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 .
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.
Claims 1-3 are 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.
In claim 1 the phrase “each of the bending induction grooves” in the last paragraph of claim 1 is confusing, vague, and indefinite because it is not clear what grooves are being references. It is noted that the phrase continues to add “and the second bending induction grooves” which is confusing.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mokos (2021/0153600).
Mokos shows A functional shoe that is capable of allowing an instep of a wearer to be bent when walking, helping alleviation of plantar fasciitis with a windlass mechanism, and reducing an impact to spine and knee joints, the functional shoe comprising:
an outsole (12) configured to support a sole of a foot and to support an arch of the foot by being bent in response to the bending of the foot when the wearer walks; and
an upper (14) coupled to the outsole to support the instep, wherein the outsole comprises:
an arch support (see figure 10 which shows the arch portion at where the number 60 points which arches up as is conventional to support the arch) protruding from a top surface of the outsole to support the arch of the wearer’s foot;
first bending induction grooves (70) defined in plurality in a bottom surface of the outsole along a longitudinal direction of the outsole and configured to induce the bending of the outsole when the wearer walks; and
second bending induction grooves (see figures 7, 20, and 20A which shows the sidewall grooves) defined in a side surface of the outsole along the longitudinal direction of the outsole and connected to the first bending induction grooves and configured to induce the bending of the outsole when the wearer walks,
wherein each of the bending induction grooves is provided in a dome structure (see figures which shows the first and second bending grooves having a domed shape) of which a width gradually decreases along a direction in which each bending induction groove is recessed from an outer surface of the outsole as claimed.
In reference to claim 2, the rearmost element 70 is considered to be a bugger grooves inasmuch as applicant has defined such.
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aubonnet (2020/0113273) in view of Mokos (2021/0153600).
Aubonnet shows A functional shoe that is capable of allowing an instep of a wearer to be bent when walking, helping alleviation of plantar fasciitis with a windlass mechanism, and reducing an impact to spine and knee joints, the functional shoe comprising:
an outsole (22, 24, and 26) configured to support a sole of a foot and to support an arch of the foot by being bent in response to the bending of the foot when the wearer walks; and
an upper (28) coupled to the outsole to support the instep, wherein the outsole comprises:
an arch support (see figure 58) protruding from a top surface of the outsole to support the arch of the wearer’s foot;
first bending induction grooves (see below marked up figure) defined in plurality in a bottom surface of the outsole along a longitudinal direction of the outsole and configured to induce the bending of the outsole when the wearer walks; and
second bending induction grooves (see below marked up figure) defined in a side surface of the outsole along the longitudinal direction of the outsole and connected to the first bending induction grooves and configured to induce the bending of the outsole when the wearer walks,
wherein each of the bending induction grooves is provided in a dome structure (see figure 2 which shows the first bending grooves having a domed shape) of which a width gradually decreases along a direction in which each bending induction groove is recessed from an outer surface of the outsole substantially as claimed except for the shape of the second bending grooves. Mokos teaches forming first and second grooves to have a domed shape (see figure 7, 20, and 20A). It would have been obvious to shape the grooves in a domed shape as shown and taught by Mokos in the shoe of Aubonnet to make the grooves easy to manufacture, stronger and more durable.
PNG
media_image1.png
921
934
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The prior art cited and not relied upon by the Examiner for the above rejections are considered to be pertinent in that the references cited are considered to be the nearest prior art to the subject matter defined in the claims as required by MPEP707.05.
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.
In order to avoid potential delays, Technology Center 3700 is encouraging FAXing of responses to Office Actions directly into the Center at (571)273-8300 (FORMAL FAXES ONLY). Please identify Examiner Marie Bays of Art Unit 3732 at the top of your cover sheet.
Any inquiry concerning the MERITS of this examination from the examiner should be directed to Marie Bays whose telephone number is (571) 272-4559. The examiner can normally be reached from Mon-Thurs 6-4. Alternatively if the Examiner cannot be reached, please contact the Examiners SPE Alissa Tompkins at 571-272-3425.
/MARIE D BAYS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732