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
Applicant’s amendments, filed 12/01/2025, has been entered, claims 1-15 remain pending.
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) 1, 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20200206546), hereafter Kim, in view of Stern et al. (US5372130), hereafter Stern, further in view of Legare et al. (US10751660), hereafter Legare.
Regarding Claim 1, Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a mask apparatus (Abstract) comprising: a mask body (Fig 1. The mask 1 excluding packing 15) having a suction port (Fig. 7, 8, first and second suction openings 221, 421).
Kim is silent on a mask body having a suction port at a rear surface thereof.
However, Legare teaches a mask apparatus comprising of a mask body (Fig. 6, a mask comprising of mask body 300), wherein the mask body having a suction port (Fig. 11, air-permeable area 63) at a rear surface thereof (See Fig. 6, the suction port is at the rear surface of the mask body). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known mask apparatus of Kim, with the mask of Legare, and reverse the direction of the suction port of the mask to face the rear, to protect the filter from debris as taught by Legare (Legare, par. 0045).
The modified Kim further discloses the mask body including: a front body (See Kim Fig. 1, mask body 10) and a rear body (See Fig. A below, frame 11) coupled to a rear surface of the front body (See Fig. A below, front cover 12), the rear body including: a pair of accommodation portions (Fig. A below, Kim Fig. 9, 10, first fixing body 130, second fixing body 140) that protrude from a front surface of the rear body toward the front body (Kim, par. 0124, 0134, See Fig. 4, accommodation portions 130 and 140 are protruding from a front surface of the rear body towards the front body), and are covered by the front body (Examiner Notes: See Kim, par. 127, Fig. 1, 2, the front body comprises of an opening, see element 120a in Fig. 4, in use, the opening corresponds to element 133/143 of the accommodation portions 130/140, therefore the accommodation portion is covered by the front body), each of the pair of accommodation portion defining a recess (See Kim Fig. 9, 10, first and second duct insertion hole 131, 141), an exhaust port provided under the pair of accommodation portions (See Kim Fig. 17, outlet 112a, 112b are positioned under 131, 141), and an exhaust flow path guide protruding forward along an edge of the exhaust port (See Kim Fig. 16-18, an exhaust flow path is defined from outlet 112 to discharge port 128); a face guard that is coupled to a rear surface of the rear body (Kim, Fig. 1, packing 15; See Fig. A below), the face guard being configured to contact a user's face (Kim, par. 0036, “The packing 15 may be interposed between the frame 11 and the user's face when the mask body 10 is worn by the user”) and defining a breathing space formed therein (See Kim, Fig. 3, the space created by the packing 15 and the mask body); a fan module (See Fig. A below, Kim, Fig. 7, 8, first air cleaner 20 and the second air cleaner 40; comprises of fans 24, 44) received in one of the pair of recesses of the pair of accommodation portions (See Fig. A, Kim, Fig. 7-10, portion 211 and 411 of the fan module are received by the pair of recess 131 and 141) and configured to supply external air to the breathing space through the suction port (Kim, par. 0040, “The filtered air may flow to the inside of the mask body 10 and through the inlet 111a and 111b to be supplied to the nose and mouth of the user”; par. 0180, “The outside air sucked into the first suction opening 221” See Fig. 15-17, external air is drawn through the suction port into the breathing space).
The modified Kim is silent on a sealing cover coupled to an end portion of the exhaust flow path guide.
However, Stern teaches a mask apparatus (Fig. 1), comprising of a exhaust valve (Fig. 4, valve 106), an exhaust port (Fig. 4, port defined by housing 86), an exhaust flow path guide (Fig. 4, second housing 88), and a sealing cover (Fig. 4, sealing ring 92; alternatively valve 98) coupled to an end portion of the exhaust flow path guide (Fig. 4, left end portion of the exhaust flow path guide 88). Furthermore, Kim teaches an exhaust valve at the exhaust port (Fig. 16, exhaust check valve 118). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify the known mask of 708’, with the exhaust valve and the sealing cover of Stern, to form a sealing at the exhaust port and prevent exhaled air from leaking as taught by Stern (Stern, col. 7, line 64-67).
PNG
media_image1.png
492
623
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A, adapted from Kim Fig. 4
Regarding Claim 6, the modified Kim discloses the mask apparatus of claim 1, wherein the pair of accommodation portions are symmetrically disposed with respect to a vertical plane passing through a center of the rear body in a left and right direction (See Kim, Fig. 17, the pair of accommodation portions are symmetrical as claimed).
Regarding Claim 7, the modified Kim discloses The mask apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: a flow guide provided behind the fan module (Kim, Fig. 7, 8, 15, first and second duct 211 and 411, See Fig. 15, the duct guides the airflow and is behind the fan module in the direction of the air flow); a filter seated on the flow guide and configured to purify the external air that flows into the fan module (Kim, Fig. 7, 8, 15 filter 25, 45); and a filter housing (See Kim Fig. 7, 8, first and second cleaner body 21, 41) including a filter frame that covers a side surface of the filter (Kim, first/second air flow space, par. 0096, “The first compartment rib 216 may define a shape of the first air flow space 214 to accommodate the first fan module 24 and the first filter module 25”), wherein the rear surface of the filter cover defines a portion of the rear surface of the mask body (See Legare, Fig. 6, after the modification, the filter cover will face the back of the mask body and therefore defines a portion of the rear surface of the mask body).
Regarding Claim 8, the modified Kim discloses the mask apparatus of claim 7, wherein the suction port is defined at the filter cover to suction the external air through the rear surface of the mask body (Fig. 7, 8, first and second suction openings 221, 421; Legare Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 9, the modified Kim discloses the mask apparatus of claim 8, wherein a discharge port is defined between an inner edge of one of the pair of accommodation portions and an inner edge of the flow guide (Kim, Fig. 7, 8, 15, first and second air flow hole 211a, 411a; See par. 0092, a port is defined by the accommodation portion and the flow guide for air flowing into the mask).
Regarding Claim 10, the modified Kim discloses the mask apparatus of claim 8, wherein the suction port includes a plurality of holes having different diameters (Kim Fig. 1 and 2, the holes have different diameter).
Claim(s) 2, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Stern, in view of Legare, further in view of Prabhudesai et al. (US20190366029), hereafter Prab.
Regarding Claim 2, the modified Kim discloses the mask apparatus of claim 1, wherein the sealing cover includes: a cover frame (Stern, Fig. 4, outer surface of sealing cover 92) provided at a front surface of the exhaust flow path guide (Stern, Fig. 4, front surface as claimed is interpreted as the surface of the rear body facing the front body; In Stern Fig. 4, a cover frame is provided at the front surface of housing 88).
The modified Kim is silent on an inner rib extending rearward from an inner edge of the cover frame; and an outer rib extending rearward from an outer edge of the cover frame; wherein a fitting groove is defined between the inner rib and the outer rib and configured to accommodate the exhaust flow path guide.
However, Prab teaches a mask apparatus (Abstract, apparatus shown in Fig. 1), comprising of an exhalation valve (Fig. 2, valve 10, par. 0015), an exhaust flow path guide (Fig. 2, a flow guide is defined by housing 12) wherein the exhalation valve comprises of a sealing cover (Fig. 2, support plate 26, par. 0043, the support plate 26 provides sealing and covers the seal 20). The sealing cover includes: a cover frame (Fig. 2, outer surface of the sealing cover), an inner rib extending rearward from an inner edge of the cover frame (Fig. 2, inner rib defied by the interior surface of the sealing cover); and an outer rib extending rearward from an outer edge of the cover frame (Fig. 2, outer rib defined by the exterior surface); wherein a fitting groove is defined between the inner rib and the outer rib and configured to accommodate the exhaust flow path guide (See Fig. 2, a step-shaped grooved is defined between the inner and outer ribs, accommodates the exhaust flow path as shown in Fig. 2 and 1B). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify the known mask of Kim, with the exhalation valve of Prab, to reduce pressure of exhalation flow and prevent exhalation flow back to the patient as taught by Prab (Pran, par. 0042 - 0043).
Regarding Claim 3, the modified Kim discloses the mask apparatus of claim 2, wherein the sealing cover further includes a connection rib that couples a left portion and a right portion of the cover frame (Prab, Fig. 2, a connection rib is provided in the middle of sealing cover 26, coupling a left and right portion).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Stern, in view of Legare, further in view of Timpson, Jr. et al. (US4687212), hereafter Timpson.
Regarding Claim 4, the modified Kim discloses the mask apparatus of claim 1, but is silent on wherein the sealing cover is made of a rubber or silicone material.
However, Timpson teaches a sealing member (seal 10, Fig. 1), made of a rubber or silicone material (col. 3, line 36-40, “As is known in the art, the seal 10 may be made of a deformable but substantially non-compressable material, which may for instance comprise rubber...”). The courts have held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the know mask of Kim and use rubber for the sealing cover as taught by Timpson.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Stern, in view of Legare, further in view of Kim (KR101619487, machine translation accessed 8/19/2025 relied upon herein), hereafter Jun.
Regarding Claim 5, the modified Kim discloses the mask apparatus of claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein the sealing cover extends to an edge of a lower end portion of the rear body.
However, Jun teaches a face mask (Fig. 1), comprises of a front body (Fig. 1, cover body 300), a rear body (Fig. 1, main body 100), an exhaust port (Fig. 7, exhaust hole 133) and an exhalation valve extends to an edge of a lower end portion of the rear body (par 0043, “an exhaust part (131) is formed in the lower part (130).”; See Fig. 7, the exhaust part 131 includes a valve structure and extends to the lower edge of the rear body). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify the known mask apparatus of Kim, with the exhalation port of Jun, to have the exhalation valve as well as the sealing cover extends to a lower edge of the rear body, to ensure sealing and direct exhaled air directly away from inhalation, therefore prevents moistures from forming in the interior of the mask as taught by Jun (Jun, par. 0091)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, claims 11-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the double patenting rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The modified Kim does not disclose the strap connection portion including a strap recess, a strap hole, a strap bar, and a waterproof sleeve extending along the strap hole. Kolasa (US 20200008539 A1), Olsen (US 20170157353 A1), and Hsiung (US 20150289598 A1) disclose strap connections including a strap recess and a strap bar which could be applied to the mask apparatus of Kim. However, each reference fails to disclose a strap hole with a waterproof sleeve. This would not have been an obvious modification as there would have been no reason to do so.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/01/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, the applicant argued the amended independent claim 1 recites features that are not disclosed by the prior art. The amended claim 1 recites a suction port at a rear surface, Kim modified with Legare does disclose the claimed configuration, with the suction port facing the back of the mask and is at a rear surface of the mask body. The amended claim 1 further recites the accommodation portions are covered by the front body. See rejection for claim 1, the accommodation portions is defined as element 13, 14, which then define recesses 131 and 141 that receives the fan modules. The accommodation portions 13 and 14 are covered by the front body, as shown in par. 0127, Fig. 1, 2, in Kim. The claim itself only requires the accommodation portions to be covered by the front body, and does not require the fan module and suction portion to also be covered. Therefore, the arguments are not persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KRIS HANYU GONG whose telephone number is (703)756-5898. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4:30.
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, Brandy Lee can be reached at 571-270-7410. 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.
/KRIS HANYU GONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/VICTORIA MURPHY/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785