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 Group I (claims 1-14) without traverse in the reply filed on 13 February 2026 is acknowledged. Claim 15 has been withdrawn by the Applicant as being drawn to non-elected Invention II, there being no allowable generic of linking claim. Accordingly, claims 1-15 are pending in the application and an action on the merits follows regarding claims 1-14.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Independent Claim 1, lines 5-6, should recite, “an elastic force to [[the]] a back of a wearer's head”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“fitting unit” and “attachment means” in claim 1
“fitting means” in claim 2
“elastic means” in claim 7
“fastening portion” in claim 10
“first fitting means” and “second fitting means” in claim 11
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 (and claims 3-14 at least for depending from a rejected claim) is/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.
Independent Claim 1, is/are indefinite as it/they recite(s) “a band having one end fixed to a certain point of a helmet”. It is unclear if the band has more than one end or only one end. Therein the metes and bounds of the claim are indefinite. For examination purposes, the claim is being interpreted as, “a band having at least one end fixed to a certain point of a helmet”.
Claims 1 & 2, is/are indefinite as it/they recite(s) “elastic force” for both the fitting unit and the fitting means. It is unclear if the “elastic force” is the same force for both the fitting unit and the fitting means, or if these are two different elastic forces. Therein the metes and bounds of the claim are indefinite. For examination purposes, the claim is being interpreted as, “[[an]] a first elastic force” and “[[an]] a second elastic force.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claim(s) 2 (and claims 3-9 and 11-14 at least for depending from a rejected claim) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
Regarding Claim 2, Applicant appears to have positively recited and claimed a human body part because “back of the wearer’s head” is within a product claim. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to add functional language such as “adapted to/for” or “configured to/for” preceding, or “when in use” succeeding any reference to a human or human body part. For example, Applicant could recite, “the contact member being in contact with the back of the wearer's head when in use”
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Windham US 20160051000.
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Windham discloses a helmet fitting system (Figs. 1-2, 5, 8-9, 11, & 13-14 #12) comprising: a band (Figs. 1-2, 5, 8-9, 11, & 13-14 #24/26) having one end (Figs. 1-2, 5, 8-9, 11, & 13-14 #136 left or right) fixed to a certain point of a helmet (¶0074); a fitting unit (Applicant's “fitting unit” has been interpreted under 35 USC 112(f). Applicant’s “fitting unit” appears to be a combination of parts configured to provide elastic force toward the back of a wearers’ head [per Applicant Drawings 1-10 and Spec. Pg. 2:10-19]; Windham has a combination of parts “configured to receive user input for selective adjustment of the helmet fit system” [Windham ¶0046], which are the same as the Applicant's “fitting unit”; see Figs. 1-2, 5, 8-9, 11, & 13-14 #13) connected to the band (Figs. 1-2, 5, 8-9, 11, & 13-14) and configured to provide an elastic force to the back of a wearer's head (¶0046); and an adjustment means (Applicant's “adjustment means” has been interpreted under 35 USC 112(f). Applicant’s “adjustment means” appears to be a mechanism for moving the means of the fitting unit [per Applicant Drawings 1-10 and Spec. Pg. 9:25-11:15]; Windham has an adjustment mechanism which “is configured to receive user input for selective adjustment of the helmet fit system” [Windham ¶0046], which are the same as the Applicant’s “adjustment means”; see Figs. 1-2, 5, 8-9, 11, & 13-14 #18) configured to adjust the elastic force of the fitting unit (¶0046).
Examiner notes that italicized limitations in the Prior Art rejections are functional and do not positively recite a structural limitation, but instead require the ability of the structure to perform and/or function. As the Prior Art of Windham discloses the structure of the helmet fitting system, there would be a reasonable expectation for the helmet fitting system to perform such functions as explained after each functional limitation.
Regarding Claim 2, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 1, wherein the fitting unit comprises: a fitting means (Applicant's “fitting means” has been interpreted under 35 USC 112(f). Applicant's “fitting means” appears to be “connected to the band and configured to provide an elastic force to the band” [per Applicant Drawings 1-10 and Spec. Pg. 2:14-16]; Windham has arms connected to the band for operatively connecting the fitting means to the adjustment means, which are the same as the Applicant’s “fitting means”; see Figs. 5, 8, & 13-14 #27/29/32/124/126) connected to the band and configured to provide an elastic force to the band (¶0048); and a contact member (Figs. 1-2, 5, & 8 #20) arranged so that the fitting means is movable (¶0047-0048, 0066), the contact member being in contact with the back of the wearer's head (¶0047-0048, 0066), wherein the adjustment means is configured to change a position of the fitting means with respect to the certain point (¶0047-0048, 0066).
Regarding Claim 3, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 2, wherein, when the adjustment means moves the fitting means away from the certain point, the elastic force of the fitting means increases (¶0047), and when the adjustment means moves the fitting means closer to the certain point, the elastic force of the fitting means decreases (¶0047).
Regarding Claim 4, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 2, wherein the adjustment means is gear-coupled to the fitting means (¶0048).
Regarding Claim 5, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 4, wherein a pinion gear (Figs. 5 & 8 #25) is formed on the adjustment means (Figs. 5-8; ¶¶0048), and a rack gear (Figs. Figs. 5 & 8 show the racks on the pinion gear #25) coupled to the pinion gear (Figs. 5 & 8; ¶0047-0048) is formed on the fitting means (Figs. 5 & 8; ¶0047-0048).
Regarding Claim 6, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 2, wherein the adjustment means is coupled to the contact member (Figs. 5 & 8).
Regarding Claim 7, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 2, wherein the fitting means comprises an elastic means (Applicant's “elastic means” has been interpreted under 35 USC 112(f). Applicant’s “elastic means” appears to be a structure “directly connected to the band to substantially provide an elastic force to the band” [per Applicant Drawings 1-10 and Spec. Pg. 9:11-12]; Windham has an elastic structure attached to the band to provide stretch and tightening to the band, which are the same as the Applicant’s “elastic means”; see Figs. 5, 8 & 13-14 #30/32; ¶0061) connected to the band (Figs. 5 & 8; ¶0059, 0061).
Regarding Claim 8, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 7, wherein, when one end of the elastic means is connected to the band (Figs. 5, 8 & 13-14), the fitting means comprises a support portion (Figs. 5, 8 & 13-14 #32) to which the other end of the elastic means is connected (Figs. 5, 8 & 13-14 #140), wherein the adjustment means is configured to change a position of the support portion with respect to the certain point (¶0053-0061).
Regarding Claim 9, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 7, wherein the elastic means is a band, rubber, or silicone (¶0061).
Regarding Claim 10, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 1, further comprising a third band (Figs. 1-2, 5, 8-9, 11, & 13-14 #36) connected to the fitting unit so that the fitting unit moves forward or backward with respect to the helmet (¶0066), wherein uneven portions (Fig. 8 #110) are formed on both side surfaces of the third band (Fig. 8 shows the left and right sides of the third band contain the uneven portions #110) and are coupled to a fastening portion (Applicant's “fastening portion” has been interpreted under 35 USC 112(f). Applicant’s “fastening portion” appears to be a receiving mechanism on the helmet interior surface for coupling to the uneven portions [per Applicant Drawings 1-10 and Spec. Pg. 13:21-14:6]; Windham has an attachment inside of the helmet for fastening the uneven portion #110 to, which are the same as the Applicant’s “fastening portion”; see ¶0072 noted as, “a slot”) provided on the helmet (¶0072).
Regarding Claim 11, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 2, wherein the band comprises: a first band (Figs. 1-2, 5, 8, & 13-14 #24) having one end (Figs. 5, 8, & 13-14 #132 left) fixed to one side of the helmet (¶0074-0075); and a second band (Figs. 1-2, 5, 8, & 13-14 #26) having one end (Figs. 5, 8, & 13-14 #132 right) fixed to the other side of the helmet (¶0074-0075), wherein the fitting means comprises: a first fitting means (Applicant's “first fitting means” has been interpreted under 35 USC 112(f). Applicant’s “first fitting means” appears to be a structure for connected to one end of the band and designed such that the first fitting means and the second fitting means overlap each other in a direction perpendicular to a direction in which the elastic force of the fitting means is provided [per Applicant Drawings 1-10 and Spec. Pg. 3:22-4:9]; Windham has a left and right arm with racks on the ends, and these racks overlap when force is applied from the fitting means, which are the same as the Applicant’s “first fitting means”; see Figs. 5, 8, & 13-14 #27) connected to the other end of the first band (Figs. 5 & 8); and a second fitting means (Applicant's “second fitting means” has been interpreted under 35 USC 112(f). Applicant’s “second fitting means” appears to be a structure for connected to one end of the band and designed such that the first fitting means and the second fitting means overlap each other in a direction perpendicular to a direction in which the elastic force of the fitting means is provided [per Applicant Drawings 1-10 and Spec. Pg. 3:22-4:9]; Windham has a left and right arm with racks on the ends, and these racks overlap when force is applied from the fitting means, which are the same as the Applicant’s “second fitting means”; see Figs. 5, 8, & 13-14 #29) connected to the other end of the second band (Figs. 5 & 8).
Regarding Claim 12, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 11, wherein the adjustment means is gear-coupled to the first and second fitting means (Figs. 5 & 8).
Regarding Claim 13, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 11, wherein the first fitting means and the second fitting means overlap each other in a direction perpendicular to a direction in which the elastic force of the fitting means is provided (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 14, Windham discloses the helmet fitting system according to claim 11, wherein the contact member comprises a base portion (Fig. 8 #106) and a cover portion (Fig. 8 #104) coupled to the base portion (¶0071), wherein the contact member further comprises a holder (Fig. 8 #102) coupled to the base portion of the contact member (¶0048) and surrounding the first and second fitting means to expose one side of each of the first and second fitting means (¶0071).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Garneau US 20160174648 teaches an adjustable helmet system
Penner US 20170347736 teaches an adjustable helmet system
Gennrich US 20120167281 teaches an adjustable helmet system
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAQUEL M. WEIS whose telephone number is 571-272-6804. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 0800-1700.
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 J. TOMPKINS can be reached on 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.
/RAQUEL M. WEIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/HEATHER MANGINE, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732