DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 56, 58 and 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2018/0343952 A1 to Lachance.
Re-claim 1, Lachance discloses an impact absorber positioned between a protected object 30 and an impacted object (impacting surface 34), the impacted object is impacted by an outside object, the impact absorber comprising:
an outer absorption element comprising an outer wall enclosing a primary chamber 80, the primary chamber hermetically contains a first fluid under a first pressure (see paragraph 57), the outer wall comprising an impacted side and a protected side, the protected side is directed toward the protected object during use, the impacted side is directed toward the impacted object during use;
a first inner absorption element comprising a first wall with a first cross-sectional wall shape enclosing a first chamber 84, the first inner absorption element is positioned within the primary chamber and is substantially surrounded by the first fluid (see figures 3AA and 3BB), the first chamber hermetically contains a second fluid under a second pressure (see paragraph 59), the first inner absorption element is positioned adjacent to the impacted side with the first chamber longitudinally arranged alongside the impacted side so that the second fluid is permitted to flow from a first portion of the impacted side to a second portion of the impacted side apart from the first portion through the first chamber (upon compression or impact, fluid can move from a first end to a second end, as in the instant invention); and
a second inner absorption element comprising a second wall with a second cross- sectional wall shape enclosing a second chamber 85, the second inner absorption element is positioned within the primary chamber and is substantially surrounded by the first fluid, the second chamber is configured to hermetically contain a third fluid under a third pressure (paragraph 59), the second inner absorption element is positioned between the first inner absorption element and the protected side (chamber 85 is positioned between at least a portion of the first element 84 and the protected side 32, see figure 3BB), the second chamber is arranged substantially parallel to the first chamber so that the third fluid is permitted to flow from the first portion of the impacted side to the second portion of the impacted side apart from the first portion through the second chamber, the first cross-sectional wall shape is different than the second cross-sectional wall shape. The chambers have different widths or diameters and thus different cross sectional wall shapes.
Re-claim 56, the first inner absorption element 84 includes a first set of properties comprising a first wall thickness (the bladder wall is shown to have a thickness, see figure 3AA), a first flexural modulus (due to its level of pressurization), and a first material (such as an elastic material TPE, see paragraph 55); the second inner absorption element 85 includes a second set of properties comprising a second wall thickness, a second flexural modulus, and a second material; at least one property of the first set of properties differs from at least one similar property of the second set of properties, such as flexural modulus due to the varied pressures between chambers 84 and 85 (as suggested in paragraph 81, in which chamber 85 is inflated to a pressure greater than chamber 84).
Re-claim 58, the first and second cross-sectional wall shapes are at least a circle (figure 3BB)
Re-claim 59, the outer absorption element is an outer elongated tube (see figure 3AA) and the first inner absorption element is a first inner elongated tube.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lachance.
Lachance fails to teach the first wall thickness differing from the second wall thickness. It is noted that the wall thickness is left to the artisan, as the wall thickness would have been at least in part chosen based upon required interior pressure ranges or values. As such it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the first wall thickness different from the second wall thickness based upon need.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 65-71 are allowed.
Claims 4 and 60-64 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4, and 56-71 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. McFarland, Hallander and Du each teach at least an outermost energy absorption element surrounding an inner energy absorption element.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiries concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thomas Williams whose telephone number is 571-272-7128. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday from 6:00 AM to 4:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Robert Siconolfi, can be reached at 571-272-7124. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-6584.
TJW
October 22, 2025
/THOMAS J WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616