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 .
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.
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.
Claims 13-24 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.
In claim 13, line 1, there is no antecedent basis for “the displaceable fastening”. In claim 13, line 2, it is not clear as to what the term “shell-like” includes. The metes and bounds of the term “like” is not clear.
In claim 13, line 3, the term “which can be” is indefinite. It is not clear if the recitation is being positively claimed or that it is possible that it can function as claimed but is not positively claimed as actually doing the function as claimed.
In claim 13, line 4, the term “can be displaced’ is not a positive recitation as discussed above in line 3 in regard to “can be”.
In claim 13, last line, the Recitation of “is arranged on an inner side of the ventilation slide outer slide” is not clear in that “an inner side “ of an “outer sliced” is not clear.
In claim 14, line 2, the “ventilation slide outer side” is not clear. IT does not appear to have proper antecedent basis.
In claim 15, the term “Substantially are perpendicular to one another” is not clear.
They are either “perpendicular” or not.
IN claim 16, line 1, there is no antecedent basis for “The ventilation slide” and as well as in line 2. IN claim 16, line 3, there is no antecedent basis for “the rim” and “the inner side of the ventilation out er side” is not clear as in claim 13, last line.
In claim 18, line 2, there is no antecedent basis for “The ventilation slide outer side”.
In claim 19, line 2, the terms “ such that “ and “can be” is not a positive recitation in that it is not clear if the term “such that” is just a suggestion that the function is claimed and “can be” is also only a suggestion that the recitation thereafter is positively claimed or is only a suggestion that the element functions as claimed.
Claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 19.
In claim 23, line 1, the claim depends from “claim 10” that has been canceled. It appears that claim 23 should depend from claims 18 or 19 to include the proper antecedent basis.
In claim 24, applicant is attempting to claim “A protective helmet” . However, the body of the claim does not include any helmet structure wherein “ a ventilation slide” is included.
However, the claims, as best understood, have been examined on their merits.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Claims 13-24 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
None of the cited references, alone or in combination, disclose a ventilation slide to fasten on a helmet shell of a protective helmet wherein the ventilation slide includes a battery cell on an inner side of the ventilation outer slide as claimed in claim 13. Claims 14-24 are allowable since they depend from claim 13.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GLORIA M HALE whose telephone number is (571)272-4984. The examiner can normally be reached MON.-THURS..
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 1-571-272-3425. 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.
/GLORIA M HALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
