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
The Amendment filed February 6th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-16 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed November 6th, 2025. Applicant’s remarks regarding support for a structure is found the in specification for “a selector element” in claim 1 was found persuasive and the previous rejection under 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 1. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitations “wherein the body comprises at least one inflow (5)” and “wherein the selector element (12) is mounted for rotation about an axis of rotation (13) for selecting the flow path (2)”. There is a lack of clarity for these limitations in the claim. These limitations appear to be a double inclusion of claim 1. It is unclear whether these limitations are directed to include the same elements twice, which is “at least one inflow” and “an axis of rotation” previously claimed in claim 1. This renders the claim indefinite. The examiner suggests revising these limitations to rectify the issue.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-12 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Whitaker et al. (US Patent 8,348,181).
Regarding claim 1, Whitaker discloses a device (500, Figs. 5A-5D) for selecting a flow path (130, Fig. 1) of a liquid of a sanitary shower set (100, radial mode engine 500 may be configured for use in shower assembly 100, Fig. 1, Col. 3, Ln. 40-46, Col. 9, Ln. 45-51), comprising:
- a body (150, 160, Figs. 1, 3A-5D) having at least one inflow (134, Figs. 1, 5D) and a plurality of drains (170, one is depicted in the drawings but Whitaker states that there are one or more chambers 170 formed by front channel plate 150 and rear channel plate 160, Figs. 1, 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-13, Col. 10, Ln. 8-25), wherein each of the plurality of drains (170, Figs. 1, 5D) comprises a drain inlet (inlet of chambers 170, shown in Figs. 1, 5D) having a seal (1030, chambers 170 may have sealing structures to provide a seal between chambers 170 and between the chambers 170 and other portions of shower assembly 100, and radial mode engine 500 may be configured for use in shower assembly 100, Figs. 1, 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27, Col. 9, Ln. 45-51) and wherein the seal (1030, Fig. 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27) comprises at least one sealing lip (interpreting as a projecting edge of the seal, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, annotated in Figs. 5D); and
- a selector element (101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D) that rests against the sealing lip of each of the plurality of drains (annotated and shown in Fig. 5D), wherein the selector element is mounted for rotation about an axis of rotation (longitudinal axis of radial mode changer 101, annotated in Fig. 5D) for selecting the flow path (130, radial mode changer 101 is rotated by knob 126 and causes radial mode changer 101 to move among and between one or more spray modes, Fig. 1, Col. 4, Ln. 5-17, Col. 10, Ln. 8-25).
PNG
media_image1.png
518
698
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker further discloses the seal (1030, Fig. 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27) is annular in shape (sealing structures can be O-rings, which are annular in shape, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27).
With respect to claim 3, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker discloses the sealing lip (annotated in Fig. 5D) of each of the plurality of drains rest aslant against the selector element (101, not explicitly shown, but sealing structures may have complementary protruding and recessed structures, which can include the annotated sealing lips resting aslant against the radial mode changer 101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27).
With respect to claim 4, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker discloses the seal (annotated in Fig. 5D) has a free space (annotated in Fig. 5D), in which the sealing lip (annotated in Fig. 5D) of each of the plurality of drains can be bent (shown in Fig. 5D).
PNG
media_image2.png
516
698
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker discloses a cross-section (shown in Fig. 5D) of the seal (1030, Fig. 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27) is at least partly V-shaped (there can also be a V-shaped annular groove, shown in Fig. 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27, Col. 10, Ln. 40-42).
Regarding claim 6, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker discloses the liquid can press the sealing lip (annotated in Fig. 5D) of each of the plurality of drains against the selector element (101, as mode changer 101 is received by water from the inflow passageway 134, inflow passageway 134 and the mode changer 101 abut the O-ring 200, and seal cup 1030 and its annotated sealing lips provides a sealing engagement between the radial mode changer 101 and the inner wall of manifold 151, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D, Col. 10, Ln. 26-54).
In regards to claim 7, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker discloses the seal (1030, Fig. 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27) is disposed on a tubular section (annotated in Fig. 5D) of the plurality of drains (170, Figs. 1, 5D).
PNG
media_image3.png
516
698
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 8, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker discloses each seal (1030, Fig. 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27) is disposed in a receiving space (151, Figs. 1, 3A, 5A-5C), which is connected to the at least one inflow (134, shown in Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 9, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 8. Whitaker discloses the receiving space (151, Figs. 1, 3A, 5A-5C) is connected to the at least one inflow (134, Figs. 1, 5D) via at least one first gap (annotated in Fig. 1) between the body (150, 160, Figs. 1, 3A-5D) and a circumferential surface (outer circumferential surface of the radial mode changer 101, shown in Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D) of the selector element (101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D).
PNG
media_image4.png
612
740
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 10, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 8. Whitaker discloses the receiving space (151, Figs. 1, 3A, 5A-5C) is connected to the plurality of drains (170, Figs. 1, 5D) via at least one second gap (152, 153, 154, Figs. 1, 3A-3C, 5A-5C, annotated in Fig. 5D) between a longitudinal end (upstream end of chambers 170, shown in Fig. 5D) of the plurality of drains (170, Figs. 1, 5D) and an outflow end (downstream end of radial mode changer 101, shown in Fig. 5D) of the selector element (101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D).
PNG
media_image5.png
516
698
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker further discloses the selector element (101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D) comprises an opening (113, 114, Fig. 2A, 2C-2F) that allows liquid to flow through one of the plurality of drains (170, Figs. 1, 5D) when selected by rotating the selector element (101, user selects a spray mode by operating the radial mode changer 101, by rotating knob 126 to rotate radial mode changer 101, where water flows from first passageway 110 through first and second recessed ports 113, 114, which facilitate water delivery to chambers 170, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D, Col. 4, Ln. 1-12, Col. 6, Ln. 37-67).
In regards to claim 12, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 11. Whitaker further discloses the opening (113, 114, Fig. 2A, 2C-2F) extends from an influx end (108, shown in Fig. 2A) of the selector element (101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D) in parallel to the axis of rotation (longitudinal axis of radial mode changer 101, annotated and shown in Fig. 5D) to the outflow end (downstream end of radial mode changer 101, shown in Fig. 2A) of the selector element (101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D).
Regarding claim 14, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 7. Whitaker further discloses the tubular section (annotated in Fig. 5D) of the plurality of drains (170, Figs. 1, 5D) is at least partially parallel to the axis of rotation (longitudinal axis of radial mode changer 101, annotated and shown in Fig. 5D) of the selector element (101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D).
Regarding claim 15, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 7. Whitaker further discloses the tubular section (annotated in Fig. 5D) of the plurality of drains (170, Figs. 1, 5D) is uniformly distributed about the axis of rotation (longitudinal axis of radial mode changer 101, annotated and shown in Fig. 5D).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitaker et al. (US Patent 8,348,181) in view of Lin et al. (US 20160221006 A1).
In regards to claim 13, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. However, Whitaker does not explicitly disclose the selector element is a selector disk. Lin teaches a device (60, Fig. 1) comprising the selector element (20, Figs. 1-2) is a selector disk (shown in Fig. 2). Whitaker’s selector element would be substituted with Lin’s selector element to have the selector element is a selector disk.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the selector element taught in Lin’s device to Whitaker’s device, to have the motivation to allow the selector element to rotate with ease due to a light force needed to rotate the plate, which makes it easier to switch between different functions (Lin, Paragraphs 0015, 0035).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitaker et al. (US Patent 8,348,181) in view of Yee et al. (US Patent 11,958,065).
With respect to claim 16, Whitaker discloses the device according to claim 1. Whitaker further discloses wherein the body (150, 160, Figs. 1, 3A-5D) comprises at least one inflow (134, Figs. 1, 5D), a first drain (170, Figs. 1, 5D), a second drain (annotated in Fig. 1), and a third drain (annotated in Fig. 1),
wherein the first drain (170, Figs. 1, 5D) comprises a first seal (1030, Fig. 5D, Col. 5, Ln. 11-27) having at least one sealing lip (annotated in Fig. 5D),
wherein the selector element (101, Figs. 1-2F, 5A-5D) rests against the sealing lip (11) of the first drain (6), and
wherein the selector element (12) is mounted for rotation about an axis of rotation (longitudinal axis of radial mode changer 101, annotated in Fig. 5D) for selecting the flow path (130, radial mode changer 101 is rotated by knob 126 and causes radial mode changer 101 to move among and between one or more spray modes, Fig. 1, Col. 4, Ln. 5-17, Col. 10, Ln. 8-25).
PNG
media_image6.png
612
799
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Whitaker discloses all aspects of the claimed invention except for explicitly disclosing the second drain comprises a second seal having at least one sealing lip and the third drain comprises a third seal having at least one sealing lip. Yee teaches a device (105, Fig. 1) comprising wherein the second drain (111B, Fig. 6) comprises a second seal (180, each diaphragm member 180 is made of compressible, compliant, and/or flexible material that provides compressibility/compliance/flexibility, to seal the associated port 111, Figs. 4-5, Col. 4, Ln. 50 to Col. 5, Ln. 9) having at least one sealing lip (annotated in Figs. 4-5), and
wherein the third drain (111C, Fig. 6) comprises a third seal (180, Figs. 4-5) having at least one sealing lip (annotated in Figs. 4-5), and
wherein the selector element (109, Fig. 4) rests against the sealing lip (annotated in Figs. 4-5) of the first drain (111A, Fig. 6), the sealing lip (annotated in Figs. 4-5) of the second drain (111B, Fig. 6), and the sealing lip (annotated in Figs. 4-5) of the third drain (111C, a portion of each diaphragm member 180 presses against a portion of an inner surface 191 of the pivot plate 109, Fig. 6, Col. 4, Ln. 50 to Col. 5, Ln. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the second drain, third drain, second seal, and third seal taught in Yee’s device to Whitaker’s device, to have the motivation to seal the drains better when a drain is not in use (Yee, Col. 4, Ln. 50 to Col. 5, Ln. 9). Whitaker states that there are one or more drains 170 in Whitaker’s device 500 (Whitaker, Col. 5, Ln. 11-13, Col. 10, Ln. 8-25), so Whitaker’s structure would allow the combination of the at least one sealing lip of the second and third seals of the second and third drains taught in Yee.
PNG
media_image7.png
672
936
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
655
637
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 6th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that Whitaker does not anticipate the present invention, specifically the limitation “a body (4) having at least one inflow (5) and a plurality of drains (6, 7, 8), wherein each of the plurality of drains (6, 7, 8) comprises a drain inlet (9, 33, 34) having a seal (10, 38, 39), and wherein the seal (10, 38, 39) comprises at least one sealing lip (11)”, see Remarks, pg. 7-10, Whitaker does disclose these claimed features. Although only one is depicted in the drawings, Whitaker states that there are one or more chambers 170 formed by front channel plate 150 and rear channel plate 160 (Col. 5, Ln. 11-13, Col. 10, Ln. 8-25). Whitaker states that chambers 170 are sealed (Col. 5, Ln. 13-15), and seal cups 1030 are located at the inlet of the chambers 170 as shown in Fig. 5D below. The seal cups 1030 has a sealing lip as annotated in Fig. 5D below, and it is being interpreted that a sealing lip is a projecting edge of the seal.
In response to applicant’s argument that Fig. 2I of Whitaker does not teach the inlets of chambers 170 have a seal, see Remarks, pg. 8-9, Whitaker states that Fig. 2I is another embodiment of the invention (Col. 2, Ln. 65-67). This is a different embodiment from Figs. 1 and 5A-5D, which were relied on in the rejection for claim 1 above.
PNG
media_image1.png
518
698
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Anna T Ho whose telephone number is (571)272-2587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM, First Friday of Pay Period off.
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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/ANNA THI HO/Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/ARTHUR O. HALL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights