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 .
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.
Claim 18 is 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.
In claim 18 the phrase “sufficiently rigid to transfer a force…the midfoot region” is vague and indefinite because it is not clear what rigidity would be sufficient and therefore it is not clear what structural limitations applicant intends to encompass with such language.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-7, 10-12, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cavaliere (2023/0404211).
Cavaliere shows A sole structure (see specifically figures 8A, 8B, and 10B) for an article of footwear, the sole structure comprising:
a unitary, one-piece sole component (see paragraphs [0037] and [0090]), wherein the unitary, one-piece sole component includes a sole plate (800) and a heel support (814, see figures 10B);
wherein the sole plate (800) includes a heel region, an inner side facing a foot-receiving
side of the sole structure, and an outer side opposite from the inner side (see figures 8A and B);
wherein the heel support (814) includes an inner side contiguous with the inner side of
the sole plate and an outer side contiguous with the outer side of the sole plate, and the
heel support extends around a rear of the heel region and away from the sole plate (see figures 8A and B); and
wherein the outer side of the heel support has a convex profile from a medial side
to a lateral side of the sole plate (see figures 1-5B, 6B, 8A, and 8B).
In reference to claim 2, see figures 1-5B, 6B, 8A, and 8B.
In reference to claims 4-7, see medial sidewall (812M) and lateral sidewall (812L).
In reference to claim 10, see figure 8A.
In reference to claim 11, see figure 2F.
In reference to claims 12 and 18, see hole at 840B in figures 10A and 10B.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campbell (2004/0103561).
Campbell shows A sole structure (see specifically figure 4a) for an article of footwear, the sole structure comprising:
a unitary, one-piece sole component (see figure 4a) wherein the unitary, one-piece sole component includes a sole plate (see marked up figure below) and a heel support (see marked up figure below);
wherein the sole plate includes a heel region, an inner side facing a foot-receiving
side of the sole structure, and an outer side opposite from the inner side (see figure below);
wherein the heel support includes an inner side contiguous with the inner side of
the sole plate and an outer side contiguous with the outer side of the sole plate, and the
heel support extends around a rear of the heel region and away from the sole plate (see figure below); and
wherein the outer side of the heel support has a convex profile from a medial side
to a lateral side of the sole plate (see paragraph [0074] and figures).
PNG
media_image1.png
470
1046
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 2, see paragraph [0074] and figures.
In reference to claims 4-7, see medial sidewall and lateral sidewall (shown in figure 4b).
In reference to claims 8 and 9, see figure 4a.
In reference to claim 11, see figures 3 and 4b.
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalier or Campbell in view of Bodner (2011/0119959).
Cavalier or Campbell shows a sole structure substantially as claimed except for the exact material. Bodner teaches the use of carbon fiber composite materials (see paragraph [0040]) for a stabilizing sole structure. It would have been obvious to use carbon fiber composite materials as taught by Bodner for the sole structure of Cavalier or Campbell to provide sufficient stability and strength.
Claim(s) 12-17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cavalier or Campbell in view of Toraya (8745901).
Cavalier or Campbell as discussed above shows a sole structure substantially as claimed except for the exact hole and receptacle. Toraya teaches providing a hole (60) in a heel support and teaches providing a receptacle (45) which is tapered/ramped (see rounded edges at numbers 100 and 102 in figure 5) with a flange and ring (see figure 5) as claimed. It would have been obvious to provide a hole and receptacle as taught by Toraya in the sole structure of either Cavalier or Campbell to assist putting on the shoe.
In reference to claims 19 and 20, Cavaliere shows A sole structure (see specifically figures 8A, 8B, and 10B) for an article of footwear, the sole structure comprising:
a unitary, one-piece sole component (see paragraphs [0037] and [0090]) or Campbell shows A sole structure (see specifically figure 4a) for an article of footwear, the sole structure comprising:
a unitary, one-piece sole component (see figure 4a) substantially as claimed except for a through hole and receptacle. Toraya teaches providing a hole (60) in a heel support and teaches providing a receptacle (45) which is tapered (see rounded edges at numbers 100 and 102 in figure 5) as claimed. It would have been obvious to provide a hole and receptacle as taught by Toraya in the sole structure of either Cavalier or Campbell to assist putting on the shoe.
The prior art cited and not relied upon by the Examiner for the above rejections are considered to be pertinent in that the references cited are considered to be the nearest prior art to the subject matter defined in the claims as required by MPEP707.05.
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.
In order to avoid potential delays, Technology Center 3700 is encouraging FAXing of responses to Office Actions directly into the Center at (571)273-8300 (FORMAL FAXES ONLY). Please identify Examiner Marie Bays of Art Unit 3732 at the top of your cover sheet.
Any inquiry concerning the MERITS of this examination from the examiner should be directed to Marie Bays whose telephone number is (571) 272-4559. The examiner can normally be reached from Mon-Thurs 6-4. Alternatively if the Examiner cannot be reached, please contact the Examiners SPE Alissa Tompkins at 571-272-3425.
/MARIE D BAYS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732