Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/807,519

ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR HAVING A CLOSURE MECHANISM

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Aug 16, 2024
Examiner
LYNCH, MEGAN E
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nike, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
38%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
80%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 38% of cases
38%
Career Allow Rate
232 granted / 613 resolved
-32.2% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+41.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
71 currently pending
Career history
684
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.7%
-38.3% vs TC avg
§103
42.1%
+2.1% vs TC avg
§102
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
§112
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 613 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 December 2, 2025 has been received, Claims 1-20 are currently pending. 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. 1. Claim(s) 1-12 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuerst (US 2018/0249787) in view of Krengel (US 2016/0270482). Regarding Claim 1, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear (100) comprising: a sole structure (102); and an upper (106) fixedly attached to the sole structure (para.34), the upper configured to transition between at least one tightening configuration and at least one loosening configuration (para.77), and the upper comprising: a vamp (108 between toe end and 124b/124f & 110b,c,e,f in forefoot & midfoot) disposed at a forefoot region and a mid-foot region of the article of footwear (as seen in Fig.1); an ankle opening (136) operative to allow a wearer to extend a foot into an interior volume of the upper (para.49); a throat (108 between 136 and 124b/124f & 110a,d) extending from the ankle opening toward the vamp (as seen in Fig.1); and a closure mechanism (120,210,216) configured to adjust a maximum size of the ankle opening and tightness of the upper (para.77), the closure mechanism comprising: an adjustable lace (210) having a first end (210 at 136) disposed adjacent the ankle opening and a second end (210 at 218) disposed adjacent the vamp and opposite the first end (as seen in Fig.1), wherein the adjustable lace operatively connects a lateral portion of the article of footwear and a medial portion of the article of footwear along the throat (as seen in Fig.1); a first toggle (120) coupled to the adjustable lace at the first end (para.76); a tightening portion (216) coupled to the first end of the adjustable lace, the tightening portion configured to transition the upper to a tightening position via pulling the tightening portion in a second pulling direction (i.e. vertical pulling). Fuerst does not disclose a second toggle coupled to the adjustable lace at the second end and a loosening portion coupled to the second end of the adjustable lace, the loosening portion configured to transition the upper to a loosening position via pulling the loosening portion in a first pulling direction to loosen the adjustable lace at the first end of the adjustable lace adjacent to the ankle opening, wherein the loosening position is configured for insertion and removal of a foot. However, Krengel teaches an upper having a first fastener (120a,120b) at a first end of an adjustable lace (100); and a second toggle (324; para.191) coupled to the adjustable lace at a second end and a loosening portion (ends of 102,104) coupled to the second end of the adjustable lace, the loosening portion configured to transition the upper to a loosening position via pulling the loosening portion in a first pulling direction (i.e. horizontal pulling) to loosen the adjustable lace at the first end of the adjustable lace adjacent to the ankle opening (i.e. pulling 102,104 when 120a & 120b are released would “loosen” the lace, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant), wherein the loosening position is configured for insertion and removal of a foot (i.e. horizontal pulling) (para.191; as seen in Fig.3C). 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 adjustable lace of Fuerst to have a second toggle and loosening portion, as taught by Krengel, in order to provide a footwear with dual adjustability to customize the fit for a wide, medium, or narrow foot, as needed by an individual user. Regarding Claim 2, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 1, wherein the closure mechanism further includes: a plurality of lace guides (202, 204, 206, 302, 304, 306), wherein the plurality of lace guides are disposed on each of the medial portion of the article of footwear and the lateral portion of the article of footwear, wherein the adjustable lace is routed through the plurality of lace guides (as seen in Fig.1). Regarding Claim 3, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 1, wherein the first toggle (120) is disposed adjacent the ankle opening (136) and fixedly attached to the upper (i.e. as 120 is permanently attached to the footwear, it is fixedly attached to the upper, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant). Regarding Claim 4, When in combination, Fuerst and Krengel teach an article of footwear of claim 1, wherein the second toggle (of Krengel) is disposed adjacent the vamp (of Fuerst; Fig.1). Regarding Claim 5, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 1, wherein the loosening portion (216) is a pull tab (para.106). Regarding Claim 6, When in combination, Fuerst and Krengel teach an article of footwear of claim 1, wherein the tightening portion (Krengel: ends of 102,104) is a pull tab (i.e. the end portions of 102,104 are a pull tab, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant in that they are capable of being pulled). Regarding Claim 7, When in combination, Fuerst and Krengel teach an article of footwear of claim 1, wherein the tightening portion (of Fuerst) is configured to transition the upper to the tightening position via pulling the tightening portion (of Fuerst l) in the second pulling direction (i.e. vertical pulling). It is noted that “the tightening portion is configured to transition the upper to the tightening position” is functional and does not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead requires an ability to so perform and/or function. Fuerst and Krengel disclose the structure as claimed and therefore would have a reasonable expectation of performing such function. Regarding Claim 8, When in combination, Fuerst and Krengel teach an article of footwear of claim 7, wherein the loosening portion (of Krengel) is configured to transition the upper to the loosening position via pulling the tightening portion in the first pulling direction (i.e. horizontal pulling). It is noted that “the loosening portion is configured to transition the upper to the loosening position” is functional and does not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead requires an ability to so perform and/or function. Fuerst and Krengel disclose the structure as claimed and therefore would have a reasonable expectation of performing such function. Regarding Claim 9, Modified Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 1, wherein the first pulling direction (i.e. horizontal pulling) is substantially parallel to an axis (i.e. longitudinal axis from the toe to the heel) extending from a posterior end of the article of footwear to an anterior end of the article of footwear (as seen in Fig.2). Regarding Claim 10, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 9, wherein the second pulling direction (i.e. vertical pulling) is substantially perpendicular to the axis (i.e. longitudinal axis extending from the heel to the toe; as evidenced by Fig.2). Regarding Claim 11, When in combination, Fuerst and Krengel teach an article of footwear of claim 1, wherein the first toggle (Fuerst: 120) includes one or more apertures (Fuerst: as seen in Fig.1 & 4), wherein the second toggle includes one or more apertures (as seen in Fig.3C of Krengel, there are two apertures, one on either side of 324 to receive 104 & 102), and wherein the adjustable lace (Fuerst: 210) is routed through the one or more apertures of the first toggle and the one or more apertures of the second toggle (Fuerst: Fig.1 & Krengel: Fig.3C). Regarding Claim 12, When in combination, Fuerst and Krengel teach an article of footwear of claim 11, wherein the one of more apertures of the first toggle (Fuerst: 120) includes at least two apertures ( Fuerst:as seen in Fig.1 & 4), the first end of the adjustable lace (Fuerst: 210) routed through the at least two apertures of the first toggle forming a loop (Fuerst: as seen in Fig.1), and wherein the one or more apertures of the second toggle includes at least two apertures (as seen in Fig.3C of Krengel, there are two apertures, one on either side of 324 to receive 104 & 102), the second end of the adjustable lace routed through the at least two apertures of the second toggle forming a second loop (Fuerst: Fig.1 & Krengel: Fig.3C). Regarding Claim 19, Fuerst discloses a closure mechanism comprising: an adjustable lace (210) extending from a first end (i.e. at 136) and a second end (i.e. at 218) opposite the first end, the adjustable lace forming a closed loop between the first end and the second (as seen in Fig.1); a first toggle (120) coupled to the adjustable lace at the first end; and a tightening portion (216) coupled to the first end of the adjustable lace, the tightening portion configured to pull the adjustable lace in a second pulling direction to tighten the entirety of the adjustable lace (para.77). Fuerst does not disclose a second toggle coupled to the adjustable lace at the second end; and a loosening portion coupled to the second end of the adjustable lace, the loosening portion configured to pull the adjustable lace in a first pulling direction to loosen an entirety of the adjustable lace. However, Krengel teaches closure mechanism having a first fastener (120a,120b) at a first end of an adjustable lace (100); and a second toggle (324; para.191) coupled to the adjustable lace at a second end and a loosening portion (ends of 102,104) coupled to the second end of the adjustable lace, the loosening portion configured to pull the adjustable lace in a first pulling direction (i.e. horizontal pulling) to loosen an entirety of the adjustable lace (para.191; as seen in Fig.3C; i.e. pulling 102,104 when 120a & 120b are released would “loosen” the lace, inasmuch as has been claimed by Applicant). 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 adjustable lace of Fuerst to have a second toggle and tightening portion, as taught by Krengel, in order to provide a closure mechanism with dual adjustability to customize the fit for a wide, medium, or narrow foot, as needed by an individual user. Regarding Claim 20, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear including the closure mechanism of claim 19 (Abstract; as seen in Fig.1-2). 2. Claim(s) 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fuerst (US 2018/0249787) and Krengel (US 2016/0270482), in view of Yun (US 2022/0015509). Regarding Claim 13, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear (100) comprising: an upper (106) configured to transition between at least one tightened configuration and at least one loosened configuration (para.77), and the upper comprising: a vamp (108 between toe end and 124b/124f & 110b,c,e,f in forefoot & midfoot) disposed at a forefoot region and a mid-foot region of the article of footwear (as seen in Fig.1); an ankle opening (136) operative to allow a wearer to extend a foot into an interior volume of the upper (para.49); a tongue (108 between 136 and 124b/124f & 110a,d & 154 is a tongue portion, inasmuch as has been claimed and disclosed by Applicant, which shows an integral tongue portion) extending from the vamp to the ankle opening (as seen in Fig.1); and a closure mechanism (120,210,216) configured to transition the upper between a tightening position and a loosening position (para.77), the closure mechanism comprising: an adjustable lace (210) having a first end (210 at 136) disposed adjacent the ankle opening and a second end (210 at 218) disposed adjacent the vamp and opposite the first end (as seen in Fig.1), wherein the adjustable lace operatively connects a lateral portion of the article of footwear and a medial portion of the article of footwear (as seen in Fig.1); a plurality of lace guides (202, 204, 206, 302, 304, 306) including an anchor end (i.e. end at 102) and a loop end (i.e. loop containing 210), the adjustable lace routed through the loop end of the plurality of lace guides (as seen in Fig.1); a first toggle (120) coupled to the adjustable lace at the first end, wherein the first toggle includes a locking mechanism (para.76; i.e. button on 120, as seen in Fig.3 & 4); a tightening portion (216) disposed at the first end of the adjustable lace (as seen in Fig.1). Fuerst does not disclose a second toggle coupled to the adjustable lace at the second end; and a loosening portion disposed at the second end of the adjustable lace. However, Krengel teaches an upper having a first fastener (120a,120b) at a first end of an adjustable lace (100); and a second toggle (324; para.191) coupled to the adjustable lace at a second end and a loosening portion (ends of 102,104) disposed at the second end of the adjustable lace (para.191; as seen in Fig.3C). 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 adjustable lace of Fuerst to have a second toggle and tightening portion, as taught by Krengel, in order to provide a footwear with dual adjustability to customize the fit for a wide, medium, or narrow foot, as needed by an individual user. Fuerst and Krengel disclose the invention substantially as claimed above. Fuerst and Krengel do not disclose wherein the second toggle omits a locking mechanism. However, Yun teaches a shoe upper with an adjustable lace having a toggle (44) omitting a locking mechanism (para.41; as seen in Fig.4 & 6B). 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 substituted the toggle of modified Krengel for the toggle omitting a locking mechanism of Yun, as a simple substitution of one well known type of toggle for another, in order to yield the predictable result of providing a securing mechanism for the lace. Further, it is noted that Applicant has no criticality for the use of a toggle with or without a locking mechanism, as stated in para.39-41 of the instant Specification. Regarding Claim 14, Krengel further teaches an article of footwear of claim 13, wherein the tightening portion (ends of 102,104) is configured to transition the upper to the tightening position via pulling the tightening portion in a first pulling direction (i.e. horizontal pulling), the first pulling direction being any direction away from the upper (para.191; as seen in Fig.3C). It is noted that “the tightening portion is configured to transition the upper to the tightening position” is functional and does not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead requires an ability to so perform and/or function. Fuerst and Krengel disclose the structure as claimed and therefore would have a reasonable expectation of performing such function. Regarding Claim 15, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 13, wherein the loosening portion (216) is a loop formed by the second end of the adjustable lace (as seen in Fig.1, 216 forms a loop of 210). Regarding Claim 16, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 15, wherein the tightening portion (216) is configured to transition the upper to the tightening position via pulling the tightening portion in a second pulling direction (i.e. vertical pulling), the second pulling direction being any direction away from the upper (as seen in Fig.1-3). It is noted that “the loosening portion is configured to transition the upper to the loosening position” is functional and does not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead requires an ability to so perform and/or function. Fuerst and Krengel disclose the structure as claimed and therefore would have a reasonable expectation of performing such function. Regarding Claim 17, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 13, wherein the plurality of lace guides (202, 204, 206, 302, 304, 306) are disposed on each of a lateral side of the article of footwear and a medial side of the article of footwear (as seen in Fig.1). Regarding Claim 18, Fuerst discloses an article of footwear of claim 17, wherein the plurality of lace guides on the lateral side of the article of footwear includes three lace guides (202,204,206) extending along the tongue, and wherein the plurality of lace guides on the medial side of the article of footwear includes three lace guides (302,304,306) extending along the tongue (as seen in Fig.1). Response to Arguments In view of Applicant's amendment, the search has been updated, newly modified grounds of rejection, and new prior art has been identified and applied. Applicant's arguments have been considered but, as they are drawn solely to the newly amended limitations, are moot in view of the newly modified grounds of rejection and the new 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 16, 2024
Application Filed
Aug 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 10, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 10, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 02, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 28, 2026
Interview Requested
Feb 04, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 04, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599192
FLEXIBLE ARCH SUPPORT FOR FOOTWEAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12575647
CUT STEP TRACTION ELEMENT ARRANGEMENT FOR AN ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12557870
KNITTED COMPONENT WITH ADJUSTABLE TENSIONING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12557871
REINFORCED KNIT CHANNEL FOR AN ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12543814
ARTICLES OF FOOTWEAR WITH KNITTED COMPONENTS AND METHODS OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
38%
Grant Probability
80%
With Interview (+41.9%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 613 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