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 .
A power of attorney is of record for this application, filed 7/25/2025.
This Office Action is based on the pre-amendment of 7/25/2025. Claims 1-20 are cancelled and claims 21-40 are pending.
Note that claims 21-35 receive the effective filing date of the application, 7/25/2025 as the limitations are not found in the originally filed specification as outlined herein.
Claim Objections
Claim 36 is objected to because of the following informalities: It appears that “from” should be deleted from the preamble of the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: Claim 21 recites a first mounting ridge positioned on the first lateral surface of the shell, the first mounting ridge comprises a port, the visor comprising a first stretch portion extending between and connecting the front portion of the visor and the rear portion of the visor and a second stretch portion opposing the first stretch portion, the second stretch portion extending between and connecting the front portion of the visor and the rear portion of the visor, a clip engaging the first mounting ridge, the clip supporting the rear portion of the visor. Claim 22 recites a second mounting ridge positioned on the second lateral surface of the shell. Claim 23 recites the first stretch portion extends along an exterior surface of the first mounting ridge and the second stretch portion extends along an exterior surface of the second mounting ridge. Claim 24 recites the second mounting ridge comprises a second port. Claim 25 recites the first stretch portion is formed from a material that is more elastic than the semi-transparent material of the front portion and is more elastic than a material of the rear portion. Claim 26 recites the first stretch portion overlaps with the first mounting ridge and the rear portion overlaps with the first mounting ridge. Claim 27 recites the rear portion of the visor is formed from an opaque material. Claim 28 recites an elastic strap coupled to opposing sections of the front portion of the visor, the elastic strap extending under a front portion of the brim. Note that the specification as filed includes different terms for various elements of the invention, e.g. an auxiliary ridge and stretch zones. Claim 29 recites a first mounting ridge positioned on a first lateral surface of the shell and a first stretch portion positioned on a first side of the visor, the first stretch portion extending between and connecting the front and rear portions of the visor. Claim 30 recites a second stretch portion on a second side of the visor, the second stretch portion extending between and connecting the front portion of the visor and the rear portion of the visor. Claim 31 recites a second mounting ridge positioned on the second lateral surface of the shell and the first stretch portion positioned adjacent to the first mounting ridge and the second stretch portion adjacent to the second mounting ridge.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first mounting ridge positioned on the first lateral surface of the shell and the first mounting ridge comprises a port and a clip engaging the first mounting ridge and the clip supporting the rear portion of the visor (claim 21) and the second mounting ridge positioned on the second lateral surface of the shell (claim 22), and the limitations of claims 23-35 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hylton (U.S. 2019/0387827) in view of Lacy (U.S. 10,098,398). Hylton discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Hylton teaches a visor 12 configured to be coupled to and support from a hard hat (par.0006 discloses a hardhat safety helmet as an example of a helmet that can be worn with the visor), the visor comprising: a first portion (front portion) configured to extend around a first portion of a hard hat; a second portion (rear portion) configured to extend around a second portion of the hard hat and wherein the first portion and the second portion of the visor each extend radially outward from an inner edge to an outer edge (visor 12 connects to crown 11 at the inner edge of the brim). However, Hylton doesn’t teach a first stretch zone extending between and connecting the first portion of the visor and the second portion of the visor; and a second stretch zone opposing the first stretch zone, the second stretch zone extending between and connecting the first portion of the visor and the second portion of the visor; and wherein the first stretch zone and the second stretch zone are positioned between the inner edge and the outer edge. Lacy teaches a foldable visor 200 (2A-D) with a first stretch zone 212 extending between and connecting the first portion of the visor and the second portion of the visor, and a second stretch zone 212 opposing the first stretch zone and extending between and connecting the first portion of the visor and second portion of the visor. Lacy teaches the stretch zones as “center webbing” and teaches that the center webbing may be more elastic than the bias material in col.7, lines 4-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hylton’s visor to include the first and second stretch zones as claimed and taught by Lacy, such that Hylton’s visor can fold at the stretch zones for compact storage.
Claims 37-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hylton in view of Lacy as applied to claim 36 above, and further in view of Schoener (U.S. 2,934,767) and Davis (U.S. 6,263,508). Hylton discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Hylton doesn’t teach the first portion of the visor is formed from a semi-transparent material, and the second portion of the visor is formed from an opaque material and the semi-transparent material is a plastic material and the opaque material is fabric or the first and second portions are each formed from an opaque material. Schoener teaches that it’s known in the art to form a visor as semi-transparent (“transparent but colored”, i.e. tinted plastic as the visor is formed from plastic) or opaque. Davis teaches it’s known in the art to form a visor 42 as in Figure 9 that extends 360 degrees in circumference from a combination of materials, with different sections of the visor being a solid portion to act as an eye shade and other sections being tinted translucent plastic to permit filtered light to pass through. For claims 37 and 38, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hylton’s first portion of the visor to form from semi-transparent material and to modify the second portion of the visor to form from an opaque material and the semi-transparent material is a plastic material and the opaque material is fabric, as Davis teaches that it’s known in the art to provide a visor with sections formed from different materials to shade the wearer’s eyes from light or to permit filtered light to pass through the visor. The materials are known in the art as Hylton’s visor is formed from canvas and Schoener teaches the semi-transparent plastic will permit filtered light to pass through to the wearer’s eyes. For claim 39, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the first and second portions from an opaque material, as Hylton’s visor may be formed from canvas and Schoener teaches a visor formed form opaque material is known to act as an eye shade.
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hylton in view of Lacy as applied to claim 36 above, and further in view of Niedermeyer (U.S. 2020/0253311). Hylton discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Hylton, as modified by Lacy, teaches the first stretch and second stretch zone are formed from a first material and the first portion of the visor is formed from a second material (canvas) and the second portion of the visor is formed from a third material (bias material of the visor as in col.7, lines 1-5) and the first material is more elastic than the second material and third material as the center webbing is more elastic than the bias material and the first material is more elastic than canvas which is not elastic. Hylton doesn’t teach the visor comprising an elastic strap coupled to opposing sections of the first portion of the visor. Niedermeyer teaches a visor 20 comprising an elastic strap 34 coupled to opposing sections of the first portion of the visor configured to extend around a first portion of a hard hat. The strap includes two portions that join together to form the strap and the strap is an elastic retention strap for securing the visor to a hard hat. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hylton to provide the visor with an elastic strap coupled to opposing sections of the first portion of the visor, as Niedermeyer teaches it’s known to provide a visor with an elastic strap coupled to opposing sections of the first portion of the visor for securing the visor to a hard hat.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-35 are allowed because the prior art doesn’t teach the hard hat system including a hard hat with a shell having an exterior surface with front, rear, and lateral surfaces, a first mounting ridge positioned on the lateral surface of the shell, the ridge comprising a port and a brim extending radially outward from the shell’s exterior surface, a visor supported by the brim, the visor having a rear portion extending around the rear surface of the shell to the first mounting ridge, a front portion coupled to the rear portion, the front portion extending around the front surface of the shell to the first mounting ridge, the front portion formed from semi-transparent material and a first stretch portion extending between and connecting the front portion of the visor and the rear portion of the visor and a second stretch portion opposing the first stretch portion, the second stretch portion extending between and connecting the front portion of the visor and the rear portion of the visor, a clip engaging the first mounting ridge, the clip supporting the rear portion of the visor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications should be directed to Primary Examiner Katherine Moran at (571) 272-4990 (phone). Please note that any internet communication directed to katherine.moran@uspto.gov requires prior submission of an Authorization for Internet Communications form (PTO/SB/439). The examiner can be reached on Monday-Thursday from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm, and alternating Fridays.If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Khoa Huynh, may be reached at (571) 272-4888. The official and after final fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is (571) 273-8300. General information regarding this application and
questions directed to matters of form and procedures may be directed to the PTO Contact
Center/Inventors Assistance Center at (800) 786-9199/571-272-1000. 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 questions on
access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-
free).
/KATHERINE M MORAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732