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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-3 and 5-21 are currently pending.
Claim 4 has been canceled.
Claims 16-20 are currently withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Amendments
Applicant’s amendments 09/02/2025 have been entered.
Claims 1, 12, and 16 have been amended. Claim 4 has been canceled. Claim 21 has been added.
The Section 102 rejections have been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments.
However, new Section 103 rejections have been implemented upon further search and consideration of the amended and newly added claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 12-15, and 21, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang (CN 212325576 U; machine translation) in view of Twardowski et al. (US 2016/0113348 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 3, and 21,
Zhang teaches a padded protective helmet (a pad) comprising: a second protective layer comprising a material which may be flame-retardant and heat insulating (200, a first layer produced from a heat and flame resistant material); an interlayer (300) laminated on a surface of the first layer, which is produced form a non-Newtonian foam material (the second layer may be considered to be disposed on the first layer as the second protective layer is described as being laminated under the interlayer) (Zhang: abstract; Fig. 1; pgs. 1-6).
Zhang does not explicitly teach wherein the second layer includes a plurality of cushioning regions, each of the cushioning regions separated from one another by at least one hinge. It is noted that Applicant defines “hinge” in the context of the claimed invention as channels that allow flexibility (Applicant’s specification: par. 0062 and 0063).
Twardowski teaches a padded protective helmet (a pad) comprising: a protective layer (such as 1010, corresponds to a second layer), that may be a plastisol (a non-Newtonian fluid material) that provides cushion and may be placed into a plurality of regions (Twardowski: Figs. 9 and 10; par. 0104-0106 and 0128-0129). Figures 9 and 10 display embodiments that show spaces or gaps or channels (1008, hinges) that are located between each of the cushion regions 1010 and may serve as provide improved shearing capability and to reduce the total weight of the helmet whereby having free edges that allows for more motion (flexibility) (Twardowski: par. 0130-0132). Due to the inset nature of the and free edges of the cushion regions adjacent to the hinge regions the cushioning regions may include an outer surface and at least one sidewall that extends inward form the outer surface to intersect at the at least one hinge.
Zhang and Twardowski are in the corresponding field of padded helmets with cushion regions composed of non-Newtonian materials. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add gaps or spaces (hinges) between cushion regions in the second layer to provide improved movability, shearing capability, and to reduce the total weight of the helmet as taught by Twardowski.
Regarding claim 5,
Zhang in view of Twardowski teaches the pad required by claim 1. Zhang further teaches the pad further comprises a first protective layer (100, a third layer) which may be produced from a flame retardant and heat insulating material (Zhang: pgs. 1-6).
Regarding claim 6,
Zhang in view of Twardowski teaches the pad required by claim 1. Zhang further teaches an elasticity adjuster (a flange) is provided around a peripheral edge of the pad (Zhang: Fig. 1; pg. 3).
Regarding claim 12,
Zhang in view of Twardowski teaches a padded protective helmet (a pad assembly) comprising: a soft pad composed of a soft cushion (a flexible material); a second protective layer comprising a material which may be flame-retardant and heat insulating (200, a first layer produced from a heat and flame resistant material); an interlayer (300) laminated on a surface of the first layer, which is produced form a non-Newtonian foam material (the second layer may be considered to be disposed on the first layer) (Zhang: abstract; Fig. 1; pgs. 1-6). The combination of the first layer (200) and the second layer (300) may be considered a pad as the layers are formed of impact resistant and soft materials.
Regarding claims 13 and 14,
Zhang in view of Twardowski teaches the pad assembly required by claim 12. Zhang further teaches the pad further comprises a first protective layer (100, a third layer) which may be produced from a flame retardant and heat insulating material and may be considered coupled to the second protective layer (200, the second layer) as they are connected in the same laminate through the interlayer (Zhang: pgs. 1-6).
Regarding claim 15,
Zhang in view of Twardowski teaches the pad assembly required by claim 13. Zhang further teaches an additional layer composed of a material to protect from puncturing (310, a protective layer) (Zhang: Fig. 1; pgs. 3 and 5). The protective layer (310) is sandwiched by the second layer (300) and thus the protective layer may be considered between an upper portion of the second layer (300, the upper portion alone may be considered the second layer and the lower portion may be considered an unrecited portion) and the first layer (200) (Zhang: Fig. 1; pg. 3 and 5-6).
Claims 2 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Twardowski and in further view of Filteau (US 2023/0371629 A1; with a 09/09/2020 priority date).
Regarding claims 2 and 7-11,
Zhang in view of Twardowski teaches the pad required by claim 1. Zhang is silent towards the first layer including a surface treatment for increasing a durability, abrasion resistance, and/or friction of the pad; wherein said surface treatment is a coating, composed of chlorosulfonated polyethylene or one or more surface irregularities formed on a surface of the first layer produced from a durable, heat and flame resistant material.
Filteau teaches a reinforcement material for a garment for protection against external mechanical forces (Filteau: abstract). The fabric may be formed of heat resistant fibers, such as aramid fibers (Kevlar) which Applicant’s specification notes as a abrasion, flame, and heat resistant material (Filteau: par. 0066 and 0091-0092; Applicant’s specification: par. 0003). The fabric is coated with synthetic rubber that is a fire-resistant rubber composed of chlorosulfonated polyethylene in which the micropores may be only in fire-resistant rubber coating only (thus the coating may be considered a surface irregularity on the fabric layer) and not in the fabric (Filteau: par. 0035-0037, 0066, 0073, and 0097). Zhang teaches the first layer (200, the second protective layer) may be a fabric (Zhang: pg. 4).
Filteau and Zhang are in the corresponding field of garments with the desire for mechanical resistance and fire-resistance. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the first layer of Zhang to be a heat resistant fabric coated with a fire-resistant rubber micro-porous coating (may be considered surface irregularities) to provide improved fire-resistance and mechanical resistance (durability or abrasion resistance) as taught by Filteau. The surface irregularities in the form of a micro-porous coating composed of a fire-resistant rubber may be considered to be produced from a durable, heat and flame resistant material as the material is said to be fire-resistant and mechanically resistant.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 09/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot as they do not apply to the newly added prior art combination.
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 Travis M Figg whose telephone number is (571)272-9849. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Maria Veronica D. Ewald can be reached on 571-272-8519. 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.
/TRAVIS M FIGG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783