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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendments of claims submitted on 0630/2026 and 08/04/2026 have been considered and entered. Claims 24, 29, 39 and 43 have been amended and claims 1-23, 25 and 33 have been canceled. Claims 24, 26-32 and 34-46 are now pending in the present application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 24, 26-28 and 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Whalen et al. (US 6,560,789 B2).
Regarding claim 24, Whalen et al. discloses a shock absorbing device (note the system shown in figs. 1-3) comprising:
a first collapsible chamber (12) having a first reservoir space, a first wall extending in a lateral direction (note the side walls the collapsible member 12 shown in fig. 1) and configured to receive an impact force, and a first ejection orifice (20) configured to eject a first fluid from the first reservoir space (12), wherein the first reservoir space is enclosed by an impermeable layer (note the layers 40, 42, 52 in fig. 2) configured to contain the first fluid within the reservoir space (12).
a non-distensible material (note the layers 40, 42, 52) surrounding the first reservoir space that restricts expansion of the first collapsible chamber during loading; and
a distensible container (14) configured to receive the first fluid from the first ejection orifice (note the connection 16, 20 and 22 between the reservoirs 12 and 14 as shown in fig. 1) and act as a reservoir to expand and contain the first fluid during application of the impact force and return the first fluid back to recharge the first reservoir space when the impact force is removed (note col. 4, lines 52-57), wherein the first ejection orifice (16, 10, 22) is positioned such that the first fluid flows therethrough in the lateral direction.
Re-claim 26, Whalen et al. discloses a second collapsible chamber having a second reservoir space and a second wall configured to receive at least a portion of the impact force (note the multiple collapsible chambers connected together, each configured to receive a portion of the impact force as shown in figs. 2-3).
Re-claim 27, Whalen et al. discloses an orifice (16, 22) in communication with the first ejection orifice (20) and the second reservoir space (14).
Re-claim 28, Whalen et al. discloses an interfacing collapsible chamber (note the chambers of the orifices 16, 20, 22) between the first collapsible chamber (12) and the second collapsible chamber (14).
Re-claim 30, Whalen et al. discloses the first orifice further includes a sacrificial diaphragm that is configured to open at a predetermined pressure (note the line 16 connecting the orifices 20 and 22 can be fitted with flow control valves or restrictions to regulate the rate of change of volume of the associated impact absorbing reservoirs; also note col. 4, lines 35-46).
Re-claim 31, Whalen et al. discloses the first collapsible chamber (12) is enclosed within a surrounding enclosure (note figs. 2-3).
Re-claim 32, Whalen et al. discloses a second ejection orifice (22) in communication with the second reservoir space (14) and configured to eject a second fluid from the second reservoir space in reaction to said received portion of the impact force.
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.
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.
Claims 24, 26-29 and 31-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muthu (WO 2021080838 A1) in view of Whalen et al. (US 6,560,789 B2).
Regarding claim 24, Muthu discloses a shock absorbing device comprising: a first collapsible chamber (38 and 96 in fig. 1B) having a first reservoir space (38), a first wall (84) extending in a lateral direction and configured to receive an impact force, and a first ejection orifice (80, 89) configured to eject a first fluid from the first reservoir space (38), wherein the first reservoir space is enclosed by an impermeable layer (50; note the side wall being impermeable layer as shown in figs. 2A-2B) configured to contain the first fluid within the reservoir space.
a non-distensible material surrounding the first reservoir space that restricts expansion of the first collapsible chamber during loading; and
a distensible container configured to receive the first fluid from the first ejection orifice and act as a reservoir to expand and contain the first fluid during application of the impact force.
Muthu discloses all claimed limitations as set forth above but fails to disclose return of the first fluid back to recharge the first reservoir space when the impact force is removed, wherein the first ejection orifice is positioned such that the first fluid flows therethrough in the lateral direction as recited in the claim. However, Whalen et al. discloses a similar damping assembly comprising a plurality of reservoirs, wherein the fluid is conjured to travel back and forth between the reservoirs to recharge and including at least an orifice positioned in a lateral direction (note col. 4, lines 52-57). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at time before the effective filing date of the present application was made to modify the device of Muthu with the teaching of Whalen et al. will make the damping operation more efficient.
Re-claim 26, Muthu discloses a second collapsible chamber having a second reservoir space and a second wall configured to receive at least a portion of the impact force (note the multiple collapsible chambers connected together, each configured to receive a portion of the impact force as shown in fig. 5B).
Re-claim 27, Muthu discloses an orifice (116) in communication with the first ejection orifice and the second reservoir space.
Re-claim 28, Muthu discloses an interfacing collapsible chamber (22 in figs. 2A-2B) between the first collapsible chamber and the second collapsible chamber.
Re-claim 29, Muthu discloses the second collapsible chamber is substantially non-distensible (note each collapsible chamber comprising distensible portions or horizontal walls and non-distensible or side walls as shown in figs. 2A-2B, wherein a plurality of chambers are connected together, each configured to receive a portion of the impact force as shown in fig. 5B).
Re-claim 31, Muthu discloses the first collapsible chamber (38 and 96 in fig. 1B) is enclosed within a surrounding enclosure (note first cell and second cell bodies may be configured to be positioned within the cavity of the helmet or protective article between the external shell and the head or body part of a user as stated in [0006]).
Re-claim 32, Muthu discloses a second ejection orifice in communication with the second reservoir space and configured to eject a second fluid from the second reservoir space in reaction to said received portion of the impact force (note the multiple collapsible chambers connected each other via a plurality of fluid lines or orifices as shown in fig. 5B; also note the passage 116 of one channel 108 may be connected with at least one other passage 116 of the one or more channels to allow material (e.g., gas or liquid) to move between a group (e.g., three or more) of elements of the impact attenuating elements 14a as stated in [0069]).
Re-claim 33, Muthu discloses a distensible container (22 in figs. 2A-2B) attached to the first ejection orifice (80, 89) and configured to act as a reservoir to expand and contain the first fluid during application of the impact force and return the first fluid back to recharge the first reservoir space when the impact force is removed.
Re-claim 34, Muthu discloses the first fluid is incompressible (note water in [0089]).
Re-claim 35, Muthu discloses the second collapsible chamber comprises a plurality of ejection orifices (note the chamber 38 and the chamber 64 may be in connected through a plurality of orifices 80 in [0053]).
Re-claim 36, Muthu discloses the first collapsible chamber comprises at least one other orifice (note the chamber of 92b comprising at least two orifices 150 and 80b as shown in fig. 8B).
Re-claim 37, Muthu discloses the first collapsible chamber and the second collapsible chamber have an orientation such that the portion of the impact force received by the second wall of the second collapsible chamber is substantially parallel to a direction of the impact force received by the first wall of the first collapsible chamber (note the multiple collapsible chambers connected together, each configured to receive a portion of the impact force as shown in fig. 5B).
Re-claim 38, Muthu discloses an interfacing chamber (note the middle chamber shown in fig. 5B) between the first collapsible chamber (note the chamber on the right shown in fig. 5B) and the second collapsible chamber (note the chamber on the left shown in fig. 5B), the interfacing chamber including an interfacing reservoir space (note the space of the reservoir chamber 50a), a first interfacing wall (note the top portion of the middle chamber shown in fig. 5B) configured to receive the portion of the impact force (note the chambers are connected to each other and thus each chamber configured to receive a portion of an impact force), and a third ejection orifice (note the orifice or passage between the top chamber and the bottom chamber of the middle chamber shown in fig. 5B) configured to eject a third fluid from the interfacing reservoir space in reaction to the portion of the impact force (note each chamber member 14a comprising a passage 80a and connected to each other via line 108, 116 and 120).
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muthu (WO 2021080838 A1) in view of Whalen et al. (US 6,560,789 B2), further in view of Lakie (US 5,025,575).
Regarding claim 30, Muthu discloses a valve 150 in another embodiment 8A-8B that is movable between an open state and a closed state but fails to disclose the valve that is configured to open at a predetermined pressure as recited in the claim. However, Lakie disclose a shock absorbing device comprising: a plurality of chambers and a plurality of valves including a pressure relief valve 58, wherein the valve can be controlled to provide desired pressure in the chambers (note col. 5, line 20 to col. Line 34). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at time before the filing date of the present application was made to modify the device of Muthu with an adjustable pressure valve as taught by Lakie will allow to regulate the pressure in the chambers to achieve effective absorption of the impact force.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 39-46 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 24, 26-32 and 34-46 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on some reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The examiner notes that Muthu in view of Whalen et al. discloses all claimed limitations as set forth above and thus the rejection are proper and valid.
Conclusion
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 MAHBUBUR RASHID whose telephone number is (571)272-7218. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am to 10pm EST.
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 SICONOLFI can be reached at 5712727124. 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.
/MAHBUBUR RASHID/Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/Robert A. Siconolfi/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3616
