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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/27/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In accordance with Applicant’s amendment filed 4/27/2026, claims 1-2, 6-11 are amended. Claims 12-22 are canceled. Claims 23-26 are new. Claims 1-11, 23-26 are currently pending and presented for examination on the merits.
Applicant’s amendment has overcome the previously presented non-statutory double patenting rejection.
Applicant’s amendment has canceled all claims previously rejected under 35 USC 112(a), therefore the rejections are now moot.
Applicant’s amendment has overcome or rendered moot the previously presented rejections under 35 USC 112(b).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 6 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. As explained in the 35 USC 102/103 rejections below, a new grounds of rejection has been made.
Applicant's further arguments filed 4/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument regarding claims 2 and 8 that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to include the Hopkins tilt inducing features into the foot support system of Henrichot, Examiner notes that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In the instant case, the Examiner did not propose adding tilt features to Henrichot. Rather, Hopkins was merely relied upon as a teaching reference to teach the particular dimensional height change as a result of pumping fluid into/out of interconnected bladders as claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Henrichot (US 2020/0046071).
Regarding claim 1, Henrichot discloses: A foot support system for an article of footwear, comprising: a foot support bladder (102) including one or more interior seams or welds (“internal welds may be used (e.g., welding interior surfaces of the bladder surfaces together, e.g., as shown for example in U.S. Pat. No. 6,571,490) to control the shape of the bladder” paragraph 247), and including a heel region, a forefoot region, and a midfoot connecting portion, wherein an interior chamber of the foot support bladder extends continuously between the heel region and the forefoot region through the midfoot connecting portion (“foot support bladders 102 of this type will be sized and shaped so as to support a majority of a plantar surface of a user’s foot (e.g., […] extending continuously to provide a heel support portion 102H, a midfoot support portion 102M, and a forefoot support portion 102F)” paragraph 213); a fluid reservoir (104) including a heel region, a forefoot region, and a midfoot portion, wherein an interior chamber of the fluid reservoir extends continuously between the heel region of the fluid reservoir and the forefoot region of the fluid reservoir through the midfoot portion of the fluid reservoir (“the fluid reservoir fluid-filled bladder chamber 103 may be sized and shaped such that its major surface 104M2 lies facing and/or direction adjacent (and optionally in direct contact with […] even 100% of a total surface area of the major surface 102M2 of the foot support bladder chamber 102” paragraph 235; as described above, the chamber 102 extends continuously between a heel and forefoot region through a midfoot portion; Examiner also notes that the fluid reservoir 104 is considered to extend continuously at least due to the fact that all parts of it are fluidly connected to all other parts); a pump (110) including an inlet and an outlet (see annotated figure 3C below), the outlet supplying fluid to the foot support bladder (“the check valves and/or one way valves (e.g., valves 114, 118, other present check valves, etc.) could be reversed in the systems of FIGS. 3A-3C, e.g., to create a system that moves fluid from the reservoir 104 to the foot support bladder” paragraph 258; the annotated figures 3C and 3A below have been annotated to reflect this reversal); a first fluid line (see annotated figure 3C below) placing the fluid reservoir in fluid communication with the inlet of the pump (“the check valves and/or one way valves (e.g., valves 114, 118, other present check valves, etc.) could be reversed in the systems of FIGS. 3A-3C, e.g., to create a system that moves fluid from the reservoir 104 to the foot support bladder” paragraph 258; the annotated figures 3C and 3A below have been annotated to reflect this reversal); a second fluid line (see annotated figure 3C below) placing the foot support bladder in fluid communication with the fluid reservoir; and an electronic control system (flow control system 108; “the flow control system 108 includes structures (e.g., physical elements ) to selectively “pinch off” or close electronically or manually controlled flow stop members (such as pinching elements or valves), etc.) to control fluid transfer through one or more of fluid transfer lines” paragraph 230) configured to change the second fluid line between an open configuration (see figure 3A annotated below showing the open configuration) and a closed configuration (see figure 3C annotated below showing the closed configuration).
PNG
media_image1.png
475
694
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 3C of Henrichot showing the closed/high pressure configuration
PNG
media_image2.png
463
668
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 3A of Henrichot showing the open/low pressure configuration
Henrichot appears to further disclose: wherein when movement of sufficient fluid from the fluid reservoir has caused a decrease in a height dimension of the fluid reservoir and/or a collapse of the fluid reservoir, interaction with the electronic control system to change the second fluid line from the closed configuration to the open configuration increases the height dimension of the fluid reservoir (“when this occurs, stops 108M and 108B are opened, which switches the system 100, 200 from the configuration shown in FIG. 3C to the configuration shown in FIG. 3A. This change allows fluid to flow from the higher pressure [foot support blader 102] to the lower pressure [fluid reservoir 104] (via lines 106, 206/216) […] to thereby equalize the pressure over the entire system […] a user might hear and/or feel this relatively quick change of pressure” paragraph 255; the fluid reservoir previously had fluid pumped out of it (see paragraphs 253-254) so the volume of fluid in the chamber had decreased and thus its height is understood to have decreased, so when the fluid is allowed to flow back into the reservoir, it is understood that the increased volume of fluid inside the chamber would also be accompanied by a height increase; note that since the orientation of the check valves is reversed, the fluid is flowing from the reservoir 104 to the bladder 102, opposite to how it is described in the cited paragraphs; additionally, since the electronic/input system 1081/170 was described as an alternative or addition to the physical dial 108S in paragraph 230, it is understood that the description cited above would occur after an electronic input as well, see paragraph 251 which states “the firmness setting may be changed electronically (e.g., using an input system, such as input device 170”; Further regarding the height change, the bladders of Henrichot are made of "two thermoplastic elastomer sheet members" and "the bladder structure(s), their constructions, materials, and manufacturing methods may be conventional as are known and used in the footwear arts" and "thermo plastic materials of the types used in fluid-filled bladders for articles of footwear may be relatively flexible and pliable" (Henrichot, paragraphs 223-224) and the PSI of Henrichot overlaps that of the present application (Henrichot, low PSI of 5, para. 0254, high PSI of 30, present application low PSI of 8, high PSI of 35, para. 0155). Examiner notes that the foot support bladder and fluid reservoir of the instant application are also made of two sheets of thermoplastic elastomer material (see instant specification, paragraphs 56, 59), therefore it is understood that the action of pumping fluid into and out of chambers made of the same flexible/pliant material would result in the same response (i.e., a change in height occurs as a result of the change in pressure brought on by the change in fluid volume in the chamber due to fluid being pumped into or out of the chamber), absent specific and clear evidence to the contrary).
However, it is noted that Henrichot does not explicitly describe a height change as claimed. When the reference discloses all of the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the Examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention, the basis shifts the burden of proof to Applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2112-2112.02. In this case, it at least would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application for Henrichot to exhibit a change in the height dimension as a result of the action of pumping fluid into/out of its chambers because (1) the bladders of Henrichot are formed of "two thermoplastic elastomer sheet members" and "the bladder structure(s), their constructions, materials, and manufacturing methods may be conventional as are known and used in the footwear arts" and "thermo plastic materials of the types used in fluid-filled bladders for articles of footwear may be relatively flexible and pliable" (Henrichot, paragraphs 223-224), which Examiner notes is the same material used by Applicant (see instant specification, paragraphs 56, 59), and it is reasonably understood that an elastic material that is flexible and pliant may change its shape under the influence of outside forces, such as an increased or decreased pressure within the chamber (2) the range of pressurization of the bladders of Henrichot overlaps that of the present application (Henrichot, low pressure PSI of 5, para. 0254, high pressure PSI of 30; present application low pressure PSI of 8, high pressure PSI of 35, para. 0155), so the bladders of Henrichot and the instant application are both made of the same material and experiencing the same pressurization changes, and (3) Henrichot explicitly describes that the user can hear or feel the change when the pressure settings are changed (Henrichot, paragraph 255), so it is reasonably understood that the change must be significant enough that the user will feel the change when it occurs.
Regarding claim 3, Henrichot discloses or at least renders obvious: The foot support system according to claim 1, wherein the interaction with the electronic control system to change the second fluid line from the closed configuration to the open configuration causes an immediate increase in the height dimension of the fluid reservoir as fluid pressure is equalized in the foot support bladder and the fluid reservoir (“when this occurs, stops 108M and 108B are opened, which switches the system 100, 200 from the configuration shown in FIG. 3C to the configuration shown in FIG. 3A. This change allows fluid to flow from the higher pressure [foot support blader 102] to the lower pressure [fluid reservoir 104] (via lines 106, 206/216) […] to thereby equalize the pressure over the entire system […] a user might hear and/or feel this relatively quick change of pressure” paragraph 255; the fluid reservoir previously had fluid pumped out of it (see paragraphs 253-254) so the volume of fluid in the chamber had decreased and thus its height is understood to have decreased, so when the fluid is allowed to flow back into the reservoir, it is understood that the increased volume of fluid inside the chamber would also be accompanied by a height increase; the change is considered to be immediate because the fluid flow begins as soon as the switch in firmness setting is triggered; note that since the orientation of the check valves is reversed, the fluid is flowing from the reservoir 104 to the bladder 102, opposite to how it is described in the cited paragraphs; additionally, since the electronic/input system 1081/170 was described as an alternative or addition to the physical dial 108S in paragraph 230, it is understood that the description cited above would occur after an electronic input as well, see paragraph 251 which states “the firmness setting may be changed electronically (e.g., using an input system, such as input device 170”; Further regarding the height change, the bladders of Henrichot are made of "two thermoplastic elastomer sheet members" and "the bladder structure(s), their constructions, materials, and manufacturing methods may be conventional as are known and used in the footwear arts" and "thermo plastic materials of the types used in fluid-filled bladders for articles of footwear may be relatively flexible and pliable" (Henrichot, paragraphs 223-224) and the PSI of Henrichot overlaps that of the present application (Henrichot, low PSI of 5, para. 0254, high PSI of 30, present application low PSI of 8, high PSI of 35, para. 0155). Examiner notes that the foot support bladder and fluid reservoir of the instant application are also made of two sheets of thermoplastic elastomer material (see instant specification, paragraphs 56, 59), therefore it is understood that the action of pumping fluid into and out of chambers made of the same flexible/pliant material would result in the same response (i.e., a change in height occurs as a result of the change in pressure brought on by the change in fluid volume in the chamber due to fluid being pumped into or out of the chamber), absent specific and clear evidence to the contrary; see also obviousness reasoning presented for claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 4, Henrichot discloses or at least renders obvious: The foot support system according to claim 1, wherein the electronic control system includes an electronically controlled valve or switch that changes the second fluid line between the open configuration and the closed configuration (“the flow control system 108 includes structures (e.g., physical elements ) to selectively “pinch off” or close electronically or manually controlled flow stop members (such as pinching elements or valves), etc.) to control fluid transfer through one or more of fluid transfer lines” paragraph 230), and wherein the electronic control system further includes an input device (input system 1081) configured to receive input data indicating a desire to change fluid pressure in the foot support bladder (“[the flow control system 108] may include an input system 1081 for receiving input commands (e.g., wirelessly or via a wired connection from an electronic device 170, such as a smart phone, etc.) for changing foot support pressure” paragraph 230).
Regarding claim 5, Henrichot discloses: The foot support system according to claim 4, further comprising a mobile computing device (electronic device 170, such as a smart phone; a smart phone is a mobile computing device) in electronic communication with the electronic control system, wherein the mobile computing device is configured to receive user input indicating a desire to change fluid pressure in the foot support bladder and to wirelessly transmit the user input to the electronic control system (“[the flow control system 108] may include an input system 1081 for receiving input commands (e.g., wirelessly or via a wired connection from an electronic device 170, such as a smart phone, etc.) for changing foot support pressure” paragraph 230).
