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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The preliminary amendment filed 30 September 2025 has been entered. Currently Claims 52-58 and 106-118 are pending.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: ARTICLES OF FOOTWEAR HAVING FAR INFRARED HEATING ELEMENT AND THERMOELECTRIC COOLER ASSEMBLY.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The applicant is respectfully advised that in examining a pending application, the claims are interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably convey. In re American Academy of Science Tech Center, 70 USPQ2d. 1827, 1834 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2004). MPEP § 2111.01.
Claims 52-58, 106 and 110-117 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omnia (FR3022122A1). For purposes of the rejection the Examiner refers to the translation of the specification.
Regarding Claims 52, 106 and 114, Omni discloses in Figures 1-3, an article of footwear for warm-up and active recovery, the article of footwear comprising: a sole 1; and an upper (upper sole 40) having an infrared radiation heating element, wherein the far infrared radiation heating element is configured to apply a therapeutic regimen (the heating part 30 can be an infrared light Para 0015) wherein the footwear has a body and two terminals configured to pass a current through the body, wherein the far infrared radiation heating system is configured to provide heat to a foot of a wearer of the article of footwear; and a thermoelectric cooler assembly configured to transfer heat away from the foot of the wearer (inherently a thermoelectric function with current running through wo bodies to achieve the Peltier effect).
Omni does not explicitly disclose the infrared light being a Far Infrared (FIR) light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to substitute FIR for the infrared light because they are known equivalents and it would have yielded the predictable result providing a longer wavelength therapy for therapeutic tissue penetration. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding Claim 54, Omni discloses the article of footwear of claim 52, further comprising cold elements coupled to the sole (TEC devices cooling means of a thermoelectric or Peltier model. Para 0015).
Regarding Claims 55-56, Omni discloses the article of footwear of claim 54, wherein the cold elements (TEC) and the infrared radiation heating element are configured to operate sequentially to apply the therapeutic regimen wherein the cold elements and the far infrared radiation heating element are configured to not operate simultaneously. (Para 0015).
Regarding Claim 57, Omni discloses in Figures 1-3, the article of footwear of claim 54, wherein the cold elements comprise thermoelectric coolers (Para 0015).
Regarding Claim 58, Omni discloses in Figures 1-3, the article of footwear of claim 54, wherein the cold elements comprise contact areas (the contact areas being the front area of the foot where the cooling element is located (Para 0015 last paragraph).
Regarding Claim 110, Omni discloses the article of footwear of claim 106, wherein the far infrared radiation heating system is disposed in the sole (Para 0015).
Regarding Claim 111, Omni discloses in Figures 1-3, the article of footwear of claim 106, wherein the thermoelectric cooler assembly (heating cooling part 30) is disposed in the sole (upper sole 40 Para 0015).
Regarding Claim 112, Omni discloses in Figures 1-3, the article of footwear of claim 106, further comprising an upper (upper sole 40), wherein the far infrared radiation heating system is disposed in the upper 40 (Para 0015).
Regarding Claim 113 and 117, Omni does not explicitly disclose the article of footwear of claim 106 and 114 respectively, further comprising: an additional far infrared radiation heating system; and an additional thermoelectric cooler assembly, wherein the far infrared radiation heating system, the additional far infrared radiation heating system, the thermoelectric cooler assembly, and the additional thermoelectric cooler assembly are disposed in the sole or systems of the upper comprises three or more far infrared heating systems disposed on a medial side of the upper and three or more far infrared heating systems disposed on a lateral side of the upper.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have multiple IR and TEC units in the sole to heat and cool multiple locations of the foot since it has been held that mere duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding Claim 115, Omni discloses in Figures 1-3, the article of footwear of claim 114, wherein the far infrared heating system of the sole is disposed in a forefoot region of the sole (front of foot Para 0015 last paragraph).
Regarding Claim 116, Omnia discloses in Figure 1, the article of footwear of claim 114, wherein the one or more far infrared heating systems 30 of the upper extend from a medial side to a lateral side of the upper (the element 30 extends from the middle of the front food to the outer edges).
Claims 108-109 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omni as applied to claim 106 above, and further in view of Poitras (U.S. PG Publication No. 2003/0089437).
Omni does not disclose the body comprises a mesh that comprises carbon fiber strands.
Poitras discloses footwear where part of the sole is made from a mesh of carbon fiber strands (Para 0010) that is exceptionally strong and stable.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use a carbon fiber material for the sole body in which the FIR is incorporated as carbon fiber mesh is stable and sturdy.
Claim 53 and 107 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omni as applied to claim 52 and 106 respectively above, and further in view of Ishii (U.S. PG Publication No. 2003/0068949).
Omni does not disclose the infrared radiation heating element comprises one of carbon fiber, graphene, and ceramics.
Ishii discloses a FIR comprising ceramics which radiate the FIR (IR radiation ceramics such as alumina, zirconia and magnesia Para 0119).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use an inorganic ceramic for the infrared radiating element. All the claimed elements in Omni and Ishii were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the ceramic with the footwear heating element as claimed with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded the predictable result providing heat reserving material made from ceramic to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim 118 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omni as applied to claim 114 above, and further in view of Ko (KR 101764715B1).
Omnia does not disclose an air intake configured to draw in air to flow across a portion of the thermoelectric cooling system of the sole.
Ko discloses in Figure 2 a ventilation hole 300 for allowing air flow across a heating cooling portion (Para 0047).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ribeiro (EP3799754A1) discloses therapeutic footwear with a TEC.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J MAY whose telephone number is (571)272-5919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-3:30pm.
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, Jong-Suk (James) Lee can be reached at 571-272-7044. 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.
/ROBERT J MAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875