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 .
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, 5, 8, 9, 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McMurray (2022/0136805) in view of Martin et al (8,105,510).
McMurray discloses (see especially paragraphs 44-48 and Figure 9) a ballistic shield 20 apparatus comprising most claimed elements including a first fibrous panel 212comprisin g a plurality of layers of aramid fibers; a second fibrous panel 222 comprising a plurality of layers of aramid fibers; a hard panel 230 ; where the first and second fibrous panels are disposed on opposite sides of the hard panel; where the hard panel has a thickness between .075 inches and .175 inches (paragraph 47); and a cover 250 surrounding the panels and conforming to the exterior of the panel, where the cover appears to comprise inherently water impermeable and ultraviolet light impermeable material (see paragraph 48 and at least the nylon and a woven polyester base with an integral rubberized PVC surface would appear to meet the required limitations); and where the cover is sized to fit within a backpack 40.
Even if it is argued that the disclosed material of cover 250 does not specifically state that they are water and ultraviolet light impermeable, it is considered obvious to make the materials water and ultraviolet light impermeable, since these materials do meet this limitation if formed without apertures, and the clear and obvious reason for doing so is the improved performance available by protecting the apparatus from water and ultraviolet light damage.
. McMurray fails to disclose that the hard layer may comprise a ceramic, in particular porcelain or that there is another layer attached outside the second fibrous panel that comprises a ductile material, in particular steel. Martin et al teach, in a ballistic armor, to have both a layer formed from porcelain and to have a rear steel spall layer. Motivation to combine is the mere substitution of known armor materials instead of one of the disclosed materials of panel 230, in order to perform the same function. Also, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to add a steel layer at the rear of the ballistic shield to provide additional protection, as indicated by its indication as a spall layer. To employ the teachings of Martin et al on the ballistic shield of McMurray and have a porcelain hard layer and an additional steel layer is considered to have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art.
In regard to claim 13, to merely have the claimed size of the cover to be the claimed parameters is considered to be obvious, non-patentable, and provide no unexpected results, since this is merely providing a particular size that is an arbitrary size desired by the user.
Applicant's arguments filed 7-21-25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The amendments merely added together dependent claims which were already rejected in the prior art to the rejected independent claim. No substantive argument was made as to why the claims should be allowable over the previous rejection. The argument merely stated that the art fails to teach the order and configuration of the four panels claimed, particularly dual fibrous panels sandwiching the ceramic layer. However, the Office Action proposed that these specific elements were present in the prior art and Applicant failed to make any specific indications where the Office Action was incorrect and the elements were not present as the rejection proposed.
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 J. WOODROW ELDRED whose telephone number is (571)272-6901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30.
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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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.
/J. Woodrow Eldred/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
JWE
