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 in response to the amendment filed 09/02/26. Claim(s) 4-5, 7-13,15, and 18-20 have been amended, no new claims have been added, and no claims have been cancelled. Thus, claims 1-20 are presently pending in this application.
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: "driving module" and "heating module" in claim 1 and “driving module” “power assembly” and “heating module” in claims 7 and 14.
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.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,911,334.
Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from one another. The application claims are broader in at least one aspect and also recite additional features not claimed in the patent claims.
For claim 1:
Regarding the broadening aspect of the application claims, the following comparison between the patent claims and the application claims highlights (see underlined features in the patent claims) what elements have been excluded in the presentation of the application claims.
Patent Claim 1
Application Claim 1
A massage device, comprising:
a base;
a driving module, which is mounted on the base;
a massage head, which is connected to the driving module so as to be driven by the driving module to rotate relative to the base, wherein a side of the massage head away from the base is provided with a massage protrusion, and
a first cavity is formed on a side of the massage head facing the base;
an enclosure, which is arranged on the base and located between the base and the massage head, wherein a free end of the enclosure away from the base extends into the first cavity, and an outer wall of the free end is arranged close to an inner wall of the massage head, a gap between the outer wall of the free end of the enclosure and the inner wall of the massage head is within 3 millimeters,
a second cavity in communication with the first cavity is formed in the enclosure, and the second cavity and the first cavity jointly form a heating chamber; and
a heating module, which is accommodated in the heating chamber and fixed relative to the base, and is configured to provide thermotherapy from the massage device.
A massage device, comprising:
a base;
a driving module, which is mounted on the base;
a massage head, which is connected to the driving module so as to be driven by the driving module to rotate relative to the base, wherein a side of the massage head away from the base is provided with a massage protrusion, and
a first cavity is formed on a side of the massage head facing the base;
an enclosure, which is arranged on the base and located between the base and the massage head, wherein a free end of the enclosure away from the base extends into the first cavity, and an outer wall of the free end is arranged close to an inner wall of the massage head, there is a gap between the outer wall of the free end of the enclosure and the inner wall of the massage head,
a second cavity in communication with the first cavity is formed in the enclosure, and the second cavity and the first cavity jointly form a heating chamber; and
a heating module, which is accommodated in the heating chamber and fixed relative to the base, and is configured to provide thermotherapy from the massage device.
Thus, it is apparent, for the broadening aspect, that patent claim 1 includes features that are not in application claim 1. Following the rationale in In re Goodman, cited above, where applicant has once been granted a patent containing a claim for the specific or narrower invention, applicant may not then obtain a second patent with a claim for the generic or broader invention without first submitting an appropriate terminal disclaimer. Since application claim 1 is anticipated by patent claim 1, with respect to the broadening aspect, and since anticipation is the epitome of obviousness, then application claim 1 is obvious over patent claim 1 with respect to the broadening aspect.
Claim 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,911,334.
Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from one another. The application claims are broader in at least one aspect and also recite additional features not claimed in the patent claims.
Claim 14 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,911,334.
Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from one another. The application claims are broader in at least one aspect and also recite additional features not claimed in the patent claims.
Patent Claim 7
Application Claim 14
A massage device, comprising:
a base;
a driving module, which is mounted on the base; the driving module comprises a driving shaft; and the massage head is connected to the driving shaft so as to be driven by the driving shaft to rotate relative to the base
a massage head, which is connected to the driving module so as to be driven by the driving module to rotate relative to the base, wherein a side of the massage head away from the base is provided with a massage protrusion, and a first cavity is formed on a side of the massage head facing the base;
an enclosure, which is arranged on the base and located between the base and the massage head, wherein a free end of the enclosure away from the base extends into the first cavity, and an outer wall of the free end is arranged close to an inner wall of the massage head, a gap between the outer wall of the free end of the enclosure and the inner wall of the massage head is within 3 millimeters,
a second cavity in communication with the first cavity is formed in the enclosure, and the second cavity and the first cavity jointly form a heating chamber; and
a heating module, which is accommodated in the heating chamber and fixed relative to the base, and is configured to provide thermotherapy from the massage device.
A massage device, comprising:
a base;
a driving module, comprises a power assembly accommodated in the accommodating cavity and a driving shaft connected to the power assembly;
a massage head, connected to the driving shaft so as to be driven by the power assembly to rotate relative to the base, wherein a side of the massage head away from the base is provided with a massage protrusion, and a first cavity is formed on a side of the massage head facing the base; and
a heating module, fixed relative to the base and located between the base and the massage head, wherein the heating module is configured to generate heat when energized to heat the air in the first cavity, so as to provide thermotherapy from the massage device to a part of a user’s body.
Thus, it is apparent, for the broadening aspect, that patent claim 7 includes features that are not in application claim 14. Following the rationale in In re Goodman, cited above, where applicant has once been granted a patent containing a claim for the specific or narrower invention, applicant may not then obtain a second patent with a claim for the generic or broader invention without first submitting an appropriate terminal disclaimer. Since application claim 14 is anticipated by patent claim 7, with respect to the broadening aspect, and since anticipation is the epitome of obviousness, then application claim 14 is obvious over patent claim 7 with respect to the broadening aspect.
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.
Claim(s) 14 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu (CN211132037).
With respect to claim 14, Hu discloses a massage device (1, fig 1), comprising: a base (11, fig 4), provided with an accommodating cavity (114/115, fig 4 and see fig 2 where the internal components are within 11), a driving module (transmission component; 3, fig 2), mounted on the base (see fig 2), wherein the driving module comprises a power assembly (23, fig 2) accommodated in the accommodating cavity (see 23 attachment to 21in the cavity in fig 2) and a driving shaft (36, fig 8); a massage head (5, fig 6), connected to the driving shaft (see fig 6) so as to be driven to rotate relative to the base (see translation [0033-35]), wherein a side of the massage head away from the base is provided with a massage protrusion (see protrusion on 5 in fig 6), and a first cavity (note the space in 5 where elements 36 and 4 are accommodated) is formed on a side of the massage head facing the base; a heating module (lamp; 43, fig 6), heat air in the first cavity (see fig 6), and is configured to provide thermotherapy from the massage device (see [0035-36]).
With respect to claim 16, Hu discloses an enclosure (see space formed by 121, 122 in fig 5), which is arranged on the base (see location on base 11 and mating portion 12 fig 6), a second cavity (space formed by enclosure in fig 6) in communication with the first cavity is formed in the enclosure, and the second cavity and the first cavity jointly form a heating chamber (see 4 between 5 and enclosure as described in fig 6); and the heating module (4, fig 6), which is mounted in the enclosure (see fig 6), and configured to generate heat when energized to heat the air in the heating chamber (see [0035-36]).
With respect to claim 17, Hu discloses a supporting part (121, fig 6), fixed to the base and at least partially accommodated in the first cavity (see fig 6 and [0037]) and the heating module is mounted on the supporting part (see fig 6).
With respect to claim 18, Hu discloses the supporting part comprises a plurality of supporting ribs (see ribs extending from 122 in fig 5) and a fitting seat (122, fig 5); a first end of each of the plurality of supporting ribs is fixed to the base, a second end of each of the plurality of supporting ribs extends toward the massage head, the fitting seat is carried by and fixed to the supporting ribs; and the heating module is fixed to the fitting seat (see fig 6 and [0033 and 37]).
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) 7-8, 10-13, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu (CN211132037) in view of Xhao (CN209075395).
With respect to claim 7, Hu discloses a massage device (1, fig 1), comprising: a base (11, fig 4), provided with an accommodating cavity (114/115, fig 4 and see fig 2 where the internal components are within 11), a driving module (transmission component; 3, fig 2), mounted on the base (see fig 2), wherein the driving module comprises a power assembly (23, fig 2) accommodated in the accommodating cavity (see 23 attachment to 21in the cavity in fig 2) and a driving shaft (36, fig 8); a massage head (5, fig 6), connected to the driving shaft (see fig 6) so as to be driven to rotate relative to the base (see translation [0033-35]), wherein a side of the massage head away from the base is provided with a massage protrusion (see protrusion on 5 in fig 6), and a first cavity (note the space in 5 where elements 36 and 4 are accommodated) is formed on a side of the massage head facing the base; a heating module (lamp; 43, fig 6), heat air in the first cavity (see fig 6), and is configured to provide thermotherapy from the massage device (see [0035-36]), but is silent regarding a tubular extending part protrudes from the side of the massage head facing the base, an internal surface of the extending part and the massage head jointly form the first cavity, and at least a portion of the extending part is radially spaced apart from an open end of the massage head toward the base.
However, Xhao teaches a massage device (1, fig 1) comprising a massage head (2, fig 2) wherein a tubular extending part (shaft in massage head 2 that contains hole 23 in fig 4) protrudes from the side of the massage head facing a base (16, fig 3; note the protruding part extends from a cavity in the head toward the base figs 3-4), an internal surface of the extending part and the massage head jointly form a cavity (see space formed in the massage head; 22, fig 4), and at least a portion of the extending part is radially spaced apart from an open end of the massage head toward the base (see the protruding part in the middle of the head spaced from the edge in fig 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the massage head of Hu to include the protruding part as taught by Xhao so as to provide a well-known connection between two structures for facilitating installation (see translation [0032] of Xhao).
With respect to claim 8, the modified Hu shows the supporting part comprises a plurality of supporting ribs (see ribs extending from 122 in fig 5 of Hu) and a fitting seat (122, fig 5 of Hu); wherein a first end of each of the plurality of supporting ribs is fixed to the base, a second end of each of the plurality of supporting ribs extends toward the massage head, the fitting seat is carried by and fixed to the supporting ribs; and the heating module is fixed to the fitting seat (see fig 6 and [0033 and 37] of Hu).
With respect to claim 10, the modified Hu shows a hollow space (see the space formed as shaft hole 23 in fig 4 of Xhao) is formed between the extending part and the massage head, and the hollow space is located outside the first cavity (see the space is different than the cavity after the modification by Xhao).
With respect to claim 11, the modified Hu shows a diameter of the circle projected by the extending part on the base is smaller than the diameter of the maximum circle projected by the massage head in a rotating state on the base (the diameter of 23 is smaller than that of 2; see fig 4 of Xhao; and would be the same when modifying Hu).
With respect to claim 12, the modified Hu shows the hollow space is formed between a portion of an external surface of the extending part and a portion of an internal surface of the massage head (see the hollow space in fig 4 of Xhao).
With respect to claim 13, the modified Hu shows a portion of the extending part protrudes from the massage protrusion at a position adjacent to a top thereof (see the protruding part extending adjacent from 21 in fig 4 of Xhao).
With respect to claim 19, the modified Hu shows all the elements as claimed above but is silent regarding a tubular extending part protrudes from the side of the massage head toward the base, a portion of the extending part protrudes from the massage protrusion, dividing the massage protrusion into two independent spaces.
However, Xhao teaches a massage device (1, fig 1) comprising a massage head (2, fig 2) wherein a tubular extending part (shaft in massage head 2 that contains hole 23 in fig 4) protrudes from the side of the massage head facing a base (16, fig 3; note the protruding part extends from a cavity in the head toward the base figs 3-4), a portion of the extending part protrudes from the massage protrusion, dividing the massage protrusion into two independent spaces (see the spaces on each side of the protrusion).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the massage head of Hu to include the protruding part as taught by Xhao so as to provide a well-known connection between two structures for facilitating installation (see translation [0032] of Xhao).
With respect to claim 20, the modified Hu shows all the elements as claimed above but is silent regarding a tubular extending part protrudes from the side of the massage head toward the base, the extending part is staggered from a protruding part formed on the surface of the base in a direction perpendicular to the driving shaft; the massage head in a rotating state is staggered from the protruding part in a direction parallel to the driving shaft.
However, Xhao teaches a massage device (1, fig 1) comprising a massage head (2, fig 2) wherein a tubular extending part (shaft in massage head 2 that contains hole 23 in fig 4) protrudes from the side of the massage head facing a base (16, fig 3; note the protruding part extends from a cavity in the head toward the base figs 3-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the massage head of Hu to include the protruding part as taught by Xhao so as to provide a well-known connection between two structures for facilitating installation (see translation [0032] of Xhao).
Claim(s) 9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu and Xhao as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Chen (2012/0010544).
With respect to claim 9 and 15, the modified Chen shows the massage head is provided with a plurality of massage protrusions (see multiple protrusions on 30 in fig 6), but lacks a number of penetrating heat-permeable holes arranged through the massage head to communicate the first cavity with an external environment of the massage head; there are no penetrating heat-permeable holes at the top of any massage protrusion.
However, Chen teaches a massage device (10, fig 2) comprising massage heads (14/15, fig 2) a number of penetrating heat-permeable holes (see holes at the top of 14/15 in fig 2) arranged through the massage head to communicate the first cavity with an external environment of the massage head (see [0013]); there are no penetrating heat-permeable holes at the top of any massage protrusion (see the lack of holes on the protrusions 16/17 in fig 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the massage head of Hu to include heat permeable holes as taught by Chen so as to allow heat escape from the head to prevent overheating.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 allowed.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
PNG
media_image1.png
304
253
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
309
433
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 4 of Chen
Annotated fig 8 of Chen
Chen discloses a massage device (20, fig 1), comprising a base(22, fig 2); a driving module (24-31, fig 4), which is mounted on the base (see fig 4); a massage head (30, fig 4), which is connected to the driving module so as to be driven by the driving module to rotate relative to the base (see fig 4 and pg. 7 of translation), wherein a side of the massage head away from the base is provided with a massage protrusion (see protrusion on 30 in fig 6), and a first cavity (see annotated fig 8 of Chen) is formed on a side of the massage head facing the base; an enclosure (see fig 4 where the components are inside the space formed by 22 and 23), which is arranged on the base and located between the base and the massage head (see fig 4), a second cavity in communication with the first cavity is formed in the enclosure, and the second cavity and the first cavity jointly form a heating chamber (see annotated fig 4); and a heating module (34/35, fig 8), which is accommodated in the heating chamber and fixed relative to the base (see figs 4 and 8), and is configured to provide thermotherapy from the massage device (see pg. 8 of translation).
However, Chen fails to disclose a free end of the enclosure away from the base extends into the first cavity, and an outer wall of the free end is arranged close to an inner wall of the massage head, there is a gap between the outer wall of the free end of the enclosure and the inner wall of the massage head and to modify would be improper hindsight.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/02/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on pg. 18 that "the existence of a heat-generating lights does not necessarily establish that the lights heat air within the claimed first cavity." This is not persuasive since the heat-emitting lights produce heat and are within the cavity and thus would heat the air around them, i.e. the air in the cavity..
The arguments to the newly added claim limitations in claims 7-20 have been addressed in the above rejections.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY E BALLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8153. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 4 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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KELSEY E BALLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TU A VO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
