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 .
Status of Claims
This Action is in response to the amendment filed on October 3, 2025.
As directed by the amendment: Claims 18-19 were amended. Claims 24-29 were cancelled. Claims 32-37 are newly added, and thus claims 1-23 and 30-37 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention 2 and Species I in the reply filed on March 24, 2025, is acknowledged.
Claims 1-17, 20-23, and 30-37 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. It is noted that newly submitted claims 32-37 are drawn to the nonelected Invention I, as they each recite “The dynamic sock of claim …” rather than the “method of providing dorsiflexion support to a user” and thus do not require the method steps of claims 18-19.
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beckwith et al. (2008/0154166) in view of Thor et al. (2018/0333285).
Regarding claim 18, Beckwith discloses a method of providing dorsiflexion support to a user (using the device of Fig. 1, see the last two sentences of [0032]), the method comprising:
providing a foot-worn device (Fig. 1) including a tension band (foot assembly 14 and tension member 16, Figs. 1-2) that defines a band path (the path that assembly 14 and tension member 16 traverse, Fig. 1) and (ii) the band path extending from a first section under metatarsal heads of the user (the foot assembly 14 is positioned “at the distal end of the metatarsal bones … [and] pressure is applied to the metatarsal bones” see para. [0031] and Fig. 1. The “first section” is considered the portion of foot assembly 14 that is under the metatarsals), extends superiorly, medially and laterally in a second section (see second section 20 in annotated Fig. A below), and joins over metatarsals of the user in a third section (see third section 30 in annotated Fig. A below), extends superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section (see fourth section 40 in annotated Fig. A below) and joins in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section (see fifth section 50 in annotated Fig. A below), wherein the band path does not extend under or around the heel of the user (see Fig. 1); and
increasing tension for dorsiflexion of a forefoot with the tension band (the tension member 16 is “tensioned in a manner such that the plantarflexion of the ankle 6 is limited such that the plantar surface of the foot 8 is held in a neutral to slight dorsiflexion” see the last sentence of [0029]).
PNG
media_image1.png
455
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A (from Fig. 1 of Beckwith): Beckwith has a tension band that extends from a first section under metatarsal heads of the user (see para. [0031] and Fig. 1), extends superiorly, medially and laterally in a second section (20), and joins over metatarsals of the user in a third section (30), extends superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section (40) and joins in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section (50).
Beckwith is silent regarding the foot-worn device being a dynamic sock including a main body section with the tension band coupled to or integrated into the main body section to define the band path, (i) the main body section configured to cover at least a portion of a foot and a lower leg of a user; and the band path extends medially and laterally around a calf of the user.
Thor teaches a related dynamic sock (orthosis 400, Fig. 4A, “is manufactured as a sock” see the second sentence of [0092]. Since the sock has a tension band 408 for a therapeutic purpose, it is considered a dynamic sock) with a tension band (tensioning support strap 408, Fig. 4A) for providing dorsiflexion support (see lines 16-18 of [0093]) and limiting plantarflexion of the ankle which is advantageous in addressing drop foot condition (see lines 1-7 of [0094]). The dynamic sock includes a main body section (the portion that covers the foot and calf, in Fig. 4A) with the tension band (408) coupled to or integrated into the main body section to define a band path (strap 408 is coupled to the sock via strap(s) 402, 410, and support structure 404 and attachment point 406, Fig. 4A; see para. [0092]). The tension band (408) extends from the distal part of the foot, superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section (see fourth section 40, annotated Fig. B below); and extends medially and laterally around a calf of the user to join in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section (see fifth section 50, annotated Fig. B below). Regarding the “fifth section”, it is noted that Thor states the tension band (408, Fig. 4A) provides additional eversion and/or inversion support when the tension band (408) is “wrapped around the lower portion of the user’s leg in the fashion described with respect to the implementations of FIGS. 3A-3C” (see lines 13-18 of [0094]). Thus, the Fig. 4A tension band (408) is wrapped around the lower leg in the manner depicted in Fig. 3C. to provide the fourth section (40) and fifth section (50). Additionally, Thor states that the plurality of tensioning straps and supporting bands may be manufactured as a unitary component (see the last sentence of [0088]. Although this is stated when referring to Fig. 3A, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the tensioning straps may be made unitary in any of the embodiments). Thor’s tensioning band additionally includes a rotary tensioning dial (304, Fig. 3C) configured to provide tension to the support strap (see lines 9-11 of [0087]).
