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 Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on 6/23/206 has been received; Claims 1-44 are pending.
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 37, 38 & 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (U.S. Patent No. 4438574) in view of Greene (U.S. 20110078921) in view of Wired (Wired Staff, How to: Lace Your Shoes, 11/27/2007).
Regarding claim 37, Johnson teaches an article of footwear (10), comprising: an upper (12), comprising: a medial side; a lateral side; an instep area extending between the medial side and the lateral side (figs. 1,2); a plurality of outer lace apertures (G, see annotated fig.) located on the medial side and lateral side; a plurality of inner lace apertures located on the medial side and lateral side (F, see annotated fig.) ,wherein the plurality of inner lace apertures and the plurality of outer lace apertures form a plurality of pairs (circled in annotated fig.), each pair comprising one inner lace aperture and one outer lace aperture that are offset along a longitudinal centerline: and a sole structure (14) secured to the upper (fig. 1); but fails to teach the upper comprising a knitted component incorporated into at least the instep area, lacing holes disposed symmetrically on medial and lateral sides so that there are the same lacing holes on the lateral side.
Greene teaches footwear (fig. 1) comprising a knitted footwear tongue (40, para. 43) in the instep area (fig. 1) and lacing holes (34) disposed symmetrically on medial and lateral sides (fig. 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the upper of Johnson so as to include a knitted tongue in the instep area in view of Greene in order to decrease waste, increase manufacturing efficiency and recyclability and enhance comfort in comparison to a conventional tongue with multiple joined material elements (para. 43 of Greene) and to have disposed the lacing holes of Johnson symmetrically on medial and lateral sides in view of Greene in order to provide even tension with the lacing.
But does not specifically teach a lace that extends into the inner lace aperture of a first pair, under and along an interior foot facing surface of the upper and exits the outer lace aperture of the first pair.
Wired teaches lacing a shoe such that the lace that extends into the inner lace aperture of the first pair, under and along an interior foot facing surface of the upper and exits the outer lace aperture of the first pair.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have laced the article of footwear of the Johnson/Greene combined reference as taught by Wired fig. 1 in order to alleviate pressure points to provide more breathing room (description of 1 of Wired).
Lacing the Johnson/Greene combined reference as taught by Wired results in lacing a shoe such that the lace that extends into the inner lace aperture of the first pair (A3, see annotated fig.), under and along an interior foot facing surface of the upper and exits the outer lace aperture of the first pair (A4, see annotated fig.). The examiner notes that dashed lines indicating the lace in the annotated fig. are under the surface of the upper and solid lines indicating the lace are over the top surface of the upper.
The combination Johnson and Greene teach do not specifically disclose a distance between lace apertures of each pair is shorter than a distance between lace apertures of each pair and any immediately adjacent lace aperture of a different pair. It, however, would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to experiment with different ranges of spacing for the pairs of lace apertures in order to achieve an optimal configuration for lacing, since discovering the optimum or workable ranges of the spacing involves only routine skill in the art.
PNG
media_image1.png
406
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
500
522
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 38, the combined reference fails to teach a lace, wherein after exiting the upper through the outer lace aperture of the first pair on the medial side or on the lateral side of the upper, the lace extends across the instep area along an exterior surface of the upper and extends through an inner lace aperture of a second pair on the other of the medial side or the lateral side of the upper, extends along the interior foot-facing surface of the upper, and then exits the upper through an outer lace aperture of the second pair on the other of the medial side or the lateral side of the upper.
Wired teaches lacing a shoe such that the lace wherein after exiting the upper through the outer lace aperture of the first pair on the medial side or on the lateral side of the upper, the lace extends across the instep area along an exterior surface of the upper and extends through an inner lace aperture of a second pair on the other of the medial side or the lateral side of the upper, extends along the interior foot-facing surface of the upper, and then exits the upper through an outer lace aperture of the second pair on the other of the medial side or the lateral side of the upper (fig. 1 and description of 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have laced the article of footwear of the Johnson/Greene combined reference as taught by Wired fig. 1 in order to alleviate pressure points to provide more breathing room (description of 1 of Wired).
Lacing the Johnson/Greene combined reference as taught by Wired results in a lace wherein after exiting the upper through the outer lace aperture of the first pair on the medial side or on the lateral side of the upper, the lace extends across the instep area along an exterior surface of the upper and extends through an inner lace aperture (A3, see annotated fig.) of the plurality of inner lace apertures on the other of the medial side or the lateral side of the upper, extends along the interior foot-facing surface of the upper, and then exits the upper through an outer lace aperture (A4, see annotated fig.) of the plurality of outer lace apertures on the other of the medial side of the lateral side of the upper. The examiner notes that dashed lines indicating the lace in the annotated fig. are under the surface of the upper and solid lines indicating the lace are over the top surface of the upper.
Regarding claim 40, the combined reference teaches a polymer layer (36, leather, col. 4, lines 25-31) on a surface of the upper (fig. 1), wherein the polymer layer surrounds at least a portion of the plurality of pairs of lace apertures (fig. 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
402
608
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-36 & 41-44 allowed over the prior art of record.
Claims 39 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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