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 .
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 present application, filed on March 28, 2025, in which claims 1-10 were presented for examination.
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 1-10 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 1 recites the limitation "the two first peripheral edges of the two first hollow front portions to form goggles or installed on the two second peripheral edges of the two second hollow front portions" in lines: 14-16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “the two first peripheral edges” and “the two second peripheral edges” were not claimed before. It is unclear if Applicant is trying to claim those structures for the first time. Examiner assumes they are meant to be claimed for the first time in lines: 14-16.
Claims 2-10 are rejected for depending directly/indirectly 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)(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.
(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 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shiue (US PG Pub. 2023/0088521) as best understood.
Regarding claim 1, Shiue discloses a water sports gear set (invention as shown in Fig. 2A-3C), characterized in that the water sports gear set comprises:
a common frame (combination of 11, 12, and 15, Fig. 2A and 2B);
at least one pair of viewing windows (13);
a first waterproof skirt (122) having:
two first hollow front portions (see annotated Fig. 2A below, examiner notes “hollow” around the interior of 122) being configured for the at least one pair of viewing windows (13) to be embedded therein, respectively (13, Par. 0025, lines: 15-17, “configured for…respectively” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function); and
two first rear portions (see annotated Fig. 2A below) being configured to fit round eyes of a user only (“configured to…only” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function);
a second waterproof skirt (14) having:
two second hollow front portions (141) being configured for the at least one pair of viewing windows (13) to be embedded therein, respectively (Par. 0025, lines: 15-17 , “configured for…windows” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function); and
a second rear portion (142) being configured to fit around the eyes and a nose of the user only (Par. 0025, lines: 10-13, examiner notes as shown in Fig. 2A, “configured to…only” is considered as a functional limitation, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore it is fully capable to perform the claimed function);
a head strap (see annotated Fig. 2A below) fastened to a left side and a right side of the common frame (as shown in annotated Fig. 2A below);
wherein the common frame (combination of 11, 12, and 15) is, in a detachable manner, selectively installed on the installed on the two second peripheral edges of the two second hollow front portions (see annotated Fig. 2A below) to form a mask (as shown in Fig. 2A and 2B).
PNG
media_image1.png
590
844
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2A-Examiner Annotated
Regarding claim 5, Shiue discloses the common frame (combination of 11, 12, and 15, Fig. 2A and 2B) has a left frame (11), a right frame (12) and a bridge (15) connecting the left frame and the right frame (as shown in Fig. 2A and 2B).
Regarding claim 6, Shiue discloses each of the left frame (11) and the right frame (12) has at least one engaging slot (Par. 0025, lines: 15-17, examiner notes the “at least one engaging slot” is what allows element 122 to go into element 121) for each of the two first peripheral edges (peripheral edges of 122).
Regarding claim 7, Shiue discloses the first waterproof skirt (122, Fig. 2A) has a left skirt portion (element 122 on the left side) and a right skirt portion (element 122 on the right side) separated from each other to define the two first hollow front portions, respectively (examiner notes as shown in annotated Fig. 2A above).
Regarding claim 8, Shiue discloses the two first peripheral edges of the two first hollow front portions (peripheral edges of 122) have matching contours with peripheral edges of the left frame and the right frame, respectively (11 and 12, Par. 0025, lines: 15-17, examiner notes as shown in Fig. 2A-2C).
Regarding claim 9, Shiue discloses the second waterproof skirt (14) has a left skirt portion (see annotated Fig. 2A above) and a right skirt portion (see annotated Fig. 2A above) to define the two second hollow front portions (141, as shown in annotated Fig. 2A above), respectively, and the second waterproof skirt (14) further has a nose covering portion (see annotated Fig. 2A above) integrally formed between the left skirt portion and the right skirt portion (as shown in annotated Fig. 2A above).
Regarding claim 10, Shiue discloses the two second peripheral edges of the two second hollow front portions (see annotated Fig. 2A above) have matching contours with peripheral edges of the left frame and the right frame , respectively ( (peripheral edges of 11 and 12, see annotated Fig. 2A above, Par. 0025, lines: 7-10 and 13-17).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiue in view of DiChiara et al. “Dichiara” (US Patent 9,833,663).
Regarding claim 2, Shiue discloses the at least one pair of viewing windows (13) comprises a first pair of viewing windows (as shown in Fig. 2A and 2B), the first pair of viewing windows (13) is embedded in the two first hollow front portions (see annotated Fig. 2A above, Par. 0025, lines: 7-10 and 13-17, also Fig. 2B-2C), respectively.
Shiue does not disclose a second pair of viewing windows
However, DiChiara teaches yet another swim goggle, wherein Dichiara teaches a first pair of viewing windows (150 and 150’, Fig. 1) and a second pair of viewing windows (140 and 140’), and the second pair of viewing windows (140 and 140’) is embedded in the two second hollow front portions (combination of 123, 124, 126, 122, and 128, Fig. 3, which is also shown on the goggles opposite side as 120’ in Fig. 1, Col. 4, lines: 31-37), respectively.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the two second hollow front portions as disclosed by Shiue by incorporating a second pair of viewing windows to attach to said front portions as taught by DiChiara, in order to reduce fogging or condensation on the goggles while in use (Col. 6, lines: 11-21).
Regarding claim 3, Shiue in view of DiChiara disclose the first pair of viewing windows (13 of Shiue) and the first waterproof skirt (122) are inseparable from each other (Par. 0025, lines: 7-10 and 13-17, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize “inseparable” when the goggle is in use), and the second pair of viewing windows (140 and 140’ of DiChiara) and the second waterproof skirt (120 and 120’) are inseparable from each other (Col. 4, lines: 29-37 and 41-44, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize “inseparable” when the goggle is in use).
Regarding claim 4, Shiue in view of DiChiara disclose each of the first pair of viewing windows (13 of Shiue) and the second pair of viewing windows (140 and 140’ of DiChiara) is a two-piece viewing window with separate left and right faceplates (as shown in Fig. 2A of Shiue and Fig. 1 of DiChiara)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent (See PTO-892) to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAKOTA MARIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3529. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri., 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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.
/DAKOTA MARIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/KHALED ANNIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732