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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on December 11, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on December 11, 2025.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because “changable” is misspelled. Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 22, 2024 is generally in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. However, the IDS fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. The document listed as “Foreign Action other than Search Report on PCT DTD 10/13/2022” has not been submitted. That citation has been lined through on the IDS and has not been considered.
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.
Claims 1-13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9, 19, 20, 17, and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,904,329.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-13 are the same scope or broader than corresponding claims 1-9, 19, 20, 17, and 18 of the ‘329 patent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sandvik (US Patent Number 6,042,027) in view of Stewart (US Patent Number 3,552,436).
Re claim 1, Sandvik discloses a showerhead assembly, comprising: a showerhead (see the embodiment of Figs. 1-4, 6, and 7) housing including a top plate, a bottom plate, and a plurality of sidewalls extending between the top plate and the bottom plate (see Fig. 2 for a cross section with the top plate toward the left, the bottom plate with nozzles 22 to the right and the plurality of sidewalls including the sidewall shown towards the top as shown in Fig. 2 between the top and bottom plates as well as another sidewall shown towards the bottom of Fig. 2 also between the top and bottom plates). While the embodiment of Figs. 1-4, 6, and 7 has some distribution features within the housing, the valve assemblies are outside the housing. It is noted that the embodiment of Figs. 8-12 has a plurality of valves within a similar housing. Thus, inviting a modification. Also, Stewart discloses a similar assembly with a housing including a top plate, a bottom plate, and a plurality of sidewalls extending between the top plate and the bottom plate (see Fig. 2 for a cross section with the top plate 14 toward the top, the bottom plate 17 with outlets 46 toward the bottom and the plurality of sidewalls). Stewart also discloses a distributor plate (15) including at least one distributor outlet (24), the distributor plate situated in the showerhead housing; and a valve layer (16) positioned on the bottom plate and including a plurality of valve assemblies (43), the valve layer situated in the housing, wherein the at least one distributor outlet is coupled to, and configured such that the at least one distributor outlet disperses fluid to the plurality of valve assemblies of the valve layer (see Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Sandvik to place the distributor plate and valve layer of Stewart within the showerhead housing in order to selectively control the flow through a plurality of outlet nozzles and rapidly change the pattern of flow as desired as taught by Stewart.
Re claim 2, the modified Sandvik discloses the showerhead assembly of claim 1, wherein the plurality of valve assemblies further comprise: an inlet conduit having at least one valve assembly inlet (the top of the chamber that 43 sits in in Stewart), wherein the at least one valve assembly inlet is coupled to the at least one distributor outlet (24 in Stewart); and an outlet conduit having at least one valve assembly outlet (45 in Stewart), wherein the at least one valve assembly outlet is coupled to one of at least one showerhead outlets (in the combination, the valve outlets of Stewart lead to the outlets 46 that are the showerhead outlet nozzles 22 in Sandvik), wherein the inlet conduit is coupled to the outlet conduit (see Fig. 2 in Stewart).
Re claim 3, the modified Sandvik discloses the showerhead assembly of claim 2, wherein the plurality of valve assemblies further comprise a valve (43) coupled to the inlet conduit and the outlet conduit, wherein the valve is operable between an open state and a closed state, which is selectively changeable in response to an input (Fig. 2 shows one open and the others closed in response to fluid input).
Re claim 4, the modified Sandvik discloses the showerhead assembly of claim 3, wherein the valve is positioned in the open state and selectively changed to the closed state in response to the input (changes in the fluid input result in both the opening and closing of the valves).
Re claim 5, the modified Sandvik discloses the showerhead assembly of claim 2, wherein the at least one valve assembly inlet includes a first plurality of valve assembly inlets, and the at least one valve assembly outlet includes a second plurality of valve assembly outlets (see Sandvik, Fig. 3 and also Stewart, Figs. 1 and 4 showing inlet nipples 20 leading to separate five separate plurality of valve assemblies).
Re claim 6, the modified Sandvik disclose the showerhead assembly of claim 5, wherein the first plurality of valve assembly inlets and the second plurality of valve assembly outlets are configured in square pattern arrangements (see Sandvik, Figs. 1 and 3).
Re claim 7, the modified Sandvik disclose the showerhead assembly of claim 5, wherein the first plurality of valve assembly inlets and the second plurality of valve assembly outlets are configured in linear pattern arrangements (see Stewart, Figs. 1 and 4).
Re claim 8, the modified Sandvik discloses the showerhead assembly of claim 5, wherein the first plurality of valve assembly inlets are different in number than the second plurality of valve assembly outlets (see Sandvik, Fig. 3 with more mixed flow outlets than hot or cold flow inlets).
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sandvik in view of Stewart and Gessi (EP 3375338 A1).
Sandvik discloses a showerhead assembly, comprising: a showerhead (see the embodiment of Figs. 1-4, 6, and 7) housing including a top plate, a bottom plate, and a plurality of sidewalls extending between the top plate and the bottom plate (see Fig. 2 for a cross section with the top plate toward the left, the bottom plate with nozzles 22 to the right and the plurality of sidewalls including the sidewall shown towards the top as shown in Fig. 2 between the top and bottom plates as well as another sidewall shown towards the bottom of Fig. 2 also between the top and bottom plates). While the embodiment of Figs. 1-4, 6, and 7 has some distribution features within the housing, the valve assemblies are outside the housing. It is noted that the embodiment of Figs. 8-12 has a plurality of valves within a similar housing. Thus, inviting a modification. Also, Stewart discloses a similar assembly with a housing including a top plate, a bottom plate, and a plurality of sidewalls extending between the top plate and the bottom plate (see Fig. 2 for a cross section with the top plate 14 toward the top, the bottom plate 17 with outlets 46 toward the bottom and the plurality of sidewalls). Stewart also discloses a distributor plate (15) including at least one distributor outlet (24), the distributor plate situated in the showerhead housing; and a valve layer (16) positioned on the bottom plate and including a plurality of valve assemblies (43), the valve layer situated in the housing, wherein the at least one distributor outlet is coupled to, and configured such that the at least one distributor outlet disperses fluid to the plurality of valve assemblies of the valve layer (see Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Sandvik to place the distributor plate and valve layer of Stewart within the showerhead housing in order to selectively control the flow through a plurality of outlet nozzles and rapidly change the pattern of flow as desired as taught by Stewart.
The modified Sandvik fails to disclose a frame member coupled to the bottom plate and the showerhead housing, wherein the showerhead housing and the frame member are configured such that the showerhead housing and the frame member are flush with a ceiling. Gessi discloses a similar showerhead assembly and has a frame member (8) coupled to the showerhead housing, wherein the showerhead housing and the frame member are configured such that the showerhead housing and the frame member are flush with a ceiling (see Figs. 9A, 9B, and paragraphs [0067] to [0071]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the modified Sandvik to have a frame member coupled to the showerhead housing and wherein the showerhead housing and the frame member are configured such that the showerhead housing and the frame member are flush with a ceiling in order to not have the showerhead extend into the area below the ceiling as taught by Gessi.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sandvik, Stewart, and Gessi as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Saxon et alia (US Patent Number 8,307,472), hereinafter “Saxon”.
The modified Sandvik fails to disclose the frame member further includes frame lighting. Saxon discloses a similar showerhead assembly with lighting (60, 62) within a perimeter frame member of a showerhead assembly housing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the modified Sandvik to have lighting in the frame member in order to provide light as taught by Saxon.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sandvik, Stewart, and Gessi as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Zhou et alia (US Patent Number 8,665,673), hereinafter “Zhou”.
The modified Sandvik fails to disclose the frame member further includes stadium lighting configured such that the stadium lighting displays at least one of a time, a message, a saying, or a notification, wherein the stadium lighting further includes a plurality of display panels. Zhou discloses a similar showerhead assembly wherein a similar frame member includes stadium lighting that displays time with a plurality of display panels (see abstract and Fig. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the modified Sandvik to display time so that people can see the time when enjoying the shower as taught by Zhou (see last sentence of abstract).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric Keasel whose telephone number is (571) 272-4929. The examiner works a part-time schedule and can normally be reached on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday.
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 supervisors, Kenneth Rinehart and Craig Schneider can be reached on 571-272-4881 and 571-272-3607, respectively. 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.
/ERIC KEASEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753