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 Amendment
This office action is responsive to a preliminary amendment filed on 5/15/2023. As directed by the amendment, claims 1 and 3-7 were amended, no claims were cancelled nor added. Thus, claims 1-7 are presently pending in this application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because all of the lead lines, reference numerals and drawing outlines in figs. 1-10i are faded/dotted making it hard to view and understand the figures. Every line must be durable, clean, black, sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. Additionally, the weight of all lines must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. See PCT Rule 11.13(a) and (e).
Claim Objections
Claims 1-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 1, the term “with single rod” is suggested to be changed to --with a single rod-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, line 4, the term “at least one gear to corresponding motor shaft” is suggested to be changed to --at least one gear is attached to a corresponding motor shaft of the at least one motor-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, lines 4-5, the term “the corresponding shaft” is suggested to be changed to --the corresponding motor shaft-- in order to provide consistency.
In claim 1, lines 8-9, the term “on the slanted angular groove” is suggested to be changed to --on a respective slanted angular groove of the at least one slanted angular groove-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, lines 14-15, the term “accommodate bearing and needle roller housing” is suggested to be changed to --to accommodate the bearing and the needle roller housing--.
In claim 1, lines 18-19, the term “in the conjugation with cam assembly and needle roller housing specifically provide” is suggested to be changed to --in a conjugation with the cam assembly and the needle roller housing provide-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, line 20, the term “the form” is suggested to be changed to --a form-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claims 2-7, line 1, the term “with single rod eccentric drive mechanism” is suggested to be changed to --with the single rod eccentric drive mechanism-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 3, line 2, the term “position of slanted groove shaft” is suggested to be changed to --position of the slanted groove shaft-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 3, lines 3-4, the term “with cam assembly and needle roller housing” is suggested to be changed to --with the cam assembly and the needle roller housing-- in order to clarify the claim and provide consistency.
In claim 4, line 3, the term “contains mechanism works” is suggested to be changed to --contains a mechanism that works-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 4, lines 4-5, the term “the synchronize wave oscillation treatment” is suggested to be changed to --the synchronize percussive wave oscillation treatment-- in order to provide consistency.
In claim 6, line 5, the term “specifically provides” is suggested to be changed to --provides-- in order to clarify the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: the limitations “single rod eccentric drive mechanism to provide synchronize wave oscillation treatment” (claim 1, lines 1-2, the term “mechanism” is a generic placeholder and the function is “to provide synchronize wave oscillation treatment”) and “mechanism works in the horizontal manner on bed to provide the user cushioning and percussive massages effect in the synchronize wave oscillation treatment on the thigh and calf muscle” (claim 4, the term “mechanism” is a generic placeholder and the function is “to provide the user cushioning and percussive massages effect in the synchronize wave oscillation treatment on the thigh and calf muscle”).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “A massager with single rod eccentric drive mechanism to provide synchronize wave oscillation treatment comprises” (lines 1-2) is unclear as to which structure is applicable to the term “comprises”, the single rod eccentric drive mechanism or the massager. Furthermore, it is unclear if the function “to provide synchronize wave oscillation treatment” is applicable to the massager or the single rod eccentric drive mechanism.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “the device…the device” (lines 3 and 5) lacks proper antecedent basis. Furthermore, it is unclear as to what structure is being referred to by the term “the device”, the massager or the single rod eccentric drive mechanism or the driving means or a new/additional device.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “with serial repetitive arrangement of ring” (line 5) is unclear if the applicant is claiming a singular ring or a plurality of rings, the term “ring” means a single ring, however, the term “serial repetitive arrangement” means that there are multiple rings, therefore, how can a singular ring be a serial repetitive arrangement. For examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as --with serial repetitive arrangement of rings--.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “specific degree” (line 7) is unclear as to how to determine the metes and bounds of the limitation “specific”, the term “specific” is too relative, therefore, it is unclear as to what degree would be a specific degree and what degree would not be a specific degree.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “with two corresponding half circular joint to establish on” (line 8) is unclear if the applicant is trying to claim a joint or parts that are being joined at a joint, furthermore, it is unclear as to how many circular joint the applicant is trying to claim, the term “joint” appears to be a singular joint, however, “two corresponding half circular” means that there are two, therefore, how can two corresponding half circular be used with a singular “joint”. For examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as --with two corresponding half circular cam parts, the two corresponding half circular cam parts are joined at a joint and are established on--.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “at least one bearing to accommodate at ring of shaft at least one needle roller housing with dedicated roller in the close proximity to corresponding cam assembly at specific position” (lines 9-11) is unclear and confusing as to what the limitation is trying to claim. Specifically, “accommodate at ring of shaft at least one needle roller housing” is confusing. Furthermore, it is unclear if the limitation “ring” is referring to “serial repetitive arrangement of ring” or a ring of the serial repetitive arrangement of ring (it is noted that the term “serial repetitive arrangement of ring” is being rejected under 112(b) above, and is interpreted as best understood). Furthermore, it is unclear as to how to determine the metes and bounds of the limitation “specific”, the term “specific” is too relative, therefore, it is unclear as to what position would be a specific position and what position would not be a specific position. Furthermore, it is unclear as to what structure is being accommodated by the at least one bearing, it is noted that the limitation did not state that the at least one bearing is accommodating the ring of the shaft but instead the claim is claiming “to accommodate at ring of shaft”. For examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as --at least one bearing is configured to accommodate the at least one shaft at a ring of the serial repetitive arrangement of rings; and at least one needle housing with a dedicated roller in a close proximity to the corresponding cam assembly at a position--.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a massaging means includes at least one knobs to provide percussive massage on body, at least one linear leaver to pivotal mounted with and dome bush...provide conversion of axial rotational movement of motor driven shaft to eccentric vertical movement in the form of synchronize percussive wave oscillation treatment through relatively different vertical position of knobs on the upper side of board” (lines 12-13 and 19-22) is unclear as to how to determine the metes and bounds of the limitation since it appears that the claimed limitation misdescribe the specification, according to the specification, the knobs are static and are represented by 25, 31 and 32, the knobs are static and do not percuss on the body, while the linear leaver and the dome bush are for providing percussive massage on the body. Due to the misdescription, the limitation “static and or heating knobs” in claim 1, line 17 is unclear if the knobs are the same as or different from the knobs being claimed in claim 1, line 12. Furthermore, the limitation “of knobs on the upper side of board” (lines 21-22) is unclear if the knobs are referring to the knobs in claim 1, line 12 or the knobs in claim 1, line 17 or a different set of knobs.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “at least one linear leaver to pivotal mounted with and dome bush” (line 13) is unclear as to what structure the at least one linear leaver is pivotal mounted with, is it the dome bush or another structure. The usage of the term “with and” is confusing.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “the base strip” (line 14) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “regular interval” (line 15) is unclear as to how to determine the metes and bounds of the limitation “regular”, specifically, what interval is a regular interval, and regular interval relative to what. The term “regular” is too relative.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “through column” (line 15) is unclear as to what is the structural relationship between the column and the supportive means or the massager. For examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as --through a column of the supportive means--.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “accommodate device” (line 16) is unclear as to what device is being referred to by “device”, the device being claimed in lines 3 and 5 or a different device.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “with board” (line 16) is unclear as to what is the structural relationship between the board and the supportive means or the massager. For examination purposes, the limitation is being interpreted as --with a board of the supportive means--.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “at least one board” (line 16) is unclear if the “at least one board” is the same as the limitation “board” in “with board” in claim 1, line 16.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “having static and or heating knobs” (lines 16-17) is unclear as to how to define the metes and bounds of the limitation “and or” is the applicant trying to claim “and” or “or” or “and/or”.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “at least one knobs to provide percussive massage on body…to lift the body” (lines 12-13 and 17) is unclear as to what is the body referring to, is “body” referring to a body of the device or of a user, furthermore, it is unclear if the applicant is trying to positively claim the human body. If the body is referring to a body of the user, suggest to amend to --at least one knobs configured to provide percussive massage on a body of a user…configured to lift the body of the user-- in order to clarify the claim and avoid positively claiming the human body.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “of motor driven shaft” (lines 19-20) is unclear if the motor driven shaft is referring to the motor shaft being claimed in claim 1, line 4 or the at least one shaft in claim 1, line 6 or a different shaft being driven by the motor.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “the upper side of board” (lines 21-22) lacks proper antecedent basis because it is unclear if “board” in line 22 is referring to a new board or the board in claim 1, line 16.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “optionally comprises bed and chair type embodiment, for back and leg massage, in combination of vertical and horizontal percussive massage arrangement” (lines 2-4) is unclear as to how to determine the metes and bounds of the limitation, specifically, it is unclear if the term “optionally” makes the limitation following the term “optionally” optional and not required by the claim or if the term “optionally” means that the massager is required to have the option of the structure that follows the term “optionally”. Furthermore, the term “bed and chair type embodiment” is unclear as to how to determine the metes and bounds of the word “type”, specifically, what feature would be included in the term “type” in type bed or type chair embodiment and what feature would be excluded in the term “type” in a type bed or type chair embodiment.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “the angular position of slanted groove shaft, at 0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°, 225°, 270°, 315°” (lines 2-3) is unclear if each angle represent an angular position of the slanted groove shaft or of each respective slanted angular groove of a plurality of slanted grooves of the slanted groove shaft.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “a driving means, a rotating means, supportive means and massaging means” (lines 5-6) is unclear if the driving means, rotating means, supportive means and massaging means are the same as or different from “a driving means” (claim 1, line 3), “a rotating means” (claim 1, line 6), “a massaging means” (claim 1, line 12) and “a supportive means” (claim 1, line 14).
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “in other embodiment includes a static spring box contains mechanism works in the horizontal manner on the bed to provide the user cushioning and percussive massages effect in the synchronize wave oscillation treatment on the thigh and the calf muscle” (line 2) is unclear as to what is the “other embodiment”, is the other embodiment part of the massager or not, furthermore, it is unclear if the limitation following “in other embodiment” is being positively claimed or not. Furthermore, if the limitation are being claimed to be part of the massager, it is unclear if the mechanism in line 3 of claim 4 is an additional mechanism in relation to a particular structure or structures being claimed in claim 1 or is the term “mechanism” a placeholder for a particular structure or structures that are being claimed in claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “the horizontal manner” (line 3) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “the user” (line 4) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “the thigh and calf muscle” (line 5) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “on bed” (line 3) is unclear as to what is the structural relationship between the bed and the massager.
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “where knobs includes heating knob, rubber knobs, magnetic knobs” (line 2) is unclear if the “knobs” are the same as or different from the knobs being claimed in claim 1, if they are the same, it is unclear as to which knobs, the limitation “knobs” are referring to, the knobs in claim 1, line 12 or the knobs in claim 1, line 17 or the knobs in claim 1, line 21.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “other embodiment” (line 2) is unclear as to what is the “other embodiment”, is the other embodiment part of the massager or not, furthermore, it is unclear if the limitation following “other embodiment” is being positively claimed or not.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “the feet area or calf muscle of the user…the thigh and the bottom leg portion…the calf muscle or leg of the user” (lines 3, 4 and 6) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “four way dome” (line 4) is unclear if the limitation is trying to claim four ways or just a single way, the term “way” is singular, while the term “four” is plural, the usage of the term “four way” makes it unclear and confusing as to how many ways are being claimed.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “both dome” (line 5) is unclear as to what structure is being referred to by as “both dome” because the term “both” implies 2, however, the term “dome” is singular, it is unclear how can a singular dome be considered as both dome. Furthermore, it is unclear if “both dome” is referring to the foot dome and the four way dome or a different set of domes.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation “provides easy and simple massaging” (line 5) is unclear as to how to determine the metes and bounds of the limitation “easy and simple”, what feature makes the massage an easy and simple massage versus what feature makes the massage not an easy and simple massage. The limitation “easy and simple” is too relative.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “in another embodiment of chair” (line 2) is unclear as to what is the “another embodiment of chair”, is the another embodiment of chair part of the massager or not, furthermore, it is unclear if the limitation following “in another embodiment of chair” is being positively claimed or not. Furthermore, it is unclear if there is a first embodiment of chair being claimed since another embodiment of chair implies that the another embodiment of chair is a second embodiment of chair.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “the shaft mechanism” (lines 2-3) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “to non linear shafts” (line 4) is unclear as to what is the structural relationship between the non linear shafts and the massager, the shaft mechanism (claim 7, lines 2-3) and the at least one shaft (claim 1, line 6). Furthermore, it is unclear if the non linear shafts are referring to new shafts being claimed or if the non linear shafts are referring to shafts that were already claimed in claim 1 (“corresponding motor shaft” (claim 1, line 4) and “at least one shaft” (claim 1, line 6))
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 are allowed over the prior art.
Claims 1-7 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record Huang (2017/0196300), Carlotti (1,375,652), Kodera (4,085,738), Wang (CN 110934730), Chen (CN 108938374), Ganti (2007/0083134) do not specifically disclose the claimed apparatus as presented in the claims 1-7.
Regarding claim 1, Huang discloses a massager (entire massager shown in figs. 1-5) with a rod eccentric drive mechanism (entire mechanism shown in fig. 6) comprises, a driving means includes at least one motor (42, fig. 2, paragraphs 0025 and 0028) to provide working force in the device; at least one gear to corresponding motor shaft (see the gear 421 that is connected to the motor shaft (shaft of motor 42) connected to gear 411, figs. 1-5, paragraph 0031), a rotating means includes at least one shaft (41, figs. 1-5, paragraph 0030) with serial repetitive arrangement of rings and annular groove (see the rings and grooves on shaft 41 in fig. 6), a cam (43, fig. 6, paragraphs 0025 and 0030), a cam housing (44, fig. 6, paragraphs 0025 and 0032-0034), at least one bearing (412, figs. 1-6) to accommodate at ring of shaft (paragraphs 0032-0034), a dome bush (32, fig. 7) and a linear leaver (31, fig. 7, paragraph 0030) to provide percussive massage on a body of a user, and a knob for providing percussive massage (the knob is another set of 31/32, see figs. 1-6), a supportive means (22, 1, 11, 52, 21, figs. 1-6, paragraphs 0024-0032) includes a base strip (52 and 47, figs. 1-6 and paragraphs 0031-0032) to accommodate bearing and cam housing (see figs. 1-6) at regular interval through column (47, fig. 6, paragraphs 0032-0033), at least one housing (1, paragraph 0024) to selectively accommodate the massager in conjugation with board (22, fig. 2), wherein the shaft in conjugation with cam and cam housing to provide conversion of axial rotational movement of motor shaft to eccentric vertical movement in the form of synchronize percussive wave oscillation treatment through relatively different vertical position of knobs on the upper side of board (see paragraphs 0024-0032).
Carlotti teaches a leaver (18, figs. 1-3) pivotally mounted to a cam housing (23 and 24, fig. 3, see page 1, lines 38-92).
Park teaches a static or heating knobs (see 63 and 62 position on support 61, see figs. 1-4, paragraphs 30 and 51 of the English translation).
Wang teaches a cam (525 and 524, fig. 13) being housing by a bearing (522, fig. 13) that is being housed by a bearing and cam housing (521, fig. 13, paragraph 0051 of the English translation).
Chen teaches a shaft (32, figs. 5 and 12-13) having grooves for accommodating a cam (29, paragraphs 0044 and 0047).
Ganti teaches a timing pulley (52f, fig. 2, paragraphs 0070 and 0124).
However, Huang, Carlotti, Park, Wang, Chen and Ganti fail to disclose the combination of a driving means includes at least one motor to provide working force, at least one gear attached to a corresponding motor shaft, at least one timing pulley to guide the corresponding shaft, a rotating means includes at least one shaft with serial repetitive arrangement of rings and at least one angular groove slanted at one specific degree; at least one cam assembly with two corresponding half circular joint to establish on the slanted angular groove to complete cam assembly, at least one bearing to accommodate at a ring of the arrangement of rings of the shaft and at least one needle roller housing with dedicated roller in a close proximity to corresponding cam assembly at a specific position; a massaging means includes at least one knobs to provide percussive massage on body, at least one linear leaver to pivotal mounted with and dome bush; a supportive means includes the base strip to accommodate bearing and needle roller housing at regular interval through a column; at least one housing to selectively accommodate device in conjugation with a board, at least one board having static and or heating knobs to lift the body at one position. Therefore, to modify Huang, Carlotti, Park, Wang, Chen and Ganti to arrive at the claimed invention would not have been obvious and would be based upon improper hindsight reasoning.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
GB 531,088 is cited to show a vibratory massage comprising a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
GB 417,550 is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Chien (GB 2,267,821) is cited to show a massager comprising a shaft having a cam.
남영주 (KR 200444771) is cited to show a massager comprising a shaft having a cam and a protruding massage head.
이우천 (KR 20070034404) is cited to show a massager comprising protrusion and a shaft having a cam.
두홍직 (KR 200302954) is cited to show a massaging support comprising static protrusions.
Hong (KR 101241415) is cited to show a massager comprising a reciprocating massage mechanism.
박이석 (KR 20150040600) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Ke (CN 204600034) is cited to show a reciprocating massage mechanism comprising a shaft having cam.
Kim (LR 20120012186) is cited to show a reciprocating wave-like massage apparatus.
Sun (CN 106214464) is cited to show a percussive massager comprising a shaft having a cam.
Zhang (CN 109223473) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism.
Ding (CN 111870505) is cited to show a massager comprising a rod having cams.
Hu (CN 212369268) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism.
Liu (CN 111000713) is cited to show a massager comprising a reciprocating massage mechanism.
Qiao (CN 209048619) is cited to show a chair comprising a cam rod.
Wu (CN 109288635) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism.
Jeong (KR 101906848) is cited to show a massage comprising a plurality of massage heads configured to produce a wave pattern.
Petersen (2,360,975) is cited to show a massaging apparatus comprising a cam, a shaft and a knob.
Kim (2007/0287939) is cited to show a massager comprising shaft having a cam, and a massaging end.
Kang (2012/0101517) is cited to show a reciprocating acupressure massage pillow.
Jin (WO 2020/032500) is cited to show a massager comprising a shaft having a cam.
Badger (2,672,860) is cited to show spinal manipulation device comprising a plurality of reciprocating massage heads.
Hall (2,186,105) is cited to show a massager comprising a shaft having a cam.
Parkin (3,298,363) is cited to show a physiotherapy apparatus comprising a shaft having a cam.
Himmelman (2,773,498) is cited to show a kinesitherapy device comprising a shaft having a cam.
Hardy (1,617,593) is cited to show a mechanical manipulating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Sparhawk (2,445,158) is cited to show a hospital bed comprising a shaft having a cam.
Hardy (1,276,526) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Hardy (1,303,475) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Hardy (1,999,412) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Chapler (4,469,093) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Huang (4,999,861) is cited to show a wave motion bed.
Bennett (5,092,315) is cited to show a massager comprising a shaft having a cam.
Jean (4,682,771) is cited to show a massage pedal comprising a reciprocating massaging heads.
Regan (3,656,190) is cited to show a massager comprising a plurality of reciprocating heads.
Jones (8,011,044) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Chen (11,540,970) is cited to show a reciprocating mechanism comprising a shaft having a cam.
Saringer (2004/0215113) is cited to show a crank mechanism.
Kallmeyer (2,652,826) is cited to show a massager comprising a cam mechanism.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TU VO whose telephone number is (571)270-1045. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9:30 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, Justine Yu can be reached on 571-272-4835. 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.
/TU A VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785