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 .
Priority
1. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/09/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, this submission of the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
3. The amendment filed 01/21/2026 has been entered. Currently, claims 6-14 remain pending in the application. Independent claims 6 was amended by the Applicant without the addition of new matter. Additionally, claims 6, 8, and 10 were amended to correct previous claim objections, 35 USC112(B), and 35 USC 101 rejections that were set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 10/23/2025. Lastly, new claims 11-14 have been added, without the addition of new matter and a new 35 USC 112(D) rejection.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s amendment to independent claim 6 is sufficient to overcome the previous 35 USC § 103 rejection recited in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 10/23/2025.
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks on Pages 4-7, filed 01/21/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, the amended claims have changed the scope of the claims and upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of new and current prior art of the record: Blecha et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20220125129), Courvoisier et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4433494 ), Dombrow (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20160198793), Richie (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20110126427), PediFix (For Medical Treatment of Foot Conditions & Deformities; Vol. 14; Pages 12, 16, and 28; 2014), Yang et al. (CN 207940399 U), Shaffer (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20190167462), Gaether (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20200399799), and Fruehweign (WO 9624262 A1).
4. Overall, Examiner notes that Applicant may overcome the rejection below by reciting positive or negative limitations such as there being no padding under the phalanx of toes 2-5 to distinguish from Fruehweign ; and/or narrowing the ranges further to potentially differentiate from Courvoisier, Dombrow, PediFix, and Yang. Also, other limiting transitional phrases such as –consisting/consisting essentially of—in the preamble/body of the claim would prevent possible combinations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 14, the limitation “wherein the first piece and the second piece are not connected to each other” does not further narrow the limitation “wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal” in claim 6.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 6-7 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blecha et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20220125129) in view of Courvoisier et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4433494 ) and in further view of Dombrow (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20160198793) and Richie (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20110126427) and PediFix (For Medical Treatment of Foot Conditions & Deformities; Vol. 14; Pages 12, 16, and 28; 2014) and Yang et al. (CN 207940399 U) and Fruehweign (WO 9624262 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Blecha discloses a sock 300 (Paragraphs 10, 12, 15, 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 64 66, 69, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, sock 300 with sock body thickness 320 knitted from elastic/compressive yarns with attached thickening cushioning pillow/pads 330 corresponding to zones of pressure loading 130 and skin sensitivity 120 which include the big toe phalanx joints, 2nd to 5th metatarsophalangeal joints, and the heel) for treating plantar heel pain, comprising: a main body 320 made of an elastic and compressive material having a thickness, wherein the main body 320 has a toe portion 302 (Paragraphs 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7) for accommodating the toes, such that at least three areas are defined in a plantar surface of the sock 300: a first area (Paragraphs 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, bit toe area of toe phalanx portion 302) configured to cover a plantar region of a big toe, on which a first piece 330 is arranged and an additional thickness with respect to the thickness of the main body 320; a second area (Paragraphs 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, 2nd to 5th metatarsal toe area) configured to cover the plantar region 330 from a second to a fifth metatarsal, on which a second wedge-shaped piece 330 (Paragraph 64, non-uniform/varying height padding 330 is construed as wedge-shaped with increasing/decreasing thickness) is arranged and being defined by a decreasing thickness, a third area 304 (Paragraphs 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, heel area 304) configured to cover the plantar region of a heel, on which a third piece 330 is arranged and an additional thickness with respect to the thickness of the main body 320.
However, Blecha fails to explicitly disclose (1) the main body having the thickness between 4-12mm; (2) the first piece having a Shore A hardness of between 350 and 450 ; the second piece having a Shore A hardness of between 350 and 450 ; (3) the second piece has the additional thickness with respect to the thickness of the main body at an outer end which decreases until it is equal at an inner end to the thickness of the main body ; (4) the first piece having the additional thickness of 3mm; (5) the second piece has the additional thickness of 2 mm; (6) the third piece having the additional thickness of between 6 and 7mm; (7) the third piece having a having a Shore A hardness of between 200 and 300 ; (8) wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
Courvoisier teaches an analogous sock 2 (Col. 3, lines 47-55 and Figure 1, sock 2 with material 2a,2b of 12mm total thickness; see MPEP 2144.05(I) prima facie obviousness of overlapping ranges as the prior art range of 12mm falls within and is narrower than the claimed range of 4-12mm) wherein the analogous main body 2a,2b having the analogous thickness to be between 4-12mm.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a thickness of the sock main body of Blecha, so that the main body has a thickness of between 4-12mm, as taught by Courvoisier, in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced main body that is thick during wear for desirable base support for the user’s foot even during prolonged wear within footwear (Courvoisier, Col. 3, lines 47-55).