PNG
media_image2.png
537
623
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure B (from Fig. 4A and Fig. 3C of Thor): Fig. 4A (left) depicts a tension band (408) that extends from the distal part of the foot, superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section (40, see both Fig. 4A and Fig. 3C); and extends medially and laterally around a calf of the user (as the strap wraps around the calf, near tensioning dial 304, Fig. 3C) to join in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section (50). It is noted that the Fig. 4A tension band 408 may be wrapped around the lower leg as depicted in Fig. 3C (see lines 13-18 of [0094]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tension band of Beckwith to be integrated/coupled into the main body of a dynamic sock and have a unitary tension band follow a tension band path that extends superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section, and extend medially and laterally around a calf of the user to join in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section that is adjustably tightened by a rotary tensioning dial as taught by Thor because this provides additional eversion and/or inversion support which is advantageous for users with drop foot, and the rotary tensioning dial allows the tension to be more conveniently adjusted by the user rotating a dial along the leg. Additionally, incorporating the tension band into the sock makes the device more convenient to wear as the user can easily pull the device on/off. The modified device would still have a band path that does not extend under or around the heel of the user because Thor’s band path is not shown to extend under or around the heel.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cropper et al. (2012/0232453) in view of Thor et al. (2018/0333285).
Regarding claim 19, Cropper discloses a method of providing dorsiflexion support to a user (dorsiflexion movements may be performed, see Figs. 14-15, Figs. 23-24 for example), the method comprising:
providing a dynamic sock (compression strap 22, Figs. 23-25; compression strap 22 may be “replaced by another covering or other foot securing device such as a sock, sleeve, compression sock…” see lines 6-10 of [0055]. This sock would be “dynamic” due to being a compression sock and due to allowing attachment of an exercise strap system 170, Figs. 23-25) including a main body section (the section that the compression sock covers, such as seen in Figs. 26-27) and a tension band (exercise strap system 170, Figs. 23-25; this includes an elastic strap member that is tensioned to pull second digit 304 and/or third digit 306 of the foot, see the last nine lines of [0124]) coupled to or integrated into the main body section (exercise strap system 170 is coupled to the main body section via surface hook portion 208, Fig. 22, which mates with loop type material of outer loop surface 28 of the compression strap 22 “for forming a hook and loop type of removable coupling or attachment between the two”, see the last six lines of [0123]) to define a band path (the shape of the exercise strap system 170 as it attaches to the toe(s) and the sock, see Figs. 22-25), (i) the main body section configured to cover at least a portion of a foot and a lower leg of a user (a “compression sock” would cover at least a portion of a foot and a lower leg of a user, similarly to the sock seen in Figs. 26-27), and (ii) the band path extending from a first section under toes of the user (the central section of strap body 176, Fig. 21, which is worn under toes 304, 306, see Figs. 21-25 and see line 10 through the end of para. [0124]: “wrapping … around second digit 304 and/or third digit 306”), extends superiorly over a top of the toes in a second section (the end portions 190, 182, extend superiorly over a top of the toes, see Figs. 21-25, and see line 10 through the end of para. [0124]: “wrapping … around second digit 304 and/or third digit 306”), extends over a superior aspect of metatarsals in a third section (elastic band member 198 extends over a superior aspect of metatarsals as seen in Fig. 23-25), wherein the band path does not extend under or around the heel of the user (see Figs. 14-15, Figs. 23-24); and
increasing tension for dorsiflexion of a forefoot and the toes with the tension band (“tensioning at least one elastic strap member 198 to pull second digit 304 and/or third digit 306 of foot 300 into a dorsiflexed position” see the last nine lines of para. [0124] and Figs. 23-25).
Cropper suggests that a compression sock may be used instead of the compression strap (22; see lines 6-10 of [0055]) and states that any disclosed embodiment may be provided together or combined (see the last sentence of [0054]), but does not specifically state that the method of Figs. 23-25 and paragraph [0124] would be the same embodiment as the use of a compression sock.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the compression strap (22) of the embodiment of Figs. 23-25 to be a compression sock as taught by para. [0055] and Figs. 26-27 of Cropper because this is a simple substitution of one foot support (compression sock) for another known foot support (mid-foot compression strap) and would merely provide expected results that the user’s foot and lower leg would be supported and covered by a compression sock which may offer more comfort and desirability for users.
The modified Cropper method is silent regarding the band path extends superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section, and extends medially and laterally around a calf of the user to join in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section.
Thor teaches a related dynamic sock (orthosis 400, Fig. 4A, “is manufactured as a sock” see the second sentence of [0092]. Since the sock has a tension band 408 for a therapeutic purpose, it is considered a dynamic sock) with a tension band (tensioning support strap 408, Fig. 4A) for providing dorsiflexion support (see lines 16-18 of [0093]) and limiting plantarflexion of the ankle which is advantageous in addressing drop foot condition (see lines 1-7 of [0094]). The tension band (408) extends superiorly over a top of the toes in a second section (see second section 20, annotated Fig. C below), extends over a superior aspect of metatarsals of the user in a third section (see third section 30, annotated Fig. C below), extends superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section (see fourth section 40, annotated Fig. C below); and extends medially and laterally around a calf of the user to join in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section (see fifth section 50, annotated Fig. C below). Regarding the “fifth section”, it is noted that Thor states the tension band (408, Fig. 4A) provides additional eversion and/or inversion support when the tension band (408) is “wrapped around the lower portion of the user’s leg in the fashion described with respect to the implementations of FIGS. 3A-3C” (see lines 13-18 of [0094]). Thus, the Fig. 4A tension band (408) is wrapped around the lower leg in the manner depicted in Fig. 3C. to provide the fourth section (40) and fifth section (50). Thor’s tensioning band additionally includes a rotary tensioning dial (304, Fig. 3C) configured to provide tension to the support strap (see lines 9-11 of [0087]).
PNG
media_image3.png
609
592
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure C (from Fig. 4A and Fig. 3C of Thor): Fig. 4A (left) depicts a tension band (408) that extends superiorly over a top of the toes in a second section (20), extends over a superior aspect of metatarsals of the user in a third section (30), extends superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section (40, see both Fig. 4A and Fig. 3C); and extends medially and laterally around a calf of the user (as the strap wraps around the calf, near tensioning dial 304, Fig. 3C) to join in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section (50). It is noted that the Fig. 4A tension band 408 may be wrapped around the lower leg as depicted in Fig. 3C (see lines 13-18 of [0094]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tension band path of Cropper to continue to extend superiorly over a front of an ankle of the user in a fourth section, and extend medially and laterally around a calf of the user to join in an upper calf region of the user in a fifth section that is adjustably tightened by a rotary tensioning dial as taught by Thor because this provides additional eversion and/or inversion support which is advantageous for users with drop foot, and the rotary tensioning dial allows the tension to be more conveniently adjusted by the user rotating a dial along the leg. The modified device would still have a band path that does not extend under or around the heel of the user because Thor’s band path is not shown to extend under or around the heel.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 3, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the argument that the amended claims have the tension band that does not extend under or around the heel of the user, while Sawle pulls from all sides of a user’s foot including the heel region (see the last two paragraphs of page 11 of the Remarks, through the second paragraph of page 12 of the Remarks), this argument has been considered, but it is moot because Sawle is not relied upon in the current rejection(s).
Regarding the argument that Cropper is focused on pulling a toe away from adjacent digits, for joint control of misaligned toes (see the first paragraph of page 13 of the Remarks), this argument is not persuasive. Cropper states that the strap is an exercise strap for placing the toe(s) in a dorsiflexion position to improve function and strength (see the last 11 lines of [0116], see the last 9 lines of [0124]). Thus, it provides tension for dorsiflexion.
Regarding the argument that Cropper’s Fig. 23 design has no suggestion that the structure should extend to the ankle/shin area of the user, and there would be no benefit for doing so (see the last paragraph of page 13 of the Remarks), this argument is not persuasive. Claim 19 is now rejected as being unpatentable under over Cropper et al. (2012/0232453) in view of Thor et al. (2018/0333285). Thor provides advantages for extending the structure to the ankle/shin area of the user, as this provides additional eversion and/or inversion support which is advantageous for users with drop foot, and the rotary tensioning dial allows the tension to be more conveniently adjusted by the user rotating a dial along the leg.
Regarding the argument that Fig. 26 of Cropper reinforces that the toe-related manipulated structure is integrated with a sock that encases the heel region of the user (see the last paragraph of page 13 of the Remarks), this argument is not persuasive. First, the Fig. 26 embodiment was never relied upon in any of the rejections. Second, the claims only require that “the band path does not extend under or around the heel of the user.” Thus, the sock can still extend under or around the heel of the user (just as Applicant’s own sock 102, Fig. 7, extends over the heel), and read on the claim.
Regarding the argument that Cropper does not increase tension for dorsiflexion of a forefoot and the toes (see the last paragraph of page 13 of the Remarks), this argument is not persuasive. Cropper provides tension to cause the toe(s) and their associated metacarpal joints to undergo dorsiflexion (see Fig. 14, see the last 11 lines of [0116], see the last 9 lines of [0124]). Furthermore, the modified Cropper/Thor method applies an adjustable amount of tension using a tension band that extends vertically up the calf (as taught by Thor) and thus would place at least part of the forefoot into dorsiflexion support.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Watts (2011/0092867) discloses a related ankle-foot orthosis that leaves the heel uncovered to make the device more comfortable to wear and to give the user a greater sense of confidence when walking barefoot. Outred et al. (2008/0004558) discloses a related plantar-flexion restraint device that has a tension band extending under the toes and metatarsal area, extending over the metatarsals, and to the calf. DeFeo (10,307,282) discloses a related treatment for plantar fasciitis that has a tension band extending under the toes and metatarsal area, extending over the metatarsals, and to the calf. Shipstead (5,718,673) discloses a related foot support device to diminish or eliminate pain for people with heel spurs or plantar fasciitis, in which the device does not exert pressure on the wearer’s heel which would be painful or cause discomfort for users with heel spurs.
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 CHRISTOPHER E MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1473. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30 (Eastern).
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E MILLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785