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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species V, Figure 5, claims 21-37 in the reply filed on 11/18/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Species V and VI are not independent or distinct species in the application. This is found persuasive therefore the restriction between species V and VI withdrawn, and Species V and VI will be examined together.
The requirement is made FINAL.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 21-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rolle (US 7,210,251) in view of Guyan et al. (US 9,320,316, herein after Guyan).
With respect to claim 21, Rolle discloses a sole for a sports shoe, comprising:
a manufactured structure (shoe sole 14, see figures 1-6); and
a functional element (interchangeable covers 18, 38, 48, 58, 68, 78, 98, see figures 1-6) that is manufactured separately from the structure, wherein the manufactured structure (14) and the functional element (18) comprise at least one receptacle(notches 16 and straps 20), and wherein the functional element (18, 48, 68, 78, 98) and the manufactured structure (14) are mechanically attached to each other via the at least one receptacle (interchangeable cover 18 is secured to the base 12 by two pairs of straps 20 pulled around the notches 16 and connected beneath the sole 14, as an example). Rolle discloses all the limitations of the claims except for the manufactured structure to be an additively manufactured lattice structure. Guyan discloses a lattice structure (108) that is manufactured by additive manufacturing to form a sole for a shoe that provides a three-dimensional zonal compression to a user during all stages of the gait cycle. Wherein the platform 104 and lattice 108 structure are essentially comprised of, for example, a polymer such as, for example, nylon. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to manufacture the sole structure of Rolled as an additively manufactured lattice structure as taught by Guyan to provide a three-dimensional zonal compression to a user during all stages of the gait cycle.
With respect to claim 22, Rolle as modified by Guyan, discloses the use of hook and loop fasteners 26; metal buckle 46; hooks 50; and zipper 28. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the receptacle of Rolle/Guyan comprises a snap-fit or a snap-fasten element, since whether the mechanical attachment is a hook and loop attachment, a zipper, a snap fastener or any other art recognized equivalent is an obvious matter of choice, such as cost of manufacturing. The claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
With respect to claim 23, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses wherein the lattice structure comprises a polymer material.
With respect to claim 24, and the polymer material being reclaimed from an ocean. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use polymer that has been reclaimed from the ocean, to help with cleaning the oceans and benefit the environment by reducing plastic pollution.
With respect to claim 25, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses the sole of claim 21, wherein the sole comprises a midsole of the sports shoe (sole 14 of the shoe 10, see figure 1)
With respect to claim 26, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses wherein the functional element is releasably attached to the lattice structure (In FIG. 1, a new and improved shoe with interchangeable covers 10 of the present invention for easily and comfortably updating a single pair of shoes to coordinate with multiple outfits is illustrated and will be described. More particularly, the shoe with interchangeable covers 10 has a base 12 mounted on a modified shoe sole 14).
With respect to claim 27, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses the sole of claim 21, comprising a second functional element (interchangeable covers 38, 48; 58; 68; 78; 98), wherein the functional element (18) and the second functional element (18) are interchangeable.
With respect to claim 28, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses wherein the functional element (cover 18) comprises a flap element (strap 20, see figure 1) and a joint (section where strap 20 is connected to cover 18, see figure 1), and the flap element is configured to rotate around the joint and attach to a ground-facing surface of the sole (interchangeable cover 18 would be secured to the base 12 by two pairs of straps 20 pulled around the notches 16 and connected beneath the sole 14).
With respect to claim 29, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses wherein the functional element (cover 18) comprises a lace loop, a heel element, a lateral support element, or a combination thereof (the second cover 48 is a closed heel shoe with a plurality of hooks 50 located in pairs on the right and left edges, 52 and 54, of the front portion 42 of the shoe, with one hook 50 from each pair on the right edge 52 and one hook 50 from each pair on the left edge 54, see figure 4).
With respect to claim 30, Rolle discloses a sole for a sports shoe, comprising:
a midsole portion (shoe sole 14, see figures 1-6) comprising an manufactured structure; and
a functional element (interchangeable covers 18, 38, 48, 58, 68, 78, 98, see figures 1-6) that is manufactured separately from the midsole portion,
wherein the manufactured structure (14) and the functional element (18, etc.) comprise at least one receptacle (strap 20 and notch 16), and wherein the functional element (18) and the manufactured structure (14) are mechanically attached to each other via the at least one receptacle such that a surface of the functional element faces the midsole portion and is attached to the midsole portion (interchangeable cover 18 would be secured to the base 12 by two pairs of straps 20 pulled around the notches 16 and connected beneath the sole 14).
Rolle discloses all the limitations of the claims except for the manufactured structure to be an additively manufactured lattice structure. Guyan discloses a lattice structure (108) that is manufactured by additive manufacturing to form a sole for a shoe that provides a three-dimensional zonal compression to a user during all stages of the gait cycle. Wherein the platform 104 and lattice 108 structure are essentially comprised of, for example, a polymer such as, for example, nylon. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to manufacture the sole structure of Rolled as an additively manufactured lattice structure as taught by Guyan to provide a three-dimensional zonal compression to a user during all stages of the gait cycle.
With respect to claim 31, Rolle as modified by Guyan, discloses the use of hook and loop fasteners 26; metal buckle 46; hooks 50; and zipper 28. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the receptacle of Rolle/Guyan comprises a snap-fit or a snap-fasten element, since whether the mechanical attachment is a hook and loop attachment, a zipper, a snap fastener or any other art recognized equivalent is an obvious matter of choice, such as cost of manufacturing. The claim would have been obvious because the substitution of one known element for another would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
With respect to claim 32, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses wherein the lattice structure comprises a polymer material.
With respect to claim 33, and the polymer material being reclaimed from an ocean. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use polymer that has been reclaimed from the ocean, to help with cleaning the oceans and benefit the environment by reducing plastic pollution.
With respect to claim 34, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses wherein the functional element is releasably attached to the lattice structure (In FIG. 1, a new and improved shoe with interchangeable covers 10 of the present invention for easily and comfortably updating a single pair of shoes to coordinate with multiple outfits is illustrated and will be described. More particularly, the shoe with interchangeable covers 10 has a base 12 mounted on a modified shoe sole 14).
With respect to claim 35, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses the sole of claim 21, comprising a second functional element (interchangeable covers 38, 48; 58, 68; 78; 98), wherein the functional element (18) and the second functional element (18) are interchangeable.
With respect to claim 36, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses wherein the functional element (cover 18) comprises a flap element (strap 20, see figure 1) and a joint (section where strap 20 is connected to cover 18, see figure 1), and the flap element is configured to rotate around the joint and attach to a ground-facing surface of the sole (interchangeable cover 18 would be secured to the base 12 by two pairs of straps 20 pulled around the notches 16 and connected beneath the sole 14).
With respect to claim 37, Rolle as modified by Guyan discloses wherein the functional element (cover 18) comprises a lace loop, a heel element, a lateral support element, or a combination thereof (the second cover 48 is a closed heel shoe with a plurality of hooks 50 located in pairs on the right and left edges, 52 and 54, of the front portion 42 of the shoe, with one hook 50 from each pair on the right edge 52 and one hook 50 from each pair on the left edge 54, see figure 4).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Shown are soles for shoes analogous to applicant’s instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JILA M MOHANDESI whose telephone number is (571)272-4558. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thurs. 7:00-5:00 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alissa J Tompkins can be reached at 571-272-3425. 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.
/JILA M MOHANDESI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
JMM
01/08/2026