Appeal No. 2003-1349 Page 4
Application No. 09/768,969
The obviousness rejection based on Bulzomi in view of Oatman or Latzke
Claim 9
We sustain the rejection of claim 9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Bulzomi in view of Oatman or Latzke.
Claim 9 reads as follows:
A thermal foot cover for receiving a wearer's shoe-encased or boot-
encased foot or a wearer's foot comprising an upper cover portion having an
ankle opening therethrough and a bottom panel attached to said upper cover
portion to define a cavity for receiving the wearer's shoe-encased or boot-
encased foot or wearer's foot, at least a portion of said upper cover portion
having an outer covering, an inner covering and a radiant barrier sandwiched
between said outer covering and said inner covering, said radiant barrier being
adapted to reflect heat inwardly into said cavity.
Bulzomi's invention relates to a heat resistant work shoe, enabling the wearer to
tolerate working on hot asphalt and other heated working surfaces. Bulzomi teaches
that prior art work shoes present a disadvantage since the soles become hot on hot
surfaces and they may even be unbearable to wear, especially in the case of working
on hot asphalt materials which may reach 350 degrees F., with the consequent
inconvenience and even a risk of burn blisters if the work shoes are exposed to hot
asphalt for any considerable period of time. Bulzomi further teaches that U.S. Pat. No.
4,249,319 to Yoshida; U.S. Pat. No. 4,658,515 to Oatman; and U.S. Pat. No. 4,777,740
to Akagi describe shoes or boots designed to insulate and retain heat within the shoe or
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007