WO1997001295A1 - Structures de semelles de chaussures - Google Patents

Structures de semelles de chaussures Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO1997001295A1
WO1997001295A1 PCT/US1996/010902 US9610902W WO9701295A1 WO 1997001295 A1 WO1997001295 A1 WO 1997001295A1 US 9610902 W US9610902 W US 9610902W WO 9701295 A1 WO9701295 A1 WO 9701295A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
sole
foot
shoe sole
shoe
wearer
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/US1996/010902
Other languages
English (en)
Inventor
Frampton Erroll Ellis, Iii
Original Assignee
Frampton Erroll Ellis, Iii
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Frampton Erroll Ellis, Iii filed Critical Frampton Erroll Ellis, Iii
Priority to EP96921783A priority Critical patent/EP0955820A1/fr
Priority to AU62907/96A priority patent/AU6290796A/en
Publication of WO1997001295A1 publication Critical patent/WO1997001295A1/fr

Links

Classifications

    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A43—FOOTWEAR
    • A43B—CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF FOOTWEAR; PARTS OF FOOTWEAR
    • A43B13/00—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units
    • A43B13/14—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form
    • A43B13/143—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form provided with wedged, concave or convex end portions, e.g. for improving roll-off of the foot
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A43—FOOTWEAR
    • A43B—CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF FOOTWEAR; PARTS OF FOOTWEAR
    • A43B13/00—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units
    • A43B13/14—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form
    • A43B13/143—Soles; Sole-and-heel integral units characterised by the constructive form provided with wedged, concave or convex end portions, e.g. for improving roll-off of the foot
    • A43B13/145—Convex portions, e.g. with a bump or projection, e.g. 'Masai' type shoes

Definitions

  • This invention relates generally to the struc- ture of soles of shoes and other footwear, including soles of street shoes, hiking boots, sandals, slippers, and moccasins. More specifically, this invention relates to the structure of athletic shoe soles, including such examples as basketball and running shoes. Still more particularly, this application explicitly includes an alternate definition of the inner surface of the theoretically ideal stability plane as being complementary to the shape of the wearer's foot, instead of conforming to the wearer's foot sole or to a shoe last approximating it either for a specific individ ⁇ ual; such alternate definition is more like a standard shoe last that approximates the exact shape and size of the individual wearer's foot sole for mass production. This application also includes the broadest possible definition for the inner surface of the contoured shoe sole sides that still defines over the prior art, namely any position between roughly paralleling the wearer's foot sole and roughly paralleling the flat ground.
  • thi ⁇ invention in its simplest con- ceptual form, thi ⁇ invention relates to variations in the structure of such shoes having a sole contour which fol ⁇ lows a theoretically ideal stability plane as a basic concept, but which deviates substantially therefrom out ⁇ wardly, to provide greater than natural stability, so that joint motion of the wearer is restricted, especially the ankle joint; or, alternately, which deviates substan ⁇ tially therefrom inwardly, to provide less than natural stability, so that a greater freedom of joint motion is allowed.
  • substantial density variations or bottom sole designs are used instead of, or in combina ⁇ tion with, substantial thickness variations for the same purpose.
  • this invention is the structure of a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the shape of the outer surface of the sides of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the shoe sole sides conforming to the ground by paralleling it, as is conventional) .
  • the shoe sole sides are sufficiently flexible to bend out easily when the shoes are put on the wearer's feet and therefore the shoe soles gently hold the sides of the wearer's foot sole when on, providing the equivalent of custom fit in a mass-produced shoe sole.
  • this invention relates to shoe sole structures that are formed to conform to the all or part of the shape of the wearer's foot sole, whether under a body weight load or unloaded, but without contoured stability sides as defined by the applicant.
  • this invention relates to variations in the structure of such soles using a theoretically ideal stability plane as a basic concept, especially including structures exceeding that plane.
  • this invention relates to contoured shoe sole sides that provide support for sideways tilting of any angular amount from zero degrees to 180 degrees at least for such contoured sides proxi- mate to any one or more or all of the essential stability or propulsion structures of the foot, as defined below and previously.
  • this invention disclosed in this con- tinuation-in-part application uses soft materials or voids to enable a shoe sole to conform or be complemen ⁇ tary to the wearer's foot sole and/or to enable the shoe sole to compress to a uniform thickness or to vary within the thickness parameters established in the applicant's prior patents or as defined below, the thickness being measured in frontal or transverse plane cross sections.
  • the applicant has introduced into the art the concept of a theoretically ideal stability plane as a structural basis for shoe sole designs.
  • the theoretically ideal stability plane was defined by the applicant in previous copending applications as the plane of the surface of the bottom of the shoe sole, wherein the shoe sole conforms to the natural shape of the wearer's foot sole, particularly its sides, and has a con ⁇ tant thickness in frontal or transverse plane cross sections. Therefore, by definition, the theoretically ideal stability plane is the surface plane of the bottom of the shoe sole that parallels the surface of the wearer's foot sole in transverse or frontal plane cross sections.
  • the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane concept as implemented into shoes such as street shoes and athletic shoes is presented in U.S.
  • the '478 invention relates to variations in the structure of such shoes having a sole contour which fol- lows a theoretically ideal stability plane as a basic concept, but which deviates therefrom outwardly, to pro ⁇ vide greater than natural stability. Still more particu ⁇ larly, this invention relates to the use of structure ⁇ approximating, but increasing beyond, a theoretically ideal stability plane to provide greater than natural stability for an individual whose natural foot and ankle biomechanical functioning have been degraded by a life ⁇ time use of flawed exi ⁇ ting ⁇ hoe ⁇ .
  • the '478 invention i ⁇ a modification of the inventions disclosed and claimed in the earlier applica ⁇ tion and develop ⁇ the application of the concept of the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane to other ⁇ hoe ⁇ truc- tures. As such, it present ⁇ certain ⁇ tructural ideas which deviate outwardly from the theoretically ideal stability plane to compensate for faulty foot biomechan- ic ⁇ caused by the major flaw in existing shoe designs identified in the earlier patent applications.
  • the shoe sole designs in the '478 application are based on a recognition that lifetime use of existing shoes, the unnatural design of which is innately and seriously flawed, has produced actual structural changes in the human foot and ankle.
  • Existing ⁇ hoe ⁇ thereby have altered natural human biomechanic ⁇ in many, if not most, individuals to an extent that mu ⁇ t be compensated for in an enhanced and therapeutic design.
  • the continual repe ⁇ tition of serious interference by existing shoes appears to have produced individual biomechanical changes that may be permanent,so simply removing the cause is not enough. Treating the re ⁇ idual effect mu ⁇ t al ⁇ o be under- taken.
  • the '302 invention relates to a shoe having an anthropomorphic sole that copies the underlying support, ⁇ tability and cu ⁇ hioning ⁇ tructures of the human foot. Natural stability is provided by attaching a completely flexible but relatively inelastic shoe sole upper directly to the bottom sole, enveloping the side ⁇ of the mid ⁇ ole, in ⁇ tead of attaching it to the top ⁇ urface of the shoe sole.
  • this invention relates to support and cush ⁇ ioning which is provided by shoe sole compartments filled with a pressure-transmitting medium like liquid, gas, or gel.
  • PCT/US89/03076 filed on July 14, 1989.
  • the purpose of the inventions di ⁇ closed in these applications was primarily to provide a neutral design that allows for natural foot and ankle biomechanics a ⁇ clo ⁇ e a ⁇ po ⁇ ible to that between the foot and the ground, and to avoid the serious interfer ⁇ ence with natural foot and ankle biomechanics inherent in existing shoes.
  • the barefoot provides stability at it sides by putting those ⁇ ide ⁇ , which are flexible and relatively inela ⁇ tic, under extreme tension caused by the pressure of the compres ⁇ ed fat pad ⁇ ; they thereby become temporarily rigid when out ⁇ ide forces make that rigidity appropriate, producing none of the desta ⁇ bilizing lever arm torque problems of the permanently rigid sides of existing design ⁇ .
  • the applicant's '302 invention simply attempts, as closely as po ⁇ ible, to replicate the naturally effec ⁇ tive ⁇ tructure ⁇ of the foot that provide stability, sup ⁇ port, and cushioning. Accordingly, it was a general object of the
  • This new application explicitly include ⁇ an upper ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole surface that is complementary to the shape of all or a portion the wearer's foot sole; "con ⁇ forming" to that foot sole shape remain ⁇ the be ⁇ t mode, ⁇ ince it gives to one skilled in the art the mo ⁇ t exact direction or goal, ⁇ o that one ⁇ killed in the art can u ⁇ e whatever means are available to achieve the closest con- formance pos ⁇ ible, much a ⁇ the art i ⁇ u ⁇ ed to achieve an accurate fit for a wearer.
  • this application describes shoe contoured sole side de ⁇ ign ⁇ wherein the inner ⁇ urface of the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane lies at some point between conforming or complementary to the shape of the wearer's foot sole, that is — roughly paralleling the foot sole including its side — and par ⁇ alleling the flat ground; that inner surface of the theo ⁇ retically ideal stability plane becomes load-bearing in contact with the foot sole during foot inversion and eversion, which is normal ⁇ ideways or lateral motion.
  • the basis of this design was introduced in the appli ⁇ cant's '302 application relative to Fig. 9 of that appli ⁇ cation.
  • this application describes shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide de ⁇ igns wherein the lower surface of the theo ⁇ retically ideal stability plane, which equates to the load-bearing surface of the bottom or outer shoe sole, of the shoe sole side portions is above the plane of the underneath portion of the shoe sole, when measured in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cross sections; that lower surface of the theoretically ideal stability plane becomes load-bearing in contact with the ground during foot inversion and eversion, which is normal sideways or lateral motion.
  • the appli ⁇ cant's earlier invention disclo ⁇ ed in his '714 applica ⁇ tion is the structure of a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having it ⁇ ⁇ ide ⁇ bent up so that their inner surface conforms to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional) .
  • This concept is like that described in Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 application; for the applicant's fully contoured design described in Fig.
  • the entire shoe sole — including both the ⁇ ides and the portion directly underneath the foot — is bent up to conform to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the contoured shape of the unloaded foot sole of the wearer, rather than the partially flat ⁇ tened load-bearing foot sole shown in Fig. 3.
  • the total shoe sole thicknes ⁇ of the contoured ⁇ ide por ⁇ tion ⁇ is much les ⁇ than the total thickne ⁇ s of the sole portion directly underneath the foot
  • the shoe sole thicknes ⁇ of the contoured side portions are the same as the thicknes ⁇ of the ⁇ ole portion directly underneath the foot, meaning uniform thickness as mea ⁇ ured in frontal or transverse plane cros ⁇ sections, or at least similar to the thick ⁇ ness of the sole portion directly underneath the foot, meaning a thickness variation of up to 25 percent, as measured in frontal or transverse plane cross section ⁇ .
  • Thi ⁇ continuation-in-part application explic ⁇ itly defines those thickness variations, a ⁇ mea ⁇ ured in frontal or transverse plane cross sections, of the appli ⁇ cant's ⁇ hoe ⁇ oles from 26 percent up to 50 percent, which distinguishe ⁇ over all known prior art; the earlier '478 application ⁇ pecified thickne ⁇ s and density variations of up to 25 percent.
  • the shoe sole thicknes ⁇ variation of the applicant' ⁇ shoe soles is increased in this appli- cation from 26 to 50 percent, and from 51 percent to 100 percent in some extreme cases, generally in the forefoot, as mea ⁇ ured in frontal or transverse plane cross ⁇ ec ⁇ tion ⁇ .
  • This application similarly increases construc- tive den ⁇ ity variation ⁇ , a ⁇ most typically measured in durometers on a Shore A scale, to include 26 percent up to 50 percent and from 51 percent to 200 percent.
  • the same variations in shoe bottom sole design can provide similar effects to the variation in shoe sole den ⁇ ity de ⁇ cribed above.
  • any of the above de ⁇ cribed thick ⁇ ne ⁇ variation ⁇ from a theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane can be u ⁇ ed together with any of the above de ⁇ cribed density or bottom sole design variations.
  • All portions of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole are included in thickne ⁇ and den ⁇ ity mea ⁇ urement, including the ⁇ ockliner or insole, the midsole (including heel lift or other thicknes ⁇ variation mea ⁇ ured in the ⁇ agittal plane) and bottom or outer sole.
  • the above described thickness and density vari ⁇ ations apply to the load-bearing portions of the con ⁇ toured sides of the applicant's shoe ⁇ ole invention ⁇ , the side portion being identified in Fig. 4 of the '819 pat ⁇ ent.
  • Thickness and density variations described above are measured along the contoured side portion.
  • the ⁇ ide portion of the fully contoured design introduced in the '819 patent in Fig. 15 cannot be defined as explicitly, since the bottom portion is contoured like the side ⁇ , but should be measured by estimating the equivalent Fig. 4 figure; generally, like Figs. 14 and Fig. 15 of the '819 patent, assuming the flattened sole portion shown in Fig. 14 corresponds to a load-bearing equivalent of Fig. 15, so that the contoured sides of Figs. 14 and Fig. 15 are es ⁇ entially the same.
  • the thicknes ⁇ and density varia ⁇ tions described above can be measured from the center of the e ⁇ ential structural support and propulsion elements defined in the '819 patent. Those elements are the base and lateral tuberosity of the calcaneus, the heads of the metatarsals, and the base of the fifth metatarsal, and the head of the fir ⁇ t di ⁇ tal phalange, re ⁇ pectively. Of the etatar ⁇ al heads, only the first and fifth metatarsal head ⁇ are u ⁇ ed for such measurement, since only those two are located on lateral portions of the foot and thus proximate to contoured stability sides of the applicant' ⁇ shoe sole.
  • the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion maintains the natural stability and natural, unin- terrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare through ⁇ out its normal range of sideway ⁇ pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of loco ⁇ motion of the wearer, including when the wearer i ⁇ ⁇ tand- ing, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unstable and inflexible conventional shoe soles, including the partially contoured existing art described above.
  • the side ⁇ of the applicant's shoe sole invention extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the shoe sole side ⁇ are made of mate ⁇ rial ⁇ ufficiently flexible to bend out ea ⁇ ily when the ⁇ hoes are put on the wearer's feet and therefore the shoe soles gently hold the side ⁇ of the wearer's foot ⁇ ole when on, providing the equivalent of custom fit in a mas ⁇ -produced shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments include the structural and material flexibility to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural ⁇ upport necessary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the excessive soft- ne ⁇ of many of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole material ⁇ used in shoe soles in the existing art cau ⁇ e instability in the form of abnormally excessive foot pronation and supination.
  • a shoe according to the '714 invention comprise ⁇ a sole having at least a portion thereof following the contour of a theoretically ideal stability plane, and which fur- ther includes rounded edges at the finishing edge of the sole after the last point where the constant shoe sole thickness is maintained.
  • the upper surface of the sole does not provide an unsupported portion that creates a destabilizing torque and the bottom surface does not provide an unnatural pivoting edge.
  • the shoe in another aspect in the '714 application, includes a naturally contoured sole structure exhib ⁇ iting natural deformation which closely parallels the natural deformation of a foot under the same load.
  • the naturally contoured side por ⁇ tion of the sole extend ⁇ to contours underneath the load- bearing foot.
  • the sole portion is abbreviated along its sides to essential support and propulsion elements wherein those elements are combined and integrated into the same discontinuous shoe sole structural element ⁇ underneath the foot, which approxi ⁇ mate the principal structural elements of a human foot and their natural articulation between elements.
  • the density of the abbreviated shoe sole can be greater than the density of the material used in an unabbreviated shoe sole to compensate for increased pre ⁇ ure loading.
  • the e ⁇ sential support element ⁇ include the ba ⁇ e and lateral tuberosity of the calcaneus, heads of the metatarsal, and the base of the fifth metatarsal.
  • the '714 application shoe sole i ⁇ naturally contoured, paralleling the shape of the foot in order to parallel its natural deformation, and made from a mate ⁇ rial which, when under load and tilting to the side, deforms in a manner which closely parallels that of the foot of its wearer, while retaining nearly the same amount of contact of the shoe sole with the ground as in its upright ⁇ tate under load.
  • a deformable ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole according to the invention may have it ⁇ ⁇ ide ⁇ bent inwardly ⁇ omewhat so that when worn the side ⁇ bend out ea ⁇ ily to approximate a cu ⁇ tom fit.
  • a ⁇ hoe according to the '478 invention comprises a sole having at least a portion thereof following approximately the contour of a theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane, preferably applied to a naturally contoured ⁇ hoe sole approximating the contour of a human foot.
  • the ⁇ hoe sole thicknes ⁇ of the contoured ⁇ ide portion ⁇ are at lea ⁇ t ⁇ imilar to the thickne ⁇ of the sole portion directly underneath the foot, meaning either a thickness variation from 5 to 10 percent or from 11 to 25 percent, as measured in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cross section ⁇ .
  • the shoe in another a ⁇ pect of the '478 invention, includes a naturally contoured sole structure exhib ⁇ iting natural deformation which closely parallels the natural deformation of a foot under the same load, and having a contour which approximates, but increases beyond the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • a naturally contoured sole structure exhib ⁇ iting natural deformation which closely parallels the natural deformation of a foot under the same load, and having a contour which approximates, but increases beyond the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • such variations are consistent through all frontal plane cross sections so that there are proportionally equal increa ⁇ es to the theoretically ideal stability plane from front to back. That is to say, a 25 percent thickne ⁇ increase in the lateral stability side ⁇ of the forefoot of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole would al ⁇ o have a 25 percent increases in lateral stability side ⁇ proximate to the base of the fifth metatarsal of a wearer's foot and a 25 increase in the lateral ⁇ tability ⁇ ide ⁇ of the heel of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole.
  • the thickne ⁇ s may increa ⁇ e, then decrease at respective adjacent loca ⁇ tions, or vary in other thickness sequence ⁇ .
  • the thick- ne ⁇ variations may be symmetrical on both sides, or asymmetrical, particularly since it may be desirable to provide greater ⁇ tability for the medial side than the lateral side to compensate for common pronation problem ⁇ .
  • the variation pattern of the right shoe can vary from that of the left shoe. Variation in shoe ⁇ ole den ⁇ ity or bottom ⁇ ole tread can also provide reduced but similar effects.
  • This invention relates to shoe sole structures that are formed 'to conform to the all or part of the shape of the wearer's foot sole, either under a body weight load (defined as one body weight or alternately as any body weight force) , but without contoured stability ⁇ ide ⁇ a ⁇ defined by the applicant.
  • this invention relates to variations in the structure of ⁇ uch soles using a theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane a ⁇ a basic concept, especially including structures exceeding that plane.
  • this invention relates to contoured shoe sole sides that provide support for sideway ⁇ tilting of any angular amount from zero degree ⁇ to 150 degree ⁇ at lea ⁇ t for such contoured side ⁇ proximate to any one or more or all of the e ⁇ ential ⁇ tability or propul ⁇ ion ⁇ tructure ⁇ of the foot, as defined below and previously.
  • Figs. 1 through 9 are from prior copending applications of the applicant, with some new textual specification added.
  • Figs. 1-3 are from the '714 appli ⁇ cation;
  • Figs. 4-8 are from the '478 application; and
  • Fig. 9 is from the '302 application.
  • Figs. IA to IC [8] illustrate functionally the principles of natural deformation as applied to the shoe soles of the '667 and '714 invention.
  • Fig. 2 show ⁇ variations in the relative density of the shoe sole including the shoe insole to maximize an ability of the sole to deform naturally.
  • Fig. 3 ⁇ how ⁇ a shoe having naturally contoured side ⁇ bent inwardly ⁇ omewhat from a normal ⁇ ize ⁇ o then when worn the shoe approximates a custom fit.
  • Fig. 4 shows a frontal plane cross section at the heel portion of a shoe with naturally contoured side ⁇ like tho ⁇ e of Fig. 24, wherein a portion of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ is increased beyond the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 5 is a view similar to Fig. 4, but of a shoe with fully contoured sides wherein the sole thick ⁇ ne ⁇ increases with increasing distance from the center line of the ground-engaging portion of the sole.
  • Fig. 6 is a view similar to Figs. 29 and 30 showing still another density variation, one which is asymmetrical.
  • Fig. 7 shows an embodiment like Fig. 25 but wherein a portion of the shoe sole thickness is decreased to less than the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 8 shows a bottom sole tread design that provides a ⁇ imilar den ⁇ ity variation a ⁇ that in Fig. 6.
  • Fig. 9 i the applicant' ⁇ new ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole design in a sequential ⁇ erie ⁇ of frontal plane cro ⁇ s sections of the heel at the ankle joint area that correspond ⁇ exactly to the Fig. 42 memori ⁇ below.
  • Fig. 10 i the applicant' ⁇ custom fit design utilizing downsized flexible contoured shoe sole ⁇ ides in combination with a thicknes ⁇ greater than the theoreti ⁇ cally ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 11 is the same custom fit design in combi- nation with ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole side portions having a material with greater density than the sole portion.
  • Figs. 12-23 are from the '714 application.
  • Fig. 12 is a rear view of a heel of a foot for explaining the use of a stationery sprain simulation te ⁇ t.
  • Fig. 13 i a rear view of a conventional run ⁇ ning ⁇ hoe un ⁇ tably rotating about an edge of it ⁇ ⁇ ole when the shoe sole is tilted to the outside.
  • Fig. 14 i a diagram of the force ⁇ on a foot when rotating in a shoe of the type shown in Fig. 2.
  • Fig. 15 is a view similar to Fig. 3 but showing further continued rotation of a foot in a shoe of the type shown in Fig. 2.
  • Fig. 16 is a force diagram during rotation of a ⁇ hoe having motion control device ⁇ and heel counter ⁇ .
  • Fig. 17 is another force diagram during rota ⁇ tion of a shoe having a constant shoe sole thickness, but producing a destabilizing torque because a portion of the upper sole surface is unsupported during rotation.
  • Fig. 18 shows an approach for minimizing desta ⁇ bilizing torque by providing only direct ⁇ tructural ⁇ up ⁇ port and by rounding edge ⁇ of the sole and its outer and inner surfaces.
  • Fig. 19 shows a shoe ⁇ ole having a fully con ⁇ toured de ⁇ ign but having sides which are abbreviated to the essential structural stability and propulsion ele ⁇ ments that are combined and integrated into discontinuous structural elements underneath the foot that simulate those of the foot.
  • Fig. 20 is a diagram serving as a basis for an expanded discussion of a correct approach for measuring shoe sole thicknes ⁇ .
  • Fig. 21 show ⁇ ⁇ everal embodiment ⁇ wherein the bottom ⁇ ole include ⁇ mo ⁇ t or all of the ⁇ pecial contour ⁇ of the new designs and retain ⁇ a flat upper ⁇ urface.
  • FIG. 22 in Fig ⁇ . 22A - 22C, ⁇ how frontal plane cro ⁇ sections of an enhancement to the previously- described embodiment.
  • Fig. 23 show ⁇ , in Fig ⁇ . 23A - 23C, the enhance ⁇ ment of Fig. 39 applied to the naturally contoured ⁇ ide ⁇ embodiment of the invention.
  • Figs. 24-34 are from the '478 application.
  • Fig. 24 shows, in frontal plane cross section at the heel portion of a shoe, the applicant' ⁇ prior invention of a ⁇ hoe sole with naturally contoured side ⁇ ba ⁇ ed on a theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane.
  • Fig. 25 shows, again in frontal plane cros ⁇ ⁇ ection, the mo ⁇ t general ca ⁇ e of the applicant's prior invention, a fully contoured shoe sole that follows the natural contour of the bottom of the foot as well as its sides, also ba ⁇ ed on the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 26 as seen in Figs. 26A to 26C in frontal plane cross section at the heel, shows the applicant's prior invention for conventional shoe ⁇ , a quadrant- ⁇ ided shoe sole, based on a theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 28 is a view similar to Figs. 4 ,5 & 27 wherein the sole thicknes ⁇ e ⁇ vary in diver ⁇ e sequences.
  • Fig. 29 is a frontal plane cross section show- ing a density variation in the midsole.
  • Fig. 30 i ⁇ a view similar to Fig. 29 wherein the firmest den ⁇ ity material i ⁇ at the outermost edge of the midsole contour.
  • Fig. 31 shows a variation in the thickness of the sole for the quadrant embodiment which is greater than a theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 32 shows a quadrant embodiment as in Fig. 31 wherein the density of the sole varies.
  • Fig. 33 shows embodiments like Figs. 24 through 26 but wherein a portion of the shoe sole thickness is decreased to less than the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 34 how embodiment ⁇ with ⁇ ide ⁇ both greater and le ⁇ ser than the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig ⁇ . 35-44 are from the '302 application.
  • Fig. 35 i ⁇ a per ⁇ pective view of a typical athletic shoe for running known to the prior art to which the invention is applicable.
  • Fig. 36 illustrates in a close-up frontal plane cross section of the heel at the ankle joint the typical shoe of existing art, undeformed by body weight, when tilted sideways on the bottom edge.
  • Fig. 37 shows, in the same close-up cros ⁇ sec ⁇ tion as Fig. 2, the applicant's prior invention of a naturally contoured shoe sole design, also tilted out.
  • Fig. 38 shows a rear view of a barefoot heel tilted laterally 20 degrees.
  • Fig. 39 ⁇ how ⁇ , in a frontal plane cro ⁇ section at the ankle joint area of the heel, the applicant's new invention of tension stabilized ⁇ ide ⁇ applied to his prior naturally contoured shoe sole.
  • Fig. 40 show ⁇ , in a frontal plane cro ⁇ section close-up, the Fig. 5 de ⁇ ign when tilted to it ⁇ edge, but undeformed by load.
  • Fig. 41 shows, in frontal plane cross section at the ankle joint area of the heel, the Fig. 5 design when tilted to its edge and naturally deformed by body weight, though constant shoe sole thicknes ⁇ is maintained undeformed.
  • Fig. 42 is a ⁇ equential ⁇ erie ⁇ of frontal plane cross section ⁇ of the barefoot heel at the ankle joint area.
  • Fig. 8A is unloaded and upright;
  • Fig. 8B is moder ⁇ ately loaded by full body weight and upright;
  • Fig. 8C is heavily loaded at peak landing force while running and upright;
  • Fig. 8D is heavily loaded and tilted out laterally to its about 20 degree maximum.
  • Fig. 43 is the applicant's new shoe ⁇ ole de ⁇ ign in a ⁇ equential ⁇ erie ⁇ of frontal plane cro ⁇ s section ⁇ of the heel at the ankle joint area that corresponds exactly to the Fig. 8 ⁇ erie ⁇ above.
  • Fig. 44 is two perspective views and a close-up view of the structure of fibrou ⁇ connective tissue of the groups of fat cells of the human heel.
  • Fig. 10A shows a quartered section of the calcaneu ⁇ and the fat pad cham ⁇ ber ⁇ below it;
  • Fig. 10B ⁇ how ⁇ a horizontal plane clo ⁇ e-up of the inner ⁇ tructure ⁇ of an individual chamber;
  • Fig. 10D ⁇ how ⁇ a horizontal ⁇ ection of the whorl arrange ⁇ ment of fat pad underneath the calcaneus.
  • Figs. 45 - 58 were new to the continuation-in- part applications, Serial No. 462,531 filed June 5, 1995, and Serial No. 472,979 filed June 7, 1995.
  • Fig. 45 is similar to Fig. 4, but show ⁇ more extreme thickness increase variations.
  • Fig. 46 is similar to Fig. 5, but show ⁇ more extreme thickne ⁇ s increase variations.
  • Fig. 48 is similar to Fig. 7, but ⁇ how ⁇ more extreme thickne ⁇ s decrease variation ⁇ .
  • Fig. 51 is similar to Fig. 11, but shows more extreme density variations.
  • Fig. 52 is similar to Fig. IA, but show ⁇ on the right side an upper shoe sole surface of the contoured side that is complementary to the shape of the wearer's foot sole; on the left side Fig. 52 shows an upper sur ⁇ face between complementary and parallel to the flat ground and a lower surface of the contoured shoe sole side that is not in contact with the ground.
  • Fig. 53 is like Fig. 27 of the '819 patent, but with angular measurements of the contoured shoe sole sides indicated from zero degrees to 180 degrees.
  • Fig. 54 i ⁇ similar to Fig. 19 of the '819 pat ⁇ ent, but without contoured stability sides.
  • Figs. 55-56 are similar to Figs. 20-21 of the
  • Fig. 57 i ⁇ ⁇ imilar to Fig. 34 which is Fig. 15 of the '478 application showing the applicant's design with the outer surface defined by a part of a quadrant, but with more extreme thickne ⁇ variations.
  • Fig. 58 is based on Fig. IB but al ⁇ o shows, for purposes of illustration, on the right side a relative thicknes ⁇ increase of the contoured shoe sole side for that portion of the contoured shoe sole side beyond the limit of the full range of normal sideways foot inversion and eversion motion, and on the left side, a similar relative density increase;
  • Figs. 59 - 63 are new to this continuation-in- part application;
  • Fig. 59 is Fig. 25 of the applicant's '819 patent and illustrates an alternate embodiment of the invention wherein the sole structure deforms in use to follow a theoretically ideal stability plane according to the invention during deformation;
  • Fig. 60 is Fig. 26 of the '819 patent and shows an embodiment wherein the contour of the ⁇ ole according to the invention i ⁇ approximated by a plurality of line ⁇ egment ⁇ ;
  • Fig. 61 i ⁇ new and ⁇ imilar to Fig. 52 above, but shows the u ⁇ e of ⁇ oft material or voids between the upper side surface of the contoured shoe sole side ⁇ and contoured ⁇ ides of the wearer's foot sole;
  • Fig. 62A-B is new and similar to Fig. 45A-B above, but show ⁇ the u ⁇ e of soft material or voids within the contoured sides of the shoe sole;
  • Fig. 63 is Fig. 8 from the applicant's '748 application and shows a footprints 37 and 17, like Fig. 5 of the '748 application, of a right barefoot upright and tilted out 20 degrees, showing the actual relative posi ⁇ tions to each other as a low arched foot rolls outward from upright to tilted out 20 degrees.
  • Figs. 1A-C illustrate, in frontal or transverse plane cross sections in the heel area, the applicant's concept of the theoretically ideal stability plane applied to shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ .
  • Fig ⁇ . 1A-1C illu ⁇ trate clearly the principle of natural deformation as it applies to the applicant's design, even though design diagrams like those preceding (and in his previous applications already referenced) are normally shown in an ideal state, without any functional deformation, obviously to show their exact shape for proper construction. That natural structural shape, with its contour paralleling the foot, enables the shoe sole to deform naturally like the foot.
  • the natural deformation feature creates such an important functional advantage it will be illustrated and discussed here fully. Note in the figures that even when the shoe sole shape is deformed, the constant shoe sole thicknes ⁇ in the frontal plane feature of the inven ⁇ tion is maintained.
  • Fig. IA is Fig. 8A in the applicant's U.S. Patent Application 07/400,714 and Fig. 15 in his 07/239,667 Application.
  • Fig. IA shows a fully contoured shoe sole design that follows the natural contour of all of the foot ⁇ ole, the bottom as well as the sides.
  • the fully contoured shoe ⁇ ole assumes that the resulting slightly rounded bottom when unloaded will deform under load a ⁇ shown in Fig. IB and flatten just as the human foot bottom is slightly round unloaded but flattens under load. Therefore, the shoe sole material must be of such composition as to allow the natural deformation following that of the foot.
  • the design applies particularly to the heel, but to the rest of the shoe sole as well.
  • Fig ⁇ . IA and IB show in frontal plane cross section the essential concept underlying this invention, the theoretically ideal stability plane which is al ⁇ o theoretically ideal for efficient natural motion of all kind ⁇ , including running, jogging or walking.
  • the theoretically ideal stability plane 51 is determined, first, by the desired shoe sole thick ⁇ ne ⁇ (s) in a frontal plane cross section, and, second, by the natural shape of the individual's foot surface 29.
  • the desired shoe sole thick ⁇ ne ⁇ (s) in a frontal plane cross section
  • the theoreti ⁇ cally ideal stability plane for any particular individual is determined, first, by the given frontal plane cros ⁇ section shoe sole thicknes ⁇ ( ⁇ ) ; second, by the natural shape of the individual's foot; and, third, by the frontal plane cross section width of the individual's load-bearing footprint which is defined as the supper surface of the shoe sole that is in physical contact with and supports the human foot sole.
  • Fig. IB is Fig. 8B of the '714 application and shows the same fully contoured design when upright, under normal load (body weight) and therefore deformed natu ⁇ rally in a manner very closely paralleling the natural deformation under the same load of the foot.
  • Fig. IC is Fig. 8C of the '714 application and shows the same design when tilted outward 20 degrees laterally, the normal barefoot limit; with virtually equal accuracy it shows the opposite foot tilted 20 degrees inward, in fairly severe pronation.
  • the deformation of the shoe sole 28 again very closely parallels that of the foot, even as it tilts.
  • the flattened area of the deformed ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole i ⁇ also nearly the same as when upright.
  • the capability to deform naturally is a design feature of the applicant's naturally contoured shoe sole design ⁇ , whether fully contoured or contoured only at the sides, though the fully contoured design is mo ⁇ t optimal and is the most natural, general case, a ⁇ note in the referenced September 2, 1988, application, assuming shoe sole material such as to allow natural deformation. It is an important feature because, by following the natural deformation of the human foot, the naturally deforming shoe sole can avoid interfering with the natural biome- chanics of the foot and ankle.
  • Fig. IC also represents with reasonable accu ⁇ racy a shoe sole design corresponding to Fig. IB, a natu ⁇ rally contoured ⁇ hoe sole with a conventional built-in flattening deformation, as in Fig. 14 of the above refer- enced September 2, 1988, application, except that design would have a slight crimp at 145.
  • the naturally contoured side de ⁇ ign in Fig. IB is a more conventional, conservative design that is a special case of the more generally fully contoured design in Fig. IA, which is the closest to the natural form of the foot, but the least conventional.
  • the appli ⁇ cant's Fig. 1 invention is the structure of a conven ⁇ tional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional) ; this concept is like that described in Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 application.
  • the entire shoe sole including both the sides and the portion directly underneath the foot — is bent up to conform to the shape of the unloaded foot sole of the wearer, rather than the partially flattened load-bearing foot sole shown in Fig. 3.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole invention extend sufficiently far up the side ⁇ of the wearer's foot ⁇ ole to maintain the lateral stabil ⁇ ity of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion maintains the natural stability and natural, unin ⁇ terrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare through ⁇ out its normal range of sideways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of loco ⁇ motion of the wearer, including when said wearer is standing, walking, jogging and running, even when said foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unstable and inflexible conventional shoe sole ⁇ , including the partially contoured exi ⁇ ting art de ⁇ cribed above.
  • the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the applicant' ⁇ ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole invention extend ⁇ ufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain that natural ⁇ tability and uninterrupted motion.
  • the amount of any ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide portion ⁇ coplanar with the theore ⁇ tically ideal stability plane is determined by the degree of shoe sole stability desired and the shoe sole weight and bulk required to provide said stability; the amount of said coplanar contoured sides that is provided ⁇ aid shoe sole being ⁇ ufficient to maintain intact the firm ⁇ tability of the wearer's foot throughout the range of foot inversion and eversion motion typical of the use for which the shoe is intended and al ⁇ o typical of the kind of wearer — ⁇ uch a ⁇ normal or exce ⁇ sive pronator — for which said shoe is intended.
  • Fig. IA is Fig. 15 in the applicant's 07/239,667 application; however, it does not show the heel lift 38 which i ⁇ included in the original Fig. 15. That heel lift i ⁇ ⁇ hown with con ⁇ tant frontal or transverse plane thicknes ⁇ , ⁇ ince it is oriented con ⁇ ventionally in alignment with the frontal or transver ⁇ e plane and perpendicular to the long axi ⁇ of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole; consequently, the thickness of the heel lift decreases uniformly in the frontal or transver ⁇ e plane between the heel and the forefoot when moving forward along the long axis of the shoe ⁇ ole.
  • the con ⁇ ventional heel wedge, or toe taper or other ⁇ hoe sole thickness variations in the sagittal plane along the long axis of the shoe sole can be located at an angle to the conventional alignment.
  • the heel wedge can be rotated inward in the horizontal plane so that it is located perpendicular to the subtalar axis, which is located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degrees medially, although a different angle can be used base on individual or group testing; such a orientation may provide better, more natural support to the subtalar joint, through which critical pronation and supination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require constant shoe sole thicknes ⁇ in a vertical plane perpendicular to the cho ⁇ en ⁇ ubtalar joint axis, instead of the frontal plane.
  • Fig. 2 is Fig. 9 of the '714 application and shows, in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cro ⁇ s section in the heel area, the preferred relative density of the shoe sole, including the insole a ⁇ a part, order to maximize the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole's ability to deform naturally following the natural deformation of the foot sole.
  • the softest and most flexible material 147 should be closest to the foot sole, with aprogressively ⁇ ion through le ⁇ soft 148 to the firmest and least flexible 149 at the outermost shoe sole layer, the bottom sole. This arrangement helps to avoid the unnatural ⁇ ide lever arm/torque problem mentioned in the previou ⁇ several figures.
  • Fig. 3 which is a frontal or transverse plane cros ⁇ section at the heel, is Fig. 10 from the appli ⁇ cant's copending U.S. Patent Application 07/400,714, filed August 30, 1989.
  • Fig. 3 illustrates that the applicant's naturally contoured shoe sole sides can be made to provide a fit so close as to approximate a custom fit. By molding each mas ⁇ -produced ⁇ hoe ⁇ ize with sides that are bent in somewhat from the position 29 they would normally be in to conform to that standard size shoe last, the shoe soles so produced will very gently hold the side ⁇ of each individual foot exactly. Since the shoe sole is designed as described in connection with Fig. 2 (Fig. 9 of the applicant's copending application No.
  • Fig. 3 show ⁇ the shoe sole structure when not on the foot of the wearer; the dashed line 29 indicates the position of the shoe last, which is assumed to be a reasonably accurate approximation of the shape of the outer surface of the wearer's foot sole, which determines the shape of the theoretically ideal stability plane 51.
  • the dashed lines 29 and 51 show what the position ⁇ of the inner ⁇ urface 30 and outer surface 31 of the shoe sole would be when the shoe is put on the foot of the wearer. Numbering with the figures in this application is con ⁇ i ⁇ tent with the numbering u ⁇ ed in prior applica ⁇ tion of the applicant.
  • the Fig. 3 show ⁇ the shoe sole structure when not on the foot of the wearer; the dashed line 29 indicates the position of the shoe last, which is assumed to be a reasonably accurate approximation of the shape of the outer surface of the wearer's foot sole, which determines the shape of the theoretically ideal stability plane 51.
  • the dashed lines 29 and 51 show what the position ⁇ of
  • the appli ⁇ cant's invention is the structure of a conventional ⁇ hoe sole that has been modified by having it ⁇ sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to a shape nearly identical but ⁇ lightly ⁇ maller than the ⁇ hape of the outer ⁇ urface of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ides being flat on the ground, as is con ⁇ ventional) ; this concept is like that described in Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 application.
  • Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 application.
  • the entire ⁇ hoe sole — including both the side ⁇ and the portion directly underneath the foot — is bent up to conform to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the contoured shape of the unloaded foot sole of the wearer, rather than the par ⁇ tially flattened load-bearing foot ⁇ ole shown in Fig. 3.
  • the shoe sole thickness of the contoured side portions is much less than the thickness of the sole portion directly underneath the foot, whereas in the applicant's ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole invention ⁇ the ⁇ hoe sole thicknes ⁇ of the contoured side portion ⁇ are the same as the thicknes ⁇ of the ⁇ ole por ⁇ tion directly underneath the foot.
  • the applicant' ⁇ ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole inven ⁇ tion maintain ⁇ the natural ⁇ tability and natural, unin- terrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare through ⁇ out it ⁇ normal range of ⁇ ideways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of loco ⁇ motion of the wearer, including when the wearer is stand ⁇ ing, walking, jogging and running, even when ⁇ aid foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unstable and inflexible conventional shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ , including the partially contoured existing art described above.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe ⁇ ole invention extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the shoe sole sides of the Fig. 3 invention are sufficiently flexible to bend out easily when the shoe ⁇ are put on the wearer's feet and therefore the shoe sole ⁇ gently hold the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the wearer's foot sole when on, providing the equivalent of custom fit in a mas ⁇ -produced ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole.
  • the applicant' ⁇ preferred ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole embodiments include the structural and material flexibility to deform in parallel to the natural deforma ⁇ tion of the wearer's foot ⁇ ole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics cre ⁇ ated by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support necessary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the excessive soft ⁇ ness of many of the shoe sole materials used in shoe soles in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and supination.
  • the essential structural support elements are the base and lateral tuberosity of the calcaneus 95, the heads of the metatar- sals 96, and the base of the fifth metatarsal 97; the es ⁇ ential propulsion element i ⁇ the head of the first distal phalange 98.
  • the Fig. 3 shoe sole structure can be abbreviated along its sides to only the es ⁇ ential ⁇ tructural ⁇ upport and propulsion elements, like Fig. 21 of the '667 application.
  • the Fig. 3 design can also be abbreviated underneath the shoe sole to the ⁇ ame e ⁇ sen- tial structural support and propulsion element ⁇ , a ⁇ shown in Fig. 28 of the '667 application.
  • the applicant has previously shown heel lifts with constant frontal or transverse plane thicknes ⁇ , since it is ori ⁇ ented conventionally in alignment with the frontal or transverse plane and perpendicular to the long axis of the shoe sole.
  • the heel wedge or toe taper or other shoe sole thickness variations in the sagittal plane along the long axis of the shoe sole
  • the heel wedge can be rotated inward in the horizontal plane so that it is located per- pendicular to the subtalar axis, which i ⁇ located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degrees medially, although a different angle can be used base on individual or group testing; such a orientation may provide better, more natural ⁇ upport to the ⁇ ubtalar joint, through which critical pronation and supination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal stability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require constant ⁇ hoe sole thickness in a vertical plane perpendicular to the chosen subtalar joint axis, instead of the frontal plane.
  • the side ⁇ of the ⁇ hoe sole structure described under Fig. 3 can also be used to form a slightly le ⁇ s optimal structure: a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its side ⁇ bent up ⁇ o that their inner ⁇ urface conform ⁇ to ⁇ hape nearly identical but slightly larger than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer, instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional.
  • a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its side ⁇ bent up ⁇ o that their inner ⁇ urface conform ⁇ to ⁇ hape nearly identical but slightly larger than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer, instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional.
  • the closer the sides are to the shape of the wearer's foot sole the better as a general rule, but any side position between flat on the ground and conforming like Fig. 3 to a shape slightly smaller than the wearer's shape is both possible and more effective than conventional flat shoe ⁇ ole sides.
  • the ⁇ hape of the flexible ⁇ hoe upper ⁇ which can even be made with very ela ⁇ tic materials such as lycra and spandex, can provide the capability for the shoe, including the shoe sole, to conform to the shape of the foot.
  • the critical functional feature of a ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole is that it deforms under a weight-bearing load to conform to the foot sole just as the foot sole deforms to conform to the ground under a weight-bearing load. So, even though the foot sole and the shoe sole may start in different loca ⁇ tions — the shoe sole sides can even be conventionally flat on the ground — the critical functional feature of both is that they both conform under load to parallel the shape of the ground, which conventional shoes do not, except when exactly upright.
  • the appli- cant's shoe sole invention ⁇ tated most broadly, includes any shoe ⁇ ole — whether conforming to the wearer's foot sole or to the ground or ⁇ ome intermediate po ⁇ ition, including a ⁇ hape much ⁇ maller than the wearer's foot ⁇ ole — that deform ⁇ to conform to the theoretically ideal stability plane, which by definition itself deforms in parallel with the deformation of the wearer's foot sole under weight-bearing load.
  • Fig. 4 is Fig. 4 from the applicant's copending U.S. Patent Application 07/416,478, filed October 3, 1989.
  • Fig. 4 illustrate ⁇ , in frontal or transverse plane cros ⁇ ⁇ ection in the heel area, the applicant's new invention of shoe sole side thickness increasing beyond the theoretically ideal stability plane to increase sta ⁇ bility somewhat beyond its natural level.
  • the unavoid ⁇ able trade-off re ⁇ ulting is that natural motion would be restricted somewhat and the weight of the shoe sole would increase somewhat.
  • Fig. 4 shows a situation wherein the thicknes ⁇ of the sole at each of the opposed side ⁇ i ⁇ thicker at the portion ⁇ of the ⁇ ole 31a by a thickness which gradu ⁇ ally varies continuously from a thicknes ⁇ ( ⁇ ) through a thickne ⁇ (s+sl) , to a thickne ⁇ ( ⁇ + ⁇ 2) .
  • the ⁇ e designs recognize that lifetime use of existing shoes, the design of which has an inherent flaw that continually di ⁇ rupt ⁇ natural human biomechanic ⁇ , has produced thereby actual structural changes in a human foot and ankle to an extent that must be compensated for. Specifically, one of the most common of the abnormal effects of the inherent exi ⁇ ting flaw i ⁇ a weakening of the long arch of the foot, increa ⁇ ing pronation.
  • the ⁇ e designs therefore modify the applicant's preceding designs to provide greater than natural stability and should be particularly useful to individuals, generally with low arches, prone to pronate exces ⁇ ively, and could be used only on the medial side.
  • Fig. 4 (like Figs. 1 and 2 of the '478 application) allows the ⁇ hoe sole to deform naturally closely paralleling the natural deformation of the barefoot under load; in addition, shoe sole material must be of such composition as to allow the natural deformation following that of the foot.
  • the new design ⁇ retain the e ⁇ ential novel a ⁇ pect of the earlier de ⁇ ign ⁇ ; namely, contouring the shape of the shoe sole to the shape of the human foot.
  • the difference is that the shoe sole thicknes ⁇ in the frontal plane i ⁇ allowed to vary rather than remain uni ⁇ formly con ⁇ tant.
  • Fig. 4 and Fig ⁇ . 5, 6, 7, and 11 of the '478 application) ⁇ how, in frontal plane cross sections at the heel, that the shoe sole thickness can increase beyond the theoretically ideal stability plane 51, in order to provide greater than natural stability.
  • Such variations can be consi ⁇ tent through all frontal plane cro ⁇ ⁇ ections, so that there are proportionately equal increa ⁇ e ⁇ to the theoretically ideal stability plane 51 from the front of the shoe sole to the back, or that the thicknes ⁇ can vary, preferably continuously, from one frontal plane to the next.
  • the exact amount of the increase in shoe sole thicknes ⁇ beyond the theoretically ideal stability plane is to be determined empirically.
  • right and left ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ would be custom designed for each individual based on an biomechanical analysis of the extent of his or her foot and ankle disfunction in order to provide an optimal individual correction.
  • contoured side portion on the order of 11 to 25 percent more than the theoretically ideal stability plane, again, prefera ⁇ bly at least in that part of the contoured side which becomes wearer's body weight load-bearing during the full range of inversion and eversion, which is sideway ⁇ or lateral foot motion.
  • the optimal contour for the increa ⁇ ed contoured side thickness may also be determined empirically.
  • the applicant's Fig. 4 inven ⁇ tion is the structure of a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to a shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the shoe sole side ⁇ conforming to the ground by paralleling it, a ⁇ is conventional) ; this concept is like that described in Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 appli ⁇ cation.
  • Fig. 4 inven ⁇ tion is the structure of a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to a shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the shoe sole side ⁇ conforming to the ground by paralleling it, a ⁇ is conventional) ; this concept is like that described in Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 appli ⁇ cation.
  • Fig. 4 inven ⁇ tion is the structure of a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner
  • the entire shoe sole including both the sides and the portion directly underneath the foot — is bent up to conform to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the contoured shape of the unloaded foot sole of the wearer, rather than the partially flattened load-bearing foot sole shown in Fig. 4.
  • the total ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ of the contoured ⁇ ide por ⁇ tion ⁇ , including every layer or portion, is much les ⁇ than the total thickne ⁇ of the ⁇ ole portion directly underneath the foot
  • the shoe sole thickness of the contoured side portions are at least similar to the thickness of the sole portion directly underneath the foot, meaning a thickness variation of up to 25 percent, as measured in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cross sections.
  • the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion maintains the natural stability and natural, unin- terrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare through ⁇ out its normal range of sideway ⁇ pronation and ⁇ upination motion occurring during all load-bearing pha ⁇ e ⁇ of loco ⁇ motion of the wearer, including when the wearer i ⁇ ⁇ tand- ing, walking, jogging and running, even when ⁇ aid foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in con ⁇ trast to unstable and inflexible conventional shoe sole ⁇ , including the partially contoured exi ⁇ ting art described above.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole invention extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the exact thick ⁇ ness of the shoe sole side ⁇ and their ⁇ pecific contour will be determined empirically for individuals and groups using standard biomechanical technique ⁇ of gait analy ⁇ is to determine tho ⁇ e combination ⁇ that best provide the barefoot stability described above.
  • the amount of any shoe sole side portions coplanar with the theore ⁇ tically ideal stability plane is determined by the degree of shoe sole stability desired and the shoe sole weight and bulk required to provide said ⁇ tability; the amount of ⁇ aid coplanar contoured sides that is provided said shoe sole being ⁇ ufficient to maintain intact the firm ⁇ tability of the wearer's foot throughout the range of foot inversion and eversion motion typical of the use for which the shoe is intended and also typical of the kind of wearer — such as normal or exces ⁇ ive pronator — for which ⁇ aid ⁇ hoe i ⁇ intended.
  • the applicant' ⁇ preferred ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole embodiments include the structural and material flexibil ⁇ ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support necessary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the exce ⁇ sive soft ⁇ ne ⁇ of many of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole materials used in shoe soles in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and supination.
  • the applicant has previously shown heel lifts with constant frontal or transver ⁇ e plane thickness, since it is ori ⁇ ented conventionally in alignment with the frontal or tran ⁇ verse plane and perpendicular to the long axis of the shoe sole.
  • the heel wedge (or toe taper or other shoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ variation ⁇ in the ⁇ agittal plane along the long axi ⁇ of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole) can be loca ⁇ ted at an angle to the conventional alignment in the Fig. 4 de ⁇ ign.
  • the heel wedge can be located perpendicular to the ⁇ ubtalar axis, which is located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degrees medially, although a different angle can be used base on individual or group testing; such a orientation may provide better, more natural support to the subtalar joint, through which critical pronation and supination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal stability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require constant shoe sole thicknes ⁇ in a vertical plane perpendicular to the cho ⁇ en subtalar joint axis, instead of the frontal plane.
  • Fig. 5 is Fig. 5 in the applicant's copending U.S. Patent Application 07/416,478 and shows, in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cro ⁇ ⁇ ection in the heel area, a variation of the enhanced fully contoured de ⁇ ign wherein the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole begins to thicken beyond the theoretically ideal stability plane 51 at the contoured side ⁇ portion, preferably at lea ⁇ t in that part of the contoured ⁇ ide which become ⁇ wearer's body weight load-bearing during the full range of inversion and eversion, which is ⁇ ide ⁇ ways or lateral foot motion.
  • Fig. 6 is Fig. 10 in the applicant's copending '478 application and show ⁇ , in frontal or tran ⁇ verse plane cro ⁇ section in the heel area, that similar varia ⁇ tion ⁇ in shoe midsole (other portions of the shoe sole area not shown) density can provide similar but reduced effects to the variations in shoe sole thickness described previously in Figs. 4 and 5.
  • the major advan ⁇ tage of this approach is that the structural theoreti ⁇ cally ideal stability plane is retained, so that natu ⁇ rally optimal stability and efficient motion are retained to the maximum extent po ⁇ ible.
  • con ⁇ tructive den- sity variations are most typically mea ⁇ ured in durometer ⁇ on a Shore A ⁇ cale, to include from 5 percent to 10 per ⁇ cent and from 11 percent up to 25 percent.
  • the den ⁇ ity variation ⁇ are located preferably at lea ⁇ t in that part of the contoured ⁇ ide which become ⁇ wearer's body weight load-bearing during the full range of inversion and ever ⁇ sion, which is sideways or lateral foot motion.
  • the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion maintains the natural stability and natural, unin- terrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare through ⁇ out its normal range of ⁇ ideways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of loco ⁇ motion of the wearer, including when the wearer is stand ⁇ ing, walking, jogging and running, even when said foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contra ⁇ t to un ⁇ table and inflexible conventional ⁇ hoe ⁇ oles, including the partially contoured existing art described above.
  • the sides of the applicant' ⁇ shoe sole invention extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the exact material density of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole sides will be determined empirically for individuals and groups using standard biomechanical techniques of gait analy ⁇ is to determine those combination ⁇ that be ⁇ t provide the bare ⁇ foot ⁇ tability de ⁇ cribed above.
  • the amount of any ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide portion ⁇ coplanar with the theore- tically ideal stability plane is determined by the degree of ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole stability desired and the shoe sole weight and bulk required to provide said stability; the amount of said coplanar contoured sides that is provided said shoe sole being sufficient to maintain intact the firm stability of the wearer's foot throughout the range of foot inversion and eversion motion typical of the use for which the shoe is intended and also typical of the kind of wearer — such as normal or exces ⁇ ive pronator — for which ⁇ aid ⁇ hoe i ⁇ intended.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments include the structural and material flexibil ⁇ ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support neces ⁇ ary to maintain normal pronation and ⁇ upination, a ⁇ if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the excessive soft ⁇ ne ⁇ of many of the shoe sole materials used in shoe sole ⁇ in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and supination.
  • the applicant has previously shown heel lifts with constant frontal or transverse plane thickness, since it is ori ⁇ ented conventionally in alignment with the frontal or transverse plane and perpendicular to the long axis of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole.
  • the heel wedge (or toe taper or other shoe sole thicknes ⁇ variations in the sagittal plane along the long axis of the shoe sole) can be loca ⁇ ted at an angle to the conventional alignment in the Fig. 4 de ⁇ ign.
  • the heel wedge can be located perpendicular to the subtalar axis, which is located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degrees medially, although a different angle can be used base on individual or group testing; such a orientation may provide better, more natural support to the subtalar joint, through which critical pronation and supination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal stability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require constant shoe sole thickness in a vertical plane perpendicular to the chosen subtalar joint axis, instead of the frontal plane.
  • Fig. 7 is Fig. 14B of the applicant's '478 application and shows, in frontal or transverse plane cros ⁇ sections in the heel area, embodiments like those in Fig. 4 through 6 but wherein a portion of the shoe sole thickne ⁇ i ⁇ decrea ⁇ ed to le ⁇ than the theoreti ⁇ cally ideal stability plane, the amount of the thicknes ⁇ variation as defined for Fig. 4 and 5 above, preferably at least in that part of the contoured side which become ⁇ wearer's body weight load-bearing during the full range of inversion and eversion, which is sideways or lateral foot motion.
  • Fig. 7 show ⁇ a embodiment like the fully contoured design in Fig. 5, but with a show sole thicknes ⁇ decreas ⁇ ing with increasing distance from the center portion of the sole.
  • Fig. 8 is Fig. 13 of the '478 application and shows, in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cros ⁇ ⁇ ection, a bottom ⁇ ole tread design that provides about the same overall shoe sole density variation as that provided in Fig. 6 by midsole density variation.
  • Fig. 8 from the '478 is illu ⁇ trative of the applicant's point that bottom sole tread patterns, just like midsole or bottom sole or inner sole density, directly affect the actual structural support the foot receives from the shoe sole.
  • bottom sole tread patterns just like midsole or bottom sole or inner sole density
  • tread patterns directly affect the actual structural support the foot receives from the shoe sole.
  • a typical example in the real world is the popular "center of pressure" tread pattern, which is like a backward horse ⁇ shoe attached to the heel that leaves the heel area directly under the calcaneus unsupported by tread, so that all of the weight bearing load in the heel area is transmitted to outside edge treads. Variations of this pattern are extremely common in athletic shoes and are nearly universal in running shoe ⁇ , of which the 1991 Nike 180 model and the Avia "cantilever" ⁇ eries are examples.
  • the applicant's '478 shoe sole invention can, therefore, utilize bottom sole tread patterns like any these common example ⁇ , together or even in the absence of any other shoe sole thicknes ⁇ or den ⁇ ity variation, to achieve an effective thickne ⁇ greater than the theoreti ⁇ cally ideal ⁇ tability plane, in order to achieve greater stability than the shoe sole would otherwise provide, as discus ⁇ ed earlier under Fig ⁇ . 4-6.
  • the applicant's shoe sole invention maintains intact the firm lateral stability of the wearer's foot, that stability as demonstrated when the foot i ⁇ un ⁇ hod and tilted out laterally in inver ⁇ ion to the extreme limit of the normal range of motion of the ankle joint of the foot.
  • the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the applicant' ⁇ ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole inven ⁇ tion extend ⁇ ufficiently far up the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the lateral stability of the wear ⁇ er's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion maintains the natural stability and natural, unin ⁇ terrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare through- out its normal range of sideway ⁇ pronation and ⁇ upination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of loco ⁇ motion of the wearer, including when the wearer is stand ⁇ ing, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in con- trast to un ⁇ table and inflexible conventional shoe sole ⁇ , including the partially contoured exi ⁇ ting art de ⁇ cribed above.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole invention extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the exact thick ⁇ nes ⁇ and material density of the bottom sole tread, as well as the shoe sole sides and their specific contour, will be determined empirically for individuals and groups using standard biomechanical technique ⁇ of gait analy ⁇ is to determine those combinations that best provide the barefoot stability described above.
  • Fig. 9 is Fig. 9A from the applicant's copend ⁇ ing U.S. Patent Application 07/463,302, filed January 10, 1990.
  • Fig. 9A shows, also in cro ⁇ ⁇ ections at the heel, a naturally contoured shoe sole design that parallels as closely as possible the overall natural cushioning and stability system of the barefoot (described in Fig. 8 of the '302 application) , including a cushioning compartment 161 under support structures of the foot containing a pressure-transmitting medium like gas, gel, or liquid, like the subcalcaneal fat pad under the calcaneus and other bones of the foot; consequently, Figs. 9A-D from '302, shown completely in Figs.
  • the ga ⁇ , gel, or liquid, or any other effective material can be further encap ⁇ ulated it ⁇ elf, in addition to the sides of the ⁇ hoe sole, to control leakage and maintain unifor ⁇ mity, as is common conventionally, and can be subdivided into any practical number of encapsulated areas within a compartment, again as i ⁇ common conventionally.
  • the relative thickness of the cushioning compartment 161 can vary, as can the bottom sole 149 and the upper midsole 147, and can be consistent or differ in various areas of the shoe ⁇ ole; the optimal relative ⁇ izes should be those that approximate most closely those of the average human foot, which sugge ⁇ t ⁇ both ⁇ maller upper and lower ⁇ oles and a larger cushioning compartment than shown in Fig. 9.
  • the cushioning compartments or pads 161 can be placed anywhere from directly underneath the foot, like an insole, to directly above the bottom sole. Optimally, the amount of compression created by a given load in any cushioning compartment 161 should be tuned to approximate as closely as possible the compres ⁇ ion under the corre ⁇ sponding fat pad of the foot.
  • the function of the subcalcaneal fat pad i ⁇ not met satisfactorily with existing proprietary cu ⁇ hioning ⁇ ystems, even those featuring gas, gel or liquid as a pressure transmitting medium.
  • the new de ⁇ ign shown is Fig. 9 conforms to the natural contour of the foot and to the natural method of transmitting bottom pres ⁇ ure into side tension in the flexible but relatively non-stretching (the actual optimal elasticity will require empirical studie ⁇ ) sides of the shoe sole.
  • Fig. 9D shows the same shoe sole design when fully loaded and tilted to the natural 20 degree lateral limit, like Fig. 4ID.
  • Fig. 9D ⁇ how ⁇ that an added ⁇ tability benefit of the natural cu ⁇ hioning ⁇ ystem for ⁇ hoe soles is that the effective thicknes ⁇ of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole is reduced by compression on the side so that the potential destabilizing lever arm repre ⁇ ented by the shoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ s is also reduced, so foot and ankle stabil ⁇ ity is increased.
  • Another benefit of the Fig. 9 design is that the upper midsole shoe surface can move in any horizontal direction, either sideways or front to back in order to absorb shearing forces; that shearing motion is controlled by tension in the sides.
  • Figs. 9A-D is modified to provide a natural crease or upward taper 162, which allows complete side compression without binding or bunching between the upper and lower shoe sole layers 147, 148, and 149; the shoe sole crease 162 parallels exactly a similar crease or taper 163 in the human foot.
  • FIG. 9A-D Another pos ⁇ ible variation of joining shoe upper to shoe bottom sole is on the right (lateral) side of Figs. 9A-D, which makes use of the fact that it is optimal for the tension absorbing shoe sole sides, whether shoe upper or bottom sole, to coincide with the Theoretically Ideal Stability Plane along the side of the shoe sole beyond that point reached when the shoe is tilted to the foot's natural limit, so that no destabil ⁇ izing shoe sole lever arm is created when the shoe is tilted fully, as in Fig. 9D.
  • the joint may be moved up slightly so that the fabric side does not come in contact with the ground, or it may be cover with a coating to provide both traction and fabric protection.
  • Fig. 9 design pro ⁇ vides a structural ba ⁇ i ⁇ for the ⁇ hoe sole to conform very easily to the natural ⁇ hape of the human foot and to parallel ea ⁇ ily the natural deformation flattening of the foot during load-bearing motion on the ground. Thi ⁇ is true even if the shoe sole is made conventionally with a flat sole, as long as rigid structures such as heel coun ⁇ ters and motion control devices are not used; though not optimal, such a conventional flat shoe made like Fig. 9 would provide the es ⁇ ential features of the new invention resulting in significantly improved cushioning and sta ⁇ bility.
  • the Fig. 9 design could also be applied to intermediate-shaped shoe ⁇ oles that neither conform to the flat ground or the naturally contoured foot.
  • the Fig. 9 de ⁇ ign can be applied to the appli ⁇ cant' ⁇ other designs, such as those described in his pending U.S. Patent Application 07/416,478, filed on October 3, 1989.
  • the Fig. 9 design ⁇ how ⁇ a shoe con ⁇ struction for a shoe, including: a shoe sole with a com- partment or compartments under the structural elements of the human foot, including at least the heel; the compart ⁇ ment or compartments contains a pres ⁇ ure-tran ⁇ itting medium like liquid, gas, or gel; a portion of the upper surface of the shoe sole compartment firmly contacts the lower surface of said compartment during normal load- bearing; and pressure from the load-bearing is transmit ⁇ ted progre ⁇ ively at least in part to the relatively inelastic sides, top and bottom of the shoe sole compart ⁇ ment or compartments, producing tension.
  • the applicant's Fig. 9 invention can be com ⁇ bined with the Fig.
  • All of the applicant's shoe sole invention mentioned immediately above maintain intact the firm lateral stability of the wearer's foot, that stability as demonstrated when the wearer's foot is unshod and tilted out laterally in inversion to the extreme limit of the normal range of motion of the ankle joint of the foot; in a similar demonstration in a conventional shoe sole, the wearer's foot and ankle are unstable.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole invention extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the lateral stability of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's invention main ⁇ tains the natural stability and natural, uninterrupted motion of the foot when bare throughout its normal range of sideways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of locomotion of the wear ⁇ er, including when said wearer is standing, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unsta ⁇ ble and inflexible conventional shoe soles, including the partially contoured existing art described above.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole invention extend suf ⁇ ficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ides are sufficiently flexible to bend out easily when the shoe ⁇ are put on the wearer's feet and therefore the shoe soles gently hold the side ⁇ of the wearer's foot sole when on, providing the equivalent of custom fit in a mass-produced shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole embodiments include the structural and material flexibil ⁇ ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support necessary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the exce ⁇ ive soft- ne ⁇ of many of the shoe sole materials used in shoe soles in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and supination.
  • Fig. 10 was new with this '598 application and is a combination of the shoe sole structure concepts of
  • Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 it combines the custom fit design with the contoured side ⁇ greater than the theoretically ideal stability plane. It would apply as well to the Fig. 7 design with contoured side ⁇ less than the theoretically ideal stability plane, but that combination is not shown. It would al ⁇ o apply to the Fig. 8 de ⁇ ign, which shows a bottom sole tread design, but that combination is also not shown.
  • Fig. 3 custom fit invention is novel for shoe sole structures as defined by the theoretically ideal stability plane, which specifies constant shoe ⁇ ole thickness in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane
  • the Fig. 3 cu ⁇ tom fit invention is also novel for shoe sole struc ⁇ ture ⁇ with side ⁇ that exceed the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane: that i ⁇ , a ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole with thickne ⁇ s greater in the sides than underneath the foot.
  • a shoe sole structure that provides stability like the barefoot, as described in Figs. 1 and 2 of the '714 application.
  • the appli ⁇ cant's invention is the structure of a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its side ⁇ bent up so that their inner surface conforms to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the shoe sole sides conforming to the ground by parallel ⁇ ing it, as is conventional) ; this concept is like that described in Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 appli- cation.
  • Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 appli- cation.
  • the entire shoe sole including both the sides and the portion directly underneath the foot — is bent up to conform to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the contoured shape of the unloaded foot sole of the wearer, rather than the partially flattened load-bearing foot sole shown in Fig. 3.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole invention extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the lateral stabil ⁇ ity of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's invention main ⁇ tains the natural ⁇ tability and natural, uninterrupted motion of the foot when bare throughout it ⁇ normal range of ⁇ ideway ⁇ pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phase ⁇ of locomotion of the wearer, including when ⁇ aid wearer i ⁇ ⁇ tanding, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot i ⁇ tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contra ⁇ t to un ⁇ ta ⁇ ble and inflexible conventional ⁇ hoe ⁇ oles, including the partially contoured exi ⁇ ting art described above.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole invention extend suf ⁇ ficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the exact thickne ⁇ and material density of the shoe sole sides and their spe ⁇ cific contour will be determined empirically for individ ⁇ uals and groups using standard biomechanical techniques of gait analysis to determine tho ⁇ e combination ⁇ that be ⁇ t provide the barefoot stability described above.
  • the shoe sole side ⁇ are ⁇ ufficiently flexible to bend out ea ⁇ ily when the ⁇ hoe ⁇ are put on the wearer's feet and therefore the shoe soles gently hold the side ⁇ of the wearer's foot sole when on, providing the equivalent of custom fit in a mass-produced shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments include the structural and material flexibil- ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant' ⁇ preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support necessary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the excessive soft- ne ⁇ of many of the shoe sole materials u ⁇ ed in shoe soles in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and supination.
  • the applicant has previously shown heel lift with con ⁇ stant frontal or transver ⁇ e plane thickne ⁇ , ⁇ ince it is oriented conventionally in alignment with the frontal or transverse plane and perpendicular to the long axis of the shoe sole.
  • the heel wedge or toe taper or other shoe sole thicknes ⁇ variations in the sagittal plane along the long axis of the shoe sole
  • the heel wedge can be located perpendicular to the subtalar axis, which i ⁇ located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degree ⁇ medially, although a different angle can be used base on individual or group testing; such a orientation may provide better, more natural support to the subtalar joint, through which critical pronation and supination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal stability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require con ⁇ tant ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ in a vertical plane perpendicular to the cho ⁇ en subtalar joint axis, instead of the frontal plane.
  • Fig. 10 shows the shoe sole structure when not on the foot of the wearer;
  • the dashed line 29 indicates the position of the shoe last, which is assumed to be a reasonably accurate approximation of the shape of the outer surface of the wearer's foot sole, which determines the shape of the theoretically ideal stability plane 51.
  • the dashed line ⁇ 29 and 51 show what the position ⁇ of the inner surface 30 and outer surface 31 of the shoe sole would be when the shoe is put on the foot of the wearer.
  • the Fig. 10 invention provides a way make the inner surface 30 of the contoured shoe sole, especially it ⁇ ⁇ ide ⁇ , conform very clo ⁇ ely to the outer surface 29 of the foot sole of a wearer. It thus makes much more practical the applicant' ⁇ earlier underlying naturally contoured designs shown in Figs. 4 and 5.
  • the shoe sole structures shown in Fig. 4 and 5, then, are what the Fig.
  • shoe sole structure would be when on the wearer's load-bearing foot, where the inner surface 30 of the shoe upper is bent out to virtually coincide with the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer 29 (the figures in this and prior applications show one line to emphasize the conceptual coincidence of what in fact are two lines; in real world embodiments, ⁇ ome divergence of the ⁇ ur ⁇ face, e ⁇ pecially under load and during locomotion would be unavoidable) .
  • the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the ⁇ hoe sole structure described under Fig. 10 can also be u ⁇ ed to form a ⁇ lightly less optimal structure: a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to shape nearly identical but ⁇ lightly larger than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer, instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional.
  • a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to shape nearly identical but ⁇ lightly larger than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer, instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional.
  • the closer the side ⁇ are to the shape of the wearer's foot sole the better as a general rule, but any side position between flat on the ground and conforming like Fig. 10 to a shape slightly ⁇ maller than the wearer's ⁇ hape is both possible and more effective than conventional flat shoe sole ⁇ ides.
  • the shape of the flexible shoe uppers which can even be made with very ela ⁇ tic material ⁇ such as lycra and spandex, can provide the capability for the shoe, including the shoe sole, to conform to the shape of the foot.
  • the critical functional feature of a ⁇ hoe sole is that it deforms under a weight-bearing load to conform to the foot sole just as the foot sole deforms to conform to the ground under a weight-bearing load. So, even though the foot sole and the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole may start in different loca ⁇ tions — the shoe sole sides can even be conventionally flat on the ground — the critical functional feature of both is that they both conform under load to parallel the shape of the ground, which conventional shoes do not, except when exactly upright.
  • the appli ⁇ cant's shoe sole invention includes any shoe sole — whether conforming to the wearer's foot sole or to the ground or ⁇ ome intermediate position, including a shape much smaller than the wearer's foot sole — that deform ⁇ to conform to a ⁇ hape at lea ⁇ t simi ⁇ lar to the theoretically ideal stability plane, which by definition itself deforms in parallel with the defor a- tion of the wearer's foot sole under weight-bearing load.
  • Fig. 11 is new with this application and is a combination of the shoe sole structure concepts of Fig. 3 and Fig. 6; it combines the custom fit design with the contoured side ⁇ having material den ⁇ ity variation ⁇ that produce an effect ⁇ imilar to variations in shoe sole thickness shown in Fig ⁇ . 4, 5, and 7; only the mid ⁇ ole i ⁇ shown.
  • the density variation pattern shown in Fig. 2 can be combined with the type shown in Fig. 11.
  • the density pattern can be constant in all cros ⁇ sections taken along the long the long axis of the shoe sole or the pattern can vary.
  • shoe sole invention maintains intact the firm lateral ⁇ tability of the wear ⁇ er's foot, that stability as demonstrated when the wear ⁇ er's foot is un ⁇ hod and tilted out laterally in inver ⁇ ion to the extreme limit of the normal range of motion of the ankle joint of the foot; in a ⁇ imilar demon ⁇ tration in a conventional ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole, the wearer's foot and ankle are unstable.
  • the side ⁇ of the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the lateral stability of the wear- er's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's invention main ⁇ tains the natural stability and natural, uninterrupted motion of the foot when bare throughout its normal range of sideways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of locomotion of the wearer, including when said wearer is standing, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unsta ⁇ ble and inflexible conventional shoe soles, including the partially contoured existing art described above.
  • the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the applicant' ⁇ shoe sole invention extend suf ⁇ ficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the amount of any shoe ⁇ ole side portions coplanar with the theore ⁇ tically ideal stability plane is determined by the degree of shoe sole stability desired and the shoe sole weight and bulk required to provide said stability; the amount of said coplanar contoured ⁇ ide ⁇ that is provided said shoe sole being sufficient to maintain intact the firm stability of the wearer's foot throughout the range of foot inversion and eversion motion typical of the use for which the shoe is intended and al ⁇ o typical of the kind of wearer — such as normal or as excessive pronator — for which said shoe is intended.
  • the shoe sole sides are sufficiently flexible to bend out easily when the shoes are put on the wearer's feet and therefore the shoe soles gently hold the sides of the wearer's foot sole when on, providing the equivalent of custom fit in a ma ⁇ -produced shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred ⁇ hoe sole embodiment ⁇ include the structural and material flexibil ⁇ ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiment ⁇ are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support necessary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the exce ⁇ ive ⁇ oft- ness of many of the shoe sole materials used in shoe soles in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and supination.
  • the applicant has previously shown heel lift with con ⁇ stant frontal or transverse plane thicknes ⁇ , since it is oriented conventionally in alignment with the frontal or transverse plane and perpendicular to the long axis of the shoe sole.
  • the heel wedge or toe taper or other shoe sole thicknes ⁇ variation ⁇ in the sagittal plane along the long axis of the shoe sole
  • the heel wedge can be located per ⁇ pendicular to the subtalar axis, which is located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degree ⁇ medially, although a different angle can be used base on individual or group testing; such a orientation may provide better, more natural support to the subtalar joint, through which critical pronation and supination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal stability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require constant shoe sole thickness in a vertical plane perpendicular to the chosen subtalar joint axis, instead of the frontal plane.
  • the intentional undersizing of the flexible shoe sole sides allows for simplified design of shoe sole lasts, ⁇ ince the shoe last needs only to be approximate to provide a virtual custom fit, due to the flexible side ⁇ .
  • the under ⁇ sized flexible shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide ⁇ allow the applicant' ⁇ Fig. 10 shoe sole invention based on the theoretically ideal stability plane to be manufactured in relatively standard ⁇ izes in the same manner as are shoe uppers, since the flexible shoe sole sides can be built on standard shoe lasts, even though conceptually those sides conform to the specific shape of the individual wearer's foot sole, becau ⁇ e the flexible ⁇ ide ⁇ bend to so conform when on the wearer's foot sole.
  • a flexible under ⁇ ized version of the fully contoured design described in Fig. 11 can also be pro ⁇ vided by a similar geometric approximation.
  • the undersized flexible shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide ⁇ allow the appli ⁇ cant' ⁇ ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole inventions based on the theoretically ideal stability plane to be manufactured in relatively standard ⁇ ize ⁇ in the ⁇ ame manner as are shoe uppers, since the flexible shoe sole sides can be built on stan ⁇ dard shoe lasts, even though conceptually tho ⁇ e sides conform closely to the specific shape of the individual wearer's foot ⁇ ole, because the flexible sides bend to conform when on the wearer's foot sole.
  • Fig. 11 shows the shoe sole structure when not on the foot of the wearer;
  • the dashed line 29 indicates the po ⁇ ition of the ⁇ hoe la ⁇ t, which is assumed to be a reasonably accurate approximation of the shape of the outer surface of the wearer's foot sole, which determines the shape of the theoretically ideal stability plane 51.
  • the da ⁇ hed line ⁇ 29 and 51 ⁇ how what the positions of the inner surface 30 and outer surface 31 of the ⁇ hoe sole would be when the shoe is put on the foot of the wearer.
  • the Fig. 11 invention provides a way make the inner surface 30 of the contoured shoe sole, especially its sides, conform very closely to the outer surface 29 of the foot sole of a wearer. It thus makes much more practical the applicant's earlier underlying naturally contoured designs shown in Fig. 1A-C and Fig. 6.
  • the shoe sole structure shown in Fig. 61, then, is what the Fig.
  • 11 shoe sole structure would be when on the wearer's foot, where the inner surface 30 of the shoe upper is bent out to virtually coincide with the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer 29 (the figures in this and prior applications show one line to emphasize the concep- tual coincidence of what in fact are two lines; in real world embodiments, some divergence of the surface, espe ⁇ cially under load and during locomotion would be unavoid ⁇ able) .
  • the sides of the shoe sole structure described under Fig. 11 can al ⁇ o be u ⁇ ed to form a slightly less optimal structure: a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its ⁇ ides bent up ⁇ o that their inner surface conforms to shape nearly identical but slightly larger than the shape of the outer surface of the foot ⁇ ole of the wearer, in ⁇ tead of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ides being flat on the ground, a ⁇ i ⁇ conventional.
  • the clo ⁇ er the ⁇ ides are to the ⁇ hape of the wearer's foot sole, the better as a general rule, but any side position between flat on the ground and conforming like Fig.
  • the critical functional feature of a shoe sole is that it deforms under a weight-bearing load to conform to the foot sole just as the foot sole deforms to conform to the ground under a weight-bearing load. So, even though the foot sole and the shoe sole may start in different loca ⁇ tions — the shoe sole sides can even be conventionally flat on the ground — the critical functional feature of both is that they both conform under load to parallel the shape of the ground, which conventional shoes do not, except when exactly upright.
  • the appli ⁇ cant's ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole invention ⁇ tated most broadly, includes any shoe sole — whether conforming to the wearer's foot sole or to the ground or some intermediate position, including a shape much smaller than the wearer's foot sole — that deforms to conform to the theoretically ideal stability plane, which by definition itself deforms in parallel with the deformation of the wearer's foot sole under weight-bearing load.
  • the ultimate goal of the applicant's invention is to provide shoe sole structure ⁇ that maintain the natural ⁇ tability and natural, uninterrupted motion of the foot when bare throughout it ⁇ normal range of side ⁇ ways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of locomotion of a wearer who has never been shod in conventional shoes, including when said wearer is ⁇ tanding, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unstable and inflexible conventional shoe soles.
  • Figs. 12-23 are Figs. 1-7 and 11-15, respec ⁇ tively, from the '714 application.
  • Fig. 12 show ⁇ in a real illustration a foot 27 in position for a new biomechanical te ⁇ t that is the basi ⁇ for the discovery that ankle sprain ⁇ are in fact unnatural for the bare foot.
  • the te ⁇ t ⁇ imulates a lateral ankle sprain, where the foot 27 — on the ground 43 — rolls or tilt ⁇ to the out ⁇ ide, to the extreme end of it ⁇ normal range of motion, which i ⁇ usually about 20 degrees at the heel 29, as ⁇ hown in a rear view of a bare (right) heel in Fig. 12.
  • Lateral (inver ⁇ ion) sprains are the most common ankle sprain ⁇ , accounting for about three-fourth ⁇ of all.
  • the especially novel aspect of the testing approach is to perform the ankle spraining simulation while standing stationary.
  • the absence of forward motion is the key to the dramatic ⁇ ucce ⁇ of the te ⁇ t becau ⁇ e otherwi ⁇ e it i ⁇ impo ⁇ sible to recreate for testing pur ⁇ pose ⁇ the actual foot and ankle motion that occur ⁇ during a lateral ankle ⁇ prain, and ⁇ imultaneously to do it in a controlled manner, while at normal running speed or even jogging slowly, or walking. Without the critical control achieved by slowing forward motion all the way down to zero, any te ⁇ t subject would end up with a sprained ankle.
  • SSST Stationary Sprain Simulation Test
  • the Stationary Sprain Simulation Test clearly identifies what can be no less than a fundamental flaw in existing shoe design. It demonstrate ⁇ conclu ⁇ ively that nature's biomechanical system, the bare foot, is far superior in stability to man's artificial shoe design. Unfortunately, it also demonstrate ⁇ that the shoe's severe instability overpowers the natural stability of the human foot and synthetically creates a combined bio ⁇ mechanical system that is artificially unstable. The shoe is the weak link.
  • the test shows that the bare foot is inherently stable at the approximate 20 degree end of normal joint range because of the wide, steady foundation the bare heel 29 provides the ankle joint, as seen in Fig. 12.
  • the area of physical contact of the bare heel 29 with the ground 43 is not much les ⁇ when tilted all the way out to 20 degree ⁇ a ⁇ when upright at 0 degrees.
  • the new Stationary Sprain Simulation Test pro ⁇ vides a natural yardstick, totally missing until now, to determine whether any given shoe allows the foot within it to function naturally. If a shoe cannot pas ⁇ this simple litmus test, it is positive proof that a particu- lar shoe is interfering with natural foot and ankle bio ⁇ mechanic ⁇ .
  • Fig. 13 shows that, in complete contrast the foot equipped with a conventional running shoe, desig ⁇ nated generally by the reference numeral 20 and having an upper 21, though initially very stable while resting com- pletely flat on the ground, become ⁇ immediately un ⁇ table when the shoe sole 22 is tilted to the outside.
  • the tilting motion lifts from contact with the ground all of the shoe sole 22 except the artificially sharp edge of the bottom outside corner.
  • the shoe sole instability increases the farther the foot is rolled laterally.
  • the instability induced by the shoe itself is so great that the normal load-bearing pressure of full body weight would actively force an ankle sprain .if not controlled.
  • the abnormal tilting motion of the shoe does not stop at the barefoot's natural 20 degree limit, as you can see from the 45 degree tilt of the shoe heel in Fig. 13.
  • Fig. 14A illustrate ⁇ that the underlying prob ⁇ lem with exi ⁇ ting ⁇ hoe de ⁇ ign ⁇ i ⁇ fairly easy to under ⁇ stand by looking closely at the principal force ⁇ acting on the physical structure of the shoe sole.
  • the weight of the body held in the shoe upper 21 shifts automatically to the outside edge of the shoe sole 22.
  • the tilted ⁇ hoe sole 22 provides abso ⁇ lutely no supporting physical ⁇ tructure directly under ⁇ neath the ⁇ hifted body weight where it i ⁇ critically needed to ⁇ upport that weight.
  • An e ⁇ sential part of the supporting foundation is missing.
  • struc- tural ⁇ upport come ⁇ from the sharp corner edge 23 of the shoe sole 22, which unfortunately is not directly under the force of the body weight after the shoe is tilted. Instead, the corner edge 23 is offset well to the inside.
  • a lever arm 23a is set up through the shoe sole 22 between two interacting forces (called a force couple) : the force of gravity on the body (usually known as body weight 133) applied at the point 24 in the upper 21 and the reaction force 134 of the ground, equal to and opposite to body weight when the shoe i ⁇ upright.
  • the force couple cre ⁇ ates a force moment, commonly called torque, that forces the shoe 20 to rotate to the outside around the sharp corner edge 23 of the bottom sole 22, which serves as a stationary pivoting point 23 or center of rotation.
  • torque a force moment
  • the opposing two force ⁇ produce torque, causing the shoe 20 to tilt even more.
  • the torque forcing the rotation becomes even more powerful, ⁇ o the tilting process becomes a self-reenforcing cycle.
  • the more the shoe tilt ⁇ the more destabilizing torque is produced to fur ⁇ ther increa ⁇ e the tilt.
  • the problem may be ea ⁇ ier to understand by looking at the diagram of the force components of body weight shown in Fig. 14A.
  • Fig. 14B show that the full force of body weight 133 is split at 45 degrees of tilt into two equal components: supported 135 and un ⁇ upported 136, each equal to .707 of full body weight 133.
  • the two vertical compo ⁇ nents 137 and 138 of body weight 133 are both equal to .50 of full body weight.
  • the ground reaction force 134 is equal to the vertical component 137 of the supported component 135.
  • Fig. 15 show a summary of the force component ⁇ at ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole tilt ⁇ of 0, 45 and 90 degree ⁇ .
  • Fig. 15, which uses the same reference numerals as in Fig. 14, show ⁇ that, a ⁇ the outward rotation continue ⁇ to 90 degree ⁇ , and the foot ⁇ lip ⁇ within the ⁇ hoe while liga ⁇ ments stretch and/or break, the destabilizing unsupported force component 136 continues to grow.
  • the sole 22 is providing no structural support and there is no sup ⁇ ported force component 135 of the full body weight 133.
  • the ground reaction force at the pivoting point 23 is zero, since it would move to the upper edge 24 of the shoe sole.
  • all of the full body weight 133 i ⁇ directed into the unre ⁇ i ⁇ ted and un ⁇ upported force component 136, which i ⁇ destabilizing the shoe sole very powerfully.
  • the full weight of the body is physically unsupported and there- fore powering the outward rotation of the shoe sole that produces an ankle sprain. Insidiou ⁇ ly, the farther ankle ligament ⁇ are ⁇ tretched, the greater the force on them.
  • Fig. 16 illustrates that the extremely rigid heel counter 141 typical of existing athletic shoes, together with the motion control device 142 that are often used to strongly reinforce those heel counters (and sometimes also the sides of the mid- and forefoot) , are ironically counterproductive. Though they are intended to increase stability, in fact they decrease it.
  • Fig. 16 shows that when the shoe 20 is tilted out, the foot i ⁇ shifted within the upper 21 naturally against the rigid structure of the typical motion control device 142, instead of only the outside edge of the shoe sole 22 itself.
  • the motion control support 142 increa ⁇ e ⁇ by almo ⁇ t twice the effective lever arm 132 (compared to 23a) between the force couple of body weight and the ground reaction force at the pivot point 23.
  • Fig. 17 ⁇ hows that the ⁇ ame kind of tor ⁇ ional problem, though to a much more moderate extent, can be produced in the applicant' ⁇ naturally contoured de ⁇ ign of the applicant' ⁇ earlier filed application ⁇ .
  • the concept of a theoretically-ideal ⁇ tability plane was developed in terms of a sole 28 having a lower surface 31 and an upper surface 30 which are spaced apart by a pre- determined distance which remains constant throughout the sagittal frontal planes.
  • the outer surface 27 of the foot is in contact with the upper surface 30 of the sole 28.
  • it might ⁇ eem desirable to extend the inner surface 30 of the shoe sole 28 up around the sides of the foot 27 to further support it (especially in creating anthropomorphic designs) Fig.
  • Fig. 18 illustrates an approach to minimize structurally the destabilizing lever arm 32 and therefore the potential torque problem.
  • the finishing edge of the shoe ⁇ ole 28 ⁇ hould be tapered gradually inward from both the top ⁇ urface 30 and the bottom ⁇ urface 31, in order to provide matching rounded or semi-rounded edges.
  • the upper ⁇ urface 30 does not provide an unsupported portion that creates a destabilizing torque and the bottom surface 31 does not provide an unnatural pivoting edge.
  • the gap 144 between shoe sole 28 and foot sole 29 at the edge of the shoe sole can be "caulked" with exceptionally soft sole mate ⁇ rial as indicated in Fig. 18 that, in the aggregate (i.e.
  • Fig. 19 illustrates a fully contoured design, but abbreviated along the side ⁇ to only essential struc ⁇ tural ⁇ tability and propul ⁇ ion shoe sole elements as shown in Fig. 21 of United States Patent Application 07/239,667 (filed 02 September 1988) combined with the freely articulating structural elements underneath the foot as shown in Fig. 28 of the ⁇ ame patent application.
  • the unifying concept is that, on both the side ⁇ and underneath the main load-bearing portion ⁇ of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole, only the important ⁇ tructural (i.e., bone) element ⁇ of the foot ⁇ hould be ⁇ upported by the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole, if the natural flexibility of the foot i ⁇ to be paralleled accu ⁇ rately in ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole flexibility, so that the shoe ⁇ ole does not interfere with the foot's natural motion.
  • the shoe sole should be composed of the same main structural elements as the foot and they should articu ⁇ late with each other just as do the main joints of the foot.
  • Fig. 19E shows the horizontal plane bottom view of the right foot corresponding to the fully contoured design previously described, but abbreviated along the sides to only essential structural support and propul ⁇ ion element ⁇ .
  • Shoe sole material density can be increa ⁇ ed in the unabbreviated e ⁇ ential elements to compensate for increased pressure loading there.
  • the essential struc- tural ⁇ upport element ⁇ are the ba ⁇ e and lateral tubero ⁇ - ity of the calcaneu ⁇ 95, the head ⁇ of the etatarsals 96, and the ba ⁇ e of the fifth metatar ⁇ al 97 (and the adjoin ⁇ ing cuboid in some individuals) . They must be supported both underneath and to the outside edge of the foot for stability.
  • the essential propulsion element is the head of the first distal phalange 98.
  • Fig. 19 shows that the naturally contoured stability side ⁇ need not be used except in the identified es ⁇ ential area ⁇ . Weight savings and flexibility improvements can be made by omitting the non-essential stability sides.
  • the design of the portion of the shoe sole directly underneath the foot shown in Fig. 19 allows for unobstructed natural inversion/ever ⁇ ion motion of the calcaneus by providing maximum shoe sole flexibility particularly between the base of the calcaneus 125 (heel) and the metatarsal heads 126 (forefoot) along an axis 120.
  • An unnatural tor ⁇ ion occur ⁇ about that axi ⁇ if flexibility is insufficient so that a conventional shoe sole interferes with the inversion/eversion motion by restraining it.
  • the object of the design is to allow the relatively more mobile (in inversion and eversion) calca- neu ⁇ to articulate freely and independently from the relatively more fixed forefoot in ⁇ tead of the fixed or fu ⁇ ed ⁇ tructure or lack of stable structure between the two in conventional designs. In a sense, freely articu ⁇ lating joints are created in the shoe sole that parallel those of the foot.
  • the design is to remove nearly all of the shoe sole material between the heel and the forefoot, except under one of the previously described essential structural support elements, the base of the fifth meta ⁇ tarsal 97.
  • An optional support for the main longitudinal arch 121 may also be retained for runners with sub ⁇ tan- tial foot pronation, although would not be nece ⁇ ary for many runner ⁇ .
  • the forefoot can be subdivided (not shown) into its component essential structural support and propulsion elements, the individual heads of the metatarsal and the heads of the distal phalanges, so that each major articu ⁇ lating joint set of the foot is paralleled by a freely articulating shoe sole support propulsion element, an anthropomorphic design; various aggregations of the sub ⁇ division are also possible.
  • the design in Fig. 19 features an enlarged structural support at the base of the fifth metatarsal in order to include the cuboid, which can also come into contact with the ground under arch comPrEs ⁇ ion in some individuals.
  • the design can provide general side support in the heel area, as in Fig. 19E or alterna ⁇ tively can carefully orient the stability side ⁇ in the heel area to the exact positions of the lateral calcaneal tuberosity 108 and the main ba ⁇ e of the calcaneus 109, as in Fig. 19E' (showing heel area only of the right foot) .
  • Figs. 19A-D show frontal plane cross sections of the left shoe and Fig.
  • FIG. 19E shows a bottom view of the right foot, with flexibility axes 120, 122, 111, 112 and 113 indica ⁇ ted.
  • Fig. 19F shows a sagittal plane cross section show ⁇ ing the structural elements joined by very thin and rela ⁇ tively soft upper midsole layer.
  • Figs. 19G and 19H show similar cross section ⁇ with ⁇ lightly different de ⁇ ign ⁇ featuring durable fabric only (slip-lasted shoe) , or a structurally sound arch design, respectively.
  • Fig. 191 ⁇ how ⁇ a side medial view of the shoe sole.
  • Fig. 19J shows a simple interim or low cost construction for the articulating shoe ⁇ ole support ele- ment 95 for the heel (showing the heel area only of the right foot) ; while it is most critical and effective for the heel support element 95, it can also be used with the other elements, such as the ba ⁇ e of the fifth metatar ⁇ al 97 and the long arch 121.
  • the heel sole element 95 shown can be a single flexible layer or a lamination of layers. When cut from a flat sheet or molded in the general pat ⁇ tern shown, the outer edges can be easily bent to follow the contours of the foot, particularly the side ⁇ .
  • the shape shown allows a flat or slightly contoured heel ele- ment 95 to be attached to a highly contoured shoe upper or very thin upper sole layer like that shown in Fig. 19F.
  • a very simple construction technique can yield a highly sophisticated shoe ⁇ ole design.
  • the size of the center section 119 can be ⁇ mall to conform to a fully or nearly fully contoured design or larger to con ⁇ form to a contoured sides design, where there is a large flattened sole area under the heel.
  • the flexibility is provided by the removed diagonal sections, the exact proportion of size and shape can vary.
  • Fig. 20 illu ⁇ trates an expanded explanation of the correct approach for measuring shoe sole thicknes ⁇ according to the naturally contoured design, as described previously in Figs. 23 and 24 of United States Patent Application 07/239,667, filed 02 September 1988.
  • the tangent described in tho ⁇ e figure ⁇ would be parallel to the ground when the shoe sole is tilted out sideways, so that mea ⁇ uring ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole thickness along the perpendicu- lar will provide the least distance between the point on the upper shoe sole ⁇ urface clo ⁇ est to the ground and the close ⁇ t point to it on the lower surface of the shoe sole (as ⁇ uming no load deformation) .
  • Fig. 21 shows a non-optimal but interim or low cost approach to shoe sole construction, whereby the midsole and heel lift 127 are produced conventionally, or nearly so (at least leaving the midsole bottom surface flat, though the sides can be contoured) , while the bot ⁇ tom or outer ⁇ ole 128 include ⁇ mo ⁇ t or all of the special contours of the new design. Not only would that com ⁇ pletely or mostly limit the special contours to the bot ⁇ tom sole, which would be molded specially, it would also ease assembly, since two flat surfaces of the bottom of the midsole and the top of the bottom sole could be mated together with less difficulty than two contoured sur ⁇ faces, as would be the case otherwi ⁇ e.
  • Fig. 21A shows some con ⁇ tours on the relatively softer midsole sides, which are subject to les ⁇ wear but benefit from greater traction for stability and ease of deformation, while the rela ⁇ tively harder contoured bottom sole provides good wear for the load-bearing areas.
  • Fig. 2IB shows in a quadrant side design the concept applied to conventional street shoe heels, which are usually separated from the forefoot by a hollow instep area under the main longitudinal arch.
  • Fig. 21C show ⁇ in frontal plane cross section the concept applied to the quadrant sided or single plane design and indicating in Fig.
  • Fig. 2IE in the shaded area 129 of the bottom sole that portion which should be honeycombed (axis on the horizontal plane) to reduce the density of the relatively hard outer sole to that of the midsole material to provide for relatively uniform shoe den ⁇ ity.
  • Fig. 2IE ⁇ how ⁇ in bottom view the outline of a bottom sole 128 made from flat material which can be conformed topologically to a contoured midsole of either the one or two plane designs by limiting the side areas to be mated to the es ⁇ ential support areas di ⁇ cussed in Fig.
  • the contoured mids ⁇ ole and flat bottom sole surfaces can be made to join sati ⁇ factorily by coinciding clo ⁇ ely, which would be topologically impo ⁇ sible if all of the side areas were retained on the bottom sole.
  • Figs. 22A-22C frontal plane cross sections, show an enhancement to the previously described embodi ⁇ ments of the shoe sole side stability quadrant invention of the '349 Patent.
  • one major purpose of that design is to allow the shoe sole to pivot ea ⁇ ily from side to side with the foot 90, thereby following the foot's natural inversion and eversion motion; in conven ⁇ tional design ⁇ ⁇ hown in Fig. 22a, ⁇ uch foot motion is forced to occur within the shoe upper 21, which resists the motion.
  • the enhancement is to position exactly and stabilize the foot, especially the heel, relative to the preferred embodiment of the shoe sole; doing so facili ⁇ tates the shoe sole's responsivenes ⁇ in following the foot's natural motion. Correct positioning is essential to the invention, especially when the very narrow or
  • the form of the enhancement is inner shoe sole stability side ⁇ 131 that follow the natural contour of the ⁇ ide ⁇ 91 of the heel of the foot 90, thereby cupping the heel of the foot.
  • the inner stability side ⁇ 131 can be located directly on the top ⁇ urface of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole and heel contour, or directly under the shoe insole (or integral to it) , or somewhere in between.
  • the inner stability sides are similar in structure to heel cups integrated in insoles currently in common use, but differ because of its material density, which can be relatively firm like the typical mid-sole, not soft like the insole.
  • the inner stability side ⁇ function as part of the shoe sole, which provides structural support to the foot, not just gentle cushioning and abra ⁇ ion protection of a ⁇ hoe in ⁇ ole.
  • insoles should be con ⁇ idered ⁇ tructurally and functionally a ⁇ part of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole, a ⁇ ⁇ hould any shoe material between foot and ground, like the bottom of the shoe upper in a slip- lasted shoe or the board in a board-lasted shoe.
  • the inner stability side enhancement is par ⁇ ticularly useful in converting existing conventional shoe sole design embodiments 22, as con ⁇ tructed within prior art, to an effective embodiment of the ⁇ ide ⁇ tability quadrant 26 invention.
  • Thi ⁇ feature i ⁇ important in constructing prototypes and initial production of the invention, as well as an ongoing method of low cost pro- duction, ⁇ ince such production would be very close to exi ⁇ ting art.
  • the size of the inner stability sides should, however, taper down in proportion to any reduc- tion in shoe sole thickness in the sagittal plane.
  • Figs. 23A-23C frontal plane cross sections, illustrate the same inner shoe sole stability sides enhancement as it applies to the previously described embodiments of the naturally contoured side ⁇ '667 appli- cation design.
  • Fig. 23A shows a conventional design.
  • the inner shoe sole stability side ⁇ 131 conform to the natural contour of the foot sides 29, which determine the theoretically ideal stability plane 51 for the shoe sole thickness (s) .
  • Figs. 24, 25, and 26 show frontal plane cross sectional views of a shoe sole according to the appli- cant's prior inventions based on the theoretically ideal stability plane, taken at about the ankle joint to show the heel section of the shoe.
  • Figs. 4, 5, 8, and 27-32 show the same view of the applicant's enhancement of that invention.
  • the reference numerals are like those used in the prior pending applications of the applicant mentioned above and which are incorporated by reference for the sake of completenes ⁇ of di ⁇ clo ⁇ ure, if nece ⁇ sary.
  • a foot 27 is positioned in a naturally contoured shoe having an upper 21 and a sole 28.
  • the shoe sole normally contact ⁇ the ground 43 at about the lower cen ⁇ tral heel portion thereof, a ⁇ ⁇ hown in Fig. 4.
  • the con ⁇ cept of the theoretically ideal stability plane as developed in the prior application ⁇ as noted, defines the plane 51 in terms of a locus of points determined by the thickness(es) of the sole.
  • Fig. 24 shows, in a rear cross sectional view, the application of the prior invention ⁇ howing the inner surface of the shoe sole conforming to the natural con- tour of the foot and the thickness of the shoe sole remaining constant in the frontal plane, so that the outer surface coincide ⁇ with the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 25 show ⁇ a fully contoured ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole de ⁇ ign of the applicant' ⁇ prior invention that follows the natural contour of all of the foot, the bottom as well as the ⁇ ide ⁇ , while retaining a con ⁇ tant shoe sole thickness in the frontal plane.
  • Fig. 24 is a more conventional, conservative design that is a special case of the more general fully con ⁇ toured design in Fig. 25, which is the closest to the natural form of the foot, but the least conventional.
  • the amount of deformation flattening used in the Fig. 24 design, which obviously varies under different loads, is not an essential element of the applicant's invention.
  • Figs. 24 and 25 both show in frontal plane cross sections the es ⁇ ential concept underlying thi ⁇ invention, the theoretically ideal stability plane, which is also theoretically ideal for efficient natural motion of all kinds, including running, jogging or walking.
  • Fig. 25 shows the most general case of the invention, the fully contoured design, which conforms to the natural shape of the unloaded foot.
  • the theoretically ideal stability plane 51 is determined, first, by the desired shoe sole thicknes ⁇ (es) in a fron ⁇ tal plane cross section, and, second, by the natural shape of the individual's foot surface 29.
  • the theoretically ideal stability plane for any particular individual is deter ⁇ mined, first, by the given frontal plane cros ⁇ ⁇ ection shoe sole thickness(es) ; second, by the natural shape of the individual's foot; and, third, by the frontal plane cros ⁇ ⁇ ection width of the individual' ⁇ load-bearing footprint 30b, which i ⁇ defined as the upper surface of the shoe sole that is in physical contact with and ⁇ up- ports the human foot sole.
  • the second part is the naturally contoured stability side outer edge 31a located at each side of the first part, line segment 31b. Each point on the contoured side outer edge 31a is located at a distance which is exactly shoe sole thick ⁇ ness(es) from the closest point on the contoured side inner edge 30a.
  • the theoretically ideal stability plane is the essence of this invention because it is u ⁇ ed to determine a geometrically precise bottom contour of the shoe sole based on a top contour that conforms to the contour of the foot.
  • This invention specifically claims the exactly determined geometric relationship just described.
  • Fig. 26 illustrates in frontal plane cro ⁇ ⁇ ec ⁇ tion another variation of the applicant' ⁇ prior invention that u ⁇ es stabilizing quadrants 26 at the outer edge of a conventional shoe sole 28b illustrated generally at the reference numeral 28.
  • the stabilizing quadrants would be abbreviated in actual embodiments.
  • Fig. 28 show ⁇ that the thickne ⁇ can also increase and then decrea ⁇ e; other thickne ⁇ variation ⁇ equence ⁇ are al ⁇ o po ⁇ ible.
  • the variation in ⁇ ide con ⁇ tour thickness in the new invention can be either symme ⁇ trical on both sides or asymmetrical, particularly with the medial side providing more stability than the lateral side, although many other asymmetrical variations are pos ⁇ ible, and the pattern of the right foot can vary from that of the left foot.
  • Fig ⁇ . 29, 30, 6 and 32 ⁇ how that ⁇ imilar varia ⁇ tions in shoe midsole (other portions of the shoe sole area not shown) density can provide similar but reduced effects to the variations in shoe sole thickness described previously in Figs. 4, 5, 27 and 28.
  • the applicant's prior invention did not prefer multi-densi- tie ⁇ in the midsole, since only a uniform den ⁇ ity pro ⁇ vide ⁇ a neutral ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole de ⁇ ign that doe ⁇ not interfere with natural foot and ankle biomechanics in the way that multi-density shoe soles do, which is by providing dif ⁇ ferent amounts of support to different parts of the foot; it did not, of course, preclude such multi-density mid- ⁇ ole ⁇ .
  • the density of the sole mater ⁇ ial designated by the legend (dl) is firmer than (d) while (d2) i ⁇ the firmest of the three representative densities shown.
  • Fig. 29 a dual density ⁇ ole i ⁇ shown, with (d) having the les ⁇ firm density.
  • shoe soles using a combination both of sole thicknesses greater than the theoretically ideal stability plane and of midsole den ⁇ sities variations like those just described are also possible but not shown.
  • individu ⁇ als with overly rigid feet, those with restricted range of motion, and those tending to over-supinate may benefit from the Fig. 33 embodiments.
  • the invention will benefit individual ⁇ with significant bilateral foot function asymmetry: namely, a tendency toward pronation on one foot and supination on the other foot. Consequently, it is antici ⁇ pated that this embodiment would be used only on the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole of the ⁇ upinating foot, and on the in ⁇ ide portion only, possibly only a portion thereof.
  • Fig. 33A shows an embodiment like Figs. 4 and
  • Fig. 33B show ⁇ an embodiment like the fully contoured de ⁇ ign in Figs. 5 and 6, but with a shoe ⁇ ole thickness decreasing with increasing di ⁇ tance from the center portion of the sole.
  • Fig. 33C shows an embodiment like the quadrant-sided de ⁇ ign of Fig. 31, but with the quadrant sides increas ⁇ ingly reduced from the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • the lesser-sided design of Fig. 33 would also apply to the Figs. 29, 30, 6 and 32 density variation approach and to the Fig. 8 approach using tread design to approximate density variation.
  • Fig. 34 A-C show, in cross sections similar to those in pending U.S. Patent '349, that with the quad ⁇ rant-sided design of Figs. 26, 31, 32 and 33C that it is possible to have shoe sole side ⁇ that are both greater and le ⁇ er than the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane in the same shoe.
  • the radius of an intermediate shoe sole thicknes ⁇ , taken at (S 2 ) at the base of the fifth metatarsal in Fig. 34B, is maintained constant throughout the quadrant sides of the shoe ⁇ ole, including both the heel, Fig. 34C, and the forefoot, Fig. 34A, so that the side thickness is le ⁇ than the theoretically ideal ⁇ ta- bility plane at the heel and more at the forefoot.
  • Figs. 35-44 are Figs. 1-10 from the '302 appli ⁇ cation.
  • Fig. 35 show ⁇ a per ⁇ pective view of a ⁇ hoe, ⁇ uch a ⁇ a typical athletic ⁇ hoe specifically for running, according to the prior art, wherein the running shoe 20 includes an upper portion 21 and a sole 22.
  • Fig. 36 illustrate ⁇ , in a close-up cros ⁇ ⁇ ec ⁇ tion of a typical ⁇ hoe of existing art (undeformed by body weight) on the ground 43 when tilted on the bottom outside edge 23 of the shoe sole 22, that an inherent stability problem remains in existing design ⁇ , even when the abnormal torque producing rigid heel counter and other motion device ⁇ are removed, as illustrated in Fig. 5 of pending U.S. Patent Application 07/400,714, filed on August 30, 1989, shown as Fig. 16 in this application.
  • the problem is that the remaining ⁇ hoe upper 21 ( ⁇ hown in the thickened and darkened line) , while providing no lever arm extension, since it is flexible instead of rigid, nonetheless creates unnatural destabilizing torque on the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole.
  • the torque is due to the tension force 155a along the top surface of the shoe sole 22 caused by a compre ⁇ sion force 150 (a composite of the force of gravity on the body and a sideway ⁇ motion force) to the side by the foot 27, due simply to the shoe being tilted to the side, for example.
  • the resulting destabilizing force acts to pull the shoe sole in rotation around a lever arm 23a that is the width of the shoe sole at the edge.
  • the compression force 150 also cre ⁇ ates a ten ⁇ ion force 155b, which is the mirror image of tension force 155a
  • Fig. 37 shows, in a close-up cross section of a naturally contoured design shoe sole 28, described in pending U.S. Patent Application 07/239,667, filed on September 2, 1988, (also shown undeformed by body weight) when tilted on the bottom edge, that the same inherent stability problem remain ⁇ in the naturally contoured shoe sole design, though to a reduced degree.
  • the problem i ⁇ les ⁇ since the direction of the force vector 155 along the lower surface of the shoe upper 21 is parallel to the ground 43 at the outer sole edge 32 edge, instead of angled toward the ground as in a conventional design like that ⁇ hown in Fig. 36, ⁇ o the re ⁇ ulting torque produced by lever arm created by the outer sole edge 32 would be less, and the contoured shoe ⁇ ole 28 provides direct structural support when tilted, unlike conventional designs.
  • Fig. 38 shows (in a rear view) that, in con ⁇ trast, the barefoot is naturally stable because, when deformed by body weight and tilted to its natural lateral limit of about 20 degrees, it does not create any desta ⁇ bilizing torque due to tension force. Even though ten ⁇ sion paralleling that on the shoe upper i ⁇ created on the outer ⁇ urface 29, both bottom and ⁇ ides, of the bare foot by the compre ⁇ ion force of weight-bearing, no de ⁇ tabil- izing torque is created because the lower ⁇ urface under tension (i.e., the foot's bottom sole, shown in the dark ⁇ ened line) is resting directly in contact with the ground. Consequently, there is no unnatural lever arm artificially created against which to pull.
  • the lower ⁇ urface under tension i.e., the foot's bottom sole, shown in the dark ⁇ ened line
  • the weight of the body firmly anchors the outer surface of the foot underneath the foot so that even considerable pressure against the outer surface 29 of the side of the foot result ⁇ in no de ⁇ tabilizing motion.
  • the supporting structures of the foot like the calcaneus, slide against the side of the strong but flex ⁇ ible outer surface of the foot and create very substan ⁇ tial pressure on that outer surface at the sides of the foot. But that pres ⁇ ure i ⁇ precisely resisted and bal ⁇ anced by tension along the outer surface of the foot, resulting in a stable equilibrium.
  • Fig. 39 hows, in cross section of the upright heel deformed by body weight, the principle of the ten- sion stabilized side ⁇ of the barefoot applied to the naturally contoured ⁇ hoe sole design; the same principle can be applied to conventional ⁇ hoe ⁇ , but i ⁇ not shown.
  • the key change from the existing art of shoes is that the side ⁇ of the shoe upper 21 (shown as darkened lines) mu ⁇ t wrap around the outside edges 32 of the shoe sole 28, instead of attaching underneath the foot to the upper surface 30 of the shoe sole, as done conventionally.
  • the shoe upper side ⁇ can overlap and be attached to either the inner ( ⁇ hown on the left) or outer surface (shown on the right) of the bottom sole, since those sides are not unusually load-bearing, as shown; or the bottom sole, optimally thin and tapering as shown, can extend upward around the outside edges 32 of the shoe sole to overlap and attach to the shoe upper sides (shown Fig. 39B) ; their optimal position coincides with the Theoretically Ideal Stability Plane, so that the ten ⁇ ion force on the shoe side ⁇ i ⁇ transmitted directly all the way down to the bottom shoe, which anchors it on the ground with virtually no intervening artificial lever arm.
  • the attachment of the shoe upper side ⁇ should be at or near the lower or bottom surface of the shoe ⁇ ole.
  • the design shown in Fig. 39 is based on a fun ⁇ damentally different conception: that the ⁇ hoe upper i ⁇ integrated into the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole, in ⁇ tead of attached on top of it, and the shoe sole is treated as a natural exten- sion of the foot sole, not attached to it separately.
  • the fabric (or other flexible material, like leather) of the shoe uppers would preferably be non- stretch or relatively so, ⁇ o a ⁇ not to be deformed exces ⁇ sively by the tension place upon its sides when com- pressed as the foot and shoe tilt.
  • the fabric can be reinforced in areas of particularly high tension, like the e ⁇ sential structural support and propulsion elements defined in the applicant's earlier applications (the base and lateral tubero ⁇ ity of the calcaneus, the base of the fifth metatarsal, the heads of the metatarsal ⁇ , and the first distal phalange) ; the reinforcement can take many forms, such as like that of corners of the jib sail of a racing sailboat or more simple strap ⁇ . A ⁇ clo ⁇ ely as possible, it should have the same performance character- istic ⁇ a ⁇ the heavily callou ⁇ ed ⁇ kin of the sole of an habitually bare foot. The relative density of the shoe sole is preferred as indicated in Fig. 9 of pending U.S.
  • Patent Application 07/400,714 filed on Augu ⁇ t 30, 1989, with the ⁇ ofte ⁇ t den ⁇ ity neare ⁇ t the foot ⁇ ole, ⁇ o that the conforming sides of the shoe sole do not provide a rigid destabilizing lever arm.
  • the change from existing art of the tension stabilized sides shown in Fig. 39 is that the shoe upper is directly integrated functionally with the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole, in ⁇ tead of ⁇ imply being attached on top of it.
  • the advantage of the ten ⁇ ion ⁇ tabilized ⁇ ide ⁇ design is that it provides natural stability as close to that of the barefoot as possible, and does so economically, with the minimum shoe ⁇ ole side width possible.
  • the result is a shoe sole that is naturally stabilized in the same way that the barefoot is stabil ⁇ ized, as seen in Fig. 40, which shows a close-up cross section of a naturally contoured design shoe sole 28 (undeformed by body weight) when tilted to the edge.
  • the shoe uppers may be joined or bonded only to the bottom sole, not the midsole, so that pres- sure shown on the side of the shoe upper produce ⁇ ⁇ ide ten ⁇ ion only and not the de ⁇ tabilizing torque from pull ⁇ ing ⁇ imilar to that de ⁇ cribed in Fig. 36.
  • the upper area ⁇ 147 of the ⁇ hoe mid ⁇ ole, which forms a sharp corner, should be composed of relatively soft midsole material; in this ca ⁇ e, bond ⁇ ing the ⁇ hoe uppers to the midsole would not create very much destabilizing torque.
  • the bottom sole is preferably thin, at least on the stability side ⁇ , so that its attachment overlap with the ⁇ hoe upper ⁇ ide ⁇ coincide a ⁇ clo ⁇ e as possible to the Theoretically Ideal Stability Plane, so that force is tran ⁇ mitted on the outer shoe sole surface to the ground.
  • the Fig. 39 design is for a shoe con ⁇ truction, including: a ⁇ hoe upper that i ⁇ compo ⁇ ed of material that is flexible and relatively inelastic at least where the shoe upper contacts the areas of the structural bone elements of the human foot, and a shoe sole that has relatively flexible side ⁇ ; and at lea ⁇ t a portion of the sides of the shoe upper being attached directly to the bottom sole, while enveloping on the outside the other sole portion ⁇ of ⁇ aid shoe sole.
  • This construction can either be applied to convention shoe sole structures or to the applicant's prior shoe sole inventions, such a ⁇ the naturally contoured ⁇ hoe sole conforming to the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Fig. 41 shows, in cross section at the heel, the tension stabilized side ⁇ concept applied to naturally contoured de ⁇ ign shoe sole when the shoe and foot are tilted out fully and naturally deformed by body weight (although constant shoe sole thickness is shown unde ⁇ formed) .
  • the figure show ⁇ that the ⁇ hape and ⁇ tability function of the shoe sole and shoe uppers mirror almost exactly that of the human foot.
  • Figs. 42A-42D show the natural cushioning of the human barefoot, in cros ⁇ ⁇ ection ⁇ at the heel.
  • Fig. 42A shows the bare heel upright and unloaded, with little pressure on the subcalcaneal fat pad 158, which is evenly distributed between the calcaneus 159, which is the heel bone, and the bottom sole 160 of the foot.
  • Fig. 42B shows the bare heel upright but under the moderate pres ⁇ ure of full body weight.
  • the compres ⁇ ⁇ ion of the calcaneus against the subcalcaneal fat pad produces evenly balanced pres ⁇ ure within the subcalcaneal fat pad because it is contained and surrounded by a rela ⁇ tively unstretchable fibrous capsule, the bottom ⁇ ole of the foot. Underneath the foot, where the bottom ⁇ ole i ⁇ in direct contact with the ground, the pre ⁇ sure cau ⁇ ed by the calcaneu ⁇ on the compre ⁇ ed ⁇ ubcalcaneal fat pad i ⁇ tran ⁇ mitted directly to the ground.
  • thi ⁇ ⁇ ys ⁇ tem allow ⁇ the relatively narrow ba ⁇ e of the calcaneus to pivot from side to side freely in normal pronation/ supination motion, without any obstructing torsion on it, despite the very much greater width of compressed foot sole providing protection and cushioning; this is cru ⁇ cially important in maintaining natural alignment of joints above the ankle joint such as the knee, hip and back, particularly in the horizontal plane, ⁇ o that the entire body is properly adjusted to absorb shock cor ⁇ rectly.
  • Figs. 43A-D show Figs. 9B-D of the '302 appli ⁇ cation, in addition to Fig. 9 of this application.
  • FIG. 44A and 44C are perspective views of cross ⁇ ection ⁇ of the human heel ⁇ howing the matrix of elastic fibrous connec ⁇ tive tissue arranged into chambers 164 holding closely packed fat cells; the chambers are structured a ⁇ whorl ⁇ radiating out from the calcaneu ⁇ .
  • the ⁇ e fibrou ⁇ -tissue strands are firmly attached to the undersurface of the calcaneus and extend to the ⁇ ubcutaneou ⁇ tissues.
  • the lower ⁇ urface 165 of the upper mid ⁇ ole 147 would corre ⁇ spond to the outer surface 167 of the calcaneus 159 and would be the origin of the U shaped whorl chamber ⁇ 164 noted above.
  • Fig. 44B shows a clo ⁇ e-up of the interior structure of the large chambers shown in Fig. 44A and 44C. It is clear from the fine interior structure and compression characteristics of the mini-chambers 165 that those directly under the calcaneus become very hard quite easily, due to the high local pres ⁇ ure on them and the limited degree of their ela ⁇ ticity, so they are able to provide very firm support to the calcaneus or other bones of the foot ⁇ ole; by being fairly inela ⁇ tic, the compre ⁇ sion force ⁇ on tho ⁇ e compartment ⁇ are dissipated to other areas of the network of fat pads under any given support structure of the foot, like the calcaneus.
  • a cushioning compartment 161 such as a ⁇ the compartment under the heel ⁇ hown in Figs. 9 & 43, is subdivided into ⁇ maller chambers, like those ⁇ hown in Fig. 44, then actual contact between the upper ⁇ urface 165 and the lower ⁇ urface 166 would no longer be required to provide firm ⁇ upport, ⁇ o long as those compartments and the pres ⁇ sure-transmitting medium contained in them have material characteristic ⁇ similar to tho ⁇ e of the foot, a ⁇ described above; the use of gas may not be satisfactory in this approach, ⁇ ince its compres ⁇ ibility may not allow adequate firmness.
  • the Fig. 44 design show ⁇ a shoe construction including: a shoe sole with a compartments under the structural elements of the human foot, includ ⁇ ing at least the heel; the compartments containing a pressure-transmitting medium like liquid, gas, or gel; the compartments having a whorled structure like that of the fat pads of the human foot ⁇ ole; load-bearing pre ⁇ ⁇ ure being transmitted gradually ⁇ ively at lea ⁇ t in part to the relatively inelastic sides, top and bottom of the shoe sole compartments, producing tension therein; the elasticity of the material of the compartment ⁇ and the pre ⁇ ure-tran ⁇ mitting medium are ⁇ uch that normal weight- bearing load ⁇ produce ⁇ ufficient ten ⁇ ion within the ⁇ tructure of the compartment ⁇ to provide adequate struc- tural rigidity to allow firm natural ⁇ upport to the foot ⁇ tructural element ⁇ , like that provided the barefoot by it ⁇ fat pads.
  • That shoe sole construction can have shoe ⁇ ole compartments that are subdivided
  • the upper ⁇ urface of tho ⁇ e in ⁇ ole ⁇ which would be in contact with the bottom ⁇ ole of the foot (and it ⁇ ⁇ ides) , would be coarse enough to stimulate the production of natural barefoot callouses.
  • the insoles would be removable and available in different uniform grades of coarseness, as is sandpaper, so that the user can progress from finer grades to coarser grades as his foot soles toughen with use.
  • socks could be produced to serve the same function, with the area of the sock that corresponds to the foot bottom sole (and ⁇ ide ⁇ of the bottom ⁇ ole) made of a material coarse enough to stimulate the produc ⁇ tion of callouses on the bottom sole of the foot, with different grades of coarseness available, from fine to coarse, corresponding to feet from soft to naturally tough.
  • the toe area of the sock could be relatively les ⁇ abrasive than the heel area.
  • Fig. 45 i ⁇ new in the continuation-in-part application, but i ⁇ ⁇ imilar to Fig. 4 from the appli- cant' ⁇ copending U.S. Patent Application 07/416,478, filed October 3, 1989, and de ⁇ cribed above.
  • Fig. 45A illu ⁇ trate ⁇ , in frontal or transverse plane cros ⁇ section in the heel area, the applicant's new invention of shoe sole side thickness increasing beyond the theoretically ideal stability plane to increase stability ⁇ omewhat beyond it ⁇ natural level.
  • the unavoidable trade-off re ⁇ ulting i ⁇ that natural motion would be re ⁇ tricted ⁇ omewhat and the weight of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole would increa ⁇ e ⁇ omewhat.
  • Fig. 45A shows roughly a 50 percent thickness increase over the theoretically ideal stability plane 51 and the left side show ⁇ roughly a 100 percent increa ⁇ e.
  • Fig. 45B ⁇ hows the same modifications to a forefoot ⁇ ection of the shoe sole, where such extreme thickness variations are considered more practical and effective.
  • Fig. 45 shows a situation wherein the thicknes ⁇ of the sole at each of the opposed ⁇ ide ⁇ i ⁇ thicker at the portion ⁇ of the sole 31a by a thickness which gradu ⁇ ally varies continuously from a thickness (s) through a thickness (s+sl) , to a thickne ⁇ s (s+s2) .
  • the ⁇ e de ⁇ igns recognize that lifetime use of existing shoes, the design of which has an inherent flaw that continually disrupts natural human biomechanics, has produced thereby actual structural changes in a human foot and ankle to an extent that must be compensated for. Specifically, one of the most common of the abnormal effects of the inherent existing flaw is a weakening of the long arch of the foot, increasing pronation. These designs therefore modify the applicant's preceding designs to provide greater than natural stability and should be particularly useful to individuals, generally with low arches, prone to pronate exces ⁇ ively, and could be used only on the medial side.
  • Fig. 45 (like Figs. 1 and 2 of the '478 application) allows the shoe sole to deform naturally closely paralleling the natural deformation of the barefoot under load; in addition, shoe sole material mu ⁇ t be of ⁇ uch compo ⁇ ition as to allow the natural deformation following that of the foot.
  • the new designs retain the essential novel aspect of the earlier design ⁇ ; namely, contouring the ⁇ hape of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole to the ⁇ hape of the human foot.
  • the difference i ⁇ that the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ in the frontal plane is allowed to vary rather than remain uni ⁇ formly constant. More specifically, Fig. 45 (and Figs.
  • the applicant's Fig. 4 and this new Fig. 45 invention are the structure of a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to a shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the shoe sole sides conforming to the ground by paralleling it, as i ⁇ conventional) ; thi ⁇ con ⁇ cept is like that described in Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 application.
  • Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 application.
  • the entire shoe sole — including both the side ⁇ and the portion directly underneath the foot — is bent up to conform to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the contoured shape of the unloaded foot sole of the wearer, rather than the partially flattened load-bearing foot sole shown in Fig. 45.
  • the total shoe sole thickness of the contoured side por ⁇ tions, including every layer or portion, is much les ⁇ than the total thickness of the sole portion directly underneath the foot, whereas in the applicant's '478 shoe sole invention the shoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ of the contoured ⁇ ide portion ⁇ are at lea ⁇ t ⁇ imilar to the thickne ⁇ of the sole portion directly underneath the foot, meaning a thicknes ⁇ variation of up to 25 percent, as measured in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cro ⁇ sections.
  • New Fig. 45 of thi ⁇ continuation-in-part appli ⁇ cation explicitly define ⁇ tho ⁇ e thickne ⁇ variation ⁇ , as measured in frontal or transverse plane cros ⁇ sections, of the applicant's shoe soles from 26 percent up to 50 percent, which distinguishes over all known prior art.
  • the shoe sole thicknes ⁇ variation of the applicant' ⁇ ⁇ hoe soles is increased in this appli ⁇ cation from 51 percent to 100 percent, as measured in frontal or transverse plane cros ⁇ sections.
  • Fig. 45 can be used at any one, or combination including all, of the essential structural support and propul ⁇ ion elements defined in the '819 patent. Those elements are the base and lateral tuberosity of the calcaneus, the heads of the metatarsal ⁇ , and the base of the fifth metatarsal, and the head of the first di ⁇ tal phalange, re ⁇ pectively. Of the metatarsal heads, only the first and fifth metatarsal heads are proximate to the contoured shoe ⁇ ole sides.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion extend sufficiently far up the ⁇ ides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the lateral stability of the wear ⁇ er's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion maintains the natural stability and natural, unin ⁇ terrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare through ⁇ out its normal range of sideways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of loco ⁇ motion of the wearer, including when the wearer is stand ⁇ ing, walking, jogging and running, even when said foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in con ⁇ trast to un ⁇ table and inflexible conventional shoe sole ⁇ , including the partially contoured existing art described above.
  • the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the applicant' ⁇ shoe sole invention extend ⁇ ufficiently far up the ⁇ ides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the exact thick- ness of the shoe sole sides and their specific contour will be determined empirically for individuals and groups using ⁇ tandard biomechanical techniques of gait analysis to determine those combination ⁇ that be ⁇ t provide the barefoot ⁇ tability described above. For the Fig.
  • the amount of any shoe sole side portions coplanar with the theore ⁇ tically ideal stability plane is determined by the degree of shoe sole stability desired and the shoe sole weight and bulk required to provide said stability; the amount of said coplanar contoured sides that is provided said shoe sole being sufficient to maintain intact the firm stability of the wearer's foot throughout the range of foot inversion and eversion motion typical of the u ⁇ e for which the ⁇ hoe i ⁇ intended and also typical of the kind of wearer — such as normal or excessive pronator — for which said shoe is intended.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe ⁇ ole embodiment ⁇ include the structural and material flexibil ⁇ ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support neces ⁇ ary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the excessive soft- ne ⁇ of many of the shoe sole materials used in shoe sole ⁇ in the existing art cau ⁇ e abnormal foot pronation and ⁇ upination.
  • Fig. IA the applicant has previously shown heel lifts with constant frontal or transver ⁇ e plane thickne ⁇ , since it is ori ⁇ ented conventionally in alignment with the frontal or transverse plane and perpendicular to the long axis of the shoe sole.
  • the heel wedge or toe taper or other shoe sole thickness variations in the sagittal plane along the long axis of the shoe sole
  • the heel wedge can be located perpendicular to the subtalar axis, which i ⁇ located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degree ⁇ medially, although a different angle can be u ⁇ ed ba ⁇ e on individual or group te ⁇ ting; such a orientation may provide better, more natural support to the ⁇ ubtalar joint, through which critical pronation and ⁇ upination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal stability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require constant shoe sole thickne ⁇ s in a vertical plane perpendicular to the chosen subtalar joint axi ⁇ , in ⁇ tead of the frontal plane.
  • any of the above described thick ⁇ nes ⁇ variations from a theoretically ideal stability plane can be used together with any of the below described density or bottom sole design variations. All portion ⁇ of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole are included in thickne ⁇ and density measurement, including the ⁇ ockliner or insole, the midsole (including heel lift or other thickness vari- ation measured in the sagittal plane) and bottom or outer sole.
  • Fig. 45 and below described thickness and density variations apply to the load-bearing portions of the contoured side ⁇ of the applicant's shoe sole inventions, the side portion being identified in Fig. 4 of the '819 patent. Thicknes ⁇ and density variations described above are measured along the contoured side portion.
  • the side portion of the fully contoured design introduced in the '819 patent in Fig. 15 cannot be defined as explicitly, since the bottom portion is contoured like the sides, but should be mea ⁇ ured by estimating the equivalent Fig. 4 figure; generally, like Figs. 14 and Fig. 15 of the '819 patent, assuming the flattened sole portion shown in Fig. 14 corresponds to a load-bearing equivalent of Fig.
  • Figs. 14 and Fig. 15 are es ⁇ entially the same.
  • the thickness and density varia ⁇ tions described above can be measured from the center of the es ⁇ ential structural support and propul ⁇ ion element ⁇ defined in the '819 patent.
  • Tho ⁇ e elements are the base and lateral tuberosity of the calcaneus, the heads of the metatarsal ⁇ , and the ba ⁇ e of the fifth metatar ⁇ al, and the head of the first distal phalange, respectively.
  • Fig. 47 is similar to Fig. 6 of the parent '598 application, which is Fig. 10 in the applicant's copendi ⁇ ng '478 application and shows, in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cros ⁇ section in the heel area, that similar varia ⁇ tions in shoe mid ⁇ ole (other portions of the shoe sole area not shown) density can provide similar but reduced effects to the variations in shoe sole thickness described previously in Fig ⁇ . 4 and 5.
  • the major advan- tage of thi ⁇ approach i ⁇ that the structural theoreti ⁇ cally ideal stability plane is retained, so that natu ⁇ rally optimal ⁇ tability and efficient motion are retained to the maximum extent possible.
  • the den ⁇ ity variations are located preferably at least in that part of the contoured side which becomes wearer's body weight load-bearing during the full range of inversion and ever ⁇ ion, which i ⁇ ⁇ ide ⁇ way ⁇ or lateral foot motion.
  • the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion maintains the natural ⁇ tability and natural, unin ⁇ terrupted motion of the wearer' ⁇ foot when bare through- out its normal range of sideways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of loco ⁇ motion of the wearer, including when the wearer is stand ⁇ ing, walking, jogging and running, even when said foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in con- trast to unstable and inflexible conventional shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ , including the partially contoured exi ⁇ ting art de ⁇ cribed above.
  • the sides of the applicant' ⁇ ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole invention extend ⁇ ufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the exact mate ⁇ rial density of the shoe sole sides will be determined empirically for individuals and group ⁇ using standard biomechanical techniques of gait analysis to determine those combinations that be ⁇ t provide the barefoot stabil- ity de ⁇ cribed above.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments include the structural and material flexibil ⁇ ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support neces ⁇ ary to maintain normal pronation and ⁇ upination, a ⁇ if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the excessive soft ⁇ ne ⁇ of many of the ⁇ hoe sole materials used in shoe soles in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and supination.
  • the applicant has previously shown heel lifts with constant frontal or transverse plane thickness, since it i ⁇ ori ⁇ ented conventionally in alignment with the frontal or tran ⁇ ver ⁇ e plane and perpendicular to the long axis of the shoe sole.
  • the heel wedge or toe taper or other shoe sole thicknes ⁇ variation ⁇ in the sagittal plane along the long axis of the shoe sole
  • the heel wedge can be located perpendicular to the subtalar axi ⁇ , which i ⁇ located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degrees medially, although a different angle can be used base on individual or group testing; ⁇ uch a orientation may provide better, more natural ⁇ upport to the ⁇ ubtalar joint, through which critical pronation and ⁇ upination motion occur.
  • the applicant' ⁇ theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane concept would teach that ⁇ uch a heel wedge orientation would require constant shoe sole thickness in a vertical plane perpendicular to the chosen subtalar joint axis, instead of the frontal plane.
  • Fig. 48 is similar to Fig. 7 of the parent '598 application, but with more the extreme thicknes ⁇ varia- tion similar to Fig. 45 above.
  • Fig. 48 is like Fig. 7, which is Fig. 14B of the applicant's '478 application and shows, in frontal or transverse plane cross sections in the heel area, embodiments like those in Fig. 4 through 6 but wherein a portion of the shoe sole thickness is decreased to less than the theoretically ideal stability plane, the amount of the thicknes ⁇ variation a ⁇ defined for Fig.
  • the mo ⁇ t extreme maximum inwardly variation is 41 to 50 percent, and the more typical maximum inwardly thickness variation would be 26 to 40 percent, preferably at least in that part of the contoured side which becomes wearer's body weight load- bearing during the full range of inversion and eversion, which is sideways or lateral foot motion.
  • the right side of Fig. 48 ⁇ how ⁇ a thick- ne ⁇ reduction of approximately 40 percent and the left side a reduction of approximately 50 percent.
  • Fig. 7 Show ⁇ a embodiment like the fully contoured de ⁇ ign in Fig. 5, but with a show sole thicknes ⁇ decrea ⁇ ing with increasing distance from the center portion of the sole.
  • Fig. 49 i ⁇ similar to Fig. 8 of the parent '598 application which was Fig.
  • FIG. 13 of the '478 application shows, in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cross section, a bottom sole tread design that provides about the same overall shoe ⁇ ole den ⁇ ity variation as that provided in Fig. 6 by midsole density variation.
  • the less supporting tread there i ⁇ under any particular portion of the shoe sole the less effective overall shoe density there is, since the midsole above that portion will deform more easily than if it were fully supported.
  • Fig. 49 shows more extreme shoe sole tread design, roughly equivalent to the structural changes in shoe sole thicknes ⁇ and/or den ⁇ ity de ⁇ cribed in Figs. 45-48 above.
  • Fig. 49 like Fig.
  • bottom sole tread patterns just like mid ⁇ ole or bottom sole or inner sole density, directly affect the actual structural support the foot receives from the shoe sole.
  • bottom sole tread patterns just like mid ⁇ ole or bottom sole or inner sole density
  • tread patterns directly affect the actual structural support the foot receives from the shoe sole.
  • center of pres ⁇ ure tread pattern
  • Variation ⁇ of thi ⁇ pattern are extremely common in athletic shoes and are nearly universal in running shoes, of which the 1991 Nike 180 model and the Avia "cantilever" memori ⁇ are example ⁇ .
  • the Fig. 49 invention can, therefore, utilize bottom sole tread patterns like any these common examples, together or even in the absence of any other shoe sole thickness or density variation, to achieve an effective thickne ⁇ greater than the theoretically ideal stability plane, in order to achieve greater stability than the shoe sole would otherwi ⁇ e provide, a ⁇ di ⁇ cussed earlier under Fig ⁇ . 4-6.
  • shoe bottom or outer sole tread pattern ⁇ can be fairly irregular and/or complex and can thus make difficult the measurement of the outer load-bearing sur ⁇ face of the shoe sole. Consequently, thicknes ⁇ varia ⁇ tion ⁇ in ⁇ mall portions of the shoe sole that will deform or compre ⁇ s without significant overall resistance under a wearer's body weight load to the thicknes ⁇ of the over- all load-bearing plane of the shoe out sole should be ignored during measurement, whether ⁇ uch ea ⁇ y deformation i ⁇ made po ⁇ ible by very high point pre ⁇ ure or by the use of relatively compres ⁇ ible outsole (or underlying midsole) materials.
  • mid ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ s variations of unused ⁇ hoe ⁇ oles due to the use of materials or structures that compact or expand quickly after use should also be ignore when mea ⁇ uring ⁇ hoe sole thicknes ⁇ in frontal or tran ⁇ - verse plane cros ⁇ section ⁇ .
  • the applicant's shoe ⁇ ole invention maintains intact the firm lateral stability of the wearer's foot, that stability as demonstrated when the foot is unshod and tilted out laterally in inversion to the extreme limit of the normal range of motion of the ankle joint of the foot.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion extend sufficiently far up the side ⁇ of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the lateral ⁇ tability of the wear ⁇ er's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's shoe sole inven ⁇ tion maintains the natural stability and natural, unin ⁇ terrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare through ⁇ out its normal range of ⁇ ideway ⁇ pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of loco- motion of the wearer, including when the wearer is stand ⁇ ing, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unstable and inflexible conventional ⁇ hoe soles, including the partially contoured existing art described above.
  • the ⁇ ides of the applicant's shoe ⁇ ole invention extend ⁇ ufficiently far up the ⁇ ides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the exact thickness and material density of the bottom sole tread, as well as the shoe sole sides and their specific contour, will be determined empirically for individuals and groups u ⁇ ing standard biomechanical techniques of gait analysi ⁇ to determine those combinations that best provide the barefoot stability described above.
  • Fig. 50 i ⁇ similar to Fig. 10, which was new with the '598 application and which was a combination of the shoe sole structure concepts of Fig. 3 and Fig. 4; it combines the custom fit design with the contoured side ⁇ greater than the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane. It would apply a ⁇ well to the Fig. 7 design with contoured side ⁇ le ⁇ s than the theoretically ideal stability plane, but that combination is not ⁇ hown. It would al ⁇ o apply to the Fig. 8 design, which shows one of a typical bottom sole tread design ⁇ , but that combination i ⁇ al ⁇ o not ⁇ hown.
  • the Fig. 3 cus ⁇ tom fit invention is also novel for shoe sole structures with sides that exceed the theoretically ideal stability plane: that is, a ⁇ hoe sole with thicknes ⁇ greater in the ⁇ ides than underneath the foot. It would also be novel for shoe sole structures with sides that are less than the theoretically ideal stability plane, within the para ⁇ meters defined in the '714 application. And it would be novel for a shoe sole structure that provides stability like the barefoot, as described in Figs. 1 and 2 of the '714 application.
  • the appli ⁇ cant's invention is the structure of a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to a shape nearly identical but slightly smaller than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer (instead of the shoe sole sides conforming to the ground by parallel ⁇ ing it, as is conventional) ; this concept is like that described in Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 appli- cation.
  • Fig. 3 of the applicant's 07/239,667 appli- cation.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe ⁇ ole invention extend ⁇ ufficiently far up the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the lateral stabil ⁇ ity of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's invention main ⁇ tains the natural stability and natural, uninterrupted motion of the foot when bare throughout its normal range of sideways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phases of locomotion of the wear ⁇ er, including when said wearer is standing, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unsta ⁇ ble and inflexible conventional shoe soles, including the partially contoured existing art described above.
  • the sides of the applicant's shoe ⁇ ole invention extend ⁇ uf ⁇ ficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot ⁇ ole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the exact thickness and material density of the shoe sole side ⁇ and their ⁇ pe ⁇ cific contour will be determined empirically for indi- vidual ⁇ and group ⁇ u ⁇ ing ⁇ tandard biomechanical tech ⁇ nique ⁇ of gait analy ⁇ i ⁇ to determine tho ⁇ e combinations that best provide the barefoot ⁇ tability described above. For the Fig.
  • the amount of any shoe sole side portions coplanar with the theore ⁇ tically ideal stability plane is determined by the degree of shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ tability de ⁇ ired and the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole weight and bulk required to provide said stability; the amount of said coplanar contoured sides that is provided ⁇ aid shoe sole being sufficient to maintain intact the firm stability of the wearer's foot throughout the range of foot inversion and eversion motion typical of the use for which the shoe is intended and al ⁇ o typical of the kind of wearer — such as normal or as excessive pronator — for which said shoe is intended.
  • the shoe sole sides are sufficiently flexible to bend out easily when the shoes are put on the wearer's feet and therefore the shoe ⁇ oles gently hold the ⁇ ides of the wearer's foot sole when on, providing the equivalent of custom fit in a mas ⁇ -produced ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole.
  • the applicant' ⁇ preferred ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole embodiment ⁇ include the ⁇ tructural and material flexibil- ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole a ⁇ if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanic ⁇ created by rigid conventional ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support neces ⁇ ary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the excessive soft- ness of many of the shoe sole materials used in shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and ⁇ upination.
  • the heel wedge can be located perpendicular to the ⁇ ubtalar axis, which is located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degrees medially, although a different angle can be used base on individual or group testing; such a orientation may provide better, more natural support to the ⁇ ubtalar joint, through which critical pronation and supination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal stability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require con ⁇ tant ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ s in a vertical plane perpendicular to the chosen subtalar joint axis, instead of the frontal plane.
  • the intentional undersizing of the flexible shoe sole sides allows for simplified design of shoe sole last ⁇ , since the shoe last needs only to be approximate to provide a virtual custom fit, due to the flexible sides.
  • the under ⁇ sized flexible shoe sole sides allow the applicant's Fig. 50 shoe sole invention based on the theoretically ideal stability plane to be manufactured in relatively standard sizes in the same manner as are shoe uppers, since the flexible shoe sole side ⁇ can be built on ⁇ tandard ⁇ hoe lasts, even though conceptually those sides conform to the specific shape of the individual wearer's foot sole, because the flexible sides bend to so conform when on the wearer's foot ⁇ ole.
  • Fig. 50 ⁇ how ⁇ the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ tructure when not on the foot of the wearer; the dashed line 29 indicates the position of the shoe last, which is as ⁇ umed to be a rea ⁇ onably accurate approximation of the shape of the outer surface of the wearer's foot sole, which determines the shape of the theoretically ideal stability plane 51.
  • the dashed lines 29 and 51 show what the position ⁇ of the inner ⁇ urface 30 and outer ⁇ urface 31 of the shoe sole would be when the ⁇ hoe i ⁇ put on the foot of the wearer.
  • the Fig. 50 invention provide ⁇ a way make the inner surface 30 of the contoured shoe sole, especially its side ⁇ , conform very closely to the outer surface 29 of the foot ⁇ ole of a wearer. It thu ⁇ make ⁇ much more practical the applicant's earlier underlying naturally contoured designs shown in Figs. 4 and 5.
  • the shoe sole structures shown in Fig. 4 and 5, then, are similar to what the Fig.
  • shoe sole structure would be when on the wearer's load-bearing foot, where the inner surface 30 of the ⁇ hoe upper is bent out to virtually coincide with the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer 29 (the figures in this and prior applications show one line to empha ⁇ ize the conceptual coincidence of what in fact are two line ⁇ ; in real world embodiment ⁇ , some divergence of the surface, especially under load and during locomotion would be unavoidable) .
  • the sides of the shoe sole structure de ⁇ cribed under Fig. 50 can al ⁇ o be used to form a slightly le ⁇ s optimal structure: a conventional ⁇ hoe sole that has been modified by having its side ⁇ bent up ⁇ o that their inner surface conforms to shape nearly identical but slightly larger than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer, instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional.
  • the clo ⁇ er the sides are to the shape of the wearer's foot sole, the better as a general rule, but any side position between flat on the ground and conforming like Fig. 50 to a ⁇ hape ⁇ lightly ⁇ maller than the wearer's shape is both pos ⁇ ible and more effective than conventional flat shoe sole side ⁇ .
  • the shoe sole sides can even be conventionally flat on the ground — the critical functional feature of both is that they both conform under load to parallel the shape of the ground, which conventional shoe ⁇ do not, except when exactly upright.
  • the appli ⁇ cant's ⁇ hoe sole invention include ⁇ any ⁇ hoe sole — whether conforming to the wearer's foot sole or to the ground or some intermediate position, including a shape much smaller than the wearer's foot sole — that deforms to conform to a shape at least simi ⁇ lar to the theoretically ideal stability plane, which by definition itself deforms in parallel with the deforma ⁇ tion of the wearer's foot sole under weight-bearing load.
  • Fig. 51 was new in Serial No. 462,531 filed June 5, 1995, and Serial No. 472,979 filed June 7, 1995, and similar to Fig. 11, which was new with the '598 ap- plication and which was is a combination of the shoe ⁇ ole structure concepts of Fig. 3 and Fig. 6; it combines the cu ⁇ tom fit design with the contoured sides having mate ⁇ rial density variations that produce an effect similar to variations in shoe sole thickness shown in Fig ⁇ . 4, 5, and 7; only the midsole is shown.
  • the density variation pattern shown in Fig. 2 can be combined with the type shown in Fig. 11 or Fig. 51.
  • the density pattern can be constant in all cros ⁇ ⁇ ection ⁇ taken along the long the long axis of the shoe sole or the pattern can vary.
  • the applicant's Fig. 51 shoe sole invention maintains intact the firm lateral stability of the wear ⁇ er's foot, that stability as demonstrated when the wear ⁇ er's foot is unshod and tilted out laterally in inversion to the extreme limit of the normal range of motion of the ankle joint of the foot; in a similar demonstration in a conventional shoe sole, the wearer's foot and ankle are un ⁇ table.
  • the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the applicant' ⁇ shoe sole inven- tion extend sufficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the lateral stability of the wear ⁇ er's foot when bare.
  • the applicant's invention main ⁇ tains the natural stability and natural, uninterrupted motion of the foot when bare throughout it ⁇ normal range of ⁇ ideway ⁇ pronation and ⁇ upination motion occurring during all load-bearing pha ⁇ es of locomotion of the wearer, including when said wearer is standing, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unsta ⁇ ble and inflexible conventional shoe sole ⁇ , including the partially contoured existing art de ⁇ cribed above.
  • the ⁇ ide ⁇ of the applicant's ⁇ hoe sole invention extend suf ⁇ ficiently far up the sides of the wearer's foot sole to maintain the natural stability and uninterrupted motion of the wearer's foot when bare.
  • the amount of any shoe sole side portions coplanar with the theore ⁇ tically ideal stability plane is determined by the degree of shoe sole stability desired and the shoe sole weight and bulk required to provide said stability; the amount of ⁇ aid coplanar contoured ⁇ ide ⁇ that i ⁇ provided ⁇ aid shoe sole being sufficient to maintain intact the firm stability of the wearer's foot throughout the range of foot inversion and eversion motion typical of the use for which the shoe is intended and al ⁇ o typical of the kind of wearer — such as normal or as exces ⁇ ive pronator — for which ⁇ aid ⁇ hoe i ⁇ intended.
  • the shoe sole ⁇ ides are sufficiently flexible to bend out easily when the shoes are put on the wearer's feet and therefore the shoe soles gently hold the sides of the wearer's foot sole when on, providing the equivalent of cu ⁇ tom fit in a mass-produced shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments include the structural and material flexibil ⁇ ity to deform in parallel to the natural deformation of the wearer's foot sole as if it were bare and unaffected by any of the abnormal foot biomechanics created by rigid conventional shoe sole.
  • the applicant's preferred shoe sole embodiments are sufficiently firm to provide the wearer's foot with the structural support necessary to maintain normal pronation and supination, as if the wearer's foot were bare; in contrast, the excessive soft ⁇ ness of many of the shoe sole materials used in shoe soles in the existing art cause abnormal foot pronation and supination.
  • the applicant has previou ⁇ ly ⁇ hown heel lift with con ⁇ tant frontal or transverse plane thickness, since it is oriented conventionally in alignment with the frontal or transver ⁇ e plane and perpendicular to the long axis of the shoe sole.
  • the heel wedge or toe taper or other shoe sole thickness variations in the sagittal plane along the long axis of the shoe sole
  • the heel wedge can be located perpendicular to the subtalar axis, which is located in the heel area generally about 20 to 25 degree ⁇ medially, although a different angle can be u ⁇ ed base on individual or group testing; such a orientation may provide better, more natural support to the subtalar joint, through which critical pronation and supination motion occur.
  • the applicant's theoretically ideal stability plane concept would teach that such a heel wedge orientation would require con ⁇ tant ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ in a vertical plane perpendicular to the cho ⁇ en ⁇ ubtalar joint axi ⁇ , in ⁇ tead of the frontal plane.
  • the intentional under ⁇ izing of the flexible ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole sides allows for ⁇ implified de ⁇ ign of ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole la ⁇ t ⁇ , ⁇ ince the shoe last needs only to be approximate to provide a virtual custom fit, due to the flexible sides.
  • the under ⁇ sized flexible shoe sole sides allow the applicant's Fig. 50 shoe sole invention based on the theoretically ideal stability plane to be manufactured in relatively standard sizes in the same manner as are shoe uppers, since the flexible shoe sole sides can be built on standard shoe lasts, even though conceptually those sides conform to the specific shape of the individual wearer's foot sole, because the flexible ⁇ ide ⁇ bend to ⁇ o conform when on the wearer's foot sole.
  • a flexible undersized version of the fully contoured design described in Fig. 51 can also be pro- vided by a similar geometric approximation.
  • a ⁇ a re ⁇ ult, the under ⁇ ized flexible ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ides allow the appli ⁇ cant's shoe sole inventions based on the theoretically ideal stability plane to be manufactured in relatively ⁇ tandard ⁇ ize ⁇ in the ⁇ ame manner a ⁇ are ⁇ hoe uppers, since the flexible shoe sole side ⁇ can be built on ⁇ tan ⁇ dard ⁇ hoe la ⁇ ts, even though conceptually those ⁇ ide ⁇ conform clo ⁇ ely to the ⁇ pecific ⁇ hape of the individual wearer' ⁇ foot sole, because the flexible side ⁇ bend to conform when on the wearer's foot sole.
  • Fig. 51 shows the shoe sole structure when not on the foot of the wearer; the dashed line 29 indicates the position of the shoe last, which is a ⁇ umed to be a reasonably accurate approximation of the shape of the outer ⁇ urface of the wearer' ⁇ foot sole, which determines the shape of the theoretically ideal stability plane 51.
  • the dashed lines 29 and 51 show what the positions of the inner surface 30 and outer surface 31 of the shoe sole would be when the shoe is put on the foot of the wearer.
  • the Fig. 51 invention provide ⁇ a way make the inner ⁇ urface 30 of the contoured ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole, e ⁇ pecially its sides, conform very closely to the outer surface 29 of the foot sole of a wearer. It thus makes much more practical the applicant's earlier underlying naturally contoured de ⁇ igns shown in Fig. 1A-C and Fig. 6.
  • the shoe sole structure shown in Fig. 51, then, is what the Fig.
  • 11 shoe ⁇ ole structure would be when on the wearer's foot, where the inner surface 30 of the shoe upper i ⁇ bent out to virtually coincide with the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer 29 (the figure ⁇ in thi ⁇ and prior application ⁇ show one line to emphasize the concep- tual coincidence of what in fact are two lines; in real world embodiments, some divergence of the surface, espe ⁇ cially under load and during locomotion would be unavoid ⁇ able) .
  • the sides of the shoe sole structure described under Fig. 51 can also be used to form a slightly les ⁇ optimal structure: a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to shape nearly identical but slightly larger than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer, instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional.
  • a conventional shoe sole that has been modified by having its sides bent up so that their inner surface conforms to shape nearly identical but slightly larger than the shape of the outer surface of the foot sole of the wearer, instead of the shoe sole sides being flat on the ground, as is conventional.
  • the closer the sides are to the shape of the wearer's foot sole the better as a general rule, but any ⁇ ide position between flat on the ground and conforming like Fig. 11 to a shape slightly ⁇ maller than the wearer's shape is both possible and more effective than conventional flat shoe sole side ⁇ .
  • the shape of the flexible shoe uppers which can even be made with very elastic materials such as lycra and spandex, can provide the capability for the shoe, including the shoe sole, to conform to the shape of the foot.
  • the critical functional feature of a shoe sole is that it deforms under a weight-bearing load to conform to the foot sole just as the foot sole deforms to conform to the ground under a weight-bearing load. So, even though the foot sole and the shoe sole may start in different loca ⁇ tion ⁇ — the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide ⁇ can even be conventionally flat on the ground — the critical functional feature of both is that they both conform under load to parallel the shape of the ground, which conventional shoes do not, except when exactly upright.
  • the appli ⁇ cant's shoe ⁇ ole invention ⁇ tated mo ⁇ t broadly, includes any shoe sole — whether conforming to the wearer's foot sole or to the ground or some intermediate position, including a shape much smaller than the wearer's foot sole — that deforms to conform to the theoretically ideal stability plane, which by definition it ⁇ elf deform ⁇ in parallel with the deformation of the wearer's foot sole under weight-bearing load.
  • the applicant's shoe sole invention ⁇ de ⁇ cribed in Fig ⁇ . 4, 10, 11 and 51 all attempt to provide struc- tural compen ⁇ ation for actual structural changes in the feet of wearers that have occurred from a lifetime of use of existing shoes, which have a major flaw that has been identified and described earlier by the applicant.
  • the biomechanical motion of even the wearer's bare feet have been degraded from what they would be if the wearer's feet had not been structurally changed. Consequently, the ultimate design goal of the applicant' ⁇ inventions is to provide un-degraded barefoot motion.
  • the ultimate goal of the applicant' ⁇ invention i ⁇ to provide ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ tructure ⁇ that maintain the natural stability and natural, uninterrupted motion of the foot when bare throughout its normal range of side ⁇ ways pronation and supination motion occurring during all load-bearing phase ⁇ of locomotion of a wearer who ha ⁇ never been shod in conventional shoes, including when said wearer is standing, walking, jogging and running, even when the foot is tilted to the extreme limit of that normal range, in contrast to unstable and inflexible conventional shoe soles.
  • Fig. 51 like Fig. 47, increases constructive density variations, as most typically measured in duro- meter ⁇ on a Shore A ⁇ cale, to include 26 percent up to 50 percent and from 51 percent to 200 percent.
  • the ⁇ ame variation ⁇ in shoe bottom sole de ⁇ ign can provide ⁇ imilar effect ⁇ to the variation in shoe sole den ⁇ ity de ⁇ cribed above.
  • any of the above de ⁇ cribed thick ⁇ ne ⁇ variation ⁇ from a theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane can be u ⁇ ed together with any of the above described density or bottom ⁇ ole de ⁇ ign variation ⁇ .
  • Fig. 51 show such a combination; for illu ⁇ tration purpo ⁇ e ⁇ , it show ⁇ a thickness increase greater than the theoretically ideal stability plane on the right ⁇ ide and a le ⁇ er thickness on the left side — both sides illustrate the density variations described above. All portion ⁇ of the shoe sole are included in thickness and density measure- ment, including the ⁇ ockliner or insole, the midsole (including heel lift or other thickness variation mea ⁇ sured in the sagittal plane) and bottom or outer ⁇ ole.
  • Fig. 51 invention and the Fig. 11 invention can be combined with the invention ⁇ hown in Fig. 12 of the '870 application, which can al ⁇ o be com ⁇ bined with the other figures of this application, as can Fig. 9A-9D of the '870 application. Any of these figures can also be combined alone or together with Fig. 9 of this application, which is Fig. 9 of the '302 application or Fig. 10 of that application, or with Figs. 11-15, 19- 28, 30, and 33A-33M of the '523 application, or with Figs.7-9 of the '313 application, or Fig. 8 of the '748 application, with or without stability sipe 11.
  • the thickness and density varia ⁇ tions described above can be measured from the center of the essential structural support and propul ⁇ ion element ⁇ defined in the '819 patent. Those elements are the base and lateral tuberosity of the calcaneus, the heads of the metatarsals, and the ba ⁇ e of the fifth metatarsal, and the head of the first distal phalange, re ⁇ pectively. Of the metatar ⁇ al head ⁇ , only the first and fifth metatarsal heads are used for such measurement, since only those two are located on lateral portions of the foot and thu ⁇ proximate to contoured ⁇ tability sides of the applicant's shoe sole.
  • Fig. 52A-B was new with the continuation-in- part applications Serial No.
  • Fig. 52 explicitly includes an upper shoe sole surface that is complementary to the shape of all or a portion the wearer's foot sole.
  • this application describes shoe contoured sole side designs wherein the inner surface of the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane lie ⁇ at ⁇ ome point between conforming or complementary to the shape of the wearer's foot sole, that is — roughly paralleling the foot sole including its side — and par ⁇ alleling the flat ground; that inner surface of the theo- retically ideal stability plane becomes load-bearing in contact with the foot sole during foot inversion and ever ⁇ ion, which i ⁇ normal sideways or lateral motion.
  • the basi ⁇ of thi ⁇ de ⁇ ign was introduced in the appli ⁇ cant's '302 application relative to Fig. 9 of that appli- cation.
  • Fig. 52B describes shoe sole side designs wherein the lower surface of the theoretically ideal stability plane, which equates to the load-bearing surface of the bottom or outer shoe sole, of the shoe sole side portions is above the plane of the underneath portion of the shoe sole, when measured in frontal or transver ⁇ e plane cro ⁇ sections; that lower ⁇ urface of the theoretically ideal stability plane becomes load-bearing in contact with the ground during foot inversion and ever ⁇ ion, which i ⁇ nor ⁇ mal sideways or lateral motion.
  • Fig. 53 wa ⁇ new in the continuation-in-part applications Serial No. 462,531 filed June 5, 1995, and Serial No. 472,979 filed June 7, 1995, and provides a means to measure the contoured shoe sole sides incorpo ⁇ rated in the applicant's inventions described above.
  • Fig. 53 i ⁇ Fig. 27 of the '819 patent modified to corre ⁇ late the height or extent of the contoured side portions of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole with a preci ⁇ e angular measurement from zero to 180 degrees.
  • the contoured shoe sole sides as described in this application can have any angu- lar measurement from zero degrees to 180 degrees.
  • Figs. 54A-54F, Fig.55A-E, and Fig. 56 were new to the continuation-in-part applications Serial No. 462,531 filed June 5, 1995, and Serial No. 472,979 filed June 7, 1995, and describe shoe sole structural inven- tions that are formed with an upper surface to conform, or at least be complementary, to the all or most or at least part of the shape of the wearer's foot sole, whether under a body weight load or unloaded, but without contoured stability sides as defined by the applicant.
  • a ⁇ such, Figs. 54-56 are similar to Figs. 19-21 of the '819 patent, but without the contoured stability side ⁇ 28a defined in Fig.
  • Those contoured side thickness variations from the theoretically ideal stability plane are uniform thicknes ⁇ , variation ⁇ of 5 to 10 percent, variation ⁇ of 11 to 25 percent, variation ⁇ of 26 to 40 percent and 41 to 50 for thickne ⁇ ses decrea ⁇ ing from the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane, thickne ⁇ variation ⁇ of 26 to 50 percent and 51 percent to 100 percent for thickne ⁇ variation ⁇ increasing from the theoretically ideal stability plane.
  • Figs. 54A-54F, Fig.55A-E, and Fig. 56 like the many other variation ⁇ of the applicant' ⁇ naturally con ⁇ toured de ⁇ ign described in this and earlier applications, shown a shoe ⁇ ole invention wherein both the upper, foot ⁇ ole-contacting ⁇ urface of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole and the bottom, ground-contacting ⁇ urface of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole mirror the contour ⁇ of the bottom ⁇ urface of the wearer's foot sole, forming in effect a flexible three dimensional mirror of the load-bearing portion ⁇ of that foot sole when bare.
  • the shoe ⁇ ole ⁇ hown in Fig ⁇ .
  • Fig. 55D shows somewhat more conventional contoured ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide ⁇ , but which are not load-bearing, like the roughly vertical sides shown in Fig ⁇ . 55A-C.
  • Fig. 57A-57C is similar to Fig. 34A-34C, which show, in cross section ⁇ ⁇ imilar to tho ⁇ e in pending U.S. Patent '349, that with the quadrant- ⁇ ided de ⁇ ign of Figs. 26, 31, 32 and 33C that it is pos ⁇ ible to have ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide ⁇ that are both greater and le ⁇ er than the theoreti ⁇ cally ideal stability plane in the same shoe.
  • Fig. 57A-C shows the same range of thickness variation in contoured shoe side as Fig. 45 and used to show ⁇ imultaneously the general case for both extreme increases and extreme decreases.
  • the quadrant design determines the shape of the load-bearing portion of outer surface of the bottom or outer sole, which is coincident with the theoretically ideal stability plane; the finishing edge 53 or 53a is optional, not a mandatory part of the invention.
  • a corrected shoe sole design avoids such unnatural interference by neutrally maintaining a constant distance between foot and ground, even when the ⁇ hoe is tilted sideway ⁇ , a ⁇ if in effect the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole were not there except to cushion and protect. Unlike existing shoe ⁇ , the corrected ⁇ hoe would move with the foot's natural sideways pronation and supination motion on the ground. To the problem of using a shoe sole to maintain a naturally constant distance during that side ⁇ way ⁇ motion, there are two po ⁇ sible geometric solutions, depending upon whether just the lower horizontal plane of the shoe sole surface varies to achieve natural contour or both upper and lower surface plane ⁇ vary.
  • both upper and lower ⁇ urface ⁇ or planes of the shoe sole vary to conform to the natural contour of the human foot.
  • the two plane solution i ⁇ the most fundamental concept and naturally most effective. It is the only pure geo ⁇ metric solution to the mathematical problem of maintain- ing con ⁇ tant distance between foot and ground, and the most optimal, in the same ⁇ en ⁇ e that round i ⁇ only ⁇ hape for a wheel and perfectly round is most optimal. On the other hand, it is the least similar to exi ⁇ ting de ⁇ igns of the two pos ⁇ ible solutions and requires computer aided design and injection molding manufacturing techniques.
  • the quadrant contour side design which will be described in Figures 29-37, the side contours are formed by varia- tion ⁇ in the bottom surface alone.
  • the upper surface or plane of the shoe sole remains unvaryingly flat in fron ⁇ tal plane cros ⁇ sections, like most existing shoes, while the plane of the bottom shoe sole varies on the sides to provide a contour that pre ⁇ erve ⁇ natural foot and ankle biomechanics.
  • the one plane quadrant contour side design is still the only optimal single plane solution to the prob ⁇ lem of avoiding disruption of natural human biomechanics.
  • the one plane solution is the close ⁇ t to exi ⁇ ting shoe sole design, and therefore the easie ⁇ t and cheape ⁇ t to manufacture with existing equipment. Since it is more conventional in appearance than the two plane solution, but les ⁇ biomechanically effective, the one plane quad- rant contour ⁇ ide de ⁇ ign is preferable for dress or street shoe ⁇ and for light exerci ⁇ e, like ca ⁇ ual walking.
  • Fig. 57A-C, and Fig. 34A-34F shows a general embodiment of the applicant's invention for thicknes ⁇ or den ⁇ ity variation ⁇ , whether quadrant ⁇ ided or naturally contoured ⁇ ides: that whatever the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole ⁇ ide thick ⁇ ne ⁇ variation defined for a particular embodiment, that thickness variation definition is maintained as measured in two different frontal or transverse plane cros ⁇ sec ⁇ tions and those two cros ⁇ sections must be taken from section ⁇ of the ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole that have different thick- ne ⁇ e ⁇ , a ⁇ measured in sagittal plane cros ⁇ ⁇ ections or cross sections along the long axis of the shoe ⁇ ole.
  • Fig. 57A-C also ⁇ hows the special case of the radius of an intermediate shoe ⁇ ole thickne ⁇ , taken at (S 2 ) at the ba ⁇ e of the fifth metatarsal in Fig. 34B, is maintained constant throughout the quadrant sides of the shoe sole, including both the heel, Fig. 34C, and the forefoot, Fig. 34A, so that the side thickness is les ⁇ than the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane at the heel and more at the forefoot. Though po ⁇ ible, thi ⁇ i ⁇ not a preferred approach.
  • Fig. 58 i ⁇ based on Fig. IB but also ⁇ how ⁇ , for purposes of illustration, on the right side of Fig. 58 a relative thickness increase of the contoured shoe sole side for that portion of the contoured shoe sole side beyond the limit of the full range of normal sideways foot inversion and eversion motion, while uniform thick- ness exist ⁇ for the load-bearing portions of the con ⁇ toured shoe sole side.
  • the same relative thicknes ⁇ increase of the contoured shoe sole side could exist for that portion of the contoured shoe sole side beyond the limit of the full range of foot inversion and eversion, relatively more uniform or smaller thickness variations exi ⁇ t ⁇ for the load-bearing portion ⁇ of the contoured ⁇ hoe sole side; thi ⁇ de ⁇ ign could apply to Fig. 4, 5, 8, 45, 46, and 49 and other ⁇ .
  • the left side of Fig. 58 shows a density increase used for the same purpo ⁇ e a ⁇ the thickne ⁇ s increase.
  • the same design can be used for embodi ⁇ ments with decreasing thickness variations, like Fig. 7 and Fig. 48.
  • That normal range of foot inversion or ever- sion, and its corresponding limit ⁇ of load-bearing outer or bottom ⁇ ole ⁇ urface 211, noted above and elsewhere in this application can be determined either by individual measurement by means known in the art or by using general existing ranges or ranges developed by statistically meaningful studies, including using new, more dynamically based te ⁇ ting procedure ⁇ ; such ranges may also include a extra margin for error to protect the individual wearer.
  • the following Figures 59-62 are new with thi ⁇ continuation-in-part application, although Figs. 59 and 60 are from a prior application, now an issued patent. Figs. 59 and 60 are Figs. 25 and 26 from the applicant's '819 patent.
  • the shoe sole according to the invention can be made by approximating the contours, a ⁇ indicated in Fig ⁇ . 59A, 59B, and 60.
  • Fig. 59A shows a frontal plane cross section of a design wherein the sole material in areas 107 is so relatively soft that it deforms easily to the contour of shoe sole 28 of the pro ⁇ posed invention.
  • the heel cross section includes a sole upper surface 101 and a bottom sole edge ⁇ urface 102 following when deformed an in ⁇ et theoretically ideal stability plane 51.
  • the sole edge surface 102 terminates in a laterally extending portion 103 joined to the heel of the ⁇ ole 28.
  • the laterally-extending portion 103 i ⁇ made from a flexible material and ⁇ tructured to cau ⁇ e it ⁇ lower ⁇ urface 102 to terminate during deformation to parallel the in ⁇ et theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane 51.
  • Sole material in specific areas 107 is extremely soft to allow sufficient deformation.
  • the outer edge contour assumes approximately the theoretically ideal stability shape described above as a result of the deformation of the portion 103.
  • the top surface 101 similarly deforms to approximately parallel the natural contour of the foot as de ⁇ cribed by line ⁇ 30a and 30b shown in Fig. 4 of the applicant's '819 patent.
  • the con ⁇ trolled or programmed deformation can be provided by either of two techniques.
  • the shoe sole sides, at especially the midsole can be cut in a tapered fash ⁇ ion or grooved so that the bottom sole bends inwardly under pres ⁇ ure to the correct contour.
  • the second use an easily deformable material 107 in a tapered manner on the ⁇ ide ⁇ to deform under pre ⁇ sure to the correct contour. While such techniques produce stability and natural motion re ⁇ ult ⁇ which are a significant improvement over conventional design ⁇ , they are inherently inferior to contour ⁇ produced by simple geometric shaping.
  • the actual deformation mu ⁇ t be produced by pre ⁇ ure which i ⁇ unnatural and does not occur with a bare foot and sec ⁇ ond, only approximations are possible by deformation, even with sophi ⁇ ticated design and manufacturing tech ⁇ niques, given an individual's particular running gait or body weight.
  • the deformation proces ⁇ i ⁇ limited to a minor effort to correct the contours from surfaces approximating the ideal curve in the first instance.
  • the theoretically ideal ⁇ tability plane can also be approximated by a plurality of line segments 110, such as tangents, chords, or other lines, as shown in Fig. 60.
  • Both the upper surface of the shoe sole 28, which coincides with the side of the foot 30a, and the bottom surface 31a of the naturally contoured side can be approximated. While a single flat plane 110 approxima ⁇ tion may correct many of the biomechanical problems occurring with existing designs, because it can provide a gross approximation of the both natural contour of the foot and the theoretically ideal stability plane 51, the single plane approximation i ⁇ presently not preferred, since it is the lea ⁇ t optimal. By increa ⁇ ing the number of flat planar ⁇ urfaces formed, the curve more closely approximates the ideal exact design contours, as previ ⁇ ously described. Single and double plane approximations are shown as line ⁇ egment ⁇ in the cro ⁇ s section illus ⁇ trated in Fig. 60.
  • Both Figs. 59A and 59B are relatively hybrid embodiment ⁇ of a more general invention, the u ⁇ e of ⁇ oft, easily deformable materials 107 in any embodiment so that, first, the upper surface 30 of the shoe sole con ⁇ forms, or is at least complementary, to some or all of the shape of the wearer's foot sole when that upper sur- face 30 would not otherwise so conform; in other words, the soft, deformable material enables the conformance.
  • This enabling structure is shown in Fig. 61, which is ⁇ imilar to Fig. 52 above; Fig. 61 i ⁇ shown in the undeformed state.
  • Fig. 61 which is ⁇ imilar to Fig. 52 above; Fig. 61 i ⁇ shown in the undeformed state.
  • 61 shows, on the left side, a side upper surface 30a which does not conform to the side of the wearer's foot sole, but will easily deform to con ⁇ form during lateral motion if the material 107 used between the upper surface 30a and the wearer's foot sole 29 is sufficiently soft, compared to the material of the adjoining shoe sole portions.
  • the enclosed or partially enclosed space 108 between surface ⁇ 30a and 29 can also be devoid of material; the outermost side can be contained by shoe sole 28 material or by the shoe sole upper 21, as shown.
  • the use of soft, deformable materials may al ⁇ o compress sufficiently so as to enable the thick- ness of the shoe sole, as measured in frontal or trans ⁇ ver ⁇ e plane cros ⁇ ⁇ ection ⁇ , to be uniform or to have a thickne ⁇ that varie ⁇ within the parameters established in other earlier applications or above in earlier contin ⁇ uation-in-part applications of the '598 parent of this application, even if ⁇ uch thickne ⁇ would not otherwi ⁇ e be uniform or vary with the applicant' ⁇ e ⁇ tablished parameters.
  • FIG. 62A- B This enabling ⁇ tructures is shown in Fig. 62A- B, which is similar to Fig. 45A-B above.
  • Fig. 62A-B is ⁇ hown in a uncompre ⁇ ed ⁇ tate, but with sufficiently soft material 107, the Fig. 62A ⁇ tructure on the left side of the shoe sole shown could compres ⁇ to roughly the thick ⁇ ne ⁇ equivalent to the right ⁇ ide of the Fig. 62A ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole.
  • the soft materials 107 can be located in one con- tinuous section of soft material 107, as shown in Fig.
  • Such soft material 107 can be located anywhere between the wearer's foot sole 29 and the ground 43, including anywhere between the upper surface of the shoe sole 30 and the bottom surface 31.
  • the soft material 107 can form all or a portion of those upper or lower surfaces 30 and 31, or can be enclosed fully or in part by ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole material of generally typi ⁇ cal firmne ⁇ , ⁇ uch as from 30 to 80 durometers on the Shore A scale.
  • ⁇ hoe ⁇ ole material of generally typi ⁇ cal firmne ⁇ , ⁇ uch as from 30 to 80 durometers on the Shore A scale.
  • Fig. 62B can also be devoid of any shoe sole material, as ⁇ hown in Fig. 62B, ⁇ o that all or a portion of the upper surface 30* of the enclosed section or sections is in contact with all or a portion of the lower surface 31 of the enclosed section or ⁇ ection ⁇ , or the material 107 can be extraordinarily ⁇ oft so that such contact is virtually made.
  • the right side of the Fig. 62B shoe sole structure would compre ⁇ to coincide roughly with the theoretically ideal stability plane 51; and the left ⁇ ide would com ⁇ press in thickness to the original outer surface of the right side of Fig. 45B above.
  • 61-62 can be combined with Fig. 58 above.
  • the upper portion of the contoured shoe sole side can not fully compress into contact between upper and lower surfaces 30* and 31 % , since 31 x is longer; therefore, that upper portion can coincide with the non-load-bearing portion of the shoe sole, a ⁇ in Fig. 58, with the ⁇ ame functional utility.
  • the thickness of the flattened, load-bearing portion of the applicant's shoe soles should be substantially uniform, as shown by the vertically oriented dashed lines labeled "S" in Fig ⁇ . 1B- 1F, or within the variation parameters established in this and the applicant's prior applications. As measured in frontal plane cross sections, uniform thickness is generally considered the best or most optimal mode, but thickness variations within ⁇ tated parameters for the reason ⁇ de ⁇ cribed previou ⁇ ly and above may be optimal for individuals or groups, and are sub ⁇ tantially superior in stability to the prior art.
  • the thickne ⁇ s of the applicant's shoe ⁇ ole invention a ⁇ defined in thi ⁇ and prior application ⁇ , and in the '819 patent should preferably be maintained over the full range of the wearer's subtalar ankle joint, from extreme pronation to extreme supination, as shown by Fig. 63 below, the extended width of which, compared to convention shoes, corresponds to the applicant's conform ⁇ ing side ⁇ invention when flattened under a wearer's body weight load measured when standing, as described in Figs. 12-13 above, where the load is roughly one half the wear ⁇ er's body weight.
  • the ⁇ ame type of mea ⁇ urement ⁇ hould be made for the dynamic peak force ⁇ that occur during all form ⁇ of locomotion, ⁇ ince tho ⁇ e higher forces will increase the width of the dynamic load-bearing footprint and thus will require higher conforming shoe sole sides.
  • the forms of locomotion that should be included, but not limited to, are at least walking, which has a peak force of about one wearer's body weight (conventionally called 1 G) ; run ⁇ ning, which ha ⁇ a peak force of about three wearer's body weights (or 3 G's) ; and leaping, which has a peak force of about five to seven wearer's body weights (5 to 7 G' ⁇ ) .
  • Fig. 63 is Fig. 8 from the applicant's '748 application and show ⁇ a footprints 37 and 17, like Fig. 5 of the '748 application, of a right barefoot upright and tilted out 20 degree ⁇ , showing the actual relative posi ⁇ tion ⁇ to each other a ⁇ a low arched foot rolls outward from upright to tilted out 20 degrees.
  • Fig. 63 shows footprints 37 and 17, like Fig. 5, of a right barefoot upright and tilted out 20 degrees, showing the actual relative positions to each other as a low arched foot rolls outward from upright to tilted out 20 degrees.
  • the low arched foot is particularly notewor ⁇ thy because it exhibits a wider range of motion than the Fig. 5 high arched foot, ⁇ o the 20 degree lateral tilt footprint 17 i ⁇ farther to the out ⁇ ide of upright foot ⁇ print 37.
  • the low arched foot pronate ⁇ inward to inner footprint border ⁇ 18; the hatched area 19 is the increased area of the footprint due to the prona- tion, wherea ⁇ the hatched area 16 i ⁇ the decrea ⁇ ed area due to pronation.
  • lateral stability sipe 11 is clearly located on the shoe ⁇ ole along the inner margin of the lateral footprint 17 superimposed on top of the shoe sole and is straight to maximize ease of flexibil ⁇ ity.
  • Extremely wide shoe sole ⁇ are most practical if the sides of the shoe sole are not flat as is conventional but rather are bent up to conform to the natural shape of the shoe wearer's foot sole in accordance with the applicant's '819 patent and later pending applications.
  • Fig. 63 shoe ⁇ ole 28 can be used with or without lateral sipe 11 and i ⁇ shown here primarily to indicate the full range of the load-bearing portion of a wearer's foot sole.

Abstract

Cette invention se rapporte à une semelle (28) de chaussure comportant des portions latérales (28a) épousant les formes.
PCT/US1996/010902 1995-06-26 1996-06-26 Structures de semelles de chaussures WO1997001295A1 (fr)

Priority Applications (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
EP96921783A EP0955820A1 (fr) 1995-06-26 1996-06-26 Structures de semelles de chaussures
AU62907/96A AU6290796A (en) 1995-06-26 1996-06-26 Shoe sole structures

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US49452795A 1995-06-26 1995-06-26
US494,527 1995-06-26

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO1997001295A1 true WO1997001295A1 (fr) 1997-01-16

Family

ID=23964853

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US1996/010902 WO1997001295A1 (fr) 1995-06-26 1996-06-26 Structures de semelles de chaussures

Country Status (3)

Country Link
EP (1) EP0955820A1 (fr)
AU (1) AU6290796A (fr)
WO (1) WO1997001295A1 (fr)

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5893221A (en) * 1997-10-16 1999-04-13 Forest Footwear L.L.C. Footwear having a protuberance
WO2007086251A1 (fr) * 2006-01-26 2007-08-02 World Wing Enterprise Co. Semelle et chaussure en etant pourvue

Citations (13)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4272858A (en) * 1978-01-26 1981-06-16 K. Shoemakers Limited Method of making a moccasin shoe
US4366634A (en) * 1981-01-09 1983-01-04 Converse Inc. Athletic shoe
US4559723A (en) * 1983-01-17 1985-12-24 Bata Shoe Company, Inc. Sports shoe
US4727660A (en) * 1985-06-10 1988-03-01 Puma Ag Rudolf Dassler Sport Shoe for rehabilitation purposes
WO1990000358A1 (fr) 1988-07-15 1990-01-25 Ellis Frampton E Iii Chaussure a semelle profilee naturellement
US4989349A (en) 1988-07-15 1991-02-05 Ellis Iii Frampton E Shoe with contoured sole
WO1991003180A1 (fr) 1989-08-30 1991-03-21 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
WO1991004683A1 (fr) 1989-10-03 1991-04-18 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelles de chaussure corrective utilisant un contour plus grand que le plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
WO1991005491A1 (fr) 1989-10-20 1991-05-02 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelle de chaussures avec relief produisant une deformation naturelle parallele au pied
WO1991010377A1 (fr) 1990-01-10 1991-07-25 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structure de semelle
WO1991011124A1 (fr) 1990-01-24 1991-08-08 Ellis Frampton E Iii Semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
WO1994003080A1 (fr) * 1992-08-10 1994-02-17 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelle de chaussure
US5317819A (en) 1988-09-02 1994-06-07 Ellis Iii Frampton E Shoe with naturally contoured sole

Patent Citations (13)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4272858A (en) * 1978-01-26 1981-06-16 K. Shoemakers Limited Method of making a moccasin shoe
US4366634A (en) * 1981-01-09 1983-01-04 Converse Inc. Athletic shoe
US4559723A (en) * 1983-01-17 1985-12-24 Bata Shoe Company, Inc. Sports shoe
US4727660A (en) * 1985-06-10 1988-03-01 Puma Ag Rudolf Dassler Sport Shoe for rehabilitation purposes
WO1990000358A1 (fr) 1988-07-15 1990-01-25 Ellis Frampton E Iii Chaussure a semelle profilee naturellement
US4989349A (en) 1988-07-15 1991-02-05 Ellis Iii Frampton E Shoe with contoured sole
US5317819A (en) 1988-09-02 1994-06-07 Ellis Iii Frampton E Shoe with naturally contoured sole
WO1991003180A1 (fr) 1989-08-30 1991-03-21 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
WO1991004683A1 (fr) 1989-10-03 1991-04-18 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelles de chaussure corrective utilisant un contour plus grand que le plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
WO1991005491A1 (fr) 1989-10-20 1991-05-02 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelle de chaussures avec relief produisant une deformation naturelle parallele au pied
WO1991010377A1 (fr) 1990-01-10 1991-07-25 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structure de semelle
WO1991011124A1 (fr) 1990-01-24 1991-08-08 Ellis Frampton E Iii Semelle de chaussure utilisant un plan de stabilite theoriquement ideal
WO1994003080A1 (fr) * 1992-08-10 1994-02-17 Ellis Frampton E Iii Structures de semelle de chaussure

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
See also references of EP0955820A4 *

Cited By (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5893221A (en) * 1997-10-16 1999-04-13 Forest Footwear L.L.C. Footwear having a protuberance
WO2007086251A1 (fr) * 2006-01-26 2007-08-02 World Wing Enterprise Co. Semelle et chaussure en etant pourvue
JPWO2007086251A1 (ja) * 2006-01-26 2009-06-18 株式会社ワールドウィングエンタープライズ ソールおよびこれを備えた履物
KR100966709B1 (ko) * 2006-01-26 2010-06-29 가부시키가이샤 월드 윙 엔터프라이즈 밑창 및 이를 구비한 신발
JP4590455B2 (ja) * 2006-01-26 2010-12-01 株式会社ワールドウィングエンタープライズ ソールおよびこれを備えた履物
US8127467B2 (en) 2006-01-26 2012-03-06 World Wing Enterprise Co. Sole, and footwear provided with the same

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
EP0955820A4 (fr) 1999-11-17
EP0955820A1 (fr) 1999-11-17
AU6290796A (en) 1997-01-30

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US6789331B1 (en) Shoes sole structures
US7168185B2 (en) Shoes sole structures
CA2630817C (fr) Dispositifs a lamelles a flexibilite interne comprenant des chambres lamelisees pour chaussures
US6115941A (en) Shoe with naturally contoured sole
US7647710B2 (en) Shoe sole structures
US6918197B2 (en) Shoe sole structures
US7793429B2 (en) Shoe sole orthotic structures and computer controlled compartments
CA2534381C (fr) Chaussure et premiere de proprete pour cette derniere
US5317819A (en) Shoe with naturally contoured sole
US20080000108A1 (en) Removable rounded midsole structures and chambers with computer processor-controlled variable pressure
JP2002538866A (ja) コンピュータ・プロセッサ制御式可変圧力を用いる取外し可能な丸くされた中底構造およびチャンバ
EP1278435A2 (fr) Structures de semelle intercalaire amovibles et compartiments a pression variable regulee
EP1002475A1 (fr) Structure de semelle de chaussures munies de compartiments empilés
WO1997000029A1 (fr) Structures de semelle de chaussure
WO1997001295A1 (fr) Structures de semelles de chaussures
WO1996039060A1 (fr) Structure de semelle de chaussure
WO2002009547A2 (fr) Structures d'orthese pour semelles de chaussure et compartiments commandes par ordinateur
RU2115352C1 (ru) Способ изготовления подошвы

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AL AM AT AU AZ BB BG BR BY CA CH CN CZ DE DK EE ES FI GB GE HU IL IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LK LR LS LT LU LV MD MG MK MN MW MX NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK TJ TM TR TT UA UG US UZ VN AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): KE LS MW SD SZ UG AT BE CH DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA

DFPE Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101)
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application
WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 1996921783

Country of ref document: EP

REG Reference to national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: 8642

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: CA

WWP Wipo information: published in national office

Ref document number: 1996921783

Country of ref document: EP

WWW Wipo information: withdrawn in national office

Ref document number: 1996921783

Country of ref document: EP