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 .
Specification
The use of the term “Velcro”, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The specification lacks proper antecedent basis for “a fixing member” (claim 1).
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3-6, 10, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the sole” in line 5. It appears that this limitation should read “the base sole” to maintain consistent claim language.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the lever piece” in lines 7, 9, 10, and 11. It appears that these limitations should read --the lever part-- to maintain consistent claim language.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a Mette rod” in line 8. It appears this limitation should read --the connecting rod--, to maintain consistent language with the specification.
Claims 3-6 and 11 recite the limitation “the link.” It appears that this limitation should read --the connecting rod-- to maintain consistent claim language.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “wherein it comprises” in line 2. This limitation does not clearly define what element “it” refers to. The claim should be amended to remove or clarify the term “it.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1 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 1 recites the limitation “wherein the fixing member comprises:” in lines 3-4, and continues to list a lever part, a connecting rod, and a deformable member. The fixing member is previously described as “intended to be attached to the skier’s leg” (line 3). It is not clear how the fixing member can comprise a lever part, a connecting rod, and a deformable member. The fixing part appears to be only a part of the ski boot, which attaches to the leg of the skier (see element 41; Fig. 3). For purposes of examination it appears that the ski boot comprises a lever part, a connecting rod, and a deformable member, not just the fixing member.
Claims 2-10 depend from rejected claim 1.
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, 7, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Forney (US 2016/0263468).
Regarding claim 1, Forney discloses a ski boot comprising a base sole (1) intended to receive a shoe of a skier and a connecting device (7, 9, 41) to the skier’s lower leg, the connecting device comprising a fixing member (4, 5) intended to be attached to the skier’s leg, wherein the ski boot comprises: (a) a lever part (3) fixed by a pivot connection (2) to the base sole, the connecting device being mounted on the lever part and being arranged so that the fixing member is movable in translation and/or rotation opposite the lever part; (b) a connecting rod (6) connected at a first point to the lever part by a first connection and connected at a second point, by a second connection (41) to the sole, the first connection being a pivot connection and the second connection being arranged to allow movement of the second point with respect to the sole; and (c) a deformable member (spring within damper 6) arranged to exert a force against a movement of the second point with respect to a rest position of the second point (paragraph 0033, 0035, 0042; Fig. 1-2).
Regarding claim 2, Forney discloses that the connection and/or the deformable member is arranged to allow rotation of the lever part between an angle of at least 15 degrees and at least -30 degrees on either side of the rest position (Fig. 1b, 1c).
Regarding claim 3, Forney discloses that the sole comprises a slide in which the second point of the link is slidably mounted (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Forney discloses that the connecting device comprises a holding member (7, 9, 14, 41) of the fixing member, the holding member being connected by a slide connection (paragraph 0042; Fig. 1, 1d).
Regarding claim 8, Forney discloses that the fixing member is connected to the holding member by a pivot connection.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-9, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gertsch et al. (US 3,753,571), herein Gertsch.
Regarding claim 1, Gertsch discloses a ski boot comprising a base sole (5, 7) intended to receive a shoe of a skier and a connecting device (18, 19, 20) to the skier’s lower leg, the connecting device comprising a fixing member (23) intended to be attached to the skier’s leg, wherein the ski boot comprises: (a) a lever part (15) fixed by a pivot connection to the base sole, the connecting device being mounted on the lever part and being arranged so that the fixing member is movable in translation and/or rotation opposite the lever part; (b) a connecting rod (12, 14) connected at a first point to the lever part by a first connection and connected at a second point, by a second connection (11) to the sole, the first connection being a pivot connection and the second connection being arranged to allow movement of the second point with respect to the sole (wherein rod members 12 may located within different bores 11 along the length of sole); and (c) a deformable member (13) arranged to exert a force against a movement of the second point with respect to a rest position of the second point (column 3, line 35-column 4, line 64; Fig. 1, 2).
Regarding claim 2, Gertsch discloses that the connection and/or the deformable member is arranged to allow rotation of the lever part between an angle of at least 15 degrees and at least -30 degrees on either side of the rest position (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Gertsch discloses that the sole comprises a slide in which the second point of the link is slidably mounted (wherein rod members 12 may slide within bores 11).
Regarding claim 4, Gertsch discloses that the connecting rod comprises a frame comprising two uprights arranged on either side of the lever part and connected together by a transverse spacer passing in the slide (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Gertsch discloses that the connecting device comprises a holding member (19, 20, 21) of the fixing member, the holding member being connected by a slide connection (wherein the holding member can slide within the holes of the lever part) (column 4, lines 8-19; Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Gertsch discloses that the fixing member is connected to the holding member by a pivot connection.
Regarding claims 9 and 12, Gertsch discloses that the holding member comprises a hoop provided with two opposing tabs (18), the fixing member being fixed to each of the tabs, and in which the holding member comprises a member (19, 20, 21) for adjusting the spacing of the tabs.
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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forney, as applied to claim 1, in view of Kunstadt (US 5,269,079).
Forney does not disclose a gaiter. Kunstadt teaches a ski boot having a gaiter (22) fixed to a sole. The gaiter provides waterproofing and insulation to the ski boot (column 3, line 65-column 4, line 19; Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a gaiter, as taught by Kunstadt, to the boot of Forney in order to provide waterproofing and insulation to the boot, improving the comfort of the wearer in cold and wet conditions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6, and 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 SHARON M PRANGE whose telephone number is (571)270-5280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5 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.
/SHARON M PRANGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732