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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05-18-2026 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.
Claims 27-28 are 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 27 is rejected because of the limitations "the first or second set of traction elements comprises a traction element at the peak of the first or second parabolic arc with a lengthened height in relation to each of the other traction elements in the first or second set of traction elements". It is not clear how to interpret this limitation such as does applicant try to claim that the traction element is higher than all the other (if this is correct that would be a new matter issue)? Or applicant just simply says the traction element having a height. In addition, is this another traction element having another maximum height beside the first and second maximum heights.
Claim 28 is rejected because it recites limitations “the lengthened traction element has a greater height than any other traction element in the second set of traction elements”. The limitations is conflicted with claim 4, which claim 28 is depended. Claim 4 is required the lengthened traction element is lower than the high height, but claim 28 is required the lengthened traction element is highest one; therefore, it not clear what is the high of the lengthened traction element?
In the art rejections below the claims have been treated as best understood by the 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 7-11, 15, 17, 19-20, and 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Swegle et al. (2016/0000183).
Regarding claim 1, Swegle discloses an article of footwear, comprising: an upper (para 0010, any shoe must have an upper); an outsole comprising a plurality of pivot points including a front toe pivot point, a heel pivot point, and a forefoot pivot point located between the front toe pivot point and the heel pivot point, wherein the plurality of pivot points corresponds to a plurality of locations on the outsole about which the article of footwear is configured to rotate while contacting a ground surface (fig 4); a midsole (para 0048), and
PNG
media_image1.png
204
778
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a plurality of traction elements comprising a first set of traction elements extending from the heel pivot point to the forefoot pivot point and a second set of traction elements extending from the forefoot pivot point to the front toe pivot point (fig 1A),
the first set of traction elements having different heights ranging from a first minimum height at the heel and forefoot pivot points to a first maximum height at a first midpoint between the heel and forefoot pivot points, wherein all of the traction elements in the first set of traction elements extend away from the outsole to a first plurality of points that lie along a first parabolic arc extending from the heel pivot point to the forefoot pivot point, the first plurality of points positioned at a first plurality of distances from the outsole, the first plurality of distances corresponding to the different heights of the first set of traction elements, wherein the first maximum height corresponds to a peak of the first parabolic arc, and wherein the first minimum height corresponds to one or more ends of the first parabolic arc (fig 1A-1B, member 15, any two different height of point make a parabolic and the minimum height is the start point and the maximum is the return point), and
the second set of traction elements having different heights ranging from a second minimum height at the forefoot and front toe pivot points to a second maximum height at a second midpoint between the forefoot and front toe pivot points, wherein all of the traction elements in the second set of traction elements extend away from the outsole to a second plurality of points that lie along a second parabolic arc extending from the forefoot pivot point to the front toe pivot point, the second plurality of points positioned at a second plurality of distances from the outsole, the second plurality of distances corresponding to the different heights of the second set of traction elements, wherein the second maximum height corresponds to a peak of the second parabolic arc, and wherein the second minimum height corresponds to one or more ends of the second parabolic arc (figs 1A-1B, member 16, any two different height of point make a parabolic, and the minimum height is the start point and the maximum is the return point) and
wherein the first set of traction elements comprises a first traction element and a second traction element positioned at the one or more ends of the first parabolic arc and a third traction element positioned at the first midpoint, wherein the first traction element and the second traction element have a low height, and wherein the third traction element has a high height that is greater than the low height (1.5 mm height vs 3mm height).
Regarding claim 3, Swegle discloses the first set of traction elements comprises one or more additional traction elements positioned between the first or second traction element and the third traction element, the one or more additional traction elements having a medium height that is greater than the low height and less than the high height (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 4, Swegle discloses the second set of traction elements comprises a lengthened traction element positioned at the second midpoint, the lengthened traction element having a medium height that is greater than the low height and less than the high height (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 5, Swegle discloses the second set of traction elements comprises one or more additional traction elements positioned between the lengthened traction element and the one or more ends of the second parabolic arc, the one or more additional traction elements having a height that is greater than the low height and less than the medium height (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 7, Swegle discloses a height of the first set of traction elements gradually increases from the heel and forefoot pivot points to the first midpoint between the heel and forefoot pivot points (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 8, Swegle discloses a height of the second set of traction elements gradually increases from the forefoot and front toe pivot points to the second midpoint between the forefoot and front toe pivot points (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 9, Swegle discloses a height of the first set of traction elements gradually decreases from the first midpoint to the heel and forefoot pivot points (fig 1B annotated above). Regarding claim 10, Swegle discloses a height of the second set of traction elements gradually decreases from the second midpoint to the forefoot and front toe pivot points (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 11, Swegle discloses each traction element between the peak of the first or second parabolic arc and the one or more ends of the first or second parabolic arc has a different height depending on a distance between each traction element and the peak or the one or more ends of the first or second parabolic arc (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 15, Swegle discloses the first set of traction elements and the second set of traction elements are separated or spaced apart by one or more flat or substantially flat regions (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 17, Swegle discloses the outsole comprises a central portion and a peripheral portion extending around the central portion, wherein the peripheral portion includes the first and second sets of traction elements, and wherein the central portion includes one or more flat surface areas that do not include any traction elements (figs 1B annotated above and 4).
Regarding claim 19, Swegle discloses the first set of traction elements and the second set of traction elements include a combination of different types of traction elements (fig 1B annotated above and 2).
Regarding claim 20, Swegle discloses the plurality of traction elements comprise a rubber material and a thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) material (para 0047).
Regarding claim 26, Swegle discloses the first maximum height is greater- different than the second maximum height (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 27, Swegle discloses the first or second set of traction elements comprises a traction element at the peak of the first or second parabolic arc with a lengthened height in relation to each of the other traction elements in the first or second set of traction elements (fig 1B annotated above).
Regarding claim 28, lengthened traction element has a greater height than any other traction element in the second set of traction elements (fig 1B annotated above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, dated 05-18-2026, with respect to the drawing objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection has been withdrawn due to applicant amendments.
Applicant’s arguments, dated 05-18-2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C §112(a) have been fully considered, and are persuasive. The rejection to the claims has been withdrawn due to the amendments to the claims.
Applicant’s arguments, dated 05-18-2026, with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C §112(3) have been fully considered, but are not persuasive as analyzed above.
Applicant's arguments, date 05-18-2026, with respect to the rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C §102 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Argument 1: applicant argues that the first or second maximum are related to different set of traction element. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees since there is not any of this argument discloses in the original specification.
Argument 2: applicant argues that the prior art does not teach the amended limitations. However, this argument is not commensurate with the rejected claims, as the limitations have not been previously presented and they have been address as analyzed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAO-THIEU L NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0476. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-3pm.
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 D. 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.
BAO-THIEU L. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/BAO-THIEU L NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights