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 with traverse of Species I, fig.1A, 1B, claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-10 in the reply filed on 11/19/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Auyang (2019/0343232).
Regarding claim 1, Auyang discloses a lacing device (fig.14) for securing a shoe to a foot, comprising a shoe main body (fig.14) for receiving the foot, at least one lacing element (122, 124) for holding the foot in the shoe main body, and at least one adaptor (500, par [0085]) for adjusting the degree of lacing of the lacing element, wherein the adaptor is coupled to the lacing element. But Auyang does not disclose a functional limitation such as the adaptor being configured to release or lock the lacing element with respect to the shoe main body depending on the speed of a relative movement of the lacing element. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to recognize that the footwear article of Auyang is configured to perform as the claimed invention, since the functional implications and statements of intended use does not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead requires an ability to so perform and/or function for that they are not deemed to impose any structural limitations distinguishable over the cited prior art.
Regarding claims 2, 4, Auyang discloses wherein the lacing element and/or the adaptor comprise at least one section arranged proximal, anterior to the shoe main body to interact with the back of the foot (fig.14); wherein the at least one adaptor is coupled to the lacing element such that the adaptor forms an intermediate section of the lacing element, wherein two ends of the adaptor are coupled to a lacing element section, or the adaptor forms an extension of the lacing element, wherein one end of the adaptor is attached to the shoe main body (fig.14).
Regarding claims 5-6, 10, Auyang discloses the lacing device of claim 1, wherein the at least one adaptor is arranged in the line of force of the lacing element (par [0085]); wherein the adaptor comprises a restoring element (interior section of element 500, par [0085]), and the restoring element is configured to bring the lacing element into and retain it in a laced up position; wherein the adaptor runs substantially in the longitudinal direction or transverse to the longitudinal direction of the shoe main body .
Regarding claim 9, Auyang does not disclose the adaptor being configured such that when the speed of relative movement of the lacing element with respect to the shoe main body is below a threshold value, the adaptor allows the relative movement of the lacing element, and configured such that when the speed of relative movement of the lacing element with respect to the shoe main body exceeds the threshold value, the adaptor stops the relative movement of the lacing element in order to lace up a wearer's foot located in the shoe main body. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to recognize that the footwear article of Auyang is configured to perform as the claimed invention, since the functional implications and statements of intended use does not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead requires an ability to so perform and/or function for that they are not deemed to impose any structural limitations distinguishable over the cited prior art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, 9-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicants argue that Auyang does not disclose a functional limitation such as the adaptor being configured to release or lock the lacing element with respect to the shoe main body depending on the speed of a relative movement of the lacing element. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to recognize that the footwear article of Auyang is configured to perform as the claimed invention, since the functional implications and statements of intended use does not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead requires an ability to so perform and/or function for that they are not deemed to impose any structural limitations distinguishable over the cited prior art. Such argument has not persuasive.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY K TRIEU whose telephone number is (571)270-3495. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4.
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, Alissa Tompkins can be reached at 571-272-3425. 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.
/Timothy K Trieu/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights