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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed November 13, 2025 has been received, Claims 1-5, 8-13, and 16-24 are currently pending.
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.
1. Claims 3 and 4 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.
Claims 3 and 4 recite “the slow pressure release component remains open”. The claim limitation is indefinite as Claim 1 previously recites “wherein the slow pressure release component includes: (i) a second fluid line that opens into the foot support bladder, (ii) a flow rate reducing component for restricting flow rate through the second fluid line, and (iii) a low pressure relief valve.” It is highly unclear how the low pressure release component remains open when it comprises a relief valve, and valves are known to be opened and closed. This is further unclear as Applicant’s disclosure points to a single structure as being the slow release component ‘124’, not comprising multiple structures. Claims 3 and 4 are rejected as best understood by 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.
2. Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 8-12, 16-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lo (US 2020/0397094).
Regarding Claim 1, Lo discloses a foot support system for an article of footwear, comprising: a foot support bladder (2); a first pump (1) including a first pump inlet (13) and a first pump outlet (12)(para.21); a first fluid line (4 from 1 to 43) placing the first pump outlet in fluid communication with the foot support bladder for supplying fluid to the foot support bladder (as seen in Fig.9); and a slow pressure release component (4 from 43 to 2 & 5, 41, 21, 5) in fluid communication with the foot support bladder (para.25), wherein the slow pressure release component releases fluid from the foot support bladder to change the foot support bladder from a high pressure foot support configuration (i.e. when 2 is “saturated”/”overly inflated”) to a low pressure foot support configuration (i.e. when 2 is less saturated and less inflated)(para.24-25), wherein the slow pressure release component includes: (i) a second fluid line (4 from 43 to 2 & 5) that opens into the foot support bladder (as seen in Fig.9), (ii) a flow rate reducing component (41) for restricting flow rate through the second fluid line (para.25), and (iii) a low pressure relief valve (5) located in the second fluid line downstream from the flow rate reducing component (as seen in Fig.9), and wherein the low pressure relief valve sets a minimum pressure threshold value for the foot support bladder (para.25; i.e. 5 sets a minimum pressure threshold value for 2, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant, in that 5 releases air from the front air pad when it is over saturated).
Regarding Claim 3, insofar as is definite, Lo discloses a foot support system according to claim 1, wherein the slow pressure release component remains open while the first pump supplies fluid to the foot support bladder (i.e. 41 remains open, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant, in that air irreversibly flows from the first port 411 to the second port 412).
Regarding Claim 4, insofar as is definite, Lo discloses a foot support system according to claim 1, wherein the slow pressure release component remains open at all times that fluid pressure in the foot support bladder is above the minimum pressure threshold value (i.e. 5 remains open at all times that fluid pressure in the foot support bladder is above the minimum pressure threshold value, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant, as it regulates and releases air that has oversaturated 2; para.25).
Regarding Claim 5, Lo discloses a foot support system according to claim 1, wherein the slow pressure release component (5) releases fluid from the foot support bladder (2) at a slower rate than a pumping rate at which the first pump supplies fluid to the foot support bladder (para.25; i.e. 5 releases oversaturated levels of air, meaning the pump oversaturates 2 at a faster rate than 5 releases).
Regarding Claim 8, Lo discloses a foot support system according to claim 1, wherein the flow rate reducing component (41) includes a fluid line insert (i.e. 41 is a fluid line insert in that it is inserted into 4) having an always open orifice (i.e. interior void of 41) extending through the fluid line insert (as seen in Fig.8 & 9).
Regarding Claim 9, Lo discloses a foot support system according to claim 1, further comprising: a high pressure relief valve (6) configured to release fluid from the foot support system when necessary to prevent over-inflation of the foot support bladder (para.26-27).
Regarding Claim 10, Lo discloses a foot support system according to claim 9, wherein the high pressure relief valve (6) is located in a fluid line (i.e. tube that houses 6) that extends from and is in direct fluid communication with one of the first pump (1), the foot support bladder (2), or the first fluid line (4)(as seen in Fig.9; para.26-27).
Regarding Claim 11, Lo discloses a foot support system according to claim 1, wherein when in the low pressure foot support configuration (i.e. when 2 is less saturated and less inflated), the foot support bladder (2) has a first height dimension, when in the high pressure foot support configuration (i.e. when 2 is “saturated”/”overly inflated”), the foot support bladder has a second height dimension, and wherein the second height dimension is greater than the first height dimension (i.e. when 2 is overly inflated it will be a higher height than when 2 is less inflated).
Regarding Claim 12, Lo discloses a sole structure for an article of footwear, comprising: a midsole component (100) including an upper-facing surface and a ground-facing surface (as seen in Fig.3 & 4); a foot support bladder (2) having a foot supporting portion mounted on the upper-facing surface of the midsole component (as seen in Fig.4); a first foot-activated pump (1) including a first pump inlet (13) and a first pump outlet (12)(para.21), wherein the first foot-activated pump moves fluid in response to force applied by a wearer’s foot (para.24); a first fluid line (4 from 1 to 43) placing the first pump outlet in fluid communication with the foot support bladder for supplying fluid to the foot support bladder (as seen in Fig.9); and a pressure control system (i.e. valves) for maintaining fluid pressure in the foot support bladder between a maximum threshold value (i.e. when 2 is “saturated”/”overly inflated”) and a minimum threshold value (i.e. when 2 is less saturated and less inflated), wherein the pressure control system includes a slow pressure release component (4 from 43 to 2 & 5, 41, 21, 5) in fluid communication with the foot support bladder (para.25), wherein the slow pressure release component includes: (i) a second fluid line (4 from 43 to 2 & 5) that opens into the foot support bladder (as seen in Fig.9), (ii) a flow rate reducing component (41) for restricting flow rate through the second fluid line (para.25), and (iii) a low pressure relief valve (5) located in the second fluid line downstream from the flow rate reducing component (as seen in Fig.9), and wherein the low pressure relief valve sets a minimum pressure threshold value for the foot support bladder (para.25; i.e. 5 sets a minimum pressure threshold value for 2, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant, in that 5 releases air from the front air pad when it is over saturated), and wherein the slow pressure release component continuously releases fluid from the foot support bladder when the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder is above the minimum threshold value (para.24-25).
Regarding Claim 16, Lo discloses a sole structure according to claim 12, wherein the flow rate reducing component (41) includes a fluid line insert (i.e. 41 is a fluid line insert in that it is inserted into 4) having an always open orifice (i.e. interior void of 41) extending through the fluid line insert (as seen in Fig.8 & 9).
Regarding Claim 17, Lo discloses a sole structure according to claim 12, wherein the pressure control system further includes a high pressure relief valve (6) configured to divert fluid moved by the first foot-activated pump away from the foot support bladder when the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder is at the maximum threshold value (para.26-27).
Regarding Claim 18, Lo discloses a sole structure according to claim 17, wherein the high pressure relief valve (6) is located in a fluid line (i.e. tube that houses 6) that extends from and is in direct fluid communication with one of the first pump (1), the foot support bladder (2), or the first fluid line (4)(as seen in Fig.9; para.26-27).
Regarding Claim 20, Lo discloses a sole structure according to claim 12, wherein when the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder (2) is at the minimum threshold value (i.e. when 2 is less saturated and less inflated), the foot support bladder has a first height dimension, when the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder is at the maximum threshold value (i.e. when 2 is “saturated”/”overly inflated”), the foot support bladder has a second height dimension, and wherein the second height dimension is greater than the first height dimension (i.e. when 2 is overly inflated it will be a higher height than when 2 is less inflated).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
3. Claim(s) 2, 13, and 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lo (US 2020/0397094) in view of Lindsay (US 2013/0326912).
Regarding Claims 2 and 13, Lo discloses the invention substantially as claimed above. Lo does not disclose wherein the minimum pressure threshold value is less than 8 psi. However, Lindsay teaches a forefoot support bladder (18) having a minimum pressure threshold value less than 8 psi (para.46 & 49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the minimum pressure threshold value of Lo at less than 8 psi, as taught by Lindsay, in order to provide the optimum level of support and cushioning to a user’s foot.
Regarding Claims 21 and 23, Lo discloses the invention substantially as claimed above. Lo does not disclose wherein the minimum pressure threshold value is less than 12 psi. However, Lindsay teaches a forefoot support bladder (18) having a minimum pressure threshold value less than 12 psi (para.46 & 49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the minimum pressure threshold value of Lo at less than 12 psi, as taught by Lindsay, in order to provide the optimum level of support and cushioning to a user’s foot.
Regarding Claims 22 and 24, Lo discloses the invention substantially as claimed above. Lo does not disclose wherein the minimum pressure threshold value is less than 10 psi. However, Lindsay teaches a forefoot support bladder (18) having a minimum pressure threshold value less than 10 psi (para.46 & 49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the minimum pressure threshold value of Lo at less than 10 psi, as taught by Lindsay, in order to provide the optimum level of support and cushioning to a user’s foot.
4. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lo (US 2020/0397094) in view of Lo (US 2019/0200701), herein after Chih-Fang.
Regarding Claim 19, Lo discloses a sole structure according to claim 12, wherein when the foot support bladder (2) is at the minimum threshold value (i.e. when 2 is less saturated and less inflated), a foot supporting surface of the foot support bladder retracts (i.e. moves downward). Lo does not disclose the foot supporting surface of the foot support bladder retracts to a location such that the upper-facing surface of the midsole component is positioned to directly support a portion of the wearer’s foot adjacent the location where the foot support bladder has retracted. However, Chih-Fang teaches a shoe midsole (1) having a foot supporting surface of a foot support bladder (3) retracts (i.e. moves downward) to a location such that the upper-facing surface of a midsole component (i.e. upper surface of blocks within 1) is positioned to directly support a portion of the wearer’s foot adjacent the location where the foot support bladder has retracted (as seen in Fig.2-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the midsole of Lo to have an upper-facing surface of the midsole positioned to directly support a portion of the wearer’s foot, as taught by Chih-Fang, in order to provide the desired level of support and comfort to a user’s foot while walking.
Response to Arguments
In view of Applicant's amendment, the search has been updated, and newly modified grounds of rejection have been identified and applied. Applicant's arguments have been considered but, as they are drawn solely to the amended limitations, are moot in view of the newly modified ground(s) of rejection.
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 MEGAN E LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-3267. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8:00am-4:00pm 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.
/MEGAN E LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732