DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lapham (US 2010/0031426). Lapham discloses a ballistic applique for headgear/helmet (10) made of polycarbonate laminate that is bullet resistant/ballistic material, subparagraph 65 including a first shell portion/center support (102, 302); and a second shell portion/front wedge (110) coupled to the first shell portion; wherein the first shell portion is configured to move in relation about pivot point (120, 122, 124) to the second shell portion between: a first position of the first shell portion at which the ballistic applique is in an open position and is configured to receive and at least partially cover the headgear and a second position of the first shell portion at which the ballistic applique is in a closed position and the first and second shell portions are configured to nest in relation to each other, subparagraphs 33-35 and as shown in figures 5. 7, 9, 12-13 and 16-17. The pivot point/fastener is a pin, subparagraph 39 and as shown in figure 4. The first and second shell portions are slidably coupled with the first and second shell portions are configured so that an
inner surface of the first shell portion faces an outer surface of the second shell portion when the
ballistic applique is in the closed position as shown in figures 3-7. Also, a lock feature (118)
having an engageable pin/tabs (122,124) is configured to hold the ballistic applique in at least
one of the open position or the closed position, subparagraphs 37-39. Furthermore, the ballistic
applique is in the open position, a gap (164) is disposed in a region where a portion of the first
shell portion overlaps with a part of the second shell portion, subparagraph 47 and about .25
inches to about 1 inch as shown in figure 7. A headgear (200) includes the helmet and ballistic
applique removably attached thereto, subparagraph 49 and as shown in figure 15.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that the first shell of Lapham moves substantially moves about the pivot point in relation to the second shell portion between a first deployed position and the second position that is in the nesting position depending on level of protection required when the helmet is worn.
With regard to claims 8 and 9, subparagraph 39, discloses the engageable pin/tabs (122,124) being pushed into place. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that the engageable pin/tabs of Lapham can substantially defined as a biasing member will allow the first shell to be fully deployed or fully stowed in a nested position of the first shell portion as needed.
With regard to claims 14 and 16, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that the headgear (200) on an inner portion of helmet of Lapham is substantially formed from but not limited to cushion element of a non-ballistic material that that conforms about the head while minimizing time of attaching/detaching as associated with traditional liners or as required for an end use thereof.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of the prior art references cited on PTO-892 disclose a helmet having first and second shell portions that are nested in relation to each other.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEJASH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-4993. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am -5pm.
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.
August 19, 2026 /TAJASH D PATEL/ Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights