DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the filing of a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) and amendments to the claims therein on 12/22/2025. As per the amendments, claims 1, 15-17, and 20 have been amended, claims 7 and 18-19 have been cancelled, and no claims have been added. Thus, claims 1-5, 8-17, and 20 are pending in the application.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/22/2025 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because the phrase “extends from first arm” (ln. 1) should read --extends from the first arm--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5-6 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 5, the term “a second direction” (ln. 2) is unclear if the term is referring to the “second direction” recited in claim 4 (ln. 2) or a different second direction. For the purposes of examination, the term “second direction” will be interpreted as the same “second direction” recited in claim 4. If this interpretation is correct, the applicant is encouraged to amend the term to read --the second direction--.
Regarding claim 8, the term “a dorsal brace” (ln. 2) is unclear if the term is referring to the “dorsal brace” that is recited in claim 1 (ln. 2) or introducing an additional dorsal brace. For the purposes of examination, the term “a dorsal brace” will be interpreted as the same “dorsal brace” recited in claim 1. If this interpretation is correct, the applicant is encouraged to amend the term to read --the dorsal brace--.
Any remaining claims are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 8-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lambden (US Pat. 6,241,693) in view of Schupman (US Pat. 8,337,438).
Regarding claim 1, Lambden discloses a massage device comprising (device of Figs. 1-2): a dorsal brace that includes a first end and a second end (see Fig. 1 where the arcuate shaft 10 has a portion with radius of curvature 18, from approximately between where the two different numerals “22” are pointing, which show first and second ends of a dorsal brace portion); a first dorsal projection which attaches directly and perpendicularly to the dorsal brace (see Figs. 2 and 4A-4B where pressure applicator 26 attaches to the arcuate shaft 10 and extends perpendicular thereto); a second dorsal projection which attaches directly and perpendicularly to the dorsal brace, separately from the attachment of the first dorsal projection (a second of pressure applicators 26 in Figs. 2-3, which attaches to the arcuate shaft 10 and extends out in direction perpendicular thereto); wherein the first end of the dorsal brace is connected to a first end of a first arm and wherein the first arm extends in a first direction (see Figs. 1-3 where a left side of the arcuate shaft 10 about the radius of curvature 10 connects to the left radius of curvature 22, leading into a first arm at the radius of curvature and leading to handle 14); wherein the second end of the dorsal brace is connected to a first end of a second arm (see Figs. 1-3 where a right side of the arcuate shaft 10 about the radius of curvature 10 connects to the right radius of curvature 22, leading into a second arm at the radius of curvature and leading to handle 14); and wherein the second arm extends in the first direction which is substantially parallel to the first arm (see Figs. 2-3 where the two segments on either side about the radius of curvature 22 extend in substantially the same direction so as to be substantially parallel).
Lambden lacks a detailed description of a first dorsal projection extends upwardly from the dorsal brace, and a second dorsal projection extends upwardly from the dorsal brace.
However, Schupman teaches a similar body and muscle massaging device, where the dorsal projection extends upward and perpendicular to the dorsal brace (see Figs. 1-2 where a neck portion 16 comprising flexible coupling 24, arms 26, and tip 18 attaches to the body 12 so as to extend upward and perpendicularly therefrom).
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 pressure applicators of Lambden (Lambden; see Col. 2 lines 17-28 and Col. 4 lines 20-41 where the pressure applicators are movable, removable, and able to target different body parts) to be upward and perpendicular dorsal projections as taught by Schupman, as it would provide an additional type of pressure applicator which can be connected to the dorsal brace of Lambden to provide a different massage function, while also being able to specifically target the user’s neck (Schupman; see Col. 2 lines 30-41).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Lambden device has a first handle connected to a second end of the first arm (Lambden; see Figs. 2-3 where a first left handle 14 is connected to the radius of curvature 22 at the first arm).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Lambden device has a second handle connected to a second end of the second arm (Lambden; see Figs. 2-3 where a second right handle 14 is connected to the radius of curvature 22 at the second arm).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Lambden device has wherein the first handle extends from first arm in a second direction (Lambden; see Fig. 3 where a first handle 14 extends from the arm to be directed in a second direction).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Lambden device has wherein the second handle extends from the second arm in a second direction (Lambden; see Fig. 3 where a second handle 14 extends from the arm to be directed in a second direction).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Lambden device has wherein the second direction is substantially perpendicular to the length of the first and the second arms (Lambden; see Fig. 3 where the handles 14 extend up and away from the arms at radius of curvature 22 so as to be substantially perpendicular thereto).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Lambden device has wherein a first end of the first dorsal projection is attached to a dorsal brace (Lambden; see Figs. 2-3 where each pressure applicator 26 (as modified in light of Schupman) has a bottom end of the pressure applicator which attaches to the arcuate shaft 10).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Lambden device has the massage device further comprising: a massage head connected to a second end of the first dorsal projection (Schupman; see Fig. 1 tips 18).
Regarding claim 10, the modified Lambden device has wherein the first dorsal projection contains a bend in the first direction (Schupman; see Fig. 1 where arms 26 have a curvature, the bend being in the same direction as the extension of the arms of Lambden in the modified device).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Lambden device has wherein the second dorsal projection contains a bend in the first direction (Schupman; see Fig. 1 where arms 26 have a curvature, the bend being in the same direction as the extension of the arms of Lambden in the modified device).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Lambden device has wherein the second dorsal projection is positioned nearer to the second end of the dorsal brace than the first end of the dorsal brace (Lambden; see Figs. 2-3 where a right applicator 26 is closer to a right end of shaft 10 than the left applicator 26 is).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Lambden device has wherein the first dorsal projection is positioned nearer to the first end of the dorsal brace than to the second end of the dorsal brace (Lambden; see Figs. 2-3 where a left applicator 26 is closer to a left end of shaft 10 than the right applicator 26 is).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Lambden device has a distance between the first end of the dorsal brace and the first dorsal projection is the same as a distance between the second end of the dorsal brace and the second dorsal projection (Lambden; see Col. 2 lines 17-28 and Col. 4 lines 20-41 where the pressure applicators are movable along arcuate shaft 10, such that they can be placed where a first applicator 26 is the same distance from the first end of the brace as the second applicator 26 is from the second end of the brace).
Regarding claim 15, Lambden discloses a massage device comprising (device of Figs. 1-2): a dorsal brace (see Fig. 1 where the arcuate shaft 10 has a portion with radius of curvature 18, from approximately between where the two different numerals “22” are pointing, which show first and second ends of a dorsal brace portion); a plurality of dorsal projections separately and directly connected perpendicularly to the dorsal brace (see Figs. 2-3 where pressure applicators 26 attach to the arcuate shaft 10 and extend perpendicular thereto, each being a separate applicator); wherein a first end of the dorsal brace is connected to a first end of a first arm; wherein the first arm extends in a first direction (see Figs. 1-3 where a left side of the arcuate shaft 10 about the radius of curvature 10 connects to the left radius of curvature 22, leading into a first arm at the radius of curvature and leading to handle 14, and being a first direction); wherein a second end of the dorsal brace is connected to a first end of a second arm (see Figs. 1-3 where a right side of the arcuate shaft 10 about the radius of curvature 10 connects to the right radius of curvature 22, leading into a second arm at the radius of curvature and leading to handle 14); wherein the second arm extends in the first direction which is substantially parallel to the first arm (see Figs. 2-3 where the two segments on either side about the radius of curvature 22 extend in substantially the same direction so as to be substantially parallel).
Lambden lacks a detailed description of a plurality of dorsal projections extending upwardly from the dorsal brace.
However, Schupman teaches a similar body and muscle massaging device, where the dorsal projection extends upward and perpendicular to the dorsal brace (see Figs. 1-2 where a neck portion 16 comprising flexible coupling 24, arms 26, and tip 18 attaches to the body 12 so as to extend upward and perpendicularly therefrom).
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 pressure applicators of Lambden (Lambden; see Col. 2 lines 17-28 and Col. 4 lines 20-41 where the pressure applicators are movable, removable, and able to target different body parts) to be upward and perpendicular dorsal projections as taught by Schupman, as it would provide an additional type of pressure applicator which can be connected to the dorsal brace of Lambden to provide a different massage function, while also being able to specifically target the user’s neck (Schupman; see Col. 2 lines 30-41).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Lambden device has the massage device further comprising: a first handle connected to a second end of the first arm and extending upwardly from the second end of the second arm (Lambden; see Figs. 2-3 where a first left handle 14 is connected to the radius of curvature 22 at the first arm and extends upward therefrom).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Lambden device has the massage device further comprising: a second handle connected to a second end of the second arm and extending upwardly from the second end of the second arm (Lambden; see Figs. 2-3 where a second right handle 14 is connected to the radius of curvature 22 at the second arm and extends upward therefrom).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Lambden device has wherein the first handle extending upwardly from the first arm and the second handle extending upwardly from the second arm is a direction that is substantially perpendicular to a length of the first and the second arms (Lambden; see Fig. 3 where the handles 14 extend up and away from the arms at radius of curvature 22 so as to be substantially perpendicular thereto).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 8-17, and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record. Specifically, the newly applied Lambden primary reference addresses the changes made by the amendment.
For the reasons above, the rejection holds.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D ZIEGLER whose telephone number is (571)272-3349. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10:00-6:00.
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.
/MATTHEW D ZIEGLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785