Buckles – buttons – clasps – etc. – Drawstring – laced-fastener – or separate essential...
Reexamination Certificate
2001-07-28
2003-02-04
Sakran, Victor (Department: 3677)
Buckles, buttons, clasps, etc.
Drawstring, laced-fastener, or separate essential...
C024S713600, C024S714100, C024S714800, C036S050100
Reexamination Certificate
active
06513211
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The process of the present invention relates to shoes, in particular a process for lacing shoes that is useful with any type of shoelaces and most types of shoes.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The prior art comprises variations on two common processes for lacing shoes, and numerous inventions attempting to overcome the difficulties associated with those processes. The most frequently used processes for shoe lacing involve a crisscross pattern, two popular variations of which are illustrated in
FIGS. 1 and 2
, each with four pairs of lace-holes. The other frequently used processes are used primarily to achieve the aesthetically-pleasing “ladder” pattern, two popular variations of which are illustrated in
FIGS. 3 and 4
, each with four pairs of lace-holes. Shoes laced by these processes are relatively difficult and time-consuming to loosen and tighten. These problems result from two causes: (1) friction resulting from the shoelaces crossing each other and the edges of the shoe upper, and (2) the requirement that the shoelaces be pulled in different directions or for excessive length.
The cause of the high friction effects experienced by these processes can be readily perceived by counting the number of lace-over-lace crossings on the same side of the shoe upper, represented by “a”, and the number of crossings of a shoelace against the edges of the shoe upper in going from one side to the other, represented by “b”. Other sources of friction, such as the shoelace passing through the lace-hole, and contact of the shoelaces with the shoe upper and/or tongue surfaces, are essentially equivalent in all of the prior art processes, as well as the process of the present invention, and therefore can be disregarded for the purpose of comparison. For a shoe with a number of pairs of lace-holes “n”, it can be readily seen that the common processes result in the following amount of friction from these effects:
Number of
Number of
Lace/Lace
Lace/Edge
Crossing
Crossing
Prior Art Process
FIG.
Effects, a
+
Effects, b
basic crisscross
1
(n − 1)
+
2 × (n − 1)
X-crisscross
2
(n − 1)
+
0
basic ladder
3
(n − 1)
+
0
single-helix ladder
4
(n − 1)
+
0
Thus, the friction effects from lace-over-lace crossing, a, for all of these processes increase in direct proportion to the number of lace-holes, n. In addition, the basic crisscross process results in substantial effects from shoelaces coming into contact with edges of the shoe upper in going from one side to another, b, which also increase in direct proportion to the number of lace-holes, n. As a result, the cumulative effects are moderate with dress or casual shoes (typically 3-4 holes), significant with athletic-type shoes (typically 5-8 holes), and extremely significant with boots such as military or hunting boots (9-12+holes).
The problem with the direction that the shoelaces must be pulled to loosen and tighten the shoes is identical in the two crisscross processes. To loosen or tighten a crisscross-laced shoe, the wearer must pull on shoelace segments that cross each other, in a manner causing them to move in opposite directions. If the wearer of a shoe laced by the basic crisscross process as illustrated in
FIG. 1
attempts to loosen two crossing shoelace segments simultaneously by inserting a finger under them and lifting, the combination of the friction from the shoelaces sliding across each other above the finger (a), and the friction from the shoelaces sliding against the edge of the shoe upper (b), results in substantial resistance and concomitant discomfort. The wearer of a shoe laced by the X-crisscross process as illustrated in
FIG. 2
experiences the same resistance from the moving crossed shoelaces (a), but while this process does not involve laces sliding against the edges of the shoe upper, it does involve added resistance from the crossed shoelaces on the underside of the shoe upper (a). Alternatively, the wearer of a crisscross-laced shoe can use both hands to loosen the shoelaces. As a practical matter, tightening shoes laced by a crisscross process requires the use of both hands.
Neither ladder process gives the wearer any external indication of which direction the shoelace segments need to be pulled to loosen them. The basic ladder process as illustrated in
FIG. 3
must be loosened by pulling each successive shoelace segment in the opposite direction, against the friction resulting from the crossed shoelaces on the underside of the shoe upper, a. A shoe laced by the single-helix ladder process as illustrated in
FIG. 4
is loosened and tightened using just the long shoelace end that spirals through all of the lace-holes except for one at the top. While this process can be performed using just one hand, it is tedious. If the shoelace is of such a length that the lace-end available for tying is the same length as the other lace-end when the shoelaces are fully tightened, then loosening the shoelace requires the wearer to unlace the spiraling shoelace sufficiently to remove the shoe, and tightening requires re-lacing. If the shoelace is sufficiently long to allow loosening without unlacing, then after tightening the wearer must tie a knot with one relatively short shoelace end and one relatively long one. This disadvantage increases with the number of pairs of lace-holes and is therefore greatest in boots with numerous lace-holes.
Finally, all of the prior art lacing processes result in shoelace segments with an orientation that increases the likelihood that the shoelace segments will catch or snag on underbrush or other materials with which the shoe comes into contact during forward movement. The prior art lacing processes also all result in shoelace segments with an orientation that increases resistance to the movement of air across the shoe surface.
While numerous inventions have striven to overcome the problems inherent in the common processes of shoe lacing, all have required that the shoe and/or shoelace be custom-made to obtain the inventions' benefits. For example, Torppey (U.S. Pat. No. 5,027,482), Quellais (U.S. Pat. No. 5,345,697), Louviere (U.S. Pat. No. 5,353,483), Hyde (U.S. Pat. No. 5,357,691), Nichols (U.S. Pat. No. 5,469,640), Donnadieu (U.S. Pat. No. 5,537,763), and Veylupek (U.S. Pat. No. 5,755,044) describe shoes in which, after the shoelaces have been adjusted for a desired fit, the shoelaces can be loosened or adjusted by releasing or moving part of the lacing mechanism. McElroy (U.S. Pat. No. 595,833), Derderian (U.S. Pat. No. 4,553,342), Autry (U.S. Pat. No. 4,670,949) Nichols (5,042,120), Berger (U.S. Pat. No. 5,117,567), Crowley (U.S. Pat. No. 5,682,654), and Maurer (U.S. Pat. No. 6,219,891) describe shoes with specialized lacing mechanisms. Bertrand (U.S. Pat. No. 431,737), Dumke (U.S. Pat. No. 864,774), Peterson (U.S. Pat. No. 1,256,254), Gatti (U.S. Pat. No. 3,703,775), Klausner (5,016,327), and Sink (U.S. Pat. No. 5,471,769) use a single specialized shoelace fixed at the bottom of the lacing area which proceeds through pairs of parallel lace-holes and/or hooks in either a zig-zag or single-helix path, with specialized means to secure the shoelace at the top of the shoe. Scott (U.S. Pat. No. 796,258), Oberg (U.S. Pat. No. 1,450,047), Nelson (U.S. Pat. No. 3,059,518), Streule (U.S. Pat. No. 3,205,544), Dassler (U.S. Pat. No. 3,626,610), Famolare (U.S. Pat. No. 4,114,297), Swinton (U.S. Pat. No. 4,247,967), Lin (U.S. Pat. No. 4,571,856), Chassaing (U.S. Pat. No. 4,577,419), Oatman (U.S. Pat. No. 4,592,154), DeRenzo (U.S. Pat. No. 4,640,025), Ingram (U.S. Pat. No. 4,777,705), Rosen (U.S. Pat. No. 4,967,492), Batra (U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,184,378; 5,271,130), McDonald (U.S. Pat. No. 5,319,869), Brown (U.S. Pat. No. 5,526,585), Dewey (U.S. Pat. No. 5,894,640), Bowen (U.S. Pat. No. 6,049,955), Oreck (U.S. Pat. No. 6,052,921), and Ritter (U.S. Pat. No. 6,128,835) describe specialized shoelaces or other devices for enhancing the fit or securing the shoe on the wearer's foot. Brown (U.S. Pat. No. 705,817), Kroell (U.S.
LandOfFree
Double helix shoe lacing process does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Double helix shoe lacing process, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Double helix shoe lacing process will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3175798