Additionally, 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 thickness of the main body of Blecha to have a thickness between 4-12mm since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984); see MPEP 2144.04(IV)(a). In the instant case, the device of Blecha would not operate differently with the claimed thickness and since the Blecha includes a sock main body intended with additional thickness padding pieces supported thereon, the sock main body of Blecha would function appropriately having the claimed thickness. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the thickness “of 4 and 12 mm is common in garments of this type” such that there is no patentable unexpected result (specification pp. [0018]).
However, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier fails to explicitly disclose (2) the first piece having a Shore A hardness of between 350 and 450 ; the second piece having a Shore A hardness of between 350 and 450; (3) the second piece has the additional thickness with respect to the thickness of the main body at an outer end which decreases until it is equal at an inner end to the thickness of the main body ; (4) the first piece having the additional thickness of 3mm; (5) the second piece has the additional thickness of 2 mm; (6) the third piece having the additional thickness of between 6 and 7mm; (7) the third piece having a having a Shore A hardness of between 200 and 300 ; (8) wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
Dombrow teaches an analogous first piece (Paragraph 42 and Figure 2C, midsole padding piece 205 with a first area that contact against user’s big toe phalange having Shore A of 45; see MPEP 2144.05(I) prima facie obviousness of overlapping ranges as the prior art range of 45 falls within and is narrower than the claimed range of 35-45) having a Shore A hardness of between 350 and 450; the analogous second piece (Paragraph 42 and Figure 2C, midsole padding piece 205 with a second area that contact against user’s metatarsal joint having Shore A of 45; see MPEP 2144.05(I) prima facie obviousness of overlapping ranges as the prior art range of 45 falls within and is narrower than the claimed range of 35-45) having a Shore A hardness of between 350 and 450.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a Shore A hardness of the first and second pieces of Blecha in view of Courvoisier, so that the first and second pieces have a Shore A hardness of between 350 and 450, as taught by Dombrow in order to provide an improved sock with enhanced first and second pieces that rests against the user’s foot such as against the big toe phalanx as well as the metatarsals for desirable hardness support while also maintaining adequate comfort throughout wear (Dombrow, Paragraph 42).
However, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow fails to explicitly disclose (3) the second piece has the additional thickness with respect to the thickness of the main body at an outer end which decreases until it is equal at an inner end to the thickness of the main body ; (4) the first piece having the additional thickness of 3mm; (5) the second piece has the additional thickness of 2 mm; (6) the third piece having the additional thickness of between 6 and 7mm; (7) the third piece having a having a Shore A hardness of between 200 and 300 ; (8) wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
Richie teaches an analogous wedge-shaped second piece 24 (Paragraphs 30-32 and Figures 1-2 and 4A, wedge shaped padding 24 with additional thickness from base body 22 greatest at lateral/outer end 24a by pinky toe and goes to zero thickness equal with base body 22 at medial end 24b at medial side of 2nd metatarsal) has the analogous additional thickness with respect to the analogous thickness of the analogous main body 22 at an outer end which decreases until it is equal at an inner end 24b to the analogous thickness of the analogous main body 22.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a size and thickness of the wedge shaped second piece of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow, so that the second piece has the additional thickness with respect to the thickness of the main body at an outer end which decreases until it is equal at an inner end to the thickness of the main body at the 2nd metatarsal, as taught by Richie, in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced second piece having the wedge shape aligned from laterally to medially across the 2nd to 5th metatarsal for desirable gradual downward slope for desirable foot pain relief and comfort (Richie, Paragraphs 30-32).
However, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie fails to explicitly disclose (4) the first piece having the additional thickness of 3mm; (5) the second piece has the additional thickness of 2 mm; (6) the third piece having the additional thickness of between 6 and 7mm; (7) the third piece having a having a Shore A hardness of between 200 and 300 ; (8) wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) teaches an analogous sock (Page 12, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, visco-gel bunion care relief sleeve sock) with the analogous first piece (Page 12, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, gel padding of 3mm that supports a medial side and inferior side of a big toe phalanx) having the analogous additional thickness of 3mm.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the additional thickness of the first piece of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie, so that the first piece has the additional thickness of 3mm, as taught by PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve), in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced first piece having a thickness that is thin to be supported by the main body as well as during wear within footwear to provide support to the area surrounding the big toe (PediFix, Page 12, Paragraph 3).
However, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) fails to explicitly disclose (5) the second piece has the additional thickness of 2 mm; (6) the third piece having the additional thickness of between 6 and 7mm; (7) the third piece having a having a Shore A hardness of between 200 and 300 ; (8) wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) teaches an analogous sock (Page 16, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, visco-gel silicone thin forefoot stretch fabric sleeve/sock) with the analogous second piece (Page 16, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, silicone gel padding of 2mm that supports metatarsal forefoot areas) having the analogous additional thickness of 2mm.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the additional thickness of the second piece of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve), so that the second piece has the additional thickness of 2mm, as taught by PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion), in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced second piece having a thickness that is thin to be supported by the main body as well as during wear within additional footwear or barefoot to provide increased comfort and support to the forefoot metatarsals (PediFix, Page 16, Paragraph 3).
However, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) fails to explicitly disclose (6) the third piece having the additional thickness of between 6 and 7mm; (7) the third piece having a having a Shore A hardness of between 200 and 300 ; (8) wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) teaches an analogous third piece (Page 28, Paragraph 1 and Figure 1, heel padding of 3/8in thickness formed by top cover layer and two removable 1/8in thickness peel off layers to adjust height, wherein removing one peel away layer results in a total thickness of 2/8in or 6.35mm; see MPEP 2144.05(I) prima facie obviousness of overlapping ranges as the prior art range of 6.35 mm falls within and is narrower than the claimed range of 6-7 mm) having the analogous additional thickness of between 6 and 7 mm.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the additional thickness of the third piece of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion), so that the third piece has the additional thickness of 6-7mm, as taught by PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift), in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced third piece having a thickness that is durable to be supported by the main body as well as during wear within additional footwear or barefoot for reducing strain on Achilles, compensation of leg length to balance hips and backs, and elevating calcaneus to ease plantar fascia strain and heel pain (PediFix, Page 28, Paragraph 1).
However, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) fails to explicitly disclose (7) the third piece having a having a Shore A hardness of between 200 and 300 ; (8) wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
Yang teaches an analogous third piece 1,2 (Page 5/24, lines 36-38 and Figures 1-2, heel pad 1,2 with shore A of 30; see MPEP 2144.05(I) prima facie obviousness of overlapping ranges as the prior art range of 30 falls within and is narrower than the claimed range of 20 to 30) having a having a Shore A hardness of between 200 and 300.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a Shore A hardness of the third piece of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift), so that the third piece has a Shore A hardness of between 20 and 30, as taught by Yang in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced third piece that rests against the user’s heel for desirable hardness support while also maintaining adequate comfort throughout wear (Yang, Page 5/24, lines 36-38).
However, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang fails to explicitly disclose (8) wherein the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
Fruehweign teaches an analogous sock (Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4, sock with main body having separate distal phalanx toe padding 1, metatarsal padding 2, and heel padding 3) with an analogous main body wherein the analogous first piece 1covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the analogous second piece 2 covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first piece and second piece of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang, so that the first piece covering the plantar region of the big toe is separated from the second piece covering the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal, as taught by Fruehweign, in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced first and second piece that cover the distal phalanx of the toe and the metatarsals, respectively, with a spacing separation therebetween for desirable user joint support as well as mobility during walking (Fruehweign, Page 2/17, Paragraph 8).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign discloses the invention as described above. Blecha further discloses wherein the elastic and compressive material (Paragraph 72, polyester elastic and compression sock material 320) comprises polyester material.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign discloses the invention as described above and further discloses wherein the first piece (Blecha, Paragraphs 10, 12, 15, 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 64 66, 69, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, first piece padding 330 on pressure zone 120,130 at big toe; Dombrow, Paragraph 42 and Figure 2C, midsole padding piece 205 with a first area that contact against user’s big toe phalange having Shore A of 45; Pedifix, Page 12, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, gel padding of 3mm that supports a medial side and inferior side of a big toe phalanx; Fruehweign , Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4, sock with main body having separate distal phalanx toe padding 1) is configured to extend to a distal phalanx (Fruehweign , Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4, distal phalanx toe padding 1), and the second piece (Blecha, Paragraphs 10, 12, 15, 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 64 66, 69, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, first piece padding 330 on pressure zone 120,130 at metatarsals; Dombrow, Paragraph 42 and Figure 2C, midsole padding piece 205 with a second area that contact against user’s metatarsal joint having Shore A of 45; see MPEP 2144.05(I) prima facie obviousness of overlapping ranges as the prior art range of 45 falls within and is narrower than the claimed range of 35-45; Richie, Paragraphs 30-32 and Figures 1-2 and 4A, wedge shaped padding 24 with additional thickness from base body 22 greatest at lateral/outer end 24a by pinky toe and goes to zero thickness equal with base body 22 at medial end 24b at medial side of 2nd metatarsal; Pedifix, Page 16, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, silicone gel padding of 2mm that supports metatarsal forefoot areas; Fruehweign, Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4, separate metatarsal padding 2) is configured to only extend to a proximal phalanx (Fruehweign, Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4, separate metatarsal padding 2 extends to proximal phalanx and not further distal).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign discloses the invention as described above and further discloses wherein the second piece (Blecha, Paragraphs 10, 12, 15, 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 64 66, 69, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, first piece padding 330 on pressure zone 120,130 at metatarsals; Dombrow, Paragraph 42 and Figure 2C, midsole padding piece 205 with a second area that contact against user’s metatarsal joint having Shore A of 45; see MPEP 2144.05(I) prima facie obviousness of overlapping ranges as the prior art range of 45 falls within and is narrower than the claimed range of 35-45; Richie, Paragraphs 30-32 and Figures 1-2 and 4A, wedge shaped padding 24 with additional thickness from base body 22 greatest at lateral/outer end 24a by pinky toe and goes to zero thickness equal with base body 22 at medial end 24b at medial side of 2nd metatarsal; Pedifix, Page 16, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, silicone gel padding of 2mm that supports metatarsal forefoot areas; Fruehweign, Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4, separate metatarsal padding 2) is configured to only cover the plantar region from the second to the fifth metatarsal (Richie, Paragraphs 30-32 and Figures 1-2 and 4A, wedge shaped padding 24 with additional thickness from base body 22 greatest at lateral/outer end 24a by pinky toe and goes to zero thickness equal with base body 22 at medial end 24b at medial side of 2nd metatarsal).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign discloses the invention as described above. Blecha further discloses wherein the main body (Paragraph 57, paddings 330 add additional thickness to smaller thickness of fabric main body) does not have additional thickness with respect to the thickness of the main body other than the first piece 330, the second piece 330, and the third piece 330.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign discloses the invention as described above and further discloses wherein the first piece (Blecha, Paragraphs 10, 12, 15, 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 64 66, 69, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, first piece padding 330 on pressure zone 120,130 at big toe; Dombrow, Paragraph 42 and Figure 2C, midsole padding piece 205 with a first area that contact against user’s big toe phalange having Shore A of 45; Pedifix, Page 12, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, gel padding of 3mm that supports a medial side and inferior side of a big toe phalanx; Fruehweign , Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4, sock with main body having separate distal phalanx toe padding 1) and the second piece (Blecha, Paragraphs 10, 12, 15, 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 64 66, 69, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7, first piece padding 330 on pressure zone 120,130 at metatarsals; Dombrow, Paragraph 42 and Figure 2C, midsole padding piece 205 with a second area that contact against user’s metatarsal joint having Shore A of 45; see MPEP 2144.05(I) prima facie obviousness of overlapping ranges as the prior art range of 45 falls within and is narrower than the claimed range of 35-45; Richie, Paragraphs 30-32 and Figures 1-2 and 4A, wedge shaped padding 24 with additional thickness from base body 22 greatest at lateral/outer end 24a by pinky toe and goes to zero thickness equal with base body 22 at medial end 24b at medial side of 2nd metatarsal; Pedifix, Page 16, Paragraph 3 and Figure 3, silicone gel padding of 2mm that supports metatarsal forefoot areas; Fruehweign, Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4, separate metatarsal padding 2) are not connected to each other (Fruehweign, Page 2/17, Paragraph 8 and Figure 4).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blecha et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20220125129) in view of Courvoisier et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4433494 ) in view of Dombrow (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20160198793) in view of Richie (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20110126427) in view of PediFix (For Medical Treatment of Foot Conditions & Deformities; Vol. 14; Pages 12, 16, and 28; 2014) in view of Yang et al. (CN 207940399 U) in view of Fruehweign (WO 9624262 A1), as applied to claim 6, and in further view of Gaether (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20200399799).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign discloses the invention as described above. Blecha further discloses with a fourth area (Figures 1-2 and 7, inner arch fourth area) configured to cover an inner arch region of the foot.
However, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign fails to explicitly disclose the fourth area is provided with a plurality of wavy longitudinal raised patterns, wherein the plurality of wavy longitudinal raised patterns provide a tension greater than a tension provided by the elastic and compressive material making up the rest of the main body.
Gaether teaches an analogous sock 10 (Paragraphs 40-41 and Figure 3, elastic/compression sock 10 with inner arch fourth area 25 having plurality of additional elastic/compression raised ridges 32 which are semi-circular wavy/contoured longitudinal pattern that exert an intensified targeted compression force at the inner arch of the foot which is substantially greater than the compression force applied in other directly adjacent areas of the foot portion 12) wherein the analogous fourth area 25 is provided with a plurality of wavy longitudinal raised patterns 32, wherein the plurality of wavy longitudinal raised patterns 32 provide a tension greater than a tension provided by the analogous elastic and compressive material making up a rest of the analogous main body 12.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fourth area of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign , so that the fourth area is provided with a plurality of wavy longitudinal raised patterns, wherein the plurality of wavy longitudinal raised patterns provide a tension greater than a tension provided by the elastic and compressive material making up the rest of the main body, as taught by Gaether, in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced fourth area wherein the inner arch is provided with longitudinal pattern that exerts an intensified targeted compression force at the inner arch of the foot which is substantially greater than the compression force applied in other directly adjacent areas of the sock main body for desirable foot support during gait (Gaether, Paragraph 41).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign in view of Gaether discloses the invention as described above and further discloses wherein the plurality of wavy, longitudinal raised patterns 32 is made of a material (Gaether, Paragraphs 41, 45, and Figures 3 and 9, raised longitudinal ridges 32 formed by same body yarns and elastic yarns as that of the main body) that is the same material as the main body 320 (Blecha, Paragraphs 45-48, 52, 54, 60-61, 64, 69, 72 and Figures 1-2 and 7).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blecha et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20220125129) in view of Courvoisier et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4433494 ) in view of Dombrow (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20160198793) in view of Richie (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20110126427) in view of PediFix (For Medical Treatment of Foot Conditions & Deformities; Vol. 14; Pages 12, 16, and 28; 2014) in view of Yang et al. (CN 207940399 U) in view of Fruehweign (WO 9624262 A1), as applied to claim 6, and in further view of Shaffer (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 20190167462).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign discloses the invention as described above but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the toe portion is divided into at least two compartments, wherein a first compartment is configured to allow the big toe to be accommodated and a second compartment is configured to allow a rest of the toes to be accommodated.
Shaffer teaches an analogous sock (Paragraphs 23-24 and Figure 1, sock 10 with toe portion 12 comprising big toe compartment 13 and 2nd to 5th toe compartment 14) wherein the analogous toe portion 12 is divided into at least two compartments 13,14, wherein a first compartment 13 is configured to allow the big toe to be accommodated and a second compartment 14 is configured to allow remaining toes to be accommodated.
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary level of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the toe portion of Blecha in view of Courvoisier in view of Dombrow in view of Richie in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Bunion Care™ Relief Sleeve) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Visco-GEL® Silicone Thin Forefoot Cushion) in view of PediFix (embodiment of Peel Away® Adjustable Heel Lift) in view of Yang in view of Fruehweign , so that the toe portion is divided into at least two compartments, wherein a first compartment allows the big toe to be accommodated and a second compartment allows a rest of the toes to be accommodated, as taught by Shaffer, in order to provide an improved sock with an enhanced toe portion that separates the big toe such that separate forces are applied to the big toe as opposed to the four smaller toes for desirable joint pressure and toe spacing to correct foot deformities (Shaffer, Paragraphs 23-24).
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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Milo whose telephone number is (571)272-6476. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 7:00-5:00.
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, Alireza Nia can be reached on +1(571) 270-3076. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL MILO/
Art Unit 3786
/ALIREZA NIA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3786