Appeal No. 2005-1051 2
Application No. 09/788,147
Representative claim 1 reads as follows:
1. A shoe comprising:
an outsole having an upper surface, an opposite lower
surface, and a heel section, the upper surface being positioned
relatively closer to a wearer’s foot and the lower surface being
positioned to engage upon a floor or ground surface when the shoe
is worn during walking, the outsole further defining an aperture
in the heel section extending from the upper surface to the
opposite lower surface; and
a resilient, deformable first cushion disposed in said
aperture, with an upper cushion surface of said first cushion
disposed at a region of the upper surface of the outsole in the
heel section and a lower cushion surface of said first cushion
exposed at a region of the lower surface of the outsole in the
heel section,
said first cushion being adapted to deform and flow toward
the floor or ground surface under the wearer’s weight and force
of heel strike, and
the outsole further comprising a recessed wall surface
extending generally upwards from the lower surface toward the
upper surface and defining a recessed region in communication, at
its upper reaches, with said aperture, said lower cushion surface
of said first cushion, exposed at the aperture within said
recessed region, being spaced by said recessed wall surface of
said outsole above the floor or ground surface at all times,
including when said first cushion deforms and flows under the
wearer’s weight and force of heel strike.
THE PRIOR ART
The references relied on by the examiner to support the
final rejection are:
Duclos 4,724,624 Feb. 16, 1988
Fuerst 4,897,936 Feb. 06, 1990
Preston 5,287,638 Feb. 22, 1994
Dyer et al. 5,325,611 Jul. 05, 1994
(Dyer)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007