Appeal No. 2001-1450
Application 08/477,640
comprising concavely rounded sole portions through the lowermost
portion of the shoe sole as viewed from a frontal plane (Figs. 3
and 4) and as viewed from a sagital plane (Fig. 7) as claimed.
Claims 22 and 66 through 70 additionally stand rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being clearly anticipated by Giese.
In this instance, in the final rejection (Paper No. 32, page 5),
the examiner urges that Giese “shows a shoe sole as claimed
inasmuch as the claims are understood.” In the answer (page 4),
the examiner indicates that Giese “shows a shoe sole with
concavely rounded portions as shown in figures 6-10A as
claimed.”1
1 As noted on page 2 of the examiner’s answer, the rejection
of claim 68 under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, set forth in
the final rejection has now been withdrawn. Further, as noted in
Paper No. 53, mailed May 15, 2002, the examiner has also
withdrawn the provisional double patenting rejections based on
Application Nos. 08/376,661 and 08/162,373 as set forth in the
final rejection. According to the examiner, “[d]ue to amendments
made in these prior applications and other specific issues in
these applications, a proper claim by claim analysis for
determining a Double Patenting Rejection cannot be made at this
point in time.”
3
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007