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. Preliminary Amendment This office action is responsive to the preliminary amendment filed on 9/19/23 . As directed by the amendment: claims 1-19 have been amended, no claims have been canceled, and no new claims have been added. Thus, claims 1-19 are presently pending in the application. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 11, paragraph 43, 4 th to last line recites “146A in FIG. 1” suggested to be changed to --146A in FIG. 2-- since 146A is only found in figure 2. Appropriate correction is required. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “ the formable seal comprising a foam material shaped to include a tapered upper edge that tapers downwardly in a direction extending from the front face toward the rear face ” from claim 1, “ the formable seal member is shaped with a taper that tapers downwardly ” in claim 8 must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims. Figure 2 shows an upward taper since the top portion of the formable seal 146 is narrower than the bottom portion when the top portion is sewn to the main body. No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1, 4 and 11 recite “the formable seal” suggested to be changed to --the formable seal member-- for consistency. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claims 1 - 3 and 8-9 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 formable seal comprising a foam material shaped to include a tapered upper edge that tapers downwardly in a direction extending from the front face toward the rear face ,” and claim 8 recites “ wherein the formable seal member is shaped with a taper that tapers downwardly such that an upper portion of the formable seal member is narrower than a lower portion of the formable seal member ,” however based on applicant’s application and figures, it appears applicant intended to recite that the taper is upward from the rear face toward the front face since applicant discloses a narrow top portion of the formable seal due to the top portion being sewn to the main body and therefore compressed. Further, claim 8 also states that the upper portion of the formable seal member is narrower than the lower portion of the formable seal member, which describes an upward taper. As best understood and for examination purposes, applicant intended to recite that the taper is upwards. Claim 3 recites “approximately” language, however it is unclear what the scope of this language includes. Any remaining claims are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base 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 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. 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. Claim s 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palomo et al. (2012/0272973) and Matula , JR. et al. (2013/0014760) and Prevot (2020/0375281) . Regarding claim 1, in fig. 1 and 6A-7 Palomo discloses a method of producing an anti-fogging face mask, the method comprising: providing a main body 70 comprising a panel sized to cover a mouth and nostrils of a wearer (Fig. 7), the main body having a front side facing in a forward direction extending away from the wearer in use (side furthest from user in use, Fig. 7), the main body further defining a rear side facing in a rearward direction extending toward the wearer in use (side closest to user in use, Fig. 7); providing a formable seal member (40 [0057]) disposed along an upper portion of the main body (Figures 1 and 7), the formable seal comprising a front face facing the main body (see Fig. 1 and 7), the formable seal further comprising a rear face facing away from the main body (see Fig. 1 and 7), the formable seal comprising a foam material [0057] shaped to include a tapered upper edge that tapers downwardly in a direction extending from the front face toward the rear face (due to the stitching at 44, a narrower section is formed at the top of the seal, [0058-0060]); but is silent regarding a first baffle extending upwardly and rearwardly from the rear face of the formable seal so as to define an eyewear-receiving channel between the first baffle and the tapered upper edge of the formable seal; a second baffle extending upwardly from the rear face of the formable seal from a position below the first baffle; and a third baffle extending downwardly from the rear face of the formable seal from a position below the first baffle. However, in fig. 1 Matula teaches a first baffle (outer baffle 40) extending upwardly (when worn, due to the flexibility of 40, 40 is able to extend upwardly [0007][0034-0035]) and rearwardly from the rear face of the formable seal so as to define an eyewear-receiving channel between the first baffle and the upper edge of the formable seal (the ribs 40 extend rearwardly from seal 32 and define between an eyewear-receiving channel between the first baffle and the upper edge of the formable seal); a second baffle (second baffle 40 inwards of the outermost baffle 40) extending upwardly (when worn, due to the flexibility of 40, 40 is able to extend upwardly [0007][0034-0035]) from the rear face of the formable seal from a position below the first baffle (at the nose region); and a third baffle (third baffle 40 inwards of the second baffle 40) extending downwardly (when worn, due to the flexibility of 40, 40 is able to extend downwardly [0007][0034-0035]) from the rear face of the formable seal from a position below the first baffle (at the nose region). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify Palomo’s seal with the addition of three baffles, as taught by Matula , for the purpose of providing an enhanced seal. The modified Palomo is silent regarding that the baffles are pleats. However, Prevot teaches three sealing pleats (118, see fig. 1C [0060]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the modified Palomo’s baffles with pleats, as taught by Prevot , for the purpose of providing an alternate sealing structure having the predictable results of sealing a mask. The modified Palomo discloses that a lower channel is defined beneath the third pleat (Fig. 1C Prevot ), a middle channel is defined between the third pleat and the second pleat (Fig. 1C Prevot ), and an upper channel is defined between the second pleat and the first pleat (Fig. 1C Prevot ), wherein the first pleat, the second pleat, the third pleat, the first channel, the second channel, and the third channel are configured for blocking or re-directing travel of exhaled vapor away from eyewear in the eyewear-receiving channel so as to mitigate against fogging of the eyewear in use (Fig. 1C Prevot ). Regarding claim 2, the modified Palomo discloses that the first, second and third pleats are overlaying the formable seal member (Fig. 1 Matula , Fig. 1C Prevot ) and attached to the main body (Fig. 1 Matula , Fig. 1C Prevot ), the main body comprises an outerwardly -facing layer of spunbond polypropylene, a middle meltblown layer of polypropylene, and an inwardly-facing layer of spunbond polypropylene [0084], but is silent regarding that the first pleat, the second pleat, and the third pleat are formed in a sheet of polypropylene material. However, Palomo teaches filtering sheet material of polypropylene [0084]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the modified Palomo’s pleating sheet material with polypropylene sheet material, as taught by Palomo , for the purpose of providing an alternate filtering sheet material having the predictable results of filtering out particles. Regarding claim 3, the modified Palomo the is silent regarding that the first pleat, the second pleat, and the third pleat are spaced apart from one another at approximately 0.19 inches (4.76 mm) apart, and wherein the first pleat, the second pleat, and the third pleat each extend approximately 0.19 inches (4.75 mm) in length. However, Matula teaches baffles that are spaced 0.15 mm apart [0040], although also states that the magnitude of the different spacings in any particular application will be dictated by the circumstances and requirements of the application [0039] and that the baffles extend 3 mm in length [0039]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the modified Palomo’s spacing and length with spacing and lengths of approximately 0.19 inches (4.76 mm) and approximately 0.19 inches (4.75 mm), respectively , since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art , and it appears that such spacings and lengths would perform equally as well at providing a seal . In re Boesch , 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Claim s 4, 7-11, 13-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palomo et al. (2012/0272973) and Matula , JR. et al. (2013/0014760) . Regarding claim 4, in fig. 1 and 6A-7 Palomo discloses a method of producing an anti-fogging face mask, the method comprising: providing a main body 70 comprising a panel sized to cover a mouth and nostrils in a donned position of the face mask (Fig. 7); providing a formable seal (40 [0057]) disposed along an upper portion of the main body (Figures 1 and 7) and arranged for obstructing vapor flow from the mouth or nostrils to eyewear when the eyewear is positioned over the face mask in the donned position (Fig. 1 and 7); but is silent regarding providing a first baffle extending rearwardly and upwardly away from the formable seal; a second baffle positioned below the first baffle and extending rearwardly and upwardly away from the formable seal; and a third baffle positioned below the second baffle and extending rearwardly and downwardly away from the formable seal. However, in fig. 1 Matula teaches a first baffle (outer baffle 40) extending rearwardly and upwardly (when worn, due to the flexibility of 40, 40 is able to extend upwardly [0007][0034-0035]) away from the formable seal (the ribs 40 extend rearwardly from seal 32 and define between an eyewear-receiving channel between the first baffle and the upper edge of the formable seal); a second baffle (second baffle 40 inwards of the outermost baffle 40) positioned below the first baffle (at the nose region) and extending rearwardly and upwardly away from the formable seal (when worn, due to the flexibility of 40, 40 is able to extend upwardly [0007][0034-0035]); and a third baffle (third baffle 40 inwards of the second baffle 40) positioned below the second baffle (at the nose region) and extending rearwardly and downwardly away from the formable seal (when worn, due to the flexibility of 40, 40 is able to extend downwardly [0007][0034-0035]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify Palomo’s seal with the addition of three baffles, as taught by Matula , for the purpose of providing an enhanced seal. Regarding claim 7, the modified Palomo discloses that the formable seal member comprises a foam material ([005 8 ] Palomo ). Regarding claim 8, the modified Palomo discloses that the formable seal member is shaped with a taper that tapers downwardly such that an upper portion of the formable seal member is narrower than a lower portion of the formable seal member (due to the stitching at 44, a narrower section is formed at the top of the seal, [0058-0060] Palomo ). Regarding claim 9, the modified Palomo discloses stitching extending through the upper portion of the formable seal member (at 44 [0058-0060] Palomo ), the stitching connecting the formable seal member with the main body ([0058-0060] Palomo ), the stitching further compressing the upper portion of the formable seal member to impart at least part of a tapered shape of the formable seal member ([0058-0060] Palomo ). Regarding claim 10, the modified Palomo discloses straps (20 Palomo ) coupled with the main body, the straps comprising tying strands (Fig. 1 and 7, Palomo ) or ear loops. Regarding claim 11, the modified Palomo discloses a nose bridge clamp (100 Palomo , see Fig. 3) operable to be pressed into a shape for conforming the formable seal toward a shape of a face of a wearer in the donned position ([0076] Palomo ). Regarding claim 13, the modified Palomo discloses that the face mask is configured to be disposable or re-usable (Fig. 1 Palomo ). Regarding claim 14, in fig. 1 and 6A-7 Palomo discloses an anti-fogging assembly for a face mask, the assembly comprising: a base 42 comprising a formable seal member [0057]; and an attachment interface (portion of 40 folded over, designated as 44, and in contact with the mask body) configured for facilitating attachment of the base with a main body of a face mask in a position for blocking upward vapor travel in a donned state [0058-0060], but is silent regarding a first baffle extending rearwardly from the base; a second baffle positioned below the first baffle and extending rearwardly from the base; a third baffle positioned below the second baffle and extending rearwardly from the base. However, in fig. 1 Matula teaches a first baffle (outer baffle 40) extending rearwardly from the base (the ribs 40 extend rearwardly from seal 32); a second baffle (second baffle 40 inwards of the outermost baffle 40) positioned below the first baffle (at the nose region) and extending rearwardly from the base (the ribs 40 extend rearwardly from seal 32); and a third baffle (third baffle 40 inwards of the second baffle 40) positioned below the second baffle (at the nose region) and extending rearwardly from the base (the ribs 40 extend rearwardly from seal 32). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify Palomo’s seal with the addition of three baffles, as taught by Matula , for the purpose of providing an enhanced seal. Regarding claim 15, the modified Palomo discloses that the attachment interface (44 Palomo ) comprises a surface configured for abutting the main body of the face mask (Fig. 6a-7, Palomo ) for attachment via an adhesive, stitching ([0059] Palomo ), or bonding. Regarding claim 16, the modified Palomo discloses that at least one of the first baffle, the second baffle, or the third baffle extends at a non-perpendicular orientation from the base (during use the ribs 40 bend [ 0007][ 0034-0035] Matula ). Regarding claim 17, the modified Palomo discloses that the first baffle, the second baffle, and the third baffle are each elongate (Fig. 1 and 4, Matula ). Regarding claim 19 , the modified Palomo discloses the main body (70, Palomo ) of the face mask. Claim s 5-6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palomo and Matula , as applied to claims 4 and 14 above, respectively, in further view of Prevot (2020/0375281) . Regarding claim 5, the modified Palomo is silent regarding that the first baffle, the second baffle, and the third baffle are formed as folds or pleats in a sheet of material attached with the main body. However, Prevot teaches three sealing pleats (118, see fig. 1C [0060]) in a sheet of material attached to a main body of a mask via a seal (Fig. 1C). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the modified Palomo’s baffles with pleats, as taught by Prevot , for the purpose of providing an alternate sealing structure having the predictable results of sealing a mask. Regarding claim 6, the modified Palomo discloses that the main body comprises multiple polypropylene layers that include a meltblown layer sandwiched between spunbond layers ([0084] Palomo ), but is silent regarding that the first pleat, the second pleat, and the third pleat are formed in a sheet of polypropylene material. However, Palomo teaches filtering sheet material of polypropylene [0084]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the modified Palomo’s pleating sheet material with polypropylene sheet material, as taught by Palomo , for the purpose of providing an alternate filtering sheet material having the predictable results of filtering out particles. Regarding claim 18, the modified Palomo is silent regarding that at least one of the first baffle, the second baffle, or the third baffle is formed as a pleat of a sheet of material. However, Prevot teaches three sealing pleats (118, see fig. 1C [0060]) in a sheet of material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to modify the modified Palomo’s baffles with pleats, as taught by Prevot , for the purpose of providing an alternate sealing structure having the predictable results of sealing a mask. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palomo and Matula , as applied to claim 11 above, in further view of Patrick (2003/0217751) . Regarding claim 12, the modified Palomo discloses that the nose bridge clamp comprises metal ([0077] Palomo ), but is silent regarding that the nose bridge clamp comprises metal of at least 20 gauge and no greater than 25 gauge. However, Patrick teaches a nose bridge clamp of 18 gauge copper wire (see claim 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the modified Palomo’s metal nose bridge clamp with a nose bridge clamp with metal of at least 20 gauge and no greater than 25 gauge, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art , and it appears that a nose bridge clamp of metal of at least 20 gauge and no greater than 25 gauge would perform equally as well at forming a seal for a face mask . In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim (2022/0023681) to a mask with a seal that is stitched on, Steed, Jr. et al. (2019/0388636) to a mask with baffles, Hughes (2022/0117331) to a mask with pleated baffles (Fig. 8), Swenson et al. ( 1 0,507,298) and Paseman et al. (11,134,730) to masks with baffles . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT RACHEL T SIPPEL whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-1481 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 9:00-5:00 PM . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Timothy Stanis can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-5139 . 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. /RACHEL T SIPPEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785