DETAILED ACTION
This non-final rejection is responsive to the RCE filed 30 July 2026. Claims 1, 3-5, and 7-16 are pending. Claim 1 is an independent claim. Claims 1, 7, and 9 are amended. Claims 6 is cancelled. Claims 13-16 are new.
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 Remarks
35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant’s prior art arguments have been fully considered and they are persuasive. Applicant argues that the cited reference does not teach the newly amended claims which specify an inflatable bladder coupled to an upper and adjusts the pressure for a degree of fit.
Examiner agrees. Accordingly, a new reference, Weast (US 2019/0365042 A1), has been added to the rejection, as further detailed below.
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.
Claim 3 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 3 refers to “the type of activity”. There is not antecedent basis for this term.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 11-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Molyneux (US 2014/0165427 A1) hereinafter known as Molyneux in view of Weast (US 2019/0365042 A1) hereinafter known as Weast.
Regarding independent claim 1, Molyneux teaches:
obtaining a first air pressure measurement of an inflatable bladder ... ; (Molyneux: Figs. 1 and 5 and ¶[0053]; Molyneux teaches retrieving pressure value inside bladder 122.)
calculating a pressure differential between the first air pressure measurement of the bladder and a reference air pressure level; (Molyneux: Figs. 1 and 5 and ¶[0053]; Molyneux teaches determining if the current bladder pressure is within a predetermined error or percentage of the target pressure.)
...
...
...
...
An embodiment of Molyneux does not explicitly teach but another embodiment teaches:
determining whether the calculated pressure differential is within a predetermined tolerance of the reference air pressure level; (Molyneux: Figs. 1 and 5 and ¶[0053]; Molyneux teaches determining if the current bladder pressure is within a predetermined error or percentage of the target pressure, such as within 5% of the value of the target pressure.)
calculating an air pressure adjustment for the bladder based on the calculated pressure differential; and (Molyneux: Figs. 1 and 5 and ¶[0053]; Molyneux teaches determining if the current bladder pressure is within a predetermined error or percentage of the target pressure, such as within 5% of the value of the target pressure.)
actuating a pump disposed on the article of footwear to adjust the air pressure of the bladder based on the calculated air pressure adjustment, .... (Molyneux: Fig. 5 and ¶[0054]; Molyneux teaches entering deflation or inflation mode.)
Molyneux is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, as it is directed to footwear with varying pressure air bladders. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine footwear with an air bladder wherein the system is capable of measuring the current air pressure and target air pressure with further calculating how much to adjust the air pressure based on the calculation. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine these teachings because the combination would allow to change the air pressure based on activity, as suggested by Molyneux: Figs. 6-7 and ¶[0056].
Molyneux does not explicitly teach but Weast further teaches:
... coupled to an upper of an article of footwear. (Weast: ¶[0027]; Weast teaches a fluid bladder in an interior foot-receiving chamber of the footwear, between layers of the upper along a vamp area of the upper. ¶[0056] teaches that the fluid may be air.)
..., wherein the adjustment of the air pressure of the bladder adjusts a degree of fit between the upper and a foot of a wearer, (Weast: ¶[0059]-¶[0062]; Weast teaches a user using an interface to adjust the firmness by changing the pressure.)
wherein the reference air pressure level is determined on a desired fit level between the upper and the foot of the wearer inputted through a user interface of a remote device by a user. (Weast: ¶[0059]-¶[0062], ¶[0064], and ¶[0069]; Weast teaches a user using an interface to adjust the firmness by changing the pressure.)
Weast is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, since it is directed to footwear with varying pressure of air bladders. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine footwear with an air bladder wherein the system is capable of adjusting the pressure in the footwear air bladder based on user input and activity as taught in Molyneux with further an air bladder coupled to an upper of the article of the footwear as taught in Weast. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Molyneux to include teachings of Leary because it would allow the user to specify various firmness levels, as suggested by Weast: ¶[0059].
Regarding claim 4, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Molyneux further teaches:
wherein the reference air pressure level is further determined by: obtaining a plurality of air pressure measurements of the inflatable bladder associated with a period of time; calculating a desired air pressure level for the bladder using the plurality of air pressure measurements associated with the period of time; and setting the desired air pressure level as the reference air pressure level. (Molyneux: Figs. 6-7 and ¶[0056]-¶[0063]; Molyneux teaches determining pressures during multiple periods of time and adjusting accordingly.)
Regarding claim 7, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Weast further teaches:
wherein actuating the pump comprises increasing the air pressure of the inflatable bladder to cinch the upper of the article of footwear to a foot of the user wearing the article of footwear. (Weast: ¶[0059]-¶[0062], ¶[0064], and ¶[0069]; Weast teaches a user using an interface to adjust the firmness by changing the pressure.)
Regarding claim 11, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Livaccari further teaches:
wherein the user interface of the remote device is a graphical user interface shown on a display of the remote device. (Livaccari: Fig. 2; Livaccari teaches the user being able to specify levels on a user interface with graphical elements.)
Regarding claim 12, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Molyneux further teaches:
wherein the first air pressure measurement of the inflatable bladder is detected by a pressure sensor disposed on the article of footwear. (Molyneux: Figs. 1, 5, and ¶[0044] ¶[0053]; Molyneux teaches retrieving pressure value inside bladder 122 using pressure sensor 160.)
Regarding claim 13, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Weast further teaches:
wherein increasing the desired fit level includes increasing the air pressure of the bladder to cinch the upper to the foot of the wearer. (Weast: ¶[0059]-¶[0062], ¶[0064], and ¶[0069]; Weast teaches a user using an interface to adjust the firmness by changing the pressure, e.g. increasing the pressure.)
Regarding claim 14, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Weast further teaches:
wherein decreasing the desired fit level includes decreasing the air pressure of the bladder to loosen the upper around the foot of the wearer. (Weast: ¶[0059]-¶[0062], ¶[0064], and ¶[0069]; Weast teaches a user using an interface to adjust the firmness by changing the pressure, e.g. decreasing the pressure.)
Regarding claim 16, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Weast further teaches:
wherein the reference air pressure level is determined based on a type of activity inputted through a user interface of a remote device by a user. (Livaccari: Figs. 1-2 and ¶[0024]-¶[0029]; Livaccari teaches a remote interface where the user is able to select Terrain Response, Distance Response, and Weather Response to change the cushioning level. ¶[0030] further teaches the user being able to specify a type of a sport.)
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Molyneux in view of Weast in view of Livaccari (US 2017/0336781 A1) hereinafter known as Livaccari.
Regarding claim 3, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Livaccari further teaches:
wherein the type of activity is selected from a group consisting of running, walking, jumping, and participating in an athletic event. (Livaccari: Figs. 1-2 and ¶[0030]; Livaccari teaches the user being able to specify a type of a sport.)
Livaccari is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, since it is directed to footwear with varying pressure air bladders. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine footwear with an air bladder wherein the system is capable of adjusting the pressure in the footwear air bladder based on user input and activity as taught in Molyneux with further allowing the user to adjust the air pressure level remotely based on a type of activity as taught in Livaccari. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Molyneux to include teachings of Livaccari because it would allow the user to operate with default settings or set custom settings, as suggested by Livaccari: ¶[0025].
Regarding claim 10, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Livaccari further teaches:
further comprising: actuating the pump disposed on the article of footwear to adjust the air pressure of the bladder according to a schedule inputted through the user interface of the remote device by the user. (Livaccari: Figs. 1-2 and ¶[0030]; Livaccari teaches the user being able to specify cushioning levels corresponding to different points in a marathon.)
Livaccari is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, since it is directed to footwear with varying pressure air bladders. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine footwear with an air bladder wherein the system is capable of adjusting the pressure in the footwear air bladder based on user input and activity as taught in Molyneux with further allowing the user to adjust the air pressure level based on a schedule as taught in Livaccari. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Molyneux to include teachings of Livaccari because it would allow the user to operate with default settings or set custom settings, as suggested by Livaccari: ¶[0025].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Molyneux in view of Weast in view of Spier (US 4,995,173 A) hereinafter known as Spier.
Regarding claim 5, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Molyneux does not explicitly teach but Spier teaches:
wherein the method further comprises: determining whether a wearer's foot is received in the article of footwear; and actuating the pump disposed on the article of footwear to inflate the bladder when determining that a wearer's foot is received in the article of footwear. (Spier: col. 4, lines 25-35; Spier teaches inflation of the bladder when a person puts on the shoe.)
Molyneux and Spier are in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, as the references are directed to footwear with varying pressure of air bladders. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine footwear with an air bladder wherein the system is capable of adjusting the pressure in the footwear air bladder based on user input and activity as taught in Molyneux with further adjusting the pressure upon the determination that a wearer’s foot is receive as taught in Spier. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Molyneux to include teachings of Spier because it would allow automatic inflation, as suggested by Spier: col. 4, lines 25-35.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Molyneux in view of Weast in view of Fox-Mudge (US 2016/0174657 A1) hereinafter known as Fox-Mudge.
Regarding claim 8, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Molyneux in view of Weast does not explicitly teach but Fox-Mudge teaches:
wherein the reference air pressure level is further determined based on a weight of the user wearing the article of footwear. (Fox-Mudge: ¶[0022]; Fox-Mudge teaches adjusting air pressure to compensate for the user’s weight.)
Fox-Mudge is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, since the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, i.e. setting a reference air pressure in footwear based on the user’s weight. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine footwear with an air bladder wherein the system is capable of adjusting the pressure in the footwear air bladder based on user input and activity as taught in Molyneux with adjusting the pressure based on the user’s weight as taught in Fox-Mudge. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Molyneux to include teachings of Fox-Mudge because it would allow compensating the pressure based on user’s weight, as suggested by Fox-Mudge: ¶[0022].
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Molyneux in view of Weast in view of Fox-Mudge in view of Ross (US 2011/0214501 A1) hereinafter known as Ross.
Regarding claim 9, Molyneux in view of Livaccari in view of Weast in view of Fox-Mudge further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction of claim 8.
Molyneux in view of Weast in view of Fox-Mudge does not explicitly teach but Ross teaches:
wherein the weight of the user wearing of the article of footwear is inputted through a user interface of a remote device by the user. (Ross: ¶[0062]-¶[0063]; Ross teaches the user inputting the weight through a reporting device.)
Ross is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, since the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, i.e. setting a user’s weight to monitor pressure. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine footwear with an air bladder wherein the system is capable of adjusting the pressure in the footwear air bladder based on user input and activity and adjusting the pressure based on the user’s weight as taught in Molyneux in view of Livaccari in view of Fox-Mudge with further allowing the user to adjust the weight using a remote device as taught in Ross. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Molyneux to include teachings of Ross because it would allow to efficiently to set the weight.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Molyneux in view of Weast in view of Darnold (US 2019/0029902 A1) hereinafter known as Darnold.
Regarding claim 15, Molyneux in view of Weast further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instruction of claim 1.
Molyneux in view of Weast does not explicitly teach but Darnold teaches:
wherein the method further comprises transmitting a warning signal to the remote device when the first air pressure measurement falls below a predetermined minimum air pressure level. (Darnold: ¶[0053], ¶[0056], and ¶[0085]; Darnold teaches providing a warning signal if there’s a change in internal pressure and the cushion is under inflated.)
Darnold is in the same field of endeavor as the present invention, since the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, i.e. maintaining specific air pressure in the cushio. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person of ordinary skill in the art, to combine footwear with an air bladder wherein the system is capable of adjusting the pressure in the footwear air bladder based on user input and activity as taught in Molyneux in view of Livaccari in view of Weast with further a notification when the pressure falls below a level as taught in Darnold. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Molyneux to include teachings of Darnold because it would allow notifying user of pressure levels, as suggested by Darnold: ¶[0053].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX OLSHANNIKOV whose telephone number is (571)270-0667. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/ALEKSEY OLSHANNIKOV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights