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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a-d) with reference to Application Number: AU2021902533 filed on 08/13/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) have been reviewed by the examiner and are found to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98, and MPEP § 609.
Drawings
The drawing(s) have been reviewed by the examiner and are found to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.81 to 1.85. However, examiner notes that Figs. 5 – 7 are improved when illustrated in greyscale as found in Figs. 5 – 7 in the foreign priority application. Greyscale illustration is permitted – and requested – given the improvement in illustration from Figs. 5 - 7.
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 1, 21, and dependents therein 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.
The term “substantially” in claims 1 and 21 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not adequately 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. In the instant case, the standard for determining at what point the side wall portions of the mask frame would “substantially retain acoustic energy” travelling through the frame is not described in the specification or known to one of ordinary skill in the art. While the applicant defines the term “substantially” to mean “sufficiently, mostly, or near enough”, such definition provides no further clarity in understanding the limitation at issue.
The term “substantially” in claim 7 is likewise rejected as indefinite. It is unclear at what point coverage of the surface area qualifies as “substantial”. Furthermore, the indicated side wall is described as a “portion”, which varies based on how exactly the portion is considered.
Applicant may overcome the above rejections by deletion of the word “substantial” or “substantially”.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 8 recites the broad recitation 1 to 5 mm, and the claim also recites 3.5 mm, which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 11 is 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. With respect to the increased sound pressure level output, it is unclear what the claimed face mask guide is being compared to. Applicant describes the comparison mask solely in the negative: “a mask without any contour portions”. Such mask may cover a litany of other embodiments, such as a flat frame with inside baffles, or frames incorporating sound absorbing material.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 5, 7, 9, 11, 16, 18, and 20 – 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thompson (US 20180311516).
1. Thompson discloses a face mask (Fig. 4), comprising: a frame (body 112) defining a respiratory chamber, for receiving nose and mouth portions of a user (see general teaching [0030], body 12 in Fig. 2), between a proximal end of the frame for interfacing with a face portion of the user (end connecting with seal 24, see general teaching in [0031], including connection with removable seal) and a distal end of the frame configured for allowing gas exchange with the environment (end connected with openings 28, see general teaching in [0032], including connection with replaceable filter cartridges); a vocal guide defined by a sectional portion of the frame (section portion of frame 112 defines the vocal guide, similar to applicant’s frame), the guide comprising an arched nose ridge portion (see attachment below, “NP”), side wall portions extending from the nose ridge portion (see attachment below, ”SP”) and a base connecting the side wall portions (see attachment below, “B”), wherein the guide is configured with a contoured portion located at one or more regions of each of the side wall portions (see attachment below, portions indicated by “CP”) so as to substantially retain acoustic energy in select frequencies of sound waves travelling through the frame for improving speech intelligibility of the mask during use (see [0060, 0063, 0064], body 112 is designed to facilitate the transmission of sound waves generated by the user travelling through the body 112 for improving speech intelligibility; examiner notes that a filtering/exclusion of frequencies through the frame is not claimed or supported, and body mask 112 retains frequencies select to the user to improve speech intelligibility).
PNG
media_image1.png
692
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
2. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, wherein the contoured portion is an inwardly-projecting contour (see attachment above, topmost inwardly projecting contour “CP”).
3. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, wherein the contoured portion is an outwardly-projecting contour (see attachment above, bottommost outwardly projecting contour “CP”).
4. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, wherein the contoured portion is located at a region of the nose ridge portion (see contouring extending into region “NP” in the attachment above, inclusive of the arched ridge similar to applicant’s invention; note further contouring in Fig. 2, specifically distal end bulge overlapped by arrow “18” in the figure).
5. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 4, wherein the contoured portion is located at a region of the nose ridge portion towards the distal end of the frame (note further contouring in Fig. 2, specifically distal end bulge overlapped by arrow “18” in the figure).
7. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, wherein the contoured portion covers a substantial surface area of the respective side wall portions (see attachment above).
9. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, wherein the magnitude of a deviation of a contour of the contoured portion from a frame surface increases progressively towards a centre region of the contour (see attachment 1 above, each of the contours CP deviate progressively as moving toward the centre of each of the contours CP, where the centre is best indicated by the arrows “CP”, but the contour portion CP generally includes the area surrounding it).
11. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, wherein the guide is configured to increase the sound pressure level output of the mask by about 1 dB to about 6 dB higher than a mask without any contour portions located at one or more regions of each of the side wall portions (a mask without any contour portions does not affirmatively claim the comparison mask, so that design without contour portions may therefore be chosen; see rejection under 112(b) above; the comparison mask could be designed so as to meet the claimed range when tested against the mask body 112 of Thompson)
16. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, wherein the frame comprises an assembly of components (the frame may be considered to include removable seal 24, see [0031], or other components such as the replaceable filter cartridge, see [0032], or the attachments 131).
18. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, wherein the mask is a reusable respirator mask (see [0002], [0031], see [0054], Fig. 4; for example, a thermoset mask body 112 may be disassembled, cleaned, and reused).
20. Thompson discloses a face mask kit comprising a frame and a vocal guide according to claim 1, and further comprising a face-contacting seal securable to a proximal end of the frame and a filtration unit securable to a distal end of the frame (see general teachings, [0031, 0032]).
21. Thompson discloses a vocal guide for use with a face mask comprising a frame (body 112) defining a respiratory chamber, for receiving nose and mouth portions of a user (see general teaching [0030], body 12 in Fig. 2), between a proximal end of the frame for interfacing with a face portion of the user (end connecting with seal 24, see general teaching in [0031], including connection with removable seal) and a distal end of the frame configured for allowing gas exchange with the environment (end connected with openings 28, see general teaching in [0032], including connection with replaceable filter cartridges), the vocal guide being defined by a sectional portion of the frame (section portion of frame 112 defines the vocal guide, similar to applicant’s frame), the guide comprising an arched nose ridge portion (see attachment above, “NP”), side wall portions extending from the nose ridge portion (see attachment above, ”SP”) and a base connecting the side wall portions (see attachment above, “B”), wherein the guide is configured with a contoured portion located at one or more regions of each of the side wall portions (see attachment above, portions indicated by “CP”) so as to substantially retain acoustic energy in select frequencies of sound waves travelling through the frame for improving speech intelligibility of the mask during use (see [0060, 0063, 0064], body 112 is designed to facilitate the transmission of sound waves generated by the user through the body 112 for improving speech intelligibility; examiner notes that a filtering/exclusion of frequencies through the frame is not claimed or supported, and body mask 112 retains frequencies select to the user).
22. Thompson discloses a vocal guide according to claim 21, wherein the contoured portion is an inwardly-projecting contour (see attachment above, topmost inwardly projecting contour “CP”).
23. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 21, wherein the contoured portion is an outwardly-projecting contour (see attachment above, bottommost outwardly projecting contour “CP”).
24. A vocal guide according to claim 21, wherein the contoured portion located at a region of the nose ridge portion (see contouring extending into region “NP” in the attachment above, inclusive of the arched ridge itself; note further contouring in Fig. 2, specifically distal end bulge overlapped by arrow “18”).
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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson in view of Nam (US 20050137860).
10. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, including the transmission of sound waves generated by the user through the frame wherein the guide is configured to increase the sound pressure level output of sound waves, see [0060], [0063, 0064] as well as explanation above, but does not explicitly disclose sound waves at any one or more of the following frequency values: about 160 Hz, about 200 Hz, about 250 Hz, about 315 Hz, about 400 Hz, about 500 Hz, about 630 Hz, about 1,000 Hz, about 1,250 Hz, about 1,600 Hz, about 2,000 Hz, about 2,500 Hz, about 3,150 Hz, about 4,000 Hz, about 5,000 Hz, about 6,300 Hz, and about 8,000 Hz. Nam discloses that user generated sound waves are typically between 2,000 Hz and 4,000 Hz, see [0006]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the user generated output of Thompson according to the frequency range disclosed in Nam because such frequency range is the predictable result of enhancing speech clarity generated by the mask user.
Claim(s) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson.
6. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the contoured portion deviates from a frame surface by a range of between about 1 mm and about 2 mm. However, Thompson appears to illustrate the feature, see for example the annotated figure above, in which the topmost contoured portion CP appears to deviate from a bottom frame surface below it in the figure by a range of between about 1 mm and about 2 mm, and the bottommost contoured portion CP appears to deviate from a top surface above it in the figure by a range of between about 1 mm and about 2 mm (examiner notes that, as currently written, any deviation within 1 to 2 mm reads on the claim, including a contoured portion that may extend beyond 1 to 2 mm, and would therefore necessarily deviate between 1 to 2 mm in order to reach the extended length). Thompson additionally discloses that the nose area is sized to receive the nose of the user therein, and the mouth area is sized to cover the user’s mouth, see [0030]. The description of the article pictured can be relied on, in combination with the drawings, for what they would reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2125). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to the contoured portion deviation of Thompson within applicant’s claimed range for the benefit of appropriately conforming to the mouth and nose of the user.
8. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the contoured portion deviates from a frame surface by a range of between about 1 mm and about 5 mm. However, Thompson appears to illustrate the feature, see for example the annotated figure above, in which the topmost contoured portion CP deviates from a bottom frame surface below it in the figure by a range of between about 1 mm and about 5 mm, and the bottommost contoured portion CP deviates from a top surface above it in the figure by a range of between about 1 mm and about 5 mm (examiner notes that, as currently written, any deviation within 1 to 5 mm reads on the claim, including a contoured portion that may extend beyond 1 to 5 mm, and would therefore necessarily deviate between 1 to 5 mm in order to reach the extended length). Thompson additionally discloses that the nose area is sized to receive the nose of the user therein, and the mouth area is sized to cover the users mouth, see [0030]. The description of the article pictured can be relied on, in combination with the drawings, for what they would reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2125). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to the contoured portion deviation of Thompson within applicant’s claimed range for the benefit of appropriately conforming to the mouth and nose of the user.
Claim(s) 19 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thompson in view of Knoblock (US 1410928), as evidenced by O’Laughlin (US 4963799).
19. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 1. Thompson furthermore discloses that the mask body can be made of any suitable material, see [0054]. However, Thompson does not disclose wherein the vocal guide is constructed from a material having an acoustic absorption coefficient of below about 0.2 across any one or more of the following frequencies: about 160 Hz, about 200 Hz, about 250 Hz, about 315 Hz, about 400 Hz, about 500 Hz, about 630Hz, about 1,000 Hz, about 1,250 Hz, about 1,600 Hz, about 2,000 Hz, about 2,500 Hz, about 3,150 Hz, about 4,000 Hz, about 5,000 Hz, about 6,300 Hz, and about 8,000 Hz. Nonetheless, Knoblock discloses a mask body made from metal (p. 1, c. 2, ll. 76 – 69), such material having an acoustic absorption coefficient of below about 0.2 across any one or more of the following frequencies: about 160 Hz, about 200 Hz, about 250 Hz, about 315 Hz, about 400 Hz, about 500 Hz, about 630Hz, about 1,000 Hz, about 1,250 Hz, about 1,600 Hz, about 2,000 Hz, about 2,500 Hz, about 3,150 Hz, about 4,000 Hz, about 5,000 Hz, about 6,300 Hz, and about 8,000 Hz (see evidencing reference to O’Laughlin, c. 7: 26 – 29, where the audio spectrum is inclusive of 2,000 to 4,000 Hz as disclosed in Nam [0006], referenced above). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the mask body of Thompson according to the metal of Knoblock for the benefit of a sturdy mask base that protects against impact and can be reused multiple times. The metal material with sound absorbent coefficient would additionally improve rigidity so as to better transmit a user’s speech from inside the plenum of the mask body as described in the construction parameters discussed in [0063] of Thompson.
25. Thompson discloses a face mask according to claim 21. Thompson furthermore discloses that the mask body can be made of any suitable material, see [0054]. However, Thompson does not disclose wherein the vocal guide is constructed from a material having an acoustic absorption coefficient of below about 0.2 across any one or more of the following frequencies: about 160 Hz, about 200 Hz, about 250 Hz, about 315 Hz, about 400 Hz, about 500 Hz, about 630Hz, about 1,000 Hz, about 1,250 Hz, about 1,600 Hz, about 2,000 Hz, about 2,500 Hz, about 3,150 Hz, about 4,000 Hz, about 5,000 Hz, about 6,300 Hz, and about 8,000 Hz. Nonetheless, Knoblock discloses a mask body made from metal (p. 1, c. 2, ll. 76 – 69), such material having an acoustic absorption coefficient of below about 0.2 across any one or more of the following frequencies: about 160 Hz, about 200 Hz, about 250 Hz, about 315 Hz, about 400 Hz, about 500 Hz, about 630Hz, about 1,000 Hz, about 1,250 Hz, about 1,600 Hz, about 2,000 Hz, about 2,500 Hz, about 3,150 Hz, about 4,000 Hz, about 5,000 Hz, about 6,300 Hz, and about 8,000 Hz (see evidencing reference to O’Laughlin, c. 7: 26 – 29, where the audio spectrum is inclusive of 2,000 to 4,000 Hz as disclosed in Nam [0006], referenced above). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the mask body of Thompson according to the metal of Knoblock for the benefit of a sturdy mask base that protects against impact and can be reused multiple times. The metal material with sound absorbent coefficient would additionally improve rigidity so as to better transmit a user’s speech from inside the plenum of the mask body as described in the construction parameters discussed in [0063] of Thompson.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
The following patents are relevant to acoustic transmission via the frame:
US 20130263848 A1
US 6817362 B2
US 20210346733 A1
The following patents disclose contoured masks fully capable of transmitting acoustics:
US 20210353972 A1
US 20210379411 A1
US 20220096876 A1
US 2415846 A
US 10974084 B1
US 1410928 A
US 11478027 B2
US 20220054871 A1
US 20210346732 A1
US 20200114178 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY H PHILIPS whose telephone number is (571)270-5180. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F.
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, Brandy Lee can be reached at (571) 270-7410. 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.
/BRADLEY H PHILIPS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights