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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 26, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
1. Claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 41 recites “the plurality of ribs”. The claim limitation is indefinite as it is unclear what plurality of ribs Applicant is intending to refer to as Claim 37 recites “a plurality of first ribs” and “a plurality of second ribs”. Claim 41 is rejected as best understood by examiner.
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.
2. Claim(s) 37 and 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Erickson (US 6,708,426).
Regarding Claim 37, Erickson discloses an article of footwear comprising: an upper (12) having a bottom surface; and a first plate (14,16,20), including a first surface (i.e. top surface of 14) and a second surface (i.e. bottom surface of 20), attached to the bottom surface of the upper by the first surface in a forefoot region (as seen in Fig.1 & 2), the first plate further including: a first serrated region including a plurality of first ribs extending from a bottom surface of the first plate (See annotated Figure below), wherein each of the first ribs includes a central portion (i.e. center region of rib), a first end (i.e. left end), and a second end (i.e. right end) opposite the first end, a height of each of the first ribs tapering from a tallest height at the central portion to shorter heights at the first end of the first ribs and at the second end of the first ribs (as seen in Fig.2, 3 & 6), and wherein a width (i.e. length of each rib; see para.64 of Applicant’s disclosure which indicates the rib width is the length of the rib) of respective ribs of the plurality of first ribs continuously increases from the first end of the first serrated region to the second end of the first serrated region (as seen in the annotated Figure below); a plurality of second ribs extending from the bottom surface of the first plate (as seen in the annotated Figure below), wherein at least one first rib of the plurality of first ribs includes a first concave surface and at least one second rib of the plurality of second ribs includes a second concave surface, the first concave surface faces one end of the first plate and the second concave surface faces another end of the first plate (as seen in the annotated Figure below), wherein, the plurality of first ribs is positioned on a lateral side of the first plate next to a lateral peripheral cleat (lateral 61 below 50), and the plurality of second ribs is positioned on a medial side of the first plate next to a medial peripheral cleat (medial 61 below 50)(as seen in the annotated Figure below, which shows the first ribs has a portion located on a lateral side and “next” to the lateral peripheral cleat & which shows the second ribs has a portion located on a medial side and “next” to the medial peripheral cleat), and wherein the lateral peripheral cleat and the medial peripheral cleat are aligned with one another on respective opposing sides and on widest portions of the article of footwear relative to an axis extending at an oblique angle respective to a longitudinal axis of the article of footwear(as seen in the annotated Figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
491
549
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
378
382
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
364
422
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 41, Erickson discloses an article of footwear of claim 37, wherein the [second] plurality of ribs are disposed solely within a ball portion of the article of footwear and wherein the plurality of second ribs extend continuously from a toe portion of the article of footwear to the ball portion of the article of footwear (see annotated Figure below; the second plurality of ribs extend continuously from the edge of the toe portion into the ball portion).
PNG
media_image4.png
378
473
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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.
3. Claim(s) 38-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erickson (US 6,708,426) in view of Minami (US 2013/0067778).
Regarding Claim 38, Erickson discloses an article of footwear of Claim 37, further including: a first peripheral cleat (lateral 61) extending from the first plate and a second peripheral cleat (medial 61) extending from the first plate. Erickson does not disclose each of the first peripheral cleat and the second peripheral cleat further including: a stud, the stud including a first end attached to the second surface of the first plate and including a second end disposed apart from the first end and facing away from the bottom surface, forming a portion of an outer peripheral surface of the article of footwear, wherein a width of the stud tapers from a largest width at the first end to a smallest width at the second end; a first blade extending along a first longitudinal direction from an anterior end of the stud; and a second blade extending along a second longitudinal direction from a posterior end of the stud. However, Minami teaches a sole having a peripheral cleat (530) having a stud (532), the stud including a first end attached to the second surface of the first plate and including a second end disposed apart from the first end and facing away from the bottom surface (as seen in Fig.1 & 6), forming (via connection) a portion of an outer peripheral surface (i.e. periphery of plate) of the article of footwear (as seen in Fig.1), wherein a width of the stud tapers from a largest width at the first end to a smallest width at the second end (as seen in Fig.1); a first blade (536) extending along a first longitudinal direction from an anterior end of the stud; and a second blade (534) extending along a second longitudinal direction from a posterior end of the stud (as seen in Fig.6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the peripheral cleats of Erickson to have a stud and first and second blades extending along longitudinal directions from ends of the stud, as taught by Minami, in order to provide a removable peripheral cleat with a shape that delivers the desired level of traction for activity being performed by the user when wearing the shoes.
Regarding Claim 39, When in combination, Erickson and Minami teach an article of footwear of Claim 38, wherein a portion of the stud (Minami: i.e. convex surface of 532) forms (via connection) a portion of an outer peripheral surface (i.e. periphery of plate) of the article of footwear such that a gap is formed between the first blade and the second blade, and the outer peripheral surface of the article of footwear (Erickson: Fig.4 & Minami: Fig.6).
Regarding Claim 40, When in combination, Erickson and Minami teach an article of footwear of Claim 38, wherein each of the stud, the first blade, and the second blade includes an outer surface forming a continuous convex surface (Minami: Fig.6), and wherein a first gap is disposed between the first blade and the outer peripheral surface (i.e. periphery of the sole), and a second gap is disposed between the second blade and the outer peripheral surface (i.e. periphery of the sole)(Erickson: Fig.4 & Minami: Fig.6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-27,29-35 and 42 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
In view of Applicant's amendment, the search has been updated, and newly modified grounds of rejection have been identified and applied. Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the newly modified ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN E LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-3267. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00am-4:00pm EST.
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.
/MEGAN E LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights