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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
This office action is responsive to Request for Reconsideration files on 08/07/2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 1 – 16, 18 & 20 – 22 are pending, claims 17 & 19 have been canceled, claims 21 – 22 have been added & claims 1, 13 – 14, 16 & 18.
This office action is responsive to Request for Reconsideration files on 08/07/2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 1 – 16, 18 & 20 – 22 are pending, claims 17 & 19 have been canceled, no claims have been added & no claims have been amended.
Applicant's arguments filed 01/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues the prior art Beach does not show or suggest the massage contact member is closed or includes any form of membrane. Beach is vague with the description of the massage contact member and if it includes a membrane. This was considered based on Figure 1. However, Beach does disclose the massage contact member of any usual or desired construction meaning it allows modification to the massage contact member of Beach that includes a membrane. (Beach, Page 1, Column 2, Paragraph 2)
Applicant's arguments filed 01/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues Beach would not allow the addition of a membrane; however, Beach does disclose the massage contact member of any usual or desired construction meaning it allows modification to the massage contact member of Beach that includes a membrane. (Beach, Page 1, Column 2, Paragraph 2).
Applicant's arguments filed 01/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues Weck does not have a rest state and an operation state as it only has a single state. However, the examiner considers the rest state to be when the head does not receive any force and the operation state is when force is exerted. This would be obvious in any massage device as pressure is not always exerted when massaging. The limitation of the seal being maintained in both states is a known practice to seal any hollow area if it is intended to maintain the fluid inside even when in use or when pressure is exerted on it. (Figure 3 depicts the inside 48 of the sphere has a seal 58 to maintain the fluid inside)
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 11, files 01/15/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. As disclosed in the examiner interview summary record it was specified that the reference does not state different rigidities for the first, intermediate or second portions. However it does disclose the use of different rigidities in the prongs. Based on this, an obviousness argument was stated that this rigidity use can be incorporated in other areas of the device to provide different functions.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 12, filed 01/15/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim 14 under have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Palmer et al. (US 2437402 A).
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 13 & 14, filed 01/15/2026, with respect to 103 rejection of claim 22 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 22 has been withdrawn.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 4, 6, 13, 15 - 16, 18 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach et al. (US 1368782 A), in view of Kuhnen et al. (DE 4320328 A1), Weck et al. (US 20150045192 A1), Uemura et al. (JP 3991360 B2) & Coffman et al. (US 1391759 A).
Regarding claim 1, A head unit 25, connectable to an external device 6, the external device 6 including an actuator 14 (Note: examiner considers the actuator to be what creates the vibration movement) suitable for operating the head unit 25 and being fully disposed within the external device (Figure 3), the head unit 25 comprising:
a first portion (see annotated Figure 1) arranged about a main longitudinal axis of said head unit 25, said first portion (see annotated Figure 1), including a first connection region (Figure 1 / Note: examiner is considering this limitation as the first way both portions get connected); and
a second portion (see annotated Figure 1),
an intermediate portion (see annotated Figure 1), fixedly attached to said first portion (see annotated Figure 1) and disposed between said first portion (see annotated Figure 1) and said second portion (see annotated Figure 1),
wherein an interior volume (see annotated Figure 1) is formed between said first portion, said intermediate portion (see annotated Figure 1), and second portion (see annotated Figure 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
425
730
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Annotated Figure of App. US 1368782 A
Beach does not disclose the first connection region to be reversibly connectable to the external device for attachment to and detachment from the actuator.
Kuhnen discloses the first connection region to be reversibly connectable (Note: examiner is considering the limitation as a connection that can easily be undone or reversed) to the external device (Page 6 / Paragraph 5, lines 8 - 10) for attachment to and detachment from the actuator 54. (Page 8, Paragraph 3)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify Beach to include wherein the first connection region to be reversibly connectable to the external device for attachment to and detachment from the actuator as it would allow head unit to be substituted for another unit that can include different modifications that may be better or preferred by the user. (Page 8, Paragraph 3)
Modified Beach does not disclose a flexible and elastic membrane said membrane including:
a first protrusion extending outwardly from said membrane away from said first portion and including a first extreme point associated with a first virtual tangential plane,
a second protrusion extending outwardly from said membrane away from said first portion and including a second extreme point associated with a second virtual tangential plane.
Uemura discloses a flexible and elastic membrane 3 said membrane including protrusions 4 extending outwardly from said membrane 3 away from said first portion (Note: the examiner considers the first portion to be the combination of the membrane and protrusions).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Beach to modify the massage contact member of Beach to be a membrane that is flexible and elastic as it would allow the membrane to be able to have the membrane be bent by reciprocating repeatedly and ensure no matter the area that is forced on the membrane can be flexed well. This modification to Beach would be possible as Beach discloses the massage contact member can be of any usual or desired construction meaning it allows modification to the massage contact member of Beach that includes a membrane. (Beach, Page 1, Column 2, Paragraph 2) By including a membrane, it would be possible for the massage head of Beach to include a plurality of protrusions. (Uemura, Figure 6 / Page 6, Paragraph 7) Also, it would have been obvious to further modify Beach to modify the elastic membrane to include protrusions extending outwardly from said membrane away from said first portion as it is a commonly known way of bettering the massage effects and being able to stimulate the area successfully. (Uemura, Page 5, last paragraph – Page 6, first paragraph)
Kuhnen discloses a first protrusion 38 (see annotated Figure 3, including a first extreme point (see annotated Figure 3) associated with a first virtual tangential plane (Figure 3), a second protrusion 36 (see annotated Figure 3) and including a second extreme point (see annotated Figure 3) associated with a second virtual tangential plane (Figure 3).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Beach to include disclose first protrusion and second protrusion, including a first extreme point associated with a first virtual tangential plane and including a second extreme point associated with a second virtual tangential plane. The modifications of the protrusions of modified Beach to have the protrusions be changed to first and second protrusions means the protrusions have different heights making the second protrusions have a higher height. Based on this change the first protrusion a second protrusions of Beach will incorporate the same setup of the protrusions of Kuhnen on the membrane. This will allow the contact surfaces of the protrusions not lie in a flat level and instead on an easy concave level resulting in a better adjustment to any surfaces lying in a convex plane. (Page 3, Paragraphs - 6). Based on the changes of the height of the protrusions, the first protrusions will have a first extreme point that dictates where the protrusion touches the surface. The same will occur with the second protrusion will have a second extreme point that will dictates where the protrusion touches the surface. Based on the fact that they are found in a circular form (as seen in Kuhnen), the extreme points will associate with the tangential line of the location of the protrusion.
Modified Beach discloses wherein a perimeter of said membrane (Note: the membrane was added in a previous modification) is attached to said intermediate portion (see annotated Figure 1 / Note: the membrane is attached to the intermediate portion due to the fact that the membrane is a part of the second portion) along a perimeter of said intermediate portion (see annotated Figure 1).
Modified Beach does not disclose head unit can be operated by the actuator of the external device in a periodic manner characterized by at least one amplitude and at least one frequency.
Kuhnen discloses wherein said head unit 25 can be operated by the actuator 54 of the external device 4 in a periodic manner characterized by at least one amplitude and at least one frequency (Page 6, Paragraph 2 - 4).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Kuhnen wherein the head unit can be operated by the actuator of the external device in a periodic manner characterized by at least one amplitude and at least one frequency. This modification allows the vibrations to be dependent on the speed of the motor where it is possible to dictate the frequency of the massage effect and in turn dictate the amplitude of the vibration. (Page 7, Paragraph 2)
Kuhnen further discloses wherein said first and second protrusions are adapted, during operation of said head unit 2, to engage and apply force to an external surface in a graded manner (Page 6, Paragraph 2)
Modified Beach does not disclose said interior volume being sealed.
However, Weck discloses said interior volume being sealed. (Paragraph 0039)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Beach to include said interior volume being sealed, such that in a rest state of the head unit and during operation of the head unit as it is a known practice to seal any hollow area if it is intended to maintain the fluid inside even when in use or when pressure is exerted on it. (Figure 3 depicts the inside 48 of the sphere has a seal 58 to maintain the fluid inside)
Modified Beach discloses such that in a rest state (Note: the examiner considers this to be when pressure is not exerted on the head) of the head unit and during operation of the head unit said interior volume (see annotated Figure 1) is filled with a fluid (Figure 1). (Note: the examiner considers the hollow space of the internal volume to be filled with air)
Modified Beach does not expressly disclose a first rigidity.
However, Kuhnen does provide a specific rigidity description to the secondary portion and the intermediate portion. (Page 3, Paragraph 8 / Page 4, Paragraph 6)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to specify the rigidity the first portion of the head unit by specifically using the Shore hardness scale to determine what rigidity or hardness that specific part would need based on its function. Based on this it could be decided if the hardness would be below 30 to make the part flexible / compliant or 70 to become extremely hard in order to provide a determined massage effect.
Modified Beach does not expressly disclose having a second rigidity, smaller than said first rigidity.
However, Kuhnen does disclose the second portion, which according to the Shore hardness, is in a range of approximately where 30 makes the tines very flexible. (Page 6, Paragraph 5, lines 10 – 16)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have the first rigidity harder than others as it connects the actuator to the head unit and received the most pressure. Making it necessary to have a hard first portion that does not get easily damaged by it. (Figure 4 / Page 6, Paragraph 5, lines 10 – 16)
Modified Beach does not expressly disclose wherein said intermediate portion having a third rigidity, different from said first rigidity and from said second rigidity,
However, Kuhnen does disclose the second portion, which according to the Shore hardness, is in a range of approximately where 30 makes the tines very flexible. By using a lower number for the second portion it would make the third portion to have greater rigidity than the second portion. (Page 3, Paragraph 8)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have the first rigidity harder than others as it connects the actuator to the head unit and received the most pressure. Making it necessary to have a hard first portion that does not get easily damaged by it. (Figure 4 / Page 6, Paragraph 5, lines 10 – 12)
PNG
media_image2.png
466
768
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 3: Annotated figure from App. DE 4320329 C1
Regarding claim 2, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach discloses wherein said membrane (as claimed in claim 1) is connected to said first portion (see annotated Figure 1) only by said perimeter of said membrane (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Kuhnen further discloses wherein a first height of said first protrusion 38 is different from a second height of said second protrusion 36 (Page 6, Paragraph 2)
and wherein said graded manner of engagement and application of force is at least partially a result of said different first and second heights. (Page 5, Paragraph 2 / Page 5, last paragraph)
Regarding claim 4, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Kuhnen further discloses wherein said first protrusion 36 is centered about said main longitudinal axis, and said second protrusion is circumferential about said first protrusion 38 (Figure 1). (As modified in claim 1, the protrusions of Beach will take on the setup of the protrusions of Kuhnen)
Regarding claim 6, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not expressly disclose wherein said membrane is separate from said first portion and said intermediate portion, and is reversibly attachable to said intermediate portion along said perimeter.
However, Modified Beach does disclose the massage head to be reversibly attachable from the actuator. Based on this already taught modification, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Beach wherein said membrane is separate from said first portion and said intermediate portion, and is reversibly attachable to said intermediate portion along said perimeter as it would be obvious to apply the reversibly attachable mechanisms to other areas of the device that is intended to be removed or changed.
Regarding claim 11, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not further disclose a fluid insertion portal disposed in said first portion or in said intermediate portion, wherein said portal having an open operative orientation and a sealed operative orientation.
Weck discloses disclose a fluid insertion portal 36 disposed in said first portion (Note: the examiner considers the first portion to be anything above 34) or in said intermediate portion (Paragraph 0069), wherein said portal having an open operative orientation and a sealed operative orientation. (Paragraph 0069 discloses the portal can be opened and sealed closed)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filling date to modify Beach to include a fluid insertion portal disposed in said first portion or in said intermediate portion, wherein said portal having an open operative orientation and a sealed operative orientation as it would ensure the possibility of filling the massage head with a variety of materials and later be able to seal it with a plug. Such materials include granular elements or liquid. (Paragraph 0069)
Regarding claim 13, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not disclose wherein, said fluid includes a liquid.
Weck further discloses wherein, said fluid includes a liquid. (Paragraph 0039)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Beach wherein, said fluid includes a liquid as there is no specification that the device of Beach includes only air in its interior volume. However, it is obvious to insert a variety of different materials such as granular elements or liquid as the amount and weight of the material within the head section can greatly affect the unique operations of the device. (Paragraph 0039)
Regarding claim 15, Kuhnen discloses a method for providing treatment to a treatment surface, the method comprising: attaching a head unit (Note: the examiner considers the head unit to be everything under the plate ‘48’) to an external device 4 functioning as an actuator;
engaging said membrane 6 of said head unit with said treatment surface, in a graded manner (Page 5, Paragraph 2 / Page 5, last paragraph) and
operating said actuator 54 such that said actuator 54 causes percussion of said membrane against said treatment surface (Page 6, Paragraph 1)
wherein said application of force is periodic (Page 3, last paragraph) and is characterized by at least one amplitude and at least one frequency (Page 6, paragraph 4)
Regarding claim 16, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not expressly disclose wherein said third rigidity is selected to be one of the following:
is smaller than said second rigidity; or
greater than said second rigidity, and smaller than said first rigidity.
However, Kuhnen discloses a hardness in the second portion, which according to the Shore hardness, is approximately 50. The third portion is described by having a rubber-elastic formation that is deflectable on both sides. Also, it discloses a range of Shore Hardness of about 30 to 70. This means it is possible for the third rigidity to be greater than said second rigidity and smaller than first rigidity. (Page 3, Paragraph 8, Page 4, Paragraph 5 - 6 / Page 5, Paragraph 7)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filling date to modify Beach to assume the third rigidity is smaller than said second rigidity as the third portion is described to be deflectable on both sides with a rubber-elastic material means the rigidity is very low based on the Shore hardness compared to the second portion. This would allow the third portion to be able to complete the pumping movement that increases and decreases the volume of the intermediate portion. This provides the scalp with the pulsating vibration and having a rigid second portion allows the intensive massage effect. (Page 6, Paragraph 5, lines 10 – 15 – Page 7, First paragraph) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have the first rigidity harder than others as it connects the actuator to the head unit and received the most pressure. Making it necessary to have a hard first portion that does not get easily damaged by it. (Figure 4 / Page 6, Paragraph 5, lines 10 – 16)
Regarding claim 18, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not expressly disclose wherein the force of the actuator is transferred axially to said perimeter of said membrane, and within said membrane, said force is transferred from one protrusion to the next protrusion, from the perimeter of the membrane toward the center of the membrane.
Kuhnen does disclose how the movement of the motor transfers to the intermediate portion. These pulsating pressure vibrations generated cause an altering pressure and tension towards the protrusion. (Page 7, Paragraph 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date that the mechanics and modified structure of Beach would have the force of the actuator being transferred axially to said perimeter of said membrane because the modified Beach intermediate portion is connected to the membrane on the perimeter and force from the actuator to the first portion, to the intermediate portion and then the membrane. This would allow the drive elements to provide a back-and-forth movement of the wall area, which would make it obvious for the force of the membrane to be transferred via the perimeter of the membrane. (Seen similar to Kuhnen, Page 7, Claim 1). It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the mechanics and modified structure of Beach would, within said membrane, said force be transferred from one protrusion to the next protrusion, from the perimeter of the membrane toward the center of the membrane. One skilled in the art would expect that the vibration would move across the membrane to the center as it ensures that all the protrusions are able to provide a massage to the scalp of the user. (Seen similar to Kuhnen, Page 7, Paragraph 2, lines 1 -2).
Regarding claim 20, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach discloses said head unit being devoid of an internal actuator (Figure 1 discloses how there is not internal actuator as it is not inside of the head unit, instead it is connected to it).
Claim(s) 5 & 8 - 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach et al. (US 1368782 A), Kuhnen et al. (DE 4320328C1), Weck et al. (US 20150045192 A1), Uemura et al. (JP 3991360 B2) & Coffman et al. (US 1391759 A) as applied in claim 1, in view of Takeda et al. (EP 1964537 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not disclose wherein said membrane is formed of a viscoelastic material or of an auxetic material.
Takeda discloses wherein said membrane is formed of a viscoelastic material or of an auxetic material. (Page 2, Section 2, Paragraph 0006)
However, it does disclose a change in shape when the head unit is being used and when the process is finished the unit returns to its natural shape (Page 2, Section 2, Paragraph 0006; Figure 5A and Figure 5B)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date to further modify Beach to include a membrane formed of a viscoelastic material or of an auxetic material. This ensures the unit to have a more concave shape in the center region on order to effectively perform the massage over the scalp and treated area. (Page 3, Section 3, Paragraph 0008; Figure 5B)
Regarding claim 8, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not disclose wherein during application of an increasing force pushing said head unit onto said external surface, when said external surface is a flexible external surface, a contact area of said membrane with said external surface increases, resulting in a decrease of a distance between said first and second protrusions, thereby causing pinching and release of said flexible external surface between said first and second protrusions in a direction perpendicular to the main longitudinal axis.
Takeda discloses wherein during application of an increasing force pushing said head unit onto said external surface, when said external surface is a flexible external surface, a contact area of said membrane with said external surface increases, resulting in a decrease of a distance between said first 22 and second protrusions 19, thereby causing pinching and release of said flexible external surface between said first 22 and second protrusions 19 in a direction perpendicular to the main longitudinal axis (Page 5, Paragraph 0022, lines 56 -58 – Page 6, lines 1 - 4 / Figure 5B discloses how the protrusions when in contact with an external surface go into an inward position) .
However, It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date to further modify Beach to wherein during application of an increasing force pushing said head unit onto said external surface, when said external surface is a flexible external surface, a contact area of said membrane with said external surface increases, resulting in a decrease of a distance between said first and second protrusions, thereby causing pinching and release of said flexible external surface between said first and second protrusions in a direction perpendicular to the main longitudinal axis. This would allow the use of a flexible membrane so that when it is in contact with an external surface it results in a decrease of a distance between said first and second protrusions cause pinching and release of said flexible external surface between said first and second protrusions in a direction perpendicular to the main longitudinal axis. By having a flexible membrane that acts under pressure it will take on the position being forced into. As it moved inward, it would cause it to create a pinching between the protrusions creating an effective massage (Page 3, Section 3, Paragraph 0008).
Regarding claim 9, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not expressly disclose wherein during application of force to said membrane against a rigid external surface, a configuration of a surface of said membrane is determined by at least one of a contour of said rigid external surface, a flexibility of said membrane, and a flexibility of said rigid external surface.
Takeda discloses wherein during application of force to said membrane 3 against a rigid external surface S, a configuration of a surface of said membrane 3 is determined by at least one of a contour of said rigid external surface S, a flexibility of said membrane 3, and a flexibility of said rigid external surface S. (Page 3, Section 3, Paragraph 0010 / Figure 5B)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date to further modify Beach wherein during application of force to said membrane against a rigid external surface, a configuration of a surface of said membrane is determined by at least one of a contour of said rigid external surface, a flexibility of said membrane, and a flexibility of said rigid external surface. By having the membrane find the right configuration for the message it allows the curved membrane to press down the protrusions more smoothly over a curve such as the head. (Page 3, Section 3, Paragraph 0010 / Figure 5B)
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach et al. (US 1368782 A), Kuhnen et al. (DE 4320328C1), Weck et al. (US 20150045192 A1), Uemura et al. (JP 3991360 B2) & Coffman et al. (US 1391759 A) as applied in claim 1, in further view of Novstrup et al. (US 1930019 A)
Regarding claim 7, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not expressly disclose wherein said first portion said intermediate portion, and said membrane are integrally formed of a single material .
Novstrup discloses wherein said first portion, said intermediate portion, and said membrane are integrally formed of a single material. (Claim 2)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date to further modify Beach wherein said first portion, said intermediate portion, and said membrane are integrally formed of a single material. This would allow all the limitations to be integrally formed of a single material in order to form a specific structure (Claim 1)
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach et al. (US 1368782 A), Kuhnen et al. (DE 4320328C1), Weck et al. (US 20150045192 A1), Uemura et al. (JP 3991360 B2) & Coffman et al. (US 1391759 A) as applied in claim 1, in view of Gattnar et al. (DE 102012105865 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not disclose wherein said membrane is asymmetrical relative to said main longitudinal axis and has a first side having a first radius and a second side having a second radius, said second radius being larger than said first radius.
Gattnar disclose the massage head not being rotationally symmetrical. (Page 13, Paragraph 5)
Gattnar does not expressly disclose wherein said membrane is asymmetrical relative to said main longitudinal axis and has a first side having a first radius and a second side having a second radius, said second radius being larger than said first radius.
However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date to further modify the membrane of modified Beach wherein the membrane has a first side having a first radius and a second side having a second radius, said second radius being larger than said first radius because Gattnar discloses that massage heads/membranes can have different radiuses and be rotationally asymmetric. One would be motivated to have different radiuses to allow more variations in the massage application (Page 13, paragraph 5). Based on this modification, the membrane would be considered asymmetrical relative to the main longitudinal axis as two different radiuses will be found in the membrane.
Claim(s) 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach et al. (US 1368782 A), in view of Kuhnen et al. (DE 4320328 A1), Weck et al. (US 20150045192 A1), Uemura et al. (JP 3991360 B2) & Coffman et al. (US 1391759 A) as claimed in claim 1, in further view of You et al. (KR 20200086864 A)
Regarding claim 12, Modified Beach discloses a head unit as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not disclose further comprising a reinforcing ring surrounding said first connection region.
You discloses further comprising a fastening part 120 (Note: the examiner considers this to be ring shaped) surrounding said first connection region (Figure 4 / Page 3, Paragraph 8)
You does not expressly disclose a reinforcing ring.
However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Beach to include the fastening part of You in the first connection region specifically in the area on top of the massage head (Note: the examiner considers this to be the rod that is considered what connected the body to the massage head) to ensure the massage head is secured and stable to the device to allow the vibration energy generated from the power unit is well transmitted to the massage head. (Page 3, Paragraph 8)
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach et al. (US 1368782 A), Kuhnen et al. (DE 4320328C1), Weck et al. (US 20150045192 A1), Uemura et al. (JP 3991360 B2) & Coffman et al. (US 1391759 A) as applied in claim 1, in view of ZOU et al. (CN 101669868 A) & Palmer et al. (US 2437402 A)
Regarding claim 14, Modified Beach discloses a head unit system as claimed in claim 1.
Modified Beach does not disclose at least two head units, said first portions of each of said at least two head units being mechanically connected to a single intermediate base, said single intermediate base including a connector adapted for reversible connection to the external device.
ZOU discloses at least two head units 15 & 16. (Page 3, Last Paragraph / Figure 2)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify Beach to have a at least two head units in order to have a multidirectional massaging function that is capable of meeting humanized demands and improve the massage effect. (ZOU, Abstract)
Palmer discloses said first portions of each of said at least two head units 17 (Note: the examiner considers this to be two head units as it is connected in two different places) being mechanically connected to a single intermediate base 19 (Figure 1 & 7), said single intermediate base 19 including a connector area of 22 & 21 adapted for reversible connection to the external device 13. (Column 2, Paragraph 2)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Beach to include said first portions of each of said at least two head units being mechanically connected to a single intermediate base, said single intermediate base including a connector adapted for reversible connection to the external device as it would allow the connection with the actuator finger that is able to provide reciprocation motion applicable to the head. (Column 2, Paragraph 2)
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beach et al. (US 1368782 A), Kuhnen et al. (DE 4320328C1), Weck et al. (US 20150045192 A1), Uemura et al. (JP 3991360 B2), Coffman et al. (US 1391759 A), ZOU et al. (CN 101669868 A) & Palmer et al. (US 2437402 A) as applied in claim 14, in further view of LIU et al. (EP 3747503 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Modified Beach discloses the system as claimed in claim 14.
Modified Beach does not disclose wherein an angle of at least one of said at least two head units relative to at least a portion of said intermediate base, is adjustable.
Liu discloses wherein an angle of at least one of said at least two head units 300 relative to at least a portion of said intermediate base 100, is adjustable. (Paragraph 0033)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to further modify Beach wherein an angle of at least one of said at least two head units relative to at least a portion of said intermediate base, is adjustable as it would allow the user to adjust the head according to the preferred position for the massage. (Paragraph 0033)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 is 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.
Regarding claim 22, the closest prior art is Beach et al. (US 1368782 A) & Palmer et al. (US 2437402 A).
The prior arts disclose at least two head units with interior volumes. However, they do not disclose the two head units being fluidly connected such that fluid can pass between said interior volumes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRACIELA NATALIA LEBRON DE JESUS whose telephone number is (571)270-3892. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00 CST.
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, Kendra Carter can be reached at 571-272-9034. 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.
/GRACIELA NATALIA LEBRON DE JESUS/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/KENDRA D CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785