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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment of 11/24/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 and 12-13 are presented.
Claims 4-10 and 13 remain withdrawn.
Claims 1-2 are presented in independent form and are amended.
Dependent claims 3 and 12 are amended.
The present Office action treats claims 1-3 and 12 on the merits.
The present Office action is a final rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s REMARKS of 11/24/2025 (see p. 6-8 of the reply) are fully considered.
Regarding Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (p. 6-7): Applicant’s arguments are fully considered but are moot insofar as Applicant’s claim amendments of 11/24/2025 have amended the claims so as to no longer recite the argued subject matter.
Regarding Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (p. 7-8): Applicant’s arguments are fully 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Luthi, DE-19904744-A1, newly cited] in view of [Fusco, US 2018/0153254, newly cited] and [Cross, US 2019/0365044, newly cited].
Regarding claim 1:
Luthi discloses:
A sole (the combined “outer sole”, “midsole”, “inner sole”, and “stability element”; p. 4 lines 14-15) that forms a part of a shoe (p. 4 line 14), the sole comprising:
an upper midsole (the “inner sole”; p. 4 line 15);
a lower midsole (the “midsole”; p. 4 line 15);
a plate (the “stability element”; p. 4 line 14) between the upper midsole and the lower midsole (“stability element...integrated...by placing it between...the midsole and the inner sole”; p. 4 lines 14-15); and
an outer sole (the “outer sole”; p. 4 line 15);
the plate having a reinforcement portion 10 (i.e. “base body 10”; p. 5 line 1) including a composite material (p. 6 lines 37-41) containing a resin (p. 6 line 38) and a plurality of fibers (p. 6 lines 37-38), wherein
the plate is configured to extend from a position superimposed in a direction of thickness of the sole in a front end of a foot of a wearer of the shoe (see annotated Fig. 2 – a below) to a position superimposed in the direction of thickness of the sole in a rear end of the foot of the wearer (see annotated Fig. 2 – a below),
the plate is configured to be spaced from a toe side end and a heel side end of the shoe (see annotated Fig. 2 – a below), and
the plurality of fibers in the reinforcement portion has an orientation property such that the plurality of fibers is aligned in a foot length direction (“fibers being arranged parallel to the longitudinal axis of the shoe”; p. 5 lines 25-26).
PNG
media_image1.png
859
933
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Luthi does not expressly disclose the outer sole covering a lower surface of the lower midsole;
Luthi does not expressly disclose the plate is configured such that an entirety of the plate is spaced from the outer sole of the sole.
Fig. 2 of Luthi shows reinforcement portion 10 of the plate in relation to “shoe 1” (p. 5 line 1) and does not show the extent and spatial arrangement of the lower midsole, the outer sole, the upper midsole relative to one another and relative to the plate.
However, Fusco teaches a sole 204 (i.e. “sole structure 204”; para 45) that forms a part of a shoe 200 (i.e. “article of footwear 200”; para 45) wherein an outer sole 240 (i.e. “ground-engaging component 240”; para 49) is covering (para 49) a lower surface 232G of a lower midsole 230 (i.e. “[]lower impact force attenuating component 230”; para 49); a plate 220 (i.e. “rigid plate component 220”; para 49) configured such that an entirety of the plate is spaced from the outer sole 240 (Figs. 2A-2B, 2F-2T).
It 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 to have modified the sole of Luthi such that its outer sole is covering a lower surface of the lower midsole, as in Fusco, in order to yield the predictable result of a sole whose outer sole is capable of being interposed between its lower midsole and a ground surface for the purpose of protecting the lower midsole from abrasion.
It 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that the plate is configured such that an entirety of the plate is spaced from the outer sole of the sole, as in Fusco, in order to yield the predictable result of a sole whose lower midsole is capable of attenuating impact forces—for example impact forces applied to the plate by a foot whilst walking or running—via deformation of the lower midsole in the region of the lower midsole that is between the plate and the outer sole and within the space between the plate and the outer sole.
Luthi does not expressly disclose the plate is configured to be spaced from a toe side end and a heel side end of the upper midsole.
In further view of Fusco:
In Fusco, the plate 220 is configured to be spaced from a toe side end of upper midsole 212 (i.e. “at the...toe...end[]” (para 75) of “[]upper impact force attenuating component 212” (para 49) and so as to permit the direct junction 238F between upper and lower midsoles as described in para 75 and shown in, e.g., Figs. 2A and 2B) and a heel side end of upper midsole 212 (i.e. “at the...heel end[]” and so as to permit the direct junction 238R between upper and lower midsoles as described in para 75 and shown in, e.g., Figs. 2A and 2B).
Fusco further teaches that the plate, upper midsole, and lower midsole, so arranged, result in “direct junction[s]” between the upper midsole and lower midsole which “help provide a more stable and secure connection between the sole structure 204 components. For example, these direct junction(s) 238F and/or 238R at the extreme toe and heel ends can help prevent delamination of the sole structure 204 (e.g., by helping prevent the forward and/or rear ends of the rigid plate component 220 from “delaminating” or pulling apart from their connection to the impact attenuating components 212 and/or 230” (para 75).
It 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that the plate is configured to be spaced from a toe side end and a heel side end of the upper midsole, as in Fusco, in order to provide a more stable and/or secure connection between sole components; and/or to help prevent ends of the plate from delaminating and/or pulling apart from their connection to upper and/or lower midsoles, as taught by Fusco (para 75).
Luthi does not expressly disclose the plate having a reinforcement portion including a composite material containing a synthetic resin and a plurality of fibers.
Luthi does not expressly disclose the plurality of fibers in the reinforcement portion has a weight average fiber length from 0.4 mm to 7.0 mm.
Cross teaches a sole 320 (i.e. “sole structure 320”; para 94) comprising a plate 322 (i.e. “plate 322” wherein the plate is configured to impart bending rigidity to the sole: “sole structure 320 of the present construction may include a rigid or semi rigid plate 322 that is placed and operatively configured to inhibit bending or certain flexural motions of the sole structure 320”; para 94.
Cross further teaches the plate comprises a reinforcement portion (i.e. the plate 322) including a composite (“composite”; para 94) material containing a synthetic resin (“polyamide (e.g., PA6 or PA66), polyether ether ketone (PEEK), Polyphenylene sulfide (PPS), Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), and/or the like”; para 94) and a plurality of fibers (“plurality of continuous or discontinuous reinforcing fibers are embedded therein. In one configuration, the plurality of fibers include carbon, aramid, or glass fibers”; para 94).
Cross further teaches “the fibers may be short fibers, each having an average longitudinal/length dimension of less than about 25 mm, or less than about 20 mm, or less than about 15 mm, or even less than about 10 mm. These short fibers may be mixed with the molten polymer and injection molded into the required shape. As such, shorter fibers are typically easier to injection mold, though are typically less strong than comparable longer fibers (greater than about 25 mm)” (para 94).
Because Cross is concerned with ease of injection molding and strength of a sole plate configured to impart bending rigidity and provides a range (i.e. the “less than about 10 mm” of para 94) encompassing the claimed limitation, the claimed range is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at the claimed average fiber length through routine experimentation in order to provide desired sole properties. The claimed average fiber length is merely an optimum or workable average fiber length and the average fiber length of the fibers within the reinforcement portion is expected to affect ease of injection molding and the strength of the reinforcement portion.
It 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that its resin is a synthetic resin and the plurality of fibers in the reinforcement portion has a weight average fiber length from 0.4 mm to 7.0 mm in order to yield the predictable result of a plate that is capable of being manufactured via injection molding further wherein the plate and its reinforcement portion has the combined ease-of-injection-molding and strength afforded by fibers having a weight-average fiber length of from 0.4 to 7.0 mm.
Regarding claim 12:
Luthi in view of Fusco and Cross teach the sole according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Luthi does not expressly disclose an upper connected to the sole and located above the sole and accordingly the modified Luthi does not meet the limitation A shoe comprising the sole according to claim 1; and an upper connected to the sole and located above the sole.
However and in further view of Fusco:
Fusco teaches a shoe 200 comprising an upper 202 connected to (para 45; Figs. 2A-2C) a sole 204 and located above (Figs. 2A-2C) the sole.
Fusco teaches “The upper 202 of this example includes a foot-receiving opening 206 that provides access to an interior chamber into which the wearer's foot is inserted” (para 46).
It 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that an upper is connected to the sole and located above the sole to yield a shoe comprising the sole according to claim 1 and an upper connected to the sole and located above the sole in order to permit a wearer to don the shoe and its sole via inserting his foot into a shoe interior chamber via an opening of the upper, as taught by Fusco (para 46).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Luthi, DE-19904744-A1, newly cited] in view of [Fusco, US 2018/0153254, newly cited] and [Cross, US 2019/0365044, newly cited].
Regarding claim 2:
Luthi discloses:
A sole (the combined “outer sole”, “midsole”, “inner sole”, and “stability element”; p. 4 lines 14-15) that forms a part of a shoe (p. 4 line 14), the sole comprising:
an upper midsole (the “inner sole”; p. 4 line 15);
a lower midsole (the “midsole”; p. 4 line 15);
a plate (the “stability element”; p. 4 line 14) between the upper midsole and the lower midsole (“stability element...integrated...by placing it between...the midsole and the inner sole”; p. 4 lines 14-15); and
an outer sole (the “outer sole”; p. 4 line 15);
the plate having a reinforcement portion 10 (i.e. “base body 10”; p. 5 line 1) including a composite material (p. 6 lines 37-41) containing a resin (p. 6 line 38) and a plurality of fibers (p. 6 lines 37-38), wherein
the plate is configured to extend from a position superimposed in a direction of thickness of the sole in a front end of a foot of a wearer of the shoe (see annotated Fig. 2 – a presented in above treatment of claim 1) to a position superimposed in the direction of thickness of the sole in a rear end of the foot of the wearer (see annotated Fig. 2 – a presented in above treatment of claim 1),
the plate is configured to be spaced from a toe side end and a heel side end of the shoe (see annotated Fig. 2 – a presented in above treatment of claim 1), and
a flexural rigidity of the reinforcement portion in a foot length direction of the shoe (the “bending stiffness in the fiber direction...the fibers...arranged parallel to the longitudinal axis” which is “between 450 N/mm2 and 500 N/mm2) is at least two times as high as a flexural rigidity of the reinforcement portion in a foot width direction of the shoe (the “bending stiffness perpendicular to the fiber direction” which is “between 90 N/mm2 and 160 N/m2”); it is noted that every value within the range of 450-500 is at least two times as high as every value within the range of 90-160.
Luthi does not expressly disclose the outer sole attached to the lower midsole;
Luthi does not expressly disclose the plate is configured such that an entirety of the plate is spaced from the outer sole of the sole.
Fig. 2 of Luthi shows reinforcement portion 10 of the plate in relation to “shoe 1” (p. 5 line 1) and does not show the extent and spatial arrangement of the lower midsole, the outer sole, the upper midsole relative to one another and relative to the plate.
However, Fusco teaches a sole 204 (i.e. “sole structure 204”; para 45) that forms a part of a shoe 200 (i.e. “article of footwear 200”; para 45) wherein an outer sole 240 (i.e. “ground-engaging component 240”; para 49) is attached to (para 49) a lower surface 232G of a lower midsole 230 (i.e. “[]lower impact force attenuating component 230”; para 49); a plate 220 (i.e. “rigid plate component 220”; para 49) configured such that an entirety of the plate is spaced from the outer sole 240 (Figs. 2A-2B, 2F-2T).
It 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 to have modified the sole of Luthi such that its outer sole is attached to a lower surface of the lower midsole, as in Fusco, in order to yield the predictable result of a sole whose outer sole is capable of being interposed between its lower midsole and a ground surface for the purpose of protecting the lower midsole from abrasion.
It 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that the plate is configured such that an entirety of the plate is spaced from the outer sole of the sole, as in Fusco, in order to yield the predictable result of a sole whose lower midsole is capable of attenuating impact forces—for example impact forces applied to the plate by a foot whilst walking or running—via deformation of the lower midsole in the region of the lower midsole that is between the plate and the outer sole and within the space between the plate and the outer sole.
Luthi does not expressly disclose the plate is configured to be spaced from a toe side end and a heel side end of the upper midsole.
In further view of Fusco:
In Fusco, the plate 220 is configured to be spaced from a toe side end of upper midsole 212 (i.e. “at the...toe...end[]” (para 75) of “[]upper impact force attenuating component 212” (para 49) and so as to permit the direct junction 238F between upper and lower midsoles as described in para 75 and shown in, e.g., Figs. 2A and 2B) and a heel side end of upper midsole 212 (i.e. “at the...heel end[]” and so as to permit the direct junction 238R between upper and lower midsoles as described in para 75 and shown in, e.g., Figs. 2A and 2B).
Fusco further teaches that the plate, upper midsole, and lower midsole, so arranged, result in “direct junction[s]” between the upper midsole and lower midsole which “help provide a more stable and secure connection between the sole structure 204 components. For example, these direct junction(s) 238F and/or 238R at the extreme toe and heel ends can help prevent delamination of the sole structure 204 (e.g., by helping prevent the forward and/or rear ends of the rigid plate component 220 from “delaminating” or pulling apart from their connection to the impact attenuating components 212 and/or 230” (para 75).
It 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that the plate is configured to be spaced from a toe side end and a heel side end of the upper midsole, as in Fusco, in order to provide a more stable and/or secure connection between sole components; and/or to help prevent ends of the plate from delaminating and/or pulling apart from their connection to upper and/or lower midsoles, as taught by Fusco (para 75).
Luthi does not expressly disclose the plate having a reinforcement portion including a composite material containing a synthetic resin and a plurality of fibers.
Luthi does not expressly disclose the plurality of fibers in the reinforcement portion has a weight average fiber length from 0.4 mm to 7.0 mm.
Cross teaches a sole 320 (i.e. “sole structure 320”; para 94) comprising a plate 322 (i.e. “plate 322” wherein the plate is configured to impart bending rigidity to the sole: “sole structure 320 of the present construction may include a rigid or semi rigid plate 322 that is placed and operatively configured to inhibit bending or certain flexural motions of the sole structure 320”; para 94.
Cross further teaches the plate comprises a reinforcement portion (i.e. the plate 322) including a composite (“composite”; para 94) material containing a synthetic resin (“polyamide (e.g., PA6 or PA66), polyether ether ketone (PEEK), Polyphenylene sulfide (PPS), Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), and/or the like”; para 94) and a plurality of fibers (“plurality of continuous or discontinuous reinforcing fibers are embedded therein. In one configuration, the plurality of fibers include carbon, aramid, or glass fibers”; para 94).
Cross further teaches “the fibers may be short fibers, each having an average longitudinal/length dimension of less than about 25 mm, or less than about 20 mm, or less than about 15 mm, or even less than about 10 mm. These short fibers may be mixed with the molten polymer and injection molded into the required shape. As such, shorter fibers are typically easier to injection mold, though are typically less strong than comparable longer fibers (greater than about 25 mm)” (para 94).
Because Cross is concerned with ease of injection molding and strength of a sole plate configured to impart bending rigidity and provides a range (i.e. the “less than about 10 mm” of para 94) encompassing the claimed limitation, the claimed range is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at the claimed average fiber length through routine experimentation in order to provide desired sole properties. The claimed average fiber length is merely an optimum or workable average fiber length and the average fiber length of the fibers within the reinforcement portion is expected to affect ease of injection molding and the strength of the reinforcement portion.
It 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that its resin is a synthetic resin and the plurality of fibers in the reinforcement portion has a weight average fiber length from 0.4 mm to 7.0 mm in order to yield the predictable result of a plate that is capable of being manufactured via injection molding further wherein the plate and its reinforcement portion has the combined ease-of-injection-molding and strength afforded by fibers having a weight-average fiber length of from 0.4 to 7.0 mm.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Luthi, DE-19904744-A1], [Fusco, US 2018/0153254] and [Cross, US 2019/0365044] as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of [Diharce, US 2021/0386158, previously cited; refer to the PTO-892 of 06/04/2024] and [Shanker, US 2019/0357627, previously cited; refer to the PTO-892 of 06/04/2024].
Regarding claim 3:
Luthi in view of Fusco and Cross teach The sole according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Luthi does not expressly disclose the reinforcement portion has a specific gravity of not larger than 1.15.
However, Diharce teaches a plate (30) used for a sole that forms part of a shoe (Abstract) wherein the plate has specific gravity in the range of 1.0-1.2 (para 29) further wherein the plate comprises a fiber reinforced composite (para 29).
Because Diharce is concerned with plate material specific gravity and provides a range (i.e. 1-1.2) encompassing the claimed limitation, the claimed range is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at the claimed specific gravity value through routine experimentation in order to provide desired plate properties. The claimed specific gravity is merely an optimum or workable specific gravity and the specific gravity of the plate is expected to affect weight and balance of the plate and also of a shoe that contains the plate.
Therefore, it 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that it has a specific gravity not larger than 1.15 in order to yield the predictable result of a plate that has desirable weight and/or balance when combined in a fully assembled footwear for some users.
Luthi does not expressly disclose flexural rigidity of the reinforcement portion in the foot length direction of the shoe is from 10 GPa to 17 GPa.
However, Shanker teaches a plate (16) comprising a fiber reinforced composite material (Abstract) used for a sole that forms a part of a shoe (Abstract) wherein a flexural rigidity of the plate is 1 GPa to 100 GPa (para 29). Shanker further teaches the plate “provides impact resistance and maintains overall stiffness” of the assembly “when impacted by an object” (para 23).
Because Shanker is concerned with desired impact resistance and sole stiffness and provides a range (i.e. 1 GPa to 100 GPa) encompassing the claimed limitation, the claimed range is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at the claimed flexural rigidity values through routine experimentation in order to provide desired plate properties. The claimed rigidity is merely an optimum or workable rigidity and the rigidity of the plate is expected to affect stiffness and impact protection of the plate.
Therefore, it 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 to have modified the modified Luthi such that flexural rigidity of the reinforcement portion in the foot length direction of the shoe is from 10 GPa to 17 GPa in order to yield the predictable result of a plate that affords desirable stiffness and impact protection according to some users’ preferences and use cases.
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 GRADY A NUNNERY whose telephone number is (571)272-2995. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 M-F.
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.
/GRADY ALEXANDER NUNNERY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3732