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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on 2/2/2026 has been received; Claims 1-15 & 17-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11 & 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Simonetti (EP 2 494 880).
Regarding Claim 11, Simonetti disclose an article of footwear (Figures 1-4), comprising: an upper (10) coupled to a sole (Figures 1 & 2); and an adjustable strap assembly (Figures 3 & 4) circumferentially surrounding the upper (Figures 1-4), the adjustable strap assembly including an adjustable double ring (double ring, see annotated Figure 3 below) positioned on a lateral side of the upper (Figures 1-4), a fixed portion (2) coupled to a first loop (loop, see annotated Figure 3 below) of the adjustable double ring, and a variable portion (7) looped through a second loop (loop, see annotated Figure 3 below) of the adjustable double ring, configured to adjust a circumference of the adjustable strap assembly when a second longitudinal end of the variable portion is moved towards a medial side of the upper and towards a lateral side of the upper (Figures 3 & 4).
Regarding Claim 17, Simonetti discloses an article of footwear (Figure 1-4), comprising: an upper (10) and a tongue (20) together defining an opening of the article of footwear (Figures 1 & 2); and an adjustable strap assembly (Figures 3 & 4) circumferentially surrounding the upper (Figures 1-4); the adjustable strap assembly comprising an adjustable double loop (double ring, see annotated Figure 3 below) positioned at a lateral side of the upper, a fixed portion (2) coupled at a first longitudinal end to the upper and fixedly coupled at a second longitudinal end to a first loop (loop, see annotated Figure 3 below) of the adjustable double loop, and a variable portion (7) looped through a second loop (loop, see annotated Figure 3 below) of the adjustable double loop, and wherein the variable portion is configured to cross once over the tongue (Figures 3 & 4) and wherein the adjustable strap assembly does not cross from the lateral side of the upper to a medial side of the upper at a forefoot of the upper more than once (Figures 3 & 4).
Regarding Claim 18, Simonetti discloses a first longitudinal end of the variable portion is reversibly coupled to the second longitudinal end of the fixed portion (Figures 3 & 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
567
566
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danezin (US 2019/0159544) in view of Nurse (US 2015/0289584).
Regarding Claim 1, Danezin discloses an article of footwear (Figures 1, 4 & 5), comprising: an upper (2); and an adjustable strap assembly (Figures 4 & 5) circumferentially surrounding the upper (Figures 1, 4 & 5); wherein the adjustable strap assembly includes a fixed portion (fixed, see annotated Figure 4 below), wherein the fixed portion is a first strap including a first longitudinal end (1st, see annotated Figure 4 below) and a second longitudinal end (2nd, see annotated Figure 4 below), wherein the fixed portion is fixedly coupled at a first longitudinal end to a first loop (loop, see annotated Figure 4 below) of an adjustable ring (ring, see annotated Figure 4), and a variable portion (44/45/47), wherein the variable portion is a separate second strap including a first longitudinal end (45) and second longitudinal end (47/44), wherein the variable portion is looped through a ring (loop, see annotated Figure 4 below) of the adjustable ring, wherein the first longitudinal end of the variable portion is reversibly coupled to a second longitudinal end of the fixed portion (Figures 3 & 4). Danezin does not specifically disclose an adjustable double ring. However, Nurse discloses the use of a buckle having an adjustable double ring (236, Para. 40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Danezin by structuring the ring into the generally double buckle shape to assist in performing the intended functions. Such modification would be considered a mere choice of a preferred optimum configuration for the buckle/ring to attach straps as a matter of “obvious to try” as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Danezin and Nurse disclose the variable portion looped through the second ring of the adjustable double ring decreases and increases a circumference of the adjustable strap assembly when a second longitudinal end of the variable portion is moved towards and away from the first longitudinal end of the variable portion (as modified, Danezin, Figures 1, 4 & 5 & Nurse, Figure 2A, Para. 40).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Danezin and Nurse disclose a fixed strap loop positioned on a medial side of the upper (Danezin, Figure 4) and including a crease configured to support the fixed portion (Danezin, Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Danezin and Nurse disclose a free floating loop (Danezin, 462) circumferentially surrounding the variable portion and configured to support a second end of the variable portion (Danezin, Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Danezin and Nurse disclose a rear loop (Danezin, 462) extending from a heel cap to above the upper (Danezin, Figures 1, 4, & 5), and wherein the variable portion is positioned between the rear loop and the upper (Danezin, Figures 1, 4, & 5).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Danezin and Nurse disclose a tongue (Danezin, Figure 1 & 212/213) and wherein the tongue is a split tongue and includes a lateral section and a medial section (Danezin, 212/213), the lateral section and the medial section not coupled to each other (Danezin, Figure 1 & 212/213).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Danezin and Nurse disclose the adjustable strap assembly does not cross from a medial side of the upper to a lateral side of the upper more than once (Danezin, Figures 1, 4, & 5).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danezin (US 2019/0159544) in view of Nurse (US 2015/0289584) in further view of Girard (US 2014/0215854).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Danezin and Nurse do not specifically disclose an edge closure positioned on the upper and configured to adjust a longitudinal tension of the article of footwear. However, Girard discloses an edge closure (Figure 9, Para. 68) positioned on an upper (Figures 9) and configured to adjust a longitudinal tension of an article of footwear (Para. 55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include an edge closure, as taught by Girard, in order provide a suitable means for opening and closing the boot of Danezin-Nurse.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Danezin, Nurse and Girard disclose the edge closure is independent of and not coupled to the adjustable strap assembly (Danezin, Figures 1, 4, & 5).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Danezin, Nurse and Girard disclose the edge closure does not extend to a heel region or a forefoot region of the article of footwear (Danezin, Figures 1, 4, & 5).
Claims 19 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Simonetti (EP 2 494 880) in view of Girard (US 2014/0215854).
Regarding Claim 19, Simonetti does not specifically disclose an edge closure extends away from a heel region of the article of footwear and laterally along a quarter in a midfoot region of the article of footwear. However, Girard discloses an edge closure (Figure 9, Para. 68) extends away from a heel region of the article of footwear and laterally along a quarter in a midfoot region of the article of footwear (Figure 9). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include an edge closure, as taught by Girard, in order provide a suitable means for opening and closing the boot of Simonetti.
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Simonetti and Girard disclose the edge closure is positioned on the lateral side of the upper in the midfoot region of the article of footwear (Girard, Figure 9), and wherein the edge closure does not extend past the lateral side of the upper (Girard, Figure 9) and the edge closure does not extend to the opening of the article of footwear (Girard, Figure 9).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Simonetti (EP 2 494 880) in view of Nardulli (USPN 4,918,840).
Regarding Claim 12, Simonetti does not specifically disclose the article of footwear further comprises gore bands coupled at a first longitudinal end to the medial side of the upper and at a second longitudinal end to the lateral side of the upper, and wherein the gore bands are formed of elastic material. However, Nardulli discloses an article of footwear (Figure 1) further comprises gore bands (3) with a zipper (1), wherein each of the gore bands are coupled at a first longitudinal end to the medial side of the upper and at a second longitudinal end to the lateral side of the upper (Figures 1-3), and wherein the gore bands are formed of elastic material (Col. 2, lines 20-21 & 29-30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective file to include the gore bands on an opening with a zipper, as taught by Nardulli, to the footwear of Simonetti, in order to provide a desired fit.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Simonetti and Nardulli discloses the upper further comprising a vamp extending from a forefoot region to a midfoot region (Simonetti, Figures 1 & 2 & Nardulli, Figure 1) and positioned at least partially under the gore bands (Simonetti, Figures 1 & 2 & Nardulli, Figure 1), and wherein a portion of the vamp underneath the gore bands is split into a lateral portion and a medial portion (Simonetti, Figures 1 & 2 & Nardulli, Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Simonetti and Nardulli discloses a zipper (Simonetti, Figures 1 & 2 & Nardulli, Figure 1, zipper 1) configured to adjust a tension of the gore bands (Simonetti, Figures 1 & 2 & Nardulli, Figure 1), wherein the zipper includes a first member and a second member (Figure 2), and the tension of the gore bands is greater when the first member is coupled to the second member than when the first member is decoupled from the second member (Simonetti, Figures 1 & 2 & Nardulli, Figure 1), and wherein the zipper is parallel to the second longitudinal end of the gore bands (Simonetti, Figures 1 & 2 & Nardulli, Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Simonetti and Nardulli discloses the gore bands are coupled to the lateral side of the upper at a lateral gore support and the first member is directly coupled to an edge of the lateral gore support (Simonetti, Figures 1 & 2 & Nardulli, Figure 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as discussed supra.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHARINE KANE whose telephone number is (571)272-3398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, KHOA HUYNH can be reached at 571-272-4888. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KATHARINE G KANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights