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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The phrase “second strip 222” should be changed to –third strip 222—to label 222 with the correct component (paragraph 85, Lines 3-4).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 11, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The phrase “the user’s” should be changed to –a user’s—since this is the first time this is mentioned (Claim 1, Line 19).
The comma after “(60)” should be removed to correct the grammatical error (Claim 11, Line 3).
The comma after “(61)” should be removed to correct the grammatical error (Claim 11, Line 5).
The phrase “the process moreover comprising” should be changed to—further comprising—for consistency and reduce redundancy (Claim 15, Line 2).
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 5, 6, 14, and 16 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 5 states “preferably three superposed layers” (Lines 4-5). This statement is indefinite because it is unclear if three superposed layers are required. It appears the applicant was trying to say it’s a mere preference. However, the use of “preferably” creates confusion regarding whether or not the three superposed layers are positively claimed. Therefore, the number of superposed layers required cannot be determined. For examination purposes, the claim limitation will be interpreted as it’s a mere preference and not positively claimed.
Claim 6 states “the connecting zones” (Lines 3-4). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears the applicant was trying to say “connecting zones”. However, since this is the first time this is mentioned, it is unclear what it is referring back to. Therefore, the identity of the term cannot be determined. For examination purposes, the claim limitation will be interpreted as “connecting zones”. Similar rejections are applied to Claim 14 (Line 3).
Claim 16 states “a filtering material” (Line 11). This statement is indefinite because it is unclear if the filtering material is the same as the filtering material of the central part mentioned earlier. It appears the applicant was trying to say they’re the same. However, it is possible that different filtering materials are involved. Therefore, the number of filtering materials involved cannot be determined. For examination purposes, the claim limitation will be interpreted as they’re the same.
Claim 16 states “the second zones” (Line 12). This statement is indefinite because it is unclear how many second zones are there. It appears the applicant was trying to say there are two second zones involved. However, the use of “second zones” creates confusion since the “second zone” was previously recited as being a singular zone, not two distinct zones. Therefore, the number of second zones involved cannot be determined. For examination purposes, the claim limitation will be interpreted as the second zone is a singular zone but is split in half to cover both left and right sides of the mask.
Claim 6 is rejected for being dependent on rejected Claim 5.
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishikawa et al. (English Machine Translation of JP 2013236798 A provided by PE2E) in view of Kono et al. (English Machine Translation of JP 2001245998 A provided by PE2E).
Regarding Claim 16, Ishikawa discloses a facemask (apparatus of Fig 1) comprising: a first lateral part (41, Fig 1) having a first orifice (51, Fig 1) intended to receive a user's first ear (41 hooked on wearer’s right ear, Page 3, third paragraph), a second lateral part (42, Fig 1) having a second orifice (52, Fig 1) intended to receive the user's second ear (42 hooked on wearer’s left ear, Page 3, third paragraph), and a central part (20, Fig 1) interposed between the first lateral part and the second lateral part (20 is in between 41 and 42, Fig 1), the central part being intended to cover the user's nose and mouth (20 is a member that covers the mouth and nose of the wearer, Page 2, middle paragraph), the central part having a median line (30, Fig 1; central joint line, Page 2, middle paragraph), the central part being manufactured from filtering material (20 is formed by inner layer sheet and a sheet constituted by first surface layer sheet and a second surface layer sheet, first and second surface layer sheets manufactured by nonwoven fabric sheet, containing a polypropylene fiber, Page 2, bottom paragraph and Page 3, top paragraph; discomfort such as breathlessness can be eliminated, Page 2, Background Art; these masks are well-known to be made of filtering material and must filter air), wherein the first lateral part and the second lateral part are each made up of a first zone (portions that make up 41 or 42, Fig 1) provided from a strip composed of an elastic material (41 and 42 are formed of a sheet having higher elasticity than sheet forming main body, a nonwoven fabric sheet formed by mixing extensible fibers and stretchable fibers is used, formed by mixing polypropylene fibers having extensibility and urethane fibers having elasticity is used, Page 3, middle paragraph).
Ishikawa fails to disclose a second zone provided from a strip composed of a filtering material, wherein the first zone is located between the central part and the second zone, the second zones respectively defining one lateral end of the facemask, wherein the first orifice and the second orifice are each cut out of the first zone and the second zone and located straddling the first zone and the second zone.
However, Kono, of the same field of endeavor, teaches a mask (Abstract) including a second zone (portion of 17 on 3 furthest away from 2, Figs 1-2) provided from a strip composed of a filtering material (17 made of a thermoplastic synthetic resin such as polypropylene, Page 3, bottom paragraph), wherein the first zone (portion of 16 on 3 closest to 2, Figs 1-2; 16 is made of a nonwoven fabric made of thermoplastic synthetic resin elastomer or urethane, Page 3, bottom paragraph) is located between the central part and the second zone (portion of 16 on 3 closest to 2 would be in between 2 and the portion of 17 on 3 furthest away from 2, Figs 1-2; see annotated Fig 2 below showing first zone, a portion of 16, between covering portion 2 and second zone, a portion of 17), the second zones respectively defining one lateral end of the facemask (17 defines the ends of 3, Figs 1-2; see annotated Fig 2 below showing 17 at farthest end of 3), wherein the first orifice and the second orifice are each cut out of the first zone and the second zone and located straddling the first zone and the second zone (orifices 4 are shown on both sides of 3 which would cut through the layers 16 and 17, Figs 1-2) to reduce or eliminate pain around the base of the ears when the mask is worn (Page 2, top paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ear loops or ear hooks to have an additional filter polypropylene layer, as taught by Kono, to reduce or eliminate pain around the base of the ears when the mask is worn (Kono: Page 2, top paragraph). This addition would provide further comfort onto the existing mask ear loops so that less pain is applied on the user’s ears. It is noted that Applicant has not specified that the zones must be on the same layer, the zones do not have other layers of material above or below them, or the ear loops are made from a single layer throughout.
PNG
media_image1.png
296
667
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 contain allowable subject matter.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 discusses a facemask manufacturing process that includes six distinct strips of material being interposed or superposed on each other to form a facemask. The six strips are depicted in Fig 3.
Prior art similar to the claimed invention are explained below.
Ishikawa et al. (English Machine Translation of JP 2013236798 A provided by PE2E) discusses a technique for manufacturing a mask. Regarding Claim 1, though Ishikawa’s manufacturing process is similar to the claimed invention, Ishikawa lacks the six distinct strips of material involved in the claimed invention. Specifically, Ishikawa only utilizes three strips across each other to form the masks. This is a common technique for forming this particular kind of masks that have vertical welds and fabric ear loops in which the outer filtering material strips have a middle elastic material strip welded onto them (Ishikawa: Fig 7). However, the claimed invention requires two elastic material strips, each one being in between two filtering material strips. As depicted in the instant drawings, the manufacturing of the masks with this arrangement results in masks that have ear loops with two different materials in two distinct areas of the ear loops (Fig 3). In other words, the resulting ear loops are not entirely made of just the elastic material strips. The instant invention details this kind of manufacturing process as a way to reduce material waste. This is drastically different from Ishikawa which only has ear loops made of a single elastic material strip without two distinct zones or areas. It would be non-obvious to modify the ear loops to be formed by two different material strips as there would be no motivation to do so and it would require a drastic rearrangement of manufacturing processes and components. Therefore, Ishikawa does not disclose Claim 1.
Claims 2-15 contain allowable subject matter due to their dependencies on Claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for art cited of interest including:
US-20220125133-A1 discusses the manufacturing of a mask with vertical weld and fabric ear loops and a window.
US-20220047012-A1 the manufacturing of a mask with vertical weld and fabric ear loops with masks alternating with each other on the strips.
US-20080035153-A1 discusses the manufacturing of a mask with vertical weld and fabric ear loops in a roll.
English Machine Translation of CN-111387586-A provided by PE2E discusses the manufacturing of a mask with vertical weld and fabric ear loops along three strips.
English Machine Translation of CN-112075687-A provided by PE2E discusses the manufacturing of a mask with vertical weld and fabric ear loops along three strips.
English Machine Translation of JP-2006345993-A provided by PE2E discusses the manufacturing of a mask with vertical weld and fabric ear loops along three strips.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN THAI-BINH KHONG whose telephone number is (571)272-1857. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 9:00 am-6:00 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, Kendra Carter can be reached at (571) 272-9034. 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.
/BRIAN T KHONG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/PAIGE KATHLEEN BUGG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights