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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-7 are pending and under examination in this office action.
Information Disclosure Statement
Receipt is acknowledged of the Information Disclosure Statement filed 4/16/24. The Examiner has considered the references cited therein to the extent that each is a proper citation. Please see the attached USPTO Form 1449.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 4972241) in view of Gill et al. (CA 2240912) and Yao et al. (CN 113152090) in view of Yammoto et al. (JP 2000042126) and Oike et al. (JP 2010274022)
JP teaches, with regards to instant claim 1, antibacterial fiber sheet containing inorganic antibacterial fine particles on the fiber surface, wherein the sheet has light-colored where the inorganic antibacterial fine particles are exposed i.e., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have added an indicator that changes color to the sheet to indicate the need to change the sheet.
However JP fails to teach the antiviral sheet carries shikkui particles and an indicator. Although JP did not per se teach the alkaline indicator/thymophthalein, nonetheless teaches that the sheet has light colored portions the fact that it is taught would make one of ordinary skill in the art to have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention incorporation an indicator with a reasonable expectation of success.
Gill teaches providing uniform visual change wherein the use of an indicator is added and can be worn wherein the alkaline indicator is thymolphthalein (see entire reference). Therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to add an alkaline indicator such as thymolphthalein (as required in claims 1 and 5 in part).
Yao teaches mask for protective cover comprising a mesh fiber with an antiviral or antibacterial (see abstract, as required by instant claim 4).
Yamamoto teaches a mask comprising antibacterial wherein the mask is a face mask (see English translation, as required by instant claim 6). Thus the mask can be a face mask that covers the mouth and nose.
Although the JP reference above fails to teach shikkui particles, nonetheless teaches examples of inorganic antibacterial fine particle such as silver ions can be used are held on the inorganic carrier is exposed on the surface of the polyolefin fiber. Therefore it is reasonable that one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to substitute the silver ions taught by JP above with shikkui particle as both are antibacterial with a reasonable expectation of success.
Oike teaches a mask with an alkaline substance impregnated with an alkaline indicator such as phenolphthalein that can be visualized by changing the color. The mask comprised calcium hydroxide molded in the mask with particle size. However fails to teach specifically that the fiber sheet carries shikkui. Nonetheless teaches calcium hydroxide known as slaked lime (see JS R International 01-07-2017)is a primary component of shikkui (when the specification is used as a dictionaryfor better understanding).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the cited references to substitute the silver ions taught by JP with the calcium hydroxide a slaked lime to result in the instant claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success by having the slaked lime embedded on the mess of the mask. Additionally known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art; reason why one of ordinary skill in the art would substitute silver ions and slaked lime for shikkui particles.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the cited references to result in the instant claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable subject matter
Claims 2-3 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 7 is free of art. None of the data bases searched by the Examiner revealed any references which anticipate or provide a basis for concluding that the claimed subject matter would have been obvious. Further, the claims are presented in an enabled, definite manner.
Accordingly, these claims are deemed to be in condition for allowance.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIRLEY V GEMBEH whose telephone number is (571)272-8504. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, Robert A. Wax can be reached at 571-272-0623. 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.
/SHIRLEY V GEMBEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1615 12/9/25