Appeal No. 2002-0225 Page 7
Application No. 08/332,275
Claims 17, 19, 21, 25, 26 and 32 are directed to a boot comprising, inter alia, a
tread sole; an upper secured to the tread sole; and an insole. Vibram's invention
relates to a sole assembly in the manufacture of shoes having segmented uppers such
as sandals.
The appellants argue (brief, p. 6; reply brief, p. 2) that claims 17, 19, 21, 25, 26
and 32 are not anticipated by Vibram since Vibram does not disclose a boot. We
agree. In that regard, we view the appellants' definition of boot3 (reply brief, p. 2) to be
the broadest reasonable meaning of the term boot as used in its ordinary usage as it
would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art taking into account the written
description contained in the appellants' specification. Thus, we view the examiner's
definition of boot4 (answer, p. 7) to be in error.
Since all the limitations of claims 17, 19, 21, 25, 26 and 32 are not disclosed in
Vibram for the reasons set forth above, the decision of the examiner to reject claims 17,
19, 21, 25, 26 and 32 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Vibram is
reversed.
3 Any closed shoe with an upper rising higher than the ankle.
4 A protective covering for the foot.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007