1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates generally to thin-walled, impact-absorbing compressible members. More specifically, the invention relates to an air venting, impact-absorbing compressible member, preferably fabricated from thermoplastic elastomer (TPE) material, that can be used in the construction of a wide variety of shock-absorbing and/or impact protective devices, including, without limitation, protective headgear, protective pads for other parts of the body, protective padding for sports arenas such as hockey rink boards and the like, and impact-absorbing devices for vehicles such as bumpers, dashboards and the like.
2. Background Information
Concussions, also called mild traumatic brain injury, are a common, serious problem in sports known to have detrimental effects on people in the short and long term. With respect to athletes, a concussion is a temporary and reversible neurological impairment, with or without loss of consciousness. Another definition of a concussion is a traumatically induced alteration of brain function manifested by 1) an alteration of awareness or consciousness, and 2) signs and symptoms commonly associated with post-concussion syndrome, such as persistent headaches, loss of balance, and memory disturbances, to list but a few. Some athletes have had their careers abbreviated because of concussions, in particular because those who have sustained multiple concussions show a greater proclivity to further concussions and increasingly severe symptoms. Although concussions are prevalent among athletes, the study of concussions is difficult, treatment options are virtually non-existent, and “return-to-play” guidelines are speculative. Accordingly, the best current solution to concussions is prevention and minimization.
Concussion results from a force being applied to the brain, usually the result of a direct blow to the head, which results in shearing force to the brain tissue, and a subsequent deleterious neurometabolic and neurophysiologic cascade. There are two primary types of forces experienced by the brain in an impact to the head, linear acceleration and rotational acceleration. Both types of acceleration are believed to be important in causing concussions. Decreasing the magnitude of acceleration thus decreases the force applied to the brain, and consequently reduces the risk or severity of a concussion.
Protective headgear is well known to help protect wearers from head injury by decreasing the magnitude of acceleration (or deceleration) experienced by the wearers. Currently marketed helmets primarily address linear forces, but generally do not diminish the rotational forces experienced by the brain. Helmets fall generally into two categories: single impact helmets and multiple-impact helmets. Single-impact helmets undergo permanent deformation under impact, whereas multiple-impact helmets are capable of sustaining multiple blows. Applications of single-impact helmets include, for example, bicycling and motorcycling. Participants of contact sports, such as hockey and football, use multiple-impact helmets. Both categories of helmets have similar construction. A semi-rigid outer shell distributes the force of impact over a wide area and a compressible foam inner layer reduces the force upon the wearer's head.
The inner layer of single-impact helmets are typically constructed of fused expanded polystyrene (EPS), a polymer impregnated with a foaming agent. EPS reduces the amount of energy that reaches the head by permanently deforming under the force of impact. To be effective against the impact, the inner layer must be sufficiently thick not to crush entirely throughout its thickness. A thick inner layer, however, requires a corresponding increase in the size of the outer shell, which increases the size and bulkiness of the helmet.
Inner layers designed for multiple-impact helmets absorb energy through elastic and viscoelastic deformation. To absorb multiple successive hits, these helmets is need to rebound quickly to return to their original shape. Materials that rebound too quickly, however, permit some of the kinetic energy of the impact to transfer to the wearer's head. Examples of materials with positive rebound properties, also called elastic memory, include foamed polyurethane, expanded polypropylene, expanded polyethylene, and foamed vinylnitrile. Although some of these materials have desirable rebound qualities, an inner layer constructed therefrom must be sufficiently thick to prevent forceful impacts from penetrating its entire thickness. The drawback of a thick foam layer, as noted above, is the resulting bulkiness of the helmet. Moreover, the energy absorbing properties of such materials tend to diminish with increasing temperatures, whereas the positive rebound properties diminish with decreasing temperatures.
Regardless of the particular material involved, the material properties and densities of foam inner layers in helmets have historically been selected to optimally absorb energy for impacts that are considered severe for the particular sport or activity in which the helmets are to be used. Foams are thus relatively ineffective in absorbing impact energies below the severe level. Industry safety standards currently test and certify helmet designs based on their ability to absorb high energy impacts to ensure that helmets protect wearers against severe head injuries, such as skull fractures. Recent evidence has shown that lower energy impacts result in less severe yet still damaging head injuries, typically concussions. Current laboratory certification tests are pass/fail tests, and are not designed to test for prevention of concussions.
As such, testing of helmets to protect against concussions is being developed outside the realm of existing industry standards as the industry attempts to determine if helmets can be designed that provide universal protection against both mild and severe impacts. Several manufacturers are experimenting with various permutations of laminated foams and newer materials to broaden the range of impact energies over which the materials provide effective energy absorption. While some progress is being made, it is limited. This is due at least in part to the fact that foam materials are inherently limited in their ability to absorb energy because of their tendency to “bottom out” when compressed. Specifically, foams can be compressed downwardly only about seventy percent (70%) from their uncompressed thicknesses before they become so dense and stiff that they no longer effectively absorb impact energy. This factor is referred to as the “ride-down” point of the foam. When compressed to the is maximum “ride-down” point, a foam in a helmet is said to have “bottomed out”, and acts essentially as a rigid layer that transfers impact energy with little or no absorption directly to the wearer's head.
There is thus a need in the industry for an improved helmet construction that can reduce the risk and severity of head injuries, including concussions, over a wide range of impact energies, without the aforementioned disadvantages of current helmet designs. There exists a similar need for structures that have improved impact-absorbing properties for use in a variety of other applications.
The present invention provides a compressible member whose properties, configuration and construction are optimized to maximize its impact-absorbing capabilities over a wide range of impact energies.
In accordance with the invention, a compressible member comprises a thin-walled enclosure defining a hollow inner chamber containing a volume of fluid such as air. The compressible member has at least one orifice by which fluid can vent from its inner chamber when the member experiences an impact. Preferably, the orifice is sized and positioned so that the compressible member provides a rate sensitive response to impacts, i.e., the member provides relatively low resistance to compression in response to relatively low energy impacts and relatively high resistance to compression in response to relatively high energy impacts. More than one orifice may also be provided in the compressible member so that air flows into its inner chamber following an impact at a rate that can be selected by the designer depending on the particular application of the member to be equal to, less than, or greater than the rate at which air flows out of the inner chamber during the impact.
The thin-walled enclosure of the compressible member is preferably fabricated from blow-molded thermoplastic elastomer material (“TPE”). TPE materials are uniquely suited for the fabrication of the impact-absorbing, compressible members of the invention because they can be readily and economically molded and shaped into the desired thin-walled, hollow configuration, and because they maintain their compressibility, stretchability and structural integrity in use after experiencing repeated impacts. Additionally, because they are hollow and air filled, the TPE compressible members of the invention are capable of being compressed to substantially greater degrees than conventional foams of the type currently used in protective headgear, without “bottoming out.” This greater degree of “ride down” makes the TPE compressible members of the invention effective in the absorption of a much wider range of impact energies. Other advantages resulting from the use of TPE materials for the compressible members of the invention, and their higher “ride-down” factors, are discussed in more detail below.
The compressible members of the invention may be assembled side-by-side in a layer, and combined with one or more layers of other materials, to form multilayer impact-absorbing shells for use in a wide variety of applications. One particularly advantageous embodiment of a protective shell structure comprises a thin outer shell layer, a compressible middle layer comprised of a plurality of the compressible members of the invention arranged in spaced apart positions, and a thin inner layer. In response to an impact to the outer shell layer, the outer layer deflects locally causing the compressible members of the middle layer to compress and vent air from their inner chambers. The inner layer is preferably provided with one or more passageways that allow the air vented from the compressible members to pass to the inside of the inner layer. The outer shell layer and the inner layer are also preferably secured to the compressible middle layer, but not directly or rigidly to each other. This allows the outer layer to shear or rotate relative to the inner layer and thus take up and absorb tangential components of the impact force.
Multilayered shell structures which include one or more compressible members of the invention can be configured and used in the construction of a wide variety of impact-absorbing devices. Examples disclosed include helmets, protective body pads, sports arena padding, vehicle bumpers, dashboards and the like.
The above and further advantages of this invention may be better understood by referring to the following description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like numerals indicate like structural elements and features in various figures. The drawings are not necessarily to scale or relative dimension, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the invention.
Thermoplastic elastomers or TPEs are polymer blends or compounds, which exhibit thermoplastic characteristics that enable shaping into a fabricated article when heated above their melting temperature, and which possess elastomeric properties when cooled to their designed temperature range. Accordingly, TPEs combine the beneficial properties of plastic and rubber, that is, TPEs are moldable and shapeable into a desired shape when heated and are compressible and stretchable when cooled. In contrast, neither thermoplastics nor conventional rubber alone exhibits this combination of properties.
To achieve satisfactory purposes, conventional rubbers must be chemically crosslinked, a process often referred to as vulcanization. This process is slow, irreversible, and results in the individual polymer chain being linked together by covalent bonds that remain effective at normal processing temperatures. As a result, vulcanized rubbers do not become fluid when heated to these normal processing temperatures (i.e., the rubber cannot be melted). When heated well above normal processing temperatures, vulcanized rubbers eventually decompose, resulting in the loss of substantially all useful properties. Thus, conventional vulcanized rubbers cannot be formed into useful objects by processes that involve the shaping of a molten material. Such processes include injection molding, blow molding and extrusion, and are extensively used to produce useful articles from thermoplastics.
Thermoplastics are generally not elastic when cooled and conventional rubbers are not moldable using manufacturing processes and equipment currently used for working with thermoplastics, such as injection molding and extrusion. These processes, however, are applicable for working with TPEs.
Most TPEs have a common feature: they are phase-separated systems. At least one phase is hard and solid at room temperature and another phase is elastomeric and fluid. Often the phases are chemically bonded by block or graft polymerization. In other cases, a fine dispersion of the phases is apparently sufficient. The hard phase gives the TPEs their strength. Without the hard phase, the elastomer phase would be free to flow under stress, and the polymers would be unusable. When the hard phase is melted, or dissolved in a solvent, flow can occur and therefore the TPE can be processed. On cooling, or upon evaporation of the solvent, the hard phase solidifies and the TPEs regain their strength. Thus, in one sense, the hard phase of a TPE behaves similarly to the chemical crosslinks in conventional vulcanized rubbers, and the process by which the hard phase does so is often called physical crosslinking. At the same time, the elastomer phase gives elasticity and flexibility to the TPE.
Examples of TPEs include block copolymers containing elastomeric blocks chemically linked to hard thermoplastic blocks, and blends of these block copolymers with other materials. Suitable hard thermoplastic blocks include polystyrene blocks, polyurethane blocks, and polyester blocks. Other examples of TPEs include blends of a hard thermoplastic with a vulcanized elastomer, in which the vulcanized elastomer is present as a dispersion of small particles. These latter blends are known as thermoplastic vulcanizates or dynamic vulcanizates.
TPEs can also be manufactured with a variety of hardness values, e.g., a soft gel or a hard 90 Shore A or greater. One characteristic of the TPE material is its ability to return to its original shape after the force against it removed (i.e., TPE material is said to have memory). Other characteristics of TPE include its resistance to tear, its receptiveness to coloring, and its rebound resilience elasticity. Rebound resilience elasticity is the ratio of regained energy in relation to the applied energy, and is expressed as a percentage ranging from 0% to 100%. A perfect energy absorber has a percentage of 0%; a perfectly elastic material has a percentage of 100%. In general, a material with low rebound resilience elasticity absorbs most of the applied energy from an impacting object and retransmits little or none of that energy. To illustrate, a steel ball that falls upon material with low rebound resilience elasticity experiences little or no bounce; the material absorbs the energy of the falling ball. In contrast, the ball bounces substantially if it falls upon material with high rebound resilience elasticity. This characteristic can influence the behavior of the compressible member.
Another advantage of these TPEs is that their favorable characteristics may exist over a wide range of temperatures. Preferably, the TPE material of the compressible member 50 has a glass-transition temperature of less than −20 degrees Fahrenheit. The glass-transition temperature is the temperature below which the material loses its soft and rubbery qualities. A TPE material with an appropriate glass-transition temperature can be selected for the compressible member 50 depending on the particular application of the member (e.g., a glass-transition temperature of 0 degrees Fahrenheit may be sufficient for baseball helmets, whereas a glass transition temperature of −40 degrees Fahrenheit may be needed for football and hockey helmets).
The size of the opening 136 in the compressible member 50 is preferably selected to produce a rate-sensitive response to any impact causing compression of the member 50. For instance, if the application of force upon the member 50 is gradual or of relatively low energy, the opening 136 permits sufficient air to pass through so that the member 50 compresses gradually and presents little resistance against the force. In that case, an individual may be able to compress the member 50 manually with a moderate touch of a hand or finger.
If, as illustrated by
A further important advantage of the compressible member 50 is that it can be compressed ninety percent (90%) or more from its uncompressed thickness before “bottoming out”, i.e., before the top wall of TPE material comes in contact with the bottom wall of TPE material. This increased “ride-down” factor compared to conventional foams, which have ride-down factors of only about 70%, increases the distance over which impacts are effectively absorbed and, as a result, decreases the force transferred through the compressible member 50 proportionately to this increased distance. Even when the compressible member 50 “bottoms out”, a thickness of TPE material (equal to twice the wall thickness) remains, which, because of its compressibility, provides further energy absorption.
Additionally, the geometry of the compressible member 50, the stiffness and elasticity of the TPE material used for its enclosure, and the venting of the member 50 can all be adjusted and optimized to provide a “softer landing” than conventional foams across a broad range of impact energy levels. Force/time curves for foams are bell-shaped due to the increased stiffness of foams as they are compressed which results in increasing forces with severe peaks. The shape of the force/time curve for foams is similar regardless of the amount of ride-down, which is dependent on the energy of the impact. For low energy impacts, the ride-down distance of foams is low and can result in concussions, even at relatively low impact energies, especially with EPS foams.
The compressible member 50 of the invention, on the other hand, can be engineered to allow optimal ride down for a wide range of impact energies and also to “shape” the rate at which the forces increase during the impact. This “shaping” of the force/time curve is accomplished by managing the air pressure in the inner chamber of the member 50 for various impact energies, something foams cannot do. The result is a flatter and broader force/time curve for the compressible member 50 which reduces the force of impact. This broader, flatter curve in essence demonstrates a “soft landing”.
This technology allows for the manipulation of multiple engineering parameters, such as material properties, chamber geometry, chamber wall thickness, and relative configurations of outflow(s) and inflow(s). Careful calibration of the many design parameters will allow those skilled in the art to determine the optimum combination based on the particular application to which the member 50 is to be put.
In addition to providing this rate-sensitive response, the compressible member 50 can also stretch and bend during tangential impact, as illustrated by
As the sequence of
To further enhance the “rate-sensitive” response of the compressible member 250 of this embodiment, the outflow slits 254 are elastic, being formed directly in the TPE material of the wall of the enclosure 252. Because of this elasticity, the slits 254 provide some resistance to opening and to the escape of the air in the inner chamber during the impact, and close resiliently and quickly following the impact. The slits 254 are also preferably significantly smaller in diameter that the inflow opening of the one-way flap valve 256. As a result, the member 250 provides a greater degree of resistance to compression and collapse depending upon the energy level of the impact force, yet will return quickly to its uncompressed condition upon removal of the force, ready to absorb additional impacts.
In the shell structure 230 of
Those desiring further details of the construction of a shell structure such as shell structure 230, and its configuration as a protective helmet, are referred to my copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/059,427, filed Feb. 16, 2005, and my related application filed concurrently herewith, titled “EnergyAbsorbing Inner Liners For Use With Protective Headgear”, which, as noted above, are incorporated by reference herein.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that other embodiments of the compressible member, such as the members 150 and 250 shown above, can be substituted for the compressible members 50 in the shell structure 230 of
The layered construction of the invention can be likewise used to construct a variety of types of protective headgear including, but not limited to, safety helmets, motorcycle helmets, bicycle helmets, ski helmets, lacrosse helmets, hockey helmets, and football helmets, batting helmets for baseball and softball, headgear for rock and mountain climbers, and headgear for boxers. Other applications can include helmets used on construction sites, in defense and military applications, and for underground activities.
Although the foregoing description focuses primarily on protective headgear, it is to be understood that the compressible members of the invention can be used in other types of equipment used for sports activities or other applications.
By way of example,
While the invention has been shown and described with reference to specific preferred embodiments, it should be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and detail may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the following claims.
This application is a continuation of, and claims priority to, co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/815,486, filed Aug. 3, 2007 which is a continuation-in-part application claiming priority to my co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/059,427, filed Feb. 16, 2005, titled “Multi-Layer Air-Cushion Shell With Energy-Absorbing Layer For Use in the Construction of Protective Headgear.” The entirety of this patent application is incorporated by reference herein. This application also claims priority to my Provisional Application No. to 60/654,225, filed Feb. 18, 2005, titled “Compressible Air Cushion Technology For Use In Protective Body Equipment,” my Provisional Application No. 60/654,194, filed Feb. 18, 2005, titled “Compressible Air Cushion Technology For Use In Sports Arenas,” and my Provisional Application No. 60/654,128, filed Feb. 18, 2005, titled “Vehicular Uses Of Compressible Air Cushion Technology.” The entireties of these provisional applications are also incorporated by reference herein. This application is also related to my PCT application filed concurrently herewith, titled “Energy-Absorbing Liners For Use With Protective Headgear” PCT/US06/05856. The entirety of this application is also incorporated by reference herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1080690 | Hipkiss | Dec 1913 | A |
1552965 | Smith | Sep 1925 | A |
1560825 | Kelticka | Nov 1925 | A |
2296355 | Levin | Sep 1942 | A |
2759186 | Dye | Aug 1956 | A |
3039109 | Simpson | Jun 1962 | A |
3144247 | Szonn et al. | Aug 1964 | A |
3174155 | Pitman | Mar 1965 | A |
3202412 | Trask | Aug 1965 | A |
3231454 | Williams | Jan 1966 | A |
3242500 | Derr | Mar 1966 | A |
3447163 | Tojeiro et al. | Jun 1969 | A |
3487417 | Morgan | Dec 1969 | A |
3487471 | Hagen | Jan 1970 | A |
3500475 | Otsuka | Mar 1970 | A |
3574379 | Jordan | Apr 1971 | A |
3600714 | Cade et al. | Aug 1971 | A |
3609764 | Morgan | Oct 1971 | A |
3666220 | Rider | May 1972 | A |
3666310 | Charno et al. | May 1972 | A |
3668704 | Conroy et al. | Jun 1972 | A |
3713640 | Margan | Jan 1973 | A |
3747968 | Hornsby | Jul 1973 | A |
3782511 | Parfitt | Jan 1974 | A |
3784985 | Conroy | Jan 1974 | A |
3787893 | Larcher | Jan 1974 | A |
3811467 | Jones | May 1974 | A |
3849801 | Holt et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
3872511 | Nichols | Mar 1975 | A |
3877076 | Summers et al. | Apr 1975 | A |
3880087 | Pamer | Apr 1975 | A |
3900222 | Muller | Aug 1975 | A |
3971583 | Kornhauser | Jul 1976 | A |
3984595 | Stephens | Oct 1976 | A |
3999220 | Keltner | Dec 1976 | A |
4023213 | Rovani | May 1977 | A |
4037273 | Labaire | Jul 1977 | A |
4038700 | Gyory | Aug 1977 | A |
4064565 | Griffiths | Dec 1977 | A |
4067063 | Ettinger | Jan 1978 | A |
4075717 | Lemelson | Feb 1978 | A |
4076872 | Lewicki | Feb 1978 | A |
4098434 | Uhlig | Jul 1978 | A |
4099759 | Kornhauser | Jul 1978 | A |
4105236 | Haar | Aug 1978 | A |
4124904 | Matthes | Nov 1978 | A |
4134156 | Gyory | Jan 1979 | A |
4191370 | Imatt et al. | Mar 1980 | A |
4192699 | Lewicki et al. | Mar 1980 | A |
4213202 | Larry | Jul 1980 | A |
4218807 | Snow | Aug 1980 | A |
4282610 | Steigerwald et al. | Aug 1981 | A |
4370754 | Donzis | Feb 1983 | A |
4432099 | Grick et al. | Feb 1984 | A |
4441751 | Wesley | Apr 1984 | A |
4453271 | Donzis | Jun 1984 | A |
4472472 | Schultz | Sep 1984 | A |
4534068 | Mitchell et al. | Aug 1985 | A |
4564959 | Zahn | Jan 1986 | A |
4566137 | Gooding | Jan 1986 | A |
4568102 | Dauvergne | Feb 1986 | A |
4586200 | Poon | May 1986 | A |
4627114 | Mitchell | Dec 1986 | A |
4642814 | Godfrey | Feb 1987 | A |
4700411 | Kawasaki et al. | Oct 1987 | A |
4704746 | Nava | Nov 1987 | A |
4710984 | Asper et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4724549 | Herder et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4883299 | Bonar | Nov 1989 | A |
4911443 | Foster | Mar 1990 | A |
4916759 | Arai | Apr 1990 | A |
4937888 | Straus | Jul 1990 | A |
4970729 | Shimazaki | Nov 1990 | A |
5042859 | Zhang et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
5056162 | Tirums | Oct 1991 | A |
5058212 | Kamata | Oct 1991 | A |
5083320 | Halstead | Jan 1992 | A |
5093938 | Kamata | Mar 1992 | A |
5098124 | Breed et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5161261 | Kamata | Nov 1992 | A |
5204998 | Liu | Apr 1993 | A |
5235715 | Donzis | Aug 1993 | A |
5263203 | Kraemer et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5319808 | Bishop et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5334646 | Chen | Aug 1994 | A |
5336708 | Chen | Aug 1994 | A |
5343569 | Asare et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5345614 | Tanaka | Sep 1994 | A |
5356177 | Weller | Oct 1994 | A |
5388277 | Taniuchi | Feb 1995 | A |
5412810 | Taniuchi | May 1995 | A |
5500951 | Marchello | Mar 1996 | A |
5548848 | Huybrechts | Aug 1996 | A |
5561866 | Ross | Oct 1996 | A |
5575017 | Hefling et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5678885 | Stirling | Oct 1997 | A |
5713082 | Bassette et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
5734994 | Rogers | Apr 1998 | A |
5764271 | Donohue | Jun 1998 | A |
5794271 | Hastings | Aug 1998 | A |
5846063 | Lakic | Dec 1998 | A |
5867840 | Hirosawa et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5872511 | Ohkuma | Feb 1999 | A |
5881395 | Donzis | Mar 1999 | A |
5911310 | Bridgers | Jun 1999 | A |
5916664 | Rudy | Jun 1999 | A |
5943706 | Miyajima et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5950243 | Winters et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5956777 | Popovich | Sep 1999 | A |
6026527 | Pearce | Feb 2000 | A |
6058515 | Kitahara | May 2000 | A |
6065158 | Rush | May 2000 | A |
6073271 | Alexander et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6098209 | Bainbridge et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6260212 | Orotelli et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6332226 | Rush, III | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6349599 | Lynnworth et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6351853 | Halstead et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6394432 | Whiteford | May 2002 | B1 |
6401262 | Bacchiega | Jun 2002 | B2 |
6425141 | Ewing et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6434755 | Halstead et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6446270 | Durr | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6453476 | Moore, III | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6467099 | Dennis et al. | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6519873 | Buttigieg | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6560787 | Mendoza | May 2003 | B2 |
6565461 | Zatlin | May 2003 | B1 |
6604246 | Obreja | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6658671 | Von Holst et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6665884 | Demps et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6681408 | Ku | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6694529 | Chiu | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6704943 | Calonge Clavell | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6803005 | Dennis et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6839910 | Morrow et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6908209 | Miller | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6925657 | Takahashi et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6934971 | Ide et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
7146652 | Ide et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7188375 | Harrington | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7444687 | Sato et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7578074 | Ridinger | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7774866 | Ferrara | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7895681 | Ferrara | Mar 2011 | B2 |
8528119 | Ferrara et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
20020023291 | Mendoza | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20030221245 | Lee et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040025231 | Ide | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040117896 | Madey et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040168246 | Phillips | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040261157 | Talluri | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20070075469 | Yamazaki | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070190292 | Ferrara | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070190293 | Ferrara | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070198292 | Ash et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20080155735 | Ferrara | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080256686 | Ferrara | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20100025902 | Hofmann et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100186150 | Ferrara et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100186158 | Morita et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100282554 | Stone | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110047685 | Ferrara et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20120266366 | Ferrara | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20130152284 | Ferrara et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130153350 | Ferrara et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20140097052 | Reynolds et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20150223545 | Fraser | Aug 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2176859 | Dec 1996 | CA |
2407462 | Nov 2001 | CA |
3619282 | Dec 1987 | DE |
4336665 | May 1995 | DE |
1572542 | Jun 1969 | FR |
2561887 | Oct 1985 | FR |
1316722 | May 1973 | GB |
1503483 | Mar 1978 | GB |
2287435 | Sep 1995 | GB |
3-282031 | Dec 1991 | JP |
4-4332 | Jan 1992 | JP |
9204210 | Mar 1992 | WO |
9614768 | May 1996 | WO |
2006005143 | Jan 2006 | WO |
2006089098 | Aug 2006 | WO |
2006089234 | Aug 2006 | WO |
2006089235 | Aug 2006 | WO |
2012045169 | Apr 2012 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Examination Report in Canadian Patent Application No. 2,663,728, mailed on Jan. 16, 2014, 3 pages. |
Examination Report in Canadian Patent Application No. 2,681,439, mailed on Feb. 7, 2014, 3 pages. |
Examination Report in Canadian Patent Application No. 2,820,137, mailed on Sep. 30, 2013, 3 pages. |
Extended Search Report issued for European Patent Application No. 11250730.6, mailed on Dec. 9, 2013, 6 pages. |
International Application Serial No. PCT/US2007/021050, International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed on Aug. 22, 2008, 10 pages. |
International Application Serial No. PCT/US2010/000211, International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed on May 17, 2010, 10 pages. |
Barth et al., “Acceleration-Deceleration Sport-Related Concussion: The Gravity of It All”, Journal of Athletic Training, vol. 36, No. 3, Sep. 2001, pp. 253-256. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/360,864, filed Jan. 28, 2009 by Vincent R. Ferrara et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/857,753, filed Aug. 17, 2010 by Vincent R. Ferrara et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/816,145, filed Aug. 13, 2007 by Vincent R. Ferrara et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,716, filed Dec. 14, 2011 by Vincent R. Ferrara et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/046,482, filed Oct. 4, 2013 by Alexander Reynolds et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,728, filed Dec. 14, 2011 by Vincent R. Ferrara et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/815,486, filed Aug. 3, 2007 by Vincent R. Ferrara et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/543,642, filed Oct. 5, 2006 by Ferrara et al.; Non-Final Office Action mailed Oct. 1, 2009 and Notice of Allowance mailed Apr. 15, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/689,541, filed Mar. 22, 2007 by Ferrara et al.; Restriction Requirement mailed Apr. 1, 2010; Non-Final Office Action mailed Jul. 8, 2010 and Notice of Allowance mailed Dec. 10, 2010. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/815,486, filed Aug. 3, 2007 by Ferrara et al.; Non-Final Office Action mailed Aug. 5, 2011; Non-Final Office Action mailed Mar. 25, 2013; Final Office Action mailed May 10, 2012 and Final Office Action mailed Feb. 4, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/816,145, filed Aug. 13, 2007 by Ferrara et al.; Restriction Requirement mailed Sep. 16, 2011; Non-Final Office Action mailed Jan. 24, 2012 and Final Office Action mailed Oct. 16, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/360,864, filed Jan. 28, 2009 by Ferrara et al.; Non-Final Office Action mailed Aug. 5, 2011. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/857,753, filed Aug. 17, 2010 by Ferrara et al.; Non-Final Office Action mailed Mar. 29, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,716, filed Dec. 14, 2011 by Ferrara et al.; Restriction Requirement mailed on Nov. 20, 2013 and Non-Final Office Action mailed Jan. 17, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/325,728, filed Dec. 14, 2011 by Ferrara et al.; Non-Final Office Action mailed Aug. 1, 2013; Final Office Action mailed on Feb. 13, 2014 and Notice of Allowance Received mailed Apr. 18, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/534,160, filed Jun. 27, 2012 by Ferrara et al.; Non-Final Office Action mailed Jan. 14, 2013 and Notice of Allowance mailed on Jun. 28, 2013. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150008085 A1 | Jan 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60654225 | Feb 2005 | US | |
60654194 | Feb 2005 | US | |
60654128 | Feb 2005 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11815486 | US | |
Child | 14295507 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11059427 | Feb 2005 | US |
Child | 11815486 | US |