Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/794,574

ATHLETIC SYSTEMS

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Aug 05, 2024
Examiner
PRANGE, SHARON M
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nike, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
54%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 54% of resolved cases
54%
Career Allow Rate
473 granted / 884 resolved
-16.5% vs TC avg
Strong +47% interview lift
Without
With
+47.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
60 currently pending
Career history
944
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.9%
-38.1% vs TC avg
§103
43.3%
+3.3% vs TC avg
§102
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
§112
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 884 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . This is in response to Applicant’s amendment in which claims 1, 4-6, 10, and 17 have been amended, claims 3 and 16 have been canceled, and claims 1-2, 4-15, and 17-20 remain pending. 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bonin et al. (US 2022/0225729), herein Bonin. Regarding claim 17, Bonin discloses an article of footwear comprising: an upper (1702); and a sole structure (1704) coupled to the upper, the sole structure comprising: a sleeve extending from a first end to a second end, the sleeve including: a first plate (1730A) having a first surface and a second surface opposite the first surface, the first plate extending from the first end to the second end; a second plate (1730B) having a first surface and a second surface opposite the first surface of the second plate, the second plate extending from the first end toward the second end; a brace (side portion of 1790) coupling the first plate to the second plate, wherein the brace extends between the second surface of the second plate and an outer edge of the first plate (Fig. 55), the brace comprising a flexible material configured to allow the first plate to move relative to a medial-lateral axis of the article of footwear (paragraph 0164); a first cushioning element (1750) disposed between the first plate and the second plate, wherein a force applied to the first plate compresses the first cushioning element (paragraph 0164); and a second cushioning element (1752) including a first surface configured to receive the first plate, and a second surface disposed opposite the first surface of the second cushioning element (paragraphs 0160-0164; Fig. 49-59). Regarding claim 18, Bonin discloses that the second plate further includes a first portion, a second potion, and a third portion, the first portion and the second portion are separated by a first slot, and the second portion and the third portion are separated by a second slot (see Fig. 50). Regarding claim 19, Bonin discloses that the third portion is disposed adjacent the second surface of the second cushioning element (Fig. 50). Regarding claim 20, Bonin discloses that the first portion and the second portion each include one or more traction elements (1744, 1794; Fig. 50). PNG media_image1.png 364 577 media_image1.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonin et al. (US 2022/0225729), herein Bonin, in view of Greenspan et al. (US 2021/0052037), herein Greenspan. Regarding claim 1, Bonin discloses an article of footwear comprising: an upper (1702); and a sole structure (1704) coupled to the upper, the sole structure comprising: a sleeve extending from a first end to a second end, the sleeve including: a first plate (1730A) having a first surface and a second surface opposite the first surface, the first plate extending from the first end to the second end; a second plate (1730B) having a first surface and a second surface opposite the first surface of the second plate, the second plate extending from the first end toward the second end; a brace (side portion of 1790) coupling an edge on a lateral side of the first late to an edge on the lateral side of the second plate (Fig. 55); a first cushioning element (1750) disposed on a medial side of the article of footwear, wherein the first cushioning element is disposed between the first plate and the second plate; and a second cushioning element (1752) coupled to the first plate (paragraphs 0160-0164; Fig. 49-59). Bonin does not disclose a third cushioning element. Greenspan teaches a sole structure including a first plate (206), a second plate (202), and a cushioning element (210) disposed between the first plate and the second plate. The cushioning element may be two distinct cushioning elements (246b) extending across the width of the forefoot area, allowing the two cushioning elements to be different sizes or hardnesses from each other (paragraphs 0098-0099; Fig. 16, 21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the cushioning element 1750 of Bonin into two distinct cushioning elements (as taught by Greenspan), such that the sole structure has a third cushioning element disposed between the first plate and the second plate, in order to allow the two sides of the forefoot to have different sizes and/or hardnesses of cushioning. Regarding claim 2, Bonin discloses that the first cushioning element is a fluid-filled bladder (paragraph 0120). Regarding claim 4, Bonin discloses that the brace is comprised of a flexible material (paragraph 0164). Regarding claim 5, Bonin discloses that the brace is disposed on a lateral side of the article of footwear (Fig. 50). Regarding claim 6, Bonin discloses that the second plate includes a first portion, a second potion, and a third portion, the first portion and the second portion are separated by a first slot, and the second portion and the third portion are separated by a second slot (see annotated Fig. 50 above). Regarding claim 7, Bonin discloses that a third slot (slot on medial side) extends within the second portion. Regarding claim 8, Bonin discloses that the first portion is a forward-most portion of the second plate, the third portion is a rear-most portion of the second plate, and the second portion is disposed between the first potion and the third portion (Fig. 50). Regarding claim 9, Bonin discloses that the first portion and the second portion includes one or more traction elements (1744, 1794), the one or more traction elements extending outwardly from the second surface of the second plate (Fig. 50). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 10-15 are allowed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 05, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 23, 2025
Interview Requested
Oct 07, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Oct 07, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 17, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 31, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Feb 24, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 06, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 06, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588737
FOOTWEAR SOLE AND RELATED METHOD OF USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12569029
SOLE AND SHOE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564246
SHOE HAVING RESILIENT HEEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12550981
ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR WITH A PULLEY SYSTEM HAVING A GUIDE PORTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12550969
GOLF SHOES HAVING MULTI-SURFACE TRACTION OUTSOLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
54%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+47.3%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 884 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month