DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the amendment, filed on October 9, 2025. Primary Examiner acknowledges Claims 1-9 and 11-13 are pending in this application, with Claims 1, 12, and 13 having been currently amended, and Claim 10 having been cancelled.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
On Page 5, Lines 10-20 of the original specification as filed Applicant has provided several non-patent literature documents which are not listed on the information disclosure statement. Additionally, Applicant is reminded, a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed is required to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a})(2). Appropriate correction is required.
This objection is repeated from the non-final rejection, mailed on July 9, 2025. Despite Applicant’s amendment to the specification, filed on October 9, 2025, this objection remains as the non-patent literature documents, now listed on Page 6, lack a legible copy.
Applicant is advised to provide a legible copy of each of: Ghule et al., Green Chem., 2006, 8, 1034-1041; Kandirmaz et al., in the journal Nordic Pulp & Paper Research Journal; vol. 34, no. 4, 2019, pp. 507-515; and Zhang et al.; Cellulose volume 28, pages4371-4384 (2021).
Appropriate correction is required
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 8, 9, 11, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “mask” as seen in Claims 2, 8, 9, and 13 is inconsistent with the former disclosure of a/the “face mask”. Applicant is advised to correct the instances of “mask” to “face mask”. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “facemask” as seen in Claim 8 is inconsistent with the former disclosure of a/the “face mask”. Applicant is advised to correct the instances of “facemask” to “face mask”. Appropriate correction is required.
The term “face” as seen in Claim 11 is inconsistent with the former disclosure of a/the “face mask”. Applicant is advised to correct the instances of “face” to “face mask”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-4, 8, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gattamorta (5,787,508) in view of Maniscalco (2003/0127093) and Klein (4,643,182).
As to Claim 1, Gattamorta discloses a facemask (10, “The inflatable decorative mask assembly 10 is structured to be inflated with a gas, such as air, in order to define an attractive and decorative, three dimensional configuration to be worn by a user in a wide variety of desired activities.” Column 5, Lines 1-15) having: a front surface (20, “The decorative mask assembly 10 of the present invention is initially seen to include a first flexible material panel 22 and a second flexible material panel 20.” Column 5, Lines 15-30); a back surface (22, “In this regard, the interior securement segments 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 define an interior surface contour of the first flexible material panel 22 that substantially conforms to a curvature of the user's face, in a manner which will be described shortly.” Column 6, Lines 25-40; also see: “The decorative mask assembly 10 of the present invention is initially seen to include a first flexible material panel 22 and a second flexible material panel 20.” Column 5, Lines 15-30), wherein the front surface (20) and the back surface (22) comprise a printed image representing a face (“Continuing with this example, one of the flexible material panels 20 may include particular graphical indicia thereon while the other flexible material panel 22 includes different graphical indicia thereon, both of which nonetheless correspond the three dimensional structural configuration achieved by the mask assembly 10. In this regard it is preferred that a non-toxic substance or material be utilized to imprint the graphical indicia, or in the alternative, the interior side of one of the flexible material panels could be made to be transparent, with only the exterior material panel bearing differing indicia on opposite sides thereof.” Column 7, Lines 1-20).
Additionally, Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) includes a nose region, points below the nose of the patient, and points above the eyes of the patient.
Regarding the nose region, Gattamorta explicitly discloses the face mask (10) “includes a nose section that protrudes generally outwardly so as to receive a wearer's nose comfortably” (Column 4, Lines 15-25); “the goggle region 40 includes a nose section 43. The nose section 43 is structured to substantially confront and correspond a user's nose. Moreover, as a result of the positioning of interior securement segments 52-56 which define the nose section, the nose section 43 tends to be maintained in a generally forward, protruding orientation, thereby more effectively accommodating the user's nose.” (Column 7, Lines 25-40).
Regarding points below the nose of the patient, Gattamorta explicitly discloses the construction of the face mask (10), as seen in Figure 5, includes segments that extend beyond the nose region of the patient, whereby “the plurality of interior compartments 25, is structured to be disposed generally over a user's eyes and the front region of the user's face.” (Column 6, Lines 35-55).
Regarding points above the eyes of the patient, Gattamorta explicitly discloses the construction of the face mask (10), as seen in Figures 1-4 and 6, include segments that extend above the eyes of the patient, whereby “the perimeter design region 35 are preferably directed generally outwardly from the goggle region 40, thereby providing the enhanced, embellished exterior design to the exterior surface configuration in a manner which protrudes generally from the user's face as well as from the user's head rather than merely wrapping over the user's head like a cap or helmet.” (Column 9, Lines 15-25).
Hence, the configuration of the face mask (10) of Gattamorta discloses the capability of the face mask (10) to cover beyond the eyes of the patient to include the nose region, points below the nose region, and points above the eyes of the patient.
Yet, Gattamorta does not expressly disclose the use of “a mouth or nose aperture…adapted to couple with an airway device gas line opening” nor the dimensions of the facemask to be “about 5-9 inches wide” and “about 7-14 inches high”.
Regarding the use of a mouth or nose aperture, Maniscalco teaches a facemask (12, “The face mask 12, which preferably has an oval shape, is formed of a relatively thin, clear plastic. The face mask 12 is comprised of an outer surface 14, an inner surface 16, a perimeter edge 18 preferably having a reinforcing bead 20, and a receptacle bore 24. As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, an oxygen input receptacle 26, is inserted into and attached to the receptacle bore 24.” Para 0036) having: a front surface (one of 14/16, “an outer surface 14, an inner surface 16” Para 0036), a back surface (other of 16/14, “an outer surface 14, an inner surface 16” Para 0036), and a mouth or nose aperture (24, “receptacle bore 24” Para 0036) adapted to couple with an airway device gas line opening (26, “an oxygen input receptacle 26” Para 0036) to facilitate the conveyance of gas to the patient when the face mask is being worn – thus, supporting the breathing of the patient.
As best seen in Figures 1 and 2, the facemask of Maniscalco extends from a top the patient’s head to below the nose of the patient – encompassing the chin - to provide an oxygen support to each of the breathing passageways – both nose and mouth – of the patient along the entirety of the facemask. Thus, providing a contained region which supports breathing by encompassing the entire face of the patient.
Regarding the dimensions of the facemask, Klein teaches a facemask (11 of Figure 2 and 21 of Figure 3 – whereby 11 - “In FIG. 2 there is shown a mask 11, formed of sheet material 12, enveloping the full face of the wearer and containing a gas adsorbent substance 13 throughout.” Column 3, Lines 50-65; and whereby 21 – “FIG. 3 illustrates a protective mask 21 in the form of a full head covering in which the sheet material 22 is generally in a bag-like configuration.” Column 4, Lines 1-15) having a front surface (as shown in Figures 2 and 3) and a rear surface (defined by the region accepting the face of the patient), whereby the facemask is dimensions through the manufacturing process to be “formed by wrapping the two-ply sheet horizonitally lengthwise around a rectangular, box-like form measuring about 21.6 cm. long, 12.7 cm. wide and 30.5 cm. high, with the sheet material of Example 1 facing outward, and overlapping and sealing the edges with hot melt adhesive to form a sleeve.” (Column 13, Lines 50-65) in order to encompass at least the full face of the wearer in use.
The dimensions of 12.7 cm wide correspond to the claimed “about 5-9 inches wide”, whereby 12.7 cm wide is equal to 5 inches; and the dimensions of 30.5 cm high correspond to the claimed “about 7-14 inches high”, whereby 30.5 cm is 12 inches. Hence, Klein considers the application of a facemask extending from the top of the patient’s head to below the nose – encompassing the chin – to provide a contained breathing area that covers at least the full face of the wearer in use.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the construction of the face mask of Gattamorta as extending beyond the eyes of the patient to include the nose region, points below the nose region, and points above the eyes of the patient – in a full face construction format, to be constructed with a mouth or nose aperture, as taught by Maniscalco to provide a contained region for supporting the breathing of the patient along the entire face of the patient, and to include the explicit dimensions as taught by Klein to be a known construction suitable for encompassing the entire face of the patient.
As to Claim 2, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) is stiff enough (“to provide shape defining stiffness to the first and second flexible material panels upon introduction and containment of the gas in the interior compartments” Abstract; also see: “is structured to conform to the contours of the human face so as to aid in providing sufficient stiffness to the mask, and to aid in providing an even and balanced appearance which resists the collapse of distal mask portions.” Column 1, Lines 60-70; “offers sufficient stiffness to even distal portions of the mask so as to prevent collapse, and which enables the mask to generally conform to the wearer's face.” Column 2, Lines 55-70; “possesses sufficient stiffness to prevent collapse of even distal portions of the decorative mask assembly.” Column 3, Lines 5-20; “to provide a shape defining stiffness to the first and second flexible material panels, upon introduction and containment of a gas within the interior chamber.” Column 3, Lines 45-55; “Moreover, it is seen that the particular size and orientation of the interior securement segments 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, and the plurality of interior compartments 25 relative to one another also provides a shape defining stiffness to the first and second flexible material panels 20 and 22, once the gas, such as air, is introduced and contained within the interior compartments 25.” Column 6, Lines 25-35) to resist bending or folding under its own weight once coupled to said airway device. Primary Examiner notes the modified Gattamorta is an inflatable face mask that provides stiffness in the presence of air within the interior compartments 25, the act of connecting the airway device as taught by Maniscalco requires the placement of the face mask in its inflated state upon the face of the user prior to insertion of the airway device of Maniscalco. Thus, the modified Gattamorta meets the limitations of the claims.
As to Claim 3, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) contains at least one eye aperture (41/42, “Preferably, however, the goggle region 40 comprises at least one, and more preferably, a pair of spaced apart eye regions 41 and 42. The eye regions 41 and 42 are structured to be disposed over and to generally correspond one or both of the user's eyes in order to permit viewing therethrough when the mask assembly 10 is being worn by the user.” Column 6, Lines 45-60).
As to Claim 4, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) is constructed of “a first and a second flexible material panel” (Abstract). The configuration of a flexible material imparts plastic properties of the material.
As to Claim 8, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) includes elastic straps (70, “Preferably, the fastening means comprise an elastic band 70 having a first end 71 and a second end 72, structured to be coupled with the mask assembly 10. In the preferred embodiment, the elastic band 70 is coupled directly to the first flexible material panel 22 by any conventional fastening means.” Column 9, Lines 45-70) adapted to secure and adjust the face mask (10) to the head of the patient.
As to Claim 12, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) having a back surface (22) containing at least one eye aperture (41/42) and further includes printed indica representing eyebrows (via 52/53, as best seen in Figures 1, 2, 4, and 6), ear (56 of Figure 5), nose (43 of Figures 1, 2, and 4; 54/55 of Figure 5), forehead (35 of Figures 1-4 and 6), cheek (35 of Figure 5).
As to Claim 13, please see the rejection of Claim 1. The difference between Claim 1 and Claim 13 is the additional recitation of the face mask is flat. The modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) is flat until air is introduced via 65 (Column 9, Lines 35-45) to inflate the face mask (10) to conform to the contours of the patient’s face.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gattamorta (5,787,508) in view of Maniscalco (2003/0127093) and Klein (4,643,182), as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Wilson (4,890,609).
As to Claim 11, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Maniscalco teaches an aperture (24) adapted to couple to an airway device gas line (26); yet, does not expressly disclose the orientation the location of the aperture at the mouth of the face mask.
Wilson teaches a facemask (Figure 1) having a front surface (best seen Figure 4A), a back surface (best seen Figures 1 and 4D), and a mouth or nose aperture (11, “an X-cut 11 is made just below the center of the air mask 1” Column 2, Lines 45-60) is adapted to couple with an airway device gas line opening (2, “tube 2” Column 2, Lines 1-15).
Regarding the remaining limitations, Wilson teaches the orientation of the opening at the mouth region of the face mask to facilitate the conveyance of gas from the interior of the face mask to the exterior of the facemask.
Although the modified Gattamorta discloses a full facemask, while Wilson teaches a mask which covers only the nose and mouth of the patient, the decision to move the location of the aperture is obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, whereby success would be defined by the ability to direct the conveyance of gases.
Moreover, Applicant has not asserted the specific location of the aperture at the mouth of the facemask provides a particular advantage, solves a stated problem, or serves a particular purpose beyond the ability to introduce gas to the user while the user is wearing the facemask; thus, the specific construction at the mouth lacks criticality in its design. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with the modified Gattamorta, as the construction would yield the predictable results of providing a location for the conveyance of gases.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the location of the aperture of the modified Gattamorta to be at the mouth, a known result effective variable, as taught by Wilson to be a known location suitable for the conveyance of gas.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gattamorta (5,787,508) in view of Maniscalco (2003/0127093) and Klein (4,643,182), as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Hajgato et al. (2008/011046).
As to Claim 5, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) is constructed of “a first and a second flexible material panel” (Abstract). Yet, does not expressly disclose the use of “PVC plastic”.
Hajgato teaches a facemask (10, “The mask body (10) comprises a resilient flexible plastic such as PVC. Optionally, the mask body is transparent.” Para 0024) having a front surface (one of the region exposed to the ambient environment having a design OR the region contacting the face of the patient suitable for receipt of the patient’s face); a back surface (other of the region exposed to the ambient environment having a design OR the region contacting the face of the patient suitable for receipt of the patient’s face); a mouth or nose aperture (32, “The mask comprises upper (12) and lower (14) portions, with the upper portion being the portion of the mask body disposed above the central inlet (32) and the lower portion being disposed below this location.” Para 0024), wherein the mouth or nose aperture (32) is adapted to couple with an airway device gas line opening (38, “The connector tube (38) comprises an upper horizontal tube (40) disposed in a horizontal direction (when the mask is upright) which is co-axial with the inlet tube (32), for directing a flow of gas in a generally horizontal direction directly at the patient's nose and mouth region.” Para 0025).
Regarding the remaining limitations, Hajgato teaches a facemask (10) is constructed of PVC plastic material (“The mask body (10) comprises a resilient flexible plastic such as PVC.” Para 0024).
As both the face mask of the modified Gattamorta and Hajgato are made of a flexible material, the decision to swap a generic flexible material for the specific flexible material of PVC plastic, would be obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, whereby success would be defined by the ability to formulate a facemask suitable for conveyance of gases and containment of at least the breathing passages of the patient.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the material composition of the flexible material of the modified Gattamorta to be PVC plastic, a known result effective variable, as taught by Hajgato suitable for the formation of a facemask to convey gases and contain the breathing passages of the patient.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gattamorta (5,787,508) in view of Maniscalco (2003/0127093) and Klein (4,643,182), as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Hammer et al. (2021/0100969).
As to Claim 6, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) is constructed of “a first and a second flexible material panel” (Abstract). Yet, does not expressly disclose the use of “EVA flexible foam”.
Hammer teaches a facemask (Figures 1 and 2) having a front surface (one of the region suitable for exposure to the ambient environment OR the region suitable for engagement with the patient’s face), a back surface (other of the region suitable for exposure to the ambient environment OR the region suitable for engagement with the patient’s face), a mouth or nose aperture (212, best seen Figure 2, “The mask 210 includes an inlet aperture 212 that receives a gas supply conduit 214 that delivers gases to the mask 210 in use.” Para 0147) adapted to couple to an airway device gas line opening (214, “a gas supply conduit 214” Para 0147).
Regarding the remaining limitations, Hammer teaches the facemask (Figures 1 and 2) can be constructed of EVA flexible foam (“The lightweight construction of the EVA foam components of the mask system 200 (e.g., the mask 210 and frame 250) can advantageously reduce or lower the tensile forces needed to seal the mask 210 to the patient's face in use, which can increase or improve patient comfort.” Para 0149).
As both the face mask of the modified Gattamorta and Hammer are made of a flexible material, the decision to swap a generic flexible material for the specific flexible material of EVA foam, would be obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, whereby success would be defined by the ability to formulate a facemask suitable for conveyance of gases and containment of at least the breathing passages of the patient to increase or improve patient comfort.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the material composition of the flexible material of the modified Gattamorta to be EVA foam, a known result effective variable, as taught by Hammer suitable for the formation of a facemask to convey gases and contain the breathing passages of the patient to increase or improve patient comfort.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gattamorta (5,787,508) in view of Maniscalco (2003/0127093) and Klein (4,643,182), as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Davis (2018/002877).
As to Claim 9, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) having dimensions of the facemask to be “about 5-9 inches wide” and “about 7-14 inches high”; yet, does not expressly disclose the thickness of the facemask.
Davis teaches a facemask (10, “In a preferred embodiment, the contact area of the facial mask 10 includes the forehead 12 and the cheeks 14.” Para 0073) having a front surface (one of the region exposed to the ambient OR the region contacting the patient’s skin) representing the face, a back surface (other of region exposed to the ambient OR the region contacting the patient’s skin) representing a face, and a mouth or nose aperture (36, “For increased oxygen intake and to facilitate breathing of the user to address issues of sleep apnea, the mask of the present invention further includes an airway passage 36 positioned in the nose region of the mask, and further including a breathing tube 38 connected to the mask at the airway passage 36, which extends outwardly from a nasal area of the contoured facial mask face surface portion.” Para 0085) adapted to couple with an airway delivery gas line opening (38, “a breathing tube 38 connected to the mask at the airway passage 36” Para 0085).
Regarding the remaining limitations, Davis teaches the facemask (10) has a thickness from 0.4 to 5 mm thick (“In a preferred embodiment, the facial mask 10 has a thickness t between about 0.0625 inches and about 0.1875 inches.” Para 0091, wherein 0.0625 inches is 1.5875 mm, 0.1875 inches is 4.7625 mm). Thus, meeting the thicknesses within the claimed range.
As both the face mask of the modified Gattamorta and Davis are suitable for the formation of a full facemask to contain the breathing passages of the patient, the thickness would be obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, whereby success would be defined by the ability to formulate a facemask suitable for conveyance of gases and containment of at least the breathing passages of the patient.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify thickness of the facemask of the modified Gattamorta to be from 0.4 to 5 mm thick, a known result effective variable, as taught by Davis suitable for the formation of a facemask to convey gases and contain the breathing passages of the patient.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gattamorta (5,787,508) in view of Maniscalco (2003/0127093) and Klein (4,643,182), as applied to Claim 1, and further in view of Durand (6,079,980) and Lahti et al. (2022/0009683).
As to Claim 6, the modified Gattamorta, specifically Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) is constructed of “a first and a second flexible material panel” (Abstract). Yet, does not expressly disclose the use of “200 to 300 GSM cardboard”.
Durand teaches a facemask (10, “Referring now to FIGS. 1-2, depicted is the dental patient face mask, hereinafter face mask 10, according to the preferred embodiment of the present invention. Protecting a dental patient (not shown in the Figures) from liquids and solids often projected during dental procedures, the face mask 10 consists of a masking sheet 11 that includes a molded nose mask 12, a sight aperture 13 and a mouth cut- out 14.” Column 3, Lines 50-60) having a front surface (one of the region suitable for exposure to the ambient environment OR the region suitable for engagement with the patient’s face), a back surface (other of the region suitable for exposure to the ambient environment OR the region suitable for engagement with the patient’s face), and a mouth or nose aperture (14, “a mouth cut-out 14.” Column 3, Lines 50-60), wherein the mouth or nose aperture (14) is adapted to couple with an airway device gas line opening (conventional suction line utilized with dental procedures to remove saliva), wherein the facemask (10) is constructed of paper in the form of cardboard (“The soft nose mask 40 is constructed of a generally soft and flexible cotton fiber material that forms a concave shape supported by a support band 41 constructed of a generally rigid cardboard material or the like.” Column 5, Lines 10-35).
Regarding the remaining limitations, Lahti teaches the construction of cardboard as a protective containment structure having a “a basis weight above 200 g/m.sup.2.” Para 0045) for the purpose of imparting sufficient rigidity to the containment structure.
The teachings of Lahti are analogous to the disclosure of Durand as both cardboard structures are concerned with imparting protection through supportive reinforcement.
Still further, in light of the teachings of Lahti the decision to modify the specific weight of the cardboard of Durand would be obvious to try choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions having a reasonable expectation of success, whereby success would be defined by the ability to impart rigidity and protection through the cardboard structure.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the flexible material of the modified Gattamorta to be constructed of a cardboard structure of Durant to include the explicit GSM as taught by Lahti to be a known GSM suitable for imparting protection and rigidity in the application of cardboard structures, in order to provide a facemask suitable for the containment of the breathing passage of the patient in use.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot.
The amendments to the claims do not overcome the application of newly located prior art Gattamorta (5,787,508) in combination with former prior art references, whereby Gattamorta clearly discloses a facemask (10, “The inflatable decorative mask assembly 10 is structured to be inflated with a gas, such as air, in order to define an attractive and decorative, three dimensional configuration to be worn by a user in a wide variety of desired activities.” Column 5, Lines 1-15) having: a front surface (20, “The decorative mask assembly 10 of the present invention is initially seen to include a first flexible material panel 22 and a second flexible material panel 20.” Column 5, Lines 15-30); a back surface (22, “In this regard, the interior securement segments 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 define an interior surface contour of the first flexible material panel 22 that substantially conforms to a curvature of the user's face, in a manner which will be described shortly.” Column 6, Lines 25-40; also see: “The decorative mask assembly 10 of the present invention is initially seen to include a first flexible material panel 22 and a second flexible material panel 20.” Column 5, Lines 15-30), wherein the front surface (20) and the back surface (22) comprise a printed image representing a face (“Continuing with this example, one of the flexible material panels 20 may include particular graphical indicia thereon while the other flexible material panel 22 includes different graphical indicia thereon, both of which nonetheless correspond the three dimensional structural configuration achieved by the mask assembly 10. In this regard it is preferred that a non-toxic substance or material be utilized to imprint the graphical indicia, or in the alternative, the interior side of one of the flexible material panels could be made to be transparent, with only the exterior material panel bearing differing indicia on opposite sides thereof.” Column 7, Lines 1-20).
Additionally, Gattamorta discloses the face mask (10) includes a nose region, points below the nose of the patient, and points above the eyes of the patient.
Regarding the nose region, Gattamorta explicitly discloses the face mask (10) “includes a nose section that protrudes generally outwardly so as to receive a wearer's nose comfortably” (Column 4, Lines 15-25); “the goggle region 40 includes a nose section 43. The nose section 43 is structured to substantially confront and correspond a user's nose. Moreover, as a result of the positioning of interior securement segments 52-56 which define the nose section, the nose section 43 tends to be maintained in a generally forward, protruding orientation, thereby more effectively accommodating the user's nose.” (Column 7, Lines 25-40).
Regarding points below the nose of the patient, Gattamorta explicitly discloses the construction of the face mask (10), as seen in Figure 5, includes segments that extend beyond the nose region of the patient, whereby “the plurality of interior compartments 25, is structured to be disposed generally over a user's eyes and the front region of the user's face.” (Column 6, Lines 35-55).
Regarding points above the eyes of the patient, Gattamorta explicitly discloses the construction of the face mask (10), as seen in Figures 1-4 and 6, include segments that extend above the eyes of the patient, whereby “the perimeter design region 35 are preferably directed generally outwardly from the goggle region 40, thereby providing the enhanced, embellished exterior design to the exterior surface configuration in a manner which protrudes generally from the user's face as well as from the user's head rather than merely wrapping over the user's head like a cap or helmet.” (Column 9, Lines 15-25).
Hence, the configuration of the face mask (10) of Gattamorta discloses the capability of the face mask (10) to cover beyond the eyes of the patient to include the nose region, points below the nose region, and points above the eyes of the patient.
In the interest of compact prosecution, it may behoove Applicant to modify the claims to include a picture claim of Figures 1 and 5, whereby the character facemask (1) is overlayed onto an anesthesia mask (2) such that the airway device gas line opening (30) aligns with the mouth opening (20) of the character facemask (1), and further the features of the anesthesia mask (2) having element (35).
In light of the aforementioned reasoning, the non-final rejection of the claims is maintained and made FINAL.
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 ANNETTE F DIXON whose telephone number is (571)272-3392. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 EST with flexible hours.
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, Kendra D Carter can be reached at 571-272-9034. 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.
ANNETTE FREDRICKA DIXON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3782
/Annette Dixon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785