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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 04 June 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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 1, 3, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al. ‘563 (US Pub No. 2004/0226563 – cited by Applicant).
Regarding claim 1, Xu et al. ‘563 teaches filtering face mask (Title, Fig. 2 full-face mask 100 and [0060])comprising:
a mask body (inner face piece 104 and [0063]) having an upper portion (nose portion 104a and [0064]) of a first material and configured to cover a user's nostrils ([0064]) and a lower portion (mouth portion 104b and [0064]) of a second material ([0103]; “ nose portion 202a and mouth portion 202b can be readily made of different materials for optimal filtration material utilization”) coupled with the upper portion and configured to cover a user's mouth ([0064]), the first material, second material, or both comprising a filtration material ([0061], [0063]; One of ordinary skill would understand that the materials mentioned in [0061] would filter particular materials.); and
a divider dividing the mask body into the upper portion and the lower portion (separation piece 106 and [0064]).
Regarding claim 3, Xu et al. ‘563 teaches a sampling collection material (filter medium 120 and [0067]; The Examiner interprets filter medium 120 as the sampling collection material as the filter medium 120 would “collect” particles to prevent the particles passing through.).
Regarding claim 9, Xu et al. ‘563 teaches wherein the sample collection material forms at least a part of the upper portion, the lower portion, the divider, or a combination thereof (Fig. 2 shows that filter medium 120 is part of mouth portion 104b.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. ‘563 in view of Choe et al. ‘250 (Korean Patent No. 10-2014250).
Regarding claim 2, Xu et al. ‘563 teaches all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above except for wherein the first material exhibits a pressure drop that is higher than a pressure drop of the second material.
An excerpt of Choe et al. ‘250 follows:
< Equation 1>
0 ≤ A < B.
Here, A means the air permeability of the separating member 50 in the direction of the nasal fluid space in the mouth fluid space, B means the air permeability of the separating member 50 in the direction of the mouth fluid space in the nasal fluid space, 0 is non- Means breathable. Breathability can be quantified by measuring to the ISO 9237 standard.
That is, the separating member 50 may be smoothly ventilated from the nasal fluid space in the direction of the mouth fluid space (B) so that the air exhaled from the nose may be quickly discharged into the mouth fluid space through the separating member 50. However, if the air flows easily from the mouth fluid space in the opposite direction to the nasal fluid space (A), air exhaled by the mouth may enter the nasal fluid space through the separating member and may be re-intake into the nose. It is better to design it as non-breathable or smaller than B. Although not limited, B may be 1.5 times or more than A, and specifically, it is preferable to be large in the range of 2 times to 100 times.
Choe et al. ‘250 teaches that the breathability of space (B) is higher than space (A). Because the breathability is higher in space (B), the pressure drop in space (B) is lower than the pressure drop in space (A). This indicates that the pressure drop in space (A) is higher than the pressure drop in space (B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first material of Xu et al. ‘563 to include exhibiting a pressure drop that is higher than a pressure drop of the second material as Choe et al. ‘250 teaches that this would be a better design and air exhaled by the mouth may enter the nasal fluid space through the separating member and may be re-intake into the nose.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. ‘563 in view of Rubin ‘762 (US Pub No. 2022/0008762).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Xu et al. ‘563 teaches all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above except for wherein the sample collection material comprises a nonwoven filtration layer having an electrostatic charge (claim 4); and wherein the nonwoven filtration layer is hydrophobic (claim 5).
Rubin ‘762 teaches a first layer 5a of a face mask (Title, Fig. 1) is an antibacterial and electrostatic absorption layer. More specifically, the first layer 5a is an antibacterial and electrostatic absorption layer in which radiation shielding material (e.g., metal, such as silver, copper, etc.) is dispersed in a soft and pliable base material…the base material may be an antibacterial nonwoven fabric having high hydrophobicity or water repellency. In the preferred embodiment, bacteria- or virus-containing droplets adhered to the first layer 5a are prevented from being absorbed onto the first layer 5a itself and thus cannot be easily led to the intermediate layers. Moreover, the first layer 5a may have an increased air permeability to make mask wearing more comfortable for the wearer ([0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sample collection material of Xu et al. ‘563 to include a nonwoven filtration layer having an electrostatic charge (claim 4); and wherein the nonwoven filtration layer is hydrophobic (claim 5) as Rubin ‘762 teaches that this will aid in the filtering face mask having antibacterial properties.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. ‘563 in view of Scalisi ‘415 (US Pub No. 2021/0307415, provisional date 04 April 2020).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Xu et al. ‘563 teaches all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above except for wherein the sample collection material forms a removable insert (claim 6); and wherein the removable insert is disposed in or on the divider (claim 7).
Scalisi ‘415 teaches a face mask where a replaceable filter 28, which is removeable, is between an outer housing 12 and an inner housing 16 (Fig. 10 and [0108]). The inner housing 16 is on top of the overmold 36, which includes a partition 30 (Figs. 9, 10). The partition 30 may be configured to sit against an area above the upper lip of the user 22 below the nostrils, such that the upper chamber 32 may be configured to receive the nose of a user 22, and the lower chamber 34 may be configured to receive the mouth of the user 22 (Fig. 5 and [0097]). Thus, the replaceable filter 28 is disposed on the partition 30.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sample collection material of Xu et al. ‘563 to include forming a removable insert (claim 6); and wherein the removable insert is disposed in or on the divider (claim 7) as Scalisi ‘415 teaches that this will aid in replacing the filter every 3-5 days ([0110]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. ‘563 in view of Braun et al. ‘368 (US Patent No. 5,656,368 – cited by Applicant).
Regarding claim 8, Xu et al. ‘563 teaches all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above except for wherein the sample collection material has a major surface having a surface area of 50 mm2 to 500 mm2.
Braun et al. ‘368 teaches to form a corrugated filtration layer for a face mask, the top surface area of energy concentrators 62 is about 2 to 4 mm2 (Fig. 9 and Column 15 Lines 31-33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sample collection material of Xu et al. ‘563 to include a major surface having a surface area of 50 mm2 to 500 mm2 as Braun et al. ‘368 teaches that this will aid in forming a corrugated filtration layer.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. ‘563.
Regarding claim 10, the embodiment of Fig. 2 of Xu et al. ‘563 teaches all of the elements of the current invention as mentioned above except for wherein the filtering face mask is a flat-fold mask.
The embodiment of Figs. 18-20 of Xu et al. ‘563 teaches wherein the filtering face mask is a flat-fold mask (fold flat face mask 210 and [0106]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the flat-fold mask of Figs. 18-20 of Xu et al. ‘563 for the filtering face mask of Fig. 2 of Xu et al. ‘563 as Xu et al. ‘563 teaches that this is another embodiment of the present invention ([0053]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AURELIE H TU whose telephone number is (571)272-8465. The examiner can normally be reached [M-F] 7:30-3:30.
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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at (571) 272-4233. 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.
/AURELIE H TU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights