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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/11/2026 has been entered.
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.
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 2-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu (US 2012/0192462) in view of Sallop (US 2012/0119920).
Regarding Claim 2, Hsu discloses an article of footwear (Figures 1 & 2), comprising: an upper portion (10) including a lace to adjust a fit of the upper portion against a foot (Figures 1 & 2); a lower portion including a mid-sole (20) and an out-sole (13), the lower portion coupled to the upper portion at the mid-sole (Figures 1 & 2), the mid-sole forming a cutout segment (Figure 2), the cutout segment including: a gap that provides medial-to-lateral visibility completely through the mid-sole (Figures 1 & 2, Para. 19, due to the translucency); and a translucent segment (Para. 19); a haptic generator (33) configured to generate a haptic sensation that is perceptible by a wearer or the article of footwear based on a command from the processor (Para. 20-23), the haptic sensation associated with a user interface experience (Para. 20-23); and a light emitter positioned to be visible externally to the sole through the translucent segment (Para. 24). Hsu does not specifically disclose a haptic vibration sensation. Howver, Sallop discloses a haptic vibration sensation (Para. 29) for the purpose of conveying information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a vibration to convey information to a user.
Regarding Claim 3, Hsu discloses a user interface (32), wherein the user interface is aligned with the light emitter (Para. 20).
Regarding Claim 4, Hsu discloses the user interface comprises a button (32, Para. 20).
Regarding Claim 5, Hsu discloses the light emitter comprises a plurality of light emitting devices (Para. 20-24).
Regarding Claim 6, Hsu discloses multiple ones of the plurality of light emitting devices are visible through the translucent segment (Figures 1 & 2, Para. 20-24).
Regarding Claim 7, Hsu discloses all of the plurality of light emitting devices are visible through the translucent segment (Figures 1 & 2, Para. 20-24).
Claims 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu (US 2012/0192462) in view of Sallop (US 2012/0119920) and Chen (US 2017/0339773).
Regarding Claim 8, Hsu does not specifically disclose a wireless transceiver configured to communicate with a remote device. However, Chen discloses the use of a wireless remote transceiver (Para. 20 & 27). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a wireless system to be able to use a remote, as taught by Chen, to the shoe of Hsu, in order to provide ease of control.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Hus and Chen disclose the transceiver is configured to receive instructions related, at least in part, to a performance of the light emitter (Chen, Para. 27).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Hus and Chen disclose the performance of the light emitter is related to a color of light emitted by the light emitter (Hsu, Para. 24 & Chen, Para. 27).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Hus and Chen disclose the light emitter comprises a plurality of light emitting device and the performance of the light emitter is related to a sequence by which the plurality of lights are illuminated (Hsu, Para. 24 & Chen, Para. 27).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as discussed supra.
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 KATHARINE KANE whose telephone number is (571)272-3398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm 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.
/KATHARINE G KANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights