Portion of a shoe sole

Description

FIG. 1 is a front, right side and top perspective view of a portion of a shoe sole showing the new design;

FIG. 2 is a rear, right side perspective view thereof;

FIG. 3 is a right side elevational view thereof;

FIG. 4 is a left side elevational view thereof; and,

FIG. 5 is a rear elevational view thereof.

The broken line showing of the sole in the Figures is for illustrative purposes only and form no part of the claimed design.

Claims

CLAIM The ornamental design for a portion of a shoe sole, as shown and described.

---

Inventors:	Grote; Paul S. (Cincinnati, OH)
Assignee:	New Balance Athletic Shoe, Inc. (Boston, MA)
Appl. No.:	D/312,462
Filed:	October 22, 2008

---

Current U.S. Class:	D2/947; D2/964; D2/946
Current International Class:	0299
Field of Search:	;D2/896,902,906-908,943,944,964,977,946,947 ;36/45-49,50.1,77M,77R,83,88,113,114,126-131,34R-34A

---

References Cited [Referenced By]

---

U.S. Patent Documents

2953861	September 1960	Horten
4536974	August 1985	Cohen
4611412	September 1986	Cohen
4638577	January 1987	Riggs
4753021	June 1988	Cohen
4754559	July 1988	Cohen
5224277	July 1993	Sang Do
5279051	January 1994	Whatley
5337492	August 1994	Anderie et al.
5461800	October 1995	Luthi et al.
D378012	February 1997	Le
5625964	May 1997	Lyden et al.
5713140	February 1998	Baggenstoss
5784808	July 1998	Hockerson
5797199	August 1998	Miller et al.
5822886	October 1998	Luthi et al.
5839208	November 1998	Huang
6115943	September 2000	Gyr
D487840	March 2004	Hillyer
6769202	August 2004	Luthi et al.
D495480	September 2004	Laberge
D495859	September 2004	Kubo et al.
D499247	December 2004	Wahoske et al.
D499541	December 2004	Dolan
D500585	January 2005	Wahoske et al.
D503029	March 2005	Sonnergren
D504205	April 2005	Andrews-Kramer
D508160	August 2005	Sonnergren
D511618	November 2005	McDowell et al.
7017285	March 2006	Lakic
D522221	June 2006	Shin
D522230	June 2006	Young
D523232	June 2006	Shaffer
D523628	June 2006	Young
D524035	July 2006	Greene et al.
D524535	July 2006	Cass
D527879	September 2006	Cessor
D528753	September 2006	Dirsa
D528754	September 2006	Dirsa
D529267	October 2006	Portzline
D532597	November 2006	Chan
D532598	November 2006	Chan
D540014	April 2007	Turner et al.
D543689	June 2007	Chan
D549942	September 2007	Ho
D549943	September 2007	Ho
D549944	September 2007	Ho
D549945	September 2007	Ho
D549946	September 2007	Ho
D553338	October 2007	Holmes
D553834	October 2007	Nakano
D554840	November 2007	McClaskie
D555348	November 2007	Bettencourt
D555891	November 2007	Bettencourt
D560060	January 2008	Chan
D560061	January 2008	Chan
D560062	January 2008	Chan
D560063	January 2008	Chan
D560903	February 2008	Chan
D561437	February 2008	Evans et al.
D561442	February 2008	Kayano et al.
7334349	February 2008	Sokolowski et al.
D571087	June 2008	Dillenbeck et al.
7383647	June 2008	Chan et al.
D574130	August 2008	Le
D593291	June 2009	Chen
D594195	June 2009	Nakano
2002/0050077	May 2002	Wang et al.
2009/0013559	January 2009	Chan

Other References

Authentic.sub.--Nike.sub.--Powerseller, A Comparison Between Nike Air, Nike Shox and Nike Impax, eBay Guides, downloaded Oct. 25, 2007, pp. 6-7, United States (http://reviews.ebay.com/A-Comparison-Between-Nike-Air-Nike-Shox-and-Nike- -Impax.sub.--W0QQuigidZ10000000004244893). cited by other . U.S. Appl. No. 29/291,589, filed Sep. 6, 2007, Marya L. Chan. cited by other.

Primary Examiner: Simone; Dominic
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Goodwin Procter LLP