DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendments
The Amendment filed 4/9/2026 has been entered. Claims 16-17, 19-21, and 24-28 were amended, and claims 1-15 and 18 were canceled. Thus, claims 16-17 and 19-28 are pending in the 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 16-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pepe (US 2020/0268594 A1) in view of Williams (US 2022/0015988 A1), Levi (US 2018/0185236 A1), Yasuhiro (US 2009/0306607 A1), and Dai et al. (US 2021/0128402 A1), or alternatively over Pepe in view of Williams, Levi, Yasuhiro, Dai, Yamazaki (US 2015/0121900 A1), and Rhoades (US 2006/0058714 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Pepe discloses a temperature-controlled massage node (a massage head 100 with a heating element 112 inside that can be turned on and off) (Fig. 11; para. [0042]) for removably coupling to an independently powered massager (a massage head 100 can be attached and detached to and from a massage device 102, which can have a battery inside) (Figs. 1-4, 12-13; para. [0047-0048]) having a piston that percussively moves interchangeably attachable massage nodes (massage device 102 has a brushless motor 138, swing shift 150, and moving pole 152 to thereby provide a percussive movement to an attached massage head 100; the massage device 102 has a shaft 107 that can accept multiple types of massage heads) (Fig. 13; para. [0036]; para. [0044]), the temperature-controlled massage node comprising:
a node housing having an upper portion and a lower portion (massage head 100 has a housing comprising a first hemispherical section 104 and a second hemispherical section 106) (Fig. 11; para. [0037]);
at least one battery positioned within the node housing (power source 160 which can be a battery is inside the massage head 100 housing) (Fig. 11; para. [0042]);
a contact plate positioned on the upper portion of the node housing (a heating element 112 inside a massage head 100 contacts a flat portion inside the upper portion of the second hemispherical portion 106) (Figs. 6, 11; para. [0038]; para. [0042]);
at least one mounting sleeve on the lower portion of the node housing and configured to removably couple the temperature-controlled massage node to the piston of the independently powered massager (threaded wall 123 at the lower portion of the first hemisphere 104 to removably and threadably connect the massage head 100 to the shaft 107 to the moving pole 152 of massage device 102) (Figs. 11, 13);
a temperature element positioned within the node housing and electrically connected with the at least one battery for cooling the contact plate to impart cooling effect from the temperature-controlled massage node to a user independent of whether or not the node housing is coupled to the independently powered massager (heating element 112 inside the massage head 100 and electrically connected to its power source 160 so it can be used independent from the massage device 102; massage head can provide a heating or cooling effect) (Fig. 11; para. [0042]; para. [0048]);
a first user controller positioned on the node housing and electrically connected to a circuit board positioned within the node housing, where the first user controller is configured to allow a user to control the temperature element (power switch 126 on the massage head 100 housing enables the user to turn on/off the heating element 112 and would require circuitry in the massage head 100 to do so) (Fig. 11; para. [0042]);
a motor positioned within the node housing (vibration generator 162 inside the massage head 100) (Fig. 11; para. [0042]).
Alternatively, if Pepe is not seen as definitively disclosing a contact plate, Yamazaki teaches a warm-cool beauty treatment device wherein the heating or cooling effect from the Peltier element is transferred using a contact plate (warm plate 160a and/or cool plate 160b) (Yamazaki; Figs. 1A-2; para. [0021]).
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 Pepe upper portion of the second hemispherical portion 106 to include a contact plate, as taught by Yamazaki, for the purpose of ensuring good thermal conductivity for a heating or cooling effect to be transferred from a thermal element to the user’s skin (Yamazaki; para. [0021]).
Pepe does not disclose to removably couple the temperature-controlled massage node to the piston of the independently powered massager by friction fit, whereby the friction fit maintains the temperature-controlled massage node coupled to the piston of the independently powered massager while the piston is percussively moving.
However, Williams teaches a massage tool (Williams; abstract) including to removably couple the massage node to the piston of the independently powered massager by friction fit (the massage tool 10, 40, 80 can be removably coupled to the reciprocating shaft 17 of motor 3 via friction using an o-ring 42) (Williams; Figs. 1, 4, 14-16; para. [0043]; para. [0048]; para. [0058]), whereby the friction fit maintains the massage node coupled to the piston of the independently powered massager while the piston is percussively moving (the massage tool 40 is coupled to the reciprocating shaft 17 of motor 3 with the o-ring 42 that provides sufficient friction to maintain engagement during operation) (Williams; para. [0046]; para. [0048]).
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 Pepe temperature-controlled massage node and piston such that the temperature-controlled massage node is removably coupled to the piston of the independently powered massager by friction fit, whereby the friction fit maintains the temperature-controlled massage node coupled to the piston of the independently powered massager while the piston is percussively moving, as taught by Williams, for the purpose of providing a specific suitable connection mechanism which provides sufficient friction to maintain the engagement within the massage tool during operation (Williams; para. [0048]), thereby ensuring the secure connection between parts during operation of the device.
Pepe does not disclose the temperature element is a Peltier plate.
However, Levi teaches a multifunctional treatment device (Levi; abstract) where the temperature element is a Peltier plate (thermoelectric elements 65 is a Peltier for both heating and cooling) (Levi; Fig. 5B; para. [0030-0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the Pepe heating element 112 for the Peltier plate as taught by Levi, for the purpose of providing the device with an alternate mechanism for providing a heating/cooling treatment effect to a user which one of ordinary skill in the art could feasibly expect to perform similarly well.
Alternatively, if Pepe is not seen as definitively disclosing a circuit board positioned within the node housing, Rhoades teaches an apparatus with treatment attachments (Rhoades; abstract) including a circuit board positioned within the node housing (circuit board 270 inside the head of tool 110; alternatively, a treatment attachment can include a printed circuit board) (Rhoades; Figs. 3, 6-7; para. [0041]; para. [0109]).
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 Pepe node housing to include a circuit board positioned within the node housing, as taught by Rhoares, for the purpose of providing the device with a specific structure suitable to control the operation of other treatment electronics such as a motor (Rhodes; para. [0041]).
Pepe does not disclose to provide at least two pre-determined temperature settings; one or more light sources electrically connected to the circuit board, wherein the circuit board is configured to cause the one or more light sources to illuminate in different states corresponding to the at least two pre-determined temperature settings.
However, Yasuhiro teaches a flat iron-like moxibustion device (Yasuhiro; abstract) including at least two pre-determined temperature settings (low and high temperature modes) (Yasuhiro; Fig. 1(b); para. [0039]); one or more light sources electrically connected to the circuit board, wherein the circuit board is configured to cause the one or more light sources to illuminate in different states corresponding to the at least two pre-determined temperature settings (LED lamps 11d electrically connected to control circuit 101 to provide a red or green light; the light is red when the temperature is not being met according to the selected low or high temperature mode; the light is green when the temperature is met according to the selected low or high temperature mode) (Yasuhiro; Figs. 1(b), 4; paras. [0039-0045]).
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 Pepe node housing to include at least two pre-determined temperature settings; one or more light sources electrically connected to the circuit board, wherein the circuit board is configured to cause the one or more light sources to illuminate in different states corresponding to the at least two pre-determined temperature settings, as taught by Yasuhiro, for the purpose of providing a means by which to indicate to a user when a measured temperature meets a predetermined temperature according to a selected low or high temperature mode (Yasuhiro; paras. [0040-0045]).
Pepe does not disclose a fan positioned within the node housing.
However, Dai teaches a system to provide therapy via heating/cooling and percussion (Dai; abstract) including a fan positioned within the node housing (cooling vent/fan 18 mounted in the housing shell for the heating/cooling attachment 17) (Dai; Figs. 16, 18; para. [0098]; para. [0116]).
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 Pepe node housing to include a fan positioned within the node housing, as taught by Dai, for the purpose of helping to provide a cooling function for a cooling mode (Dai; para. [0090]).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Pepe teaches where a second user controller is positioned on the node housing and is configured to allow the user to heat the temperature-controlled massage node to at least two pre-determined temperature settings (the Yasuhiro low temperature mode button 11b and high temperature mode button 11c would be on the Pepe massage head 100 housing in order to control the Pepe heating element 112 to one of those two predetermined low and high temperature settings) (Pepe, Fig. 11, para. [0042]; Yasuhiro, Fig. 1(b), para. [0039]).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Pepe teaches where the temperature-controlled massage node further comprises a shaft extending from the lower portion of the node housing, where the mounting sleeve is positioned around at least a portion of the shaft, and where the mounting sleeve is a cylindrical sleeve extending axially along the at least portion of the shaft (swivel retaining shaft 67 on rod 5 extending from the lower portion of the massage tool 80 housing of brackets 65 with hinge pin 63, an unlabeled cylinder and o-ring 42 positioned and extending axially around the swivel retaining shaft 67; alternatively, the unlabeled cylinder and the swivel retaining shaft 67 on rod 5 extending from the lower portion of the massage tool 80 housing of brackets 65 with hinge pin 63, with an o-ring 42 positioned and extending axially around at least a portion of the unlabeled cylinder) (Williams; Figs. 14-16; para. [0058]).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Pepe teaches where the temperature-controlled massage node does not electrically couple to the piston when removably coupled to the piston (heating element 112 is inside the massage head 100 and electrically connected to its power switch 126 and power source 160 so as to be self-contained, and thereby be electrically independent from the massage device 102 with a shaft 107 and moving pole 152 so as to be useable when removed) (Pepe; Figs. 11, 13; para. [0042]).
Claims 21-25 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pepe in view of Williams and Yasuhiro, or alternatively over Pepe in view of Williams, Yasuhiro, Yamazaki, and Rhoades.
Regarding claim 21, Pepe discloses a temperature-controlled massage node (a massage head 100 with a heating element 112 inside that can be turned on and off) (Fig. 11; para. [0042]) for coupling to an independently powered massager (a massage head 100 can be attached and detached to and from a massage device 102, which can have a battery inside) (Figs. 1-4, 12-13; para. [0047-0048]) having a piston that percussively moves interchangeably attachable massage nodes (massage device 102 has a brushless motor 138, swing shift 150, and moving pole 152 to thereby provide a percussive movement to an attached massage head 100; the massage device 102 has a shaft 107 that can accept multiple types of massage heads) (Fig. 13; para. [0036]; para. [0044]), the temperature-controlled massage node comprising:
a node housing having an upper portion and lower portion (massage head 100 has a housing comprising a first hemispherical section 104 and a second hemispherical section 106) (Fig. 11; para. [0037]), where a contact plate is positioned on the upper portion (a heating element 112 inside a massage head 100 contacts a flat portion inside the upper portion of the second hemispherical portion 106) (Figs. 6, 11; para. [0038]; para. [0042]);
at least one battery positioned within the node housing (power source 160 which can be a battery is inside the massage head 100 housing) (Fig. 11; para. [0042]);
a heating element positioned within the node housing and electrically connected with the at least one battery, where the at least one battery supplies power to the heating element independent of whether or not the node housing is coupled to the independently powered massager, where the heating element is configured to heat the contact plate (heating element 112 inside the massage head 100 and electrically connected to its power source 160 so it can be used independent from the massage device 102; heating element 112 would provide a heating effect to the flat portion inside the upper portion of the second hemispherical portion 106) (Figs. 6, 11; para. [0038]; para. [0042]); and
a user controller positioned on the node housing and electrically connected to a circuit board positioned within the node housing, where the user controller is configured to allow a user to control the heating element (power switch 126 on the massage head 100 housing enables the user to turn on/off the heating element 112 and would require circuitry in the massage head 100 to do so) (Fig. 11; para. [0042]).
Alternatively, if Pepe is not seen as definitively disclosing a contact plate, Yamazaki teaches a warm-cool beauty treatment device wherein the heating or cooling effect from the Peltier element is transferred using a contact plate (warm plate 160a and/or cool plate 160b) (Yamazaki; Figs. 1A-2; para. [0021]).
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 Pepe upper portion of the second hemispherical portion 106 to include a contact plate, as taught by Yamazaki, for the purpose of ensuring good thermal conductivity for a heating or cooling effect to be transferred from a thermal element to the user’s skin (Yamazaki; para. [0021]).
Pepe does not disclose a shaft extending from the lower portion of the node housing having an outer mounting sleeve positioned around at least a portion of the shaft, where the outer mounting sleeve is configured to removably couples the temperature-controlled massage node to the piston of the independently powered massager by friction fit, whereby the friction fit maintains the temperature-controlled massage node coupled to the piston of the independently powered massager while the piston is percussively moving.
However, Williams teaches a massage tool (Williams; abstract) including a shaft extending from the lower portion of the node housing having an outer mounting sleeve positioned around at least a portion of the shaft (swivel retaining shaft 67 on rod 5 extending from the lower portion of the massage tool 80 housing of brackets 65 with hinge pin 63, with an unlabeled cylinder and o-ring 42 positioned around the swivel retaining shaft 67; alternatively, the unlabeled cylinder and the swivel retaining shaft 67 on rod 5 extending from the lower portion of the massage tool 80 housing of brackets 65 with hinge pin 63, with an o-ring 42 positioned around at least a portion of the unlabeled cylinder) (Williams; Figs. 14-16; para. [0058]), where the outer mounting sleeve is configured to removably couple the massage node to the piston of the independently powered massager by friction fit (the massage tool 80 can be removably coupled to the reciprocating shaft 17 of motor 3 via friction using an o-ring 42 on the unlabeled cylinder around the swivel retaining shaft 67) (Williams; Figs. 14-16; para. [0058]), whereby the friction fit maintains the massage node coupled to the piston of the independently powered massager while the piston is percussively moving (the massage tool 40 is coupled to the reciprocating shaft 17 of motor 3 with the o-ring 42 that provides sufficient friction to maintain engagement during operation) (Williams; para. [0046]; para. [0048]).
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 Pepe temperature-controlled massage node to include a shaft extending from the lower portion of the node housing having an outer mounting sleeve positioned around at least a portion of the shaft, where the outer mounting sleeve is configured to removably couples the temperature-controlled massage node to the piston of the independently powered massager by friction fit, whereby the friction fit maintains the temperature-controlled massage node coupled to the piston of the independently powered massager while the piston is percussively moving, as taught by Williams, for the purpose of providing a specific suitable connection mechanism which provides sufficient friction to maintain the engagement within the massage tool during operation (Williams; para. [0048]), thereby ensuring the secure connection between parts during operation of the device.
Alternatively, if Pepe is not seen as definitively disclosing a circuit board positioned within the node housing, Rhoades teaches an apparatus with treatment attachments (Rhoades; abstract) including a circuit board positioned within the node housing (circuit board 270 inside the head of tool 110; alternatively, a treatment attachment can include a printed circuit board) (Rhoades; Figs. 3, 6-7; para. [0041]; para. [0109]).
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 Pepe node housing to include a circuit board positioned within the node housing, as taught by Rhoares, for the purpose of providing the device with a specific structure suitable to control the operation of other treatment electronics such as a motor (Rhodes; para. [0041]).
Pepe does not disclose to provide at least two pre-determined temperature settings; one or more light sources electrically connected to the circuit board, wherein the circuit board is configured to cause the one or more light sources to illuminate in different states corresponding to the at least two pre-determined temperature settings.
However, Yasuhiro teaches a flat iron-like moxibustion device (Yasuhiro; abstract) including at least two pre-determined temperature settings (low and high temperature modes) (Yasuhiro; Fig. 1(b); para. [0039]); one or more light sources electrically connected to the circuit board, wherein the circuit board is configured to cause the one or more light sources to illuminate in different states corresponding to the at least two pre-determined temperature settings (LED lamps 11d electrically connected to control circuit 101 to provide a red or green light; the light is red when the temperature is not being met according to the selected low or high temperature mode; the light is green when the temperature is met according to the selected low or high temperature mode) (Yasuhiro; Figs. 1(b), 4; paras. [0039-0045]).
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 Pepe node housing to include at least two pre-determined temperature settings; one or more light sources electrically connected to the circuit board, wherein the circuit board is configured to cause the one or more light sources to illuminate in different states corresponding to the at least two pre-determined temperature settings, as taught by Yasuhiro, for the purpose of providing a means by which to indicate to a user when a measured temperature meets a predetermined temperature according to a selected low or high temperature mode (Yasuhiro; paras. [0040-0045]).
Regarding claim 22, the modified Pepe teaches where the outer mounting sleeve includes grooves (unlabeled cylinder around the swivel retaining shaft 67 has a groove for o-ring 42 and a groove for shaft 67) (Williams; Fig. 16; para. [0058]).
Regarding claim 23, the modified Pepe teaches where the shaft has an open center (the unlabeled cylinder around the swivel retaining shaft 67 has an open center through its proximal end 13) (Williams; Fig. 16; para. [0058]).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Pepe teaches where the independently powered massager includes a node mount, and where the outer mounting sleeve of the temperature-controlled massage node frictionally fits within an interior of the node mount (reciprocating motor 3 has a reciprocating shaft 17, into which the rod 5, retaining shaft 67, and/or cylinder around the swivel retaining shaft 67 is fit via friction from the o-ring 42) (Williams; Figs. 14-16; para. [0058]).
Regarding claim 25, the modified Pepe teaches where the temperature-controlled massage node does not electrically couple to the piston when removably coupled to the piston (heating element 112 is inside the massage head 100 and electrically connected to its power switch 126 and power source 160 so as to be self-contained, and thereby be electrically independent from the massage device 102 with a shaft 107 and moving pole 152 so as to be useable when removed) (Pepe; Figs. 11, 13; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 28, the modified Pepe teaches where the outer mounting sleeve is a cylindrical sleeve extending axially along the at least portion of the shaft (the unlabeled cylinder and o-ring 42 extending axially around the swivel retaining shaft 67) (Williams; Figs. 14-16; para. [0058]).
Claims 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pepe in view of Williams, Yasuhiro, Yamazaki, and Rhoades as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Harder (US 2014/0101914 A1).
Regarding claim 26, the modified Pepe teaches the invention as previously claimed, but does not teach where the outer mounting sleeve of the temperature-controlled massage node comprises a first portion having a first outer diameter and a second portion having a second outer diameter greater than the first outer diameter.
However Harder teaches an accessory with a cylindrical tube having o-rings to be inserted into an opening via a friction fit (Harder; Fig. 7; paras. [0061-0062]) where the outer mounting sleeve of the temperature-controlled massage node comprises a first portion having a first outer diameter and a second portion having a second outer diameter greater than the first outer diameter (cylindrical body 62 has a first portion that fits into the cylindrical tube 144 with a first diameter, and a second portion of edge 64 having a larger second diameter) (Harder; Fig. 7; paras. [0061-0062]).
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 modified Pepe outer mounting sleeve of Williams such that the outer mounting sleeve of the temperature-controlled massage node comprises a first portion having a first outer diameter and a second portion having a second outer diameter greater than the first outer diameter, as taught by Harder, for the purpose of providing a structure to prevent over insertion (Harder; para. [0061]).
Regarding claim 27, the modified Pepe teaches where the first outer diameter frictionally fits within the interior of the node mount (Williams o-ring 42 on the unlabeled cylinder around the swivel retaining shaft 67 has a diameter to fit inside of the receiving cavity of reciprocating shaft 17 and provide friction) (Williams; Figs. 14-16; para. [0058]) and the second outer diameter does not frictionally fit within the interior of the node mount (Williams rod 5 previously modified by Harder to have an edge 64 having a larger second diameter) (Williams, Figs. 14-16, para. [0058]; Harder, Fig. 7, paras. [0061-0062]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/9/2026 and the affidavit filed 4/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 7 in the last paragraph to page 8 in the second paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as sections 7-8 of the affidavit, the Applicant argues that achieving a reliable friction fit to couple the massage node to the piston presents significant and non-obvious engineering challenges, as percussive massage devices are high-intensity and operate at 1,200-3,500 PPM with stokes of 6-16 mm, therefore the coupled massage node has too great a force acting on it in each percussive cycle to achieve the friction fit. However, the 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. the percussive massage device functioning at a high-intensity of 1,200-3,500 PPM with stokes of 6-16 mm) 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). Moreover, the Pepe reference used as the primary reference to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention similarly does not recite any specific PPM and stroke distance that might deter a reliable friction fit as argued. Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
On page 8 in the third paragraph to page 10 in the first paragraph and page 13 in the last paragraph to page 14 in the first paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as sections 9-11 and 18 of the affidavit, the Applicant argues that having electrical component such as a battery, a thermoelectric element, a circuit board, a user controller, light sources, a fan, and a motor in the massage node increases its overall mass to increase the force acting on the friction fit coupling during each percussive cycle and shift its center of gravity to introduce torsional and off-axis forces during operation that a simpler lighter weighted massage node such as taught by the Williams reference would not generate, and thus there would not be a reasonable expectation of success by one of ordinary skill in the art to maintain the friction fit for the Applicant’s claimed massage node. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Applicant has not recited a specific weight or weight comparison in their claims or original disclosure for the massage node that would result from the added electrical components. Such electrical components can lightweight, as evidenced by DeSeve (US 2017/0209301 A1). DeSeve evidences a system with electric components such as thermoelectric modules (TEMs), a circuit board, sensors, switches, a CPU, a battery, and a fan can be lightweight (DeSeve; para. [0081]; para. [0092]; para. [0117]; claim 1). Moreover, although Williams is silent on the specific weight of its massage node or tool being friction fit with an o-ring to a shaft, Williams does teach the massage node or tool can be made out of materials such as metal (Williams; para. [0068]), which can be heavy. Furthermore, 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 specific weight for the massage node to be considered lightweight, and/or shifting the massage node’s center of gravity to introduce torsional and off-axis forces during operation) 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). Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
On page 10 in the second paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as section 12 of the affidavit, the Applicant argues that the internal components of the massage node must remain securely positioned and electrically connected during percussive impacts, which imposes additional design constraints on the friction fit coupling and the internal layout of the massage node not taught by the cited prior art. However, the 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. the function of keeping the internal components of the massage node securely positioned and electrically connected during percussive impacts; a specific internal layout of the massage node that affects the friction fit) 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). Moreover, the Applicant has not claimed any particular structure(s) that would function to securely position and keep electrically connected the internal components of the massage node during percussive impacts other than the friction fit as claimed. As the Williams reference teaches the friction fit structure as claimed (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of the independent claims above), it would thus be able to perform the same function. Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
Applicant’s arguments on page 10 in the last paragraph to page 11 in the last paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as sections 13-15 of the affidavit, with respect to the Dai reference teaching the friction fit have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection using the Williams reference in the current rejection as discussed above.
On page 12 in the first paragraph to page 13 in the first paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as sections 16-17 of the affidavit, the Applicant argues that Pepe teaches mechanisms such as using locking projections or a threaded fastener to secure the massage node to the shaft, thereby teaching away from using a friction fit. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Firstly, the Examiner is not using the Pepe reference to teach the Applicant’s claimed friction fit limitation, as the Williams reference was used to teach that claim limitation. Secondly, Pepe does not specifically recite excluding other fastening mechanisms other than the locking projections or a threaded fastener to secure the massage node to the shaft from being possible fastening mechanisms, and so does not teach away from friction fit mechanisms. Thirdly, Williams teaches both threaded and friction fit fastening mechanisms are suitable fastening mechanisms to hold a massage node in place on the reciprocating shaft of a percussive device (Williams; Figs. 3-16; para. [0007]). Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
On page 13 in the second paragraph to page 14 in the first paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as section 18 of the affidavit, the Applicant argues that the Williams o-ring cannot teach the mounting sleeve as the o-ring is not a cylindrical or tubular structure that fits around a shaft over a meaningful axial length, provides structural coupling, load distributing, and alignment between the components it connects. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Firstly, 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. the mounting sleeve being a cylindrical or tubular structure that fits around a shaft over a meaningful axial length, provides structural coupling, load distributing, and alignment between the components it connects) are not recited in the rejected claim 21. 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). Regardless, the Williams o-ring would still be able to teach such features of being a cylindrical or tubular structure that fits around a shaft over a meaningful axial length, provides structural coupling, load distributing, and alignment between the components it connects (the o-ring 42 is a ring, and so is a cylindrical or tubular structure that fits around the unlabeled cylinder and the swivel retaining shaft 67 for a portion of their axial length; the o-ring 42 provides the frictionally coupling structure that aligns the unlabeled cylinder with the reciprocating shaft 17, and so would also take on the load being distributed from the reciprocating shaft 17) (Williams; Figs. 14-16; para. [0058]). Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
On page 14 in the second paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as section 19 of the affidavit, the Applicant argues that none of the other cited references of Levi, Jacobs, Barasch, or Yamazaki address the friction fit coupling for the massage node as claimed, and thus cannot teach the Applicant’s claimed invention. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Levi, Jacobs, Barasch, and Yamazaki references are not being used to teach the friction fit limitation. Rather, this limitation is being taught by Williams as detailed in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of the independent claims above. Thus, this argument is moot, and the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
On page 14 in the third paragraph to page 15 in the first paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as sections 20-21 and 23 of the affidavit, the Applicant argues that one of ordinary skill in the art would not have a reasonable expectation of success in combining the teachings of these reference to arrive at a self-contained, complex, and electromechanical massage node reliably friction fit to a high-frequency percussive piston, and that instead both Dai and Pepe teach against the friction fit in favor of positive locking mechanisms. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Firstly, neither the Dai nor the Pepe references are being used to teach the friction fit limitation. Instead, that limitation is taught by the Williams reference. Moreover, as previously explained above, the primary reference of Pepe does not teach away from using a friction fit to couple it massage node to a shaft of a percussion device, as Pepe does not specifically recite excluding other fastening mechanisms other than the locking projections or a threaded fastener to secure the massage node to the shaft from being possible fastening mechanisms. Additionally, the modification of the Pepe massage node to have a friction fit instead of a threaded attachment mechanism does not take away from the complexity of the massage node interior. Furthermore, as previously explained above, the Applicant has not recited a specific weight or weight comparison in their claims or original disclosure for the massage node that would result from the added electrical components which could be lightweight as evidenced by DeSeve, DeSeve teaching a system with electric components such as thermoelectric modules (TEMs), a circuit board, sensors, switches, a CPU, a battery, and a fan can be lightweight (DeSeve; para. [0081]; para. [0092]; para. [0117]; claim 1). Moreover, although Williams is silent on the specific weight of its massage node or tool being friction fit with an o-ring to a shaft, Williams does teach the massage node or tool can be made out of materials such as metal (Williams; para. [0068]), which can be heavy. Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
On page 15 in the second paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, as well as section 22 of the affidavit, the Applicant argues that the cited art does not teach the specific structural relationship between the outer mounting sleeve, shaft, and piston that enables the claimed friction fit to withstand percussive forces while accommodating the mass and weight distribution of the internal electrical components. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The modified Pepe device does teach the friction fit comprised of the structures of the outer mounting sleeve, shaft, and piston as claimed (unlabeled cylinder around the swivel retaining shaft 67 with o-ring 42; rod 5 and/or retaining shaft 67; reciprocating motor 3 with a reciprocating shaft 17) (Williams; Figs. 14-16; para. [0058]), and so thus would be able to function as argued to withstand percussive forces while accommodating the mass and weight distribution of the internal electrical components. Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
Applicant’s arguments on page 15 in the last paragraph to page 16 in the first paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks with respect to the newly added claim limitations regarding one or more light sources to illuminate in different states corresponding to at least two pre-determined temperature settings have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection using the Yasuhiro reference in the current rejection as discussed above.
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 JACQUELINE M PINDERSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-7032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-4:00.
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.
/JACQUELINE M PINDERSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/RACHEL T SIPPEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights