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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on 2/11/2026 has been received; Claims 1-21 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-9 & 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Renaud-Goud (US 2011/0258758).
Regarding Claim 1, Renaud-Goud discloses an ocular protection mask (1) comprising; frame (500), and visor system (Figure 16) fixed to the frame, the visor system including a first visor (308) and a support (100) fixed to the first visor, the first visor covering the front of the frame and the support (Figure 16), wherein the support (at sup, see annotated Figure 16 below) does not project radially from an external edge of the first visor, wherein the support includes: a front surface (FS, see annotated Figure 15 below) fixed against a rear face of the first visor (Figure 16), and a retaining surface (RS or RS, see annotated Figure 15 below) extending substantially parallel to the first visor behind the first visor (Figure 16), the retaining surface and an external edge of the first visor together forming a radial groove (groove1, see annotated Figure 15 below) cooperating with the frame to retain the visor system on the frame (Figures 15 & 16).
Regarding Claim 2, Renaud-Goud discloses the support further includes a rear surface (521) extending in front of the frame (Figure 16), the retaining surface extending between the front surface of the support and the rear surface of the support (Figure 16).
Regarding Claim 3, Renaud-Goud discloses the frame includes a radial groove (groove2, see annotated Figure 15 below), the retaining surface being inserted in the radial groove (Figure 16).
Regarding Claim 4, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface extends along at least 50% of an external edge of the visor (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 5, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface includes at least one notch (see annotated Figure 15 at RS) and the frame includes at least one protuberance (the protuberance in notch, see Figure 16) having a shape complementary to a shape of the at least one notch (Figure 16), the at least one protuberance nesting in the at least one notch (Figure 16).
Regarding Claim 6, Renaud-Goud discloses the at least one notch has a narrowed inlet (RS, see annotated Figure 15 below).
Regarding Claim 7, Renaud-Goud discloses the at least one notch includes: at least one first notch formed on a portion of the retaining surface intended to extend around a nose at least one second notch formed on a portion of the retaining surface intended to extend in front of a cheek (Figures 1-3), and- at least a third notch formed on a portion of the retaining surface intended to extend in front of a forehead (Figures 1-3).
Regarding Claim 8, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface extends at least in a lower part of the support intended to extend in front of cheeks and around nose (Figures 1-3), in an upper part of the support intended to extend in front of a forehead (Figures 1-3), in a left lateral part of the support intended to extend opposite an outside edge of a left eye (Figures 1-3), and in a right lateral part of the support intended to extend opposite an outside edge of a right eye (Figures 1-3).
Regarding Claim 9, Renaud-Goud discloses the frame is more deformable than the visor system (Para. 66), only the frame being intended to be deformed to assemble or to disassemble the visor system onto or from the frame (Para. 66).
Regarding Claim 11, Renaud-Goud discloses an entirety of an external edge of the first visor is visible from outside the mask (an entirely of the front surface edge of the first visor is visible from outside the mask, Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 12, Renaud-Goud discloses the visor system includes a second visor extending parallel to the first visor behind the first visor, the second visor being retained by the support
Regarding Claim 13, Renaud-Goud discloses the frame includes a radial groove (groove2, see annotated Figure 15 below), the retaining surface being inserted in the radial groove (Figure 15).
Regarding Claim 14, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface extends along at least 50% of an external edge of the visor (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 15, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface extends along at least 50% of an external edge of the visor (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 16, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface extends along at least 80% of an external edge of the visor (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 17, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface extends along at least 80% of an external edge of the visor (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 18, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface extends along at least 80% of an external edge of the visor (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 19, Renaud-Goud discloses the retaining surface includes at least one notch (see annotated Figure 15 at RS) and the frame includes at least one protuberance (the protuberance in notch, see Figure 16) having a shape complementary to a shape of the at least one notch (Figure 16), the at least one protuberance nesting in the at least one notch (Figure 16).
Regarding Claim 20, Renaud-Goud discloses the at least one notch has a narrowed inlet (Figure 15).
PNG
media_image1.png
299
325
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
193
502
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Renaud-Goud (US 2011/0258758) in view of Matsumoto (US 2006/0119948).
Regarding Claim 10, Renaud-Goud discloses the ocular protection mask includes an strap (190) configured to retain the ocular protection mask on a head of a person (Para. 87), the strap being fixed to the frame (Figure 1). Renaud-Goud does not specifically disclose the strap is elastic. However, Matsumoto discloses an elastic strap (Para. 54-56 & 58). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use an elastic strap, as taught by Renaud-Goud, in order to provide a snug fit to a user’s head.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 is allowed over the prior art.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHARINE KANE whose telephone number is (571)272-3398. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm EST.
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, KHOA HUYNH can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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.
/KATHARINE G KANE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights