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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after December 8, 2025, of which claims 1-12, 14-15, 17-20, and 23-24 were presented for examination, of which claims 18-20 were withdrawn, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species I (Figs. 1-18) in the reply filed on December 8, 2025 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 § 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.
Claims 7-9 and 17 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.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “wherein the support assembly comprises a rear piece connected to the peripheral portion, comprising a plurality of queued hollow components that are deformable to exert tension over the peripheral portion” (lines: 1-3) is indefinite because it is unclear which structure comprises “the hollow components”. Examiner assumes the rear piece comprises the “hollow components”.
Regarding claim 9, the limitation “wherein the peripheral portion comprises on each side two protrusions disposed in a front/rear fashion” (lines: 1-2) is indefinite because it is unclear what constitutes a “front/rear fashion”. Examiner assumes the limitation to be a front or rear surface of the peripheral portion.
Regarding claim 17, the limitation “A kit comprising the protective face shield of claim, and a base” (line: 1) is indefinite because it is unclear which claim the kit is depending from by declaring it comprises “the protective face shield of claim,”. Examiner assumes the kit comprises the protective face shield of claim 1.
Claim 8 is rejected for depending directly/indirectly from a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 5-8, 12, 14, 17, and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Treiber (US Patent 2,758,307).
Regarding claim 1, Treiber discloses a protective face shield to be worn over the head of a wearer, comprising:
- a support assembly (combination of 21 and 30) adapted to interface with a portion of a circumference of the head of the wearer (“adapted to…wearer” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function), the support assembly comprising:
- a peripheral portion (see annotated Fig. 1 below); and- a front portion (see annotated Fig. 1 below) comprising front arms extending frontward to connect to the peripheral portion (see annotated Fig. 1 below), and a forehead abutting portion rearward to the front arms (see annotated Fig. 1 below); and
- a visor (10) adapted to be mounted to the support assembly (combination of 21 and 30, examiner notes visor, 10, is mounted to support assembly, 21, through there shared connection of elements 25 and 28, as shown in Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
746
828
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Fig. 1
Regarding claim 2, Treiber discloses the support assembly comprises a pair of trunnions (28) each located at an opposed side of the peripheral portion (Fig. 1), and wherein the protective shield comprises a rotatable visor assembly (combination of 20 and 25) to be mounted to the trunnions (28) and adapted to mount the visor (as shown in Fig. 1) thereto, wherein the rotatable visor assembly is adapted to be moved between a lowered position in front of the face of the wearer (as shown in Fig. 1), and a raised position above the head of the wearer (shown as dotted lines in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Treiber discloses the support assembly comprises a pair of side protrusions (25) each located at an opposed side of the peripheral portion (see annotated Fig. 1 above), and a third protrusion located in front of the side protrusions (38), wherein the visor (10) is adapted to be mounted to the side protrusions and the third protrusion (as shown in Fig. 1, where visor, 10, is indirectly connected to side protrusions, 25, through element 20, and directly connected to the third protrusion, 38, as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Treiber discloses wherein components of the protective face shield are symmetrical (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Treiber discloses the support assembly (combination of 21 and 30) comprises a rear piece (combination of 44, 52, 54, 42) connected to the peripheral portion (Fig. 1), comprising a plurality of queued hollow components (44 and 42) that are deformable to exert tension over the peripheral portion (“deformable to…portion” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function).
Regarding claim 8, Treiber discloses the hollow components (44 and 42) are shapes having at least four sides (as shown in Fig. 1 and 4).
Regarding claim 12, Treiber discloses comprising a front (shown as area around element 24) and a rear (shown as area around element 46), and further comprising a top piece (22) adapted to be connected at the front about the forehead abutting portion and at the rear to the peripheral portion (examiner notes as shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, Treiber discloses the peripheral portion (see annotated Fig. 1 above) extends frontward (examiner notes “frontward” taken to be around the “peripheral portion”) beyond its connections to the front arms (see annotated Fig. 1 above, examiner notes the “connections” are taken to be area around opening caused by pin, 25), and wherein the peripheral portion comprises a break between the connections (examiner notes the “break” is the opening caused by pin, 25).
Regarding claim 17, Treiber discloses a kit comprising the protective face shield of claim (as shown in Fig. 1), and a base (20) comprising a curved channel (examiner notes “curved channel” is opening between elements 30 and 20) adapted to receive the visor of the protective face shield (10) through an edge thereof (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 23, Treiber discloses a protective face shield (as shown in Fig. 1) comprising:
- a support assembly (combination of 20, 21, 22, 30, 44, and 10) comprising:
- a first piece (combination of 20 and 21) having two arc-shaped portions (as shown in Fig. 1) connected through a front portion (see annotated Fig. 1 below) comprising a forehead abutting portion (see annotated Fig. 1 below) and front arms (see annotated Fig. 1 below) extending frontward to connect to the arc-shaped portions, and a pair of rear extremities (see annotated Fig. 1 below);
-a top piece (combination of 22 and 30) connectable to the first piece (combination of 20 and 21) at the forehead abutting portion and about the rear extremities (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 below); and
- a rear piece (44) connectable to the first piece (combination of 20 and 21) about the rear extremities (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 below); and
- a visor (10) adapted to be mounted to the first piece (combination of 20 and 21, Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
746
839
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1-Examiner Annotated
Regarding claim 24, Treiber discloses the first piece (combination of 20 and 21) comprises protrusions (38 and 46) over its external face (as shown in Fig. 1), and wherein the top piece (combination of 22 and 30), the rear piece (44) and the visor (10) comprises apertures (36, 48, opening around pin, 38, ) designed to receive the protrusions to be mounted to the first piece (as shown in Fig. 1, 2, and 4).
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.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Treiber in view of Hill (US PG Pub. 2002/0029399).
Regarding claim 3, Treiber discloses the invention substantially as claimed above.
Treiber does not disclose the support assembly and the rotatable visor assembly are connected with an elastic band mounted thereto that exert the rotatable visor assembly away from a position between the lowered position and the raised position.
However, Hill teaches yet another protective face shield, wherein Hill teaches the support assembly (22, Fig. 1-5) and the rotatable visor assembly (64) are connected with an elastic band (38) mounted thereto that exert the rotatable visor assembly away from a position between the lowered position (Fig. 1) and the raised position (Fig. 2, Par. 0105-0106).
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 support assembly and the rotatable visor assembly as disclosed by Treiber, by incorporating an elastic band as taught by Hill, in order to enhance the structural integrity of the protective face shield.
Regarding claim 4, Treiber in view of Hill disclose the support assembly comprises on each side a rear facing hook (combination of 30 and 46, Fig. 1 of Hill, Par. 0096, examiner notes the combination of 30 and 46 act as a “hook” due to elastic band, 38 wrapping around it) rearward relative to the trunnions (40), and wherein each one of the elastic bands (38) is adapted to be mounted to one of the hooks (combination of 30 and 46, as shown in Fig. 1-5).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Treiber.
Regarding claim 9, Treiber discloses the peripheral portion (see annotated Fig. 1 above) comprises on each side (interior and exterior surface of the annotated portion) one protrusion (46) disposed in a front/rear fashion (examiner notes shown as a “rear fashion” in Fig. 1 and 4), the rear piece (combination of 44, 52, 54, 42) comprises two extremities, wherein about each one of the extremities are a series of openings (examiner notes the “extremities or series of openings” are shown within element 44), and wherein the rear piece (combination of 44, 52, 54, 42) is adapted to be mounted to the peripheral portion of the support assembly, on each side, by inserting the one protrusion in two of the openings (as shown in Fig. 1 and 4) two protrusions in two of the openings.
Treiber discloses the claimed invention except for two protrusions. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have two protrusions, instead of one protrusion, in order to provide enhance securement between the rear piece and peripheral portion, since such a modification would amount to a mere duplication of parts. It has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Examiner notes due to this rationale, the limitation “by inserting the one protrusion in two protrusions in two of the openings” would be taught.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Treiber in view of Batty (US Patent 5,673,431).
Regarding claim 10, Treiber discloses wherein the visor (10) comprises an opening (opening around pin, 38) adapted to cooperate with protrusions (38, “adapted to…protrusions” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function).
Treiber does not disclose the visor comprises openings, and wherein at least one of the openings is an oblong opening.
However, Batty teaches yet another protective face shield, wherein Batty teaches a visor (40, Fig. 1-6) comprises openings (400) adapted to cooperate with protrusions (210, “adapted to…protrusions” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function), and wherein at least one of the openings (400) is an oblong opening (as shown in Fig. 5).
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 visor as disclosed by Treiber, by incorporating openings wherein at least one of the openings is an oblong opening as taught by Batty, in order to enhance securement between the visor and support assembly.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Treiber in view of Martino et al. “Martino” (US PG Pub. 2021/0386137).
Regarding claim 11, Treiber discloses the visor (10) comprises a bottom edge (bottom edge of 18).
Treiber does not disclose the visor comprises a colored portion about at least a portion of the bottom edge.
However, Martino teaches yet another protective face shield, wherein Martino teaches a visor comprises a colored portion about at least a portion of the bottom edge (Par. 0040, lines: 6-8, examiner notes the entire visor is colored, and due to the limitation “about at least a portion of the bottom edge” it does not limit the entire visor being colored).
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 visor as disclosed by Treiber, by incorporating a colored portion about at least a portion of the bottom edge of the visor as taught by Martino, in order to allow the visor to be used for different applications and users (Par. 0040, lines: 6-12).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Treiber in view of Anderson et al. “Anderson” (US Patent 10,881,157).
Regarding claim 15, Treiber teaches the invention substantially as claimed above.
Treiber does not disclose the forehead abutting portion and the front arms generally define a X-shaped portion.
However, Anderson teaches yet another protective face shield, wherein Anderson teaches the forehead abutting portion (portion of 12 and 11 against the forehead) and the front arms (14) generally define a X-shaped portion (examiner notes a “generally defined X-shaped portion” is shown in Fig. 1 and 2).
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 forehead abutting portion and the front arms as disclosed by Treiber, by forming a generally X-shaped portion as taught by Anderson, in order to enhance the ergonomics of the face shield when worn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent (See
PTO-892) to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAKOTA MARIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3529. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri., 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, ALISSA TOMPKINS can be reached at (571) 272-3425. 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.
/DAKOTA MARIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/KHALED ANNIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732