DETAILED ACTION
Note: 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 without traverse of claims 15-32 and 35 in the reply filed on September 23, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-10 and 14 are withdrawn from consideration.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365 is acknowledged. The prior-filed applications (PCT/US2022/045955 filed on 10/6/2022; 63/313110 filed on 2/23/2022; 63/297484 filed on 1/7/2022; and 63/253085 filed on 10/6/2021) were acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 5, 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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 15-32 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferguson (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0042272 A1).
With respect to claim 15, Ferguson teaches a headwear article liner configured to be attached to a protective headgear article having a plurality of interior pad members each configured to contact a wearer's head (Abstract “protective impact-absorbing headgear liner and impact sensing system… received impact-absorbing pads”), the headwear article liner comprising: an insert body configured for removable attachment to an interior of the protective headgear article, the insert body having a size and shape selected to permit its placement adjacent to the plurality of interior pad members (par.0035+ “The pockets pockets101, 103, 105, each have a slot or opening… through which impact-absorbing pads may be inserted and removed…selected pads 102, 104, 106, 108 will generally conform to the shape of the associated pocket 101, 103, 105, 107 and are shown as removable, generally rectangular inserts.”); at least one force detection sensor positioned along the insert body (abstract “impact sensor assembly to sense the force of impact received”), the at least one force detection sensor configured to obtain force data indicative of forces applied to the headwear article liner along multiple different directions (par.0060 “sensor may record longitudinal, lateral, vertical and resultant acceleration… accelerometer”); at least one temperature sensor positioned along the insert body, the at least one temperature sensor configured to obtain temperature data article (par.0035+ “the pockets… each have a slot… include optional fasteners if desired”).
Although Ferguson does not expressly teach obtain temperature data indicative of the body temperature of the wearer of the headwear article liner, further modification to incorporate this feature would have been prima facie obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (“PHOSITA”) when the invention was filed for the following reasons. First, Ferguson expressly teaches that “temperature may be monitored in order by a physician to warn of impending heat exhaustion, heat stroke, or the like” (par.0058). Accordingly, a warning/alert of impending heat exhaustion, heat stroke, or the like suggests that the body temperature of the wearer is obtained/monitored. Therefore, PHOSITA would have had predictable success modifying Ferguson to obtain temperature data indicative of the body temperature of the wearer of the headwear article liner for the purpose of providing a warning of impending heat exhaustion, heat stroke, or the like, as suggested by Ferguson (par.0058).
With respect to claim 16, Ferguson teaches further comprising a circuit board operatively connected with the at least one force detection sensor and the at least one temperature sensor, the circuit board further configured to store, transmit to a remote device, or both store and transmit to the remote device, the force data and the temperature data (par.0014, 59, 64; Figs. 7 and 12).
With respect to claim 17, Ferguson teaches wherein the insert body includes: a base; a left side lobe that extends from the base and curves adjacent a left temple portion of the protective headgear article; a right side lobe that extends from the base and curves adjacent a right temple portion of the protective headgear article; and an elongated crown lobe that extends from the base adjacent a top of the protective headgear article and separate from the left side lobe and the right side lobe, and wherein the left side lobe, the right side lobe, and the elongated crown lobe include one or more force detection sensors (Fig. 6).
With respect to claim 18, Ferguson teaches wherein the at least one force detection sensor is positioned along an inner surface of the insert body (par.0049 “impact sensors, or impact sensor assemblies 502 may be disposed at various places in the pads”; Fig. 5).
With respect to claim 19, Ferguson teaches wherein the at least one force detection sensor is positioned along an outer surface of the insert body (par.0049 “impact sensors, or impact sensor assemblies 502 may be disposed at various places in the pads”; Fig. 5).
With respect to claim 20, Ferguson teaches wherein the circuit board is coupled to the base of the insert body (par.0014, 59, 64; Figs. 7 and 12).
With respect to claim 21, Ferguson teaches wherein the circuit board is configured to remotely transmit the force data and the temperature data in real time (par.0014, 59, 64; Figs. 7 and 12).
With respect to claim 22, Ferguson teaches wherein the circuit board is configured to collect and store the force data and the temperature data (Figs. 7 and 12)
With respect to claim 23, Ferguson teaches further comprising a power source removably coupled to the circuit board (par.0059).
With respect to claim 24, Ferguson teaches wherein the at least one force detection sensor is configured to obtain force data after repeated launderings (abstract “impact sensor assembly to sense the force of impact”, of which obtaining force data after repeat use, launderings, etc. would only involve routine skill in the art).
With respect to claim 25, Ferguson teaches wherein the at least one temperature sensor is configured to obtain temperature data after repeated launderings (par.0058 “temperature may be monitored”, of which obtaining temperature data after repeat use, launderings, etc. would only involve routine skill in the art).
With respect to claim 26, Ferguson teaches wherein the at least one temperature sensor and the at least one force detection sensor are flexible (par.0044, 47).
With respect to claim 27, Ferguson teaches wherein each of the plurality of attachment members is an adhesive gripping member (par.0030+).
With respect to claim 28, Ferguson teaches wherein each of the plurality of attachment members is a fastener for mechanically coupling the insert body to the protective headgear article (par.0035, 45).
With respect to claim 29, Ferguson teaches wherein each of the plurality of attachment members is disposed between a pair of force detection sensors (par.0035+, 45).
With respect to claim 30, Ferguson does not explicitly teach wherein the insert body is formed from a silicone material. However, Ferguson discloses utilizing different materials for the insert body (par.0037). Therefore, utilizing widely known silicone as the material for the insert body would be prima facie obvious to PHOSITA when the invention was filed as a simple substitution.
With respect to claim 31, Ferguson teaches further comprising at least one accelerometer (par.0060).
With respect to claim 32, Ferguson does not expressly teach at least one gyroscope. However, Ferguson discloses recording longitudinal, lateral, vertical and resultant acceleration, which can also be obtained via widely known gyroscope. Therefore, modifying Ferguson to utilize a widely known gyroscope would have been prima facie obvious to PHOSITA when the invention was filed as a simple substitution.
With respect to claim 35, Ferguson teaches further comprising: a first computing device including a processor, a memory, and a communication unit, wherein the communication unit obtains data from a control unit of the headwear article, and the processor is configured to process and display the obtained data via a user interface (Figs. 7, 11, and 12).
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PUYA AGAHI whose telephone number is (571)270-1906. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM - 5 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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at 5712724233. 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.
/PUYA AGAHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
