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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1 (Fig. 1-2) in the reply filed on 07/22/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 6-7 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/22/2025.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Oberhauser et al. (US 2023/0363488), herein Oberhauser.
Regarding claim 1, Oberhauser discloses a ski boot (410e) comprising: a substantially rigid foot-casing which is adapted to accommodate the foot of the user; a substantially rigid cuff which is adapted to surround the lower part of the leg of the user, and is hinged on the foot-casing so as to swing about a first transversal rotation axis that is substantially perpendicular to the midplane of the ski boot; an oblong-shaped tongue that is arranged longitudinally to close the upper part of the foot-casing; a protective inner-boot which is located inside the foot-casing and is shaped/structured so as to accommodate and protect at least the foot of the user (Fig. 12); and a foot-casing closing assembly which is adapted to close/tighten the upper part of the foot-casing on the foot of the user; the ski boot being characterized in that the foot-casing closing assembly comprises: a first fairlead member (224) which is located on the hinge that connects the cuff to the foot-casing; a plurality of second fairlead members (guides) which are arranged along a first major longitudinal edge of the tongue, in part integral with the foot-casing (212, 213) and in part integral with the tongue; and a manually-operated cable winding winch (110) which is located on the cuff and is provided with a flexible cable (112) that comes out from the cable winding winch itself, engages in freely slidable manner and in succession said first and said second (21) fairlead members, and has the distal end fastened to the foot-casing (paragraph 0058; Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 3, Oberhauser discloses that the distal end of the flexible cable is fastened rigidly to the foot-casing in proximity of the front end of the tongue (Fig. 12).
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) 2, 8, 9, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oberhauser, as applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Oberhauser discloses that the second fairlead members are arranged alternately on opposite sides of the first major longitudinal edge of the tongue and are rigidly fixed to the foot-casing. The embodiment of Fig. 12 does not disclose that the fairlead members are rigidly fixed to the tongue. However, the embodiments of Fig. 8 and 9 teach that fairlead members may be rigidly fixed to the tongue. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rigidly fix the fairlead members to the tongue, as taught by the embodiments of Fig. 8 and 9, as this would be simple substitution of one attachment mechanism for another, with the predictable result of simplifying construction.
Regarding claim 8, Oberhauser does not explicitly disclose that the first major longitudinal edge of the tongue and the first fairlead member are located on the outer side of the foot-casing and cuff. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to locate the closing assembly on the outer side of the ski boot in order to provide easy access to the assembly while the ski boot is being worn, allowing a user to tighten or loosen the boot as needed.
Regarding claim 9, Oberhauser discloses that the winch is spaced above the hinge (Fig. 12). The winch would further be located on the outer side of the cuff with the remainder of the closing assembly, as discussed regarding claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 13, the embodiment of Fig. 12 does not disclose that the winch is located on the tongue. However, the embodiments of Fig. 8 and 9 teach that the winch may be located on the tongue, close to the cuff and/or straddling the boot vertical midplane. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to locate the winch on the tongue, as taught by the embodiments of Fig. 8 and 9, as this would be a simple substitution of one location for the winch for another, with the predictable result of placing the winch in a location where it is less likely to knock against outside objects and be unintentionally displaced.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oberhauser, as applied to claim 1, in view of Sartor (US 4,785,555).
Regarding claim 4, Oberhauser does not disclose that the first fairlead member is an idler pulley. Sartor teaches a ski boot having a foot-casing (2), and a cuff (3, 4) hinged to the foot casing. A flexible cable (11) is routed around a fairlead member (12) at the hinge. The fairlead member is an idler pulley that is pivoted in a freely rotatable manner on the hinge (column 2, lines 22-25, 46-58; Fig. 1-3). 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 first fairlead member of Oberhauser in the form of an idler pulley, as taught by Sartor, as this would be a simple substitution of one type of cable routing mechanism for another, with the predictable result of allowing the cable to easily route around hinge and move through the fairlead member when the cable is tightened or loosened.
Regarding claim 5, Sartor teaches that the pulley is substantially coaxial to a transversal rotation axis (Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oberhauser, as applied to claim 1, in view of Parisotto (US 2015/0033586).
Regarding claim 10, Oberhauser does not disclose a cuff locking mechanism. Parisotto teaches a ski having a foot-casing (2), and a cuff (5) hinged to the foot-casing. The ski boot comprises a manually-operated cuff locking mechanism (10), which is at least partially located on the rear part of the cuff and is structured so as to selectively rigidly lock the cuff to the foot-casing in a given downhill position (paragraphs 0021, 0022, 0027-0029; Fig. 1). 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 cuff locking mechanism, as taught by Parisotto, to the ski boot of Oberhauser in order to the allow the boot to be selectively locked while in a skiing position, or unlocked to provide improved comfort while walking.
Regarding claim 11, Oberhauser discloses that the winch is located on the rear part of the cuff (Fig. 12). The winch would further be located at least partially above the cuff locking mechanism, which is located at the bottom of the cuff (see Fig. 1 of Parisotto).
Regarding claim 12, Oberhauser does not disclose the specific attachment of the tongue to the foot-casing. Parisotto teaches that a tongue on a ski boot may have a front end firmly fixed onto the anterosuperior part of the foot-casing, with the capability of turning forward (the lower end of the tongue is hinged to the shell; paragraph 0003, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to hingedly connect the front end of the tongue to the foot-casing, as taught by Parisotto, in order to allow the tongue to swing forward, easing entry and exit of the foot into and out of the ski boot.
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