Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/084,653

LED-BASED CONFIGURATIONS FOR CHANGEABLE COLOR FOOTWEAR

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Dec 20, 2022
Examiner
BREVAL, ELMITO
Art Unit
2875
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
1052 granted / 1380 resolved
+8.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
1423
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
51.6%
+11.6% vs TC avg
§102
30.6%
-9.4% vs TC avg
§112
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1380 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Objections Claims 1 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 1, line 1, add “An” before “Apparatus” In claim 4, line 2, delete [comprises] in insert “comprise” after “components” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-2, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sackett (US. Pub: 2018/0160762 A1). Regarding claim 1, Sackett discloses (in at least figs. 1-6) an apparatus for providing changeable color footwear (at least figs. 1-6), comprising a plurality of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (245-1, 245-2, 245-3; [0005]; [0024]), with individual sets of LEDs (see at least fig. 2) within the plurality configured to emit at different colors ([0033]); a placement component (see at least figs. 1-6; i.e. where the LED ribbons are located) for distributing the location of the different colors from the plurality of LEDs (245-1, 245-2, 245-3) across an outer surface of a footwear product (see figs. 1-6); a battery source (250; [0026]) coupled to the plurality of LEDs (245-1, 245-2, 245-3) to enable illumination; and a switching arrangement (abstract; i.e. the toggle switch) disposed between the plurality of LEDs (245-1, 245-2, 245-3) and the battery source (250) to control the selection of individual sets of LEDs of different color that are illuminated at any point in time to change the color appearance of the outer surface of the footwear ([0033]). Regarding claim 2, Sackett discloses (in at least figs. 1-6) the plurality of LEDs (245-1, 245-2, 245-3) are configured as a collection of individual strings of LEDs (see fig. 2). Regarding claim 8, Sackett discloses (in at least figs. 1-6) the battery source (250) and the switching arrangement ([0024]-[0025]) are co-located with the plurality of LEDs (245-1, 245-2, 245-3). Regarding claim 10, Sackett discloses (in at least figs. 1-6) the battery source (250) is configured to be rechargeable by a co-located charging station ([0026]). 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. Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sackett (US. Pub: 2018/0160762 A1) in view of Beers et al. (US. Pat: 9,861,155 B2~hereinafter “Beers”) of record. Regarding claim 3, Sackett discloses all the claimed limitations except for the placement component comprises a plurality of releasable attachment elements disposed along separate locations of each individual string of the collection of individual strings, the plurality of releasable attachment elements joining with like elements on the footwear external surface to provide the ability to attach or remove an individual string of LEDs to/from the outer surface of the footwear. Beers discloses (in at least figs. 1-15) a lighting assembly for articles of footwear (title) comprised of, in part, a placement component comprises a plurality of releasable attachment elements (col. 4, lines 22-31) disposed along separate locations of each individual string of the collection of individual strings (see at least figs. 1-13), the plurality of releasable attachment elements joining with like elements on the footwear external surface to provide the ability to attach or remove an individual string of LEDs to/from the external surface of the footwear (see at least fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the footwear apparatus of Sackett with the teachings of Beers in order to releasably attach the LED strings so that they can detach or remove easily. Regarding claim 4, Beers discloses (in at least figs. 1-15) the placement components comprises an adhesive (see fig. 12; col. 2, lines 61-63) for providing attachment of the collection of individual strings of LEDs to desired locations on the outer surface of the footwear (see at least fig. 1). Regarding claim 5, Sackett as modified by Beers discloses all the claimed limitations except for one or more of the individual strings of LEDs are disposed in transparent plastic tubing. However, it is well-known in the art to form LED strings in transparent plastic tubing for the benefit of providing suitable insulation to the LED strings. As evidence, Plavnicky (US. Pub: 2019/0072246 A1) of record discloses an LED lighting system (title) comprised of, in part, one or more of the individual strings of LEDs that disposed in transparent plastic tubing (see at least fig. 5; [0009]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the footwear apparatus of Sackett as modified by Beers with the teachings of Plavnicky for the benefit of providing suitable insulation to the LED strings. Rondini (US. Pat: 5,052,131) also discloses (col. 3, lines 19-23) the claimed limitation. Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sackett as modified by Beers/Plavnicky and Rondini discloses (in at least figs. 1-12 Beers) the placement component comprises a transparent cover for attachment to the footwear (see at least fig. 1), with the collection of individual strings of LEDs attached to the transparent cover (see at least figs. 1-5). Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sackett (US. Pub: 2018/0160762 A1) in view of Wu (CN:20973700) of record. Regarding claim 7, Sackett discloses all the claimed limitations except for the placement component comprises a plurality of optical fibers woven within a fabric to form a shoe skin, wherein the plurality of LEDs are remotely located at a distal termination of the plurality of optical fibers, with different bundles of individual optical fibers coupled to different-colored LEDs. Wu discloses (in at least fig. 1) a placement component comprises a plurality of optical fibers woven within a fabric to form a shoe skin (see fig. 1; abstract), wherein the plurality of LEDs (4) are remotely located at a distal termination of the plurality of optical fibers (see fig. 1), with different bundles of individual optical fibers coupled to the LEDs (4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the footwear apparatus of Sackett with the plurality of optical fibers woven of Wu for the benefit of having a footwear apparatus with uniform luminance and high brightness. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sackett (US. Pub: 2018/0160762 A1) in view of Tseng (US. Pub: 2019/0246733 A1) of record and Sackett (US. Pub: 2018/0160762 A1) of record. Regarding claim 9, Sackett discloses all the claimed limitations except for the apparatus further comprises a wireless switch controller, used to control the setting of the switching arrangement to change the color appearance of the outer surface of the footwear from a remote location. Tseng discloses (in at least figs. 1-5) discloses a footwear apparatus comprised of, in part, a wireless switch controller ([0066]), used to control the setting of the switching arrangement to change a color appearance of the outer surface of the footwear from a remote location. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the footwear apparatus of Sackett with the wireless switch controller of Tseng to change the color appearance of the footwear from a remote location. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 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. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELMITO BREVAL whose telephone number is (571)270-3099. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th~ 7:30-5:30. 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, Michael G Lee can be reached on 571-272-2398. 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. ELMITO BREVAL Primary Examiner Art Unit 2875 /ELMITO BREVAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 20, 2022
Application Filed
May 06, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Aug 11, 2023
Response Filed
Oct 10, 2023
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 19, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604529
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604576
DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595409
HIGH LUMINOUS EFFICACY PHOSPHOR CONVERTED WHITE LEDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595888
Broad View Headlamp
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593600
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+10.8%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1380 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month