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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1 and Subspecies B in the reply filed on 8/28/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Subspecies B should include figures 1-4 (identified in the restriction requirement as part of Subspecies A) because “figures 1-4 are essential to all sub-species of Species 1” (Remarks, page 10). This is not found persuasive because Subspecies A and B have mutually exclusive features as described in the restriction requirement (see for example the clear structural differences between plate 37 in figures 1-4 and plate 36 in figures 5-8). Although the subspecies may share some common traits, they are referred to separately in the specification as originally filed (see paragraph 136 of instant specification) and have mutually exclusive features, therefore they are not depicting the same embodiment and searching both subspecies together would result in a serious search burden on the examiner due to the mutually exclusive features which would require searching different classes/subclasses or using different text queries. Examiner notes that any features which are described in reference to the embodiment depicted in figures 5-8 will be held to read on the elected subspecies B; for example, a maximum posterior depth value and maximum anterior depth value are described in reference to figures 5-8 in paragraph 139.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination on the merits.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 81 (figure 2), 82 (figure 2), 28 (figures 1, 5, 9, 11), 17 (figures 1, 5, 9, 11).
The drawings are further objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “43” has been used to designate both “end of the anterior area of the midsole” and “end of the posterior area of the midsole” (see figure 2).
The drawings are further objected to because of the following informalities:
Figure 5 has two instances of “30” which are pointing to different things.
Figure 9 has two instances of “30” which are pointing to different things.
Figure 11 has two instances of “30” which are pointing to different things.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 1-19 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.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation “the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface” and “the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface”. The phrase “from a view of the ground engaging surface” introduces confusion into the claim because, firstly, it does not appear that the upper facing surface would be viewable “from the ground engaging surface” because they are on opposite sides. Secondly, it is unclear why the concave/convex shape is being defined “from a view of the ground engaging surface” when a surface itself can be defined as concave or convex. The specific distinction that it is being defined “front a view of the ground engaging surface” (i.e., from below) appears to be defining the shape as the opposite from what would be considered the conventional definition of concave/convex when referring to a surface, see drawing below. It is unclear if this is the intended effect of the language or not. Examiner respectfully suggests that the concavity/convexity of the upper facing surface be defined relative to the surface itself (i.e., the upper facing surface is substantially flat or concave or convex, as applicable) rather than “from a view of the ground engaging surface” for clarity.
PNG
media_image1.png
390
300
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites the limitations “the lateral axis” and “the longitudinal axis”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. They have been interpreted for the purposes of examination as “a lateral axis” and “a longitudinal axis”.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites “wherein the lowest positions further comprising”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the lowest positions”, and all of the following limitations are about the upper facing surface, so it is unclear how they relate to any alleged “lowest positions”. For the purposes of examination, this limitation has been interpreted as simply “wherein” because it cannot be determined what “the lowest positions” is supposed to be referring to.
Further regarding claim 3, the claim recites the limitation “the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface; and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.” The phrase “from a view of the ground engaging surface” introduces confusion into the claim because, firstly, it does not appear that the upper facing surface would be viewable “from the ground engaging surface” because they are on opposite sides. Secondly, it is unclear why the concave/convex shape is being defined “from a view of the ground engaging surface” when a surface itself can be defined as concave or convex. The specific distinction that it is being defined “front a view of the ground engaging surface” (i.e., from below) appears to be defining the shape as the opposite from what would be considered the conventional definition of concave/convex when referring to a surface, see drawing provided above with the 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claim 1 above. It is unclear if this is the intended effect of the language or not. Examiner respectfully suggests that the concavity/convexity of the upper facing surface be defined relative to the surface itself (i.e., the upper facing surface is substantially flat or concave or convex, as applicable) rather than “from a view of the ground engaging surface” for clarity.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites the limitation “the maximum intermediate depth value measuring a position having a largest depth value”. This limitation is unclear because it is unclear how a depth value can “measure” a position. It appears that the maximum intermediate depth value is defined at a position having a largest depth value.
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites “the maximum intermediate depth value”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The maximum intermediate depth value was only introduced in claim 8, however, claim 9 does not depend from claim 8. For the purposes of examination, this limitation has been interpreted as referring to the limitation introduced in claim 8; however, if this interpretation is correct, the dependency should be updated for proper antecedent basis.
Further regarding claim 9, the claim recites “the intermediate depth value” which also lacks antecedent basis and it is unclear whether this should be referring to the maximum intermediate depth value of claim 8 or any intermediate depth value. For the purposes of examination, this limitation has been interpreted as referring to the limitation introduced in claim 8; however, if this interpretation is correct, the dependency and claim terminology should be updated for proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites the limitation “the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface”. The phrase “from a view of the ground engaging surface” introduces confusion into the claim because, firstly, it does not appear that the upper facing surface would be viewable “from the ground engaging surface” because they are on opposite sides. Secondly, it is unclear why the concave/convex shape is being defined “from a view of the ground engaging surface” when a surface itself can be defined as concave or convex. The specific distinction that it is being defined “front a view of the ground engaging surface” (i.e., from below) appears to be defining the shape as the opposite from what would be considered the conventional definition of concave/convex when referring to a surface, see drawing provided above with the 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claim 1 above. It is unclear if this is the intended effect of the language or not. Examiner respectfully suggests that the concavity/convexity of the upper facing surface be defined relative to the surface itself (i.e., the upper facing surface is substantially flat or concave or convex, as applicable) rather than “from a view of the ground engaging surface” for clarity.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites the limitations “the lateral axis” and “the longitudinal axis”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. They have been interpreted for the purposes of examination as “a lateral axis” and “a longitudinal axis”.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites the limitation “the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface; and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.” The phrase “from a view of the ground engaging surface” introduces confusion into the claim because, firstly, it does not appear that the upper facing surface would be viewable “from the ground engaging surface” because they are on opposite sides. Secondly, it is unclear why the concave/convex shape is being defined “from a view of the ground engaging surface” when a surface itself can be defined as concave or convex. The specific distinction that it is being defined “front a view of the ground engaging surface” (i.e., from below) appears to be defining the shape as the opposite from what would be considered the conventional definition of concave/convex when referring to a surface, see drawing provided above with the 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claim 1 above. It is unclear if this is the intended effect of the language or not. Examiner respectfully suggests that the concavity/convexity of the upper facing surface be defined relative to the surface itself (i.e., the upper facing surface is substantially flat or concave or convex, as applicable) rather than “from a view of the ground engaging surface” for clarity.
The dependent claims inherit the deficiency by nature of dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101). The claim recites the limitation “directly under an intermediate area of the foot” which defines the structure in terms of human anatomy and therefore requires a human foot.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Whatley (US 2002/0026730).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood by Examiner, Whatley discloses: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot and at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot (see annotated figure 13 below showing the posterior area and anterior area); an intermediate area of the sole arrangement, wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 below showing the intermediate area); the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface (upper surface 32E) and a ground engaging surface (lower surface 72E), wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface (see figure 13); the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring the sole arrangement having a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 below showing the maximum posterior depth); the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring the sole arrangement having a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 below showing the maximum anterior depth); the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a predetermined depth value (see annotated figure 13 below showing the maximum anterior depth is greater than the maximum posterior depth; Examiner notes that no particular value is described by the claim for the “predetermined depth value” so any value is found to be sufficient); a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning to the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 below showing a striking area located between the posterior area and the anterior area (i.e., in an area where the posterior area “transitions to” the anterior area)) and the ground engaging surface of the striking area facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 below, the ground engaging surface of the striking area is oriented downward and toward the posterior end, so it is “facing away” from the anterior end); the sole arrangement substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the striking area in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 below showing an area where the depth value is decreasing from the striking area in a direction toward the anterior end; Examiner notes that no particular distance has been defined for the “predetermined distance” so any distance is found to be sufficient); and the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 below showing the transition of the upper facing surface from the posterior area to the intermediate area appears concave from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above); or the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 below showing the transition of the upper facing surface from the intermediate area to the anterior area appears convex from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above).
PNG
media_image2.png
472
1025
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
362
689
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the lateral axis extending from a medial side of the sole arrangement in a direction toward a lateral side of the sole arrangement (there is a lateral axis extending from the medial side to the lateral side of the sole); and the longitudinal axis extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (there is a longitudinal axis extending from the posterior end to the anterior end).
Regarding claim 3, as best understood by Examiner, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, wherein the lowest positions further comprising: the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the transition of the upper facing surface from the posterior area to the intermediate area appears concave from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above); the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the transition of the upper facing surface from the intermediate area to the anterior area appears convex from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above); and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the upper facing surface in the intermediate area is substantially flat from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above).
Regarding claim 4, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the anterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the depth of the anterior area gradually decreases from the position of the maximum anterior depth toward the anterior end).
Regarding claim 5, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the posterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum posterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the depth of the posterior area gradually decreases from the position of the maximum posterior depth toward the posterior end).
Regarding claim 6, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum lateral depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value (see annotated figure 4 below, the lateral segment may be defined as the lateral side of the sole as divided by the longitudinal axis, see also figure 5; “The greatest thickness of the sole is generally constant across the width of the sole below the line 56. Due to variations in individual's feet, the exact position of the line 56 and its angle to the longitudinal axis 50 will vary. The lines 52 and 54 show possible places for the line 56 in individuals with either short or long toes” paragraph 66, indicating that the maximum thickness will be the same in the medial and lateral sides, i.e., the maximum lateral depth is equal to the maximum anterior depth); a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum medial depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value (see annotated figure 4 below, the medial segment may be defined as the lateral side of the sole as divided by the longitudinal axis, see also figure 5; “The greatest thickness of the sole is generally constant across the width of the sole below the line 56. Due to variations in individual's feet, the exact position of the line 56 and its angle to the longitudinal axis 50 will vary. The lines 52 and 54 show possible places for the line 56 in individuals with either short or long toes” paragraph 66, indicating that the maximum thickness will be the same in the medial and lateral sides, i.e., the maximum medial depth is equal to the maximum anterior depth); and the maximum lateral depth position being farther away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position by a difference distance value (see annotated figure 4 below showing the maximum lateral depth position is farther away from the anterior end than the maximum medial depth position), wherein the difference distance value being a predetermined distance value between the maximum lateral depth position and the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis (Examiner notes that since the maximum lateral depth position is farther from the anterior end than the maximum medial depth position and no specific value for the “predetermined distance value” has been defined by the claim, any distance is found to be sufficient).
PNG
media_image4.png
388
889
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum lateral depth position including a maximum lateral depth, wherein the maximum lateral depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above, the lateral segment may be defined as the lateral side of the sole as divided by the longitudinal axis, see also figure 5; “The greatest thickness of the sole is generally constant across the width of the sole below the line 56. Due to variations in individual's feet, the exact position of the line 56 and its angle to the longitudinal axis 50 will vary. The lines 52 and 54 show possible places for the line 56 in individuals with either short or long toes” paragraph 66, indicating that the maximum thickness will be the same in the medial and lateral sides, i.e., the maximum lateral depth is equal to the maximum anterior depth); a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum medial depth position including a maximum medial depth value, wherein the maximum medial depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above, the medial segment may be defined as the lateral side of the sole as divided by the longitudinal axis, see also figure 5; “The greatest thickness of the sole is generally constant across the width of the sole below the line 56. Due to variations in individual's feet, the exact position of the line 56 and its angle to the longitudinal axis 50 will vary. The lines 52 and 54 show possible places for the line 56 in individuals with either short or long toes” paragraph 66, indicating that the maximum thickness will be the same in the medial and lateral sides, i.e., the maximum medial depth is equal to the maximum anterior depth); and the maximum lateral depth position being spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by a difference distance value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above showing the maximum lateral depth position is spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position; Examiner notes that no specific value for the “difference distance value” has been defined by the claim, so any distance is found to be sufficient), wherein the maximum lateral depth position being closer to the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by the difference distance value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above showing the maximum lateral depth position is farther away from the anterior end than the maximum medial depth position, therefore it is also closer to the posterior end the maximum medial depth position since the posterior end is opposite the anterior end).
Regarding claim 8, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the sole arrangement including a maximum intermediate depth value (see annotated figure 13 below showing the maximum intermediate depth), wherein the maximum intermediate depth value measuring a position having a largest depth value within the intermediate area of the sole arrangement along a lateral and longitudinal direction and directly under an intermediate area of the foot (see annotated figure 13 below showing the maximum intermediate depth); and the maximum intermediate depth value being measured at a position being spaced apart along a longitudinal axis from the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the posterior area of the sole arrangement, or both, by a predetermined distance value (see annotated figure 13 below showing the maximum intermediate depth is spaced apart from the posterior area of the sole; Examine notes that no specific value for the “predetermined distance value” has been defined by the claim, so any distance is found to be sufficient).
PNG
media_image5.png
390
871
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, as best understood by Examiner, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum intermediate depth value by a second difference depth value (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 8 above showing the maximum anterior depth is greater than the maximum intermediate depth; Examine notes that no specific value for the “second difference depth value” has been defined by the claim, so any value is found to be sufficient); and the maximum posterior depth value being larger than the intermediate depth value by a third difference depth value (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 8 above showing the maximum posterior depth is greater than the maximum intermediate depth; Examine notes that no specific value for the “third difference depth value” has been defined by the claim, so any value is found to be sufficient).
Regarding claim 10, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the striking area including an area increasing in depth value from a direction of the posterior area of the sole arrangement to a position of the maximum anterior depth value at a predetermined transition rate (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the striking area has an area that increases in depth value in a direction from the posterior area of the sole toward a position of the max anterior depth; Examine notes that no specific value for the “predetermined transition rate” has been defined by the claim, so any transition rate is found to be sufficient); and the striking area including an area substantially maintaining a depth value, or decreasing in depth value at a second transition rate, from the position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the striking area has an area that decreases in depth value in a direction from the maximum anterior depth position toward the anterior end; Examine notes that no specific value for the “second transition rate” has been defined by the claim, so any transition rate is found to be sufficient).
Regarding claim 11, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 10, further comprising: a lateral side of the striking area including the area substantially maintaining the depth value for a predetermined distance (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above; figure 13 is understood to be a lateral side view given that figure 6 is described as a medial view in paragraph 67).
Regarding claim 12 as best understood by Examiner, Whatley discloses: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot and at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the posterior area and anterior area); the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface (upper surface 32E) and a ground engaging surface (lower surface 72E), wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface (see figure 13); the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the maximum posterior depth); the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the maximum anterior depth); the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a predetermined depth value (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the maximum anterior depth is greater than the maximum posterior depth; Examiner notes that no particular value is described by the claim for the “predetermined depth value” so any value is found to be sufficient); and the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the transition of the upper facing surface from an intermediate area to the anterior area (which Examiner notes is part of the transition from the posterior area to the anterior area) appears convex from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above).
Regarding claim 13, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: the largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface and configured to be directly under the foot within the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the maximum anterior depth position); the largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface and configured to be directly under the heel of the foot (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the maximum posterior depth position); the lateral axis extending from a medial side of the sole arrangement in a direction toward a lateral side of the sole arrangement (there is a lateral axis extending from the medial side to the lateral side of the sole); and the longitudinal axis extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (there is a longitudinal axis extending from the posterior end to the anterior end).
Regarding claim 14, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: the anterior area of the sole arrangement extending from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement to an intermediate area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the intermediate area), wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the intermediate area); the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the transition of the upper facing surface from the posterior area to the intermediate area appears concave from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above); the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the transition of the upper facing surface from the intermediate area to the anterior area appears convex from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above); and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the upper facing surface in the intermediate area is substantially flat from the ground engaging surface, see 35 USC 112(b) rejection of this claim above).
Regarding claim 15, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a depth value of the anterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the depth of the anterior area gradually decreases from the position of the maximum anterior depth toward the anterior end).
Regarding claim 16, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum lateral depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above, the lateral segment may be defined as the lateral side of the sole as divided by the longitudinal axis, see also figure 5; “The greatest thickness of the sole is generally constant across the width of the sole below the line 56. Due to variations in individual's feet, the exact position of the line 56 and its angle to the longitudinal axis 50 will vary. The lines 52 and 54 show possible places for the line 56 in individuals with either short or long toes” paragraph 66, indicating that the maximum thickness will be the same in the medial and lateral sides, i.e., the maximum lateral depth is equal to the maximum anterior depth); a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum medial depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above, the medial segment may be defined as the lateral side of the sole as divided by the longitudinal axis, see also figure 5; “The greatest thickness of the sole is generally constant across the width of the sole below the line 56. Due to variations in individual's feet, the exact position of the line 56 and its angle to the longitudinal axis 50 will vary. The lines 52 and 54 show possible places for the line 56 in individuals with either short or long toes” paragraph 66, indicating that the maximum thickness will be the same in the medial and lateral sides, i.e., the maximum medial depth is equal to the maximum anterior depth); and the maximum lateral depth position being farther away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position by a difference distance value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above showing the maximum lateral depth position is farther away from the anterior end than the maximum medial depth position), wherein the difference distance value being a predetermined distance value between the maximum lateral depth position and the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis (Examiner notes that since the maximum lateral depth position is farther from the anterior end than the maximum medial depth position and no specific value for the “predetermined distance value” has been defined by the claim, any distance is found to be sufficient).
Regarding claim 17, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum lateral depth position including a maximum lateral, wherein the maximum lateral depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above, the lateral segment may be defined as the lateral side of the sole as divided by the longitudinal axis, see also figure 5; “The greatest thickness of the sole is generally constant across the width of the sole below the line 56. Due to variations in individual's feet, the exact position of the line 56 and its angle to the longitudinal axis 50 will vary. The lines 52 and 54 show possible places for the line 56 in individuals with either short or long toes” paragraph 66, indicating that the maximum thickness will be the same in the medial and lateral sides, i.e., the maximum lateral depth is equal to the maximum anterior depth); a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum medial depth position including a maximum medial depth value, wherein the maximum medial depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above, the medial segment may be defined as the lateral side of the sole as divided by the longitudinal axis, see also figure 5; “The greatest thickness of the sole is generally constant across the width of the sole below the line 56. Due to variations in individual's feet, the exact position of the line 56 and its angle to the longitudinal axis 50 will vary. The lines 52 and 54 show possible places for the line 56 in individuals with either short or long toes” paragraph 66, indicating that the maximum thickness will be the same in the medial and lateral sides, i.e., the maximum medial depth is equal to the maximum anterior depth); and the maximum lateral depth position being spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by a difference distance value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above showing the maximum lateral depth position is spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position; Examiner notes that no specific value for the “difference distance value” has been defined by the claim, so any distance is found to be sufficient), wherein the maximum lateral depth position being closer to the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by the difference distance value (see annotated figure 4 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 6 above showing the maximum lateral depth position is farther away from the anterior end than the maximum medial depth position, therefore it is also closer to the posterior end the maximum medial depth position since the posterior end is opposite the anterior end).
Regarding claim 18, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 14, further comprising: the sole arrangement including a maximum intermediate depth value (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 8 above showing the maximum intermediate depth), wherein the maximum intermediate depth value measuring the sole arrangement having a largest depth value within the intermediate area of the sole arrangement along a lateral and longitudinal direction (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 8 above showing the maximum intermediate depth); and the maximum intermediate depth value being measured at a position being spaced apart along a longitudinal axis from the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the posterior area of the sole arrangement, or both, by a predetermined distance value (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 8 above showing the maximum intermediate depth is spaced apart from the posterior area of the sole; Examine notes that no specific value for the “predetermined distance value” has been defined by the claim, so any distance is found to be sufficient).
Regarding claim 19, Whatley discloses: The sole arrangement of claim 14, further comprising: a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the intermediate area of the sole arrangement transitioning to and into the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing a striking area located between the posterior area and the anterior area (i.e., in an area where the posterior area “transitions to” the anterior area)); the striking area including an area increasing in depth value from a direction of the posterior area of the sole arrangement to a position of the maximum anterior depth value at a predetermined transition rate (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the striking area has an area that increases in depth value in a direction from the posterior area of the sole toward a position of the max anterior depth; Examine notes that no specific value for the “predetermined transition rate” has been defined by the claim, so any transition rate is found to be sufficient); and the striking area including an area substantially maintaining a depth value, or decreasing in depth value at a second transition rate, from the position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the striking area has an area that decreases in depth value in a direction from the maximum anterior depth position toward the anterior end; Examine notes that no specific value for the “second transition rate” has been defined by the claim, so any transition rate is found to be sufficient).
Regarding claim 20, Whatley discloses: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel area of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot or at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the posterior area and anterior area); the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface (upper surface 32E) and a ground engaging surface (lower surface 72E), wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface (see figure 13); the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a position within the posterior area of the sole arrangement having a largest depth value (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the maximum posterior depth); the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a position within the anterior area of the sole arrangement having a largest depth value (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the maximum anterior depth); the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a predetermined depth value (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing the maximum anterior depth is greater than the maximum posterior depth; Examiner notes that no particular value is described by the claim for the “predetermined depth value” so any value is found to be sufficient); a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning to the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing a striking area located between the posterior area and the anterior area (i.e., in an area where the posterior area “transitions to” the anterior area)), and the ground engaging surface of the striking area at least partially facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above, the ground engaging surface of the striking area is oriented downward and toward the posterior end, so it is “facing away” from the anterior end); and the sole arrangement substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the position of the striking area in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement (see annotated figure 13 provided with the 35 USC 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 1 above showing an area where the depth value is decreasing from the striking area in a direction toward the anterior end; Examiner notes that no particular distance has been defined for the “predetermined distance” so any distance is found to be sufficient).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-17 and 20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12343298. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of US Patent No. 12343298 are essentially the same as those in the instant application, as clearly shown in the comparison chart below. When the claims do differ, the claims in US Patent No. 12343298 have the narrower scope, which makes the claims of the instant application patentably indistinct from the claims of US Patent No. 12343298.
Instant Application: 19/231,286
US Patent No. 12343298
Claim 1: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising:
the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot and at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
an intermediate area of the sole arrangement, wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring the sole arrangement having a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement;
the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring the sole arrangement having a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a predetermined depth value;
a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning to the anterior area of the sole arrangement and the ground engaging surface of the striking area facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
the sole arrangement substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the striking area in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
and the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface;
or the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 1: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising:
the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot and at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a thickest position including a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement, the thickest position being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface along a lateral axis and at any position of the upper facing surface or the ground engaging surface along a longitudinal axis within the posterior area of the sole arrangement;
the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a thickest position including a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the thickest position being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface along a lateral axis and at any position of the upper facing surface or the ground engaging surface along a longitudinal axis within the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a difference depth value, wherein the difference depth value being a predetermined depth value;
a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning into the anterior area of the sole arrangement and the ground engaging surface of the striking area facing the posterior area of the sole arrangement and facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the sole arrangement substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the position of the maximum anterior depth value within the striking area in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the posterior area of the sole arrangement extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement to an intermediate area of the sole arrangement, wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement; and the upper facing surface being shaped in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; or the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 2: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the lateral axis extending from a medial side of the sole arrangement in a direction toward a lateral side of the sole arrangement; and the longitudinal axis extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 2: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the lateral axis extending from a medial side of the sole arrangement in a direction toward a lateral side of the sole arrangement; and the longitudinal axis extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 3: The sole arrangement of claim 1, wherein the lowest positions further comprising: the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface; and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 3: The sole arrangement of claim 1, wherein the lowest positions further comprising: the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface; and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 4: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the anterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 4: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the anterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 5: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the posterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum posterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 5: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the posterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum posterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 6: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum lateral depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum medial depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being farther away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position by a difference distance value, wherein the difference distance value being a predetermined distance value between the maximum lateral depth position and the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis.
Claim 6: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum lateral depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum medial depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being farther away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position by a difference distance value, wherein the difference distance value being a predetermined distance value between the maximum lateral depth position and the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis.
Claim 7: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum lateral depth position including a maximum lateral depth, wherein the maximum lateral depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum medial depth position including a maximum medial depth value, wherein the maximum medial depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by a difference distance value, wherein the maximum lateral depth position being closer to the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by the difference distance value.
Claim 7: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum lateral depth position including a maximum lateral depth, wherein the maximum lateral depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum medial depth position including a maximum medial depth value, wherein the maximum medial depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by a difference distance value, wherein the maximum lateral depth position being closer to the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by the difference distance value.
Claim 8: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the sole arrangement including a maximum intermediate depth value, wherein the maximum intermediate depth value measuring a position having a largest depth value within the intermediate area of the sole arrangement along a lateral and longitudinal direction and directly under an intermediate area of the foot; and the maximum intermediate depth value being measured at a position being spaced apart along a longitudinal axis from the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the posterior area of the sole arrangement, or both, by a predetermined distance value.
Claim 8: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the sole arrangement including a maximum intermediate depth value, wherein the maximum intermediate depth value measuring a thickest position within the intermediate area of the sole arrangement along a lateral and longitudinal direction and directly under an intermediate area of the foot; and the maximum intermediate depth value being measured at a position being spaced apart along a longitudinal axis from the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the posterior area of the sole arrangement, or both, by a predetermined distance value.
Claim 9: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum intermediate depth value by a second difference depth value; and the maximum posterior depth value being larger than the intermediate depth value by a third difference depth value.
Claim 9: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum intermediate depth value by a second difference depth value; and the maximum posterior depth value being larger than the intermediate depth value by a third difference depth value.
Claim 10: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the striking area including an area increasing in depth value from a direction of the posterior area of the sole arrangement to a position of the maximum anterior depth value at a predetermined transition rate; and the striking area including an area substantially maintaining a depth value, or decreasing in depth value at a second transition rate, from the position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 10: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the striking area including an area increasing in depth value from a direction of the posterior area of the sole arrangement to a position of the maximum anterior depth value at a predetermined transition rate; and the striking area including an area substantially maintaining a depth value, or decreasing in depth value at a second transition rate, from the position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 11: The sole arrangement of claim 10, further comprising: a lateral side of the striking area including the area substantially maintaining the depth value for a predetermined distance.
Claim 11: The sole arrangement of claim 10, further comprising: a lateral side of the striking area including the area substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance.
Claim 12: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot and at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement;
the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a predetermined depth value;
and the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 12: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot and at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement, the largest depth value being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface and configured to be directly under the heel of the foot;
the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the largest depth value being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface and configured to be directly under the foot within the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a difference depth value, wherein the difference depth value being a predetermined depth value; the anterior area of the sole arrangement extending from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement to an intermediate area of the sole arrangement, wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
and the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; or the upper facing surface being shaped in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 13: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: the largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface and configured to be directly under the foot within the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface and configured to be directly under the heel of the foot; the lateral axis extending from a medial side of the sole arrangement in a direction toward a lateral side of the sole arrangement; and the longitudinal axis extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Excerpts from claim 12: a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the largest depth value being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface and configured to be directly under the foot within the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement, the largest depth value being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface and configured to be directly under the heel of the foot;
Claim 13: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: the lateral axis extending from a medial side of the sole arrangement in a direction toward a lateral side of the sole arrangement; and the longitudinal axis extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 14: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: the anterior area of the sole arrangement extending from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement to an intermediate area of the sole arrangement, wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface;
the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface; and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Excerpts from claim 12: the anterior area of the sole arrangement extending from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement to an intermediate area of the sole arrangement, wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement
Claim 14: The sole arrangement of claim 12, wherein the lowest positions further comprising: the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface;
the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface; and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 15: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a depth value of the anterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 15: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a depth value of the anterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 16: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum lateral depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum medial depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being farther away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position by a difference distance value, wherein the difference distance value being a predetermined distance value between the maximum lateral depth position and the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis.
Claim 16: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum lateral depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum medial depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being farther away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position by a difference distance value, wherein the difference distance value being a predetermined distance value between the maximum lateral depth position and the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis.
Claim 17: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum lateral depth position including a maximum lateral, wherein the maximum lateral depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum medial depth position including a maximum medial depth value, wherein the maximum medial depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by a difference distance value, wherein the maximum lateral depth position being closer to the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by the difference distance value.
Claim 17: The sole arrangement of claim 12, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum lateral depth position including a maximum lateral, wherein the maximum lateral depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum medial depth position including a maximum medial depth value, wherein the maximum medial depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by a difference distance value, wherein the maximum lateral depth position being closer to the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by the difference distance value.
Claim 20: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel area of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot or at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a position within the posterior area of the sole arrangement having a largest depth value; the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a position within the anterior area of the sole arrangement having a largest depth value; the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a predetermined depth value; a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning to the anterior area of the sole arrangement, and the ground engaging surface of the striking area at least partially facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement; and the sole arrangement substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the position of the striking area in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 20: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel area of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot or at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a thickest position within the posterior area of the sole arrangement, the thickest position being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface along a lateral axis and at any position of the upper facing surface or the ground engaging surface along a longitudinal axis directly under the heel area of the foot; the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a thickest position within the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the thickest position being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface along a lateral axis and at any position of the upper facing surface or the ground engaging surface along a longitudinal axis directly under the forefoot area of the foot; the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a difference depth value, wherein the difference depth value being a predetermined depth value; a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning to or into the anterior area of the sole arrangement and the ground engaging surface of the striking area facing the posterior area of the sole arrangement and facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement; and the sole arrangement substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the position of the maximum anterior depth value within the striking area in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claims 1-11 and 20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11911333. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of US Patent No. 12343298 are essentially the same as those in the instant application, as clearly shown in the comparison chart below. When the claims do differ, the claims in US Patent No. 12343298 have the narrower scope, which makes the claims of the instant application patentably indistinct from the claims of US Patent No. 11911333.
Instant Application: 19/231,286
US Patent No. 11911333
Claim 1: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising:
the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot and at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
an intermediate area of the sole arrangement, wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring the sole arrangement having a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement;
the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring the sole arrangement having a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a predetermined depth value;
a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning to the anterior area of the sole arrangement and the ground engaging surface of the striking area facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
the sole arrangement substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the striking area in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
and the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface;
or the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 1: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot and at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a thickest position including a largest depth value within the posterior area of the sole arrangement, the thickest position being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface along a lateral axis and at any position of the upper facing surface or the ground engaging surface along a longitudinal axis within the posterior area of the sole arrangement;
the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a thickest position including a largest depth value within the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the thickest position being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface along a lateral axis and at any position of the upper facing surface or the ground engaging surface along a longitudinal axis within the anterior area of the sole arrangement;
the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a difference depth value, wherein the difference depth value being a predetermined depth value;
a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning into the anterior area of the sole arrangement and the ground engaging surface of the striking area facing the posterior area of the sole arrangement and facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the striking area including an area substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the posterior area of the sole arrangement extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement to an intermediate area of the sole arrangement, wherein the intermediate area of the sole arrangement connecting the posterior area of the sole arrangement with the anterior area of the sole arrangement; the anterior area of the sole arrangement extending from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement;
and the upper facing surface being shaped in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; or the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 2: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the lateral axis extending from a medial side of the sole arrangement in a direction toward a lateral side of the sole arrangement; and the longitudinal axis extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 2: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the lateral axis extending from a medial side of the sole arrangement in a direction toward a lateral side of the sole arrangement; and the longitudinal axis extending from the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 3: The sole arrangement of claim 1, wherein the lowest positions further comprising: the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface; and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 3: The sole arrangement of claim 1, wherein the lowest positions further comprising: the upper facing surface transitioning from the posterior area of the sole arrangement to the intermediate area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from a view of the ground engaging surface; the upper facing surface transitioning from the intermediate area of the sole arrangement to the anterior area of the sole arrangement in a substantially flat or convex shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface; and the upper facing surface in the intermediate area of the sole arrangement being shaped in a substantially flat or concave shaped form from the view of the ground engaging surface.
Claim 4: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the anterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 4: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the anterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 5: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the posterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum posterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 5: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a depth value of the posterior area of the sole arrangement gradually decreasing along a longitudinal axis from a position of the maximum posterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 6: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum lateral depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum medial depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being farther away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position by a difference distance value, wherein the difference distance value being a predetermined distance value between the maximum lateral depth position and the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis.
Claim 6: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum lateral depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement including a maximum medial depth position with a depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being farther away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position by a difference distance value, wherein the difference distance value being a predetermined distance value between the maximum lateral depth position and the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis.
Claim 7: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum lateral depth position including a maximum lateral depth, wherein the maximum lateral depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum medial depth position including a maximum medial depth value, wherein the maximum medial depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by a difference distance value, wherein the maximum lateral depth position being closer to the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by the difference distance value.
Claim 7: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: a lateral segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum lateral depth position including a maximum lateral, wherein the maximum lateral depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; a medial segment of the anterior area of the sole arrangement comprising a maximum medial depth position including a maximum medial depth value, wherein the maximum medial depth value being substantially equal to the maximum anterior depth value; and the maximum lateral depth position being spaced apart from the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by a difference distance value, wherein the maximum lateral depth position being closer to the end of the posterior area of the sole arrangement than the maximum medial depth position along a longitudinal axis by the difference distance value.
Claim 8: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the sole arrangement including a maximum intermediate depth value, wherein the maximum intermediate depth value measuring a position having a largest depth value within the intermediate area of the sole arrangement along a lateral and longitudinal direction and directly under an intermediate area of the foot; and the maximum intermediate depth value being measured at a position being spaced apart along a longitudinal axis from the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the posterior area of the sole arrangement, or both, by a predetermined distance value.
Claim 8: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the sole arrangement including a maximum intermediate depth value, wherein the maximum intermediate depth value measuring a thickest position within the intermediate area of the sole arrangement along a lateral and longitudinal direction and directly under an intermediate area of the foot; and the maximum intermediate depth value being measured at a position being spaced apart along a longitudinal axis from the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the posterior area of the sole arrangement, or both, by a predetermined distance value.
Claim 9: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum intermediate depth value by a second difference depth value; and the maximum posterior depth value being larger than the intermediate depth value by a third difference depth value.
Claim 9: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum intermediate depth value by a second difference depth value; and the maximum posterior depth value being larger than the intermediate depth value by a third difference depth value.
Claim 10: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the striking area including an area increasing in depth value from a direction of the posterior area of the sole arrangement to a position of the maximum anterior depth value at a predetermined transition rate; and the striking area including an area substantially maintaining a depth value, or decreasing in depth value at a second transition rate, from the position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 10: The sole arrangement of claim 1, further comprising: the striking area including an area increasing in depth value from a direction of the posterior area of the sole arrangement to a position of the maximum anterior depth value at a predetermined transition rate; and the striking area including an area substantially maintaining a depth value, or decreasing in depth value at a second transition rate, from the position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 11: The sole arrangement of claim 10, further comprising: a lateral side of the striking area including the area substantially maintaining the depth value for a predetermined distance.
Claim 11: The sole arrangement of claim 10, further comprising: a lateral side of the striking area including the area substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance.
Claim 20: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel area of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot or at least partially proximate to a midfoot area of the foot;
the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a position within the posterior area of the sole arrangement having a largest depth value; the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a position within the anterior area of the sole arrangement having a largest depth value; the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a predetermined depth value; a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning to the anterior area of the sole arrangement, and the ground engaging surface of the striking area at least partially facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement; and the sole arrangement substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the position of the striking area in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Claim 20: A sole arrangement for an article of footwear comprising: the sole arrangement extending from an end of a posterior area of the sole arrangement to an end of an anterior area of the sole arrangement, wherein the posterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a heel area of a foot and the anterior area of the sole arrangement being configured to be proximate to a forefoot area of the foot;
the sole arrangement including an upper facing surface and a ground engaging surface, wherein the upper facing surface being on an opposite side of the sole arrangement than the ground engaging surface;
the sole arrangement including a maximum posterior depth value, wherein the maximum posterior depth value measuring a thickest position within the posterior area of the sole arrangement, the thickest position being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface along a lateral axis and at any position of the upper facing surface or the ground engaging surface along a longitudinal axis directly under the heel area of the foot; the sole arrangement including a maximum anterior depth value, wherein the maximum anterior depth value measuring a thickest position within the anterior area of the sole arrangement, the thickest position being measured at a lowest position of the upper facing surface along a lateral axis and at any position of the upper facing surface or the ground engaging surface along a longitudinal axis directly under the forefoot area of the foot; the maximum anterior depth value being larger than the maximum posterior depth value by a difference depth value, wherein the difference depth value being a predetermined depth value; a striking area, wherein the striking area being an area where the posterior area of the sole arrangement transitioning to or into the anterior area of the sole arrangement and the ground engaging surface of the striking area facing the posterior area of the sole arrangement and facing away from the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement; and the striking area including an area substantially maintaining a depth value for a predetermined distance or decreasing in depth value from the position of the maximum anterior depth value in a direction toward the end of the anterior area of the sole arrangement.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Masoodifar (US 2005/0246924), Talbott (US 2004/0064973), Fuchslocher (US 2006/0254093), Baskerville (US 2013/0025158), and Nakatsuka (US 2010/0269368) teach relevant footwear.
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
/PATRICK J. LYNCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights