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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-27 are pending in the application and under consideration.
Objections to the Specification:Limited Copyrights or Mask Works in US Patent Applications
The specification is objected to for improper use of claiming copyrights and/or mask works for the text and drawings in US patent applications (e.g., paragraph [0001] on page 1 of Applicants’ specification), which copyright and/or mask work claims must be limited to previously copyrighted or mask works that are included as part of the specification and/or drawings. The use of copyrights and/or mask works in US patent applications is explained in the “Terms of Use for USPTO websites” (https://www.uspto.gov/terms-use-uspto-websites) (citing MPEP 600-608.01(v)): Under “Copyright Information”: Pursuant to federal law, most government-produced materials appearing on this website are not subject to copyright restrictions within the United States and are therefore in the public domain. Under “Patent Information: Subject to limited exceptions under reflected in 37 CFR 1.71(d),(e), and 37 CFR 1.84(s), the text and drawings are not subject to copyright restrictions: Therefore, patent applications in themselves are not subject to copyright protection, but are considered under US laws and regulations to be in the public domain.” (Emphasis added). The only exceptions to this are for identifying copyrighted or mask work protected materials in drawings, as specified by MPEP 608.01(w), which also requires that: The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will permit the inclusion of a copyright or mask work notice in a design or utility patent application, and thereby any patent issuing therefrom, which discloses material on which copyright or mask work protection [that] has previously been established, under the following conditions: (A) The copyright or mask work notice must be placed adjacent to the copyright or mask work material. Therefore, the notice may appear at any appropriate portion of the patent application disclosure, including the drawing. However, if appearing in the drawing, the notice must comply with 37 CFR 1.84(s). If placed on a drawing in conformance with these provisions, the notice will not be objected to as extraneous matter under 37 CFR 1.84. (B) The content of the notice must be limited to only those elements required by law. For example, "©1983 John Doe"(17 U.S.C. 401) and "*M* John Doe" (17 U.S.C. 909) would be properly limited, and under current statutes, legally sufficient notices of copyright and mask work respectively. (C) Inclusion of a copyright or mask work notice will be permitted only if the following authorization in 37 CFR 1.71(e) is included at the beginning (preferably as the first paragraph) of the specification to be printed for the patent: A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to (copyright or mask work) protection. The (copyright or mask work) owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent files or records, but otherwise reserves all (copyright or mask work) rights whatsoever. (D) Inclusion of a copyright or mask work notice after a Notice of Allowance has been mailed will be permitted only if the criteria of 37 CFR 1.312 have been satisfied. The inclusion of a copyright or mask work notice in a design or utility patent application, and thereby any patent issuing therefrom, under the conditions set forth above will serve to protect the rights of the author/inventor, as well as the public, and will serve to promote the mission and goals of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Therefore, the inclusion of a copyright or mask work notice which complies with these conditions will be permitted. However, any departure from these conditions may result in a refusal to permit the desired inclusion. If the authorization required under condition (C) above does not include the specific language "(t)he (copyright or mask work) owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent files or records,..." the notice will be objected to as improper by the examiner of the application. If the examiner maintains the objection upon reconsideration, a petition may be filed in accordance with 37 CFR 1.181”. (Emphasis added).
Since Applicant has departed from the conditions of limiting copyright and/or mask work claims to previously copyrighted and/or mask work protected elements of the drawings, Applicant is required to either: (a) delete the claims to copyrights and/or mask works for text and/or drawings of the patent application itself (i.e., “Copyright Notice” and paragraph [0001]); and/or (b) limit the copyright and/or mask work claims to previously copyrighted and/or mask work protected elements of the drawings.
Claim Interpretation and Reading of Specification Limitations into the Claims
The claims are interpreted in light of the teachings of Applicants’ Specification. MPEP 2173.01. Applicants’ specification describes embodiments of the invention as goggles that include a strap configured to wrap around the user’s head and two eyepieces affixed or mounted to the strap and coupled together by an adjustable nosepiece that is configured to flex and rotate over the eye socket and conforms to the user’s facial contours and a sealing pad configured to press against and conform it's shape to the user’s skin around each eye to form a watertight–seal ([0006]-[0009]).
However, Claim 1 recites a method for making the goggles and only recites the term “goggles” and does not include any of the structural features (or functions defining structures) of the goggles, e.g., as presented above. While claim 21 recites alternative elements of the goggles as “at least one of”: an eyepiece, a strap, a gasket, a seal, a sealing pad, etc., the above combination of elements including a sealing pad configured to press against the user’s skin around each eye to form a watertight seal is not recited as a specific combination, as presented above.
Since limitations from the specification are not read into the claims MPEP 2111.01(II), the claims are interpreted according to their broadest reasonable interpretation MPEP 2173.01, such that the claims are interpreted without reading into the claims the above combination of elements disclosed in Applicants’ specification.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to for the following informalities:
In claim 22, line 1, “goggles is comprised” should be “goggles are comprised” (but see 112b rejection below); Appropriate correction is suggested. See MPEP 608.01(m).
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 21 and 24-25 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 21 is considered indefinite in that the claim 1 (from which claim 21 depends) does not recite any structures (or function defining structures) that could further comprise the alternative elements and features as claimed, rendering the claims indefinite. Appropriate correction is required, e.g., incorporating into claim 1 the essential structures of the goggles that are configured to further include each of the elements/structures recited in claim 21, e.g., the elements/structures making up the goggles as disclosed in Applicants specification, e.g., the goggle comprises a strap configured to wrap around the user’s head and two eyepieces affixed or mounted to the strap and coupled together by an adjustable nosepiece that flexes and rotates over the eye socket and is configured to conform to the user’s facial contours; and a sealing pad attached to the eyepieces and configured to press against and conform it's shape to the user’s skin around each eye to form a watertight–seal ([0006]-[0009]) (See Claim Interpretation section above). See MPEP 2173.05(a).
Claims 24-25 are considered indefinite in that the claims do not recite any structure (or function defining a structure) of the goggles that could further comprise a seal or flex layer as claimed, rendering the claims indefinite and where there are no specific structures recited that could include a seal a flex layer. Appropriate correction is required, e.g., incorporating into claim 1 the essential structures of the goggles that further include structures that could provide a seal or flex layer, e.g., the eyepieces as disclosed in Applicants specification, e.g., the goggle comprises a strap configured to wrap around the user’s head and two eyepieces affixed or mounted to the strap and coupled together by an adjustable nosepiece that flexes and rotates over the eye socket and is configured to conform to the user’s facial contours; and a sealing pad attached to the eyepieces and configured to press against and conform it's shape to the user’s skin around each eye to form a watertight–seal ([0006]-[0009]) (See Claim Interpretation section above). See MPEP 2173.05(a).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for ‘establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103, the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103 and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103. Claims 1-15, 17-21, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nigro (US 6792401 B1).
As to claim 1, Nigro teaches a method for producing customized eyeglasses (as method for selecting, fitting, and purchasing eyeglasses Col.2,ll.65-66) (where eyeglasses are considered equivalent to goggles, as no distinguishing elements or features recited in the claims, See Claim Interpretation above), comprising steps of:
obtaining data associated with a three-dimensional representation of at least a portion of the face of a human, wherein the three-dimensional representational data comprises one or more physical measurements of at least a portion of the face of the human (where 3D textured modeling data acquisition for eyeglass frame specifications required, e.g., bridge and temple distances for proper fitting of the eyeglass frames Col.3,ll.13-16-19,29-32; including 3D model of face areas Col.4,ll.37-40); analyzing, by at least one computer, the three-dimensional representational data to obtain analyzed data comprising a design for eyeglasses/goggles customized to at least one of fit to and interface with at least a portion of the face of the human (where 3D data gathering based on head including face surface of customer for eyeglass frames using computer 3D modeling/reconstruction using computer 3D image generation, processing and recognition software with a GUI for 3D viewing Col.3,ll.29-41; including database and software program including data acquisition and image analysis for construction of 3D model using texture and untextured patterns using polygonal/volume of face area suitable eyeglass/goggle frame measurements for fitting the face based on 3D model of face Col.4,ll.36-56); and using the analyzed data for manufacturing of the goggles/eyeglasses (Col.14,ll.51-57) . Nigro does not specifically teach that the eyeglasses are goggles. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the eyeglasses of Nigro to be goggles, and one of skill would have been motivated to do so, where eyeglasses are considered equivalent to goggles, as no distinguishing elements or features are recited in the claims (See Claim Interpretation above), and where eyeglasses are in the same field of endeavor as coverings for the eyes with similar structures and functions.
As to claim 2, Nigro teaches wherein the manufacturing is performed using a manufacturing device and wherein the analyzed data is provided to the manufacturing device (Col.14,ll.45, 51-57) wirelessly (WAN Col.8,ll.38-43,51-52).
As to claims 3-9, Nigro teaches wherein: (claim 3) the three-dimensional representational data of the human face is obtained using at least one of a scan of the human face and an image of the human face obtained using one or more devices configured to perform at least one of the scanning and the imaging (where 3D textured modeling data acquisition from scans and images of the face for eyeglass frame specifications required, e.g., bridge and temple distances and shape for proper fitting of the eyeglass frames to the corresponding fact portions Col.3,ll.13-16-19,29-32; including 3D modeling of face areas Col.4,ll.37-40); (claim 4) the one or more devices comprise at least one of a camera (one or more cameras Col.5,ll.34-54) and a visible light device (light projectors Col.4,ll.43-67); (claim 5) the image is produced by the camera (where images from one or more cameras Col.5,ll.34-54); (claim 6) the one or more devices produce at least one of analog data and digital data based upon which the three-dimensional representational data is calculated (where digital data as 3D textured model and logistics data Col.3,ll.13-27); (claim 7) further comprising using photogrammetry to calculate the three-dimensional representational data based on the at least one of the scan and the image (where photo and 3D textured model data Col.3,ll.12-19; using software for 3D reconstruction from 2D image data Col.3,ll.34-36); (claim 8) during the at least one of the imaging and the scanning, at least one of: at least one of the devices is moving and at least the part of the human comprising the face is moving; and/or at least one of the devices is stationary and at the part of the human comprising the face is stationary (where head is kept motionless Col.5,ll.16-17 and camera takes photos by stationary or moving as different positions around head and face Col.5,ll.10-24); and (claim 9) at least one of the devices performs duplex imaging (where 2D and 3D imaging data are obtained using both general and projected illumination, data acquisition, image analysis, and model construction Col.4,ll.42-55).
As to claim 10, Nigro teaches wherein the three-dimensional representational data is calculated from at least one of camera imaging data, visible light imaging data (where 3D imaging data are obtained using both general and projected illumination, data acquisition, image analysis, and model construction Col.4,ll.42-55 using one or more cameras Col.3,ll.53-67).
As to claims 11-12, Nigro teaches wherein the physical measurements comprise one or more of shape, diameter, length, dimension, volume, and geometric shape measurements of a portion the person's face; and wherein the physical measurements are associated with at least one of one or more facial features and facial contours (where 3D data gathering based on head of customer for eyeglass frames using computer 3D modeling/reconstruction using computer 3D image processing and recognition software with GUI for 3D viewing Col.3,ll.29-41; including database and software program including data acquisition and image analysis for reconstruction of 3D model of face area suitable for construction of 3D model and eyeglass/goggle frame measurements based on 3D model of face Col.4,ll.36-41).
As to claim 13, Nigro teaches wherein the at least one computer comprises a design and reconstruction program for the analysis of the three-dimensional representational data (where 3D data gathering based on head of customer for eyeglass frames using computer 3D modeling/design/reconstruction using computer 3D image processing and recognition software on a computer with GUI for 3D viewing Col.3,ll.29-41; including database and software program including data acquisition and image analysis for reconstruction of 3D model of face area suitable for construction of 3D model and eyeglass/goggle frame measurements based on 3D model of face Col.4,ll.36-41).
As to claim 14, Nigro teaches wherein obtaining the analyzed data comprises: one or more of: mapping at least a portion of the three-dimensional representational data; 3-D topographical mapping at least a portion of the three-dimensional representational data; volumetric element calculating based on at least a portion of the three-dimensional representational data; performing calculations based on at least a portion of the three-dimensional representational data; and rendering at least a portion of the three-dimensional representational data (where 3D data gathering based on head including face of customer for eyeglass frames using computer 3D modeling/reconstruction using computer 3D image generation, processing and recognition software with a GUI for 3D viewing Col.3,ll.29-41; including database and software program including data acquisition and image analysis for construction of 3D model using texture and untextured patterns using polygonal/volume of face area suitable eyeglass/goggle frame measurements for fitting the face based on 3D model of face Col.4,ll.36-56).
As to claim 15, Nigro teaches wherein the manufacturing comprises one or more of producing the goggles, creating the goggles, constructing the goggles, molding the goggles, fixing the goggles, curing the goggles, extrusion, surface molding, performing a chemical reaction, application of a mechanical force, a mechanical reaction, heating, cooling, performing lamination, welding, and an application of an electromagnetic energy (where measurements from the 3D modeling of the face are used for specifying 3D modeling data providing the exact dimensions of the eyeglass frames and put in a database Col.6,ll.21-29,46-53; wherein the data is provided to the frame manufacturer Col.3,ll.6 as an order to the frame manufacturer to fill the order Col.6,ll.58-61; as accessed wirelessly through a WAN Col.8,ll.52-53; where the frames manufacturer produces, creates, and/or constructs the frames using the order and eyeglasses are assembled by an assembling entity Col.11,ll.45-50 ).
As to claim 17, Nigro teaches wherein at least a portion of the goggles comprise at least one of a solid, a gas, a liquid, a gel, a gel slurry, plastics, a thermo-sensitive material, a transitional material, a phase change material, a metal, an elastomer, a thermoplastic material, an extrusion material, a surface molding material, a material that can be cut, a material that can encapsulate, and a material that can be encapsulated (where the eyeglasses would necessarily include a solid, e.g, the frames and the lenses, as further presented above).
As to claim 18, Nigro teaches wherein at least a portion of a material comprised in the goggles has at least one variable characteristic comprising one or more of elasticity, hardness, softness, firmness, stiffness, elongation, stretchability, thickness, plasticity, hydrophobicity, and hydrophilicity (where the eyeglasses would necessarily include a solid, e.g, the frames and the lenses, that would necessarily have characteristics including at least hardness, firmness, stiffness, and thickness, as further presented above).
As to claim 19, Nigro teaches wherein the physical measurements are associated with one or more of a skin of the face, features of the face, facial structures, facial parts, unique facial features, nose, pupils, eyes, orbits, orbital socket, orbital depth, orbital region, cheeks, zygomatic prominences, pupils, regions near the face, margins of structures of the face, edges of the structures of the face, structures near the face, structures away from the face, structures of the face interfacing with the goggles, structures adjacent to the face, inner locations of the eyes, medial locations of the eyes, lateral locations of the eyes, anterior features of the face, posterior features of the face, cranial features of the face, caudal features of the face, medial features of the face, lateral features of the face, at least one plane of the face, features of the head of the human, and wherein the measurements comprise one or more contours, curvatures, profiles, asymmetries, distances, elasticity, and angulation (where 3D textured modeling data acquisition for eyeglass frame specifications required, e.g., bridge and temple distances for proper fitting of the eyeglass frames Col.3,ll.13-16-19,29-32; including 3D model of face areas Col.4,ll.37-40; where 3D includes facial and head physical measurement data that is processed to provide frame dimensions sent to the manufacturer sufficient to manufacture the frame Col.14,ll.51-56).
As to claim 20, Nigro teaches wherein the design comprises one or more of: a size of at least a portion of the goggles, a user interface of at least a portion of the goggles, a thickness of at least a portion of the goggles, and at least one characteristic of at least a portion of the goggles that is associated with one or more of an optimal warmth, cooling, light, shade, sensitivity to touch of the face, softness and hardness of the face, stimulation of a body part of the human, feedback for pain of the human, and temperature of the human (where 3D textured modeling data acquisition for eyeglass frame specifications required, e.g., bridge and temple distances for proper fitting of the eyeglass frames Col.3,ll.13-16-19,29-32; including 3D model of face areas Col.4,ll.37-40; where 3D includes physical measurement data including the frame dimensions sent to the manufacturer sufficient to manufacture the frame Col.14,ll.51-56).