Regarding claim 6, Henrichot discloses: A foot support system for an article of footwear, comprising: a foot support bladder (102) including one or more interior seams or welds (“internal welds may be used (e.g., welding interior surfaces of the bladder surfaces together, e.g., as shown for example in U.S. Pat. No. 6,571,490) to control the shape of the bladder” paragraph 247) and including a heel region, a forefoot region, and a midfoot connecting portion, wherein an interior chamber of the foot support bladder extends continuously between the heel region and the forefoot region through the midfoot connecting portion (“foot support bladders 102 of this type will be sized and shaped so as to support a majority of a plantar surface of a user’s foot (e.g., […] extending continuously to provide a heel support portion 102H, a midfoot support portion 102M, and a forefoot support portion 102F)” paragraph 213); a fluid reservoir (104) including a heel region, a forefoot region, and a midfoot portion, wherein an interior chamber of the fluid reservoir extends continuously between the heel region of the fluid reservoir and the forefoot region of the fluid reservoir through the midfoot portion of the fluid reservoir (“the fluid reservoir fluid-filled bladder chamber 103 may be sized and shaped such that its major surface 104M2 lies facing and/or direction adjacent (and optionally in direct contact with […] even 100% of a total surface area of the major surface 102M2 of the foot support bladder chamber 102” paragraph 235; as described above, the chamber 102 extends continuously between a heel and forefoot region through a midfoot portion; Examiner also notes that the fluid reservoir 104 is considered to extend continuously at least due to the fact that all parts of it are fluidly connected to all other parts); a pump (110) including: (i) an inlet receiving fluid from the fluid reservoir (see annotated figure 3C provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above) and (ii) an outlet supplying fluid to the foot support bladder (see annotated figure 3C provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above); a fluid line placing the foot support bladder in fluid communication with the fluid reservoir (see annotated figure 3C provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above); and an electronic control system (flow control system 108; “the flow control system 108 includes structures (e.g., physical elements ) to selectively “pinch off” or close electronically or manually controlled flow stop members (such as pinching elements or valves), etc.) to control fluid transfer through one or more of fluid transfer lines” paragraph 230) configured to change the foot support bladder between: (i) a high pressure foot support configuration in which the fluid line is closed (see annotated figure 3C provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above; figure 3C shows the high pressure configuration in which the fluid line is closed) and (ii) a low pressure foot support configuration in which the fluid line is open (see annotated figure 3A provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above; figure 3A shows the low pressure configuration in which the fluid line is open).
Henrichot appears to further disclose: wherein when movement of sufficient fluid from the fluid reservoir has caused a decrease in a height dimension of the fluid reservoir and/or a collapse of the fluid reservoir, interaction with the electronic control system to change the second fluid line from the closed configuration to the open configuration increases the height dimension of the fluid reservoir (“when this occurs, stops 108M and 108B are opened, which switches the system 100, 200 from the configuration shown in FIG. 3C to the configuration shown in FIG. 3A. This change allows fluid to flow from the higher pressure [foot support blader 102] to the lower pressure [fluid reservoir 104] (via lines 106, 206/216) […] to thereby equalize the pressure over the entire system […] a user might hear and/or feel this relatively quick change of pressure” paragraph 255; the fluid reservoir previously had fluid pumped out of it (see paragraphs 253-254) so the volume of fluid in the chamber had decreased and thus its height is understood to have decreased, so when the fluid is allowed to flow back into the reservoir, it is understood that the increased volume of fluid inside the chamber would also be accompanied by a height increase; note that since the orientation of the check valves is reversed, the fluid is flowing from the reservoir 104 to the bladder 102, opposite to how it is described in the cited paragraphs; additionally, since the electronic/input system 1081/170 was described as an alternative or addition to the physical dial 108S in paragraph 230, it is understood that the description cited above would occur after an electronic input as well, see paragraph 251 which states “the firmness setting may be changed electronically (e.g., using an input system, such as input device 170”; Further regarding the height change, the bladders of Henrichot are made of "two thermoplastic elastomer sheet members" and "the bladder structure(s), their constructions, materials, and manufacturing methods may be conventional as are known and used in the footwear arts" and "thermo plastic materials of the types used in fluid-filled bladders for articles of footwear may be relatively flexible and pliable" (Henrichot, paragraphs 223-224) and the PSI of Henrichot overlaps that of the present application (Henrichot, low PSI of 5, para. 0254, high PSI of 30, present application low PSI of 8, high PSI of 35, para. 0155). Examiner notes that the foot support bladder and fluid reservoir of the instant application are also made of two sheets of thermoplastic elastomer material (see instant specification, paragraphs 56, 59), therefore it is understood that the action of pumping fluid into and out of chambers made of the same flexible/pliant material would result in the same response (i.e., a change in height occurs as a result of the change in pressure brought on by the change in fluid volume in the chamber due to fluid being pumped into or out of the chamber), absent specific and clear evidence to the contrary).
However, it is noted that Henrichot does not explicitly describe a height change as claimed. When the reference discloses all of the limitations of a claim except a property or function, and the Examiner cannot determine whether or not the reference inherently possesses properties which anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention, the basis shifts the burden of proof to Applicant as in In re Fitzgerald, 619 F.2d 67, 205 USPQ 594 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 2112-2112.02. In this case, it at least would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application for Henrichot to exhibit a change in the height dimension as a result of the action of pumping fluid into/out of its chambers because (1) the bladders of Henrichot are formed of "two thermoplastic elastomer sheet members" and "the bladder structure(s), their constructions, materials, and manufacturing methods may be conventional as are known and used in the footwear arts" and "thermo plastic materials of the types used in fluid-filled bladders for articles of footwear may be relatively flexible and pliable" (Henrichot, paragraphs 223-224), which Examiner notes is the same material used by Applicant (see instant specification, paragraphs 56, 59), and it is reasonably understood that an elastic material that is flexible and pliant may change its shape under the influence of outside forces, such as an increased or decreased pressure within the chamber (2) the range of pressurization of the bladders of Henrichot overlaps that of the present application (Henrichot, low pressure PSI of 5, para. 0254, high pressure PSI of 30; present application low pressure PSI of 8, high pressure PSI of 35, para. 0155), so the bladders of Henrichot and the instant application are both made of the same material and experiencing the same pressurization changes, and (3) Henrichot explicitly describes that the user can hear or feel the change when the pressure settings are changed (Henrichot, paragraph 255), so it is reasonably understood that the change must be significant enough that the user will feel the change when it occurs.
Regarding claim 7, Henrichot discloses or at least renders obvious: The foot support system according to claim 6, wherein the electronic control system includes an input device (input system 1081) configured to receive input data indicating a desire to change fluid pressure in the foot support bladder (“[the flow control system 108] may include an input system 1081 for receiving input commands (e.g., wirelessly or via a wired connection from an electronic device 170, such as a smart phone, etc.) for changing foot support pressure” paragraph 230).
Regarding claim 9, Henrichot discloses or at least renders obvious: The foot support system according to claim 6, wherein the interaction with the electronic control system to change the foot support bladder from the high pressure foot support configuration to the low pressure foot support configuration causes an immediate increase in the height dimension of the fluid reservoir as fluid pressure increases in the fluid reservoir (“when this occurs, stops 108M and 108B are opened, which switches the system 100, 200 from the configuration shown in FIG. 3C to the configuration shown in FIG. 3A. This change allows fluid to flow from the higher pressure [foot support blader 102] to the lower pressure [fluid reservoir 104] (via lines 106, 206/216) […] to thereby equalize the pressure over the entire system […] a user might hear and/or feel this relatively quick change of pressure” paragraph 255; the fluid reservoir previously had fluid pumped out of it (see paragraphs 253-254) so the volume of fluid in the chamber had decreased and thus its height is understood to have decreased, so when the fluid is allowed to flow back into the reservoir, it is understood that the increased volume of fluid inside the chamber would also be accompanied by a height increase; the change is considered to be immediate because the fluid flow begins as soon as the switch in firmness setting is triggered; note that since the orientation of the check valves is reversed, the fluid is flowing from the reservoir 104 to the bladder 102, opposite to how it is described in the cited paragraphs; additionally, since the electronic/input system 1081/170 was described as an alternative or addition to the physical dial 108S in paragraph 230, it is understood that the description cited above would occur after an electronic input as well, see paragraph 251 which states “the firmness setting may be changed electronically (e.g., using an input system, such as input device 170”; Further regarding the height change, the bladders of Henrichot are made of "two thermoplastic elastomer sheet members" and "the bladder structure(s), their constructions, materials, and manufacturing methods may be conventional as are known and used in the footwear arts" and "thermo plastic materials of the types used in fluid-filled bladders for articles of footwear may be relatively flexible and pliable" (Henrichot, paragraphs 223-224) and the PSI of Henrichot overlaps that of the present application (Henrichot, low PSI of 5, para. 0254, high PSI of 30, present application low PSI of 8, high PSI of 35, para. 0155). Examiner notes that the foot support bladder and fluid reservoir of the instant application are also made of two sheets of thermoplastic elastomer material (see instant specification, paragraphs 56, 59), therefore it is understood that the action of pumping fluid into and out of chambers made of the same flexible/pliant material would result in the same response (i.e., a change in height occurs as a result of the change in pressure brought on by the change in fluid volume in the chamber due to fluid being pumped into or out of the chamber), absent specific and clear evidence to the contrary; see also obviousness reasoning presented for claim 6 above).
Regarding claim 10, Henrichot discloses or at least renders obvious: The foot support system according to claim 6, further comprising a mobile computing device (electronic device 170, such as a smart phone; a smart phone is a mobile computing device) in electronic communication with the electronic control system, wherein the mobile computing device is configured to receive user input indicating a desire to change fluid pressure in the foot support bladder and to wirelessly transmit the user input to the electronic control system (“[the flow control system 108] may include an input system 1081 for receiving input commands (e.g., wirelessly or via a wired connection from an electronic device 170, such as a smart phone, etc.) for changing foot support pressure” paragraph 230).
Regarding claim 11, Henrichot discloses or at least renders obvious: The foot support system according to claim 10, wherein the mobile computing device includes a smartphone (electronic device 170 is a smart phone; “an electronic device 170, such as a smart phone” paragraph 230).
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henrichot as applied to claim 1 and 6 above, and further in view of Hopkins (US 2021/0361030).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood by Examiner, Henrichot discloses: The foot support system according to claim 1, wherein interaction with the electronic control system to change the second fluid line from the closed configuration to the open configuration increases a height dimension of the fluid reservoir (“when this occurs, stops 108M and 108B are opened, which switches the system 100, 200 from the configuration shown in FIG. 3C to the configuration shown in FIG. 3A. This change allows fluid to flow from the higher pressure [foot support blader 102] to the lower pressure [fluid reservoir 104] (via lines 106, 206/216) […] to thereby equalize the pressure over the entire system” paragraph 255; the fluid reservoir previously had fluid pumped out of it (see paragraphs 253-254) so its volume had decreased and thus its height is understood to have decreased, so when the fluid is allowed to flow back into the reservoir, it is understood that the volume increase would also be accompanied by a height increase; note that since the orientation of the check valves is reversed, the fluid is flowing from the reservoir 104 to the bladder 102, opposite to how it is described in the cited paragraphs; additionally, since the electronic/input system 1081/170 was described as an alternative or addition to the physical dial 108S in paragraph 230, it is understood that the description cited above would occur after an electronic input as well, see paragraph 251 which states “the firmness setting may be changed electronically (e.g., using an input system, such as input device 170”; see also obviousness reasoning presented for claim 1 above).
Henrichot does not explicitly disclose: the height dimension of the fluid reservoir increases by an amount within a range of 3 mm and 35 mm.
However, Hopkins teaches a fluid system wherein sufficient movement of a fluid from a first chamber (400M) to a second chamber (400L) decreases the height dimension of the first chamber by between 3 mm and 35 mm (“the height HM of the first side fluid-filled bladder 400M in its high height configuration (FIG. 3A) may be […] at least 10 mm higher […] than its height HM at the same transverse cross sectional location in its low height configuration (FIG. 3B)” paragraph 74).
Hopkins teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of fluid systems for footwear. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the size of the fluid reservoir such that the height dimension of the fluid reservoir increase by specifically 10 mm when the system is moved from closed to open (thereby allowing fluid to flow back into the fluid reservoir), as taught by Hopkins, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the fluid reservoir. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1995). See MPEP 2144. Further, Examiner notes that there is no demonstrated criticality for the specific claimed height dimension, as paragraph 123 of the instant specification lists a wide variety of potential ranges of height differentials as follows: “The height differential between H1 and H2 (with H1 greater than H2 in the illustrated example) may be within any one or more of the following ranges: at least 3 mm; at least 5 mm; at least 8 mm; at least 10 mm; at least 12 mm; at least 15 mm; at least 20 mm; between 3 mm and 35 mm; between 3 mm and 30 mm; between 3 mm and 25 mm; between 5 mm and 35 mm; between 5 mm and 30 mm; between 5 mm and 25 mm; between 8 mm and 35 mm; between 8 mm and 30 mm; between 8 mm and 25 mm; between 10 mm and 35 mm; between 10 mm and 30 mm; and/or between 10 mm and 25 mm.”
Regarding claim 8, as best understood by Examiner, Henrichot discloses: The foot support system according to claim 6, wherein interaction with the electronic control system to change the foot support bladder from the high pressure foot support configuration to the low pressure foot support configuration increases a height dimension of the fluid reservoir (“when this occurs, stops 108M and 108B are opened, which switches the system 100, 200 from the configuration shown in FIG. 3C to the configuration shown in FIG. 3A. This change allows fluid to flow from the higher pressure [foot support blader 102] to the lower pressure [fluid reservoir 104] (via lines 106, 206/216) […] to thereby equalize the pressure over the entire system” paragraph 255; the fluid reservoir previously had fluid pumped out of it (see paragraphs 253-254) so its volume had decreased and thus its height is understood to have decreased, so when the fluid is allowed to flow back into the reservoir, it is understood that the volume increase would also be accompanied by a height increase; note that since the orientation of the check valves is reversed, the fluid is flowing from the reservoir 104 to the bladder 102, opposite to how it is described in the cited paragraphs; additionally, since the electronic/input system 1081/170 was described as an alternative or addition to the physical dial 108S in paragraph 230, it is understood that the description cited above would occur after an electronic input as well, see paragraph 251 which states “the firmness setting may be changed electronically (e.g., using an input system, such as input device 170”; see also obviousness reasoning presented for claim 6 above).
Henrichot does not explicitly disclose: the height dimension of the fluid reservoir increases by an amount within a range of 3 mm and 35 mm.
However, Hopkins teaches a fluid system wherein sufficient movement of a fluid from a first chamber (400M) to a second chamber (400L) decreases the height dimension of the first chamber by between 3 mm and 35 mm (“the height HM of the first side fluid-filled bladder 400M in its high height configuration (FIG. 3A) may be […] at least 10 mm higher […] than its height HM at the same transverse cross sectional location in its low height configuration (FIG. 3B)” paragraph 74).
Hopkins teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of fluid systems for footwear. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the size of the fluid reservoir such that the height dimension of the fluid reservoir increase by specifically 10 mm when the system is moved from closed to open (thereby allowing fluid to flow back into the fluid reservoir), as taught by Hopkins, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the fluid reservoir. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1995). See MPEP 2144. Further, Examiner notes that there is no demonstrated criticality for the specific claimed height dimension, as paragraph 123 of the instant specification lists a wide variety of potential ranges of height differentials as follows: “The height differential between H1 and H2 (with H1 greater than H2 in the illustrated example) may be within any one or more of the following ranges: at least 3 mm; at least 5 mm; at least 8 mm; at least 10 mm; at least 12 mm; at least 15 mm; at least 20 mm; between 3 mm and 35 mm; between 3 mm and 30 mm; between 3 mm and 25 mm; between 5 mm and 35 mm; between 5 mm and 30 mm; between 5 mm and 25 mm; between 8 mm and 35 mm; between 8 mm and 30 mm; between 8 mm and 25 mm; between 10 mm and 35 mm; between 10 mm and 30 mm; and/or between 10 mm and 25 mm.”
Claim(s) 23-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Henrichot as applied to claims 1, 4 and 5 (regarding claims 25 and 26), and 6 and 10 (regarding claims 23 and 24) above, and further in view of Costa (US 2021/0244128).
Regarding claim 23, Henrichot discloses “an electronic device 170, such as a smart phone” (paragraph 230), but does not further describe the smart phone, and therefore does not explicitly disclose: The foot support system according to claim 10, wherein the mobile computing device includes a display screen on which a graphical user interface is presented, the graphical user interface being configured to receive the user input indicating the desire to change the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder.
However, Costas teaches a mobile computing device (10) including a display screen on which a graphical user interface is presented (“an autopump control screen 40 for display on a GUI of remote device 10” paragraph 85), the graphical user interface being configured to receive the user input indicating the desire to change the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder (“autopump control screen 40 may include a pair of adjustment icons 43, 44, including a positive adjustment icon 43 for increasing the air pressure of bladder 210 and a negative adjustment icon 44 for decreasing the air pressure of bladder 210” paragraph 85).
Costas teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of fluid-filled bladder systems for footwear. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the mobile computing device (smartphone) of Henrichot specifically with the screen, application, and GUI as taught by Costas, in order to make it easier and simpler for the user to adjust the pressure as desired (Henrichot describes this as a desired function of the input device 170 in paragraph 256; see paragraphs 85-88 of Costas describing many ways the user can use the display screen/GUI to adjust the pressure to fit their specific needs or desires), as well as to allow the user to easily visualize the current air pressure level in both shoes(Costas, “autopump control screen 40 may include a bar graph icon 42 indicating a real-time current air pressure level of bladder 210 for each athletic shoe 100” paragraph 85).
Regarding claim 24, Henrichot as modified discloses: The foot support system according to claim 23, wherein the user input indicating the desire to change the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder relates to pressure changes desired for the foot support bladder for a first shoe of a pair of shoes, and wherein the graphical user interface further is configured to receive user input indicating a desire to change fluid pressure in a foot support bladder of a second shoe of the pair of shoes (Costas, “a wearer may input through either presets icon 45 or options icon 46 a scheduled run time at 6:00 AM every morning and a desired air pressure level for each bladder 210” paragraph 88; “autopump control screen 40 may include a bar graph icon 42 indicating a real-time current air pressure level of bladder 210 for each athletic shoe 100” paragraph 85; see also figure 13B).
Regarding claim 25, Henrichot discloses “an electronic device 170, such as a smart phone” (paragraph 230), but does not further describe the smart phone, and therefore does not explicitly disclose: The foot support system according to claim 5, wherein the mobile computing device includes a display screen on which a graphical user interface is presented, the graphical user interface being configured to receive the user input indicating the desire to change the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder.
However, Costas teaches a mobile computing device (10) including a display screen on which a graphical user interface is presented (“an autopump control screen 40 for display on a GUI of remote device 10” paragraph 85), the graphical user interface being configured to receive the user input indicating the desire to change the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder (“autopump control screen 40 may include a pair of adjustment icons 43, 44, including a positive adjustment icon 43 for increasing the air pressure of bladder 210 and a negative adjustment icon 44 for decreasing the air pressure of bladder 210” paragraph 85).
Costas teaches analogous art to the instant application in the field of fluid-filled bladder systems for footwear. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to make the mobile computing device (smartphone) of Henrichot specifically with the screen, application, and GUI as taught by Costas, in order to make it easier and simpler for the user to adjust the pressure as desired (Henrichot describes this as a desired function of the input device 170 in paragraph 256; see paragraphs 85-88 of Costas describing many ways the user can use the display screen/GUI to adjust the pressure to fit their specific needs or desires), as well as to allow the user to easily visualize the current air pressure level in both shoes (Costas, “autopump control screen 40 may include a bar graph icon 42 indicating a real-time current air pressure level of bladder 210 for each athletic shoe 100” paragraph 85).
Regarding claim 26, Henrichot as modified discloses: The foot support system according to claim 25, wherein the user input indicating the desire to change the fluid pressure in the foot support bladder relates to pressure changes desired for the foot support bladder for a first shoe of a pair of shoes, and wherein the graphical user interface further is configured to receive user input indicating a desire to change fluid pressure in a foot support bladder of a second shoe of the pair of shoes (Costas, “a wearer may input through either presets icon 45 or options icon 46 a scheduled run time at 6:00 AM every morning and a desired air pressure level for each bladder 210” paragraph 88; “autopump control screen 40 may include a bar graph icon 42 indicating a real-time current air pressure level of bladder 210 for each athletic shoe 100” paragraph 85; see also figure 13B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIANNA T DUCKWORTH whose telephone number is (571)272-1458. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at 571-272-5559. 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.
/BRIANNA T. DUCKWORTH/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/JAMESON D COLLIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights