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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In accordance with Applicant’s amendment filed 1/20/2026, claims 1, 8, 11, and 18 are amended. Applicant’s amendment has overcome the previously presented rejections under 35 USC 112(b).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections of claims 1 and 11, Applicant argues that Christensen does not teach the newly added limitation “defining a free space within the gap at a posterior end of the sole structure, and forming a boundary of the free space”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As written, the claim reads, in part, “a bladder disposed within the gap defined between the upper cushioning element and the lower cushioning element, defining a free space within the gap at a posterior end of the sole structure, and forming a boundary of the free space”. The placement of the newly added limitations make it appear that the free space is part of, or at least related to, the bladder itself. There is a free space that can be defined in the bladder (the interior space within the bladder), and that space is located within the gap (because the bladder itself is located in the gap, as previously required by the claim) at a posterior end of the sole structure (the claim also requires that the bladder has a uniform thickness between a heel region of the sole structure and a forefoot region of the sole structure, so the bladder is present in a posterior end of the sole structure), and the bladder itself forms a boundary of the free space (because the free space is defined as an interior space within the bladder, the bladder forms a boundary of that free space). Examiner therefore maintains that the prior art reads on the claim as written. However, even if another interpretation was used that defined the free space as a space outside the bladder, Examiner also submits that Christensen teaches at least two free spaces that would satisfy the limitation as written (i.e., they are “within the gap”, located at a posterior end of the sole structure, and the bladder forms a boundary of the free space), for example as shown in the annotated section of figure 1 below.
PNG
media_image1.png
196
285
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant asserts that the dependent claims are allowable based on their dependency from the independent claims; however, as described in the arguments above and rejections below, the independent claims are not allowable over the prior art. The dependent claims remain rejected.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 10-13, 15-16, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christensen (US 7694438) in view of Rudy (US 4906502) and Hazenberg (US 8015730).
Regarding claim 1, Christensen discloses: A sole structure for an article of footwear, the sole structure comprising: an upper cushioning element (upper sole member 108) having a lower surface (“a lower surface of upper sole member 108” column 5, lines 5-6); a lower cushioning element (lower sole member 110) having a recessed upper surface (“an upper surface of lower sole member 110 may have recesses”, column 5, lines 5-6) that cooperates with the lower surface of the upper cushioning element to define a gap along an entire length of the sole structure (“A lower surface of upper sole member 108 and an upper surface of lower sole member 110 may have recesses corresponding to a shape of a portion of the inflatable bladder located between the upper sole member 108 and lower sole member 110. The recesses aid in minimizing the thickness of sole 100 in the deflated state and locating inflatable bladder 112 between upper sole member 108 and lower sole member 110.”, column 5, lines 5-12); a bladder (bladder 400) disposed within the gap defined between the upper cushioning element and the lower cushioning element (“A lower surface of upper sole member 108 and an upper surface of lower sole member 110 may have recesses corresponding to a shape of a portion of the inflatable bladder located between the upper sole member 108 and lower sole member 110. The recesses aid in minimizing the thickness of sole 100 in the deflated state and locating inflatable bladder 112 between upper sole member 108 and lower sole member 110”, column 5, lines 5-12), defining a free space within the gap at a posterior end of the sole structure, and forming a boundary of the free space (the interior space within the bladder can be considered a free space as claimed, and it is within the gap at the posterior end of the sole structure because the bladder is within the gap at the posterior end of the sole structure, and the bladder forms a boundary of that free space because the free space is defined as an interior space within the bladder; see column 4, lines 53-62 describing the formation of the bladder with two films that are sealed along their peripheral edges), the bladder including a first barrier element attached to a second barrier element (first surface 408, second surface 512) to define a chamber having an interior void containing a compressible fluid (“air may enter inflatable bladder 400 through a barb connector attached at a location 418”, column 5, lines 40-42), a pressure of the compressible fluid being adjustable to selectively adjust a position of the first barrier element relative to the second barrier element (“Inflating the inflatable bladder increases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby increasing the thickness of the sole and shoe. Conversely, deflating the inflatable bladder decreases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby decreasing the thickness of the sole”, column 10, lines 16-22; inflating the bladder is understood to adjust the pressure in the bladder), the bladder operable between a first thickness and a second thickness and the pressure of the compressible fluid being a function of the first thickness and the second thickness (“Inflating the inflatable bladder increases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby increasing the thickness of the sole and shoe. Conversely, deflating the inflatable bladder decreases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby decreasing the thickness of the sole” column 10, lines 16-22; inflating the bladder is understood to adjust the pressure in the bladder), a first plate (upper plate 410; see figure 5B) disposed within the gap defined between the upper cushioning element and the lower cushioning element and attached to the first barrier element; a second plate (lower plate 410; see figure 5B) disposed within the gap defined between the upper cushioning element and the lower cushioning element and attached to the second barrier element on an opposite side of the bladder than the first plate (see figure 5B showing plates 410 on opposite sides of the bladder, one on the upper side and one on the lower side); and a pump (624), in fluid communication with the interior void, and configured to adjust a stiffness of the sole structure by adjusting the pressure of the compressible fluid (“in order for a wearer to customize the amount of air in the bladder, the bladder is placed in fluid communication with an inflation mechanism and an air pressure regulator. […] Inflation mechanism 622 consists of an underfoot pump 624 fluidly connected to an air transfer manifold 626” column 7, lines 42-44; “openings 633 on bottom surface 634 of manifold 626 are accessible for receiving barb connectors, as shown generally at 800 in FIG. 8, of bladders to fluidly connect the inflatable bladders to underfoot pump 624 via manifold 626” column 8, lines 3-7), the pump being actuated by a foot strike during a stance phase of a gait cycle and operable between a compressed state in the stance phase and an uncompressed state in a swing phase to translate the sole structure from a first stiffness corresponding to the first thickness of the bladder to a second stiffness corresponding to the second thickness of the bladder (“when underfoot pump 624 is compressed, air flows into an opening 962 in first end 944 of one-way valve 942 and through the valve body to the outlet opening (not shown) […] When the pressure is released from underfoot pump 624, elastomeric sleeve 961 returns to its original, unexpanded state such that air cannot flow back into valve 942 or into underfoot pump 624” column 8, lines 56-64), the second thickness being greater than the first thickness (“Inflating the inflatable bladder increases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby increasing the thickness of the sole and shoe” column 10, lines 16-22).
Christensen further teaches “Inflatable bladders can be shaped to have a plurality of interconnected inflatable chambers 120 as shown in FIG. 1 or a single chamber” (column 4, lines 57-59) and “there may be a single inflatable bladder that spans substantially the entire sole” (column 4, lines 15-16), thus Christensen discloses a bladder formed of a single chamber that spans substantially the entire sole (i.e., between a heel region and a forefoot region), but does not explicitly disclose: the bladder having a uniform thickness between a heel region of the sole structure and a forefoot region of the sole structure.
However, Rudy discloses a bladder for footwear with a “substantially uniform thickness” (see claim 26) that is achieved through the use of tensile load bearing structure (14).
Rudy teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of footwear with bladders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the bladder of Christensen a uniform thickness and add the tensile load bearing structure, as taught by Rudy, to the bladder of Christensen in order to give the bladder “the capacity of being pressurized to a levels such that more than 40% of the energy of impact on the structure is returned in a beneficial, efficient, and comfortable manner rather than being absorbed and dissipated in heat” as well as to make the bladder “substantially uniformly compressible over the load bearing areas while maintaining a substantially uniform thickness and avoiding the propensity for the formation of aneurisms” (Rudy, column 1, lines 11-25). The uniform compression and improved energy return capacity will improve both the comfort for the user.
Christensen as modified does not explicitly disclose: the pump is disposed beneath the first plate, the bladder, and the second plate.
However, Hazenberg teaches an article of footwear including a pump (42) and a bladder (45), wherein the pump is located below the bladder (“pump chamber 42 may be positioned below pressure chamber 45”, column 4, lines 62-63). Hazenberg also teaches that is it is possible for the pump to be located above the bladder (“Pump chamber 42 is located adjacent to pressure chamber 45 and above pressure chamber 45” column 4, lines 45-46).
Hazenberg teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of footwear with bladders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to relocate the pump of Christensen such that it is disposed below the bladder, as taught by Hazenberg, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. See MPEP 2144.04(VI). Examiner notes that this rearrangement would also move the pump below the plates of Christensen because the pump is taught as being located above the entire bladder and plate structure (“underfoot pump 624 sits in an indentation (not shown) on the upper surface of upper sole member 60. It is noted that while underfoot pump 624 is shown located in a heel region, it may be located anywhere along the top of upper sole member 608 or under upper sole member 608” column 7, lines 56-61) and the plates are specifically located on the top and bottom surface of the bladder (see figure 5B of Christensen; “either first or second surface 408, 514 of main portion 402 may have one or more plates 410 attached thereto that are then attached to lower surface 516 of upper sole member 508 or upper surface 302 of lower sole member 300, respectively” column 6, lines 4-8). Also, because Hazenberg teaches that a pump can be located either above or below a bladder, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that there is a reasonable expectation of success associated with relocating the pump to be below the bladder, as the pump is equally capable of receiving a downward force from the user’s foot whether it is located above or below the bladder.
Regarding claim 2, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 1, wherein the chamber includes a valve (Christensen; one way valve 942) in fluid communication with the interior void.
Regarding claim 3, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 1, wherein each of the bladder, the first plate, and the second plate extends from the forefoot region of the sole structure to the heel region of the sole structure (Christensen, the bladder and plates extend from the forefoot region to the heel region of the sole structure as described in the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 5, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 1, wherein the bladder includes a tensile element disposed within the interior void (Rudy, tensile load bearing structure 14; as modified this structure is inside the bladder of Christensen).
Regarding claim 6, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 5, wherein the tensile element includes a first tensile layer (Rudy, 16) attached to the first barrier element, a second tensile layer (Rudy, 18) attached to the second barrier element, and a plurality of connecting members (Rudy, 20) extending between and joining the first tensile layer and the second tensile layer (see figures 2 and 3 of Rudy, as modified this structure is inside the bladder of Christensen).
Regarding claim 10, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 1, wherein the bladder, the first plate, and the second plate include a complementary size and shape, the bladder extending along the entire length of the sole structure (Christensen, the bladder and plates extend from the forefoot region to the heel region of the sole structure as described in the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 1 above; see figure 5B showing their complementary size and shape; “Plates 410 are strategically shaped, positioned, and made of suitable materials to control the profile of inflatable bladder 400 in its inflated state, to control the height of inflation, and locate inflatable bladder 400 between upper and lower sole members 508, 300” column 6, lines 21-25).
Regarding claim 11, Christensen discloses: A sole structure for an article of footwear, the sole structure comprising: an upper cushioning element (upper sole member 108) having a lower surface (“a lower surface of upper sole member 108” column 5, lines 5-6); a lower cushioning element (lower sole member 110) having a recessed upper surface (“an upper surface of lower sole member 110 may have recesses” column 5, lines 5-6) that cooperates with the lower surface of the upper cushioning element to define a gap along an entire length of the sole structure (“A lower surface of upper sole member 108 and an upper surface of lower sole member 110 may have recesses corresponding to a shape of a portion of the inflatable bladder located between the upper sole member 108 and lower sole member 110. The recesses aid in minimizing the thickness of sole 100 in the deflated state and locating inflatable bladder 112 between upper sole member 108 and lower sole member 110.” column 5, lines 5-12); a bladder (bladder 400) disposed within the gap defined between the upper cushioning element and the lower cushioning element (“A lower surface of upper sole member 108 and an upper surface of lower sole member 110 may have recesses corresponding to a shape of a portion of the inflatable bladder located between the upper sole member 108 and lower sole member 110. The recesses aid in minimizing the thickness of sole 100 in the deflated state and locating inflatable bladder 112 between upper sole member 108 and lower sole member 110” column 5, lines 5-12), defining a free space within the gap at a posterior end of the sole structure, and forming a boundary of the free space (the interior space within the bladder can be considered a free space as claimed, and it is within the gap at the posterior end of the sole structure because the bladder is within the gap at the posterior end of the sole structure, and the bladder forms a boundary of that free space because the free space is defined as an interior space within the bladder; see column 4, lines 53-62 describing the formation of the bladder with two films that are sealed along their peripheral edges), the bladder including a first barrier element attached to a second barrier element (first surface 408, second surface 512) to define a chamber having an interior void (“air may enter inflatable bladder 400 through a barb connector attached at a location 418” column 5, lines 40-42), the bladder operable between a first thickness and a second thickness (“Inflating the inflatable bladder increases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby increasing the thickness of the sole and shoe. Conversely, deflating the inflatable bladder decreases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby decreasing the thickness of the sole.” column 10, lines 16-22; inflating the bladder is understood to adjust the pressure in the bladder); a first plate (upper plate 410; see figure 5B) disposed within the gap defined between the upper cushioning element and the lower cushioning element and attached to the first barrier element; a second plate (lower plate 410; see figure 5B) disposed within the gap defined between the upper cushioning element and the lower cushioning element and attached to the second barrier element on an opposite side of the bladder than the first plate (see figure 5B showing plates 410 on opposite sides of the bladder, one on the upper side and one on the lower side), a distance between the first plate and the second plate being selectively adjustable by varying a volume of fluid contained within the interior void (“Inflating the inflatable bladder increases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby increasing the thickness of the sole and shoe.” column 10, lines 16-22; it is understood that inflating the bladder increases the volume of air and deflating the bladder decreases the volume of air contained in the bladder); and a pump (624), in fluid communication with the interior void, and configured to adjust a stiffness of the sole structure by varying the volume of fluid contained within the interior void (“in order for a wearer to customize the amount of air in the bladder, the bladder is placed in fluid communication with an inflation mechanism and an air pressure regulator. […] Inflation mechanism 622 consists of an underfoot pump 624 fluidly connected to an air transfer manifold 626”; “openings 633 on bottom surface 634 of manifold 626 are accessible for receiving barb connectors, as shown generally at 800 in FIG. 8, of bladders to fluidly connect the inflatable bladders to underfoot pump 624 via manifold 626” column 8, lines 3-7), the volume of fluid being a function of the first thickness and the second thickness of the bladder (“Inflating the inflatable bladder increases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby increasing the thickness of the sole and shoe.” column 10, lines 16-22), the pump being actuated by a foot strike during a stance phase of a gait cycle and operable between a compressed state in the stance phase and an uncompressed state in a swing phase to translate the sole structure from a first stiffness corresponding to the first thickness of the bladder to a second stiffness corresponding to the second thickness of the bladder (“when underfoot pump 624 is compressed, air flows into an opening 962 in first end 944 of one-way valve 942 and through the valve body to the outlet opening (not shown) […] When the pressure is released from underfoot pump 624, elastomeric sleeve 961 returns to its original, unexpanded state such that air cannot flow back into valve 942 or into underfoot pump 624.” column 8, lines 56-64), the second thickness being greater than the first thickness (“Inflating the inflatable bladder increases the distance between the upper sole member and the lower sole member, thereby increasing the thickness of the sole and shoe.” column 10, lines 16-22).
