DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendment filed February 26, 2026 in which claims 1-3, 5, and 7-25 are presented for examination and claims 4 and 6 are canceled.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s First Argument: Objection to the drawings for allegedly failing to show claimed features should be withdrawn for a number of reasons including that the claims have been amended to no longer recite the features alleged to be missing from the drawings and that depictions of the claimed features are not required because they are not necessary for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention.
Examiner’s Response: Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is noted that although the claims have been amended to no longer recite all of the exact language cited in the drawing objections detailed in the prior office action mailed August 26, 2025, the currently amended claims nevertheless refer to the same features as those previously recited, albeit under updated nomenclatures (e.g., claim 1 previously recited “a base” but now recites the same feature as “a bottom widened portion”). Examiner further respectfully maintains that a depiction of the recited claim features is necessary for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention. For example, while the specification provides a description of the features at issue, it is respectfully maintained that the description of these features in the specification is inadequate on its own for a person having ordinary skill in the art (“PHOSITA”) to have an understanding of the invention. For instance, although the specification indicates that the coupling member is “I-shaped,” this description does not provide the PHOSITA with sufficient information about the dimensions of the various recited features relative to one another (e.g., how much wider the widths of the top portion and the bottom portion are relative to the central portion in claim 1). It is further respectfully noted that such a depiction is particularly necessary for the PHOSITA to have an understanding of the disclosed invention because the features at issue are presented as an essential focus of both currently amended independent claims, rather than, for example, merely tertiary details provided in dependent claims. The objection is maintained (see below), albeit in updated form in view of current amendments to the claims.
Applicant’s Second Argument: Because other rejections are pending, Applicant requests that the rejections of the claims for nonstatutory double patenting recited in the prior office action mailed August 26, 2025 be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated.
Examiner’s Response: Applicant’s request is noted. It is further respectfully noted that the rejections for nonstatutory double patenting are maintained (see below) at the present time subject to the successful filing of relevant terminal disclaimers.
Applicant’s Third Argument: Rejection of claims 1 and 13 under 35 USC 102 over USPN 9,801,424 Mazzarolo et al. should be withdrawn at least in view of current amendments to claims 1 and 13 for a number of reasons including that claims 1 and 13 now recite “A football helmet,” while Mazzarolo makes no mention of helmet 10 being suitable for sports, let alone football and because Mazzarolo does not teach, suggest, or disclose a plastic layer assembly underlying a majority of the inner portion of the energy absorbing layer as claimed because anchor means 90 (i.e., the plastic layer assembly of Mazzarolo) is a small component that underlies only a small portion of impact absorbing layer 30 of Mazzarolo.
Examiner’s Response: Examiner respectfully disagrees. Mazzarolo discloses helmets configured to be “used during sporting activities” (col. 1, lines 15-23; col. 2, lines 59-61), which Examiner respectfully maintains would encompass football. It is further respectfully noted that the recitation that the helmet is a “football” helmet is being treated as merely being a broad statement of the intended use of the claimed helmet (i.e., that any helmet can be worn while playing football) as opposed to being indefinite under 35 USC 112(b) (i.e., that it is impossible to determine the precise metes and bounds of what is required and/or excluded from a helmet for that helmet to be considered a “football” helmet). As to the limitation regarding the plastic layer assembly being positioned to underlie a majority of an inner portion of the energy absorbing layer, Examiner concedes that anchor means 90 (i.e., the plastic layer assembly of Mazzarolo) is a small component that underlies only a small area of impact absorbing layer 30 of Mazzarolo and acknowledges that Mazzarolo would not properly anticipate a limitation that, for example, the plastic layer assembly is positioned to underlie a majority of an inner surface of the energy absorbing layer. However, rather than reciting that the plastic layer assembly is positioned to underlie a majority of an inner surface of the energy absorbing layer, currently amended claims 1 and 13 recite the far-broader limitation that the plastic layer assembly is positioned to underlie a majority of an inner portion of the energy absorbing layer. As detailed in the prior office action mailed August 26, 2025, the term “portion” is very broad. Due to the breadth of the term “portion,” it is permissible to interpret the inner portion of energy absorbing layer 30 of Mazzarolo to be an area of the inner surface of energy absorbing layer 30 disposed directly beneath any of the plastic layer assemblies 90 of Mazzarolo. The rejection is maintained, albeit on an updated basis in view of current amendments to the claims (see below).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “coupling member with: (i) a top widened portion, (ii) a bottom widened portion, and (iii) a central portion that is narrower than the top widened portion and the bottom widened portion” as recited in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the at least one pad member of the comfort liner assembly is removably secured to said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly by inserting the coupling member through said opening in said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly whereby said top widened portion of the coupling member extends past an extent of said outer surface of said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly, wherein said extent is located radially outward of said opening formed in said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly” as recited in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “inner surface of the energy absorbing layer defines an interface area, and (b) an outer surface of the plastic layer assembly defines an interface area, and wherein the interface area of the layer energy absorbing layer is less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly” as recited in claim 3 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “coupler having: (i) a top portion, (ii) a bottom portion, and (iii) a central portion having a width that is less than a width of both the top portion and the bottom portion” as recited in claim 13 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “intermediate portion of the coupler resides within the opening formed in said segment of the plastic layer assembly and (ii) the top portion of the coupler resides external to an extent of an outer surface of said segment, wherein said extent encircles said opening formed in said segment of the plastic layer assembly” as recited in claim 13 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “top portion of the coupler (a) extends outwardly from the central portion of the coupler, and (b) has a width that is less than a width of the bottom portion” as recited in claim 15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “at least one projection configured to secure the plastic layer assembly to the energy absorbing layer” as recited in claim 16 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “inner surface of the energy absorbing layer defines an interface area, and (b) an outer surface of the plastic layer assembly defines an interface area, and wherein the interface area of the energy absorbing layer is less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly” as recited in claim 19 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “central portion of the coupler resides within the opening in said segment of the plastic layer assembly in the installed position” as recited in claim 21 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “top portion of the coupler has a barbed configuration” as recited in claim 22 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the central portion of the coupling member resides within the opening in said segment of the plastic layer assembly” as recited in claim 23 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “plastic layer assembly includes at least one projection configured to secure the plastic layer assembly to the energy absorbing layer” as recited in claim 24 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “top widened portion of the coupling member has a barbed configuration” as recited in claim 25 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Lines 8-9, 9, 15-16, 17, 18, and 19 of claim 1 each recite the limitation “said segment.” However, for purposes of proper antecedent basis, this limitation should be amended to recite “said at least one segment.”
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 15 of claim 1 recites the limitation “the pad member.” However, for purposes of proper antecedent basis, this limitation should be amended to recite “the at least one pad member.”
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: Lines 15-16, 18, 19-20, and 20 of claim 13 each recite the limitation “said segment.” However, for purposes of proper antecedent basis, this limitation should be amended to recite “said at least one segment.”
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 14 includes the typographical error “the bottom portion of the coupler is: (a) is positioned adjacent to an outer surface of the comfort liner assembly, and (b) is positioned between the outer surface of the comfort liner assembly,” which effectively recites the word “is” twice in a row two times.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 7-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein said extent is located radially outward of said opening formed in said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly” (lines 19-20). This limitation constitutes new matter because upon information and belief it was not present in the disclosure at the time of filing. Applicant is respectfully invited to rebut this rejection by pointing out, with specificity, which portion(s) of the disclosure as originally filed provide support for the limitation.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “(a) an inner surface of the energy absorbing layer defines an interface area, and (b) an outer surface of the plastic layer assembly defines an interface area, and wherein the interface area of the layer energy absorbing layer is less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly.” This limitation constitutes new matter because upon information and belief it was not present in the disclosure at the time of filing. Applicant is respectfully invited to rebut this rejection by pointing out, with specificity, which portion(s) of the disclosure as originally filed provide support for the limitation.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “wherein said extent encircles said opening formed in said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly” (lines 20-21). This limitation constitutes new matter because upon information and belief it was not present in the disclosure at the time of filing. Applicant is respectfully invited to rebut this rejection by pointing out, with specificity, which portion(s) of the disclosure as originally filed provide support for the limitation.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “(a) an inner surface of the energy absorbing layer defines an interface area, and (b) an outer surface of the plastic layer assembly defines an interface area, and wherein the interface area of the energy absorbing layer is less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly.” This limitation constitutes new matter because upon information and belief it was not present in the disclosure at the time of filing. Applicant is respectfully invited to rebut this rejection by pointing out, with specificity, which portion(s) of the disclosure as originally filed provide support for the limitation.
Dependent claims are rejected at least for depending from a rejected claim.
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 3 and 13-22 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 3 recites the limitation “(a) an inner surface of the energy absorbing layer defines an interface area, and (b) an outer surface of the plastic layer assembly defines an interface area, and wherein the interface area of the layer energy absorbing layer is less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly.” This limitation renders the claim indefinite at least because, as recited in the previously-presented version of claim 3 filed June 3, 2024, and as depicted for example in Figure 5, upon information and belief, an interface area of the energy absorbing layer is greater than an interface area of the plastic layer assembly, rather than the interface area of the energy absorbing layer being less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly, as recited by currently amended claim 3. Clarification is required.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “an intermediate portion of the coupler” (line 17). This limitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how it relates to the previously-recited “a central portion” (claim 13, line 17). For purposes of examination, the intermediate portion and the central portion will be interpreted as referring to the same portion of the coupler. Clarification is required.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “(a) an inner surface of the energy absorbing layer defines an interface area, and (b) an outer surface of the plastic layer assembly defines an interface area, and wherein the interface area of the layer energy absorbing layer is less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly.” This limitation renders the claim indefinite at least because, as recited in the previously-presented version of claim 19 filed June 3, 2024, and as depicted for example in Figure 5, upon information and belief, an interface area of the energy absorbing layer is greater than an interface area of the plastic layer assembly, rather than the interface area of the energy absorbing layer being less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly, as recited by currently amended claim 19. Clarification is required.
Dependent claims are rejected at least for depending 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)(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 1-3, 5, and 7-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by USPN 9,801,424 Mazzarolo et al.
To claim 1, Mazzarolo discloses a football helmet (10) (see Figures 1-19; col. 3, line 57 – col. 8, line 28; it is respectfully noted that the recitation that the helmet is a “football” helmet is being treated as merely being a broad statement of the intended use of the claimed helmet, i.e., that any helmet can be worn while playing football, as opposed to being indefinite under 35 USC 112(b), i.e., that it is impossible to determine the precise metes and bounds of what is required and/or excluded from a helmet for that helmet to be considered a “football” helmet) comprising:
an outer shell (20) having an inner surface (see Figures 1A and 2A; col. 3, lines 60-62);
an energy absorbing layer (30) (see Figures 1-4; col. 3, lines 57-59) having an inner portion (the inner portion of energy absorbing layer 30 is the area of the inner surface of energy absorbing layer 30 disposed directly beneath any of plastic layer assemblies 90; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion) and an outer portion (the outer portion of energy absorbing layer 30 is the entire outer surface of energy absorbing layer 30), the outer portion of the energy absorbing layer being positioned adjacent to the inner surface of the outer shell (see Figures 1A and 2A; col. 3, lines 60-62);
a plastic layer assembly (90) positioned adjacent to and underlying a majority of the inner portion of the energy absorbing layer (see Figures 4 and 11-19; the inner portion of energy absorbing layer 30 is the area disposed directly below any of the plastic layer assemblies 90), the plastic layer assembly having at least one segment (93) with an opening (95) extending between an inner surface of said at least one segment and an outer surface of said at least one segment (see Figures 8-10; col. 5, lines 24-56; see Figures 11-14; col. 6, lines 4-52);
a comfort liner assembly (40) (see especially Figures 3-7; col. 3, line 63 – col. 5, line 29) having at least one pad member (70) including a coupling member (80) with (i) a top widened portion (83), (ii) a bottom widened portion (not numbered, see especially Figure 10; col. 5, lines 24-56), and (iii) a central portion (82) that is narrower than the top widened portion and the bottom widened portion (see Figures 8-10; col. 5, lines 24-56); and
wherein the at least one pad member of the comfort liner assembly is removably secured to said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly by inserting the coupling member through said opening in said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly whereby said top widened portion of the coupling member extends past an extent of said outer surface of said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly, wherein said extent is located radially outward of said opening formed in said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly (see Figures 8-14; col. 5, 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 2, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the plastic layer assembly has an outer periphery and the energy absorbing layer has an outer periphery, and wherein the outer periphery of the plastic layer assembly is less than the
outer periphery of the energy absorbing layer whereby at least an extent of the outer periphery of the energy absorbing layer is exposed (see Figures 1-19; col. 6, lines 4-52).
To claim 3, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein (a) an inner surface of the energy absorbing layer defines an interface area (it is respectfully noted that the term “area” is very broad, similar to the term “portion,” as detailed above; as such, any arbitrary extent of the inner surface of energy absorbing layer 30 of Mazzarolo may properly be designated as the “interface area”), and (b) an outer surface of the plastic layer assembly defines an interface area (it is respectfully noted that the term “area” is very broad, similar to the term “portion,” as detailed above; as such, any arbitrary extent of the outer surface of plastic layer assembly 90 of Mazzarolo may properly be designated as the “interface area”), and wherein the interface area of the energy absorbing layer is less than the interface area of the plastic layer assembly (see Figures 1-19; col. 6, lines 4-52).
To claim 5, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the energy absorbing layer has a lower edge that is positioned in a brow region of the outer shell, and wherein said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly has a lower edge that is positioned in the brow region of the outer shell (see especially Figures 2-4).
To claim 7, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the outer shell is formed from a thermoplastic polymer (see Figures 1A and 2A; col. 3, lines 60-62).
To claim 8, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein a lower edge of energy absorbing layer is substantially aligned with an extent of a lower edge of the plastic layer assembly (see Figures 1-19; col. 4, lines 4-38).
To claim 9, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the comfort liner assembly has a monolithic construction (see especially Figures 5-7; col. 3, line 63 – col. 5, line 23).
To claim 10, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the coupling member is elastically deformable and configured to facilitate relative movement between the comfort liner assembly and the plastic layer assembly (see Figures 1-19; col. 7, line 54 – col. 8, line 28).
To claim 11, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the energy absorbing layer is comprised of a plurality of individual layers (see Figures 1-4; col. 3, lines 57-59).
To claim 12, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the plastic layer assembly has a thickness in at least one region that is less than 3 mm (see Figures 11-14; col. 6, lines 4-52; it is respectfully noted that it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.05).
To claim 13, Mazzarolo discloses a football helmet (10) (see Figures 1-19; col. 3, line 57 – col. 8, line 28; it is respectfully noted that the recitation that the helmet is a “football” helmet is being treated as merely being a broad statement of the intended use of the claimed helmet, i.e., that any helmet can be worn while playing football, as opposed to being indefinite under 35 USC 112(b), i.e., that it is impossible to determine the precise metes and bounds of what is required and/or excluded from a helmet for that helmet to be considered a “football” helmet) comprising:
an outer shell (20) having an inner surface and a brow region (see Figures 1A and 2A; col. 3, lines 60-62);
an energy absorbing layer (30) (see Figures 1-4; col. 3, lines 57-59) having an inner portion (the inner portion of energy absorbing layer 30 is the area of the inner surface of energy absorbing layer 30 disposed directly beneath any of plastic layer assemblies 90; it is respectfully noted that the term “portion” is very broad and merely means “a part of a whole;” see https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/portion) and an outer portion (the outer portion of energy absorbing layer 30 is the entire outer surface of energy absorbing layer 30), the outer portion of the energy absorbing layer being connected to the inner surface of the outer shell (see Figures 1A and 2A; col. 3, lines 60-62);
a plastic layer assembly (90) (col. 5, lines 57-60) coupled to and underlying a majority of the inner portion of the energy absorbing layer (see Figures 4 and 11-19; the inner portion of energy absorbing layer 30 is the area disposed directly below any of the plastic layer assemblies 90), the plastic layer assembly having at least one segment (93) (see Figures 11-14; col. 6, lines 4-52);
a comfort liner assembly (40) (see especially Figures 3-7; col. 3, line 63 – col. 5, line 29) configured to be positioned between the plastic layer assembly and a head of a wearer wherein the football helmet is worn by the wearer, the comfort liner assembly includes an arrangement of pad members (70), wherein a first pad member (71) includes a coupler having: (i) a top portion (83), (ii) a bottom portion (not numbered, see especially Figure 10; col. 5, lines 24-56), and (iii) a central portion (82) having a width that is less than a width of both the top portion and the bottom portion (see Figures 8-10; col. 5, lines 24-56);
wherein said first pad member of the comfort liner assembly is removably secured to the plastic layer assembly by inserting the coupler through an opening (95) in said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly to define an installed position (see Figures 8-14; col. 5, 24 – col. 6, line 52); and
wherein in the installed position, (i) the central portion of the coupler resides within the opening formed in the at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly and (ii) the top portion of the coupler resides external to an extent of the outer surface of said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly, wherein said extent encircles said opening formed in said at least one segment of the plastic layer assembly (see Figures 8-14; col. 5, 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 14, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the bottom portion of the coupler (a) is positioned adjacent to an outer surface of the comfort liner assembly, and (b) is positioned between the outer surface of the comfort liner assembly and the central portion of the coupler (see Figures 8-14; col. 5, 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 15, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the top portion of the coupler (a) extends outwardly from the central portion of the coupler, and (b) has a width that is less than a width of the bottom portion of the coupler (see Figures 8-14; col. 5, 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 16, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the plastic layer assembly includes at least one projection (92) configured to secure the plastic layer assembly to the energy absorbing layer (see Figures 1-19; col. 5, line 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 17, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the coupler is not integrally formed with the comfort liner assembly (see Figures 5-10; col. 3, line 63 – col. 5, line 56).
To claim 18, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the plastic layer assembly has an outer periphery and the energy absorbing layer has an outer periphery, and wherein the outer periphery of the plastic layer assembly is less than the outer periphery of the energy absorbing layer whereby at least an extent of the outer periphery of the energy absorbing layer is exposed (see Figures 1-19; col. 6, lines 4-52).
To claim 19, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein (a) an inner surface of the energy absorbing layer defines an interface area (it is respectfully noted that the term “area” is very broad, similar to the term “portion,” as detailed above; as such, any arbitrary extent of the inner surface of energy absorbing layer 30 of Mazzarolo may properly be designated as the “interface area”), and (b) an outer surface of the plastic layer assembly defines an interface area (it is respectfully noted that the term “area” is very broad, similar to the term “portion,” as detailed above; as such, any arbitrary extent of the outer surface of plastic layer assembly 90 of Mazzarolo may properly be designated as the “interface area”), and wherein the interface area of the energy absorbing layer is less than an interface area of the plastic layer assembly (see Figures 1-19; col. 6, lines 4-52).
To claim 20, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein a lower edge of energy absorbing layer is substantially aligned with a majority of a lower edge of the plastic layer assembly (see Figures 1-19; col. 5, line 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 21, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the central portion of the coupler resides within the opening in said segment of the plastic layer assembly in the installed position (see Figures 8-14; col. 5, 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 22, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the top portion of the coupler has a barbed configuration (barbs 84,85 best depicted in Figure 9; col. 7, line 63 – col. 8, line 2).
To claim 23, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the central portion of the coupling member resides within the opening in said segment of the plastic layer assembly (see Figures 8-14; col. 5, 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 24, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the plastic layer assembly includes at least one projection (92) configured to secure the plastic layer assembly to the energy absorbing layer (see Figures 1-19; col. 5, line 24 – col. 6, line 52).
To claim 25, Mazzarolo further discloses a football helmet wherein the top widened portion of the coupling member has a barbed configuration (barbs 84,85 best depicted in Figure 9; col. 7, line 63 – col. 8, line 2).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 7-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 10,721,987.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they each claim helmets comprising substantially the same elements including an outer shell, an energy absorbing layer, a plastic layer assembly, a comfort liner assembly, and a coupler configured to be received in the plastic layer assembly.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 7-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,638,457.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they each claim helmets comprising substantially the same elements including an outer shell, an energy absorbing layer, a plastic layer assembly, a comfort liner assembly, and a coupler configured to be received in the plastic layer assembly.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 7-25 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 and 18-27 of copending application No. 18/310,056 (reference application).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they each claim helmets comprising substantially the same elements including an outer shell, an energy absorbing layer, a plastic layer assembly, a comfort liner assembly, and a coupler configured to be received in the plastic layer assembly.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRIFFIN HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-0546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 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, 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.
/F Griffin Hall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights