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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to an amendment filed on 7/24/2026. As directed by the amendment, claims 1-25 were canceled, claims 26, 29-32, 34-45 were amended, and claims 46-48 were added. Thus, claims 26-48 are pending for this application.
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.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 26, 32-33 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Lee (KR 20130111843) and Elliot (US 2009/0312679).
Regarding claim 26, Unbescheiden discloses (Fig. 1-2) a device for dry water-jet massage (paragraph [0002]), comprising
a tub (tub 1), which is to be filled with massage water (paragraph [0017]), the tub running from a head end to a foot end in a longitudinal direction (longitudinal direction shown in Fig. 1 and described in paragraph [0019]) and running from a left side to a right side in a transverse direction (transverse direction shown in Fig. 1 and described in paragraph [0019]), the tub comprising a film material (flexible support sheet/foil, paragraphs [0002] and [0017]) as a cover closing the tub water-tight from above, wherein the film material is configured as a lying surface for a person to be treated (paragraphs [0002] and [0017]), wherein the film material allows a transmission of pressure pulses (paragraphs [0002] and [0017]);
a nozzle cart (carriage 2), which can be moved in the longitudinal direction of the tub and bears a nozzle (nozzle 3), which nozzle can be fed via a flexible hose (“flexible hose”, paragraph [0017]) connection with massage water from the tub by means of a pump (“pump”, paragraph [0017]) in order to eject one water jet per nozzle against a bottom side of the film material facing the tub (paragraph [0017]);
a first drive (drive element 13) for forward and backward movement of the nozzle cart in the longitudinal direction of the tub (paragraph [0022]), the nozzle moving forward and backward in the longitudinal direction of the tub with the movement of the nozzle cart (paragraph [0021]); and
a second drive (drive element 15), which moves at least one of the at least two nozzles in the transverse direction of the tub (paragraph [0023]).
Unbescheiden does not disclose the nozzle cart bears at least two nozzles.
However, Lee teaches (Fig. 1) a dry water massage device comprising a nozzle cart (spray unit 30) bearing at least two nozzles (plurality of nozzles, paragraphs [0020] and [0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nozzle cart of Unbescheiden to include at least two nozzles, as taught by Lee, for the purpose of increasing surface area of a user receiving the massage, thereby improving therapeutic outcome.
Unbescheiden does not disclose the film material comprises at least one cavity on the bottom side of the film, wherein the at least one cavity runs in the transverse direction, wherein the at least one cavity shapes the film into a convex elevated portion on a top side of the film, and wherein the convex elevated portion is directed toward the person lying on the film material.
However, Elliot teaches (Fig. 1-5) a device for dry water-jet massage (Abstract), comprising a tub (hollow housing shell 20 in the form of tub, paragraph [0023]), which is to be filled with massage water (paragraph [0026]), the tub running from a head end to a foot end in a longitudinal direction (head to foot direction as shown in Fig. 3) and running from a left side to a right side in a transverse direction (left to right direction shown in Fig. 1), the tub comprising a film material (sheet 34) as a cover closing the tub water-tight from above (paragraph [0028]), wherein the film material is configured as a lying surface for a person to be treated (paragraph [0028]), wherein the film material allows a transmission of pressure pulses (paragraph [0028]); a nozzle cart (fluid spray arrangement 16), which can be moved in the longitudinal direction of the tub (paragraph [0033]) and bears at least two nozzles (nozzles 56), which nozzles can be fed via a flexible hose (flexible tubing 102, paragraph [0036]) connection with massage water from the tub by means of a pump (pump 88) in order to eject one water jet per nozzle against a bottom side of the film material facing the tub (paragraphs [0037] and [0038]); a first drive (toothed timing belt 66) for forward and backward movement of the nozzle cart in the longitudinal direction of the tub (paragraph [0034] and [0037]-[0038]), the at least two nozzles moving forward and backward in the longitudinal direction of the tub with the movement of the nozzle cart (paragraph [0037]-[0038]); and wherein the film material comprises at least one cavity on the bottom side of the film (see cavity in Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the at least one cavity runs in the transverse direction (see transverse direction in Fig. 1), wherein the at least one cavity shapes the film into a convex elevated portion on a top side of the film, and wherein the convex elevated portion is directed toward the person lying on the film material (see Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the film of modified Unbescheiden to comprise at least one cavity on the bottom side of the film, wherein the at least one cavity runs in the transverse direction, wherein the at least one cavity shapes the film into a convex elevated portion on a top side of the film, and wherein the convex elevated portion is directed toward the person lying on the film material, as taught by Eliot, for the purpose of improving user comfort during massage by allowing to read a book or magazine, watch television, and remain otherwise occupied with other activities while receiving massage (paragraph [0005] Eliot).
PNG
media_image1.png
590
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 32, modified Unbescheiden discloses the at least one cavity comprises an outer surface defining a contact surface configured to receive a body portion of the person including a shoulder portion of the person (see top surface of cavity contacting user in Fig. 3 Eliot), wherein the contact surface is configured to be substantially inclined with respect to the back of the person (see incline of surface with respect to user’s back in Fig. 3), and wherein an inner surface of the at least one cavity opposite the outer surface is in communication with the tub such that the water jet can penetrate into the cavity and massage the body portion through the film material (see Fig. 3 Eliot and paragraph [0017] Unbescheiden).
Regarding claim 33, modified Unbescheiden discloses wherein a first rail and a second rail (left and right guide tracks 4) are fixed on a bottom of the tub (see Fig. 2), wherein the nozzle cart comprises wheels (“wheels”, paragraph [0011]) to be moved in the longitudinal direction of the tub on the first and second rails (paragraph [0022]) and wherein the nozzle cart can be operated by the first drive (motor 7) which acts on a bottom side of the nozzle cart by means of a motor (motor 7) which can be operated from outside the tub for the forward and backward movement of the nozzle cart on the wheels in the longitudinal direction of the tub.
Modified Unbescheiden does not disclose the motor is mounted inside the tub.
However, Elliot teaches (Fig. 1-3) a motor (70) for moving carriage (44) along longitudinal direction of the tub wherein the motor is mounted inside the tub (see Fig. 3 and paragraph [0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motor of modified Unbescheiden to be mounted inside the tub instead of outside the tub, as taught by Elliot, for the purpose of preventing possible environmental damage to the motor by ensuring it is enclosed within the tub.
Regarding claim 38, modified Unbescheiden discloses wherein the at least one cavity of the film material has a depth, with respect to the bottom side of the film material, but is silent regarding its specific value and thus fails to discloses it is in a range from 1 mm to 200 mm. However, absent evidence of criticality, it would have been obvious to try to make the depth with respect to bottom side of the film material in the range of 1 mm to 200 mm so that the film is strong enough to not collapse under weight of a user, since discovering the optimum value only involves routine skill in the art. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Claim 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Lee (KR 20130111843) and Elliot (US 2009/0312679), and further in view of Portales (US 2016/0143803).
Regarding claim 27, modified Unbescheiden does not disclose an arrangement for pivoting the at least two nozzles about a pivot axis, wherein the pivot axis extends perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tub, such that the water jet ejected by each of the at least two nozzles is directed against the at least one cavity of the film inclined relative to the plane of the film.
However, Portales teaches (Fig. 1-6) a pivot arrangement (bending assembly 42) for pivoting at least one massage element (rollers 3) about a pivot axis (axis of link 49a) with respect to the cart (cart 5); wherein the pivot axis extends perpendicular to the primary direction (perpendicular to longitudinal axis shown in Fig. 1), such that the at least one massager element approaches the plane of the film with increasing pivotal movement of the pivot arrangement while the angle of the water jet ejected by the least one nozzle with the plane of the film changes (while Portales does not include a nozzle, one of ordinary skill would recognize that when combined with the primary reference Unbescheiden, the nozzles of Unbescheiden (which are analogous to the rollers 3 of Portales) would approach the plane of the film with increasing pivotal movement of the pivot arrangement while the angle of the water jet ejected by the least one nozzle with the plane of the film changes, as shown by the pivoting transition in Fig. 4-5 of Portales).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the massager of Unbescheiden to include a pivot arrangement for pivoting the at least two nozzles about a pivot axis, wherein the pivot axis extends perpendicular to the longitudinal direction of the tub, such that the water jet ejected by each of the at least two nozzles is directed against the at least one cavity of the film inclined relative to the plane of the film, as taught by Portales, for the purpose of allowing for adjustment of massage intensity to a user based on how much pivoting occurs for the nozzle.
Claim 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Lee (KR 20130111843) and Elliot (US 2009/0312679), and further in view of Korenaga (US 6,210,351).
Regarding claim 28, modified Unbescheiden does not disclose wherein a part of the nozzle cart carrying the at least two nozzles is pivotable with respect to the nozzle cart about a horizontal pivot axis toward the film such that the water jet ejected by the at least two nozzles assumes an angle to the normal of the film by pivoting.
However, Korenaga teaches (Fig. 14-15) a dry hydrotherapy device comprising a nozzle cart (cart 7) wherein a part of the nozzle cart (gears 93) carrying the at least two nozzles (nozzles on gears 93) is pivotable with respect to the nozzle cart about a horizontal pivot axis toward the film (see axis of rotation through pin of support member 7e about which gears 93 rotate, which is horizontal, as shown in Fig. 14) such that the water jet ejected by the at least two nozzles assumes an angle to the normal of the film by pivoting (see angle with respect to normal of film in Fig. 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nozzle carrying cart of modified Unbescheiden such that a part of the nozzle cart carrying the at least two nozzles is pivotable with respect to the nozzle cart about a horizontal pivot axis toward the film such that the water jet ejected by the at least two nozzles assumes an angle to the normal of the film by pivoting, as taught by Korenaga, for the purpose of allowing for adjustment of the water pressure delivered to user so that different body portions can have different intensity as desired by user.
Claims 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Lee (KR 20130111843) and Elliot (US 2009/0312679), and further in view of Korenaga (US 6,210,351) and Spears (US 5,020,518).
Regarding claim 30, as best understood, modified Unbescheiden does not disclose wherein the nozzles are each arranged on a nozzle holder.
However, Korenaga teaches (Fig. 14-15) a dry hydrotherapy device comprising a nozzle cart (cart 7) comprising a plurality of nozzles (nozzles on gears 93) each arranged on a nozzle holder (gears 93).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nozzle carrying cart of modified Unbescheiden such the nozzles are each arranged on a nozzle holder, as taught by Korenaga, for the purpose of allowing for adjustment of the water pressure delivered to user so that different body portions can have different intensity as desired by user.
Modified Unbescheiden does not disclose wherein each of the nozzle holders is connected to a toothed rack which, as part of the second drive, allows the individual displacement of the nozzle holder in the transverse direction of the tub by means of a gear of the drive.
However, Spears teaches (Fig. 1-6) a holder is connected to a toothed rack (gear rack 50) which, as part of a drive, allows the individual displacement of the holder in a transverse direction of the support by means of a gear of the drive (see Fig. 4 and Col. 11 lines 44-60).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second drive of modified Unbescheiden to include a toothed rack, as taught by Spears, as it has been held that simple substitution of one well-known conveying structure (pulleys of Unbescheiden) with another conveying structure (toothed rack of Spears) would provide the expected result of supporting and providing movement of the massage carriage along the direction desired (see rationale for obviousness of a simple substitution of a well-known structure in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). See also MPEP 2143(I)(B)).
Regarding claim 31, modified Unbescheiden discloses wherein each of the nozzle holders can be pivoted relative to the toothed rack (via gears 93 of Korenaga), and wherein the toothed rack is movably connected to two axes of the nozzle cart (movably connected to the two axes through the gears 93 due to the gears 93 being rotatable relative to the toothed rack).
Claim(s) 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Lee (KR 20130111843) and Elliot (US 2009/0312679), and further in view of Nanninga (EP 2327386).
Regarding claim 37, modified Unbescheiden discloses the film material allows a transmission of pressure pulse as the top cover of the device, but does not disclose the film material is also capable of a heat transmission, and wherein the film serving as the top cover of the tub comprises a natural rubber film.
However, Nanninga teaches (Fig. 1-4 and 6-8) film material for a dry water massager that is also capable of a heat transmission (paragraph [0018]), and wherein the film serving as the top cover of the tub comprises a natural rubber film (“natural rubber”, paragraph [0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the film material of modified Unbescheiden to be capable of a heat transmission, and wherein the film serving as the top cover of the tub comprises a natural rubber film, as taught by Nanninga, for the purpose of allowing for user to receive thermal massage in addition to pressure massage (paragraph [0018] Nanninga).
Claims 40-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Nanningba (EP 2327386).
Regarding claim 40, Unbescheiden discloses (Fig. 1-2) a device for dry water-jet massage, comprising
a tub (tub 1), which is to be filled with massage water (paragraph [0017]), the tub running from a head end to a foot end in a longitudinal direction (longitudinal direction shown in Fig. 1 and described in paragraph [0019]) and running from a left side to a right side in a transverse direction (transverse direction shown in Fig. 1 and described in paragraph [0019]), a film material (flexible support sheet/foil, paragraphs [0002] and [0017]) disposed as a cover closing the tub water-tight from above, wherein the film material is configured as a lying surface for a person to be treated (paragraphs [0002] and [0017]), wherein the film material allows a transmission of pressure pulses (paragraphs [0002] and [0017]);
a nozzle cart (carriage 2), which can be moved in the longitudinal direction of the tub by means of a primary drive (drive element 13);
wherein at least one nozzle is arranged on the nozzle cart (nozzle 3); and
wherein each nozzle is fed via a flexible hose (“flexible hose”, paragraph [0017]) connection with massage water from the tub by means of a pump (“pump”, paragraph [0017]) in order to eject one water jet per nozzle against a bottom side of the film material facing the tub (paragraph [0017]).
Unbescheiden does not disclose a first nozzle holder arranged on the nozzle cart and which can be cross moved with respect to the nozzle cart in the transverse direction of the tub by means of a secondary drive; and a second nozzle holder arranged on the nozzle cart and which can be cross moved with respect to the nozzle cart in the transverse direction of the tub by means of a secondary drive; wherein at least one nozzle is arranged each of the nozzle holders, wherein the first and second nozzle holders can be cross moved independently from each other along a shaft of the nozzle cart.
However, Nanninga teaches (Fig. 1-4 and 6-8) a first nozzle holder (bush G) arranged on the nozzle cart (cart 1) and which can be cross moved with respect to the nozzle cart in the transverse direction of the tub (see Fig. 3) by means of a secondary drive (motor 2); and a second nozzle holder (bush G’) arranged on the nozzle cart and which can be cross moved with respect to the nozzle cart in the transverse direction of the tub (see Fig. 3) by means of a secondary drive (motor 2); wherein each nozzle holder is connected to a toothed rack (toothed segment 17) which allows the individual displacement of the nozzle holder in the transverse direction of the tub by means of a gear of the secondary drive (paragraph [0038]-[0039]); wherein at least one nozzle (nozzle D,D’) is arranged each of the nozzle holders (see Fig. 3), wherein the first and second nozzle holders can be cross moved independently from each other along a shaft of the nozzle cart (move along shaft 17, independent as described in paragraph [0020]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the massager of Unbescheiden to include a first nozzle holder arranged on the nozzle cart and which can be cross moved with respect to the nozzle cart in the transverse direction of the tub by means of a secondary drive; and a second nozzle holder arranged on the nozzle cart and which can be cross moved with respect to the nozzle cart in the transverse direction of the tub by means of a secondary drive; wherein each nozzle holder is connected to a toothed rack which allows the individual displacement of the nozzle holder in the transverse direction of the tub by means of a gear of the secondary drive; wherein at least one nozzle is arranged each of the nozzle holders, wherein the first and second nozzle holders can be cross moved independently from each other along a shaft of the nozzle cart, as taught by Nanninga, for the purpose of allowing for a multiplicity of new massage forms for dry water jet massage to occur (paragraph [0020] Nanninga).
Regarding claim 41, modified Unbescheiden discloses wherein the nozzle holder can be pivoted relative to the toothed rack (paragraph [0039]-[0039] Nanninga), and wherein the toothed rack is movably connected to two axes of the nozzle cart (see Fig. 6C Nanninga).
Claims 42 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Portales (US 2016/0143803).
Regarding claim 42, Unbescheiden discloses (Fig. 1-2) a dry water-jet massage device, comprising
a tub (tub 1) configured to receive massage water, a film material (flexible sheet, paragraph [0002]) substantially water-tightly closing the tub from above (paragraph [0017]), wherein the film material is configured as a lying surface for a person to be treated (paragraphs [0002] and [0017]), wherein the film material allows a transmission of pressure pulses (paragraphs [0002] and [0017]);
a nozzle cart (cart 2) comprising at least one nozzle (nozzle 3), wherein the at least one nozzle is capable to be fed via a flexible hose connection (paragraph [0017]) with massage water from the tub by means of a pump (“pump” paragraph [0017]) in order to eject a water jet per nozzle against a bottom side of the film material facing the tub (paragraph [0017]);
a first drive (drive 13) for displacing the nozzle cart in a primary direction (longitudinal direction, paragraph [0022]), wherein the at least one nozzle is commonly displaced with the nozzle cart in the primary direction (paragraph [0021]);
a second drive (drive element 15) for displacing the at least one nozzle in a direction transverse to the primary direction (paragraph [0023]).
Unbescheiden does not disclose a pivot arrangement for pivoting the at least one nozzle about a pivot axis with respect to the nozzle cart; wherein the pivot axis extends perpendicular to the primary direction, such that the at least one nozzle approaches the plane of the film with increasing pivotal movement of the pivot arrangement while the angle of the water jet ejected by the least one nozzle with the plane of the film changes.
However, Portales teaches (Fig. 1-6) a pivot arrangement (bending assembly 42) for pivoting at least one massage element (rollers 3) about a pivot axis (axis of link 49a) with respect to the cart (cart 5); wherein the pivot axis extends perpendicular to the primary direction (perpendicular to longitudinal axis shown in Fig. 1), such that the at least one massager element approaches the plane of the film with increasing pivotal movement of the pivot arrangement while the angle of the water jet ejected by the least one nozzle with the plane of the film changes (while Portales does not include a nozzle, one of ordinary skill would recognize that when combined with the primary reference Unbescheiden, the nozzles of Unbescheiden (which are analogous to the rollers 3 of Portales) would approach the plane of the film with increasing pivotal movement of the pivot arrangement while the angle of the water jet ejected by the least one nozzle with the plane of the film changes, as shown by the pivoting transition in Fig. 4-5 of Portales).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the massager of Unbescheiden to include a pivot arrangement for pivoting the at least one nozzle about a pivot axis with respect to the nozzle cart; wherein the pivot axis extends perpendicular to the primary direction, such that the at least one nozzle approaches the plane of the film with increasing pivotal movement of the pivot arrangement while the angle of the water jet ejected by the least one nozzle with the plane of the film changes, as taught by Portales, for the purpose of allowing for adjustment of massage intensity to a user based on how much pivoting occurs for the nozzle.
Regarding claim 44, modified Unbescheiden discloses wherein the at least one nozzle can be simultaneously displaced in the primary direction by said first drive together with the nozzle cart, in a direction transverse to the primary direction parallel to said pivot axis by said second drive, such that the combination of said directions allows a formation of a plurality of water-jet massage pattern on the film material (the word “can” is interpreted to mean “capable of”, and in this case the nozzle is capable of having this displacements occur simultaneously).
Claim 46 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Portales (US 2016/0143803), and further in view of Nanningba (EP 2327386).
Regarding claim 46, modified Unbescheiden does not disclose the second drive comprises a first drive unit for displacing a first nozzle of the at least one nozzle in a direction transverse to the primary direction and a second drive unit for displacing a second nozzle of the at least one nozzle in said direction transverse to the primary direction independently from the displacement of said first nozzle, while the pivot arrangement is configured to commonly pivot said first and second nozzles about said pivot axis with respect to the nozzle cart.
However, Nanninga teaches (Fig. 1-4 and 6-8) a second drive that comprises a first drive unit (bushing 15) for displacing a first nozzle of the at least one nozzle in a direction transverse to the primary direction (see Fig. 7B) and a second drive unit (bushing 15’) for displacing a second nozzle of the at least one nozzle in said direction transverse to the primary direction independently from the displacement of said first nozzle (independent movement, paragraph [0020]). Regarding the limitation “while the pivot arrangement is configured to commonly pivot said first and second nozzles about said pivot axis with respect to the nozzle cart”, this pivoting feature has been taught by Portales (see Figs. 4-5 and paragraph [0068]-[669] Portales) and thus the combined invention provides for this feature.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the massager of Unbescheiden such that the second drive comprises a first drive unit for displacing a first nozzle of the at least one nozzle in a direction transverse to the primary direction and a second drive unit for displacing a second nozzle of the at least one nozzle in said direction transverse to the primary direction independently from the displacement of said first nozzle, while the pivot arrangement is configured to commonly pivot said first and second nozzles about said pivot axis with respect to the nozzle cart, as taught by Nanninga, for the purpose of allowing for a multiplicity of new massage forms for dry water jet massage to occur (paragraph [0020] Nanninga).
Claim(s) 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Portales (US 2016/0143803), and further in view of Elliot (US 2009/0312679).
Regarding claim 43, modified Unbescheiden discloses a film material, but does not disclose wherein the film material is permanently deformed to configure a substantially convex protrusion protruding over the lying surface of the film, wherein the protrusion encompasses a cavity communicating with the tub such that the inner walls of the cavity that are made of film material can be exposed to the water jet of the at least one nozzle, such that the water jet is transmitted to a part of a body of a person adjacent to the protrusion and substantially inclined with respect to a plane of the lying surface.
However, Elliot teaches (Fig. 1-5) a device for dry water-jet massage (Abstract), comprising a tub (hollow housing shell 20 in the form of tub, paragraph [0023]), including a film material (sheet 34), wherein the film material is permanently deformed to configure a substantially convex protrusion (see convex portion in Annotated Fig. 1) protruding over the lying surface of the film (protrudes over at least one surface of the film), wherein the protrusion encompasses a cavity (bottom portion opposite protrusion in Annotated Fig. 1) communicating with the tub such that the inner walls of the cavity that are made of film material can be exposed to the water jet of the at least one nozzle (see Fig. 3), such that the water jet is transmitted to a part of a body of a person adjacent to the protrusion and substantially inclined with respect to a plane of the lying surface (inclined relative to at least one plane of the tub, see Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
590
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the film of modified Unbescheiden such that the film material is permanently deformed to configure a substantially convex protrusion protruding over the lying surface of the film, wherein the protrusion encompasses a cavity communicating with the tub such that the inner walls of the cavity that are made of film material can be exposed to the water jet of the at least one nozzle, such that the water jet is transmitted to a part of a body of a person adjacent to the protrusion and substantially inclined with respect to a plane of the lying surface, as taught by Elliot, for the purpose of improving user comfort during massage by allowing to read a book or magazine, watch television, and remain otherwise occupied with other activities while receiving massage (paragraph [0005] Eliot).
Claim(s) 48 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unbescheiden (US 2018/0140507) in view of Lee (KR 20130111843) and Elliot (US 2009/0312679), and further in view of Nanningba (EP 2327386).
Regarding claim 48, modified Unbescheiden discloses a second drive but does not disclose wherein the second drive comprises a first drive unit for displacing a first nozzle of the at least two nozzles the transverse direction and a second drive unit for displacing a second nozzle of the at least two nozzles in said transverse direction independently from a displacement of said first nozzle.
However, Nanninga teaches (Fig. 1-4 and 6-8) a second drive that comprises a first drive unit (bushing 15) for displacing a first nozzle of the at least one nozzle in a direction transverse to the primary direction (see Fig. 7B) and a second drive unit (bushing 15’) for displacing a second nozzle of the at least one nozzle in said direction transverse to the primary direction independently from the displacement of said first nozzle (independent movement, paragraph [0020]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the massager of Unbescheiden such that the second drive comprises a first drive unit for displacing a first nozzle of the at least one nozzle in a direction transverse to the primary direction and a second drive unit for displacing a second nozzle of the at least one nozzle in said direction transverse to the primary direction independently from the displacement of said first nozzle, as taught by Nanninga, for the purpose of allowing for a multiplicity of new massage forms for dry water jet massage to occur (paragraph [0020] Nanninga).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 29, 34-36, 39, and 45 are 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.
Claim 47 is allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 7/24/2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s amendments to overcome rejections under 35 USC 112(b) have been considered and are deemed sufficient. The rejections under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Regarding rejection of claim 26, applicant argued (page 17 paragraph 4-5 Remarks) that Elliot fails to disclose a cavity on the bottom side of the film because the arrow in the annotated figure points to a cavity in the chair structure, not the film. The wording “on the bottom side of the film” does not have the meaning “below the film”, but rather the at least one cavity opens toward the bottom side of the film.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The arrow in the annotated figure is meant to point to the film, which is partially shown in the figure but is implied to occupy the region indicated by the arrow. Regarding Applicant’s argument that “on the bottom side of the film” does not have the meaning “below the film”, but rather the at least one cavity opens toward the bottom side of the film, examiner clarifies that examiner has the same interpretation of applicant. However, it appears applicant and examiner’s interpretation of the term “cavity” is not the same.
“Cavity” is conventionally defined as “an unfilled space in a mass”, which is comprehended by Eliot (the convex/parabolic shape of the film results in a cavity) whereas applicant appears to be interpret the term to more mean a groove or opening (i.e. hole). Therefore it appears applicant is more narrowly interpreting the term cavity than examiner, and therefore, because no explicit definition is provided, applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant further argued (page 17 paragraph 6 Remarks) that examiner asserts Elliot would show the cavity shaping the film into a convex elevated portion on a top side of the film, however applicant contends that the film is shaped by its affixing to flanges 32 and comprises three segments, each of which perfectly flat and not showing a convex elevated portion on a top. The transition between film segments of Elliot may show one convex and one concave curvature but there is no trace of a convex elevated portion protruding over a top side of the film and having a hollow configuration opening towards the tub.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a convex elevated portion protruding over a top side of the film and having a hollow configuration opening towards the tub) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Regarding applicant’s argument that “the film is shaped by its affixing to flanges 32 and comprises three segments, each of which perfectly flat and not showing a convex elevated portion on a top”, it is not clear where applicant arrived at this conclusion, as Eliot does not appear this in the specification (i.e. three segments, perfectly flat, no convex elevated portion on top).
Regarding the references not teaching the newly amended features in claim 40, examiner respectfully disagrees and directs applicant to the rejection of claim 40 above.
Regarding the Portales reference, applicant argues (page 26 paragraph 1 Remarks) that the rollers of Portales are not analogous to nozzles, as they achieve pression by coming into contact with the backrest, not by ejecting water, and comparing Figs. 4-5 of Portales to invention, the rollers are lifted upwardly but the orientation is not changed, meaning that if the rollers were replaced by nozzles, the angle of the water ejected within the plane of the film would not change, but rather remain substantially the same.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
First, to clarify, examiner is not clarifying that the rollers are analogous to the nozzles in how they function (i.e. rollers roll, nozzles spray water), rather in how they are disposed and function relative to the cart. Both are massage means that are carried on a carriage and provide massage function and changes in massage intensity due to the position of each element. Thus, examiner maintains that Portales is analogous art.
Regarding the angle of the water ejected within the plane of the film not changing, examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim recites that “the at least one nozzle approaches the plane of the film with increasing pivotal movement of the pivot arrangement while the angle of the water jet ejected by the least one nozzle with the plane of the film changes”. In the case of the modified Portales, the angle of the water jet would change due to the fact that the film of modified reference having concave and convex portions, which would result in the angle of the water jet changing at least once relative to the plane of the film.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW R MOON whose telephone number is (571)272-2554. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/MATTHEW R MOON/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights