounding knitted
`textile structure includes utilizing a wide-tube circular knitting
`machine.
`
`The method of claim 13, wherein knitting the first and second textile
`knitted elements simultaneously with a surrounding knitted textile
`structure includes utilizing a jacquard double needle-bar raschel
`knitting machine.
`The method of claim 13, wherein knitting the first knitted textile
`element simultaneously with a surrounding knitted textile structure
`includes forming the first knitted textile element to include a first area
`and a second area with a unitary construction, the first area being
`formed of a first stitch configuration, and the second area being
`
`
`
`
`- xi -
`
`

`

`Claim
`Element
`
`
`
`LIMITATION
`formed of a second stitch configuration that is different from the first
`stitch configuration to impart varying textures to a surface of the first
`knitted textile element.
`
`
`
`
`- xii -
`
`

`

`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`The ’749 patent is directed to methods for manufacturing articles of footwear.
`
`The claims broadly recite constructing footwear by knitting a structure that includes
`
`a textile element with at least one texture while knitting a surrounding structure with
`
`a different texture. The textile element is removed from the surrounding structure,
`
`and then incorporated into the footwear.
`
`But knitted structures with simultaneously knitted textile elements and
`
`surrounding structure were well known before the ’749 patent, both generally and in
`
`the context of articles of footwear. For example, Mizuno Corporation, which started
`
`making athletic shoes in 1910, filed a patent in 2003 (Orei) describing knitting
`
`different parts of a shoe upper on a continuous knitted fabric using the same double
`
`raschel warp knitted process described by the ’749 patent. As detailed under Ground
`
`1A below, the various parts of the knitted shoe upper in Orei have different textures,
`
`as highlighted by the annotations to the shoe pattern 10 of FIG. 1 below, which shoe
`
`parts are described as being “disposed in one continuous knitted fabric.” EX1020
`
`(Orei), 1:58-2:3, 4:16-17 (“Shoe patterns 10 matched to paper patterns are placed
`
`continuously on one knitted fabric as shown in FIG.1.”).
`
`
`
`
`- 13 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`
`
`Id., FIG. 1.1 The various knitted shoe parts are then removed from the surrounding
`
`material (brown above), which has a different texture, and formed into a shoe upper,
`
`as shown below in FIG. 2 (with the same coloring added for corresponding knitted
`
`shoe parts from FIG. 1 above).
`
`
`1 Unless otherwise indicated, all color and text boxes in patent figures are
`
`added.
`
`
`
`
`- 14 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`
`
`Id., FIG. 2.
`
`
`
`The broad processes claimed in the ’749 patent were known even earlier than
`
`Orei. For example, as detailed under Ground 2A below, a patent claiming priority
`
`to a 1991 application was filed by Puma (Nishida) and discloses all of the features
`
`claimed in the ’749 patent. Specifically, Nishida discloses a knitted web of material
`
`1 constructed to have multiple shoe parts (layout 2 and tongue 40 shown in white
`
`below) having differing textures, which are surrounded by a thin textile material in
`
`the form of unfinished surface areas 1.1 (shown in purple below).
`
`
`
`
`- 15 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`Id., FIG. 1. The above knitted shoe parts are removed from the surrounding material,
`
`and formed into a shoe upper, an example of which is shown below in FIG. 3.
`
`
`
`
`
`Id., FIG. 3.
`
`
`
`Nishida was relied upon by adidas to challenge the ’749 patent in
`
`IPR2016-00922. At the institution stage, the Board noted that adidas “appears to
`
`identify a disclosure from Nishida in its claim charts (id. at 13-21) as teaching each
`
`
`
`
`- 16 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`of the limitations of claims 1 and 13 ….” EX1015, 16. However, the Board declined
`
`to institute on anticipation grounds because adidas had not listed anticipation as
`
`a basis for its challenge, and declined to institute on obviousness grounds because
`
`adidas also failed to establish a motivation to combine Nishida with the other
`
`references of the grounds. Nonetheless, the Board issued a FWD with findings
`
`establishing that Nishida discloses each limitation of independent claims 1 and 13.
`
`Thus, Nishida is presented here as an anticipation reference under Ground 2A and
`
`in combination with Guenther under Ground 2B; neither argument nor combination
`
`was presented by adidas in the previous Nishida challenge.
`
`II. OVERVIEW OF THE CHALLENGED PATENT
`A. Overview of the ’749 Patent
`
`The ’749 patent discloses an article of footwear with an upper that
`
`incorporates a knitted textile element 40. EX1001, 3:27-39. The knitted textile
`
`element 40 “may be formed as part of a larger textile element [60],” including
`
`multiple knitted textile elements 40 (green, and shown in dashed lines) and a
`
`surrounding structure (gold):
`
`
`
`
`- 17 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`Id., FIG. 8.
`
`The knitted textile element 40 is “removed from the larger textile element [60]