Christensen further teaches “Inflatable bladders can be shaped to have a plurality of interconnected inflatable chambers 120 as shown in FIG. 1 or a single chamber” (column 4, lines 57-59) and “there may be a single inflatable bladder that spans substantially the entire sole” (column 4, lines 15-16), thus Christensen discloses a bladder formed of a single chamber that spans substantially the entire sole (i.e., between a heel region and a forefoot region), but does not explicitly disclose: the bladder having a uniform thickness between a heel region of the sole structure and a forefoot region of the sole structure.
However, Rudy discloses a bladder for footwear with a “substantially uniform thickness” (see claim 26) that is achieved through the use of a first tensile layer (16), a second tensile layer (18), and a plurality of connecting members (20) extending between and joining the first tensile layer and the second tensile layer (see figures 2 and 3).
Rudy teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of footwear with bladders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the bladder of Christensen a uniform thickness and add the first tensile layer, second tensile layer, and the plurality of connecting members, as taught by Rudy, to the bladder of Christensen in order to give the bladder “the capacity of being pressurized to a levels such that more than 40% of the energy of impact on the structure is returned in a beneficial, efficient, and comfortable manner rather than being absorbed and dissipated in heat” as well as to make the bladder “substantially uniformly compressible over the load bearing areas while maintaining a substantially uniform thickness and avoiding the propensity for the formation of aneurisms” (Rudy, column 1, lines 11-25). The uniform compression and improved energy return capacity will improve both the comfort for the user.
Christensen as modified does not explicitly disclose: the pump is disposed beneath the first plate, the bladder, and the second plate.
However, Hazenberg teaches an article of footwear including a pump (42) and a bladder (45), wherein the pump is located below the bladder (“pump chamber 42 may be positioned below pressure chamber 45”, column 4, lines 62-63). Hazenberg also teaches that is it is possible for the pump to be located above the bladder (“Pump chamber 42 is located adjacent to pressure chamber 45 and above pressure chamber 45” column 4, lines 45-46).
Hazenberg teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of footwear with bladders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to relocate the pump of Christensen such that it is disposed below the bladder, as taught by Hazenberg, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. See MPEP 2144.04(VI). Examiner notes that this rearrangement would also move the pump below the plates of Christensen because the pump is taught as being located above the entire bladder and plate structure (“underfoot pump 624 sits in an indentation (not shown) on the upper surface of upper sole member 60. It is noted that while underfoot pump 624 is shown located in a heel region, it may be located anywhere along the top of upper sole member 608 or under upper sole member 608” column 7, lines 56-61) and the plates are specifically located on the top and bottom surface of the bladder (see figure 5B of Christensen; “either first or second surface 408, 514 of main portion 402 may have one or more plates 410 attached thereto that are then attached to lower surface 516 of upper sole member 508 or upper surface 302 of lower sole member 300, respectively” column 6, lines 4-8). Also, because Hazenberg teaches that a pump can be located either above or below a bladder, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that there is a reasonable expectation of success associated with relocating the pump to be below the bladder, as the pump is equally capable of receiving a downward force from the user’s foot whether it is located above or below the bladder.
Regarding claim 12, Christensen as modified discloses The sole structure of Claim 11, wherein the chamber includes a valve (Christensen; one way valve 942) in fluid communication with the interior void.
Regarding claim 13, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 11, wherein each of the bladder, the first plate, and the second plate extends from the forefoot region of the sole structure to the heel region of the sole structure (Christensen, the bladder and plates extend from the forefoot region to the heel region of the sole structure as described in the 35 USC 103 rejection of claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 15, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 11, further comprising a tensile element disposed within the interior void (Rudy, tensile load bearing structure 14; as modified this structure is inside the bladder of Christensen).
Regarding claim 16, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 15, wherein the tensile element includes a first tensile layer (Rudy, 16) attached to the first barrier element, a second tensile layer (Rudy, 18) attached to the second barrier element, and a plurality of connecting members (Rudy, 20) extending between and joining the first tensile layer and the second tensile layer (see figures 2 and 3 of Rudy, as modified this structure is inside the bladder of Christensen).
Regarding claim 20, Christensen as modified discloses: An article of footwear incorporating the sole structure of Claim 11 (Christensen, “Sole 100 is intended to be incorporated into any shoe” column 3, lines 38-39).
Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christensen/Rudy/Hazenberg, and further in view of Owsen (US 2682712).
Regarding claim 4, Christensen as modified does not explicitly disclose: The sole structure of Claim 1, wherein a stiffness of the first plate is different than a stiffness of the second plate.
However, Owsen teaches an article of footwear with a bladder (35), a first plate (17), and a second plate (30), wherein a stiffness of the first plate is different than a stiffness of the second plate (“reinforcing plate 17 which is formed from plastic” column 2, lines 4-5; “plate 30 formed from aluminum” column 2, line 39; it is understood that plastic and aluminum have different stiffnesses).
Owsen teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of footwear with bladders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the first and second plates of Christensen different stiffnesses by making the bottom plate out of aluminum (Examiner notes that the plates of Christensen are already described as being made of a “polymeric material, such as thermoplastic polyurethane”, so only one plate will be modified), as taught by Owsen, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See MPEP 2144.07. Further, altering the stiffness of the plates would allow for further optimization and customization in regards to controlling the profile of the bladder in the inflated state (see Christensen).
Regarding claim 14, Christensen as modified does not explicitly disclose: The sole structure of Claim 11, wherein a stiffness of the first plate is different than a stiffness of the second plate.
However, Owsen teaches an article of footwear with a bladder (35), a first plate (17), and a second plate (30), wherein a stiffness of the first plate is different than a stiffness of the second plate (“reinforcing plate 17 which is formed from plastic” column 2, lines 4-5; “plate 30 formed from aluminum” column 2, line 39; it is understood that plastic and aluminum have different stiffnesses).
Owsen teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of footwear with bladders. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the first and second plates of Christensen different stiffnesses by making the bottom plate out of aluminum (Examiner notes that the plates of Christensen are already described as being made of a “polymeric material, such as thermoplastic polyurethane”, so only one plate will be modified), as taught by Owsen, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See MPEP 2144.07. Further, altering the stiffness of the plates would allow for further optimization and customization in regards to controlling the profile of the bladder in the inflated state (see Christensen).
Claim(s) 7-8, 17-18, 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Christensen/Rudy/Hazenberg, and further in view of Farina (US 2017/0095033).
Regarding claim 7, Christensen as modified does not explicitly disclose: The sole structure of Claim 1, wherein each of the first plate and the second plate includes a laminate fiber structure including a plurality of fiber layers consolidated by a resin.
However, Farina teaches a composite sole plate for footwear. Specifically, Farina teaches a composite sole plate (300) for footwear, wherein the plate includes a laminate fiber structure including a plurality of fiber layers (600a, 600b, 600d) consolidated by a resin (“when fibers which are pre-impregnated with resin are used, subjecting the stack to heat and pressure can melt or soften the pre-impregnated resin and affix the plies together and hold them in the specific shape. Alternatively or additionally, a liquid resin can be applied to the plies to affix the [plies] together and in some cases to consolidate the fibers, thereby increasing the tensile strength of the plate once the resin has solidified” paragraph 194).
Farina teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of footwear. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the plates of Christensen out of the composite material as taught by Farina because “the plate may be formed from at least two layers of fibers anisotropic to one another to impart gradient stiffness and gradient load paths across the plate 300” and “the stiffness of the plate may be selected for a particular wearer based on the wearer’s tendon flexibility, calf muscle strength, and/or MTP joint flexibility. Moreover, the stiffness of the plate 300 may also be tailored based up on a running motion of the athlete” (Farina, paragraph 86). For example, “the plate 300 provides a greater longitudinal stiffness (e.g., in a direction along the longitudinal axis L) than a transverse stiffness (e.g., in a direction transverse to the longitudinal axis L)” (Farina, paragraph 86). This permits the plates to be customized for each individual user, resulting in better support and comfort for each user. Further, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 8, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 7, wherein the plurality of fiber layers of at least one of the first plate and the second plate includes at least four layers (see figure 41 of Farina; there is one ply 600d, two plies 600a, and one ply 600b for a total of four fiber layers).
Regarding claim 21, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 7, wherein a longitudinal axis of fibers of each fiber layer of the plurality of fiber layers is angled relative to a longitudinal axis of fibers of at least one adjacent fiber layer, an angle of the longitudinal axis of the fibers of each fiber layer being defined between -15° and 15° relative to a longitudinal axis of each fiber layer (Farina, “sheet 600d includes fibers positioned at 15° relative to the longitudinal axis (L), the next two sheets 600a include fibers positioned at 0° relative to the longitudinal axis (L), the next sheet 600b includes fibers positioned at -15° relative to the longitudinal axis (L)” paragraph 193; see also figure 41 of Farina).
Regarding claim 17, Christensen as modified does not explicitly disclose: The sole structure of Claim 11, wherein each of the first plate and the second plate includes a laminate fiber structure including a plurality of fiber layers consolidated by a resin.
However, Farina teaches a composite sole plate for footwear. Specifically, Farina teaches a composite sole plate (300) for footwear, wherein the plate includes a laminate fiber structure including a plurality of fiber layers (600a, 600b, 600d) consolidated by a resin (“when fibers which are pre-impregnated with resin are used, subjecting the stack to heat and pressure can melt or soften the pre-impregnated resin and affix the plies together and hold them in the specific shape. Alternatively or additionally, a liquid resin can be applied to the plies to affix the [plies] together and in some cases to consolidate the fibers, thereby increasing the tensile strength of the plate once the resin has solidified” paragraph 194).
Farina teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of footwear. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the plates of Christensen out of the composite material as taught by Farina because “the plate may be formed from at least two layers of fibers anisotropic to one another to impart gradient stiffness and gradient load paths across the plate 300” and “the stiffness of the plate may be selected for a particular wearer based on the wearer’s tendon flexibility, calf muscle strength, and/or MTP joint flexibility. Moreover, the stiffness of the plate 300 may also be tailored based up on a running motion of the athlete” (Farina, paragraph 86). For example, “the plate 300 provides a greater longitudinal stiffness (e.g., in a direction along the longitudinal axis L) than a transverse stiffness (e.g., in a direction transverse to the longitudinal axis L)” (Farina, paragraph 86). This permits the plates to be customized for each individual user, resulting in better support and comfort for each user. Further, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 18, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 17, wherein the plurality of fiber layers of at least one of the first plate and the second plate includes at least four layers (see figure 41 of Farina; there is one ply 600d, two plies 600a, and one ply 600b for a total of four fiber layers).
Regarding claim 22, Christensen as modified discloses: The sole structure of Claim 17, wherein a longitudinal axis of fibers of each fiber layer of the plurality of fiber layers is angled relative to a longitudinal axis of fibers of at least one adjacent fiber layer, an angle of the longitudinal axis of the fibers of each fiber layer being defined between -15° and 15° relative to a longitudinal axis of each fiber layer (Farina, “sheet 600d includes fibers positioned at 15° relative to the longitudinal axis (L), the next two sheets 600a include fibers positioned at 0° relative to the longitudinal axis (L), the next sheet 600b includes fibers positioned at -15° relative to the longitudinal axis (L)” paragraph 193; see also figure 41 of Farina).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Lombardino (US 5743028) (see figure 4 in particular) and Greene (US 2004/0123495) (see figure 12 in particular) both teach footwear with a free space within a gap at a posterior end of the sole structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIANNA T DUCKWORTH whose telephone number is (571)272-1458. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at 571-272-5559. 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.
/BRIANNA T. DUCKWORTH/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/PATRICK J. LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights