Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/069,714

Hard Hat with Strap Breakaway Device

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 21, 2022
Examiner
KANE, KATHARINE GRACZ
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
47%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 47% of resolved cases
47%
Career Allow Rate
296 granted / 631 resolved
-23.1% vs TC avg
Strong +45% interview lift
Without
With
+45.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
61 currently pending
Career history
692
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
48.6%
+8.6% vs TC avg
§102
26.9%
-13.1% vs TC avg
§112
18.1%
-21.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 631 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/6/2026 has been entered. 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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fava (US 2018/0352909) in view of Edmondson (GB2531146A). Regarding Claim 1, Fava discloses hard hat system (Figures 1, 2 & 12) comprising: a hard hat (Figures 1 & 2) comprising a shell (2) formed from a rigid material (Para. 28), the shell comprising an external surface (3) and an internal surface (4) that defines a cavity sized to receive the head of a wearer (Figures 1 & 2); a plurality of female couplers (12) coupled to the shell (Figures 1, 2 & 12), each of the plurality of female couplers comprising a base (16) and an aperture (17) opposite the base; a plurality of straps (8 & 9) configured to secure the shell to the head of the wearer (Figures 1, 2 & 12); a plurality of first male couplers (11/13) and a plurality of second male couplers (11/13) wherein each strap of the plurality of straps is directly coupled to one of the first male couplers and one of the second male couplers (Figures 1, 2 & 12), one of which detachably couples to a female coupler of the plurality of female couplers at a time, thereby coupling the respective strap to the hard hat (Figures 1, 2 & 12). Fava does not specifically disclose a female and male coupler having a button system as claims. However, Edmondson discloses a plurality of female couplers (7) having a base (base, see annotated Figure 3 below) and a plurality of first and second male couplers (8) including a button (9) received within the aperture of a female coupler thereby coupling the male coupler to the female coupler (Figure 3), each button comprising a top surface facing away from the base of the respective female coupler and towards the head of the wearer (Figure 3), and a bottom surface (BS, see annotated Figure 3 below) facing the base of the respective female coupler (Figure 3), wherein the male coupler decouples from the female coupler when a first predetermined release force or a second predetermined release force is applied that separates the male coupler from the female coupler (Page 2, lines 22-38); wherein the second predetermined release force is greater than the first predetermined release force (Page 2, lines 22-38); wherein for each of the plurality of first male couplers the bottom surface of the first button is coupled to a first arm (arm, see annotated Figure 3 below, via the structure of the male coupler) that biases the first button through the aperture of a female coupler when the first male coupler is coupled to the respective female coupler. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted the coupler of Fava with a button coupler, as taught by Edmondson, as a simple substitution of one well known coupling system for another to yield the predictable result of attaching a strap system to a helmet. The combination of Fava and Edmondson do not specifically disclose the second predetermined release force is at least 50 Newtons greater than the first predetermined release force. It, however, would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to experiment with different ranges of Newtons for the release force in order to achieve an optimal configuration for release, since discovering the optimum or workable ranges of the release force involves only routine skill in the art. Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the plurality of female couplers are integrally molded with the shell (Fava, Figures 1, 2 & 12 & Para. 41). Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the apertures of the plurality of female couplers define a circular shape that receives the first buttons and the second buttons (Edmondson, Figure 3). Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the first buttons of the plurality of first male couplers define a circular shape that is received in one of the apertures of the female couplers (Edmondson, Figure 3). Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the second buttons of the plurality of second male couplers define a circular shape that is received in one of the apertures of the female couplers (Edmondson, Figure 3). Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose wherein for each of the plurality of second male couplers the second button extends from a second arm that biases the second button through the aperture of a female coupler when the second male coupler is coupled to the respective female coupler (Edmondson, Page 2, lines 22-38). Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the plurality of female couplers comprises at least four female couplers (Fava, Figures 1, 2 & 12). Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the plurality of male couplers comprises at least four male couplers (Fava, Figures 1, 2 & 12). The combination of Fava and Edmondson do not specifically disclose eight male couplers. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the assembly of Fava having double the couplers (eight), since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art for the purpose of providing a secure strap system. Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the plurality of female couplers are integrally molded with the shell (Fava, Figure 12 & Para. 41). Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose there are twice as many first male couplers coupled to the straps as female couplers are coupled to the shell, wherein there are twice as many second male couplers coupled to the straps as female couplers are coupled to the shell. The combination of Fava and Edmondson do not specifically disclose twice as many male couplers. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the assembly of Fava having twice the couplers, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art for the purpose of providing a secure strap system. Regarding Claim 11, Fava discloses a hard hat system (Figures 1, 2 & 12) comprising: a hard hat (Figures 1 & 2) comprising a shell (2) formed from a rigid material (Para. 28), the shell comprising an external surface (3) and an internal surface (4) that defines a cavity sized to receive the head of a wearer (Figures 1 & 2); a plurality of female couplers (12) coupled to the shell (Figures 1, 2 & 12), each of the plurality of female couplers comprising a base (16) and an aperture (17) opposite the base; a plurality of straps (8 & 9) configured to secure the shell to the head of the wearer (Figures 1, 2 & 12); a plurality of first male couplers (11/13) and a plurality of second male couplers (11/13) wherein each strap of the plurality of straps is directly coupled to one of the first male couplers and one of the second male couplers (Figures 1, 2 & 12), one of which detachably couples to a female coupler of the plurality of female couplers at a time, thereby coupling the respective strap to the hard hat (Figures 1, 2 & 12). Fava does not specifically disclose a female and male coupler having a button system as claims. However, Edmondson discloses a plurality of female couplers (7) having a base (base, see annotated Figure 3 below) and a plurality of first and second male couplers (8) including a body (bs, see annotated Figure 3 below and a button (9) supported by the body, the button received within the aperture of a female coupler thereby coupling the male coupler to the female coupler (Figure 3), the button comprising a continuous top surface (Figure 3) facing away from the base of the respective female coupler, and a side surface that extends from the top surface at a obtuse angle (O, see annotated Figure 3 below) and that circumferentially surrounds the first button (Figure 3), wherein the side surface is space from an outer edge of the body (OE, see annotated Figure 3 below), wherein the male coupler decouples from the female coupler when a first predetermined release force or a second predetermined release force is applied that separates the first male coupler from the female coupler (Page 2, lines 22-38); wherein the second predetermined release force is greater than the first predetermined release force (Page. 2, lines 22-38). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted the coupler of Fava with a button coupler, as taught by Edmondson, as a simple substitution of one well known coupling system for another to yield the predictable result of attaching a strap system to a helmet. The combination of Fava and Edmondson do not specifically disclose the second predetermined release force is at least 50 Newtons greater than the first predetermined release force. It, however, would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to experiment with different ranges of Newtons for the release force in order to achieve an optimal configuration for release, since discovering the optimum or workable ranges of the release force involves only routine skill in the art. Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose for each of the plurality of first male couplers a bottom surface (BS, see annotated Figure 3 below) of the first button faces the base of the respective female coupler and is couple to a first arm (arm, see annotated Figure 3 below, via the structure of the male coupler), the first button extends upward from an upper surface of the first arm that biases the first button through the aperture of a female coupler (Edmondson, Page 2, lines 22-38), wherein the side surface of the first button defines a third obtuse angle (O, see annotated Figure 3 below) with respect to the upper surface of the first arm, and for each of the plurality of second male couplers the second button extends from a second arm that biases the second button through the aperture of a female coupler when the second male coupler is coupled to the respective female coupler (Edmondson, Page 2, lines 22-38), wherein the side surface of the second button defines a fourth obtuse angle (O, see annotated Figure 3 below) with respect to the upper surface of the second arm. Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the plurality of female couplers are integrally molded with the shell (Fava, Figure 12 & Para. 41). Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the plurality of female couplers are integrally molded with the shell (Fava, Figure 12 & Para. 41). Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the apertures of the plurality of female couplers define a circular shape that receives the first buttons and the second buttons (Edmondson, Figure 3). Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the first buttons of the plurality of first male couplers define a circular shape that is received in one of the apertures of the female couplers (Edmondson, Figure 3), and wherein the second buttons of the plurality of second male couplers define a circular shape that is received in one of the apertures of the female couplers (Edmondson, Figure 3). Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose there are twice as many first male couplers coupled to the straps as female couplers are coupled to the shell. The combination of Fava and Edmondson do not specifically disclose twice as many male couplers. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to construct the assembly of Fava having twice the couplers, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art for the purpose of providing a secure strap system. Regarding Claim 18, Fava discloses a strap system (Figures 1, 2 & 12) configured to secure a hard hat to the head of a wearer (Figures 1 & 2), the strap system comprising: a plurality of straps (8 & 9); a plurality of first male couplers (11/13) received within an aperture of a female coupler (12) coupled to a hard hat (Figures 1 & 2), a plurality of second male couplers (11/13) received within the aperture of a female coupler (12) thereby coupling the second male coupler to the female coupler(Figures 1 & 2), wherein each strap of the plurality of straps is directly coupled to one of the first male couplers and one of the second male couplers (Figures 1, 2 & 12), one of which couples to a female coupler of the plurality of female couplers at a time, thereby coupling the respective strap to the hard hat (Figures 1, 2 & 12). Fava does not specifically disclose a female and male coupler having a button system as claims. However, Edmondson discloses plurality of female couplers (7) and a plurality of first and second male couplers (8) including a button (9) each button comprising a top surface projected through the aperture of the female coupler and towards the head of the wearer (Page 2, lines 22-38), a bottom surface (BS, see annotated Figure 3 below) opposite the top surface and a side surface that extends from the top surface at an obtuse angle (O, see annotated Figure 3 below) and that circumferentially surrounds the button, wherein the male coupler decouples from the female coupler when a first predetermined release force or a second predetermined release force is applied that separates the male coupler from the female coupler (Page 2, lines 22-38); wherein the second predetermined release force is greater than the first predetermined release force (Page 2, lines 22-38); wherein the bottom surface of each button is positioned on an upper surface of a first arm (arm, see annotated Figure 3 below & Page 2, lines 22-38) that biases the first button through the aperture of a female coupler. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted the coupler of Fava with a button coupler, as taught by Edmondson, as a simple substitution of one well known coupling system for another to yield the predictable result of attaching a strap system to a helmet. The combination of Fava and Edmondson do not specifically disclose the second predetermined release force is at least 50 Newtons greater than the first predetermined release force. It, however, would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to experiment with different ranges of Newtons for the release force in order to achieve an optimal configuration for release, since discovering the optimum or workable ranges of the release force involves only routine skill in the art. The combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose wherein each strap of the plurality of straps is directly coupled to one of the first male couplers and one of the second male couplers, one of which couples to a female coupler of the plurality of female couplers at a time, thereby coupling the respective strap to the hard hat (Fava, Figures 1, 2 & 12 & Edmondson, Figure 3). Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the first buttons of the plurality of first male couplers define a circular shape that is received in one of the apertures of the female couplers (Edmondson, Figure 3), and wherein the second buttons of the plurality of second male couplers define a circular shape that is received in one of the apertures of the female couplers (Edmondson, Figure 3). Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose wherein the side surface of the first button defines a third obtuse angle (O, see annotated Figure 3 below) with respect to the upper surface of the first arm, and for each of the plurality of second male couplers the second button extends from a second arm that biases the second button through the aperture of a female coupler when the second male coupler is coupled to the respective female coupler (Edmondson, Page 2, lines 22-38), wherein the side surface of the second button defines a fourth obtuse angle (O, see annotated Figure 3 below) with respect to the upper surface of the second arm. Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Fava and Edmondson disclose the side surface of the first button comprises a chamfer around a perimeter of the first button (“sloped”, Page 2, lines 22-38) PNG media_image1.png 403 414 media_image1.png Greyscale Response to Amendment Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection as discussed supra. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHARINE KANE whose telephone number is (571)272-3398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm 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, KHOA HUYNH can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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. /KATHARINE G KANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 21, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 04, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 02, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 05, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 06, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 17, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599185
PROTECTIVE KNEE PAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12564247
ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR WITH REEL CLOSURE AND SLIDABLE EYELET
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12538960
FOOT SUPPORT SYSTEMS INCLUDING FLUID MOVEMENT CONTROLLERS AND ADJUSTABLE FOOT SUPPORT PRESSURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12478118
Adapter System For Vest Closure Mechanisms
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12471670
SOLE STRUCTURE HAVING A FLUID-FILLED CHAMBER FOR AN ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
47%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+45.4%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 631 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month