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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the arch pouch is placed on top of the insole, in claims 12, 15” and (an out sole and a vamp coupled to the outer sole, claim 13) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 12, 15, recites the limitation “the arch pouch is placed on top of the insole”, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear which structure encompassed by such limitation? the claim is interpreted to as “the arch pouch is placed on the insole”.
Claim 13, recites the limitation “an outer sole coupled to the vamp”, renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear which structure encompassed by such limitation.
Claims 14-20 are dependent of claim 13, and are likewise indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6, 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Finkelstein (20060010717).
Regarding claim 1, Finkelstein discloses a foot comforting device (fig.2, 9-10), comprising: an insole (fig.9, 25/4, 20A, 50); and an arch pouch (20/20A, par [0060]) formed in an arch region of the insole, the arch pouch containing a plurality of foam beads having different dimensions (bladders 20A, 4 and/or 5 having a plurality of different sizes and shapes of particles 8, par [0057, 0047]), wherein when a foot of a user is placed on the sole, the plurality of foam beads conform to an arch of the foot (par [0060].
Regarding claims 3-4, 6, Finkelstein discloses the foot comforting device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of foam beads conform to an arch of a foot of another user, when the foot of the other user is placed on the insole (fig.2, and par [0057]); wherein the arch pouch is formed of Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) material, and is shaped to the arch region of the insole (par [058]); wherein the arch pouch is sealed to the insole (fig.2, and col.1, lines 15-40).
Regarding claims 9-12, Finkelstein discloses the foot comforting device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of foam beads move within the arch pouch based on movement of the foot of the user to allow automatic customization of shape of the arch pouch with respect to the arch of the foot of the user (par [0045, 0052]); wherein the plurality of foam beads are adapted to move freely within the arch pouch based on movement of arch of the foot of the user, to enable the arch pouch to automatically adjust to the movement of the arch of the foot of the user (par [0045, 0052]); wherein the arch pouch comprises one or more rounded corners to prevent the plurality of foam beads from getting caught in sharp edges and allow the plurality of foam beads to flow naturally and form an accurate shape of the arch of the foot of the user (par [0041]); wherein the arch pouch is placed on top of the insole (see the combination of Finkelstein).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finkelstein (20060010717) in view of DiNucci (11090182).
Regarding claim 2, Finkelstein does not disclose wherein the insole is made of an injection molded closed cell Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA) foam. DiNucci teaches a similar footwear article fig.1A, foot device 100 having a shell over 102 and a soft insole layer 104; the shell layer 102 may be formed of any material known in the art including, but not limited to, plastic, ethylene vinyl acetate, and the like. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the material Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA) foam for the footwear article of Finkelstein as taught by DiNucci in order to provide an insole and support for the foot of user.
Claims 5, 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finkelstein (20060010717) in view of Levy et al. (2012/0147650—hereinafter, Levy).
Regarding claim 5, Finkelstein discloses the foot comforting device as claimed in claim 1, and the bladders 2A, 4 and/or 5 having a plurality of different sizes and shapes of particles 8, par [0057, 0047]. But Finkelstein does not disclose a diameter of each of the plurality of foam beads ranges from 2mm to 5mm and the plurality of foam beads are formed of Polyphenylene Ether (PPE) material. However, Levy teaches another similar footwear article fig.1 having an upper, a sole 14, fig.3A shows a sole component 140 having a plurality of foam particles 141, 142, and fig.3B a first foam particles 144a can have a different size or shape than the second foam particles 144b (par [0138, 0181], and [0184] states that the particles having diameter from 0.2 to 10 millimeters). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide a diameter of each of the plurality of foam beads ranges from 2mm to 5mm and the plurality of foam beads are formed of Polyphenylene Ether (PPE) material for the arch support of Finkelstein as taught by Levy in order to provide and support the arch of the sole of the footwear article.
Regarding claims 7-8, Finkelstein discloses the foot comforting device as claimed in claim 1, the bladders 2A, 4 and/or 5 having a plurality of different sizes and shapes of particles 8, par [0057, 0047]. But Finkelstein does not disclose wherein the plurality of foam beads comprise at least a first set of foam beads having a first dimension, a second set of foam beads having a second dimension and a third set of foam beads having a third dimension, wherein the third dimension is smaller than the second dimension, and the second dimension is smaller than the first dimension; wherein the third set of foam beads having the third dimension get pushed between spaces formed between the first set of foam beads and the second set of foam beads, when the foot of the user is placed on the arch pouch, to enable customization of shape of the arch pouch with respect to the arch of the foot. However, Levy teaches another similar footwear article fig.1 having an upper, an insole 14, fig.3A shows a sole component 140 having a plurality of foam particles 141, 142, and fig.3B a first foam particles 144a can have a different size or shape than the second foam particles 144b (par [0138, 0181], and [0184] states that the particles having diameter from 0.2 to 10 millimeters). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide as the claimed invention for the footwear article of Finkelstein as taught Levy in order to provide a durable and flexible arch support member to provide comfortable of the insole of the footwear article of Finkelstein.
Claim(s) 13, 15, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finkelstein (20060010717) in view of Martinez (2021/0321717).
Regarding claim 13, Finkelstein disclose a footwear, comprising: an outer sole (23, 24, fig.9); a footwear comforting device (the structure of element 25, 4, 20A or 50) configured to be arranged on the outer sole such that the foot of the user is supported over the footwear comforting device, wherein the footwear comforting device comprises: an insole (element 25); and an arch pouch (20A) formed in an arch region of the insole (fig.9-10, par [0060]), the arch pouch containing a plurality of foam beads having different dimensions, wherein when the foot of the user is placed on the insole, the plurality of foam beads conform to an arch of the foot (bladders 2A, 4 and/or 5 having a plurality of different sizes and shapes of particles 8, par [0057, 0047]). But Finkelstein does not explicitly disclose a vamp coupled to the outer sole to receive a foot of a user, and adapted to the cover at least a forepart of the foot of user. However, Martinez teaches another similar footwear article fig.8 shows an insole (100) having a plurality of pad supports 106, 110 and 112. And Fig.8 shows the footwear article having an outsole 602 and an insole 100 and a metal shank 802 and an upper or vamp upper 702, par [0048]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide a vamp or an upper of Martines to couple to the footwear article of Finkelstein in order to provide a coverable upper/vamp to protect the forepart of the user foot.
Regarding claim 15, Finkelstein further discloses the footwear as claimed in claim 13, wherein the arch pouch the arch pouch is placed on top of the insole, and is formed of Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) material (par [0058]), and is shaped to the arch region of the insole (fig.9-10).
Regarding claims 18-20, Finkelstein further discloses the footwear as claimed in claim 13, wherein the plurality of foam beads move within the arch pouch based on movement of the foot of the user to allow automatic customization of shape of the arch pouch with respect to the arch of the foot of the user (par [0045]); wherein the plurality of foam beads are adapted to move freely within the arch pouch based on movement of arch of the foot of the user, to enable the arch pouch to automatically adjust to the movement of the arch of the foot of the user (par [0045]); wherein the arch pouch comprises one or more rounded corners to prevent the plurality of foam beads from getting caught in sharp edges and allow the plurality of foam beads to flow naturally and form an accurate shape of the arch of the foot of the user (par [0041]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finkelstein (20060010717) in view of Martinez (2021/0321717) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of DiNucci (11090182).
Regarding claim 14, Finkelstein does not disclose wherein the insole is made of an injection molded closed cell Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA) foam. DiNucci teaches a similar footwear article fig.1A, foot device 100 having a shell over 102 and a soft insole layer 104; the shell layer 102 may be formed of any material known in the art including, but not limited to, plastic, ethylene vinyl acetate, and the like. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the material Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA) foam for the footwear article of Finkelstein as taught by DiNucci in order to provide an insole and support for the foot of user.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finkelstein (20060010717) in view of Martinez (2021/0321717) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Levy et al. (2012/0147650—hereinafter, Levy).
Regarding claim 16, Finkelstein discloses the foot comforting device as claimed in claim 1, and the bladders 2A, 4 and/or 5 having a plurality of different sizes and shapes of particles 8, par [0057, 0047]. But Finkelstein does not disclose a diameter of each of the plurality of foam beads ranges from 2mm to 5mm and the plurality of foam beads are formed of Polyphenylene Ether (PPE) material. However, Levy teaches another similar footwear article fig.1 having an upper, a sole 14, fig.3A shows a sole component 140 having a plurality of foam particles 141, 142, and fig.3B a first foam particles 144a can have a different size or shape than the second foam particles 144b (par [0138, 0181], and [0184] states that the particles having diameter from 0.2 to 10 millimeters). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide a diameter of each of the plurality of foam beads ranges from 2mm to 5mm and the plurality of foam beads are formed of Polyphenylene Ether (PPE) material for the arch support of Finkelstein as taught by Levy in order to provide and support the arch of the sole of the footwear article.
Regarding claim 17, Finkelstein discloses the foot comforting device as claimed in claim 1, the bladders 2A, 4 and/or 5 having a plurality of different sizes and shapes of particles 8, par [0057, 0047]. But Finkelstein does not disclose wherein the plurality of foam beads comprise at least a first set of foam beads having a first dimension, a second set of foam beads having a second dimension and a third set of foam beads having a third dimension, wherein the third dimension is smaller than the second dimension, and the second dimension is smaller than the first dimension, the third set of foam beads having the third dimension get pushed between spaces formed between the first set of foam beads and the second set of foam beads, when the foot of the user is placed on the arch pouch, to enable customization of shape of the arch pouch with respect to the arch of the foot. However, Levy teaches another similar footwear article fig.1 having an upper, an insole 14, fig.3A shows a sole component 140 having a plurality of foam particles 141, 142, and fig.3B a first foam particles 144a can have a different size or shape than the second foam particles 144b (par [0138, 0181], and [0184] states that the particles having diameter from 0.2 to 10 millimeters). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide as the claimed invention for the footwear article of Finkelstein as taught Levy in order to provide a durable and flexible arch support member to provide comfortable to the arch of user when is worn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY K TRIEU whose telephone number is (571)270-3495. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4.
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 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.
/Timothy K Trieu/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732