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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations “a first bearing part formed in close contact with the step, and inserted into the shaft part; a second bearing part inserted into the shaft part” (claim 1, lines 15-17), “wherein the shaft part has an outside thereof a first ring groove in which the first bearing part is arranged, and each of the rotating body units further comprises a first snap ring part inserted into the second bearing part at the first ring groove” (claim 2, lines 1-6) and “the shaft part has at an outside thereof a second ring groove in which the second bearing part is arranged, and each of the rotating body units further comprises a second snap ring part inserted into the first bearing part at the second ring groove” (claim 3, lines 1-6) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 3, the term “in his/her hand” is suggested to be changed to --in a hand of the user-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, line 4, the term “each of which” is suggested to be changed to --each of the pair of rotating body support parts” in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, line 10, the term “the skin” is suggested to be changed to --a skin of the user-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, lines 13-14, the term “an inclined side on which a tapered surface is formed” is suggested to be changed to --an inclined side, and a tapered surface is formed on the inclined side-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, the term “an insertion recess into which a part of the shaft part is inserted” (lines 21-22) is suggested to be changed to --an insertion recess and the shaft part is inserted into the insertion access-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 1, line 25, the term “thorough hole” is suggested to be changed to --through hole-- in order to fix typographical error.
In claim 2, lines 1-2, the term “wherein the shaft part has at an outside thereof a first ring groove in which the first bearing part is arranged” (lines 1-2) is suggested to be changed to --wherein the shaft part comprising an outside having a first ring groove, the first bearing part is arranged in the first ring groove-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 2, lines 7-8, the term “being cut at one side thereof” is suggested to be changed to --being cut at one side of the first snap ring part-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 3, lines 1-2, the term “wherein the shaft part has at an outside thereof a second ring groove in which the second bearing part is arranged” is suggested to be changed to --wherein the shaft part comprising an outside having a second ring groove, the second bearing part is arranged in the second ring groove-- in order to clarify the claim.
In claim 3, lines 7-8, the term “being cut at one side thereof” is suggested to be changed to --being cut at one side of the second snap ring part-- in order to clarify the claim.
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 1-10 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 step extending in diameter” (line 12) is unclear as to how to define the metes and bounds of the limitation, is the limitation trying to claim a diameter or a step extending in a diameter, if the latter, it is unclear how a physical step can extend in a dimension (diameter).
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a first bearing part formed in close contact with the step, and inserted into the shaft part; a second bearing part inserted into the shaft part” (lines 15-17) is unclear as to how to define the metes and bounds of the limitation since it appears that the claim is misdescribing the drawings and the disclosure, throughout the disclosure, the shaft part is being “inserted into” the first bearing part and the second bearing part (see figs. 4-10 of the instant application), however, the claim is claiming that the first and second bearing parts are “inserted into” the shaft.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “an inner circumferential surface thereof…an outer circumferential surface thereof” (lines 26 and 28-29) is unclear as to what structure is being referred to by the term “thereof”.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “a first snap ring inserted into the second bearing part at the first ring groove” (lines 4-7) is unclear and confusing as to what the applicant is trying to claim, in light of the drawing and the disclosure, the first snap ring (3060) is positioned in the first ring groove adjacent to the first bearing part (3050) not the second bearing part (3030), however, the claim is claiming “first snap ring inserted into the second bearing part at the first ring groove”, therefore, it appears that the claim is misdescribing the disclosure and drawings. Furthermore, the limitation is claiming that the first snap ring is inserted into the second bearing part, however, according to figs. 4-10 of the instant invention, the first snap ring is not inserted into the second bearing part or the first bearing part, but is adjacent to the first bearing part.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “thereby being in close contact with the first bearing part” (line 8-9) is unclear as to what structure is being in close contact with the first bearing part, each of the rotating body units or the first snap ring part.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “a second ring groove” (line 2) is unclear if there is a first ring groove being claimed or not. It is noted that claim 3 is dependent on claim 1, not dependent on claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “a second snap ring part” (lines 4-5) is unclear if there is a first snap ring part being claimed or not. It is noted that claim 3 is dependent on claim 1, not dependent on claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “a second snap ring part inserted into the first bearing part at the second ring groove” (lines 4-6) is unclear and confusing as to what the applicant is trying to claim, in light of the drawing and the disclosure, the second snap ring (3070) is positioned in the second ring groove adjacent to the second bearing part (3030) not the first bearing part (3050), however, the claim is claiming “second snap ring part inserted into the first bearing part at the second ring groove”, therefore, it appears that the claim is misdescribing the disclosure and drawings. Furthermore, the limitation is claiming that the second snap ring is inserted into the first bearing part, however, according to figs. 4-10 of the instant invention, the second snap ring is not inserted into the second bearing part or the first bearing part, but is positioned adjacent to the second bearing part.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “thereby being in close contact with the second bearing part” (line 8-9) is unclear as to what structure is being in close contact with the second bearing part, each of the rotating body units or the second snap ring part.
Regarding claim 5, the limitation “a ring-type ring support part” (line 7) is unclear as to how to define the metes and bounds of the limitation “type”, specifically, what feature makes the part a ring-type and what features make it not a ring-type.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation “delivering electrons and wavelength” (line 6) is unclear as to what structure creates electrons and wavelength, it appears that some form of electrons and wavelength source is missing from the claim.
Any remaining claims are rejected for their dependency on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 8-10 as best understood are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (WO 2020/071586).
PNG
media_image1.png
659
949
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a beauty device (entire device in figs. 1-2, paragraph 0019 of the English translation) with rollers (first roller is 300a and 50 and second roller is 300b and 50, fig. 1, paragraph 0020) the beauty device comprising: a main body part (100, fig. 1, paragraph 0020) held by a user in his/her hand (see paragraph 0020); a pair of rotating body support parts (200a and 200b, fig. 1, paragraph 0020), each of which has one end coupled to the main body part (see fig. 1), the rotating body support parts having and angle (θ1) therebetween in a V-shape (see fig. 1 and paragraph 0020) and a pair of rotating body units (1st of pair includes 300a, 44, 12, 60, 14, 52, 10, 20, 50, 16, 17, 30, 42, 18 and 2nd of pair includes 300b, 44, 12, 60, 14, 52, 10, 20, 50, 16, 17, 30, 42, 18, fig. 3, paragraphs 0053-0094) coupled to the pair of rotating body support parts respectively (see figs. 1-4), the rotating body units being configured to be rotated to massage the skin (see figs. 1-4 and paragraphs 0020, 0023, 0035-0036, 0049, 0052-0054 and 0070-0077), wherein each of the rotating body units comprises: a shaft part (10, figs. 1-4, paragraphs 0053-0061) provided with a step extended in diameter (see step 14, also steps formed by groove 16, 17, and 18, paragraphs 0056, 0060, 0065, 0085, figs. 3-6), the shaft part having an inclined side on which a tapered surface is formed (see tapered surface 12 formed on shaft 10, figs. 3-5, paragraphs 0055, 0073-0074 and 0090); a first bearing part (20, figs. 3-5, paragraphs 0053 and 0060) formed in close contact with the step (paragraph 0060), and inserted into the shaft part (figs. 3-5 and paragraphs 0053, 0060, 0065 and 0086, relatively, the bearing part 20 is inserted into the shaft part 10, this interpretation aligns with the instant disclosure/drawing); a second bearing part (30, figs. 3-5, paragraphs 0053, 0059, 0066, 0067, 0069-0070, 0072, 0084, 0085-0086) inserted into the shaft part (see figs. 3-7), being spaced apart from the first bearing part at a predetermined interval (see figs. 3-7), a roller part (300a and 300b, figs. 1-3) rotatably coupled to each of the rotating body support parts (figs. 1-3, paragraphs 0023 and 0053), and having an insertion recess into which a part of the shaft part is inserted and being in close contact with an outer circumferential surface of the second bearing part, thereby rotating around the shaft part (see recess formed by groove 42, 44, fig. 3, paragraphs 0070, 0072, 0073, and 0077); and a nut part (50, fig. 3, paragraphs 0053, 0077-0082 and 0088) having a through hole inside (see fig. 3, nut 50 comprising a through hole for accommodating bearing 20), thereby allowing an inner circumferential surface thereof to be rotatably coupled to an outer circumferential surface of the first bearing part (20) and allowing an outer circumferential surface thereof to be rotatably coupled to an inner circumferential surface of the roller part (see the annotated-Lee fig. 3 above, see paragraphs 0036-0094).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses that the shaft part (10) has at an outside thereof a first ring groove (16, figs. 3-6) in which the first bearing part (20) is arranged (paragraph 0061), and each of the rotating body units further comprises a first snap ring part (60 positioned in the first groove 16, adjacent to first bearing part 20, figs. 3-5, paragraph 0062) inserted into the second bearing part at the first ring groove, the first snap ring part being larger than an outer diameter of the shaft part and being cut at one side thereof, thereby being in close contact with the first bearing part (see the annotated-Lee fig. 3 above, see paragraphs 0061-0064). It is noted that due to the 112(b) rejection above, the claim is rejected as best understood, therefore, from the figures, the first snap ring (60) as best understood can be interpreted as being inserted into the second bearing part (being closed by to the second bearing part) at the first groove in the same manner as the applicant’s invention in that the first bearing part is adjacent to the first snap ring, see figs. 3-6 and paragraphs 0061-0064 of Lee).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses that the shaft part (10) has at an outside thereof a second ring groove (17, figs. 3-6) in which the second bearing part (30) is arranged (paragraph 0061), and each of the rotating body units further comprises a second snap ring part (60 positioned in the second groove 17, adjacent to second bearing part 30, figs. 3-5, paragraphs 0066-0069) inserted into the first bearing part at the second ring groove, the second snap ring part being larger than an outer diameter of the shaft part and being cut at one side thereof, thereby being in close contact with the second bearing part (see the annotated-Lee fig. 3 above, see paragraphs 0066-0069). It is noted that due to the 112(b) rejection above, the claim is rejected as best understood, therefore, from the figures, the second snap ring (60) as best understood can be interpreted as being inserted into the first bearing part (being closed by to the first bearing part) at the first groove in the same manner as the applicant’s invention in that the second bearing part is adjacent to the second snap ring, see figs. 3-6 and paragraphs 0061-0064 of Lee).
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses that the roller part (300a and 300b) and the nut part (50) are screw-coupled to each other (paragraph 0080).
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses an angle (θ1) between the pair of rotating body support parts is in a range of 55° to 90° (see paragraphs 0009 and 0027).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses that the pair of rotating body support parts are formed inclinedly toward a front of the main body part, and an angle (θ2) between a front surface of the main body part and the rotating body support parts is in a range of 110° to 180° (paragraph 0030).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses a distance (k) between a pair of roller parts is in a range of 5 to 7.9 mm (paragraphs 0010 and 0035).
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5-6 as best understood are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (WO 2020/071586) in view of Matsushita (WO 2016/068199) and Matsushita (2018/0140500).
Regarding claim 5, Lee fails to disclose that each of the rotating body units further comprises: a packing part having an elastic component, the packing part being in contact with the nut part, and coming into close contact with the insertion recess of the roller part; and a ring-type ring support part inserted into the packing part, thereby, fixing the packing part.
However, Matsushita ‘199 teaches a packing part (213 comprising 213d and 213a, fig. 6) having a material component (component formed by the O-ring 213d), the packing part being in contact with a bearing part (215, fig. 6), and coming into close contact with an insertion recess of a roller part (210 and 211 form the roller part, the recess is where 213d and 214a are positioned within, see fig. 6), a ring-type ring support part (214, fig. 6) inserted into the packing part, thereby, fixing the packing part (see fig. 6, 214 is inserted into 213d/213a, therefore, fixing the packing part to a certain degree, see pages 20-23 of the English translation).
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 rotating body units and the nut part of Lee to have the packing part and the ring-type ring support part as taught by Matsushita ‘199 by having the packing part as taught by Matsushita ‘199 be in contact with the nut part of Lee for the purpose of providing a sealing arrangement that protect and seal the inner components of the rotating body units (see parages 20-23 of Matsushita ‘199).
The modified Lee fails to disclose that the material component (O-ring 213d of Matsushita ‘199) is elastic.
However, Matsushita ‘500 comprises an O-ring that is an elastic component (see paragraph 0051 and fig. 10).
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 material component of the modified Lee to be elastic as taught by Matsushita ‘500 for the purpose of providing a well-known O-ring material that would provide the predictable result of providing a material that is capable of creating a seal (see paragraph 0051 of Matsushita ‘500).
PNG
media_image2.png
893
1147
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, the modified Lee discloses that the roller part comprises a support groove larger than an outer diameter of the packing part (see the annotated-Matsushita ‘199 fig. 6 above, after the modification, the recess would adopt the support groove of Matsushita ‘199 which has a support groove that is larger than an outer diameter of the packing part (the outer diameter formed by 213d of Matsushita ‘199)), and each of the rotating body units further comprises a fixed support part inserted into the support groove, the fixed support part having one side which is open, being configured to prevent decoupling of the first bearing part, the nut part, the packing part, and the ring support part (see the annotated-Matsushita ‘199 fig. 6 above, as shown the fixed support part formed by portion comprising 213f and 213e would be configured to prevent decoupling of the first bearing part of Lee, the nut part of Lee, the packing part and the ring support part of Matsushita ‘199, see pages 20-23 of Matsushita ‘199).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (WO 2020/071586) in view of Matsushita (WO 2016/068199) and Yamazaki (WO 2017/122415).
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses that the rotating body units comprises an insertion recess (see recess formed by groove 42, 44, fig. 3, paragraphs 0070, 0072, 0073, and 0077) in contact with both a tapered one side of the shaft part (tapered formed by 12 of Lee in fig. 3 of Lee), thereby delivering electrons and wavelengths to the roller part (see paragraphs 0004-0005, 0024, 0057-0058, 0076, Lee discloses the rollers are for providing electrical stimulation which would deliver electrons and wavelengths), but fails to disclose that each of the rotating body units further comprises a spring part having one side in contact with the insertion recess of the roller part and an opposite side in contact with both a tapered one side of the shaft part and the second bearing part, thereby delivering electrons and wavelength to the roller part and elastically supporting the second bearing part.
PNG
media_image3.png
894
1110
media_image3.png
Greyscale
However, Matsushita teaches a contact part (217, fig. 6) having one side in contact with the insertion recess (recess is where 13a is within) of a roller part (212, 211 and 210, fig. 6) and an opposite side in contact with both a tapered one side of the shaft (13a, 13c, 13b, 13d, figs. 5-6) and a bearing part (215, see the annotated-Matsushita ‘199 for claim 7 fig. 6 above), thereby delivering electrons and wavelengths to the roller part and supporting the bearing part (see fig. 6 and pages 22-23 of the English translation).
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 shaft and the roller part of Lee to have the contact part being in contact with the second bearing part and tapered one side of Lee as taught by Matsushita for the purpose of providing an alternative means of delivering electrical current to the roller part to deliver electrical stimulation to the user via the roller part (see paragraphs 22-23 of Matsushita).
The modified Lee fails to disclose that the contact part is a spring part.
However, Yamazaki teaches a contact part that is a spring part (140, fig. 4) comprising a spring material (see bottom half of page 4 in paragraph 9 of page 4 of the English translation, Yamazaki discloses that 140 comprises a leaf spring-like member and is pressed against the shaft 110 by elasticity of the spring, therefore, is a spring).
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 contact part of the modified Lee to have a spring material as taught by Yamazaki for the purpose of providing a contact material that is flexible and would provide the predictable result of allowing electrical current to be transferred from a shaft part to a roller part at all times due to spring elasticity (see paragraph 9 of page 4 of Yamazaki).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Matsushita (WO 2019/151294) is cited to show a beauty roller.
Matsushita (JP-2018102903) is cited to show a beauty roller.
Matsushita (2020/0383867) is cited to show a beauty roller.
Matsushita (2019/0008718) is cited to show a beauty roller.
Matsushita (2018/0116908) is cited to show a beauty roller.
Matsushita (2017/0065481) is cited to show a beauty roller.
Matsushita (20140288473) is cited to show a beauty roller.
Tanigawa (2013/0245509) is cited to show a beauty/health roller.
Lim (2022/0387250) is cited to show an electrical stimulation roller.
Deng (WO 2021184520) is cited to show a roller apparatus.
Han (CN 107198649) is cited to show a roller apparatus.
Min (2021/0031030) is cited to show a cosmetic roller.
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