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 .
There is no power of attorney on file for this application.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2- delete “acanopy” and insert --a canopy--. Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Claim 4 recites the canopy includes a main canopy section and a shell establishing tunnel configured to permit the pressurized fluid to flow into the main canopy section. It’s noted that par.34 discloses “airtunnel shell”. Claim 6 recites elastic ribbons span the C-shaped section.
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 main canopy section and shell establishing tunnel as in claim 4 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “49” has been used to designate airtunnel-canopies and airtunnel structure and inflatable canopy structures. 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. 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 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 2 is 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). Claim 2 recites when the canopy is not inflated, the canopy is arranged adjacent a rear, upper part of a torso of the wearer. To overcome this rejection, the claim should be amended to recite the canopy functionally in relation to the wearer’s anatomy as follows: when the canopy is not inflated, the canopy is configured to be arranged adjacent a rear, upper part of a torso of the wearer.
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 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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 5 lacks antecedent basis for “the shell” and this limitation is recited as referencing the shell forming the canopy. Claim 6 depends from claim 5 and is therefore also rejected.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Cooper (U.S. 8,240,610). Cooper discloses the invention as claimed. Cooper teaches a system providing an inflatable canopy, comprising: a garment 10 including a canopy 38 configured to selectively inflate upwardly relative to a wearer of the garment, wherein the canopy 38 is coupled to a source of pressurized fluid 74, wherein the pressurized fluid is selectively releasable from the source to inflate the canopy 38.
For claim 2, when the canopy 38 is not inflated, the canopy is arranged adjacent a rear, upper part of a torso of the wearer as in Figure 2.
For claim 3, when the canopy 38 is inflated, the canopy establishes air resistance to slow the wearer (col.7, lines 31-35).
For claim 7, the garment is a vest as the sleeves can be removed from the garment to form a vest.
For claim 8, the garment is a backpack as pouch 32 is considered as a backpack which holds the canopy.
For claim 9, the garment is a jacket as the garment may include a torso portion 20 and sleeves 22 forming a jacket.
For claim 10, when the canopy 38 is inflated, a main section of the canopy 38 is spaced-apart above a head of the wearer, relative to a perspective of the wearer.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a(1) as being anticipated by Kincheloe (U.S. 4,825,469). Kincheloe discloses the invention as claimed. Kincheloe teaches a system providing an inflatable canopy, comprising: a garment (disclosed as jacket-like garment) including a canopy 40 configured to selectively inflate upwardly relative to a wearer of the garment (Fig.1 shows the uninflated canopy and Fig.2 shows the canopy after upward inflation relative to the wearer), wherein the canopy 40 is coupled to a source of pressurized fluid 26, wherein the pressurized fluid is selectively releasable from the source to inflate the canopy 40.
For claim 2, when the canopy 40 is not inflated, the canopy is arranged adjacent a rear, upper part of a torso of the wearer as in Figure 1.
For claim 4, the canopy includes a main canopy section and a shell establishing tunnel configurated to permit the pressurized fluid to flow into the main canopy section (see annotated drawing).
For claim 5, as best understood, the shell includes a C-shaped section as in the annotated drawing.
PNG
media_image1.png
903
735
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kincheloe ‘610 in view of Mazzarolo (U.S. 12,167,758). Kincheloe discloses the invention substantially as claimed but doesn’t teach elastic ribbons span the C-shaped section. Mazzarolo teaches it’s known in the art to provide ribbons spanning an inflated tunnel such that the ribbons limit the volume of the inflatable member once inflated to prevent ballooning where the tunnel loses its shape. Kincheloe doesn’t teach the ribbons are elastic; however, one of ordinary skill could recognize a benefit of providing the ribbons with an elastic property to improve resiliency of the ribbons and prevent breakage under inflation pressure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kincheloe’s C-shaped section to include elastic ribbons spanning the C-shaped section as Mazzarolo teaches the ribbons assist in limiting the air volume to maintain the shape of the section once inflated and the elastic ribbons are expected to result in a resiliency to prevent ribbon breakage to prolong the useful life of the ribbons under repeated inflation and deflation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications should be directed to Primary Examiner Katherine Moran at (571) 272-4990 (phone). Please note that any internet communication directed to katherine.moran@uspto.gov requires prior submission of an Authorization for Internet Communications form (PTO/SB/439). The examiner can be reached on Monday-Thursday from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm, and alternating Fridays.If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Khoa Huynh, may be reached at (571) 272-4888. The official and after final fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is (571) 273-8300. General information regarding this application and
questions directed to matters of form and procedures may be directed to the PTO Contact
Center/Inventors Assistance Center at (800) 786-9199/571-272-1000. Information regarding the status
of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system.
Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For questions on
access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-
free).
/KATHERINE M MORAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732