DETAILED ACTION
Status of Submission
This Office action is responsive to the preliminary amendment filed on February 28, 2024, which has been entered.
Restriction Requirement
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Original patent claims 1-25, drawn to a vertical motion adjuster for a thermotherapy device having a moxibustion device, classified in A61H 39/06.
II. New reissue claims 26-33, drawn to a method of operating a bed-type massage device having massage rollers, classified in A61H 15/0078.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because Inventions I and II are related as product and process of use. The inventions can be shown to be distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product; or (2) the product as claimed can be used in a materially different process of using that product. See MPEP 806.05(h).
In the instant case, method claims 26-33 are not limited to the use of a vertical motion adjuster having the specific structure required by claims 1-25, including (i) a support frame pivotally installed at a pivot shaft on an upper surface of the support unit, (ii) a moxibustion device mounted on the support frame, (iii) a through-hole formed in a center portion of the conveyance unit, and (iv) a portion of the elevation unit passed through the through-hole. Thus, the claimed process (claims 26-33) can be practiced with a product that is materially different from the claimed product (claims 1-25).
Further, product claims 1-25 are not limited to use in a process having the specific steps required by claims 26-33, including: (i) providing a bed-type massage device comprising (a) a plurality of massage rollers, and (b) a mat having a lying surface and a hollow section extending in a longitudinal axis; and (ii) causing the vertical motion adjuster (or massage module) to travel within the hollow section along the longitudinal axis and also causing hinged movement of the support unit (or support member) such that at least part of the massage rollers simultaneously generates a first massaging effect by traveling along the longitudinal direction and a second massaging effect by the hinged movement. Thus, the claimed product (claims 1-25) can be used in a process that is materially different from the claimed process (claims 26-33).
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply: the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; and the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
Should applicant traverse this restriction requirement on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Constructive Election
Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.176, the subject matter of original patent claims 1-25 is held to be constructively elected since a disclaimer of all the patent claims has not been filed in the instant reissue application.
Accordingly, new reissue claims 26-33 are constructively non-elected and withdrawn from examination in this reissue application because these claims are drawn to a new independent and distinct invention.
As explained in MPEP 1450, applicant is advised that:
The claims to the original patented invention will continue to be examined in the instant reissue application and the non-elected claims will be held in abeyance in a withdrawn status.
A divisional reissue application directed to the constructively non-elected invention may be filed.
The non-elected claims will only be examined if filed in a divisional reissue application.
If the original patent claims are found allowable in the instant reissue application and no error (other than the failure to present the non-elected claims) is being corrected in this application, and if a divisional application has been filed for the non-elected claims, further action in the instant reissue application will be suspended pending resolution of the divisional application.
Prior Reissue Application
The same restriction requirement set forth above was made in prior Reissue Application No. 17/665,140 filed on February 4, 2022, now abandoned. In the prior reissue application, the subject matter of original patent claims 1-25 was held to be constructively elected pursuant to 37 CFR 1.176 since a disclaimer of all the patent claims was not filed in that application. Thus, patent claims 1-25 were examined in the prior reissue application, and new reissue claims 26-33 were withdrawn from examination as being drawn to a new independent and distinct invention.
The instant application was filed as a continuation reissue of prior Reissue Application No. 17/665,140. Since the instant application was not filed as a divisional reissue of prior Reissue Application No. 17/665,140, and since prior Reissue Application No. 17/665,140 is now abandoned, the same restriction requirement set forth above is proper in this continuation reissue application.
Claims Subject to Examination
Original patent claims 1-25 are subject to examination. New reissue claims 26-33 are withdrawn for the reasons given above.
Original Disclosure – Definition
The instant application seeks reissue of US Patent No. 10,548,806 B2, which issued from US Application No. 13/884,209, which was the national stage of International Application No. PCT/KR2011/008519. The “original disclosure” is the disclosure of International Application No. PCT/KR2011/008519 as filed on November 9, 2011. Any subject matter added to the disclosure (including the claims) during the examination of the instant reissue application or during the earlier-concluded examination of either US Application No. 13/884,209 or International Application No. PCT/KR2011/008519 does not constitute a part of the “original disclosure”.
Prohibition of New Matter
35 USC 132(a) states, in part, that “No amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention.”
35 USC 251(a) states, in part, that “No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue.”
PCT Article 19(2) states that “The amendments shall not go beyond the disclosure in the international application as filed”.
New Matter Added During Earlier-Concluded Examination
New matter was improperly added to the disclosure during the earlier examination of Application No. 13/884,209. See the detailed explanation that follows.
The amendment filed on May 8, 2013 amended the specification by adding the following new paragraph:
PNG
media_image1.png
126
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The new incorporation by reference of the entire contents of each of International Application No. PCT/KR2011/008519, Korean Application No. 10-2011-0064845 and Korean Application No. 10-2010-0110787 improperly added new matter to the disclosure because the entire contents of these applications was not a part of the original disclosure. It is noted that the entire contents of such applications include more than just the specification, drawings and claims of such applications.
The amendment filed on September 18, 2018 and the amendment made on November 15, 2019 (which was an examiner’s amendment authorized by applicant) amended claim 1 to recite “wherein the conveyance unit (100) includes a plate-shaped body, wherein the conveyance unit includes a through-hole (140) formed in a center portion of the plate-shaped body of the conveyance unit (100), the elevation unit (300) passing through the through-hole (140), and wherein at least a portion of the elevation unit (300) is passed through the through-hole (140) to be placed under the conveyance unit (100) when the support unit (200) is settled on the conveyance unit (100)” (ll. 14-20).
The new recitation of “a through-hole (140) formed in a center portion of the plate-shaped body of the conveyance unit (100)” (claim 1, ll. 15-16) improperly introduced new matter for the following reasons. The original disclosure describes the first disclosed embodiment shown in Figs. 2-7 as having a conveyance unit 100 that includes a plate-shaped body. See col. 5, ll. 36-38 of the patent specification (which is part of the description of the first disclosed embodiment found at col. 1, l. 65 to col. 9, l. 9). The original disclosure describes the second disclosed embodiment shown in Figs. 8-16 as having a through-hole 140 formed at the center of the conveyance unit 100. See col. 13, ll. 1-9. However, the conveyance unit 100 of the second disclosed embodiment is distinct from the conveyance unit 100 of the first disclosed embodiment at least due to the provision of (i) an accommodating space 130, and (ii) reinforcement ribs 150. See col. 12, ll. 58-67; col. 13, ll. 10-20. This distinct conveyance unit 100 of the second disclosed embodiment is not described in the original disclosure as having a plate-shaped body, and the through-hole 140 is not disclosed as being formed in a center portion of such a plate-shaped body.
The new requirement that “at least a portion of the elevation unit (300) is passed through the through-hole (140) to be placed under the conveyance unit (100) when the support unit (200) is settled on the conveyance unit (100)” (claim 1, ll. 18-20) improperly introduced new matter for the following reasons. The original disclosure describes the guide member(s) 310 of the elevation unit 300 as passing through the through hole 140. See col. 13, ll. 1-4; Figs. 9, 11 and 12A. Due to the “at least a portion of the elevation unit” claim language, the claim encompasses a configuration in which other portions of the elevation unit (other than the guide member(s) 310) pass through the through hole 140 to be placed under the conveyance unit 100. However, the specification fails to disclose an embodiment in which any other portions of the elevation unit pass through the through hole 140 to be placed under the conveyance unit 100. The original disclosure also fails to describe the support unit 200 as being “settled on” the conveyance unit 100 at a time when the guide member(s) 310 are passed through the through-hole 140.
The amendment filed on July 11, 2016 amended claim 5 to recite “wherein the conveyance unit (100) includes a driving member (330)” (ll. 1-2). However, the original disclosure defines the driving member 330 as a component of the elevation unit 300. See col. 6, ll. 33-36. The driving member 330 cannot be considered to be a component of the conveyance unit 100 if it is defined as a component of the separate elevation unit 300. Further, the original disclosure describes the driving member 330 as being installed under the conveyance unit 100. See col. 7, ll. 52-54. However, this disclosure (that the driving member 330 is installed under the conveyance unit 100) does not provide support for the claim requirement that the conveyance unit 100 includes the driving member 330.
The amendment filed on September 6, 2017 amended claim 13 to recite “wherein the protrusion (223) includes a first side extending generally toward the first moxibustion device (211) and a second side extending generally toward the second moxibustion device (212), wherein a first inclination angle is defined between the first side of the protrusion (223) and a plane parallel to an upper surface of the support unit (200), and a second inclination angle is defined between the second side of the protrusion (223) and the plane, and wherein the first inclination angle is smaller than the second inclination angle.” The original disclosure describes (i) the protrusion 223 as extending downward and formed at the lower end of the support frame, and (ii) the inclination angles α2, β2 as formed at a lower end of the protrusion 223, with the inclination angle α2 directed toward the one moxibustion device 211 being smaller than the inclination angle β2 directed toward the other moxibustion device 212. See col. 11, ll. 17-23; Fig. 12B. However, the original disclosure fails to describe the protrusion 223 as including a first side extending generally toward the first (one) moxibustion device 211 and a second side extending generally toward the second (other) moxibustion device 212. As shown in Fig. 12B, the angled sides/surfaces of the protrusion 223 that define boundaries of the inclination angles α2, β2 are not illustrated as “extending generally toward” the moxibustion devices 211, 212. The original disclosure also fails to describe the inclination angles α2, β2 as being defined with respect to “a plane parallel to an upper surface of” the support unit 200. The support unit 200 is not shown in Fig. 12B, and this figure does not establish the claimed “parallel” relationship.
The amendment filed on September 6, 2017 amended original claim 23 (later renumbered as patent claim 19) to recite “a plurality of reinforcement ribs (150) formed on the conveyance unit (100) to surround the through-hole (140), and wherein at least one of the plurality of reinforcement ribs (150) is formed in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit (100).” The original disclosure describes a singular reinforcement rib 150 formed along an edge of the conveyance unit 100 to surround the through hole 140. See col. 13, ll. 10-14; Fig. 11. Further, the original disclosure describes a plurality of reinforcement ribs 150 formed in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit 100. See col. 13, ll. 15-20; Figs. 9 and 11. However, the original disclosure does not provide support for a plurality of such reinforcement ribs formed on the conveyance unit 100 to surround the through hole 140. Nor does the original disclosure provide support for at least one such reinforcement rib that both (i) surrounds the through hole 140, and (ii) is formed in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit 100.
The amendment filed on September 18, 2018 added new claim 28 (later renumbered as patent claim 24), with this new claim reciting “a second resilient member (214) configured to apply a resilient force to the moxibustion device (210) tending to move the moxibustion device (210) upward”. The original disclosure describes the temperature detecting member 213 as including a second resilient member 214 that applies a resilient force in a direction in which the moxibustion device 210 is moved upward such that, when the moxibustion device 210 is moved upward, the temperature detecting member 213 is also moved upward by the second resilient member 214. See col. 10, ll. 39-47. While the original disclosure states that the second resilient member 214 applies a resilient force in a direction in which the moxibustion device 210 is moved upward, it does not describe the second resilient member 214 as “configured to apply a resilient force to” the moxibustion device 210. Rather, the original disclosure describes the second resilient member 214 as functioning to move the temperature detecting member 213 upward when the moxibustion device 210 is moved upward.
The amendment filed on September 18, 2018 added new claim 29 (later renumbered as patent claim 25), and the amendment made on November 15, 2019 (which was an examiner’s amendment authorized by applicant) amended this claim to recite “wherein the support unit (200) and the driving member (330) are positioned on opposite sides of the plate-shaped body of the conveyance unit (100) such that the plate-shaped body of the conveyance unit separates the support unit (200) from the driving member (330).” See the above discussion of the original disclosure’s description of the second disclosed embodiment shown in Figs. 8-16, including the explanation concerning the recited “plate-shaped body”. Further, the specification describes this second disclosed embodiment as having connecting members 420 installed at the support unit 200, with one end of the connecting members 420 extending downward to be inserted into the conveyance unit 100. See col. 12, ll. 33-52; Figs. 10A, 12A and 13. As a result of this configuration, one end of the connecting members 420 are not separated from the driving member 330 by the body of the conveyance unit 100.
For these reasons, the amendments made in Application No. 13/884,209 violated the prohibition of new matter under 35 USC 132(a).
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
New Matter Added During Present Examination
The amendment filed in the instant application on February 28, 2024 is objected to under 35 USC 132(a) and 35 USC 251(a) because it improperly introduces new matter for the following reason.
The amendment filed on February 28, 2024 amends the first paragraph of the specification as follows:
PNG
media_image2.png
196
486
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The new incorporation by reference of the entire contents of US Application No. 17/665,140, US Patent No. 10,548,806 B2 and US Application No. 13/884,209 improperly adds new matter to the disclosure because the entire contents of these applications and patent was not a part of the original disclosure. It is noted that the entire contents of such an application or patent includes more than just the specification, drawings and claims.
For these reasons, the amendment filed in the instant application on February 28, 2024 violates the prohibition of new matter under both 35 USC 132(a) and 35 USC 251(a).
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in response to this Office action.
Reissue Oath/Declaration
OBJECTION 1: The Reissue Application Declaration By The Assignee (Form PTO/AIA /06) filed on February 28, 2024 is defective because it is improperly executed on behalf of the assignee. As explained in the reissue declaration itself, applicant seeks to broaden the claims in the instant reissue application. For such a broadening reissue application, the reissue declaration may only be executed on behalf of the assignee if the application for the original patent was filed by the assignee of the entire interest under the AIA version of 37 CFR 1.46.
As explained above, Application No. 13/884,209 was the national stage of International Application No. PCT/KR2011/008519. Due to its international filing date of November 9, 2011, Application No. 13/884,209 was subject to the pre-AIA version of 37 CFR 1.46, which did not allow for the application to be made by the assignee. Accordingly, the Filing Receipt issued in Application No. 13/884,209 on June 19, 2013 did not identify the assignee as the applicant; rather, it identified the sole inventor as the applicant. Likewise, the front page of US Patent No. 10,548,806 B2 does not identify the assignee as the applicant.
OBJECTION 2: The Reissue Application Declaration By The Assignee (Form PTO/AIA /06) filed on February 28, 2024 is defective because the box is checked indicating that “The application for the original patent was filed under 37 CFR 1.46 by the assignee of the entire interest.” This statement is inaccurate for the reasons given above.
OBJECTION 3: The Reissue Application Declaration By The Assignee (Form PTO/AIA /06) filed on February 28, 2024 is defective because it fails to properly and specifically identify at least one error which can be relied upon to support the reissue application. See 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP 1414-1414.01.
As required by 37 CFR 1.175(a), the reissue oath/declaration must specifically identify at least one error pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 251 being relied upon as the basis for reissue. In identifying the error, it is sufficient that the reissue oath/declaration identify a single word, phrase, or expression in the specification or in an original claim, and how it renders the original patent wholly or partly inoperative or invalid. It is not sufficient to merely state that applicant seeks to broaden or narrow the scope of a patent claim. Further, a statement in the reissue oath/declaration of “…failure to include a claim directed to…” and then reciting all the limitations of a newly added claim would not be considered a sufficient error statement because applicant has not pointed out what the other claims lacked that the newly added claim has, or vice versa.
In the present case, the declaration’s error statement reads as follows:
The patentee had a right to claim more than what was claimed in U.S. Patent No. 10,548,806 (the “‘806 patent”). The present reissue application includes new claims that are different from (e.g., broader than) Claims 1-25 of the ‘806 patent. For example, independent Claim 1 of the ‘806 patent is directed to a vertical motion adjuster for a thermotherapy device and recites “a conveyance unit” and “an elevation unit.” On the other hand, new independent Claim 30 of the present reissue application is directed to a method of operating a bed-type massage device (an overlooked aspect) and does not recite “a conveyance unit” or “an elevation unit.”
This statement fails to identify an error which can be relied upon to support this reissue application. As explained above, new reissue claims 26-33 are constructively non-elected and, thus, will not be examined in this reissue application. As a result, new reissue claims 26-33 cannot be relied upon as the basis for this reissue application, i.e., as the means by which an error in the original patent claims is corrected. Further, there are no claims presently subject to examination that correct the alleged error in patent claim 1.
OBJECTION 4: The Reissue Application Declaration By The Assignee (Form PTO/AIA /06) filed on February 28, 2024 is improper because it is a copy of the reissue declaration filed in prior Reissue Application No. 17/665,140 on March 16, 2022. The filing of a copy of the declaration from the prior reissue application is not permitted since (i) it is not signed by the inventor, and (ii) original Application No. 13/884,209 was not filed under 37 CFR 1.46. See MPEP 1410.01.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 251
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 251:
(a) IN GENERAL.—Whenever any patent is, through error, deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective specification or drawing, or by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had a right to claim in the patent, the Director shall, on the surrender of such patent and the payment of the fee required by law, reissue the patent for the invention disclosed in the original patent, and in accordance with a new and amended application, for the unexpired part of the term of the original patent. No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue.
PNG
media_image3.png
18
19
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(b) MULTIPLE REISSUED PATENTS.—The Director may issue several reissued patents for distinct and separate parts of the thing patented, upon demand of the applicant, and upon payment of the required fee for a reissue for each of such reissued patents.
PNG
media_image3.png
18
19
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(c) APPLICABILITY OF THIS TITLE.—The provisions of this title relating to applications for patent shall be applicable to applications for reissue of a patent, except that application for reissue may be made and sworn to by the assignee of the entire interest if the application does not seek to enlarge the scope of the claims of the original patent or the application for the original patent was filed by the assignee of the entire interest.
PNG
media_image3.png
18
19
media_image3.png
Greyscale
(d) REISSUE PATENT ENLARGING SCOPE OF CLAIMS. No reissued patent shall be granted enlarging the scope of the claims of the original patent unless applied for within two years from the grant of the original patent.
GROUND 1: Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being based upon a defective reissue oath/declaration. See 37 CFR 1.175. See the explanation above.
GROUND 2: Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 because there is no “error” in the original patent that is corrected by the instant reissue application. As explained above, new reissue claims 26-33 are constructively non-elected. Thus, for the purposes of this reissue application, claims 26-33 do not serve to correct an error in the patent. Further, no other error in the patent is currently corrected by this reissue application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
GROUND 3: Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement because these claims recite new matter. See the explanation above. Claims 2-4, 6-12, 14-18 and 20-23 are included in the rejection because of their dependencies.
GROUND 4: Claims 4, 7, 8 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. These claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventors or a joint inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was filed.
The written description requirement serves both to satisfy applicant’s obligation to disclose the technologic knowledge upon which the patent is based, and to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed. It is not enough that a skilled artisan could theoretically construct his/her own version of the claimed invention. Rather, applicant bears the burden of setting forth sufficient information to show that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. Thus, the written description requirement requires applicant to go beyond a discussion of mere concepts and suggestions. It is not sufficient to merely outline desired results that the claimed invention is expected to achieve. Rather, the specification must explain how the invention is structured and how it functions in order to achieve the desired results. While subject matter that is conventional or well known in the art need not be described in detail, the specification must provide a complete description of each of the essential features recited in the claims which enable the claimed invention to achieve the desired results.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the guide member (310) is one of a plurality of guide members (310) and wherein the rotary member (320) is one of a plurality of rotary members (320).” This broad recitation allows for a configuration including three, four, five or even more guide members, and an equal number or an unequal number of rotary members. However, the original disclosure does not describe any embodiment having (i) three or more guide members, (ii) three or more rotary members, or (iii) a plurality of rotary members of unequal number to a plurality of guide members. While the provision of a plurality of guide members and a plurality of rotary members is mentioned broadly in the specification, their specific structure/arrangement is not described in the specification or illustrated in the drawings in the case of three or more guide members, three or more rotary members, or rotary members of unequal number to guide members. Absent such disclosure in a manner that is commensurate in scope with the claims, the specification fails to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed.
Claim 7 recites “a limit switch (120) at one of the conveyance unit (100) and the guide member (310), wherein a detection protrusion (312) is installed at the other one of the conveyance unit and the guide member, and when the detection protrusion (312) enters the limit switch (120), a lowering operation of the support unit (200) is stopped.” Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 12, ll. 3-11 of the patent specification. However, the specification fails to disclose and the drawings fail to illustrate the specific manner in which (i) the limit switch 120 and the protrusion 312 are structured, (ii) the limit switch 120 and the protrusion 312 are installed on the conveyance unit 100 and the guide member 310, (iii) the protrusion 312 enters and activates the limit switch 120, and (iv) activation of the limit switch causes a lowering operation of the support unit 200 to be stopped. No explanation is provided as to the specific structure required to achieve the desired result. Absent the disclosure of essential features, the specification fails to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed.
Claim 8 recites “a rotation detection member configured to detect a raising operation of the guide member (310) is installed at the driving member (330).” Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 12, ll. 12-19 of the patent specification. However, the specification fails to disclose and the drawings fail to illustrate the specific manner in which the rotation detection member 331 (i) is structured, (ii) is installed on the driving member 330, (iii) interacts with the driving member and/or the guide member 310, and (iv) functions to detect a raising operation of the guide member 310. No explanation is provided as to the specific structure required to achieve the desired result. Absent the disclosure of essential features, the specification fails to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed.
Claim 22 recites “a cover member installed at an inner surface in the lengthwise direction of the long hole (190).” Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 3, ll. 39-40 of the patent specification. However, no such cover member is illustrated in the drawings. Further, the specification fails to disclose the specific manner in which the cover member is (i) structured, and (ii) installed at an inner surface in the lengthwise direction of the long hole 190. No explanation is provided as to the specific structure required to achieve the desired result. Absent the disclosure of essential features, the specification fails to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed.
Claim 23 recites “wherein the first resilient member (222) is configured to apply a resilient force to the support frame (220) such that one moxibustion device (211) adjacent to a coupling position of the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200) is moved upward.” Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 10, ll. 10-33 of the patent specification. However, the specification fails to disclose and the drawings fail to illustrate the specific manner in which the first resilient member 222 is (i) structured, (ii) installed so as to interact with the support frame 220 and the support unit 200, and (iii) configured to apply a resilient force to the support frame 220 such that one moxibustion device 211 is moved upward. An insufficient explanation is provided as to the specific structure required to achieve the desired result. Absent the disclosure of essential features, the specification fails to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed.
Claim 24 recites “a second resilient member (214) configured to apply a resilient force to the moxibustion device (210) tending to move the moxibustion device (210) upward, wherein the second resilient member (214) is installed at the temperature detecting member (213).” Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 10, ll. 34-51 of the patent specification. However, the specification fails to disclose and the drawings fail to illustrate the specific manner in which the second resilient member 214 is (i) structured, (ii) installed so as to interact with the moxibustion device 210 and the temperature detecting member 213, and (iii) configured to apply a resilient force to the moxibustion device 210 tending to move the moxibustion device upward. An insufficient explanation is provided as to the specific structure required to achieve the desired result. Absent the disclosure of essential features, the specification fails to demonstrate that the inventor(s) was in possession of the invention that is claimed.
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.
GROUND 5: Claims 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the broad limitation “a moxibustion device (210) placed on the support unit (200)” (l. 10). The term “moxibustion” is defined as:
The burning of moxa on the skin in treating various diseases or disorders.1
A method of treatment, originally in Chinese medicine, in which a moxa is burned on the skin.2
The therapeutic use of moxa.3
(In Eastern medicine) the burning of moxa on or near a person’s skin as a counterirritant.4
The term “moxa” is defined as:
A soft, downy material, burned on the skin as a cauterizing agent or counterirritant, esp. in traditional Chinese and Japanese medicine.5
A flammable substance or material obtained from the leaves of certain Chinese and Japanese wormwood plants, especially Artemisia moxa; this substance or a similar one of cotton, wool, or the like, placed on the skin usually in the form of a cone or cylinder and ignited for use as a counterirritant.6
A soft woolly mass prepared from the ground young leaves of a Eurasian artemisia (especially Artemisia vulgaris) that is used in traditional Chinese and Japanese medicine typically in the form of sticks or cones which are ignited and placed on or close to the skin or used to heat acupuncture needles.7
A downy substance obtained from the dried leaves of an Asian plant related to mugwort. It is burned on or near the skin in Eastern medicine as a counterirritant.8
Thus, the ordinary meaning of the claim term “moxibustion device” requires a device used to burn the substance known as moxa and place this burning substance on or near a person’s skin as a form of medicinal treatment. However, applicant’s disclosure provides no discussion of this type of device. Rather, the patent specification broadly states that “The moxibustion device 210 includes a cap type moxibustion device and a roller type moxibustion device, which are configured to provide a warm moxibustion effect and an acupressure therapy effect to the user's neck and waist areas” (col. 5, ll. 51-55). Absent from the specification is any description of the manner in which the moxibustion device is “configured to provide a warm moxibustion effect”. The scope of the vague term “warm moxibustion effect” is not defined. Based on the disclosure of a “roller type” device, and the illustration of rollers in the drawing figures, the person of ordinary skill in the art would not necessarily conclude that the disclosed “roller type” device is capable of being used to burn the substance known as moxa and place this burning substance on or near a person’s skin as a form of medicinal treatment. Thus, it is unclear how the claimed moxibustion device is structured, and it is also unclear how it functions to produce the disclosed moxibustion effect. The specification further states that “a temperature detecting member 213 configured to detect a temperature of the moxibustion device 210 is provided” (col. 10, ll. 34-36). This indicates that the claimed moxibustion device possesses and/or produces a sufficient level of heat to be detected by the disclosed temperature detecting member. However, the patent specification does not disclose that the claimed moxibustion device is actively heated, and fails to provide any explanation of the source of heat used. The skilled artisan would not consider the combustion of moxa as a heat source to be consistent with the disclosed “roller type” device.
For these reasons, the scope of the claimed “moxibustion device” cannot be determined with a reasonable degree of certainty. It is unclear whether this term limits the claim to a device used to burn the substance known as moxa and place this burning substance on or near a person’s skin as a form of medicinal treatment. Absent the necessary supporting disclosure, it is unclear what structure(s) is encompassed by the claim and what structure(s) is excluded thereby.
Claim 1 first recites the broad limitation “a moxibustion device (210) placed on the support unit (200)” (l. 10) and later recites the narrower limitations “a support frame (220) on which the moxibustion device (210) is mounted, wherein the support frame (220) is installed at an upper surface of the support unit (200) and the support frame (220) is pivotally installed at a pivot shaft (221)” (ll. 11-13). Such a recitation of a broad limitation together with a narrow limitation that falls within the broad limitation (in the same claim) is considered indefinite because the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. That is, there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 1 recites “the conveyance unit (100) includes a plate-shaped body” (l. 14). This subject matter is indefinite because “plate-shaped” is ambiguous. A plate can be circular or polygonal. It can also be flat or cupped/recessed. Since no precise shape is necessarily associated with the term “plate”, it is not possible to ascertain with any degree of certainty what shapes are encompassed by the claim and what shapes are excluded thereby.
Claim 1 first recites the limitation “the elevation unit (300) passing through the through-hole (140)” (ll. 16-17) and later recites the limitation “wherein at least a portion of the elevation unit (300) is passed through the through-hole (140) to be placed under the conveyance unit (100) when the support unit (200) is settled on the conveyance unit (100)” (ll. 18-20). Such a recitation of a broad limitation together with a narrow limitation that falls within the broad limitation (in the same claim) is considered indefinite because the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. That is, there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by the narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 1 recites “the elevation unit (300) passing through the through-hole (140)” (ll. 16-17). This recitation inaccurately implies and/or encompasses a configuration in which the entire elevation unit 300 passes through the through hole 140. In contrast, the original disclosure only describes embodiments in which the guide member(s) 310 of the elevation unit 300 passes through the through hole 140. See col. 13, ll. 1-4; Figs. 9, 11 and 12A. Thus, the claim is indefinite due to the inconsistency between the scope of the claim and the scope of the disclosure.
Claim 1 recites “at least a portion of the elevation unit (300) is passed through the through-hole (140) to be placed under the conveyance unit (100) when the support unit (200) is settled on the conveyance unit (100)” (ll. 18-20). Due to the “at least a portion of the elevation unit” claim language, the claim encompasses a configuration in which other portions of the elevation unit (other than the guide member(s) 310) pass through the through hole 140 to be placed under the conveyance unit 100. Thus, the claim is indefinite due to the inconsistency between the scope of the claim and the scope of the disclosure.
In claim 3, the term “a detachable gear surface” (l. 2) is indefinite because a “surface” is not a structural element and, thus, is incapable (by itself) of being “detachable”. Rather, the surface must be a feature of a structural element, with the structural element being detachable. Thus, the claim is indefinite because no detachable structural element is claimed.
Claim 3 recites “the detachable gear surface (311) is installed inside the guide member (310)” (ll. 2-3). This subject matter is indefinite because a “surface” is not a structural element and, thus, is incapable (by itself) of being “installed”. Rather, the surface must be a feature of a structural element, with the structural element being installed. Thus, the claim is indefinite because no installed structural element is claimed.
Claim 3 recites “the detachable gear surface (311) is installed inside the guide member (310), and the rotary member (320) is a pinion (321) installed inside the guide member (310)” (ll. 2-4). Due to the phrase “installed inside”, the claim encompasses a configuration in which the gear surface 311 and the pinion 321 are both situated within the outer boundaries or confines of the guide member 310. However, such a definition of the gear surface 311 and the pinion 321 does not comport with the specification. As shown in Fig. 12A, the gear member 350 extends from the guide member 310 such that its gear surface is not “installed inside” the guide member 310. Further, the pinion 321 is separate from the guide member 310 and is not “installed inside” the guide member 310.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the guide member (310) is one of a plurality of guide members (310) and wherein the rotary member (320) is one of a plurality of rotary members (320).” This broad recitation allows for a configuration including three, four, five or even more guide members, and an equal number or an unequal number of rotary members. However, the original disclosure does not describe any embodiment having (i) three or more guide members, (ii) three or more rotary members, or (iii) a plurality of rotary members of unequal number to a plurality of guide members. While the provision of a plurality of guide members and a plurality of rotary members in mentioned broadly in the specification, their specific structure/arrangement is not described in the specification or illustrated in the drawings in the case of three or more guide members, three or more rotary members, or rotary members of unequal number to guide members. Thus, the claim is indefinite due to the inconsistency between the scope of the claim and the scope of the disclosure.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the conveyance unit (100) includes a driving member (330)” (ll. 1-2). However, the original disclosure defines the driving member 330 as a component of the elevation unit 300. See col. 6, ll. 33-36. The driving member 330 cannot be considered to be a component of the conveyance unit 100 if it is defined as a component of the separate elevation unit 300. Further, the original disclosure describes the driving member 330 as being installed under the conveyance unit 100. See col. 7, ll. 52-54. However, this disclosure (that the driving member 330 is installed under the conveyance unit 100) does not comport with the claim requirement that the conveyance unit 100 includes the driving member 330. Thus, the claim is indefinite due to the inconsistency between the claim and the disclosure.
Claim 6 recites “a gear surface (311) is installed at the guide member (310)” (ll. 2-3). This subject matter is indefinite because a “surface” is not a structural element and, thus, is incapable (by itself) of being “installed”. Rather, the surface must be a feature of a structural element, with the structural element being installed. Thus, the claim is indefinite because no installed structural element is claimed.
Claim 6 recites “a gear surface (311) is installed at the guide member (310)” (ll. 2-3). This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear what structural relationships are encompassed by the unconventional phrase “installed at”. Does this require the gear surface to be installed on the guide member? Does it encompass other relationships between the gear surface and the guide member? Thus, the claim is indefinite because it is not possible to ascertain with a reasonable degree of certainty what subject matter is encompassed by the claim and what subject matter is excluded thereby.
Claim 7 recites “a limit switch (120) at one of the conveyance unit (100) and the guide member (310), wherein a detection protrusion (312) is installed at the other one of the conveyance unit and the guide member” (ll. 2-4). The recited term “at” and the recited phrase “installed at” render the claim indefinite for essentially the same reasons given above with respect to claim 6.
Claim 7 recites “…and when the detection protrusion (312) enters the limit switch (120), a lowering operation of the support unit (200) is stopped” (ll. 4-5). Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 12, ll. 3-11 of the patent specification. However, the specification fails to disclose and the drawings fail to illustrate the specific manner in which activation of the limit switch causes a lowering operation of the support unit 200 to be stopped. No explanation is provided as to the specific structure required to achieve the desired result. Absent the necessary supporting disclosure, the claim is rendered indefinite. Further, the claim fails to recite the structure necessary to cause a lowering operation of the support unit 200 to be stopped. Thus, the claim is incomplete for omitting an essential element(s), such omission amounting to a gap between the elements.
Claim 8 recites “a rotation detection member configured to detect a raising operation of the guide member (310) is installed at the driving member (330).” Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 12, ll. 12-19 of the patent specification. However, the specification fails to disclose and the drawings fail to illustrate the specific manner in which the rotation detection member 331 (i) is structured, (ii) is installed on the driving member 330, (iii) interacts with the driving member and/or the guide member 310, and (iv) functions to detect a raising operation of the guide member 310. Absent the necessary supporting disclosure, the claim is rendered indefinite.
Claim 9 recites “the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200) are hinged through a hinge unit (400).” This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear whether it requires that the conveyance unit 100 and the support unit 200 “are hinged” to one another, or whether it requires these elements to be hinged to some other element.
Claim 10 recites “a connecting member (420) installed adjacent the protrusion member (410)” (l. 4). This subject matter is indefinite because it requires the connecting member 420 to be “installed”, but it fails to specify what element the connecting member 420 is installed on. The requirement that the connecting member 420 is “adjacent the protrusion member” does not limit the connecting member 420 to being installed on any particular element.
Claim 11 recites “wherein an upwardly moving distance of the first moxibustion device (211) adjacent to a coupling position of the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200) is different from an upwardly moving distance of the second moxibustion device (212) opposite to the first moxibustion device (211) with respect to the pivot shaft (221).” This subject matter is indefinite because the claim fails to recite the structure necessary to cause an upwardly moving distance of the first moxibustion device 211 to be different from an upwardly moving distance of the second moxibustion device 212. Thus, the claim is incomplete for omitting an essential element(s), such omission amounting to a gap between the elements.
Claim 12 recites “the upwardly moving distance of the first moxibustion device (211) is larger than the upwardly moving distance of the second moxibustion device (212).” This subject matter is indefinite because the claim fails to recite the structure necessary to cause the upwardly moving distance of the first moxibustion device 211 to be larger than the upwardly moving distance of the second moxibustion device 212. Thus, the claim is incomplete for omitting an essential element(s), such omission amounting to a gap between the elements.
Claim 13 recites “a protrusion (223) that extends downward from a lower end of the support frame (220)” (l. 2). The original disclosure describes the protrusion 223 as extending downward and formed at the lower end of the support frame 220. See col. 11, ll. 17-20. Thus, the protrusion is disclosed as formed at the lower end of the support frame 220, but the claim requires the protrusion to extend downward from the lower end of the support frame 220. Thus, the claim is indefinite due to the inconsistency between the claim and the disclosure.
Claim 13 recites “wherein the protrusion (223) includes a first side extending generally toward the first moxibustion device (211) and a second side extending generally toward the second moxibustion device (212), wherein a first inclination angle is defined between the first side of the protrusion (223) and a plane parallel to an upper surface of the support unit (200), and a second inclination angle is defined between the second side of the protrusion (223) and the plane, and wherein the first inclination angle is smaller than the second inclination angle.” The original disclosure describes (i) the protrusion 223 as extending downward and formed at the lower end of the support frame, and (ii) the inclination angles α2, β2 as formed at a lower end of the protrusion 223, with the inclination angle α2 directed toward the one moxibustion device 211 being smaller than the inclination angle β2 directed toward the other moxibustion device 212. See col. 11, ll. 17-23; Fig. 12B. However, the original disclosure fails to describe the protrusion 223 as including a first side extending generally toward the first (one) moxibustion device 211 and a second side extending generally toward the second (other) moxibustion device 212. As shown in Fig. 12B, the angled sides/surfaces of the protrusion 223 that define boundaries of the inclination angles α2, β2 are not illustrated as “extending generally toward” the moxibustion devices 211, 212. The original disclosure also fails to describe the inclination angles α2, β2 as being defined with respect to “a plane parallel to an upper surface of” the support unit 200. The support unit 200 is not shown in Fig. 12B, and this figure does not establish the claimed “parallel” relationship. Thus, the claim is indefinite due to the inconsistency between the scope of the claim and the scope of the disclosure.
Claim 14 first recites the broad limitations “an absorption member (230) protruding upward toward a lower end of the support frame (220), wherein the absorption member is formed at an upper surface of the support unit (200)” (ll. 2-4), which broad limitations only require a singular “absorption member”. However, the claim later recites the narrower limitation “a height of the absorption member (230) protruding upward toward the first moxibustion device (211) is larger than that of the absorption member (230) protruding upward toward the second moxibustion device (212)” (ll. 4-6), which narrower limitation requires two absorption members. Such a recitation of a broad limitation together with a narrow limitation that falls within the broad limitation (in the same claim) is considered indefinite because the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. That is, there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 14 recites “the absorption member is formed at an upper surface of the support unit (200)” (ll. 3-4). This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear what structural relationships are encompassed by the unconventional phrase “formed at”. Does this require the absorption member to be formed on the upper surface of the support unit? Does it encompass other relationships between the absorption member and the upper surface of the support unit? Thus, the claim is indefinite because it is not possible to ascertain with a reasonable degree of certainty what subject matter is encompassed by the claim and what subject matter is excluded thereby.
In claim 14, the terms “the absorption member (230) protruding upward toward the first moxibustion device (211)” (ll. 4-5) and “the absorption member (230) protruding upward toward the second moxibustion device (212)” (ll. 5-6) lack proper antecedent basis.
In claim 14, the terms “the absorption member (230) protruding upward toward the first moxibustion device (211)” (ll. 4-5) and “the absorption member (230) protruding upward toward the second moxibustion device (212)” (ll. 5-6) are indefinite because these terms are inconsistent with the earlier definition of “an absorption member (230) protruding upward toward a lower end of the support frame (220)” (ll. 2-3).
Claim 15 first recites the broad limitation “a coupling position” (l. 2) and later recites the narrower limitation “the coupling position of the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200)” (ll. 2-3). Such a recitation of a broad limitation together with a narrow limitation that falls within the broad limitation (in the same claim) is considered indefinite because the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. That is, there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
In claim 15, the term “the coupling position of the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200)” (ll. 2-3) lacks proper antecedent basis.
In claim 15, the term “an upper end surface of the support unit (200)” (l. 3) is indefinite because the corresponding surface is an upper surface, but it is not an “end” surface.
Claim 16 recites “the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200) are hinged by a hinge unit (400)” (ll. 1-2). This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear whether it requires that the conveyance unit 100 and the support unit 200 “are hinged” to one another, or whether it requires these elements to be hinged to some other element.
Claim 16 recites “one end of the connecting member (420) extending downward to be inserted into the conveyance unit (100)” (ll. 8-9). This subject matter is indefinite because it is broader in scope than the earlier subject matter recited at ll. 4-7 of claim 16. Note that ll. 4-7 require a hinge member providing a positive connection between the connecting member and the protrusion member of the conveyance unit. However, ll. 8-9 only require the broad functional limitation “to be inserted into the conveyance unit”. Such inconsistency in scope renders the claim indefinite.
In claim 17, the term “the hinge members” (l. 2) lacks proper antecedent basis. Note that prior claim 16 only recites a singular hinge member.
Claim 19 recites “a plurality of reinforcement ribs (150) formed on the conveyance unit (100) to surround the through-hole (140), and wherein at least one of the plurality of reinforcement ribs (150) is formed in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit (100).” The original disclosure describes a singular reinforcement rib 150 formed along an edge of the conveyance unit 100 to surround the through hole 140. See col. 13, ll. 10-14; Fig. 11. Further, the original disclosure describes a plurality of reinforcement ribs 150 formed in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit 100. See col. 13, ll. 15-20; Figs. 9 and 11. However, the original disclosure does not describe a plurality of such reinforcement ribs formed on the conveyance unit 100 to surround the through hole 140. Nor does the original disclosure describe at least one such reinforcement rib that both (i) surrounds the through hole 140, and (ii) is formed in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit 100. Thus, the claim is indefinite due to the inconsistency between the claim and the disclosure.
In claim 20, the recitation “a length in a widthwise direction” (ll. 6-7) is indefinite because the terms “length” and “width” are conventionally understood to have different meanings. Thus, it is unclear how a structure can be defined as having a “length” in a direction that is “widthwise”.
Claim 21 recites “a projection surface (191) curved toward a center of the long hole (190) is formed at an inner surface in the lengthwise direction of the long hole (190).” This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear what structural relationships are encompassed by the unconventional phrase “formed at”. Does this require the projection surface to be formed on the inner surface of the long hole? Does it encompass other relationships between the projection surface and the inner surface of the long hole? Thus, the claim is indefinite because it is not possible to ascertain with a reasonable degree of certainty what subject matter is encompassed by the claim and what subject matter is excluded thereby.
Claim 21 recites “a projection surface (191) curved toward a center of the long hole (190) is formed at an inner surface in the lengthwise direction of the long hole (190).” This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear how one “surface” can be defined as being “at” another “surface”. How can they be distinct surfaces if they are formed at the same location?
Claim 21 recites “a projection surface (191) curved toward a center of the long hole (190) is formed at an inner surface in the lengthwise direction of the long hole (190).” This subject matter is indefinite because it is inaccurate. As shown in Fig. 16, the projection surface 191 is not formed “in the lengthwise direction of” the long hole 190.
Claim 22 recites “a cover member installed at an inner surface in the lengthwise direction of the long hole (190).” Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 3, ll. 39-40 of the patent specification. However, no such cover member is illustrated in the drawings. Further, the specification fails to disclose the specific manner in which the cover member is (i) structured, and (ii) installed at an inner surface in the lengthwise direction of the long hole 190. Absent the necessary supporting disclosure, the claim is rendered indefinite.
Claim 23 recites “the first resilient member (222) installed at the pivot shaft (221)” (ll. 3-4). This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear what structural relationships are encompassed by the unconventional phrase “installed at”. Does this require the first resilient member to be installed on the pivot shaft? Does it encompass other relationships between these elements? Thus, the claim is indefinite because it is not possible to ascertain with a reasonable degree of certainty what subject matter is encompassed by the claim and what subject matter is excluded thereby.
Claim 23 recites “wherein the first resilient member (222) is configured to apply a resilient force to the support frame (220) such that one moxibustion device (211) adjacent to a coupling position of the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200) is moved upward” (ll. 5-7). Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 10, ll. 10-33 of the patent specification. However, the specification fails to disclose and the drawings fail to illustrate the specific manner in which the first resilient member 222 is (i) structured, (ii) installed so as to interact with the support frame 220 and the support unit 200, and (iii) configured to apply a resilient force to the support frame 220 such that one moxibustion device 211 is moved upward. Absent the necessary supporting disclosure, the claim is rendered indefinite.
In claim 23, the term “one moxibustion device (211)” (l. 6) is indefinite because it is unclear how this recited moxibustion device relates to the moxibustion device previously introduced in claim 1 (see l. 10). Are these the same devices or different devices. Further, the term “one moxibustion device” in claim 23 implies that this element is one of plural such devices, but the claim does not recite plural such devices.
Claim 23 recites “…such that one moxibustion device (211) adjacent to a coupling position of the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200) is moved upward” (ll. 6-7). This subject matter is indefinite because it is inaccurate. As shown in Figs. 10A, 12A and 13, the moxibustion device (211) is not “adjacent to a coupling position of the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200)”.
Claim 23 recites “…such that one moxibustion device (211) adjacent to a coupling position of the conveyance unit (100) and the support unit (200) is moved upward” (ll. 6-7). This subject matter is indefinite because it fails to define when and/or how the moxibustion device “is moved upward”. The claim language inaccurately implies that the moxibustion device is always moved upward.
In claim 24, the term “the moxibustion device (210)” (ll. 3-4, 5-6, and 6) is inconsistent with the prior recitation in claim 23 of “one moxibustion device (211)” (l. 6). Is the moxibustion device 210 of claim 24 the same device as the moxibustion device 211 of claim 23? If so, why are different reference numbers used? If not, how are they related?
Claim 24 recites “a second resilient member (214) configured to apply a resilient force to the moxibustion device (210) tending to move the moxibustion device (210) upward, wherein the second resilient member (214) is installed at the temperature detecting member (213)” (ll. 5-7). Such an arrangement is discussed in broad terms at col. 10, ll. 34-51 of the patent specification. However, the specification fails to disclose and the drawings fail to illustrate the specific manner in which the second resilient member 214 is (i) structured, (ii) installed so as to interact with the moxibustion device 210 and the temperature detecting member 213, and (iii) configured to apply a resilient force to the moxibustion device 210 tending to move the moxibustion device upward. Absent the necessary supporting disclosure, the claim is rendered indefinite.
Claim 24 recites “wherein the second resilient member (214) is installed at the temperature detecting member (213)” (ll. 6-7). This subject matter is indefinite because it is unclear what structural relationships are encompassed by the unconventional phrase “installed at”. Does this require the second resilient member to be installed on the temperature detecting member? Does it encompass other relationships between these elements? Thus, the claim is indefinite because it is not possible to ascertain with a reasonable degree of certainty what subject matter is encompassed by the claim and what subject matter is excluded thereby.
Claim 25 recites “wherein the support unit (200) and the driving member (330) are positioned on opposite sides of the plate-shaped body of the conveyance unit (100) such that the plate-shaped body of the conveyance unit separates the support unit (200) from the driving member (330).” See the above discussion of the original disclosure’s description of the second disclosed embodiment shown in Figs. 8-16, including the explanation concerning the recited “plate-shaped body”. Further, the specification describes this second disclosed embodiment as having connecting members 420 installed at the support unit 200, with one end of the connecting members 420 extending downward to be inserted into the conveyance unit 100. See col. 12, ll. 33-52; Figs. 10A, 12A and 13. As a result of this configuration, one end of the connecting members 420 are not separated from the driving member 330 by the body of the conveyance unit 100. Thus, the claim is indefinite due to the inconsistency between the claim and the disclosure.
Listing of Prior Art
The following is a listing of the prior art cited in this Office action together with the shorthand reference used for each document (listed alphabetically):
“Chen”
US Publication No. 2005/0010144 A1
“Choi”
KR Publication No. 2006-0042367 A (with translation)
“Fleetwood”
US Patent No. 5,165,390
“Heuser et al.”
US Patent No. 3,882,856
“Inada et al.”
US Patent No. 6,832,991 B1
“Kim ‘290”
KR Publication No. 10-0435290 B1 (with translation)
“Kim ‘508”
KR Publication No. 10-0853508 B1 (with translation)
“Kim ‘531”
US Publication No. 2005/0049531 A1
“Kost”
US Patent No. 6,866,644 B1
“Lee et al.”
CN Publication No. 1714768 A (with translation)
“Marcantoni”
US Publication No. 2004/0024335 A1
“Moon”
KR Publication No. 2004-0011260 A (with translation)
“No”
KR Publication No. 2001-0096093 A (with translation)
“Shiraishi”
US Publication No. 2007/0299377 A1
“Siedentop”
US Patent No. 3,238,936
Pre-AIA – First to Invent
The present reissue application does not contain claims to a claimed invention having an effective filing date on or after March 16, 2013. Accordingly, this application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for any prior art 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
GROUND 6: Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 9, 15, 18 and 19 (as best understood) are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Marcantoni in view of Lee et al.
With respect to claim 1, Marcantoni discloses a massage device 1 comprising:
A conveyance unit that includes a frame 4 having rollers 13 that travel in rails 12a of a guide frame 12, with the frame 4 coupled to a spindle 15 driven by a motor 14 such that the conveyance unit is configured to move in a lengthwise direction along the spindle 15. See Fig. 1; ¶¶ 0018, 0027-0028. As shown in Fig. 1, the frame 4 includes (i) outer frame members defining a rectangular perimeter of the frame 4, (ii) a central through-hole surrounded by the outer frame members, and (iii) an upstanding frame member (to which reference number 4 is directed in Figs. 1-4) secured to two of the outer frame members and extending across the central through-hole.
A support unit 5 having (i) a first side rotatably coupled to the conveyance unit frame 4 by a first shaft 2, and (ii) a second side. See Figs. 1-5; ¶¶ 0018, 0020.
A support frame 6 installed on an upper end of the second side of the support unit 5 via a pivot. See Figs. 1-5; ¶¶ 0018, 0026.
Massage rollers 6a, 6b mounted on opposite ends of the support frame 6. See Figs. 1-5; ¶ 0026.
An elevation unit including a motor 18 installed on the conveyance unit frame 4, a spindle 19 driven by the motor 18, a linkage 7 coupling the support unit 5 to the second shaft 3, and a slide 16 mounted on and driven by the spindle 19, with the first shaft 2 mounted on the slide 16 such that reciprocation of the slide 16 and first shaft 2 along the spindle 19 adjusts an angle of inclination of the support unit 5 by raising and lowering the second side of the support unit 5. See Figs. 1-5; ¶¶ 0018, 0024, 0028-0034. Fig. 4 shows the lowered, resting position of the support unit 5, and Fig. 5 shows its raised, working position. Based on a comparison of Figs. 1 and 4, it is evident that lower portions of the motor 18 and the slide 16 pass through the lower extent of the central through-hole of the conveyance unit frame 4. Thus, a portion of the elevation unit passes through the central through-hole when the support unit 5 is settled on the conveyance unit.
With respect to claim 1, Marcantoni broadly discloses use of the massage device in an item of furniture for sitting or lying on. See ¶ 0001. More specifically, Marcantoni discloses that the guide frame 12 is arranged, for example, in the backrest of a massage chair. See ¶¶ 0002, 0027. Based on this disclosure, the massage device is “configured to move along a mat”, as broadly claimed, because (i) the padded portion of the backrest of a massage chair can be considered to constitute a mat, (ii) an item of furniture for lying on can also be considered to constitute a mat, and (iii) the massage device is structured in such a way that it is fully capable of being installed within or below a mat.
With respect to claim 1, Marcantoni fails to disclose that the massage rollers 6a, 6b constitute a moxibustion device.
Lee et al. teaches a thermotherapy device 100 comprising:
A conveyance unit 200 that includes a body 202 having rollers 150 that travel in rails 140, with the body 202 driven by a motor 120 via a belt 130 such that the conveyance unit 200 is configured to move in a lengthwise direction. See Figs. 2-5 and 7; ¶¶ 0063, 0066, 0070-0073.9 The rails 140 support the conveyance unit 200 within/below a mat of a bed-type thermotherapy device. See ¶¶ 0002-0005, 0025, 0027, 0035, 0061-0063, 0072, 0074.
A support unit 204 installed on an upper side of the body 202. See Figs. 2-5; ¶¶ 0026, 0066.
A support frame 208 installed on an upper side of the support unit 204 via a pivot shaft 210. See Figs. 2-6; ¶¶ 0026, 0066.
Roller-type moxibustion devices 110 mounted on opposite ends of the support frame 208. See Figs. 2-6; ¶¶ 0026, 0063, 0066. The moxibustion devices 110 are moved back and forth by the conveyance unit 200 to perform warm moxibustion and acupressure therapy on a patient’s spine or on other upper/lower body portions of the patient. ¶¶ 0004-0005, 0025, 0033, 0063, 0074, 0081.
From the teachings of Lee et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Marcantoni by constructing the rollers as roller-type moxibustion devices because this enables the device to be used to perform warm moxibustion and acupressure therapy on a patient’s spine or on other upper/lower body portions of the patient. This modification, thus, adds functionality to the massage device of Marcantoni.
With respect to claim 2, Marcantoni’s slide 16 constitutes a guide member, and the spindle 19 constitutes a rotary member in contact with the guide member.
With respect to claim 4, Marcantoni’s slide 16 constitutes one guide member. The frame 4 has a similar structure (engaging the spindle 15) that constitutes another guide member. The spindles 15, 19 constitute plural rotary members.
With respect to claim 5, Marcantoni’s motor 18 constitutes a driving member that rotates the spindle (rotary member) 19. While not specifically discussed, Figs. 1-5 of Marcantoni show the motor 18 oriented perpendicular to the spindle 19, with a gear box transmitting rotational force from the output shaft of the motor 18 to the spindle (rotary shaft) 19.
With respect to claim 9, in Marcantoni, the rotational coupling of the support unit 5 to the conveyance unit frame 4 via the first shaft 2 constitutes a hinge unit, as broadly recited.
With respect to claim 15, Figs. 4-5 of Marcantoni show that the rotational coupling of the support unit 5 to the conveyance unit frame 4 via the first shaft 2 is positioned lower than an upper end surface of the support unit 5.
With respect to claim 18, the central through-hole of Marcantoni’s conveyance unit frame 4 defines an accommodating space into which the support unit 5 enters. See Figs. 1 and 4-5.
With respect to claim 19, Fig. 1 illustrates the outer frame members of Marcantoni’s conveyance unit frame 4 as having an L-shaped cross-section (like conventional angle iron) such that one leg of the L-shaped cross-section of each outer frame member constitutes a reinforcement rib. The outer frame members (with their reinforcement ribs) surround the central through-hole, and two of the outer frame members extend in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit.
GROUND 7: Claim 5 (as best understood) is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Marcantoni in view of Lee et al. (GROUND 6) and further in view of Heuser et al. and Shiraishi.
As explained in GROUND 6, the disclosure of Marcantoni at least suggests that a gear box is installed between and transmits rotational force from the output shaft of the motor 18 to the spindle (rotary shaft) 19. If Marcantoni is considered to fail to fully teach such subject matter, then Heuser et al. and Shiraishi make up for this deficiency.
Heuser et al. teaches a motor 58 oriented perpendicular to a spindle 56, with a gear box 59 installed between and transmitting rotational force from the output shaft of the motor 58 to the spindle 56. See Figs. 2-3; col. 4, ll. 43-51.
Shiraishi teaches a motor 113 oriented perpendicular to a spindle 110, with a gear box 112 installed between and transmitting rotational force from the output shaft of the motor 113 to the spindle 110. See Figs. 3 and 5; See Fig. 1; ¶¶ 0075-0076.
From the teachings of Heuser et al. and Shiraishi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Marcantoni by installing a gear box between the motor 18 and the spindle 19 in order to convert rotational movement of the motor in a first direction into rotational movement of the spindle in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction (as is illustrated in the drawing figures of Marcantoni). Further, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the use of a gear box enables the speed of the spindle to be set at a desired speed relative to the speed of the motor.
GROUND 8: Claim 7 (as best understood) is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Marcantoni in view of Lee et al. (GROUND 6) and further in view of Kim ‘290.
Marcantoni fails to teach the limit switch and detection protrusion required by claim 7.
Kim ‘290 teaches a thermotherapy device 100 comprising:
A conveyance unit that includes a frame 165 having rollers 160 that travel in rails 150 within a mat 110, with an elevation guide 170 extending upward from the frame 165. See Figs. 1-3; ¶¶ 32-34, 37.10
A support frame (see Fig. 2) installed on an upper surface of a support plate (see Fig. 2), and acupressure rollers 120 mounted on opposite ends of the support frame. See Fig. 2; ¶¶ 32, 34, 43.
An elevation unit including a guide member in the form of a rack gear 175 and a support column 180 that extend downward from the support plate (see Fig. 2) and are received in the elevation guide 170, a motor 140 installed on the conveyance unit frame 165, and a rotary gear 185 driven by the output shaft of the motor 140, with the rotary gear 185 engaging the rack gear 175 to raise and lower the support plate (see Fig. 2). See Figs. 2-3; ¶¶ 32, 34, 37.
A detection projection 190 installed on the support column 180 and limit switches 191-193 installed on an elevation guide 170 such that a lowering operation of the elevation unit is stopped when the detection projection 190 enters (actuates) one of the limit switches 191-193. See Figs. 2-3; ¶¶ 34-35, 38-42.
From the teachings of Kim ‘290, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Marcantoni by providing limit switches on the conveyance unit that are actuated by a detection protrusion on the support unit in order to accurately and precisely control the operation of the elevation unit in order to accomplish the desired therapy on different body parts of the patient.
GROUND 9: Claim 8 (as best understood) is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Marcantoni in view of Lee et al. and Kim ‘290 (GROUND 8) and further in view of Moon and Choi.
Marcantoni fails to teach the rotation detection member required by claim 8.
Moon teaches a thermotherapy device comprising:
A conveyance unit that includes a frame (see Figs. 3-4) having rollers 210b-1 that travel in rails 110a within a mat 100/120, with an elevation guide 210a extending upward from the frame. See Figs. 2-4; ¶¶ 21, 24-26, 35, 37, 39-41.11
A support frame 270a installed on an upper surface of a support block 220a, and thermotherapy rollers 270 mounted on the support frame 270a. See Figs. 3-5; ¶¶ 11, 24, 30-31, 38.
An elevation unit including a guide member (see Figs. 3-4) extending from the support block 220a through a slit 290a in the elevation guide 210a, a motor 290d installed on the conveyance unit frame (see Figs. 3-4), a spindle 290e driven by the output shaft of the motor 290d, a gear 290c driven by the spindle 290e, and a cam 290b carried by the gear 290c for engaging the guide member (see Figs. 3-4) to raise and lower the support block 220a. See Figs. 3-4; ¶¶ 24, 26-27, 37, 39-40, 42-43.
A revolution encoder (rotation detection member) 260 installed at the motor 290d to detect a raising operation of the support block 250. See Figs. 3-4; ¶¶ 28, 44. A controller relies on the input of the encoder 260 to precisely control the vertical movement of the elevation unit so that the thermotherapy rollers 270 apply a constant pressure to the patient as the conveyance unit moves horizontally along the patient’s spine. See ¶¶ 10, 16, 33, 37, 40, 50.
Choi teaches a thermotherapy device comprising:
A conveyance unit that includes a frame 30 having rollers 32 that travel in rails 11 within a mat (see Fig. 1). See Figs. 1-4; ¶¶ 17-18.12
A support plate 51 having guide members 54 extending through holes in the conveyance unit frame 30. See Figs. 1-3; ¶¶ 17, 19.
Rollers 52 and a thermotherapy device 1 installed on an upper surface of the support plate 51. See Figs. 1-3; ¶¶ 17, 19.
An elevation unit 50 including a spindle 43 extending from the support plate 51 through a hole in the conveyance unit frame 30, a motor 41 installed on the conveyance unit frame 30, and a reduction gear train 42 driven by the output shaft of the motor 41 and driving the spindle 43 to raise and lower the support plate 51. See Figs. 1-4; ¶¶ 17-19.
A rotation detection sensor 44 installed at the gear train 42 (and near the motor 41) to detect a raising operation of the support plate 51. See Fig. 4; ¶¶ 19. A controller relies on the input of the sensor 44 to (i) prevent excessive and unsafe elevation of the support plate 51, and (ii) precisely control the vertical movement of the elevation unit 50 so that the thermotherapy can be performed based upon the patient’s body shape to increase the heat treatment and acupressure applied to different parts of the patient’s body. See ¶¶ 17, 19-20.
From the teachings of Moon and Choi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Marcantoni by providing the elevation unit’s motor with a rotation detection sensor because this enables the elevation unit to be precisely controlled so as to (i) prevent excessive and unsafe elevation of the thermotherapy rollers, and (ii) adjust the position of the rollers based upon the patient’s body shape to increase the heat treatment and acupressure applied to different parts of the patient’s body.
GROUND 10: Claims 11 and 12 (as best understood) are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Marcantoni in view of Lee et al. (GROUND 6) and further in view of Kim ‘508 and Inada et al.
The Marcantoni and Lee et al. combination fails to teach that the roller-type moxibustion device located closer to the coupling position of the support unit to the conveyance unit moves upwardly a larger distance than the other roller-type moxibustion device.
Kim ‘508 teaches a thermotherapy device comprising:
A conveyance unit that includes a plate 122 that travels in rails (see Fig. 2) within a mat 102, 110. See Figs. 1-5; ¶ 25.13
Support arms 138 each having (i) a first side rotatably coupled to the conveyance unit plate 122 by a hinge unit, and (ii) a second side. See Figs. 2-5; ¶ 27.
A support frame 132 installed on the second sides the support arms 138 via a pivot shaft (see Fig. 5). See Figs. 2-5; ¶¶ 25-27.
Thermotherapy rollers 124 mounted in pairs on the support frame 132. See Figs. 2-5; ¶¶ 25-26.
An elevation unit 130 that raises and lowers the second sides of the support arms 138 and the support frame 132. See Figs. 2-5; ¶¶ 25-27. As shown in Figs. 4b and 5, the support frame 132 pivots relative to the support arms 138 such that, for each pair of rollers 124, the roller 124 located closer to the coupling position of the support arms 138 to the conveyance unit plate 122 moves upwardly a larger distance than the other roller 124 (during the raising operation of the elevation unit 130).
Inada et al. teaches a massage device comprising:
A conveyance unit that includes a frame 14 or 106 having rollers 113 (see also the rollers shown in Fig. 5) that travel within rails in a seat back 4 or 103. See Figs. 4-5 and 21-23; col. 21, ll. 21-48; col. 32, ll. 16-57.
Support arms 25 or 124 each having (i) a first side rotatably coupled to the conveyance unit frame 14 or 106, and (ii) a second side. See Figs. 1, 5-6, 8 and 21-22; col. 21, ll. 49-55; col. 33, ll. 20-31.
Support frames 26 or 125 installed on the second sides the support arms 25 or 124 via a pivot 48. See Figs. 1-3, 5, 6, 8-12 and 19-22; col. 23, ll. 27-35 and 56-61; col. 33, ll. 20-31 and 46-64.
Massage rollers 8, 9 or 126 mounted on opposite ends of the support frames 26 or 125. See Figs. 1, 3-6, 8-11 and 19-22; col. 23, ll. 36-55; col. 33, ll. 20-31.
Springs 55 or 127 biasing the support frames 26 or 125 to rotate in the direction of arrow C in Fig. 1 such that the massage rollers 8, 9 or 126 follow the contour of the patient’s body. See Figs. 1, 8 and 21; col. 23, l. 62 to col. 24, l. 8; col. 33, ll. 54-58. As shown in Fig. 8, the support frames 26 or 125 pivot relative to the support arms 25 or 124 such that, for each pair of rollers 8, 9 or 126, one of the rollers moves away from its support arm 25 or 124 a larger distance than the other roller 124 when the rollers reach a certain body portion (e.g., the shoulder) of the patient, which enables a controller to determine when the rollers have reached that certain body portion. See col. 24, ll. 26-43; col. 26, ll. 40-62. In the embodiments of Figs. 19-23, one of the rollers 8, 9 or 126 in each roller pair is positioned a greater distance from the pivot center O1 of the support frame 26 or 125, which also contributes to one roller moving a larger distance than the other roller.
From the teachings of Kim ‘508 and Inada et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to further modify Marcantoni by constructing the device such that the roller-type moxibustion device located closer to the coupling position of the support unit to the conveyance unit moves upwardly a larger distance than the other roller-type moxibustion device. From Kim ‘508, the skilled artisan would appreciate that such a configuration is desirable because it helps maintain the orientation of the rollers as the elevation unit pivots the support arm(s). From Inada et al., the skilled artisan would appreciate that such a configuration allows the rollers to remain in contact with the curvy contours of a patient’s body while also enabling a controller to determine when the rollers have reached a certain body portion.
GROUND 11: Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 15, 18 and 19 (as best understood) are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Heuser et al. in view of Lee et al.
With respect to claim 1, Heuser et al. discloses a massage device 10 comprising:
A conveyance unit 22 that includes a rectangular frame 23 having rollers 24 that travel in rails 18, 19 of a table 12 having a pad 13 and cover 16, with the frame 23 carrying a pawl 62 coupled to a spindle 56 that is driven by a motor 58 such that the conveyance unit 22 is configured to move in a lengthwise direction along the spindle 56. See Figs. 1-4; col. 2, l. 46 to col. 3, l. 23; col. 4, ll. 40-65. As shown in Figs. 1-2, the rectangular frame 23 includes (i) outer frame members formed from angle members (that is, conventional angle iron) defining a rectangular perimeter of the frame 23, (ii) a central through-hole surrounded by the outer frame members, and (iii) a frame extension 25 extending upward from one end of the rectangular frame 23. See col. 3, ll. 8-9 and 18-22.
A support unit including a cross plate 32 extending between pivot arms 30, 31, with the pivot arms 30, 31 having (i) first sides rotatably coupled to the frame extension 25 by a first pivot shaft 29 mounted in bearings 26, 27, and (ii) a second side. See Figs. 2-3; col. 3, ll. 22-27.
A support frame including plates 36, 37 installed on upper surfaces of the second sides of the support unit pivot arms 30, 31 via a second pivot shaft 33a mounted in bearings 34, 35. See Figs. 2-3; col. 3, ll. 27-54.
Massage rollers 38-40 mounted on apexes of the support frame plates 36, 37. See Figs. 2-3; col 3, ll. 31-54; col. 4, ll. 1-14.
An elevation unit including a motor-driven winch 52 installed on the conveyance unit frame 23, a fulcrum arm 51 extending downward from the support unit cross plate 32, and a cable 53 and spring 54 coupling the fulcrum arm 51 to the winch 52 such that the winch 52 is operated to adjust an angle of inclination (see arrow A in Fig. 2) of the support unit pivot arms 30, 31 by raising and lowering the second sides of the pivot arms 30, 31. See Figs. 2-3; col. 4, ll. 15-31. Fig. 2 shows the lowered position of the support unit, with the fulcrum arm 51 passing through the central through-hole of the conveyance unit frame 23. Thus, a portion of the elevation unit passes through the central through-hole when the support unit is settled on the conveyance unit 22.
With respect to claim 1, the table 12 of Heuser et al., with its pad 13 and cover 16, constitutes a mat.
With respect to claim 1, Heuser et al. fails to disclose that the massage rollers 38-40 constitute a moxibustion device.
See the explanation of the teachings of Lee et al. in GROUND 6.
From the teachings of Lee et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Heuser et al. by constructing the rollers as roller-type moxibustion devices because this enables the device to be used to perform warm moxibustion and acupressure therapy on a patient’s spine or on other upper/lower body portions of the patient. This modification, thus, adds functionality to the massage device of Heuser et al.
With respect to claim 2, the cable 53 of Heuser et al. constitutes a guide member, and the fulcrum arm 51 constitutes a rotary member in contact with the guide member.
With respect to claim 4, the cable 53 of Heuser et al. constitutes one guide member, the fulcrum arm 51 constitutes one rotary member, the pawl 62 constitutes another guide member, and the spindle 56 constitutes another rotary member.
With respect to claim 5, the motor 58 of Heuser et al. constitutes a driving member that rotates the spindle (rotary member) 56. Heuser et al. further discloses a gear box 59 installed between and transmitting rotational force from the output shaft of the motor 58 to the spindle (rotary shaft) 56. See Figs. 2-3; col. 4, ll. 43-51.
With respect to claim 7, Heuser et al. discloses a limit switch (not shown) at the conveyance unit 22 and a detection protrusion 55 installed at the cable (guide member) 53, and when the detection protrusion 55 enters the limit switch, a lowering operation of the support unit pivot arms 30, 31 is stopped. See col. 4, ll. 32-35.
With respect to claim 9, in Heuser et al., the first pivot shaft 29 mounted in bearings 26, 27 constitutes a hinge unit, as broadly recited.
With respect to claim 15, Fig. 2 of Heuser et al. shows that the support unit pivot arms 30, 31 angle upward from the first pivot shaft 29, and further shows that the rotational coupling defined by the pivot shaft 29 and bearings 26, 27 is positioned lower than upper end surfaces of the bearings 34, 35 (which can be considered to be part of the support unit).
With respect to claim 18, the central through-hole of the conveyance unit frame 23 of Heuser et al. defines an accommodating space into which the fulcrum arm 51 enters. See Figs. 2-3. Claim 18 does not preclude the fulcrum arm 51 from being considered to be part of the support unit.
With respect to claim 19, as explained above, Heuser et al. discloses that the rectangular frame 23 includes outer frame members formed from angle members (that is, conventional angle iron). Such angle members have an L-shaped cross-section such that one leg of the L-shaped cross-section of each outer frame member constitutes a reinforcement rib. See Figs. 2-4. The outer frame members (with their reinforcement ribs) surround the central through-hole, and two of the outer frame members extend in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit 22.
GROUND 12: Claim 8 (as best understood) is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Heuser et al. in view of Lee et al. (GROUND 11) and further in view of Moon and Choi.
Heuser et al. fails to teach the rotation detection member required by claim 8.
See the explanation of the teachings of Moon and Choi in GROUND 9.
From the teachings of Moon and Choi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Heuser et al. by providing the elevation unit’s motor with a rotation detection sensor because this enables the elevation unit to be precisely controlled so as to (i) prevent excessive and unsafe elevation of the thermotherapy rollers, and (ii) adjust the position of the rollers based upon the patient’s body shape to increase the heat treatment and acupressure applied to different parts of the patient’s body.
GROUND 13: Claims 10 and 15-18 (as best understood) are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Heuser et al. in view of Lee et al. (GROUND 11) and further in view of Shiraishi.
As explained in GROUND 11, Heuser et al. discloses the first pivot shaft 29 mounted in bearings 26, 27, which constitutes a hinge unit. However, Heuser et al. fails to teach a hinge unit including a protrusion member, a connecting member and a hinge member, as defined in claims 10, 16 and 17.
Shiraishi teaches a massage device 6 comprising:
A conveyance unit 70 that includes a frame 71 having rollers 72 that travel in rails 73, with the conveyance unit 70 coupled to a spindle 77 that is driven by a motor 76 such that the conveyance unit 70 is configured to move in a lengthwise direction along the spindle 77. See Figs. 1-2, 5 and 11; ¶¶ 0068-0071. The conveyance unit frame 71 includes a first hinge block (protrusion member) 101 installed proximate a side of the conveyance unit 70. See Figs. 1-2; ¶ 0073.
A support unit 3 having (i) a first side on which a second hinge block (connecting member) 102 is installed so as to be adjacent to the first hinge block (protrusion member) 101, and (ii) a second side. See Figs. 1-2, 5-6 and 10-11; ¶¶ 0072-0073.
A hinge member 103 in the form of a hinge pin passing through pin holes in the first hinge block (protrusion member) 101 and second hinge block (connecting member) 102 to form a hinge unit 100. See Figs. 1-2; ¶¶ 0072-0073.
A support frame 10 installed on an upper surface of the support unit 3 via a pivot shaft 5. See Figs. 1-2, 4-8 and 11; ¶¶ 0086-0088.
Massage rollers 11 mounted on opposite ends of the support frame 10. See Figs. 1-2, 4-8 and 11; ¶¶ 0088-0089.
An elevation unit 105 including a motor 113 that drives cams 111 that in turn reciprocate sliders 116 so as to adjust an angle of inclination of the support unit 3 by raising and lowering the second side of the support unit 3. See Figs. 1-3, 5 and 11; ¶¶ 0074-0080.
From the teachings of Shiraishi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to modify Heuser et al. by replacing the first pivot shaft 29 mounted in bearings 26, 27 with the hinge unit taught by Shiraishi (i.e., a protrusion member on the conveyance unit, a connecting member on the support unit, and a hinge pin passing through holes in the protrusion and connecting members). Such a modification involving the mere substitution of one well-known alternative structure for another (i.e., one well-known hinge unit for another) is recognized to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art when, as here, the modification yields only a predictable result. Further, Shiraishi’s hinge unit is simpler and less expensive because it does not include the particular bearings of the hinge unit of Heuser et al.
With respect to claim 15, see the explanation in GROUND 11. Further, Shiraishi’s hinge unit is configured such that the hinge block 102 of the support unit 3 extends from the support unit 3 in an opposite direction from the support frame 10. Thus, when Shiraishi’s hinge unit is applied to Heuser et al., the hinge block of the support unit will extend downward such that the hinge pin is disposed at a position lower than an upper end surface of the support unit.
With respect to claim 18, see the explanation in GROUND 11.
Pertinent Prior Art
The following prior art is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Chen discloses a massage device comprising:
A conveyance member 6 having rollers 68 that travel in rails 53, with a motor 61 driving rotary gears 65 along rack gears 52 positioned adjacent the rails 53 such that the conveyance member 6 is configured to move in a lengthwise direction.
A support unit 7 having a first side rotatable coupled to the conveyance member 6 and a second side with a rack gear 96 mounted thereon.
Support frames 76 pivotally supported on the support unit 7.
Massage rollers 77 mounted on opposite ends of the support frames 76.
An elevation unit including the rack gear 96, a roller gear 95 engaging the rear gear 96, and a motor 91 driving the roller gear 95 to drive the rack gear 96 and thereby raise and lower the support unit 7.
Fleetwood discloses a therapy device comprising:
A conveyance member including a rectangular frame 122 having rollers 124, 126, 128, 130 that travel in tracks 78, 80 such that the conveyance member is configured to move along a mat (see Fig. 1) in a lengthwise direction.
Limit switches 53, 55 positioned along the track 78 for reversing movement of the conveyance member.
A support unit 134 having (i) a first side rotatably coupled to the conveyance member frame 122 by a hinge pin 132, and (ii) a second side.
Massage rollers 22, 24 mounted on the support unit 134.
An elevation unit including a spring 148 for raising the support unit 134 by pivoting it upward about the hinge pin 132.
Kim ‘531 discloses a thermotherapy device comprising:
A conveyance member 28 having rollers 42 that travel in rails 40 such that the conveyance member 28 is configured to move in a lengthwise direction, with an elevation guide (see Figs. 2-4D) extending upward from a frame of the conveyance member 28.
A support unit 52 having an elevation guide member 58 extending downward therefrom and received in the elevation guide (see Figs. 2-4D) of the conveyance member 28.
Support frames 90, 92 installed on an upper surface of the support unit 52 via pivots 94, 96.
Thermotherapy rollers 12 mounted on opposite ends of the support frames 90, 92.
An elevation unit including a rack gear 66 formed on the guide member 58, a roller gear 48 engaging the rear gear 66, and a motor 50 driving the roller gear 48 to drive the rack gear 66 and thereby raise and lower the support unit 52. As shown in Fig. 4A, the guide member 58 passes through a central through-hole in the conveyance member 28 when the support unit 52 is in its lowered position.
Kost discloses a thermotherapy device comprising:
A conveyance unit 48 having guides 54 that travel along guide rods 50 such that the conveyance unit 48 is configured to move in a lengthwise direction. As shown in Figs. 1 and 3-4, the conveyance unit 48 has longitudinal frame elements 52 connected by lateral elements 96, 100 so as to define a central through-hole.
A support unit 64 having (i) a first side rotatably coupled to the conveyance unit 48 by a reciprocating hinge assembly 84, and (ii) a second side.
A thermotherapy device 14 mounted on the second side of the support unit 64.
An elevation unit including a handle 104 and crank 106 installed on the conveyance unit 48, a spindle 88 driven by the handle 104 and crank 106, links 78 coupling the support unit 64 to the conveyance unit 48, and the reciprocating hinge assembly 84 mounted on and driven by the spindle 88 such that reciprocation of the hinge assembly 84 along the spindle 88 adjusts an angle of inclination of the support unit 64 by raising and lowering the second side of the support unit 64.
With respect to claim 24, Lee et al. teaches: a temperature detecting member 240 for detecting a temperature of the roller-type moxibustion device 110; and a resilient member in the form of a coiled torsion spring 230 having a first end installed at the temperature detecting member 240 such that the spring 230 applies a resilient force tending to move the temperature detecting member 240 (and, thus, the roller-type device 110) upward. See Figs. 5-6; ¶¶ 0064, 0067-0069. Lee et al. explains that the temperature detecting member 240 provides for the direct measurement and feedback of the surface temperature of the roller-type moxibustion device 110, which allows for better control of the thermal therapy applied to the patient. See ¶¶ 0021, 0032, 0069.
No discloses a therapy device comprising:
A conveyance member 620 having rollers 621 that travel in rails (see Fig. 8) such that the conveyance member 620 is configured to move in a lengthwise direction, with an elevation guide (see Fig. 8) extending upward from a frame of the conveyance member 620.
A support unit 630 having an elevation guide member (see Fig. 8) extending downward therefrom and received in the elevation guide (see Fig. 8) of the conveyance member 620.
A thermotherapy device 20 installed on an upper surface of the support unit 630.
An elevation unit including a spindle 611 extending downward from the support unit 630, and a motor 610 driving the spindle 611 to raise and lower the support unit 630. As shown in Fig. 8, the spindle 611 passes through a central through-hole in the conveyance member 620 such that the motor 610 is positioned below the conveyance member 620.
Siedentop discloses a therapy device comprising:
A conveyance member 502 having rollers 506 that travel in tracks 500 such that the conveyance member 502 is configured to move along a mat 700 in a lengthwise direction.
A support unit 520 having (i) a first side rotatably coupled to the conveyance member 502 by a pivot 527, and (ii) a second side.
A support frame 540 installed on an upper end of the second side of the support unit 520 via a pivot 542.
Therapy rollers 544, 547 mounted on opposite ends of the support frame 540.
An elevation unit including a pneumatic cylinder 600 installed on the conveyance member 502, with a piston rod 608 extending from the cylinder 600 and coupled to the second side of the support unit 520 such that the elevation unit is configured to adjust an angle of inclination of the support unit 520 by raising or lowering the second side of the support unit 520. As shown in Fig. 17, the cylinder 600 with its piston rod 608 passes through a hole in a rear plate 510 of the conveyance member 502.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 8, 11 and 21 are objected to because:
In claim 6, “is installed” (l. 2) should read “[is] installed”.
In claim 8, “member configured” (l.3) should read “member (331) configured”.
In claim 8, “is installed” (l. 4) should read “[is] installed”.
In claim 11, “device (211) is a first moxibustion device” (l. 2) should read “device [(211)] (210) is a first moxibustion device (211)”.
In claim 21, “is formed” (l. 2) should read “[is] formed”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The specification is objected to for the following reasons.
The specification describes element 210 shown in the drawings as a “moxibustion device”. This description appears to be inaccurate for the reasons given in GROUND 5 above.
The specification provides confusing, inaccurate and/or duplicative brief descriptions of Figs. 5-9. See col. 4, ll. 16-29; col. 8, ll. 44-49.
The brief descriptions of Figs. 14 and 15 are inaccurate because (i) these figures do not show “exploded views”, (ii) Fig. 14 shows the conveyance unit but is described as showing support unit, and (iii) Fig. 15 shows the support unit but is described as showing the conveyance unit. See col. 4, ll. 44-48; col. 13, ll. 50-55.
Element 210 is described inaccurately as a singular “moxibustion device”, and is further described as including a singular “roller type moxibustion device”. See col. 5, ll. 50-55. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include both a cap type moxibustion device 210 and a plurality of roller type moxibustion devices 210. See Figs. 2-10A, 12A and 13; col. 5, ll. 51-55; col. 9, ll. 23-25. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular moxibustion device 210 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 6, ll. 10-11 and 30.
Element 430 is described inaccurately as a singular “hinge member”. See col. 5, ll. 62-67. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two hinge units 400, and the hinge units 400 each include a hinge member 430. See Figs. 2-3 and 10A; col. 8, ll. 16-22. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular hinge member 430 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 8, l. 30; col. 12, ll. 54-56.
The support unit 200 is inaccurately described as being “fixedly coupled” to the conveyance unit 100. See col. 6, ll. 22-25. Since the support unit 200 is coupled to the conveyance unit 100 by the hinge units 400, the support unit 200 hinges/pivots/rotates relative to the conveyance unit 100. Such a coupling is inconsistent with the “fixedly coupled” description.
Element 310 is described inaccurately as a singular “guide member”. See col. 6, ll. 31-32. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two guide members 310. See Figs. 3-6, 9, 11 and 15; col. 7, ll. 27-32. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular guide member 310 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 6, ll. 37, 39, 45, 49-52, 55, 61 and 64-65.
Element 320 is described inaccurately as a singular “rotary member”. See col. 6, ll. 31-32. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two rotary members 320, i.e., one rotary member 320 for each guide member 310. See Figs. 3-6, 9, 11 and 14. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular rotary member 320 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 6, ll. 34, 36, 39-41, 44, 48 and 52.
Element 311 is described inaccurately as a singular “gear surface”. See col. 6, ll. 51-53. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two guide members 310, with each guide member 310 having a gear surface 311. See Figs. 3-6, 9, 11 and 15; col. 7, ll. 27-32. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular gear surface 311 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 6, ll. 54-55, 57 and 59.
Element 321 is described inaccurately as a singular “pinion”. See col. 6, ll. 51-53. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two rotary members 320 (see explanation above), with each rotary member 320 being in the form of a pinion 321. See Figs. 3-6, 9, 11 and 14. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular pinion 321 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 6, ll. 56 and 57.
Element 400 is described inaccurately as a singular “hinge unit”. See col. 8, ll. 15-16 and 23-25. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two hinge units 400. See Figs. 2-3 and 10A; col. 8, ll. 16-22. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular hinge unit 400 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 12, ll. 34-35.
The hinge units 300 are inaccurately described as functioning to “rotatably fix” the support unit 200 to the conveyance unit 100. See col. 8, ll. 23-25. See the explanation with respect to “fixedly coupled” above.
Element 410 is described inaccurately as a singular “protrusion member”. See col. 8, ll. 26-28. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two hinge units 400, and the hinge units 400 each include two protrusion members/frame 411. See Figs. 2-3 and 10A; col. 8, ll. 16-22 and 26-32. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular protrusion member 410 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 12, l. 47.
Element 420 is described inaccurately as a singular “connecting member”. See col. 8, ll. 28-32. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two hinge units 400, and the hinge units 400 each include a connecting member 420. See Figs. 2-3 and 10A; col. 8, ll. 16-22. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular connecting member 420 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 12, ll. 46 and 49-50.
Element 230 is described inaccurately as a singular “absorption member”. See col. 8, ll. 37-41. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include at least two absorption members 230. Note that Figs. 12A and 13 show two absorption members 230 extending between the support unit 200 and one of the support frames 220. See col. 11, ll. 24-42. It is unclear from the patent specification whether or not each support frame 220 has its own pair of absorption members 230. Nonetheless, all references in the specification to a singular absorption member 230 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 11, ll. 24-25, 29-30, 34, 36 and 43-45.
Element 220 is described inaccurately as a singular “support frame”. See col. 9, ll. 25-27. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include a plurality of support frames 220, with each support frame 220 supporting two roller type moxibustion devices 210. See Figs. 2-10A, 12A and 13. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular support frame 220 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 9, ll. 35, 39 and 50-51.
Element 221 is described inaccurately as a singular “pivot shaft”. See col. 9, ll. 25-27. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include a plurality of support frames 220, with each support frame 220 mounted on the support frame 220 to pivot about a pivot shaft 221. Thus, while the specification is unclear, it would appear that the disclosed embodiments include at least two pivot shafts 221. If this is true, then all references in the specification to a singular pivot shaft 221 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 9, l. 50.
The moxibustion devices 210 are inaccurately described as being “fixedly supported” by the support frame 220. See col. 9, ll. 35-39. Since the moxibustion devices 210 are roller type devices, it is implied/presumed that these devices are coupled to their support frames 220 so as to roll relative thereto. Such a coupling is inconsistent with the “fixedly supported” description.
Element 160 is described inaccurately as a singular “side surface plate”. See col. 12, ll. 60-63. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two side surface plates 160. See Fig. 9. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular side surface plate 160 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 13, ll. 38-39, 41 and 47.
Element 150 is described inaccurately as a singular “reinforcement rib”. See col. 13, ll. 10-14. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include a plurality of reinforcement ribs 150. See Figs. 9 and 11; col. 13, ll. 15-16. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular reinforcement rib 150 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 13, ll. 39 and 46-47.
Element 170 is described inaccurately as a singular “roller fixing shaft”. See col. 13, ll. 36-43. The embodiments illustrated in the drawing figures include two side surface plates 160, and two roller shafts 170 are fixed to each side surface plate 160. See Fig. 9. Thus, all references in the specification to a singular roller fixing shaft 170 are inaccurate. See col. 13, l. 47-48.
Element 191 is described inaccurately as a singular “projection surface”. See col. 14, ll. 11-13. As shown in Fig. 16, reference number 191 has two lead lines that appear to be directed to two surfaces. Thus, it would appear that all references in the specification to a singular projection surface 191 are inaccurate. See, for example, col. 14, ll. 14-17 and 19-20.
The specification is also objected to because:
At col. 5, l. 14, “conveyance unit 200” should read “conveyance unit [200] 100”.
At col. 6, l. 28, “one side” should read “[one] other side” in order to be consistent with the previous description. See, for example, col. 5, ll. 7-15; col. 6, ll. 1-9.
At col. 6, l. 37, “one side” should read “[one] other side” for the reason stated above.
The description at col. 7, ll. 1-5 is confusing. How can the guide member 310 move relative to the rotary member 320 if a rubber pad is used “to adhere them”?
The description at col. 7, ll. 12-14 is inaccurate because “a leftward direction of FIG. 4” does not correspond to the disposition of the pinion 321 relative to the gear member 310.
The reference to a “length in the widthwise direction” at col. 7, ll. 33, 36 and 39 is confusing and appears to be inaccurate since a “length” is distinct from a “width” and, thus, a “length” does not extend in a “widthwise direction”.
At col. 7, ll. 36-38, the definition of a “length” having a value of “100” or a range of “1 to 20” is incomplete because it does not specify any unit of measurement.
At col. 7, l. 43, “the excessive length” is inconsistent with the earlier description of the guide member 310 as being “too short” (col. 7, l. 40) and is also inconsistent with the later description of space that is “insufficient” (col. 7, l. 45).
At col. 7, ll. 48-50, the description “the conveyance unit 100 includes the driving member 330” is inconsistent with the earlier description “the elevation unit 300 may further include a driving member 330” (col. 6, ll. 33-34).
At col. 7, l. 51, the acronym “BLDC” is undefined, which creates confusion as to the nature of the disclosure.
At col. 8, l. 34, “one side” should read “[one] other side” for the reason stated above.
At col. 8, l. 40, “230 such” should read “230 (see FIG. 12A) such” since the absorption member 230 is not shown in Fig. 3.
At col. 8, ll. 50-51, the description “The support unit 200 basically maintains the conveyance unit 100 in a horizontal state…” is inaccurate because the support unit 200 does not function in this manner. Rather, the support unit 200 is pivotally mounted on and, therefore, supported by the conveyance unit 100.
At col. 8, ll. 50-52, the description “The support unit 200 basically maintains…the moxibustion device 210 in a lowered state” is inaccurate because the support unit 200 does not function in this manner. Rather, the support unit 200 is raised and lowered relative to the conveyance unit 100 such that the moxibustion devices 210 are also raised and lowered.
At col. 8, ll. 52-55, the description “…the guide member 310 constituting the elevation unit 300 is configured to pass through the conveyance unit 100 to protrude downward as shown in FIG. 5” is inaccurate because the guide members 310 are disclosed as being a part of the elevation unit, but they do not constitute the elevation unit by themselves. Further, Fig. 5 does not show the guide members 310 passing through the conveyance unit 100 to protrude downward.
At col. 9, l. 5, “driving member 300” should read “driving member [300] 330”.
At col. 9, l. 10, the reference to “FIG. 6” is inaccurate. It appears this should read “FIG. [6] 8”.
At col. 9, ll. 10-22, the brief description of Figs. 8-13 constitutes a confusing, run-on sentence.
At col. 9, l. 23, the reference to “FIGS. 6 and 12A” is inaccurate. It appears this should read “FIGS. [6] 8 and 12A”.
At col. 9, ll. 43-45, the description “One moxibustion device 211 disposed adjacent to the coupling position of the conveyance unit 100 and the support unit 200…” is inaccurate. The coupling position defined by each hinge unit 400 is not “adjacent to” the moxibustion device 211. See Figs. 12A and 13.
At col. 9, ll. 43-54, the references to “One moxibustion device 211” and “the other moxibustion device 212” are inaccurate because the disclosed embodiments include a plurality of pairs of moxibustion devices 211, 212 (not just one set of moxibustion devices 211, 212).
The description provided at col. 11, ll. 33-42 fails to accurately describe the structure illustrated in Figs. 12A-12B. Note that Figs. 12A-12B do not show the absorption members 230 as having different heights.
At col. 12, ll. 20-21, the description “A pair of moxibustion devices 210 are arranged on the support unit 200 in a widthwise direction thereof” is inaccurate and/or incomplete. As shown in Fig. 3, a cap type moxibustion device 210 and a two pairs of roller type moxibustion devices 210 are arranged on the support unit 200.
At col. 13, ll. 15-16, the description “the plurality of reinforcement ribs 150 may be formed in a lengthwise direction of the conveyance unit 100” is inconsistent with the later description “The conveyance unit 100 has a length in a lengthwise direction smaller than that in a widthwise direction” (col. 13, ll. 17-18). As shown in Fig. 11, a majority of the ribs 150 extend in the widthwise direction, not in the lengthwise direction.
At col. 13, l. 31, “Like in the embodiment” is confusing and inaccurate because the specification describes more than one embodiment. It is unclear which embodiment this phrase refers to.
At col. 13, l. 56, “FIG. 14” should read “[FIG. 14] FIGS. 14 and 15”.
At col. 13, ll. 62-64, the description “Here, the cable 500 may pass through a long hole 190 formed in the support unit 200 rather than an outer edge of the support unit 200 to be connected thereto” is inaccurate. As shown in Fig. 14, the long hole 190 is formed in the conveyance unit 100 (not in the support unit 200). Further, in the embodiment illustrated (see Fig. 15), the cable 500 does not “pass through” an outer edge of the support unit 200 “to be connected thereto”.
At col. 13, ll. 62-64, the description “Here, the cable 500 may pass through a long hole 190 formed in the support unit 200 rather than an outer edge of the support unit 200 to be connected thereto” is confusing. How does the phrase “…in the support unit 200” constitute an alternative to “an outer edge of the support unit 200”?
At col. 13, ll. 64-66, the description “If the cable 500 passes through the outer edge of the support unit 200 and is connected thereto” is inaccurate. In the embodiment illustrated (see Fig. 15), the cable 500 does not “pass through” an outer edge of the support unit 200 and is not “connected thereto”.
Appropriate correction of the patent specification is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) for failing to show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Specifically, the drawings fail to show “a cover member installed at an inner surface in the lengthwise direction of the long hole (190).” See claim 22.
These claimed features must be shown in the drawings or canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are also objected to because:
Fig. 10A does not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3) because the section lines are improperly labeled using reference characters “A”, “B”, “C” and “D”. The ends of each section line should be designated by Arabic or Roman numerals corresponding to the view number of the sectional view.
In Fig. 11, the view label should read “Fig. 11” instead of “Fig.1 1”.
In Fig. 14, the view label should read “Fig. 14” instead of “Fig.1 4”.
In Fig. 15, the view label should read “Fig. 15” instead of “Fig.1 5”.
They do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference number 230 is used to designate both absorption members (see Fig. 12A) and a circuit member (see Fig. 15). The same reference character must never be used to designate different parts.
The objections to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Response Period
A shortened statutory period for reply is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
Amendments in Reissue Applications
Applicant is notified that any subsequent amendment to the specification, claims or drawings must comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)-(g).
Failure to fully comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b)-(g) will generally result in a notification to applicant that an amendment before final rejection is not completely responsive. Such an amendment after final rejection will not be entered.
PNG
media_image3.png
18
19
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Disclosure Obligations
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceed-ing in which the patent for which reissue is sought is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation.
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is mate-rial to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue appli-cation.
These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Filing and Contact Information
All correspondence relating to this reissue application should be directed:
By Patent Center14: Registered users may submit via the Patent Center at: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov/
By Mail15 to: Commissioner for Patents
United States Patent & Trademark Office
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
By FAX to: (571) 273-8300
By hand: Customer Service Window
Knox Building
501 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter English whose telephone number is (571)272-6671. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (8:00 am - 6:00 pm EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eileen Lillis, can be reached at 571-272-6928
/PETER C ENGLISH/Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993
Conferees:/GLENN K DAWSON/ Reexamination Specialist, Art Unit 3993
/EILEEN D LILLIS/SPRS, Art Unit 3993
1 See https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/moxibustion
2 See https://www.dictionary.com/browse/moxibustion
3 See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moxibustion
4 See Google search for “moxibustion meaning”, with result from Google’s English dictionary provided by Oxford Languages
5 See https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/moxa
6 See https://www.dictionary.com/browse/moxa
7 See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moxa
8 See Google search for “moxa meaning”, with result from Google’s English dictionary provided by Oxford Languages
9 All citations are to the English translation provided by the examiner.
10 All citations are to the English translation provided by the examiner.
11 All citations are to the English translation provided by the examiner. Unfortunately, the English translation (and perhaps the original written description in Korean) contains inaccuracies in its citation of reference numbers shown in the drawings.
12 All citations are to the English translation provided by the examiner.
13 All citations are to the English translation provided by the examiner.
14 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).
15 Mail Stop REISSUE should only be used for the initial filing of reissue applications, and should not be used for any subsequently filed correspondence in reissue applications. See MPEP 1410.
Prosecution Insights