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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 27 April 2026, is reviewed and entered. This Office Action is a final rejection.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Status of Claims
Amended
1
Canceled
4
Pending
1-3 and 5-9
Presented for Examination
1-3 and 5-9
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 27 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Drawing Objections
Overcome by the replacement drawings and withdrawn.
103 Rejections
The arguments are drawn to amended subject matter and are addressed in the rejection below.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 27 April 2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruce (US 6074060 A) in view of Nakano (US 5581821 A) and Draper (US 4219018 A).
As to claim 1, Bruce discloses noise reduction goggles (“Eyesight and hearing safety apparatus,” title), comprising a goggles frame and goggles legs (frame 2, temple member 3), wherein the goggles legs are respectively hinged to two ends of the goggles frame (FIG 1; col 3 line 1-15 describes the connection and specifically that 2 is pivotally attached to 3 via a hinge);
eye-protection lenses are mounted at the goggles frame (eye shield or protective lens 4);
noise reduction pendants are mounted at the goggles legs (combination of cord 5 and ear protectors 6); each noise reduction pendant is provided with a cotton thread (cord 5, see modification below regarding “cotton”), and a noise reduction earplug (ear protectors 6);
one end of the cotton thread is connected to the adjustment mechanism (first end 11, see modification below regarding “cotton”), and the other end of the cotton thread is connected to the noise reduction earplug (second end 12, see modification below regarding “cotton”).
Bruce does not disclose the thread is cotton.
Draper teaches a similar noise reduction pendant (“Earplug unit with inserter and tie,” title) including cotton thread (flexible cord 22; col 2 line 10-20 discloses 22 can be cotton).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide cotton thread, since it is within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. See MPEP 2144.07.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide cotton thread, for the purpose of providing a suitable flexible material for tethering ear plugs (Draper col 2 line 10-20).
Bruce does not disclose an adjustment mechanism, the adjustment mechanisms are mounted at the goggles legs and adjust lengths of the cotton threads, to release or withdraw the noise reduction earplugs;
wherein a pendant box is further arranged on each goggles leg and extends from one portion of the goggles leg toward two sides by a distance to form a box structure with an accommodating space inside to accommodate the noise reduction pendant; and
the noise reduction pendant is detachably fixedly connected to the goggles leg.
Nakano teaches a similar noise reduction pendant (“Reelable ear plugs for construction helmets,” title) including an adjustment mechanism (FIG 6), the adjustment mechanisms are mounted in a headwear (FIGS 1-2) and adjust lengths of the threads (cord 14; abstract), to release or withdraw the noise reduction earplugs (capable of releasing and withdrawing and intended to release and withdraw, see Nakano disclosure);
wherein a pendant box is further arranged on the headwear (combination of 24 and 25) to form a box structure with an accommodating space inside to accommodate the noise reduction pendant (FIGS 4 and 6); and
the noise reduction pendant is detachably fixedly connected to the headwear (16 and 17 are detachably fixedly connected to the headwear via the cord 14, pendant box 24/ 25, and other elements).
It is noted that Bruce discloses each goggle leg having an ear plug and cord such that each ear plug is positioned proximate the wearer’s ear, while Nakano discloses both ear plugs and cords are contained in a single box on the back of the headwear and the ear plugs and cords are pulled forward to be proximate the wearer’s ear. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide each of Bruce’s goggle legs with its own pendant box and adjustment mechanism, in order to have the ear plugs readily positioned proximate the wearer’s ears as intended by Bruce.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the goggle legs each with an adjustment mechanism housed in a pendant box, such as by providing each of Bruce’s goggle legs with a pendant box and adjustment mechanism such as Nakano’s, for the purpose of retracting the ear plugs for storage when not in use (Nakano col 1 line 5-15).
As to claim 2, Bruce as modified does not disclose the noise reduction goggles according to claim 1, wherein an auxiliary nail is further arranged between each cotton thread and each noise reduction earplug; and one end of the auxiliary nail is fixedly connected to the cotton thread, and the other end of the auxiliary nail is fixedly connected to the noise reduction earplug in a replaceable manner.
Draper teaches an auxiliary nail is further arranged between each cotton thread and each noise reduction earplug (see annotated Draper FIG 2 below); and one end of the auxiliary nail is fixedly connected to the cotton thread (see annotated Draper FIG 2 below), and the other end of the auxiliary nail is fixedly connected to the noise reduction earplug in a replaceable manner (see annotated Draper FIG 2 below, capable of being replaced).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide an auxiliary nail between the cotton thread and earplug, for the purpose of providing a known earplug construction and a known means of attaching the earplug and cotton thread to one another.
PNG
media_image1.png
515
499
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As to claim 3, Bruce as modified discloses the noise reduction goggles according to claim 1, wherein the noise reduction pendants are detachably fixedly connected to the goggles legs (capable of being detached, such as by cutting, capable of being fixed, as they will remain connected unless acted on by an outside force).
As to claim 5, Bruce as modified discloses the noise reduction goggles according to claim 1, wherein each noise reduction pendant is provided with a base and a top cover (this is the result of the modification presented in the rejection of claim 1 above, where Bruce’s pendant is provided with Nakano’s base 25 and top cover 24); the adjustment mechanism is mounted inside the base (Nakano FIGS 4 and 6); the top cover and the base cooperate with each other and are fixedly connected to form an integral component (Nakano FIGS 4 and 6); an extended guide column is arranged inside the base (combination of Nakano 28 and 32); the adjustment mechanism is provided with a rotating cylinder member (Nakano 30); the rotating cylinder member sleeves the extended guide column and forms a rotatable connection (Nakano FIGS 4 and 6); one end of the cotton thread that is connected to the adjustment mechanism is fixedly connected to the rotating cylinder member to wind around the rotating cylinder member (Nakano FIGS 4-6).
As to claim 6, Bruce as modified discloses the noise reduction goggles according to claim 5, wherein the adjustment mechanism is further provided with a first elastic member (Nakano spring 31), a stop member (Nakano 21, 22, and/ or 23; Nakano col 3 line 10-15 describes how these mechanisms stop retraction), a second elastic member (Nakano spring 35), and a release member (combination of Nakano plunger 34 and 47); one end of the first elastic member is fixedly connected to the extended guide column (Nakano col 3 line 45-55 teaches, “Referring now in detail to FIG. 4, it can be seen that one end of the spring 31 which is commonly known as a negator or retractor spring is connected to the hub 30 via a hooked end 40. However, the opposite end of the retractor spring 31 is connected through a slot in the fixed shaft 28 and is represented by the numeral 41.”), and the other end of the first elastic member is fixedly connected to the rotating cylinder member (Nakano col 3 line 45-55 teaches, “Referring now in detail to FIG. 4, it can be seen that one end of the spring 31 which is commonly known as a negator or retractor spring is connected to the hub 30 via a hooked end 40. However, the opposite end of the retractor spring 31 is connected through a slot in the fixed shaft 28 and is represented by the numeral 41.”), thereby driving the rotating cylinder member to rotate around the extended guide column (Nakano col 3 line 65- col 4 line 5 teaches, “The spring 31 allows the reel to unwind when the reel turns in a clockwise direction. The spring 31 causes withdrawal of the ear plugs and the cord onto the reel when the reel is moved in its counterclockwise direction in response to the tightened tension of the retractor spring 31.”);
one end of the stop member is fixedly connected to the rotating cylinder member (Nakano FIGS 4 and 6), and active teeth are arranged on one side, facing the extended guide column, of the other end of the stop member (Nakano 37);
one end of the release member sleeves the extended guide column (Nakano 47 sleeves 28/32 as shown in Nakano FIG 4), and passive teeth are arranged on one side, facing the stop member, of the other end of the release member (Nakano 36); and
one end of the second elastic member resists against the base (Nakano FIGS 4 and 6; Nakano col 3 line 30-40 teaches, “A control mechanism is illustrated which takes the form of a plunger 33 having an exposed finger-depressing portion 34 which would operate against the expansion of a coil spring 35 to release a latch 36 from an engaged position with a selected one of a plurality of teeth 37 carried on the inner diameter of a flange 38 joined with the hub 30 and movable with the reel 27.”), and the other end of the second elastic member resists against the release member, thereby driving the passive teeth of the release member and the active teeth of the stop member to cooperate with each other to form a ratchet mechanism (Nakano FIGS 4 and 6; Nakano col 3 line 30-40 teaches, “A control mechanism is illustrated which takes the form of a plunger 33 having an exposed finger-depressing portion 34 which would operate against the expansion of a coil spring 35 to release a latch 36 from an engaged position with a selected one of a plurality of teeth 37 carried on the inner diameter of a flange 38 joined with the hub 30 and movable with the reel 27.”).
As to claim 7, Bruce as modified discloses the noise reduction goggles according to claim 1, wherein the eye-protection lenses are detachably mounted inside an arc-shaped slot of the goggles frame (Bruce FIG 1).
As to claim 8, Bruce as modified discloses the noise reduction goggles according to claim 1, wherein the eye-protection lenses are further provided with nose supports (Bruce FIG 1), but does not disclose the nose supports are detachably mounted on the eye-protection lenses.
Making component parts separable or detachable is an obvious modification. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to detachably mount the nose supports, for the purpose of obtaining access to the entire nose support and lens for cleaning or repairing.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruce (US 6074060 A) in view of Nakano (US 5581821 A) and Draper (US 4219018 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Smith (US 4844606 A).
As to claim 9, Bruce as modified does not disclose the noise reduction goggles according to claim 1, wherein pin shafts are respectively arranged at two ends of the goggles frame; a shaft hole is provided in one end of each goggles leg connected to the goggles frame, causing the goggles leg to cooperate with the pin shaft through the shaft hole to form a hinged connection.
As set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above, Bruce discloses a hinge between the frame and legs; however, Bruce does not provide details of the hinge construction. A pin shaft and shaft hole is a known hinge construction.
Smith teaches similar goggles (“Temple fastener for eyeglass frames,” title) including pin shafts are respectively arranged at two ends of the goggles frame (FIG 1); a shaft hole is provided in one end of each goggles leg connected to the goggles frame (FIG 1), causing the goggles leg to cooperate with the pin shaft through the shaft hole to form a hinged connection (FIGS 2-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide the hinged connection with the hinge construction taught by Smith, for the purpose of providing a known hinge construction that is known to withstand repeated hinging movement (Smith abstract).
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 SALLY HADEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6731. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Clinton Ostrup can be reached at 571-272-5559. 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.
SALLY HADEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3732
/SALLY HADEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights