DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 1/31/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "38" and "40" have both been used to designate “relief filling,” as discussed in at least paragraph [0027] of Applicant’s specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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.
In view of the above rejections the respective claims are rejected as best understood on prior art as follows:
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 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; or
(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 1-8, 11, 15-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 4,908,893 to Smit.
Claim 1. A pillow for eye pressure relief comprising: a support portion (Smit, Fig. 2B, #20) having a support filling (Smit, Fig. 3, #26) and a support volume thickness (Smit, column 3, lines 11-14); a relief portion (Smit, Fig. 2B, #22), the relief portion having a relief filling and a relief volume thickness (regarding relief volume thickness, see Fig. 2B; also see Fig. 8 and column 4, lines 31-37); and wherein the when the support volume thickness is in a compressed state, the support volume thickness is greater than the relief volume thickness (Smit, Figs. 2A-2B).
Claim 2. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the relief portion comprises an arch shaped inner relief perimeter (Smit, Fig. 4 discloses an arch shaped depression at #32; also see Fig. 10, #112, and column 4, lines 52-59 which discloses that the shape may be adjusted to any preferred shape as may be desired by user).
Claim 3. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the relief portion comprises a relief portion lower edge, a relief portion upper edge, and a relief portion gap between the relief portion upper edge and the relief portion lower edge configured to accommodate a facial orbital (Smit, Figs. 2A-2B).
Claim 4. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the relief portion is nested within the support portion (as best understood from Applicant’s specification, “nested” is meant to be an indentation in the pillow, as at Applicant’s #34; Smit discloses an indentation in Figs. 2A-2B).
Claim 5. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein at least a portion of the relief portion extends to a pillow outer perimeter (Smit Fig. 12 discloses a horseshoe shaped pillow in which open area #144 extends to the outer edge of the pillow).
Claim 6. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 further wherein: the pillow comprises a pillow top edge, a pillow bottom edge, a first pillow side edge and a second pillow side edge forming an outer support perimeter; the support portion is bounded by the outer support perimeter and an inner relief perimeter; the relief portion is bounded by the inner relief perimeter; and wherein the relief portion is disposed proximal the pillow bottom edge forming a bridge from a lower support portion to an upper support portion (the pillow Smit has the claimed edges and perimeter; regarding the relief portion being closer to the bottom edge of the pillow, see Fig. 8).
Claim 7. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 6 further wherein the relief portion is disposed within a first third of a pillow height from the pillow bottom edge (Smit Fig. 8).
Claim 8. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 6 further wherein the relief portion is disposed within a first third of a pillow height from the pillow top edge (Smit Fig. 2A; relief portion is disposed within a top third of the pillow when the pillow turned over).
Claim 11. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the relief portion is disposed towards a rear pillow surface (Smit, Figs 2A, 2B, and 8).
Claim 15. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the relief filling comprises a foam core (Smit column 3, lines 35-40 discloses the use of foam).
Claim 16. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the relief filling is about 4 millimeters thick (Smit Fig. 8; additionally column 4, lines 34-36 disclose that the thickness of the relief area can anything between zero and the full thickness of the pillow).
Claim 17. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 having a covering comprising a pillow outer surface, the covering comprising support portion outer surfaces and relief portion inner surfaces, the covering bound to itself to form the relief portion (Smit discloses an inflatable cushion in Fig. 9 which inherently has the upper and lower outer surfaces bound to each other at inner and outer perimeters in order to form an air bladder).
Claim 20. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 17 wherein the cover comprises a hydrophobic material (Smit discloses that his pillow may be inflatable in column 4, lines 37-40; an airtight material is inherently also watertight, or hydrophobic).
Claims 1, 6-10, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 5,363,524 to Lang.
Claim 1. A pillow for eye pressure relief comprising: a support portion (Lang, Fig. 3, #43) having a support filling (Lang, Fig. 3, #26) and a support volume thickness; a relief portion (Lang, Fig. 3, relief portion is central portion located approximately at #21), the relief portion having a relief filling and a relief volume thickness (see Lang Fig. 3); and wherein the when the support volume thickness is in a compressed state, the support volume thickness is greater than the relief volume thickness (Lang, Fig. 3, support portion thickness is greater than relief portion thickness).
Claim 6. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 further wherein: the pillow comprises a pillow top edge, a pillow bottom edge, a first pillow side edge and a second pillow side edge forming an outer support perimeter; the support portion is bounded by the outer support perimeter and an inner relief perimeter; the relief portion is bounded by the inner relief perimeter; and wherein the relief portion is disposed proximal the pillow bottom edge forming a bridge from a lower support portion to an upper support portion (the pillow Lang has the claimed edges and perimeter; regarding the relief portion being closer to the bottom edge of the pillow, see Figs. 3-12, and particularly Fig. 15, which disclose that the pillow is adjustable such that the central relief portion can be formed as an shape and at any desired depth of the pillow)
Claim 7. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 6 further wherein the relief portion is disposed within a first third of a pillow height from the pillow bottom edge (Lang Fig. 15).
Claim 8. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 6 further wherein the relief portion is disposed within a first third of a pillow height from the pillow top edge (Lang Fig. 15; relief portion is disposed within a top third of the pillow when the pillow of Fig. 15 is turned over).
Claim 9. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 6 further wherein the relief portion is disposed centrally along between the pillow bottom edge and pillow top edge (Lang, Figs. 3-4).
Claim 10. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the relief portion is disposed mid the support volume thickness (Lang, Figs. 3-4).
Claim 17. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 having a covering comprising a pillow outer surface, the covering comprising support portion outer surfaces and relief portion inner surfaces, the covering bound to itself to form the relief portion (Lang, Figs. 1-12, and specifically fasteners 29A in Fig. 1).
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 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 of this title, 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 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 4,908,893 to Smit.
Claim 12. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the support filling comprises one of layers or volumetric pieces of polyurethane foam and/or polyester gel fiber, feathers, down, down alternative, cotton, latex, kapok, buckwheat, wool, memory foam, or polyfill (Smit column 3, lines 35-40 discloses the use of foam; moreover, Examiner takes Official Notice that these various claimed fill materials are well known in the art of pillows and it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select any of the known materials, and additionally that Smit anticipates the use of various materials in disclosing the use of “any suitable stuffing material” in column 2, line 67).
Claim 13. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 6 wherein the support volume thickness is between 3 and 5 inches in an uncompressed state (Smit discloses that his pillow is “at least two inches thick” in column 3, line 12; it would have been obvious matter of design choice to provide the pillow in a thickness of 3 to 5 inches since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component and change is size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art; In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237, (CCPA 1955)).
Claim 14. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 1 wherein the relief filling comprises at least one of layers or volumetric pieces of polyurethane foam and/or polyester gel fiber, feathers, down, down alternative, cotton, latex, kapok, buckwheat, wool, memory foam, or polyfill (Smit column 3, lines 35-40 discloses the use of foam; moreover, Examiner takes Official Notice that these various claimed fill materials are well known in the art of pillows and it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select any of the known materials, and additionally that Smit anticipates the use of various materials in disclosing the use of “any suitable stuffing material” in column 2, line 67).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 4,908,893 to Smit in view of US Patent 11,141,009 to Rane.
Claim 18. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 17 wherein the cover comprises a quilted pattern (Smit does not disclose the use of a quilted cover, however Rane discloses a pillow with quilted fabric, and states in column 3, lines 22-23, “Quilted fabric surfaces being best, as they have been found to provide a comfortable surface”; therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the pillow of Smit with a quilted surface in order to provide a comfortable surface).
Claim 19. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 17 wherein the cover comprises a microfiber (Smit does not disclose the use of microfiber, however Rane discloses a pillow and the use of microfiber in at least column 1, line 31; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the pillow of Smit with a microfiber material as an aesthetic design choice, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice; In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 4,908,893 to Smit in view of US Patent Application 2007/0056108 to Nikolopoulos.
Claim 20. The pillow for eye pressure relief of claim 17 wherein the cover comprises a hydrophobic material (Smit does not explicitly disclose the use of a hydrophobic material, however Nikolopoulos discloses a pillow and the use of vinyl material in paragraph [0030]; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the pillow of Smit with a vinyl material in provide an surface that is easily cleaned and disinfected; and additionally since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice; In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MYLES A THROOP whose telephone number is (571)270-5006. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Troutman can be reached at 571-270-3654. 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.
/MYLES A THROOP/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights