Abstract:
A sports helmet includes relatively wide and deep lateral reliefs in the helmet for improved peripheral vision for a person wearing the helmet, while a face guard is formed with a series of closely spaced lateral bars thereacross for precluding insertion of the fingers or hand therein. The present helmet and face guard are particularly well suited for use in the game of football, but may be adapted for use in other contact sports as well. The present helmet greatly improves safety by providing a wider field of view for a player using the helmet, and the present face guard greatly reduces the opportunity for opposing players to use the face guard for restraining or tackling players, thereby greatly reducing injuries and increasing safety during play.

Description:
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION  
       [0001]    This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 60/293,227, filed May 25, 2001. 
     
    
     
       BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION  
         [0002]    1. Field of the Invention  
           [0003]    The present invention relates generally to protective headgear, and more specifically to a sports helmet providing a relatively wide peripheral field of view for the wearer and having a face guard or mask precluding gripping by another person. The present helmet is particularly useful in the game of football, providing players with additional peripheral vision and increasing safety by greatly reducing the opportunity for opponents to grab the face guard, thus reducing the chance of head and neck injuries.  
           [0004]    2. Description of Related Art  
           [0005]    Many physical sports, and particularly contact sports such as football, require various forms of protective apparel due to the forces occurring when two players contact one another at high speeds. This is particularly true for headgear, as head and neck injuries are potentially the most dangerous of all injuries.  
           [0006]    Accordingly, helmet technology has advanced over the years, from early and relatively crude leather helmets used in the early years of football, to more sophisticated helmets formed of multiple layers of composite material and cushioning. However, in the effort to provide as much protection for the head as possible, the helmet has been extended around the head and sides of the face to the extent that some peripheral vision may be lost with some current helmet designs. This results not only in more errors on the field of play, but may also lead to additional injuries resulting from players who fail to see a hazardous situation (e.g., potential clip, etc.) from their partially blocked peripheral vision, and accordingly are unable to take evasive action in time.  
           [0007]    Another result of the advances in helmet design was the development of the face guard or face mask, to provide some additional protection to the faces of the players. Originally, such face guards developed as simple lateral bars across the front of the helmet, and some positions (e.g., place kickers, who have limited physical contact) continue to wear helmets with such limited face protection means. However, most players have found that the simple single or even double lateral bar across the front of the helmet, provides insufficient protection for the face. Face-to-face contact can result in such relatively narrow bars meshing together within the open front area of the facing helmets, and producing facial injuries which they are intended to prevent.  
           [0008]    Accordingly, most helmets are equipped with face guards or masks having multiple bars extending thereacross, which prevents such incursion of an opposing bar through at least the lower portion of the face covered by the multiple bar guard. However, the development of the face guard has led to another problem, in that the conventional face guard, with its relatively widely spaced bars, provides a tempting place for an opponent to grip the equipment of a player to restrain or tackle the player. While such a maneuver is clearly against the rules of play and results in a severe penalty if detected by the officials, it nevertheless occurs relatively frequently and can result in very serious head and neck injuries to players experiencing such a grip or tackle.  
           [0009]    Accordingly, a need arises for a helmet providing relatively wide lateral openings for greater peripheral vision, while still protecting as much of the face as possible. The present helmet preferably includes a face guard, with the face guard structure having a series of closely spaced bars thereacross, with the spacing or gap therebetween being sufficiently close as to preclude insertion of the fingers therein to prevent a person from grabbing the face guard. The present face guard still provides sufficient air passage therethrough to allow free breathing for a player who is exerting himself heavily during play, whether in football or other sport where such protective headgear may be worn or used.  
           [0010]    A discussion of the related art of which the present inventor is aware, and its differences and distinctions from the present invention, is provided below.  
           [0011]    U.S. Pat. No. 2,985,883 issued on May 30, 1961 to Michael T. Marietta, titled “Sports Helmet,” describes a relatively early helmet configuration having a double bar face guard therewith. The face guard -is secured to the helmet by a pair of screws at each side or end thereof, with one of the screws having a male snap fitting incorporated with its head for removable attachment of the helmet chin strap thereto. The Marietta helmet is relatively open in comparison with more recently developed helmets, and the Marietta face guard is particularly open. The spacing between the bars of the Marietta face guard is clearly sufficiently wide as to permit the insertion of the fingers or hand therein by an opponent, with consequent potential risk to the player using the Marietta helmet.  
           [0012]    U.S. Pat. No. 3,139,624 issued on Jul. 7, 1964 to Delby C. Humphrey, titled “Face Guard For Football Helmet,” describes a helmet and face guard with the guard having a peripheral frame generally fitting the upper front of the helmet opening. A central vertical bar and an additional lateral bar are provided over the Marietta face guard discussed above, but the spacing between bars is still so wide that an opposing player can easily reach through the bars of the Humphrey face mask to grip the mask and bring the player down, with great risk of head and/or neck injury as noted further above. Moreover, the Humphrey helmet has a configuration much like that of the Marietta helmet discussed above, with the helmet sides and face guard lateral structure appearing to limit peripheral vision, unlike the present helmet and face guard.  
           [0013]    U.S. Pat. No. 3,729,744 issued on May 1, 1973 to Frederick A. Rappleyea, titled “Protective Helmet For Football Or The Like,” describes a specific helmet construction wherein the helmet has a resilient liner removably installed within the hard outer shell of the helmet. The general configuration of the helmet is essentially the same as that of the helmets of the U.S. Patents to Marietta and Humphrey discussed above, with no particular relief provided to the sides of the helmet for additional peripheral vision. Moreover, no face guard of any type is disclosed by Rappleyea for his helmet invention, whereas the present invention includes such protective face guard means, and particularly such a guard precluding insertion of an opponent&#39;s hand therein.  
           [0014]    U.S. Pat. No. 4,342,122 issued on Aug. 3, 1982 to Carl J. Abraham et al., titled “Protective Headgear,” describes a helmet having a face guard formed of a resilient material, to allow some deflection in the case of impact. While Abraham et al. recognize the danger involved in sudden impacts to the protective headgear, and further recognize that while internal cushioning within the helmet itself alleviates this danger to a great extent, they nevertheless do not provide a response to the problem posed by relatively open bars in their face guard. The Abraham et al. face guard has a configuration much like that of the Marietta face guard discussed further above, differing mainly only in that the Abraham et al. guard includes a central vertical bar as well as the two horizontal bars.  
           [0015]    U.S. Pat. No. 4,363,140 issued on Dec. 14, 1982 to James V. Correale, titled “Football Helmet Face Guard,” describes a conventional face guard having relatively widely spaced lateral bars and a single central bar and surrounding frame. However, Correale provides quick release attachments for securing his face guard to the front of the helmet, whereby a pull on the face guard will cause it to release. This release of the face guard from the helmet precludes potential head and neck injury from grabbing the face guard, but the removal of the face guard leaves the face of the player exposed for the remainder of the play. Also, the helmet illustrated in the Correale U.S. patent is conventional, and does not provide any significant improvement in peripheral vision over other known helmets.  
           [0016]    U.S. Pat. No. 4,598,430 issued on Jul. 8, 1986 to Pier L. Nava, titled “Integral Helmet, In Particular For Sports Use,” describes a closed face helmet including a laterally hinged hard collar portion which attaches rigidly to the bottom of the helmet. The assembly provides a helmet which essentially encases the entire head, face, and upper neck of the wearer. A transparent eye shield is provided, which is hinged at the temple area of the helmet. The Nava helmet assembly is adapted for use in motorsports (automobile racing, motorcycle racing, etc.), and is not suitable for use in contact sports such as football. The Nava helmet does not provide suitable ventilation for strenuous physical exercise, and moreover, the transparent face shield would become scratched, soiled, and unusable in short order in a typical football game.  
           [0017]    U.S. Pat. No. 4,692,947 issued on Sep. 15, 1987 to Randy C. Black et al., titled “Protective Helmet, Chin Cup, And Face Guard,” describes a particular arrangement for the chin strap and chin cup of the helmet, as well as a combination attachment for one end of the chin cup retaining strap and the side of the face guard. The helmet and face guard themselves appear to be conventional, with the helmet not providing any particular advantage insofar as peripheral vision for the wearer is concerned. The face guard has relatively widely spaced lateral and vertical bars, which clearly provide sufficient space for an opposing player to insert his fingers or hands between the bars to restrain the first player. This is not possible with the present face guard with its closely spaced bars.  
           [0018]    U.S. Pat. No. 5,101,517 issued on Apr. 7, 1992 to Willie Douglas, titled “Sports Helmet With Transparent Windows In The Side Walls,” describes a helmet having several features, including the windows noted in the patent title. Douglas recognizes the importance of providing increased peripheral vision in such helmets, but the means used, i.e., transparent lateral panels, is generally not suitable for use in contact sports. The transparent panels would quickly become scratched and dirty, thereby losing any initial benefit they might have provided for peripheral vision. Also, while it is noted that Douglas provides a face guard for his helmet, it is conventional, and does nothing to preclude an opponent from inserting his fingers between the face guard bars and grasping the device.  
           [0019]    U.S. Pat. No. 5,129,108 issued on Jul. 14, 1992 to Steve Copeland et al., titled “Protective Headgear And Detachable Face Protector,” describes a helmet for use by a hockey goalie. The Copeland et al. helmet comprises an upper helmet portion with a forward portion attached thereto and substantially surrounding the face. An additional face guard screen is installed over the forward portion of the helmet, with a throat protector depending from the lower sides of the forward portion. The forward portion of the helmet is relatively confining and appears to limit peripheral vision somewhat, and the face guard screen comprises a series of relatively widely spaced heavy wire members. The Copeland et al. helmet is better suited for a hockey goalie than for a football player, as goalies must be protected from the extremely high speeds attained by the stick blades and puck, but are not restrained by an opponent grabbing their face guard.  
           [0020]    U.S. Pat. No. 5,539,936 issued on Jul. 30, 1996 to Michael E. Thomas, titled “Sports Helmet Transparent Guard Assembly,” describes a helmet with opposed, C-shaped cutouts near the temple areas. Mating transparent window covers are removably installable within the cutouts. However, the Thomas helmet configuration results in a relatively sharp corner at the lower edge of each window cutout, which could prove hazardous if the helmet is knocked out of position on the wearer&#39;s head. The problems and limitations of transparent window material, have been noted further above. Also, while Thomas provides a face guard, it is conventional and does nothing to preclude grasping the face guard bars.  
           [0021]    U.S. Pat. No. 5,713,082 issued on Feb. 3, 1998 to Aldean B. Bassette et al., titled “Sports Helmet,” describes a helmet and face mask or guard coated with a relatively soft and resilient material. While the helmet illustration appears to show some lateral reliefs, they do not extend sufficiently rearwardly to provide any substantial improvement in peripheral vision; the Bassette et al. helmet is generally conventional in configuration.  
           [0022]    The Bassette et al. face guard is also of generally conventional configuration, comprising one, or a series of, lateral bars. While  10 . two of the lateral bars of the multiple bar embodiment are positioned quite close together approximately in front of the mouth of a person wearing the helmet, the third lower bar is widely spaced therefrom, positioned at about the level of the chin. Thus there is apparently over an inch of space between the two upper bars and the third lower bar of the Bassette et al. face guard, which configuration facilitates grasping the face guard.  
           [0023]    U.S. Pat. No. 5,806,088 issued on Sep. 15, 1998 to Robert M. Zide et al., titled “Face Guard,” describes a face guard formed of a series of relatively heavy and widely spaced tubular members. The spacing between the face guard tube members is clearly sufficient to allow an opponent to insert his fingers therein, to restrain the wearer of the face mask and risk head and/or neck injury, as noted further above. While Zide et al. note the importance of a relatively unrestricted field of view, they do not disclose any form of helmet with their face guard; it is assumed the Zide face guard is used with a conventional helmet.  
           [0024]    U.S. Pat. No. 5,953,761 issued on Sep. 21, 1999 to Stanley Jurga et al., titled “Protective Headgear,” describes a helmet and mask assembly for use by baseball catchers and umpires. The Jurga et al. headgear essentially comprises a rigid front portion and a rigid rear portion, with the two portions being flexibly secured together by a series of straps. This is completely unsuitable for use in contact sports such as football, as a single, rigid helmet shell surrounding the entire head (excepting the face) is essential for proper protection. The face guard or “framework” of the Jurga et al. assembly comprises a series of relatively widely spaced heavy wire members, and does nothing to preclude the insertion of the fingers therein. This is not critical in baseball, as the catcher would not be restrained by an opposing player during the game. While Jurga et al. note the importance of a clear field of view, their helmet assembly does not provide the peripheral vision of the present invention.  
           [0025]    U.S. Pat. No. D-253,436 issued on Nov. 20, 1979 to George Lynn, titled “Protective Sports Helmet,” illustrates a design having a bill with a face guard extending generally downwardly from the periphery of the bill. The face guard is formed of a series of widely spaced members, which do nothing to limit the insertion of the fingers therein. The helmet includes relatively wide and deep sides extending forwardly to the corners of the bill, thus limiting peripheral vision somewhat. The Lynn design would be unsuitable for use in contact sports, such as football, due to the outward disposition of face guard and bill.  
           [0026]    U.S. Pat. No. D-318,747 issued on Jul. 30, 1991 to Gina M. Barker, titled “Inflatable Helmet,” illustrates a design which would appear to be more of a toy, than a functional helmet. While its outward appearance is similar to that of a true football helmet, the soft, inflatable construction would not be effective for protecting a player in a contact sport. Moreover, the bars of the face guard portion are relatively widely spaced, and the sides of the helmet appear to extend relatively far forward, precluding significant peripheral vision.  
           [0027]    British Patent Publication No. 512,106 accepted on Aug. 29, 1939 to Carl F. L. Loldrup et al., titled “Improved Protective Mask,” describes a relatively light weight mask (not a guard) having upper and lower transparent panels thereacross. The panels are separated by a lateral component which fits closely across the face above the mouth and across the bridge of the nose below the eyes. The Loldrup et al. mask fits tightly to the face, with the object of the construction being to avoid misting of the upper eye protecting window area by expelled breath, which is confined to the lower area. The Loldrup et al. mask is completely unsuitable for use in contact sports, as no helmet is provided and the mask must attach directly to the face of the wearer. Moreover, the restriction to breathing due to the solid lower face mask portion, is unsuitable for use in contact sports where heavy exertion takes place.  
           [0028]    Finally, International Patent Publication No. 82/00,243 published on Feb. 4, 1982 to Curt Klein, titled “Helmet Visor Providing Direct Visibility,” describes a closed face or wraparound style helmet having a double visor comprising a separate lower and upper portion. The upper visor is tinted, with the upper visor extending beyond the upper edge of the lower visor to provide an air gap therebetween. The problems with the use of transparent materials in the visual field of a player engaged in contact sports has been noted further above, i.e., scratching, soiling, etc., which would rapidly render the visors of the Klein helmet unsuitable for use. Moreover, the restriction to free breathing, particularly through the mouth as would be the case with a player undergoing heavy exertion, has been noted above in other closed face helmets, e.g., the helmet of the &#39;430 U.S. patent to Nava.  
           [0029]    None of the above inventions and patents, either singly or in combination, is seen to describe the instant invention as claimed.  
         SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION  
         [0030]    The present invention is a sports helmet providing a twofold improvement over other sports helmets of the past. The present sports helmet includes relatively wide or deep lateral relief areas, thereby greatly improving peripheral vision for the player wearing the helmet. The face guard or mask of the present helmet is constructed with a series of closely spaced bars, thereby preventing an opponent from inserting the fingers through the bars to grab the face mask during tackling.  
           [0031]    The present sports helmet is particularly well adapted for use in the game of football, where sturdy helmets and face mask protection are nearly universally used. While head and face protection through the use of helmets and face guards have been known for years in both amateur and professional football, the present helmet and face guard provides a significant improvement over earlier equipment. Studies have shown that on the order of one in every five to one in every six football players are injured each season, with the rate of injury among high school tackle football players reaching as high as two of every three players. More than 150,000 players under the age of fifteen receive injuries sufficiently severe as to require treatment in hospital emergency rooms each year. In March of 1994, the National Pediatric Trauma Registry analyzed a selection of recorded sports injuries. Of nearly 800 injuries considered, 339 injuries occurred while playing football. of these, twenty two percent, or about 75 injuries, were head and neck injuries, which the present helmet and face guard invention will go far to prevent.  
           [0032]    Accordingly, it is a principal object of the invention to provide an improved sports helmet and face guard assembly for use in various contact sports, and particularly well adapted for use in the game of football.  
           [0033]    It is another object of the invention to provide a sports helmet having relatively wide- and deep lateral reliefs, for improving the peripheral vision of a person wearing the present helmet.  
           [0034]    It is a further object of the invention to provide a face guard for use with a sports helmet, with the guard comprising a series of closely spaced lateral bars across the lower portion thereof, with the bar spacing precluding the insertion of a hand or fingers therebetween to preclude grabbing the face guard to tackle or restrain a player using the present face guard.  
           [0035]    Still another object of the invention is to provide a sports helmet providing a wide field of view and a face guard precluding insertion of the fingers or hand therein, in combination.  
           [0036]    It is an object of the invention to provide improved elements and arrangements thereof in an apparatus for the purposes described which is inexpensive, dependable and fully effective in accomplishing its intended purposes.  
           [0037]    These and other objects of the present invention will become readily apparent upon further review of the following specification and drawings. 
       
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
       [0038]    [0038]FIG. 1 is a front elevation view of a sports helmet and face guard according to the present invention.  
         [0039]    [0039]FIG. 2 is a side elevation view of the present sports helmet and face guard combination.  
         [0040]    [0040]FIG. 3 is a side perspective view of the helmet and guard with the guard lifted, showing the helmet peripheral relief areas. 
     
    
       [0041]    Similar reference characters denote corresponding features consistently throughout the attached drawings.  
       DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS  
       [0042]    The present invention is a sports helmet and face guard for use in contact sports. The present helmet and face guard are adapted particularly well for use in the game of football, but may be readily adapted for use in the play of other contact sports as well. While the present invention is described herein as a combination of the sports helmet and face guard, it will be seen that they may be separated from one another, with the helmet usable with other face guards (or no face guard at all), and the present face guard usable with other types of helmets, as desired.  
         [0043]    [0043]FIGS. 1 and 2 respectively provide front and right side elevation views of the present helmet and face guard assembly, designated by the reference numeral  10 . The assembly  10  comprises a helmet  12  and a face guard or mask  14 , with the two components  12  and  14  being separable from one another if so desired. The helmet  12  is formed as a rigid, hard shell, preferably of composite materials (glass or carbon fiber in a cured resin matrix, etc.), and is configured for fitting closely about the top, back, and sides of the head of a person using the present helmet  12 . The helmet shell  12  may be formed to fit a variety of head sizes and shapes, according to the molds or forms used during construction, as is conventional in built-up composite helmet construction. A resilient inner liner  16  (synthetic foam and/or other padding, etc.) is provided for comfort and shock absorbency, as is conventional in sports helmet construction. The liner  16  may be permanently or removably installed, as desired.  
         [0044]    The helmet  12  includes a frontal face opening area  18 , with a brow area  20  thereabove defining the upper edge of the open front face area  18 . The front face opening area  18  has left and right lateral face opening extensions, respectively  22  and  24 , wrapping back to each side thereof and providing the desired increase in peripheral vision for a person wearing the present helmet  12 . The helmet  12  further includes left and right temple coverage areas, respectively  26  and  28 . Left and right lower lateral face coverage portions, respectively  30  and  32 , extend substantially forwardly from the respective left and right temple coverage areas  26  and  28 , to an area at the front of the helmet shell  12 . These lateral portions  30  and  32  are open at their forward and inboard ends, and define a lower face opening  34  therebetween, as shown in FIG. 3.  
         [0045]    The two lower lateral face coverage areas  30  and  32  of the helmet  12  respectively define left and right peripheral vision relief areas indicated by the left and right side face openings  22  and  24 , most clearly shown in FIGS. 2 and 3. These peripheral vision relief areas or lateral face openings  22  and  24 , extend rearwardly toward the respective helmet temple coverage areas  26  and  28 , well back from the eyes of a person wearing the present helmet  12 , providing the person with superior peripheral vision not generally previously attainable in other sports helmets of the related art. The edges of the lateral face coverage portions  30  and  32  are also smoothly rounded and contoured and devoid of sharp protrusions, to avoid any chance of injury to a person wearing the present helmet  12  should the helmet become dislodged.  
         [0046]    The perspective view of FIG. 3 of the drawings clearly shows the relatively great lateral depths of the two side face openings or peripheral vision relief areas  22  and  24 . These openings or relief areas  22  and  24  extend well back in the sides of the helmet shell  12 , to points very near the ear openings  36 . Their vertical widths or heights  38  are relatively great also, but the lengths or spans  40  of these two peripheral vision relief areas  22  and  24  is even greater, being on the order of twice those of the widths  38 . The widths or heights  42  and lengths or spans  40  of the two lower lateral face coverage extensions  30  and  32  have similar ratios, with their lengths or spans  40  (which dimension is the same as the span or depth of the peripheral vision relief areas  22  and  24 ) preferably being on the order of twice their vertical widths or heights  42 . It will be understood that due to the apparent foreshortening of these areas as they curve around the front of the helmet  12 , that these length to width aspect ratios are not apparent in FIG. 2 of the drawings. However, other length to width ratios of the peripheral vision relief areas  22  and  24  and lateral face coverage areas  30  and  32  may be provided as desired.  
         [0047]    The face guard element  14  may be provided in combination with the present helmet shell  12 , or as an attachment for other helmets as desired. The face guard  14  has a peripheral frame  42 , which may be considered to have an upper portion  44  and a lower portion  46 . The upper portion  44  of the face guard frame  42  is essentially congruent with the edges of the two peripheral vision relief areas  22  and  24  and the front face opening  18  of the helmet shell  12 .  
         [0048]    The upper portion  44  of the face guard frame  42  includes a generally open upper area  48  to provide a clear visual field for the user, but the lower frame portion  46  includes an area  50  having a series of closely spaced, generally lateral bars  52  extending thereacross. It will be seen that the present face guard  14  includes a considerably greater number of lower lateral bars  52  than is provided in conventional face guards and masks used in contact sports. The large number and close spacing of the bars  52  of the present face guard  14 , precludes insertion of an opponent&#39;s fingers or hand between the bars and thus prevents an opponent from tackling or otherwise restraining a player using the present face guard  14 , by grabbing the face guard. The spacing between bars  52  may be on the order of one quarter inch or so, or perhaps up to a centimeter. The precise spacing is not critical, so long as the bars  52  are spaced sufficiently closely as to preclude the insertion of a person&#39;s fingers therebetween.  
         [0049]    While the bars  52  are closely spaced, it will be noted that they do provide some space therebetween for the passage of air therethrough. The present face guard is not a completely closed structure, as in the case of full face helmets used in automobile racing and other sports where continuous extreme physical exertion does not require the heavy breathing generally required in contact sports. The present face guard  14 , with its large number of passages between the closely spaced bars  52 , still allows a person wearing the present face guard  14  to breathe freely and without restriction.  
         [0050]    The present face guard  14  may be formed or constructed of any of a number of different materials (composites, etc.), as desired. However, for the sake of strength and durability, the present face guard  14  is preferably constructed of a series of metal bars (either solid or hollow) which are welded together to form the finished structure. The face guard structure  14  may attach to the helmet  12  at the brow area  20  thereof, by means of a brow attachment clip  54  secured to the brow portion  20  of the helmet  12 , which allows the central part of the upper portion  44  of the face guard peripheral frame  42  to pivot therein, in the manner of a hinge pin through a hinge. This is clearly shown in FIG. 3 of the drawings, where the face guard  14  has been pivoted upwardly about 180 degrees from its closed position.  
         [0051]    In conclusion, the present sports helmet and face guard, either singly or in combination, provide much improved safety for players of contact sports. The helmet, with its greatly increased peripheral field of view, provides players with much improved peripheral vision for avoiding incidents which might otherwise result in a tackle, or for spotting other receivers in passing, openings while running with the ball, etc. The present helmet thus has the potential to “open up” the game, and provide a faster and more exciting game than present day equipment allows.  
         [0052]    The present face guard provides further benefits, by essentially eliminating one of the greatest problems (and perhaps a ball carrier&#39;s greatest fear), that of grabbing the face guard to restrain or tackle a player. By greatly reducing or eliminating this possibility, the game is made safer for all players using the present face guard invention. This also has the benefit of reducing penalties during play, thus speeding up the play of the game to provide a more exciting game for participants and fans alike.  
         [0053]    It is to be understood that the present invention is not limited to the sole embodiment described above, but encompasses any and all embodiments within the scope of the following claims.