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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) with reference to Application Number: 63/320343 filed on 03/16/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) have been reviewed by the examiner and are found to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98, and MPEP § 609.
Drawings
The drawing(s) have been reviewed by the examiner and are found to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.81 to 1.85.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species B, subspecies ii, in the reply filed on 02/06/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 5, 9, and 13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 02/06/2026.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “air reflectors” in claims 1 – 5, and 7 – 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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, 3, 4, 7, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigematsu (US 20120000473) in view of Chen (US 6394090) in view of Lin (US 20110155138).
1. Shigematsu discloses a flexible tented facial cover (see [0028], Figs. 3 and 4, foldable face mask tented over the face) having a top portion and a bottom portion (see Fig. 3, examiner considers a central bisecting line to define the top and bottom portions) the facial cover comprising; a base layer having a thickness (filter material, see [0021]); a periphery comprising a plurality of segments in at least the top portion (see Fig. 2, periphery segments running from DM, MO’, O’N, NG, etc.); a plurality of sections at an outer edge of at least the top portion (see Fig. 2, AD and AG, where the folds extend to the outer edge as illustrated in Fig. 4; the sections are fused together, e.g. by ultrasonic welding, see [0024], [0008]) that are configured to substantially conform to the contour around a nose and a cheek of a wearer (see [0025], Fig. 3); a plurality of cover tents (see Fig. 2, AM, AO’, AN, the sections tented as illustrated in Figs. 1, 3 and 5) configured to be disposed on the nose of the wearer and cheek portions adjacent to the nose (see [0025], and Figs. 5 and 6, illustrating AM/AN on cheek portions adjacent the nose) allowing the facial cover to expand side to side and top to bottom (see [0025], [0008]; as illustrated between Figs. 3 and 4, the folds allow for movement in both side to side and top to bottom directions; the cover tents are fused together, e.g. by ultrasonic welding, see [0024], [0008]), and a plurality of air reflectors disposed on the cheek portions of the facial cover and configured to minimize air leakage around the nose (folds CD to C’D’ and GF to G’F’, where the folds are disposed on the cheeks as seen in Fig. 3; the folds are configured to reflect air and minimize air leakage around the nose by accepting fastening string 2, which tightens the seal across the mask and nose, see [0027]).
However, while Shigematsu discloses the plurality of outer sections and cover tents to be fused together, e.g. by ultrasonic welding, see [0024], [0008], Shigematsu does not explicitly disclose the mask comprising areas having different thicknesses, the plurality of sections at the outer edge having a thickness less than the thickness of the base layer, the plurality of cover tents each having a thickness less than the thickness of the base layer. Nonetheless, Chen discloses a facial mask made from filter material, the mask comprising areas having different thicknesses formed by fusing the material, e.g. by ultrasonic welding (see c. 4: 1 – 46, Fig. 1, and Fig. 5 illustrating fused thickness less than the base layer). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the fused sections such as the plurality of outer sections and the cover tents of Shigematsu to have a lower thickness as taught in Chen for the benefit of promoting a flexible joint-like function for movement between relative portions, as well as for imparting structural integrity, see Chen, c. 4: 12 - 17. Such modification is the predictable result of techniques for creating fused sections, e.g. ultrasonic welding or pressure. Upon modifying Shigematsu with Chen as disclosed, the combined references render obvious the plurality of sections at the outer edge having a thickness less than the thickness of the base layer, and the plurality of cover tents each having a thickness less than the thickness of the base layer.
However, while Shigematsu discloses a periphery comprising a plurality of segments in at least the top portion (see Fig. 2, periphery segments running from DM, MO’, O’N, NG, etc.), Shigematsu does not discloses a periphery comprising a plurality of hinged segments configured to permit deformation of at least the top portion while the periphery stays in substantial contact with wearer's skin. Nonetheless, Lin discloses a folded facial mask made from filter material (see [0027], folded configuration in Figs. 3a and 3b), the mask including a periphery comprising a plurality of hinged segments in at least the top portion (see Fig 2, as well as Fig. 4, e.g. hinged segments 14 and 16 defined by dotted fold/hinge lines; see [0033 – 0035]), the plurality of hinged segments configured to permit deformation of at least the top portion while the periphery stays in substantial contact with the wearer’s skin (see [0035]; the top portion can be extended, but the hinged segments stay in contact with the wearer; see also deformation of mask while periphery stays in contact in Fig. 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the top portion of Shigematsu (e.g. periphery segments running from DM, MO’, O’N, NG) to include a plurality of periphery hinged segments as taught in Lin for the benefit of ensuring that no gaps existing between the mask periphery and the face of the wearer, see Lin, [0005], [0010].
3. Shigematsu as modified above discloses the facial cover of claim 1. Lin discloses a fold line for the hinged segments, see Fig. 2, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of hinged segments comprises segments having alternating thicknesses such that one segment has a greater thickness than an immediately adjacent segment. Nonetheless, Chen discloses the mask comprising areas having different thicknesses formed by fusing the material, e.g. by ultrasonic welding (see c. 4: 1 – 46, Fig. 1, and Fig. 5 illustrating fused thickness less than the base layer) in order to form a hinge, the hinged segments comprising segments having alternating thicknesses such that one segment has a greater thickness than an immediately adjacent segment (see Fig. 5 of Lin, illustrating greater thicknesses immediately adjacent the hinge segment). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the hinged segments Shigematsu in view of Lin to have a lower thickness as taught in Chen for the benefit of promoting a flexible joint-like function for movement between relative portions, as well as for imparting structural integrity, see Chen, c. 4: 12 - 17. Such modification is the predictable result of techniques for creating fused hinges, e.g. ultrasonic welding or pressure. Upon providing the modification, Shigematsu in view of Line in view of Chen renders obvious the plurality of hinged segments comprises segments having alternating thicknesses such that one segment has a greater thickness than an immediately adjacent segment.
4. Shigematsu as modified by Lin and Chen discloses the facial cover of claim 1, wherein the plurality of hinged segments alternate between a segment having a first thickness and a segment having a second thickness, the first thickness being greater than the second thickness (upon modifying Shigematsu and Lin with Chen as described in claim 3 above, the plurality of hinged segments would have a thicker segments immediately adjacent a second thinner segment as per the hinge construction in Chen, Fig. 5) .
7. Shigematsu discloses the facial cover of claim 1, further comprising a strap attached to the base layer (fastening strap 2).
11. Shigematsu discloses the facial cover of claim 1, wherein the bottom portion is configured to cover mouth and chin of the wearer (see Fig. 3).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigematsu (US 20120000473) in view of Chen (US 6394090) in view of Lin (US 20110155138) in view of Michaels (US 20050161046).
2. Shigematsu discloses the facial cover of claim 1, but does not disclose further comprising a plurality of slits located at the outer edge of at least the top portion, the plurality of slits allowing widening of the facial cover during use. Michaels discloses a facial nose cover further comprising a plurality of slits located at the outer edge of at least the top portion, the plurality of slits allowing widening of the facial cover during use, see Fig. 2, [0055]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the outer edge of Shigematsu according to the slits of Michaels for the benefit of facilitating the fit and conformance of the filter material against the side and top of the nose, see [0055].
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigematsu (US 20120000473) in view of Chen (US 6394090) in view of Lin (US 20110155138) in view of Stewart (US 20120272967).
6. Shigematsu discloses the facial cover of claim 1, wherein the plurality of air reflectors comprises folds configured to reflect air (the folds such as CD are configured to directly and indirectly reflect air and minimize air leakage around the nose by accepting fastening string 2, which tightens the seal across the mask and nose, see [0027]). However, Shigematsu does not disclose the inner surfaces of the folds coated with a hydrophilic material. Nonetheless, Stewart discloses that a layer of the mask facing away from the user can be coated with a hydrophilic material, see [0007]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the whole of Shigematsu’s filter material such that an exterior layer of the mask is coated with a hydrophilic material as taught in Stewart for the benefit of rapidly absorbing pathogenic liquid away from the surface. Upon providing the modification to Shigematsu, the inner surfaces of the folds would be coated with a hydrophilic material, where examiner considers the inner surface of the folds as the surfaces of the fold CD-C’D’ facing each other.
Claim(s) 8, 10, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigematsu (US 20120000473) in view of Chen (US 6394090) in view of Lin (US 20110155138) in view of Lang (US 20200376305).
8. Shigematsu discloses the facial cover of claim 1, further comprising the cover tent of the plurality of cover tents that is configured to be disposed on the nose of the wearer (as defined by sections AM, AO’, and AN as described in claim 1 above). However, Shigematsu does not disclose an orifice located below the cover tent. Nonetheless, Lang discloses a face mask comprising filter material, wherein the face mask comprises an orifice on a middle portion of the mask, see Figs. 1, 2, 13a. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the middle portion of Shigematsu (e.g. corresponding to areas ABCD in Fig. 3) according to the orifice of Lang for the benefit of fitting a ventilation nozzle that allows the wearer to choose between receiving ventilation via the mask itself or via an outside source, see Lang, [0340]. Upon providing the modification as stated, Shigematsu in view of Lang would render obvious the orifice below the cover tent.
10. The modified Shigematsu discloses the facial cover of claim 8, further comprising a nasal ventilation adapter having an end disposed in the orifice (see Lang, 120, [0186], Figs. 13a and 13b).
12. The modified Shigematsu discloses the facial cover of claim 11, further comprising an orifice located below the cover tent of the plurality of cover tents that is configured to be disposed on the nose of the wearer and above the bottom portion (see claim 8 above, Lang, Figs. 1, 2, 13a, [0186]).
14. The modified Shigematsu discloses the facial cover of claim 12, further comprising a nasal ventilation adapter having an end disposed in the orifice (see Lang, 120, [0186], Figs. 13a and 13b).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tented nose filter - US 1523884 A
Tented nose filter – 9463340
Tented nose area - WO 2021078415 A1
Thinned nose area - US 11122841 B2
Tented nose area - US 4417575 A
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY H PHILIPS whose telephone number is (571)270-5180. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F.
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.
/BRADLEY H PHILIPS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799