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 .
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.
DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to Application filed on 9/8/2025 in which claims 1-13 were presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/10/2025 was considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “filles” did the applicant meant to recite –fills--? Appropriate correction is required.
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 5-8 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 5 recites “configured …a half -type helmet” which is unclear what the metes and bound the applicant is trying to claim.
Claims 6-8 are rejected because they depend directly or indirectly on rejected claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Specifically, these claims recite human body parts, of which limitations positively reciting non-statutory subject matter. The claims are claiming “disposed along a boundary” it is suggested to change to –for disposing along a boundary--.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Allen et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0143383 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Allen et al. “Allen” discloses a protection device (10) comprising:
an inflating strap (See Fig. 2 identifiers 22, 26, 28) having flexibility (because they are airbags that inflate and deflate) and configured (capable) to be disposed in contact with a skin of a wearer along at least a part of a boundary region between a neck and a head of the wearer in a state before the protection device is operated (See Fig. 1), the inflating strap (22, 26, 28) including an inflating portion (which is the airbag internal cavity) configured (capable) to be inflated when an inflation source (gas) is supplied at a time of operation of the protection device (para. 0020);
an inflation source supplier (See Fig. 3 identifier 34) configured (capable) to supply the inflation source to the inflating portion (para. 0021); and
an activator (18) configured (capable) to inflate the inflating portion by activating the inflation source supplier (para. 0019), wherein
the recitation “a movement of the neck of the wearer is restricted by inflating the inflating portion at a time of operation” is considered functional, the device of the prior art discloses substantially all of the claimed structural elements and therefore, it is fully capable of performing the claimed function.
Regarding claim 2, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the inflating strap (22, 26, 28) includes a lower-chin-strap portion (22, 26) disposed along a boundary region between an anterior neck and a lower chin portion of the wearer in the state before the protection device is operated (See Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the inflating strap (22, 26, 28) includes a rear strap portion (28) disposed along a boundary region between a posterior neck and an occipital portion of the wearer (See Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the inflating strap (22, 26, 28) includes a lower-chin-strap portion (22, 26) disposed along a boundary region between an anterior neck and a lower chin portion of the wearer in the state before the protection device is operated (See Fig. 2); a protection device wherein the inflating strap (22, 26, 28) includes a rear strap portion (28) disposed along a boundary region between a posterior neck and an occipital portion of the wearer (See Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the inflating strap (22, 26, 28) is formed of at least a part of a fixing strap configured (capable) to fix to the wearer a half-type helmet (See Figs. 1-2) configured (capable) to protect the head (when worn).
Regarding claim 6, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the activator further includes an operation condition detection sensor (sensor array 18 as shown in Fig. 3) configured (capable) to detect that a predetermined operation condition is satisfied (see also para. 0037), and the inflation source supplier and the activator are mounted on the helmet (See Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the inflation source supplier (34) and the activator (18) are attachable to and detachable from the helmet (para. 0021).
Regarding claim 8, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the activator further includes a mounting state detection sensor configured to detect whether the helmet is worn on the head of the wearer (sensors 18 are also mounting sensors since they detect impacts, meaning they work when the helmet is worn and in motion, see for example para. 0033).
Regarding claim 9, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the inflating strap (22, 26, 28) further includes a core cord portion to which the inflation source is not supplied, and the inflating portion is provided in contact with and integrally with the core cord portion (the chin strap to the left of airbag 26 that is attached to the helmet as shown in Fig. 2 is considered the core cord).
Regarding claim 12, Allen has been previously discussed, but their teachings will again be summarized below. Allen teaches a protection device (10) comprising: an inflating strap (See Fig. 2 identifiers 22, 26, 28) having flexibility (because they are airbags that inflate and deflate) and configured (capable) to be disposed in contact with a skin of a wearer along at least a part of a boundary region between a neck and a head of the wearer in a state before the protection device is operated (See Fig. 1), the inflating strap (22, 26, 28) including an inflating portion (which is the airbag internal cavity) configured (capable) to be inflated when an inflation source (gas) is supplied at a time of operation of the protection device (para. 0020); an inflation source supplier (See Fig. 3 identifier 34) configured (capable) to supply the inflation source to the inflating portion (para. 0021); and an activator (18) configured (capable) to inflate the inflating portion by activating the inflation source supplier (para. 0019). Under the principles of anticipation, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would inherently perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir.1986). MPEP 2112.02.
Regarding claim 13, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the inflating strap fills a gap around the neck when being inflated (0020).
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 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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Allen et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0143383 A1) in view of Lewis et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,296,204 B1).
Regarding claim 11, Allen discloses a protection device wherein the inflation source supplier (34) is a gas supply generator configured to supply inflation gas that inflates the inflating portion to the inflating portion at a time of operation (para. 0020), and
Allen does not explicitly disclose that the gas generator includes a conduit configured to introduce the inflation gas to the inflating portion, the conduit being provided with a release valve.
However, Lewis et al. “Lewis” teaches yet another protection device (See Figs. 3-7) helmet 30 operates to protect the head of the air crewmember 22 during the ejection. Located in the air crewmember's helmet 30 secured along one of the inflatable member's edges to the edge of the helmet is an inflatable member 32. Enclosed in a frangible cover 34 inside the helmet 30 is the inflatable member 32. The frangible cover is secured to the helmet and below the headband 36 allowing the inflatable member, when the cover is broken, to extend out of the helmet 30 in the direction of the arrows 38 in FIGS. 4-7. The frangible cover 34 also functions to guide the inflatable member 32 downward from the headband 36 and out of the helmet 30. An inflation tube or conduit 40 is connected between an inlet 42 in the inflatable member 32 and a source of inflation fluid 44 that may be coming from the seat 20 or contained within the helmet 30. The source of the inflation fluid 44 may be one or more inflators that ignited by a control system 29 responsive to the ejection sequence. In order to maintain pressure in the inflatable member 32 once it is inflated, there may be a one-way valve member 45 located at the inlet 42 in fluid communication with the inflatable member and the inflator. The one-way valve member 45 allows the inflation fluid into the inflatable member but does not allow it to escape once the conduit 40 disconnects from the inflator 44. As illustrated, the one-way valve member 45 is located in the conduit 40 at the inlet 42. In the alternative, the one-way valve member 45 may be located inside the inflatable member 32 adjacent the inlet 42 (Col. 2, lines 50-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have manufactured Allen device with a conduit configured to introduce the inflation gas to the inflating portion, the conduit being provided with a release valve as taught by Lewis in order to deliver gas to inflate the airbags and to prevent gas from escaping the airbags preventing injuries.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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 (move the language of claim 10 to claim 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered (See PTO-892) pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHALED ANNIS whose telephone number is (571)270-1563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 am-5 PM 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, Alissa Tompkins can be reached at 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.
/KHALED ANNIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights