Appeal No. 96-3616
Application 08/368,857
examiner's rejections will be sustained. Our reasoning in
support of this determination follows.
Looking first at the examiner's rejection of claim 1 under
§ 102(b), we are in agreement with the examiner that the groove
(21) of Anderie is readable as the "first cavity" set forth in
appellant's claim 1 on appeal. Note also that the translation
(page 7, lines 11-20) indicates that the support strap (3)
therein may also "extend through the sole of the shoe." We also
agree with the examiner that the stationary support strap (3) of
Anderie includes hook and loop fastener (e.g., Velcro) closure or
securement parts on the strap (see Figure 3, parts 31, 32 and
translation, page 9). Where we part company with the examiner's
position is in the requirement of claim 1 that the stationary
strap be "built into said upper shoe." As pointed out by
appellant (brief, page 10), the strap (3) of Anderie is secured
to the outside of the shoe at the edge or upper side of the sole
(2). See Figure 1 of Anderie. In contrast, Figures 2, 4 and 7 of
appellant's drawings clearly show the strap (24) as being built
into the upper shoe (14) in the area of the heel and ankle
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007