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 .
Election/Restrictions
Examiner acknowledges Applicants election of Group I, claims 1, 7, 8, 9 with Traverse.
Claims 2-6 and 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on December 8 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: lines 3-4, “conforming to the shape” should be –conforming to a shape--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1,7-9 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 1, line 3, “said semi-rigid flexible base member” lacks antecedent basis.
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, 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Callow(US20190274868) hereinafter (Callow) in view of Mark(8512226) hereinafter (Mark).
Callow teaches a sexual aid device, system and method including a chassis with a distal end; a proximal end with at least one penile port; at least one penile support between the distal end and proximal end; at least one penile channel between the distal end and proximal end; wherein the chassis is configured to have an opening along the top toward the proximal end. When used with a sleeve and chassis cover the system provides additional support so that the combined device substantially surrounds the donning penis. Paragraph [0063] however, some penile channel 4100 and penile port 2400 shapes and size may exceed or fall outside the generally recommended ranges. In particular, in some applications it is desired to contain a vibrating mechanism(s), such as an unbalanced motor(s), spring(s) or bells. In these embodiments that chassis are often extended to include such mechanisms, and such mechanisms are activated prior and/or during insertion of the sexual aid device into an orifice.
Examiner notes the claims are very broad and have been given the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding claim 1, Callow teaches a semi-rigid base member, for insertion into a woman's vagina;
said semi-rigid flexible base member having a shape generally conforming to the shape of a male penis; Paragraph [0056] sets forth the materials used for the base or lower chassis may include various elastomers as well as memory foam may be used in the device or part of its core. Also, the base/chassis may include more rigid materials for structural support thus making it semi-rigid. The Base/chassis is also formed to support and conform to the male penis.
a top section secured to said semi-rigid base member;
said top section being a memory foam material; and
said top section for receiving said male penis.
Note Figures 11-16 and paragraphs 47 – 59.
PNG
media_image1.png
302
548
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Callow does teach in paragraphs [0056] and [0059] that the materials may include various elastomers and may incorporate memory foam.
However, Callow does not specifically teach that the top section being made of memory foam.
Mark teaches in the same field of endeavor a sexual aid device and method for inserting and occupying space within a human female's vagina to provide a sensation of increased fullness to the female and a sensation of increased tightness and friction to a penis of a human male during sexual intercourse, thereby enhancing sexual arousal of both the female and the male. The sexual aid can be a member having a bulbous end for insertion and a tapered end for externally grasping and manipulating the member. Paragraph [26], teaches the insertable member may be constructed of memory foam.
The use of various elastomers including memory foam are taught in both Callow and Mark.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Callow and construct the top section/chassis in Callow of memory foam as is well known and taught by Mark such that when constructed from memory foam, the foam changes shape as the insertable member is inserted to accommodate the shape of the vagina. The foam also compresses to accommodate the penis once the penis is inserted into the vagina.
Regarding claim 7, Callow teaches said semi-rigid base member having a general spoon shape and supporting said male penis; and said semi-rigid base member having an enlarged front section. Note Figures 11-16 and paragraphs 47 – 59.
Regarding claim 8, Callow teaches said semi-rigid base member having a protruding end opposite of said enlarged front section; said protruding end curving downwardly; and said protruding end for remaining external to a woman's vagina. Figures 11-16 and paragraphs 47 – 59.
Regarding claim 9, Callow teaches said top section having a removable member; and
said sexual aid device simulating a male penis when said removable member is attached to said semi-rigid base member. Figures 11-16 and paragraphs 47 – 59.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Maurette(US 9545358) teaches A sexual aid device comprising a main body (100) and a cervical void (110), sized and shaped to shield a cervix (350) during intercourse.
Brown(US 5868137) teaches a penis support device to help provide stiffness to the penis for those men who have trouble getting or maintaining an erection for the purpose of having satisfactory sexual intercourse. The device is made of one piece of semi rigid molded material such as thirty durometer Santoprene.
Morreale( 20080306331) teaches a stimulation enhancement device includes a generally elongate main body portion having predetermined length, width and thickness, and defines an upwardly-facing surface and an opposing downwardly-facing surface.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN L CASLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4956. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30 to 4:30.
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, Charles Marmor can be reached at (571)272-4730. 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.
/BRIAN L CASLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791