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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/23/2025 has been entered.
Specification Amendment
A specification amendment of 09/23/2025 is acknowledged.
This amendment is acceptable and is entered.
Drawings – Replacement Sheet
A replacement sheet was received 09/23/2025. This replacement sheet is acceptable and is entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks of 09/23/2025 are fully considered.
Regarding Objections to the Specification (see p. 9-10 of the reply): Applicant’s arguments are fully considered but are moot insofar as the amended claims of 09/23/2025 no longer recite the language that necessitated the argued objection.
Regarding Objections to the Drawings (see p. 10-11 of the reply): Applicant’s arguments are fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically: upon review of the amendment of 09/23/2025—including the specification amendment thereof and the replacement sheet thereof—, upon review of Applicant’s remarks, and upon further review of the disclosure as filed, the drawings objections raised in the Office action of 07/28/2025 are overcome.
Regarding Claim Rejections – 35 USC 112 (see p. 11-13 of the reply): Applicant’s arguments are fully considered. Applicant’s amendment has overcome the 35 USC 112 rejections as applied in the Office action of 07/28/2025. However, the amendment has necessitated new 35 USC 112 rejections; see rejections below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites new matter in reciting in lines 8-9 “chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a preset minimum size of at least two millimeters”
As stated in the specification, emphases provided by Examiner, “the regrind recycled material should have a preset minimum size (e.g., an average largest dimension that is no smaller than 2-3 millimeters (mm))” (para 32) such that there is no support for “chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a preset minimum size of at least two millimeters”. It is noted that a first element having a largest dimension of 1 mm combined with a second element having a largest dimension of 7 mm would have an average largest dimension of 4 mm.
Claims 2-13 are rejected if only because they depend from a rejected claim.
Claim 14 recites new matter in reciting in lines 16-17 “chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a preset minimum size of at least three millimeters”
As stated in the specification, emphases provided by Examiner, “the regrind recycled material should have a preset minimum size (e.g., an average largest dimension that is no smaller than 2-3 millimeters (mm))” (para 32) such that there is no support for “chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a preset minimum size of at least three millimeters”. It is noted that a first element having a largest dimension of 1 mm combined with a second element having a largest dimension of 7 mm would have an average largest dimension of 4 mm.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 14 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 14 is indefinite in reciting in line 5 “adjoining forefoot, hindfoot, and rearfoot sections”.
The specification para [0024] states in relevant part “footwear 10 may be divided into three anatomical regions: a forefoot region RFF, a midfoot region RMF, and a hindfoot (heel) region RHF. In accordance with recognized anatomical classifications, the forefoot region RFF is located at the front of the footwear 10 and generally corresponds with the phalanges (toes), metatarsals, and any interconnecting joints thereof. Interposed between the forefoot and hindfoot regions RFF and RHF is the midfoot region RMF, which generally corresponds with the cuneiform, navicular, and cuboid bones (i.e., the arch area of the foot). Hindfoot region RHF, in contrast, is located at the rear of the footwear 10 and generally corresponds with the talus (ankle) and calcaneus (heel) bones” such that it is not clear what is mean by reciting both hindfoot and also rearfoot sections insofar as a hindfoot region is “located at the rear” as described in the specification.
For the purpose of applying art, claim 14 is interpreted as if the term “hindfoot” in line 5 reads instead --midfoot-- and as if the term “hindfoot” in line 7 reads instead --midfoot--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Kim, KR-102434631-B1, previously cited] in view of [Littl, DE-102015012813-B4, newly cited].
Regarding claim 1:
Kim discloses (Figs. 6-7):
A cover panel 10, 12 (i.e. the combined “tape 10” and “material 12”; para 34 of the translation) for an article of footwear (Abstract), the article of footwear including a sole structure configured to support thereon a foot of a user, and a footwear upper affixed to the sole structure and configured to attach to the foot of the user (cover panel is appropriate for use for an article of footwear as evidenced in the Abstract; Kim is accordingly appropriate for use with an article of footwear as recited in the claim; the article of footwear and its associated structure are functionally claimed), the cover panel comprising:
a cover layer 10 formed with an at least partially transparent (para 4; Figs. 2, 6, and 7) polymeric (“cellulose acetated...into a film form”; Abstract) material and configured to attach to a select segment of the footwear upper such that an outer face of the cover layer (see annotated Figs. 6-7 – a below) defines an outermost surface of the select segment of the footwear upper (cover layer 10 is configured to attach to a segment of the upper as claimed wherein the outermost surface identified in the below annotated figures is capable of defining an outermost surface as claimed; it is noted that the upper, the select segment of the upper, and the outermost surface of the select segment are functionally claimed); and
a plurality of plastic (“cellulose acetate...chips”; para 22) fragments 12 in the form of chunks, chips and/or pieces dispersed across and at least partially embedded within an interior face of the cover layer 10 (see annotated Figs. 6-7 – a below), each of the plastic fragments having a distinct shape (Figs. 6-7) and size (Figs. 6-7) visible through the cover layer.
PNG
media_image1.png
1433
1035
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Kim Figs. 6-7, although comprising plastic fragments having color (Fig. 6) visible through cover layer 10, Kim Figs. 6-7 does not expressly disclose each of the plastic fragments having a distinct shape, size, and color visible through the cover layer. Rather, Kim Figs. 6-7 appear to show colors of fragments 12 in Fig. 6 as being similar to each other. Nevertheless, Kim as embodied elsewhere teaches distinct colors of fragments embedded within a cover layer 10: the “various colors” of Fig. 2 (para 30); Fig. 4; para 14: “various colors are expressed by the colors of the waste resin pulverized products”; para 26: “mixture of...various colors”. Kim further teaches that color can be selected according to desire and aesthetics: “can be selected and used according to a desired...color...and thus aesthetics”; para 23.
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 cover panel of Kim Figs. 6-7 such that each of the plastic fragments having a distinct shape, size, and color visible through the cover layer in order to yield a multicolored aesthetic look, which at least some observer(s) and/or wearers would desire, as suggested by Kim (para 23).
Kim does not expressly disclose a plurality of unpulverized plastic fragments in the form of chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a present minimum size of at least two millimeters.
Kim does disclose “the particle size of the...resin...product is 0.5 to 2 times the thickness of the...tape, so that a part of the...resin is protruded onto the surface of the...tape during...molding” (para 9) such that Kim at least teaches plastic fragments have a size 0.5 to 2 times a thickness of the cover layer (i.e. “tape”). Kim discloses “the...tape has a thickness of 0.05-0.5 mm” (para 25) such that Kim paras 9 and 25 suggest fragment size range of 0.025 mm (i.e. lower bound of particle size range (0.05 times the thickness) multiplied by the lower bound of thickness (0.05 mm)) mm to 1.0 mm (i.e. upper bound of particle size range (2 times the thickness) multiplied by the upper bound of thickness (0.5 mm)).
However, Littl teaches a cover layer 2 (i.e. “sleeve 2”; para 19) for an article of footwear (para 1) wherein the thickness is of said cover layer is “0.1 to 3 mm” (para 18).
Littl further teaches the cover layer is configured to participate in a “firm, non-detachable joining connection” (para 7) between the cover layer and a segment of an article of footwear (i.e. “lace”) (para 7).
Because Littl is concerned with joint firmness between a cover layer and a segment of footwear and provides a range (i.e. 0.1 to 3 mm) for thickness thereof, the thickness of the cover layer is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at a thickness within the range through routine experimentation in order to provide desired cover layer properties. The thickness of the cover layer is merely an optimum or workable thickness and the thickness of the cover panel is expected to affect strength and durability of the joint between cover layer and segment of footwear.
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 cover panel of Kim such that its cover layer has a thickness of 3 mm in order to yield a cover panel capable of affording joint strength and/durability between the cover panel and a segment of footwear attached thereto due to the thickness thereof, where such joint strength and/durability is desirable for a use case of the cover panel.
And in further view of Kim:
As stated above, Kim teaches plastic fragment size is “0.5 to 2 times the thickness of the...tape, so that a part of the...resin is protruded onto the surface of the...tape during...molding” (para 9).
Because Kim is concerned with desired protrusion of a fragment a range (i.e. 0.5 to 2 times cover layer thickness) encompassing the claimed limitation (wherein it is noted 0.5 times 3 mm is 1.5 mm and 2 times 3 mm is 6 mm), the claimed range is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at the claimed plastic fragment size through routine experimentation in order to provide desired cover panel properties. The claimed plastic fragment size is merely an optimum or workable plastic fragment size and the plastic fragment size is expected to affect the degree to which a given fragment protrudes from the surface.
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 Kim such that its plurality of plastic fragments is a plurality of unpulverized plastic fragments in the form of chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a present minimum size of at least two millimeters in order to achieve the degree of plastic fragment protrusion afforded thereby, where such degree of protrusion is desirable for a use case of the cover panel.
Regarding claim 2:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the cover layer includes lateral-side and medial-side panel segments (see annotated Figs 6-7 – b below) shaped and sized to attach to and cover lateral and medial segments, respectively, of the footwear upper (the segments identified in the below annotated Figs. 6-7 - b are shaped and sized to attach to and cover lateral and medial segments of a footwear upper; it is noted the footwear upper is functionally claimed).
PNG
media_image2.png
1433
1035
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 2, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the lateral-side and medial-side panel segments are configured to extend continuously from a toe box region of the footwear upper, at a front end of the footwear, to a rear counter region of the footwear upper, at a back end of the footwear (lateral-side and medial-side panel segments extend continuously as evidenced in above treatment of claim 2, and are configured to extend in front-to-back direction of an article of footwear such that the limitation is met; it is noted the footwear upper, footwear, rear counter region, and back end are functionally claimed in claim 3).
Regarding claim 4:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 3, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the cover layer, including the lateral-side panel segment and the medial-side panel segment, is integrally formed as a one-piece structure (as in annotated Figs. 6-7 – b presented in above treatment of claim 2).
Regarding claim 5:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 3, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the lateral-side panel segment is shaped and sized to wrap around and cover a lateral surface segment of a ground-facing upper surface of the upper, the medial-side panel segment is shaped and sized to wrap around and cover a medial surface segment of the ground- facing upper surface (lateral-side and medial-side panel segments are shaped and sized to wrap around and cover underlying structure such as structure 30 of Kim).
Regarding claim 7:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the plastic fragments are permanently adhered to and protrude from the interior face of the cover layer (as in annotated Figs. 6-7 – a presented in above addressing of claim 1; wherein the fragments are permanently adhered in that they will remain adhered in a permanent manner during at least some use condition for the cover layer).
Regarding claim 8:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein some of the plastic fragments are partially embedded within the cover layer, some of the plastic fragments are encased within the cover layer, and some of the plastic fragments are adhered to the interior face the cover layer (as in annotated Figs. 6-7 – a presented in above treatment of claim 1).
Regarding claim 9:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the plastic fragments are permanently encased within the cover layer (as in annotated Figs. 6-7 – a presented in above addressing of claim 1; wherein the fragments are permanently encased in that they will remain encased in a permanent manner during at least some use condition for the cover layer).
Regarding claim 10:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the plastic fragments cover substantially the entirety of the interior face of the cover layer (as in annotated Figs. 6-7 – a presented in above treatment of claim 1; wherein it is noted that, according to Applicant, the term “substantially” means ““at, near, or nearly at,”...or “within acceptable manufacturing tolerances,” or any logical combination thereof, for example” (para [0022] of the present disclosure as filed).
Regarding claim 11:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the cover layer is shaped and sized to cover the select segment of the footwear upper and to wrap around and cover at least a portion of a ground-facing upper surface of the upper such that the cover layer abuts a soleplate of the sole structure (cover layer is shaped and sized to cover and to wrap and to abut footwear surfaces such that the functional limitation is met).
Regarding claim 12:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the polymeric material of the cover layer includes a hot-melt adhesive material (configured to adhere by heating means while melting as described in para 32), a tacky thermoplastic material, and/or an adhesive-coated polymer film.
Regarding claim 13:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
Kim further discloses wherein the plastic fragments include recycled (paras 1, 6, 8, 15) plastic material containing ground (para 11) scrap (“resin”; para 11), waste (Title; Abstract), and/or repurposed (repurposed from a shoe molding process as described para 35) plastic material.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Kim, KR-102434631-B1] and [Littl, DE-102015012813-B4] as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of [Hensley, US 2016/0295966, previously cited].
Regarding claim 6:
Kim in view of Littl teaches The cover panel of claim 1, as set forth above.
The modified Kim does not meet the limitation wherein the at least partially transparent polymeric material has a first opacity level at a first region of the cover layer and a second opacity level, distinct from the first opacity level, at a second region of the cover layer.
However, Hensley teaches a cover layer “polymeric sheet 20” (para 52) wherein an “etched feature 12C includes a number and a pictorial representation of a bird” (para 53). “with reference to FIG. 3, a first area 61 of the outer surface 40 of the bladder element 10 is the area both including the etched bird shape of the etched feature 12C and within the etched bird shape. The first area 61 has a first predetermined level of opacity, transparency or luster. A second area 63 of the surface 40 of the bladder element 10 is the area surrounding and not within the etched feature 12C, and has a second predetermined level of opacity, transparency or luster that is at least ten percent greater than or at least ten percent less than the first predetermined level of opacity” (para 68). As such, Hensley teaches an at least partially transparent polymeric material has a first opacity level at a first region of the cover layer and a second opacity level, distinct from the first opacity level, at a second region of the cover layer. Hensley further teaches the “polymeric sheet[s] 20...may be treated or processed, and/or have properties specifically selected to enable the etched feature[s]...12C to be lasting and aesthetically pleasing” (para 55).
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 Kim such that its at least partially transparent polymeric material has a first opacity level at a first region of the cover layer and a second opacity level, distinct from the first opacity level, at a second region of the cover layer, as in Hensley, in order to provide a lasting and aesthetically pleasing etched feature to the cover layer, as taught by Hensley (para 55).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Fein, US 2,316,325, previously cited] in view of [Kim, KR-102434631-B1, previously cited] and [Littl, DE-102015012813-B4, newly cited].
Regarding claim 14:
Fein discloses (Figs. 1-4):
An article of footwear 10 comprising:
a sole structure 12 configured to support thereon a foot of a user, the sole structure including a soleplate 12 defining a ground-facing footwear surface of the footwear; and
a footwear upper 22 affixed to (upper 22 is affixed to 20 (col. 1 lines 44-45); 22 is provided atop sole structure 12 with 20 provided between upper 22 and sole structure 12 (Fig. 2) and opposing surfaces of 20 and sole structure 12 are directly attached by adhesive as explained in col. 2 lines 39-41 such that footwear upper 22 is affixed to sole structure 12 via at least 20) the sole structure 12 and configured to attach to the foot of the user, the footwear upper including a ground-facing surface (see annotated Figs. 1-4 – a below) and adjoining forefoot, hindfoot, and rearfoot sections (Fig. 1); and
a cover panel 20 (i.e. the combined “cords 20”; col. 1 line 41) extending across the forefoot, hindfoot, and rearfoot sections (Fig. 1), wrapping around (Fig. 2) and covering (Fig. 2) the ground-facing surface of the footwear upper (as in annotated Figs. 1-4 – a below), and mounting thereon the soleplate of the sole structure (col. 2 lines 39-41; Fig. 2)
Fein does not expressly disclose the cover panel 20 wrapping around and covering substantially all of the ground-facing surface of the footwear upper.
Fein in the sectional view of Fig. 2 does not show the entire ground-facing surface of upper 22 but rather a portion of the ground-facing surface at the section view.
One of ordinary skill would expect the article of footwear to perform adequately for its purpose of providing a shoe with an attractive and novel appearance as set forth in col. 2 lines 9-11 if cover panel 20 wraps around and covers substantially all of the ground-facing surface of the upper as claimed in the same way that it wraps around and covers substantially all of the portion of the ground-facing surface that is presented in Fig. 2.
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 article of footwear of Fein such that its cover panel 20 is wrapping around and covering substantially all of the ground-facing surface of the upper, in the same manner that it is wrapping around and covering the ground-facing surface of the upper presented in section view in Fig. 2, in order to yield the predictable result of a shoe with an attractive and novel appearance wherein the components of the shoe are durably fixed to each other in the way shown in Fig. 2 throughout those locations of the shoe present at substantially all of the ground-facing surface of the upper.
PNG
media_image3.png
1028
687
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fein does not expressly disclose:
the cover panel including:
a cover layer formed from an at least partially transparent polymeric material and mounted to a select segment of the footwear upper such that an outer face of the cover layer defines an outermost surface of the footwear; and
a plurality of unpulverized plastic fragments in the form of chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a preset minimum size of at least three millimeters and all dispersed across and at least partially embedded within an interior face of the cover layer such that the plastic fragments are encapsulated between the cover layer and the footwear upper, each of the plastic fragments having a distinct shape, size, and color visible through the cover layer.
However and in further view of Fein:
Fein appears to show one “cord” of the cover panel 20 as having a pair of ends wherein each of the apparent pair of ends is mounted to a select segment of the footwear upper 22 and defining an outermost surface of the footwear (see annotated Figs. 1-4 – b below).
PNG
media_image4.png
909
610
media_image4.png
Greyscale
However, Kim teaches (Figs. 6-7):
a cover panel 10, 12 (i.e. the combined “tape 10” and “pulverized material 12”; para 34 of the translation) for an article of footwear (Abstract) including:
a cover layer 10 formed from an at least partially transparent (para 4; Figs. 2, 6, and 7) polymeric (“cellulose acetated...into a film form”; Abstract) material and configured to be provided on an end of a cord (“string”; Title) and configured to define an outermost surface of a combined cord and cover layer (Figs. 6-7); and
a plurality of plastic (“cellulose acetate...chips”; para 22) fragments 12 in the form of chunks, chips, and/or pieces all dispersed across and at least partially embedded within an interior face of the cover layer 10 (see annotated Figs. 6-7 – a presented in above treatment of claim 1), each of the plastic fragments having a distinct shape (Figs. 6-7) and size (Figs. 6-7) visible through the cover layer.
Kim Figs. 6-7, although comprising plastic fragments having color (Fig. 6) visible through cover layer 10, Kim Figs. 6-7 does not expressly disclose each of the plastic fragments having a distinct shape, size, and color visible through the cover layer. Rather, Kim Figs. 6-7 appear to show colors of fragments 12 in Fig. 6 as being similar to each other. Nevertheless, Kim as embodied elsewhere teaches distinct colors of fragments embedded within a cover layer 10: the “various colors” of Fig. 2 (para 30); Fig. 4; para 14: “various colors are expressed by the colors of the waste resin pulverized products”; para 26: “mixture of...various colors”. Kim further teaches that color can be selected according to desire and aesthetics: “can be selected and used according to a desired...color...and thus aesthetics”; para 23.
Kim further teaches that providing a cover panel so arranged on a cord end is such that when cords “are cut to lengths suitable for use purposes and, in order to prevent the cuts from loosening, the cuts are typically wrapped with a predetermined length of” a cover panel (para 2)
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 Fein such that the cover panel is including, at each of one or more ends of a cord: a cover layer formed from an at least partially transparent polymeric material and mounted to a select segment of the footwear upper such that an outer face of the cover layer defines an outermost surface of the footwear; and a plurality of plastic fragments in the form of chunks, chips, and/or pieces all dispersed across and at least partially embedded within an interior face of the cover layer such that the plastic fragments are encapsulated between the cover layer and the footwear upper, each of the plastic fragments having a distinct shape, size, and color visible through the cover layer in order to prevent loosening of each of the one or more ends of a cord at which the cover panel is provided and a multicolored aesthetic look, which at least some observer(s) and/or wearers would desire, as suggested by Kim (paras 2 and 23).
Fein does not expressly disclose a plurality of unpulverized plastic fragments in the form of chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a present minimum size of at least three millimeters.
In further view of Kim:
Kim does disclose “the particle size of the...resin...product is 0.5 to 2 times the thickness of the...tape, so that a part of the...resin is protruded onto the surface of the...tape during...molding” (para 9) such that Kim at least teaches plastic fragments have a size 0.5 to 2 times a thickness of the cover layer (i.e. “tape”). Kim discloses “the...tape has a thickness of 0.05-0.5 mm” (para 25) such that Kim paras 9 and 25 suggest fragment size range of 0.025 mm (i.e. lower bound of particle size range (0.05 times the thickness) multiplied by the lower bound of thickness (0.05 mm)) mm to 1.0 mm (i.e. upper bound of particle size range (2 times the thickness) multiplied by the upper bound of thickness (0.5 mm)).
However, Littl teaches a cover layer 2 (i.e. “sleeve 2”; para 19) for an article of footwear (para 1) wherein the thickness is of said cover layer is “0.1 to 3 mm” (para 18).
Littl further teaches the cover layer is configured to participate in a “firm, non-detachable joining connection” (para 7) between the cover layer and a segment of an article of footwear (i.e. “lace”) (para 7).
Because Littl is concerned with joint firmness between a cover layer and a segment of footwear and provides a range (i.e. 0.1 to 3 mm) for thickness thereof, the thickness of the cover layer is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at a thickness within the range through routine experimentation in order to provide desired cover layer properties. The thickness of the cover layer is merely an optimum or workable thickness and the thickness of the cover panel is expected to affect strength and durability of the joint between cover layer and segment of footwear.
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 Fein such that its cover layer has a thickness of 3 mm in order to yield a cover panel that affords joint strength and/durability between the cover layer and a cord attached thereto due to the thickness thereof, where such joint strength and/durability is desirable for a use case of the cover panel.
And in further view of Kim:
As stated above, Kim teaches plastic fragment size is “0.5 to 2 times the thickness of the...tape, so that a part of the...resin is protruded onto the surface of the...tape during...molding” (para 9).
Because Kim is concerned with desired protrusion of a fragment a range (i.e. 0.5 to 2 times cover layer thickness) encompassing the claimed limitation (wherein it is noted 0.5 times 3 mm is 1.5 mm and 2 times 3 mm is 6 mm), the claimed range is considered as a result-effective variable such that one of ordinary skill could have arrived at the claimed plastic fragment size through routine experimentation in order to provide desired cover panel properties. The claimed plastic fragment size is merely an optimum or workable plastic fragment size and the plastic fragment size is expected to affect the degree to which a given fragment protrudes from the surface.
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 Fein such that its plurality of plastic fragments is a plurality of unpulverized plastic fragments in the form of chunks, chips, and/or pieces each having a present minimum size of at least two three millimeters in order to achieve the degree of plastic fragment protrusion afforded thereby, where such degree of protrusion is desirable for a use case of the cover panel.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights