Shoe outsole

Description

FIG. 1 is a front perspective view of a shoe outsole showing our new design;

FIG. 2 is a bottom view thereof;

FIG. 3 is a rear perspective view thereof;

FIG. 4 is an opposite side front perspective view thereof; and,

FIG. 5 is an opposite side rear perspective view thereof.

The broken lines immediately adjacent to the shaded area define the bounds of the claimed design and form no part thereof. The broken lines showing the remainder of the shoe represent unclaimed subject matter and form no part of the claimed design.

Claims

CLAIM The ornamental design for a shoe outsole, as shown and described.

---

Inventors:	Case; Patrick (Portland, OR), Elder; Zachary M. (Portland, OR), Peyton; Lee D. (Portland, OR)
Applicant:	Name City State Country Type NIKE, Inc. Beaverton OR US
Assignee:	NIKE, Inc. (Beaverton, OR)
Appl. No.:	D/623,568
Filed:	October 25, 2017

---

Current U.S. Class:	D2/953; D2/951
Current International Class:	0204
Field of Search:	;D2/902,906,908,916,918,925,946-962,977 ;36/3B,22R,24.5,25R,28,32R,34R,59C,67A,103

---

References Cited [Referenced By]

---

U.S. Patent Documents

1528782	March 1925	Perry
1560995	November 1925	Kaplan
1605947	November 1926	Heady
D123653	November 1940	Cutler
2434770	January 1948	Lutey
2468886	May 1949	Lutey
3854227	December 1974	Borisuck
4316335	February 1982	Giese
4697361	October 1987	Ganter
D322508	December 1991	Riecken
D336771	June 1993	Hatfield et al.
D336772	June 1993	Forland et al.
5325611	July 1994	Dyer
D351277	October 1994	Aveni et al.
D354388	January 1995	Saez
D363372	October 1995	Hatfield et al.
D376902	December 1996	Avar
D385103	October 1997	Teague
D391045	February 1998	Assous
D391069	February 1998	Teague
D395337	June 1998	Greene
D402447	December 1998	Munns
D432769	October 2000	Yung
D439730	April 2001	Merceron
D446637	August 2001	Patterson
D513840	January 2006	Urie
D518945	April 2006	Vasyli
D527875	September 2006	Earle
D532586	November 2006	Birkenstock
D554836	November 2007	Shaffer
D588348	March 2009	Elliott
D618896	July 2010	Elliott
D640864	July 2011	Munkhammar
D672543	December 2012	Williams, Jr.
D680722	April 2013	Link
D702424	April 2014	Miner
D712643	September 2014	Seo
D715522	October 2014	Tucker
D715523	October 2014	Christensen
D716535	November 2014	Seo
D719327	December 2014	Lindner et al.
D719330	December 2014	Lindner et al.
D719332	December 2014	Lindner et al.
D719333	December 2014	Lindner et al.
D719334	December 2014	Lindner et al.
D719335	December 2014	Lindner et al.
D721879	February 2015	Lindner et al.
D722428	February 2015	Lindner et al.
D723776	March 2015	Lidner et al.
D727608	April 2015	Steven
9370219	June 2016	Little
D780417	March 2017	Chang
D793046	August 2017	Lee
D793680	August 2017	Lee
D801652	November 2017	Small
D801653	November 2017	Small
D816963	May 2018	Dieudonne
D821076	June 2018	Matthews
10058144	August 2018	Foxen
2012/0204449	August 2012	Stockbridge
2013/0145650	June 2013	Seo
2014/0259790	September 2014	Faggin
2017/0119096	May 2017	Greene
2017/0265566	September 2017	Case
2018/0338580	November 2018	Greene

Other References

Nike Air Max 2017 Review [online], [retrieved Feb. 8, 2018], Retrieved from Solereview.com [Internet] <URL: https://www.solereview.com/nike-air-max-2017-review/>; 23 color sheets, Dated Dec. 23, 2016. cited by applicant.

Primary Examiner: Nelson; T Chase
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.

Images