As to claim 21, Nigro teaches wherein the goggles comprise components comprising at least one of a frame, an eyepiece, a lens, a transparent lens, a nosepiece, a strap, an interface between the goggles and the human skin, a gasket, a seal, a sealing pad, a sealing interface, a closure device, a connector, a flex layer, an earbuds, an ear plug, an earphones, an orifice seal, an acoustic seal, a nose plug, a respiratory mask, a breathing mask, a closure device, and a closure device capable of holding at least one of an electrical device, a digital music device, and a monitoring device (where 3D textured modeling data acquisition for eyeglass lens and frame specifications and dimensions required, e.g., lens location, bridge and temple distances for proper fitting of the eyeglass frames and lens Col.3,ll.13-16-19,29-32; including 3D model of face areas Col.4,ll.37-40; where 3D includes physical measurement data including the lens and frame dimensions and specifications sent to the lens manufacturer and the frame manufacturer sufficient to manufacture the lens and the frame Col.14,ll.51-56).
As to claim 27, Nigro teaches the goggles manufactured in accordance with the method of Claim 1 (as presented above for claim 1).
Claims 16 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nigro in view of Davis (US 2021/0322702 A1)
As to claims 16 and 22-23, Nigro does not teach wherein: (16) the manufacturing comprises cutting; (22) the goggles are comprised in a mask; and (23) the mask comprises one or more of a respiratory mask, a breathing mask, a CPAP mask, a positive or negative pressure breathing mask, and a uni-body structure.
However, as to claim 1 (from which claims 16, 22-23 and 25-26 depend), Davis teaches a method for producing customized goggles (goggles as eyeglasses [0137],ll.15,17 that are provided as removably part of a facemask [0137],ll.1-2), comprising steps of:
obtaining data associated with a three-dimensional representation of at least a portion of the face of a human, wherein the three-dimensional representational data comprises one or more physical measurements of at least a portion of the face of the human (where 3D model of face for custom face mask created through multidimensional data of an individual’s face that is acquired through 3D scanner, multiple image or video cameras, etc. [0083],ll.1-12); and analyzing, by at least one computer, the three-dimensional representational data to obtain analyzed data comprising a design for goggles customized to at least one of fit to and interface with at least a portion of the face of the human (where 3D model of face for manufacture of a custom face mask including goggles using analyzed 3D digitized 3D face contour data of an individual’s face using digital reconstruction software [0083],ll.6-13); and using the analyzed data for manufacturing of the goggles/mask (where 3D model of face for manufacture of a custom face mask including goggles using analyzed 3D digitized 3D face contour data of an individual’s face using digital reconstruction software [0083],ll.6-13; where eyeglasses/goggles [0137],ll.15,17 part of mask [0137],ll.6-7).
As to claim 21 (from which claims 22-23 depend), Davis teaches wherein the goggles comprise a lens (where goggles as eyeglasses as part of mask [0137],ll.15,17 comprise lenses [0137],ll.7-8.
As to claims 16 and 22-23, Davis further teaches: (16) wherein the manufacturing comprises cutting (where mask/goggle manufactured using a subtractive 3D printer that is operable to cut around at least 3 axes [0086],ll.8-9, 1-13); (22) wherein the goggles is comprised in a mask (where goggles as eyeglasses as part of mask [0137],ll.15,17, 7-8); and (23) wherein the mask comprises one or more of a respiratory mask, a breathing mask, a CPAP mask, and a positive or negative pressure breathing mask (where mask can include positive air pressure, such as CPAP, as breathing or respiratory mask [0021],ll.5-6): (16) in order to facilitate manufacturing of the googles/mask using subtractive 3D printing that can be more efficient than other methods and includes cutting [0086]; and (22-23) in order to provide a CPAP mask/goggle with softer material for contact with the face of the user [0021],ll.6-8. It would have been obvious to one of skill before the effective filing date to modify the googles/mask of Davis, and one of skill would have been motivated to do so, (16) in order to facilitate manufacturing of the googles/mask using subtractive 3D printing that can be more efficient than other methods and includes cutting [0086]; and (22-23) in order to provide a CPAP mask/goggle with softer material for contact with the face of the user.
Allowable Subject Matter
Subject to the 112(b) indefiniteness rejection above, Claims 24-26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 24-26 are considered allowable over the prior art of record.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art of record is Nigro (US 6792401 B1) and Davis (US 2021/0322702 A1). As to claim 1 (from which claim 24 depends), Nigro teaches a method for producing customized eyeglasses (as method for selecting, fitting, and purchasing eyeglasses Col.2,ll.65-66) (where eyeglasses are considered equivalent to goggles, as no distinguishing elements or features are recited in the claims, See Claim Interpretation above), comprising steps of:
obtaining data associated with a three-dimensional representation of at least a portion of the face of a human, wherein the three-dimensional representational data comprises one or more physical measurements of at least a portion of the face of the human (where 3D textured modeling data acquisition for eyeglass frame specifications required, e.g., bridge and temple distances for proper fitting of the eyeglass frames Col.3,ll.13-16-19,29-32; including 3D model of face areas Col.4,ll.37-40); analyzing, by at least one computer, the three-dimensional representational data to obtain analyzed data comprising a design for eyeglasses/goggles customized to at least one of fit to and interface with at least a portion of the face of the human (where 3D data gathering based on head of customer for eyeglass frames using computer 3D modeling/reconstruction using computer 3D image processing and recognition software with GUI for 3D viewing Col.3,ll.29-41; including database and software program including data acquisition and image analysis for construction of 3D model of face area suitable for construction of 3D model and eyeglass/goggle frame measurements based on 3D model of face Col.4,ll.36-41); and using the analyzed data for manufacturing of the goggles/eyeglasses (Col.14,ll.51-57) .
As to claim 1 (from which claim 24 depends), Davis teaches a method for producing customized goggles (goggles as eyeglasses [0137],ll.15,17 that are provided as removably part of a facemask [0137],ll.1-2), comprising steps of:
obtaining data associated with a three-dimensional representation of at least a portion of the face of a human, wherein the three-dimensional representational data comprises one or more physical measurements of at least a portion of the face of the human (where 3D model of face for custom face mask created through multidimensional data of an individual’s face that is acquired through 3D scanner, multiple image or video cameras, etc. [0083],ll.1-12); and analyzing, by at least one computer, the three-dimensional representational data to obtain analyzed data comprising a design for goggles customized to at least one of fit to and interface with at least a portion of the face of the human (where 3D model of face for manufacture of a custom face mask including goggles using analyzed 3D digitized 3D face contour data of an individual’s face using digital reconstruction software [0083],ll.6-13); and using the analyzed data for manufacturing of the goggles/mask (where 3D model of face for manufacture of a custom face mask including goggles using analyzed 3D digitized 3D face contour data of an individual’s face using digital reconstruction software [0083],ll.6-13; where eyeglasses/goggles [0137],ll.15,17 part of mask [0137],ll.6-7).
However, Nigro and/or Davis fail to teach or fairly suggest (claim 24) wherein the goggles comprise a seal, at least a portion of the seal comprising one or more of an airtight and watertight interface between the goggles and the human skin, an airtight and watertight sealing interface, an airtight and watertight interface sealing layer, an airtight and watertight gasket, an airtight and watertight sealing pad, an airtight and watertight flex layer seal, an annular seal, and a non-annular seal. It would not have been obvious to one of skill before the effective filing date to modify the goggles of Nigro and/or Davis to further include the seal as claimed in claim 24, and one of skill would not have been motivated to do so, where Nigro and/or Davis fail to teach or fairly suggest adding these elements and features, and do not provide any motivation to do so.
The remaining claims 25-26 are allowable as depending from an allowable base claim 24.
No Obviousness Type Double Patenting
It is noted that the claims of issued patents US 9,107,737 B2; US 9,943,443 B2; US 11,337,858 B2; US 11,974,951 B2 and US 12,295,888 B2 (issued from parent applications 13/683775; 14/828476; 16/203424; 18/302612 and 18/610130, respectively) fail to teach or fairly suggest the present claims of applicants, e.g., where the claims of these issued patents are directed to materially different inventions; and which fail to teach or fairly suggest the combination of elements as presented above for the prior art. Thus, the claims of these patents do not render obvious the present claims under Obviousness-Type Double Patenting.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The references provided on the attached PTO Form 892 are considered relevant to Applicants’ disclosure and are cited to show further the general state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to: GUY K. TOWNSEND whose telephone number is (571) 270-3689. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri., 11 am to 6 pm Eastern Time. The direct fax number is (571) 270-4689.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, REBECCA EISENBERG, can be reached on 571-270-5879. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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 more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GUY K TOWNSEND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781