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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to an amendment filed on 12/31/2025. As directed by the amendment, claims 1, 10 and 20 were amended, no claims were cancelled nor added. Thus, claims 1-20 are presently pending in this application.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Presently, no limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 112(f).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The limitation “wherein the rear surface of the rear body includes…(ii) a second portion that defines the discharge hole and is disposed inside the face guard” (claim 1, lines 10-12) in combination with the rest of the claim is not supported by the original disclosure, and is therefore, new matter. The original specification discloses in paragraph 0021 that the discharge hole can be defined inside the breathing space, but does not disclose that the second portion that defines the discharge hole and is disposed inside the face guard.
Any remaining claims are rejected for their dependency on a rejected base claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a first portion that defines the suction hole and is disposed outside the face guard” (lines 10-11) is unclear as to which structure is disposed outside the face guard, the first portion or the suction hole.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a second portion that defines the discharge hole and is disposed inside the face guard” (lines 11-12) is unclear as to which structure is disposed inside the face guard, the second portion or the discharge hole.
Any remaining claims are rejected for their dependency on a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed over the prior art.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record Hong (CN 212817681) in view of Davidson (2008/0257354) do not specifically disclose the claimed apparatus as presented in the claims 1-20.
PNG
media_image1.png
1237
1381
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Hong discloses a mask apparatus (entire mask apparatus in figs. 1-4) comprising: a mask body (12, 13, 11 and 14, figs. 1-4, paragraphs 0030, 0033-0036 of the English translation) that defines a suction hole (suction hole can be defined as 144 of Hong or 132 of 13 or suction hole can be formed by 142, see figs. 1-4, paragraphs 0035, 0036 and 0037 of Hong) configured to receive external air from an outside of the mask apparatus and a discharge hole (114, fig. 4, paragraph 0035, the discharge hole 114 functions in the same manner as the applicant’s discharge hole, in that the discharge hole 114 takes the air from the suction hole and allow the sucked air to enter an interior of the mask and eventually to the outside of the mask via the exhaust channel 113, alternatively, the discharge hole can be interpreted as the hole formed by face guard, see the annotated-Chen fig. 5 above) configured to discharge air to the outside, the mask body comprising a rear body (11 or 11 and 13 or 18, figs. 2 and 5, paragraphs 0030 and 0033-0036, when the rear body is 11 and 13, the front body can be 12 or 12 and 14, when the rear body is just 11, the front body can be 12/13/14) and a front body (12 or 12/14 or 12/13/14, fig. 2, paragraphs 0030 and 0033-0036) that is coupled to a front surface of the rear body (see figs. 2 and 1, the front surface of the rear body 11 is the surface that faces 13 or rear surface of 18, see the annotated-Hong fig. 5 above); a face guard (16 and 18, figs. 2 and 5, paragraphs 0038-0041 and claims 1-2, alternatively, when 18 is the rear body, the face guard is 16 minus 18) coupled to a rear surface of the rear body (see paragraphs 0038-0041) and configured to be in contact with a face of a user (paragraph 0039, the flange 161 fits against the wearer’s face), the face guard defining a breathing space (see breathing cavity 17 formed by the interior surface of the face guard, paragraph 0038); and an air cleaning module (115 and 15, figs. 2 and 3, paragraphs 0035-0037) disposed at the rear body and configured to filter the external air received through the suction hole and to supply the filtered air to the breathing space (see paragraphs 0035-0037, as shown, the air cleaning module including the fan 115 and filters 15 are disposed at the rear body), wherein the face guard comprises: a coupling portion that faces the rear surface of the rear body (the coupling portion is the portion of 16 which faces the rear surface of 18 or the rear surface of 11, see figs. 1-4 and paragraphs 0035-0041 see claims 1-2) and a close contact portion configured to be in contact with the face of the user (see close contact portion 161, fig. 5, paragraph 0039), and a connection portion that connects the coupling portion to the close contact portion, the connection portion defining one or more widths of the face guard in a front-rear direction (see the annotated-Hong fig. 5 above).
PNG
media_image2.png
602
991
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Davidson teaches a face guard (30, fig. 3-1) further comprises a plurality of spacing protrusions (32, fig. 3-1) that protrude from an outer surface of the connection portion and extend in the front-rear direction, the plurality of protrusions being spaced apart from one another in a direction crossing the front-rear direction, and wherein each of lengths of the plurality of protrusions in the front-rear direction (see the annotated-Davidson fig. 3-1 and paragraphs 0043-0047).
However, Hong and Davidson fail to disclose the combination of the mask apparatus as claimed and mask body that defines a suction hole configured to receive external air from an outside of the mask apparatus and a discharge hole configured to discharge air to the outside, the mask body comprising a rear body and a front body that is coupled to a front surface of the rear body; a face guard coupled to a rear surface of the rear body and configured to be in contact with a face of a user, the face guard defining a breathing space; and an air cleaning module disposed at the rear body and configured to filter the external air received through the suction hole and to supply the filtered air into the breathing space, the air cleaning module comprising a filter housing configured to accommodate a filter, wherein the rear surface of the rear body includes (i) a first portion that defines the suction hole and is disposed outside the face guard and (ii) a second portion that defines the discharge hole and is disposed inside the face guard. Therefore, to modify Hong and Davidson to arrive at the claimed invention would not have been obvious and would be based upon improper hindsight reasoning.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10 of the remarks, filed on 12/31/2025, with respect to 103 rejection of the newly amended claims 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 103 rejection of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
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 inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TU A VO whose telephone number is (571)270-1045. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Timothy Stanis can be reached at (571)272-5139. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TU A VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785