Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/850,853

FOLDABLE HELMET

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 25, 2024
Examiner
TRIEU, TIMOTHY K
Art Unit
3732
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Newton Rider Aps
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allow Rate
484 granted / 781 resolved
-8.0% vs TC avg
Strong +55% interview lift
Without
With
+55.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
809
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.8%
-37.2% vs TC avg
§103
42.3%
+2.3% vs TC avg
§102
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
§112
32.0%
-8.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 781 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 24-38 in the reply filed on 09/24/2025 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 § 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) 24, 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirsch (3208080). Regarding claim 24, 28, Hirsch discloses a flexible helmet (fig.) for protecting a user's head along and above a periphery of the user's skull extending from the frontal bone of the user's skull to the occipital bone of the user's skull, the flexible helmet comprising: a flexible head-fitting element (cloth covering 14, col.2, lines 18-21) made from a textile adapted for vapour transportation, the flexible head-fitting element having an outer surface and an inner surface (fig.2), and wherein the flexible head-fitting element is configured to have a shape fitting the user's head (fig.1); a plurality of protector elements (13, 15, 17, 12, fig.3) arranged and attached at preselected positions on the outer surface of the flexible head-fitting element to provide the flexible helmet, the flexible helmet having at least a front portion, a middle portion and a back portion separated by gaps (fig.1-5); a protector element (fig.3) of the plurality of protector elements comprising a base (13) having a bottom surface adapted to be attached to the flexible head-fitting element, and an outer element (15/12/17) having an outer surface and being arranged on the base opposite to the bottom surface, the outer element made from another material than said base, or the outer element having a higher density than said base (see at least all figures). Regarding claim 28, Hirsch discloses wherein at least one of the front portion, the middle portion, and the back portion comprises a plurality of protector elements arranged and attached at preselected positions separated by a longitudinal gap (see all figures). 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 27, 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirsch (3208080). Regarding claim 27, Hirsch does not disclose wherein the flexible helmet has a thickness in the range of 10-20 mm. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to experiment with different ranges of thickness in order to achieve an optimal configuration, since discovering an optimum value of a result effect variable of the thickness of the layer involves only routine skill in the art. Regarding claims 36-37, Hirsch does not disclose wherein the flexible helmet is a foldable helmet adapted to be folded to a closed configuration by folding along one or more of the gaps; wherein the helmet is foldable to a closed configuration by at least the front portion and/or the back portion being folded inwardly towards the middle portion of the helmet. However, Hirsch further discloses elements 14 and 15 made of fabric and element 16 is stitching. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to recognize that the helmet of Hirsch is configured to foldable as the claimed invention, since elements 14, 15 and 16 are flexible and are configured to foldable for the helmet. Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirsch (3208080) in view of Szalkowski et al. (2018/0279711—hereinafter, Szalkowski). Regarding claim 35, Hirsch does not disclose wherein the outer element is made from a thermoplastic polymer material. However, Szalkowski teaches another similar helmet (fig.1); and par [0035] In some embodiments, the vent inserts 103 are formed using traditional manufacturing techniques such as injection molding or thermoforming. The cells 107 of the vent inserts 103 made using traditional manufacturing techniques may have a tapered wall to allow for removal from a mold. In these embodiments, the vent inserts 103 may be constructed from thermoplastic or thermoset polymers such as, but not limited to, urethanes (e.g., BASF Ellastolan®), polycarbonates, polyolefins, and polypropylenes. In still other embodiments, the vent inserts 103 are constructed of metallic honeycombs such as aluminum, or resin infused honeycombs such as nomex coated in phenolic resin (e.g., nomex phenolic honeycomb). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the outer element is made from a thermoplastic polymer material for Hirsch as taught by Szalkowski in order to provide a tapered wall of the helmet structure. (see par [0035] of Szalkowski). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 25-27, 29-34, 38 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY K TRIEU whose telephone number is (571)270-3495. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4. 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. /Timothy K Trieu/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 28, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12569019
GLOVE CONSTRUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557879
UPPER FOR ARTICLE OF FOOTWEAR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12550968
SHOE WITH ENHANCED WIRELESS SIGNAL TRANSMISSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12527376
HELMET
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12501960
FOOTWEAR WITH BOOTIES AND BOOTIE SECUREMENT SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+55.2%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 781 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month