DETAILED ACTION
This is a Non-Final Rejection for Application 18/102,889 filed January 30, 2023. Claims 1-14 are currently pending.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 30, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The examiner acknowledges the amendments to the claims.
The claim objections indicated in the Office action filed September 30, 2025 are overcome by the amendments and are hereby withdrawn. New claim objections appear below.
A 112(b) claim rejection is presented below as a result of the amendments.
The 102 and 103 rejections indicated in the Office action filed September 30, 2025 are overcome by the amendments and are hereby withdrawn. New grounds of rejection are presented below in response to the amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a rear support member attachable from the lower support arm” is already recited in claim 1 and can be removed. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1-14 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the pivotable upper chin" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. A pivotable upper chin support arm is recited prior to this limitation but not a pivotable upper chin. This rejection may be overcome with language such as “the pivotable upper chin support arm”.
Claims 2-14 are rejected for depending from and not curing the deficiencies of a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2014/0012172 (Calco).
Regarding claim 1, Calco discloses an article of manufacture for providing an adjustable cervical collar (an adjustable cervical collar system. See the abstract and Figs. 1-9.), the adjustable cervical collar comprising:
a lower support arm having a pair of opposing ends (The collar body 70 is interpreted as a lower support arm and has a pair of ends 72A, 72B ([0016]).);
a rear support member attachable from the lower support arm (The neck strap 60 is interpreted as a rear support member and is detachable from the collar body 70 ([0014]).);
a pair of lower support arm locking mechanisms coupled to the lower support arm and having a locked and unlocked configuration (The locking and release mechanism 100 locks the chin support 80 in a desired rotational position relative to the collar body 70 and comprises sliding member 102 and sliding member 104 on opposite sides of the device. Sliding member 104 comprises a plurality of teeth 104A, a spring 104B, and a button portion 114A-1. Sliding member 102 comprises a copy of the components of sliding member 104 on the opposite side of the device making a pair of locking mechanisms that are indirectly coupled to the lower support arm ([0021]-[0023]).);
a pivotable upper chin support arm having opposing ends and coupled to the lower support arm via a connecting pivot at the opposing ends (The chin support 80 is interpreted as a pivotable upper chin support arm and has opposing ends coupled to the collar body 70 via the connector end portions 82A, 82B which are fitted into the circular openings 72A-1 and 72B-1 and allow pivotal movement of the chin support structure about the pivot axis 52 ([0020]).);
wherein the lower support arm and the upper chin support arm are not integral with one another and rotate about the connecting pivot point when the pair of lower support arm locking mechanisms are in an unlocked position (The chin support 80 and collar body 70 are not integral with one another and rotate about the pivot axis when in an unlocked state (Fig. 3 and [0021]).); and
the pair of lower support arm locking mechanisms constrains the pivoting positioning of the lower support arm relative to the pivotable upper chin support arm in the locked configuration such that the pivotable upper chin is prevented from moving upward and downward (The chin support 80 and collar body 70 are constrained by the sliding members 102, 104 and prevented from moving upward and downward when locked in a selected position ([0014]).).
Regarding claim 2, Calco discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 1, wherein each of the pair of lower support arm locking mechanisms comprises:
a toothed sliding height adjustment piece having a plurality of teeth (Teeth 102A, 104A are interpreted as a plurality of teeth with sliding members 102, 104 interpreted as toothed sliding height adjustment pieces (Fig. 3).);
an anchored locking tooth component (Locking teeth 72A-3, 72B-3 are interpreted as anchored locking tooth components (Fig. 3).);
a spring-loaded sliding lock (Springs 102B, 104B and respective cables 106, 108 are interpreted as spring-loaded sliding locks (Fig. 3).);
a locking mechanism release button coupled to a release button coupling elongated section (Actuating arms 114A, 114B are interpreted as locking mechanism release buttons and are coupled to housing 112, which is interpreted as a release button coupling elongated section (Fig. 3 and [0023]).).
Regarding claim 4, Calco discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 2, wherein the spring-loaded sliding lock comprises:
a tooth engagement body (Springs 102B, 104B);
a spring engagement mechanism (Cables 106,108); and
the release button coupling elongated section (Housing 112).
Regarding claim 10, Calco discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 2, wherein a rear support member attachable from the lower support arm (The neck strap 60 is interpreted as a rear support member and is detachable from the collar body 70 ([0014]).), the rear support member comprising:
a rear support member frame component (Neck strap 60 comprises a body that is interpreted as a rear support member frame component (Fig. 1A).) and
a pair of rear support member attachment straps for coupling the rear support member to the lower support arm (Both ends of the body of the neck strap 60 are straps that couple to the collar 70 (Fig. 1A).).
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.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0012172 (Calco) in view of US 2024/0225883 (Li).
Regarding claim 8, Calco discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 2.
Calco does not disclose wherein the lower support arm comprises: a lower support arm outer shell; and a lower support arm inner shell, the pair of lower support arm locking mechanisms being coupled to the lower support arm inner shell.
However, Li discloses an adjustable cervical collar comprising a lower arm 30 and an upper chin support 101, which are analogous to the collar body 70 and chin support 80 of Calco, respectively. Li teaches that the lower arm 30 comprises a front half casing 31 and a rear half casing 32 ([0093] and Fig. 2). The half casings form an enclosed casing which allows for air bag cushion 103 and an airbag 102 to be disposed within to adjust the size to the size of the user’s neck ([0096]-[0097]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the collar body 70 of Calco to comprise a front half casing and a rear half casing as taught by Li. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to do so because Li teaches that the half casings provide an enclosed space for components such as an airbag to be disposed within. A skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation of success given that all references are analogous and drawn to cervical collars.
Regarding claim 9, Calco in view of Li discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 8, wherein the locking mechanism release button is accessible from outside the lower support arm outer shell (Actuating arms 114A, 114B are accessible from outside the front half casing of Calco in view of Li since the actuating arms are disposed on the chin support 80 which is not modified.).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0012172 (Calco) in view of US 2018/0078400 (Hsu et al.).
Regarding claim 11, Calco discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 10, wherein the rear support member frame component comprises: a pair of rear support member attachment strap slots for accepting corresponding rear support member attachment straps (The strap connectors 120 are interpreted as a pair of rear support member attachment strap slots as the strap connectors 120 accept the corresponding straps of neck strap 60 ([0026]-[0027]).).
Calco does not disclose a rear support member lower member; a pair of rear support member upper shoulder members; and a pair of rear support member upper neck members.
However, Hsu discloses a cervical collar comprises a rear support member lower member (Fig 15A, a lower member 416); a pair of rear support member upper shoulder members (Fig 15A, shoulder members 405), and a pair of rear support member upper neck members (Fig 15A, [0013], neck supports 412).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the neck strap 60 of Calco to comprise a rear support member lower member; a pair of rear support member upper shoulder members; and a pair of rear support member upper neck members as taught by Hsu. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to do so because Hsu teaches that the main part 400 improves user comfort ([0130]-[0131]). A skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation of success given that all references are analogous and drawn to cervical collars.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0012172 (Calco) in view of US 5,010,877 (Druskoczi).
Regarding claim 12, Calco discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 1, further comprises:
a lower support arm padding coupled to the lower support arm (The collar body 70 comprises a foam pad ([0031]).);
a rear support member padding coupled to the rear support member (The neck strap 60 comprises a neck pad structure 60A’ ([0036]).); and
an upper chin support member padding coupled to the upper chin support arm (The chin support 80 comprises a foam pad ([0031]).).
Calco does not disclose the lower support arm padding coupled to the lower support arm using one or more first lower pocket outer item; the rear support member padding coupled to the rear support member using a top pocket outer item and a second lower pocket outer item.
However, Druskoczi teaches an analogous neck orthosis having a lower support arm padding coupled to the lower support arm using one or more first lower pocket outer item (Fig 8, front 34 with lower support arms attached to padding layer 36 via pockets 41/40 (Col. 4, Lns. 32-50).); a rear support member padding coupled to the rear support member using a top pocket outer item and a second lower pocket outer item (Fig 8, the back 35 and the padding 44 are coupled via pockets 44d, 44b (Col. 4, Lns. 51-62).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to an artisan of ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the padding of the collar body 70 and the neck strap 60 to be coupled using pockets as taught by Druskoczi. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to do so because Druskoczi teaches that the pockets allow for removal and washing of the padding (Col. 1, Lns. 35-40). A skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation of success given that all references are analogous and drawn to cervical collars.
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0012172 (Calco) in view of US 5,010,877 (Druskoczi), and further in view of US 6,027,467 (Nakamura et al.).
Regarding claim 13, Calco in view of Druskoczi discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 12.
Calco in view of Druskoczi does not disclose wherein the upper chin support arm padding, the lower support arm padding, and the rear support member padding each having a laminated outer layer and a plurality of raised padding sections.
However, Nakamura teaches an analogous neck support with a chin, posterior, and anterior region, the padding of each region having a laminated outer layer and a plurality of plurality of raised padding sections (Fig 1, outer layer 3 and raised sections 31. ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the padding of Calco in view of Druskoczi to have the raised sections as taught by Nakamura in order to allow the padding to better curve to surround the neck of the user (Col. 3, Lns. 1-5).
Regarding claim 14, Calco in view of Druskoczi and Nakamura discloses the adjustable cervical collar according to claim 13, wherein the plurality of raised padding sections being molded into a single layer (Nakamura discloses all of the padding, outer layer 3 and raised sections 31, is a single layer that is capable of being made by a molding process. The recitation “molded into a single layer” is considered a product-by-process limitation. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. See MPEP 2113(I).).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, 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.
Claim 3 contains allowable subject matter because the closest prior art of record does not disclose wherein the anchored locking tooth component comprises: a top surface; a latching tooth flexible arm portion having an inner end being coupled to the top surface; and an engagement tooth at an outer end of the latching tooth flexible arm portion. The closest prior art of record is US 2014/0012172 (Calco) which does not disclose the limitations in claim 3. Additionally, it would not be obvious to modify Calco to teach the limitations of claim 3 as such a modification would require significant changes to the function of Calco’s locking mechanism that would require impermissible hindsight to complete. Therefore, the limitations of claim 3 in combination with the limitations of claims 1 and 2 are not disclosed in the prior art or obvious in view of the prior art. Claims 5-7 are indicated as containing allowable subject matter due to their dependence from claim 3.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Seth Brown whose telephone number is (571)272-5642. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM – 11:00 AM or 1:00 PM – 3:00 PM ET.
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, Rachael Bredefeld can be reached at (571)270-5237. 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.
/SETH R. BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 3786
/KERI J NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3786
Prosecution Insights