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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending and examined on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/06/2023 was filed before the mailing date of the First Office Action on the Merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1 recites “Method for producing a facial mask”. This is grammatically incorrect. For the purposes of this Office Action, and in the interest in compact prosecution, Examiner will treat this claim to read “A method for producing a facial mask”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 2, 4, 5, 7, 13, and 18 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.
The term “about” in claims 2, 4, 5, 7, and 13 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purposes of this Office Action, and in the interest in compact prosecution, Examiner will treat the term about to mean “approximately”.
Claims 4 and 5 recites the limitation "the total weight of the facial mask" in lines 2 and 2-3, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the thermoresponsive polymer" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-12, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2010/0191314 A1) in view of Doona (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2022/0307194 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Young teaches a facial mask (see mask 102, 300 in Figs. 1-3, 6; see also Abstract and para. [0022-0023]) comprising a carrier material (see synthetic non-woven fluff material layer 304 in para. [0047] and Fig. 6) and an active material (see active/reactive minerals 306 in Fig. 6 and para. [0047-0048]).
However, Young fails to explicitly teach a thermoresponsive material configured to release water above a threshold temperature and absorb water below a threshold temperature, as required by the claim.
Doona teaches an analogous article comprising a carrier material (see substrate 102 in Fig. 1 and para. [0033]) and a thermoresponsive material (see at least para. [0023]) configured to release water above a threshold temperature and absorb water below a threshold temperature (see at least para. [0031 and 0039]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Young to incorporate the teachings of Doona by including a thermoresponsive material configured to release water above a threshold temperature and absorb water below a threshold temperature at least in order to regulate an individual’s body temperature as it rises through physical activities, as taught by Doona (see para. [0040]).
However, while Young in view of Doona fails to explicitly teach that the article exhibits a thermal conductivity of at least 0.1W/mK at 20°C, when the article is saturated with water, since the device of Young in view of Doona teaches a facial mask comprising each and every claimed structural limitation as in claim 1, the combined device of Young in view of Doona will also necessarily function in the same manner as the claimed device. Specifically, Doona teaches that the stimuli-responsive hydrogel polymer can be N-isopropylacrylamide, which is noted by Applicant in para. [0070] as what comprises the thermoresponsive polymer. Therefore, the facial mask will exhibit a thermal conductivity of at least 0.1 W/mK at 200C, as required by the claim.
Regarding claim 2, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Doona teaches wherein the threshold temperature is between about 30°C to about 45°C (see at least para. [0039]).
Regarding claim 3, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, while Young in view of Doona fails to explicitly teach that the article exhibits a thermal conductivity of at least 0.2W/mK at 20°C, when the article is saturated with water, since the device of Young in view of Doona teaches a facial mask comprising each and every claimed structural limitation as in claim 1, the combined device of Young in view of Doona will also necessarily function in the same manner as the claimed device. Specifically, Doona teaches that the stimuli-responsive hydrogel polymer can be N-isopropylacrylamide, which is noted by Applicant in para. [0070] as what comprises the thermoresponsive polymer. Therefore, the facial mask will exhibit a thermal conductivity of at least 0.2 W/mK at 200C, as required by the claim.
Regarding claim 6, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Young teaches wherein the carrier material is flexible (see at least para. [0047] teaching that the carrier material is non-woven fluff).
Regarding claim 7, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 6. Additionally, while Young in view of Doona fails to explicitly teach that the carrier material exhibits a Young’s modulus between about 0.1 GPa to about 60 GPa, since the device of Young in view of Doona teaches a facial mask comprising each and every claimed structural limitation as in claim 1, the combined device of Young in view of Doona will also necessarily function in the same manner as the claimed device. Specifically, Doona teaches that the stimuli-responsive hydrogel polymer can be N-isopropylacrylamide, which is noted by Applicant in para. [0070] as what comprises the thermoresponsive polymer. Therefore, the carrier material exhibits a Young’s modulus between about 0.1 GPa to about 60 GPa, as required by the claim.
Regarding claim 8, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Young teaches wherein the carrier material comprises a polymer and/or wherein the carrier material comprises fibers (see at least para. [0042] teaching that a layer of synthetic fiber 272 is used, commonly referred to as fluff).
Regarding claim 9, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 8. Additionally, Young teaches wherein the fibers are polymer fibers (see para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 10, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Doona teaches wherein the carrier material is a woven material (see at least para. [0022]).
Regarding claim 11, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Doona teaches wherein the carrier material is a woven fabric (see at least para. [0022]).
Regarding claim 12, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Doona teaches wherein the thermoresponsive material is embedded within the carrier material (see Fig. 1 and para. [0033]).
Regarding claim 14, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Doona teaches wherein the carrier material comprises Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (see at least para. [0022]).
Regarding claims 15-16, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Doona teaches wherein the thermoresponsive material comprises a thermoresponsive polymer (as applied to claim 15; see at least para. [0023]); wherein the thermoresponsive polymer comprises poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) and/or poly(N-vinylcaprolactam) (as applied to claim 16; see para. [0023]).
Regarding claim 17, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Doona teaches wherein the thermoresponsive material comprises an interpenetrating polymer network (as per Applicant’s disclosure, see para. [0073] of Specification, an interpenetrating polymer network refers to polymers comprising at least two different types of macromolecules; para. [0039] of Doona teaches that at least one of a number of polymers can be used in combination).
Regarding claim 18, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 17. Additionally, Doona teaches wherein the interpenetrating polymer network comprises the thermoresponsive polymer and a hydrogel (see at least para. [0039]).
Regarding claim 19, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. Additionally, Young teaches wherein the facial mask comprises a bactericidal agent (see Table 2 in para. [0068]), and/or wherein the facial mask comprises skin care ingredients (para. [0045-0046] teach a number of active topical compounds for skin treatment, 312, 314, 316 within membrane 310).
Regarding claim 20, Young teaches a method for producing a facial mask (see mask 102, 300 in Figs. 1-3, 6; see also Abstract and para. [0022-0023]) comprising a carrier material (see synthetic non-woven fluff material layer 304 in para. [0047] and Fig. 6) and an active material (see active/reactive minerals 306 in Fig. 6 and para. [0047-0048]).
However, Young fails to explicitly teach embedding a material configured to release water above a threshold temperature and absorb water below a threshold temperature into a carrier material exhibiting a thermal conductivity of at least 0.1W/mK, as required by the claim.
Doona teaches an analogous method for producing an article comprising embedding a material configured to release water above a threshold temperature and absorb water below a threshold temperature into a carrier material (see at least para. [0023, 0031, 0033, and 0039]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Young to incorporate the teachings of Doona by embedding a material configured to release water above a threshold temperature and absorb water below a threshold temperature into a carrier material at least in order to regulate an individual’s body temperature as it rises through physical activities, as taught by Doona (see para. [0040]).
However, while Young in view of Doona fails to explicitly teach that the carrier material exhibits a thermal conductivity of at least 0.1W/mK at 20°C, when the article is saturated with water, since the method of Young in view of Doona teaches a facial mask comprising each and every claimed steps as in claim 1, the combined method of Young in view of Doona will also necessarily function in the same manner as the claimed device. Specifically, Doona teaches that the stimuli-responsive hydrogel polymer can be N-isopropylacrylamide, which is noted by Applicant in para. [0070] as what comprises the thermoresponsive polymer. Therefore, the carrier material will exhibit a thermal conductivity of at least 0.1 W/mK at 200C, as required by the claim.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2010/0191314 A1) in view of Doona (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2022/0307194 A1), as applied above to claim 1, and further in view of Bluhm (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2021/0024697 A1).
Regarding claims 4-5, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 1. However, neither Young nor Doona explicitly teach wherein the facial mask comprises between about 10 wt.-% to about 80 wt.-% of the carrier material or of the thermoresponsive material, relative to the total weight of the facial mask excluding water, as required by the claim.
Bluhm teaches an analogous article (see Abstract and para. [0001]) comprising a textile care product which contains at least one copolymer consisting of N-isopropylacrylamide units (see para. [0014]). Bluhm further teaches that the total mass of the copolymer consisting of N-isopropylacrylamide units is up 10% by mass of the textile care product (see para. [0018]). This corresponds with the 10 wt. -% of the thermoresponsive material as in claim 5 and the 10-80 wt. -% of the carrier material of claim 4.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Young in view of Doona to incorporate the teachings of Bluhm by making the facial mask comprise between about 10 wt.-% to about 80 wt.-% of the carrier material or of the thermoresponsive material, relative to the total weight of the facial mask excluding water at least since it has been held that where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In reWertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In reWoodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); see also MPEP 2144. Here, since Bluhm teaches that the thermoresponsive material is up to 10% by mass, the claimed ranges are rendered obvious.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2010/0191314 A1) in view of Doona (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2022/0307194 A1), as applied above to claim 8, and further in view of Akbari (2020/0188180 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Young in view of Doona teaches the invention as described above in claim 8. However, neither Young nor Doona explicitly teach wherein the fibers have a diameter between about 100 µm to about 2000 µm, as required by the claim.
Akbari teaches an analogous wound covering (see Abstract) comprising fibers that can have a diameter of 100μm -1000μm (see para. [0104]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Young in view of Doona to incorporate the teachings of Akbari by making the fibers have a diameter between about 100 µm to about 2000 µm at least since it has been held that where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In reWertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In reWoodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); see also MPEP 2144.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Laghi (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2019/0336410 A1) - Thermally Assisted Therapeutic Aids For Cosmetics And Wound Treatment.
Sakikawa (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2022/0288368 A1) – Application Member and Impregnation Material.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIHAD DAKKAK whose telephone number is (571)272-0567. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9AM - 5PM 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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/JIHAD DAKKAK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/ANDREW J MENSH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781