`
`and various edges of textile element 40 are secured together to form the shape of
`
`upper 30,” as shown in Figures 2-3:
`
`
`
`Id., FIGs. 2-3, 5:45-48. The upper 30 is then incorporated into an article of footwear:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 18 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`
`
`Id., FIG. 1, 4:1-2.
`
`The ’749 patent describes how a “variety of mechanical processes have been
`
`developed to manufacture a textile,” including “warp knitting or weft knitting” (Id.,
`
`6:65-67), and that any of these mechanical processes can be used. See id., 7:9-37,
`
`10:1-7. The ’749 patent does not teach or suggest that any modifications need to be
`
`made to such conventional knitting processes or machines in order to implement the
`
`described methods. EX1002, ¶¶69-74.
`
`B.
`
`Prosecution History of the ’749 Patent
`
`The Examiner rejected the claims as anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,345,638
`
`to Nishida (“Nishida”). EX1013, 235-240. Nike argued that Nishida did not disclose
`
`“simultaneously knitting a textile element with a surrounding textile structure” or
`
`“the knitted textile having at least one knitted texture that differs from a knitted
`
`texture in the surrounding textile structure.” Id., 259. The Examiner rejected the
`
`argument, stating that the material was “inherently simultaneously knitted because
`
`
`
`
`- 19 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`it [was] a sing[le] element,” and that the art disclosed techniques such as
`
`“embroidery” and “chang[ing] the type of yarn” that would create different textures.
`
`Id., 273-274. In response, Nike stated that Nishida “fails to disclose that its backing
`
`material has a first texture in an area associated with a textile element and a differing
`
`texture in an area surrounding the textile element.” “Thus,” Nike argued, “Nishida
`
`fails to disclose differing textures of any simultaneously knitted textile element and
`
`its simultaneously knitted surrounding textile structure.” Id., 286. The Examiner
`
`subsequently allowed the claims. Id., 291-296.
`
`C.
`
`Prior IPRs
`
`Adidas filed an IPR petition in 2016 challenging the ’749 patent (adidas AG
`
`v. Nike, Inc., IPR2016-00922 (“adidas IPR”)). For the primary ground, adidas relied
`
`on a combination of Nishida and US3,985,003 (“Reed”). EX1014, 7. In its
`
`Institution Decision, the Board noted that “[a]lthough Petitioner appears to identify
`
`a disclosure from Nishida in its claim charts (id. at 13–21) as teaching each of the
`
`limitations of claims 1 and 13, Petitioner does not assert expressly that Nishida
`
`alone renders claim 1 or 13 unpatentable.” EX1015, 16.2 “Declin[ing] to institute
`
`grounds not expressly asserted,” the Board refrained from instituting based on
`
`anticipation and instead instituted only on the combined Nishida-Reed ground. Id.,
`
`16.
`
`
`2 Unless otherwise noted, all emphasis is added.
`
`
`
`
`- 20 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`During the IPR, Nike asserted and expanded on the same arguments against
`
`Nishida that it made before the Examiner. EX1016, 28-31. The Board rejected
`
`Nike’s arguments, issuing a FWD with findings establishing that Nishida discloses
`
`each limitation of claims 1 and 13. See EX1017, 22 (1[pre], 13[pre]), 24-27 (1[a1]-
`
`1[c], 13[a1]-13[d]). The Board determined, however, that adidas failed to establish
`
`a motivation to combine Reed with Nishida and concluded that no claims were
`
`obvious over those references. See id., 41. The Board reiterated that determination
`
`after adidas appealed and the case was remanded in view of SAS Inst., Inc. v. Iancu.
`
`EX1019, 28-50.
`
`Given the Board’s affirmative findings with respect to Nishida, it is clear that
`
`there would have been a different result had Nishida been asserted as an anticipation
`
`reference. EX1019, 28 n.11 (adidas’ ground “necessarily rests” on the combination
`
`of Reed and Nishida).
`
`This Petition seeks to present new and stronger grounds based on the Orei
`
`reference for Grounds 1A-1C, as well as to assert the Nishida reference alone
`
`(Ground 2A), without the Reed reference and the contested motivations to combine
`
`them. This Petition also enables the Board to consider the teachings of Guenther
`
`(Ground 2B) for the first time, which describes the process upon which Nishida
`
`seeks to improve.
`
`
`
`
`- 21 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`lululemon filed IPR2024-01460 against the ’749 patent based in part on a
`
`Nishida PCT publication which is similar, but not exactly the same, as Nishida here.
`
`Moreover, lululemon did not further rely on Guenther for an alternative combination
`
`with Nishida. The IPR was instituted on August 9, 2024.
`
` New Balance also filed an IPR against the ’749 patent based on different prior
`
`art. Institution was denied on September 26, 2024.
`
`III.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE AND GROUNDS
`The asserted grounds rely on the following references:
`
`• US7,051,460 by Mizuno Corporation issued to Takeshi Orei et al.
`
`(“Orei”) was filed on December 31, 2003, published on April 21, 2005,
`
`and issued on May 30, 2006. EX1020. Orei is prior art at least under
`
`pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §102(e).
`
`• WO98/43506 by FILA U.S.A., Inc., issued to Steve McDonald
`
`(“McDonald”) was published on October 8, 1998. EX1021. McDonald
`
`is prior art under §102(b).
`
`• US5,345,638 by Puma,3 issued to Mamoru Nishida (“Nishida”) issued
`
`on September 13, 1994. EX1022. Nishida is prior art under §102(b).
`
`
`3 The assignee identified on the face of the reference is Tretorn AB, which was a
`
`wholly-owned subsidiary of Puma from 2001 to 2015. EX1063, 4.
`
`
`
`
`- 22 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`• German Patent No. 627 878 to Dr. Martin Guenther (“Guenther”)
`
`issued on July 1, 1936. (EX1023; EX1024). Guenther is prior art to the
`
`’749 patent under §102(b).
`
`The asserted grounds are:
`
`• Ground 1A: Claims 1-6, 8, 10-16, 18, and 20-21 are anticipated, or in
`
`the alternative obvious, over Orei.
`
`• Ground 1B: Claims 7, 12, 17, and 18 are obvious over Orei in view of
`
`McDonald.
`
`• Ground 1C: Claims 9 and 19 are obvious over Orei.
`
`• Ground 2A: Claim 1-8, 11-18, and 21 are anticipated by Nishida.
`
`• Ground 2B: Claim 1-8, 11-18, and 21 are obvious over Nishida in view
`
`of Guenther.
`
`• Ground 2C: Claim 9, 10, 19, and 20 are obvious under either Ground
`
`2A or 2B.
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`The ’749 patent relates to an article of footwear comprising an upper that
`
`includes a knitted textile element. EX1001, 1:20-23. A person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art (“POSITA”) in the field of the ’749 patent in March 2004 would have been
`
`someone with at least a few years of experience in knit materials and knitting
`
`methods and machines that can be used in making footwear, or a bachelor’s degree
`
`
`
`
`- 23 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`in textile-related sciences, engineering, or industrial product design, or equivalent
`
`academic or work experience, including in the footwear industry. EX1002, ¶68.
`
`Such a person of ordinary skill would have at least a general understanding of
`
`general construction processes and materials used in the manufacturing process of
`
`fabric-based articles. For individuals with a lower educational level, a person could
`
`still be of ordinary skill in the art provided that person’s working experience
`
`compensates for any such lower educational level, or vice versa. See id.
`
`This Petition does not turn on this specific definition of the level of ordinary
`
`skill. The claims would have been anticipated or obvious from the perspective of
`
`any reasonable definition of a POSITA.
`
`V. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`The Board construed certain claim terms of the ’749 patent in the adidas IPR
`
`under the then-applicable broadest reasonable interpretation standard. EX1019, 15-
`
`19. Other than the term “texture,” which Petitioner addresses below, Petitioner does
`
`not seek to re-construe any term that the Board already construed. For example, for
`
`claims 11 and 21, the Board in the adidas IPR construed “unitary construction,”4 “a
`
`
`4 In the co-pending litigation, the parties agreed that the phrase “unitary
`
`construction” means “configuration wherein portions of a textile element are not
`
`
`
`
`- 24 -
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`first area and a second area with a unitary construction,” and “impart.” EX1019, 15-
`
`17. Those constructions have been applied in this Petition.
`
`As for “texture,” consistent with the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence, the plain
`
`and ordinary meaning of “texture” should be construed to mean “the surface
`
`appearance and feel of a material, which could include both ‘smooth’ and ‘non-
`
`smooth’ textures.” In the adidas IPR, the Board construed the term “texture,” in
`
`conjunction with dependent claims 8, 11, and 21, to mean “a non-smooth surface
`
`formed while simultaneously knitting a textile element with a surrounding textile
`
`structure.” EX1019, 18-19. The Board did not address the term “texture” as used in
`
`independent claim 1 (“a knitted texture”) and independent claim 13 (“texture”).
`
`Given Nike’s previous argument that Nishida does not disclose “differing
`
`textures,” EX1013, 286, this may become a live claim construction issue (though the
`
`Board in the adidas IPR still found all of the elements of independent claims 1 and
`
`13 to be present in Nishida under its claim construction for “texture”).
`
`The patent specification would appear to be determinative as to the meaning
`
`of the claim term “texture” because it expressly discloses that texture includes
`
`
`joined together by seams or other connections.” EX1005, 2. This is the same
`
`construction applied in the adidas IPR. EX1019, 16.
`
`
`
`
`- 25 -
`
`

`

`“generally smooth” textures. EX1002, ¶¶87-92. Color-annotated FIGs. 10 and 11 are
`
`reproduced below.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,266,749
`
`
`
`Elements 46' and 46'' are in green, and depict what the patent expressly discloses are
`
`“generally smooth” textures.
`
`•
`
`“With reference to FIG. 10, a textile element 40′…is depicted as having
`
`variou