Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. Claims 1-18 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
In the instant case the abstract recites “comprising” (line 1) and “comprises” (line 4), which is form/legal phraseology often used in patent claims, and should be avoided. The Examiner suggests --including--, --includes--.
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. Para. [0016] of the Specification states “FIG. 1 is a schematic view of an existing technology muscle massager.” See MPEP § 608.02(g).
Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The claims recite “high-frequency vibrations” and the specification does not provide any examples of what would be considered “high-frequency.” Therefore, “high-frequency” has been interpreted under the broadest reasonable interpretation to mean a frequency that is relatively higher.
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112(f)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following minor formalities:
Claim 14, line 2 recites “is having a fixed groove” and the Examiner suggest --has a fixed groove--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, line 9 recites “high-frequency vibrations” and the specification does not provide any explanation of what range of frequencies would be considered “high-frequency.” Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are indefinite, as it is unclear what frequency ranges would read on “high-frequency vibrations.”
Claim 1, lines 10-11 recite “said flexible connecting body is connected in between said vibrating massage section and said handheld section is utilized to flexibly fix…” and it is unclear what structure “is utilized” is referring to. Is this referring back to the “flexible connecting body” or to the “handheld section”? As best understood, this appears to be referring to the flexible connecting body. For example, claim 18 more clearly recites that it is the flexible connecting body that is used to flexibly fix the vibrating massage section (see lines 10-11). The Examiner suggests clarifying which structure “is utilized” is referring to by including a comma and/or deleting the phrase “is utilized.”
Claim 3, lines 6 recites “the eccentric position” which lacks antecedent basis. Furthermore, lines 6-7 recite “the eccentric position of the motor rotor” which is confusing, as the motor rotor has not been stated to be eccentric, nor does the rotor appear to be eccentric in the figures.
Claim 4, lines 1-2 recite “said motor serves as external rotor” and it is unclear what is meant by this. Is this reciting a second, separate rotor? Is this merely stating that the motor provides the rotor?
Claim 4, line 2 recites “the rotating casing” which lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 4, lines 3-4 recite “the eccentric position of one side of said rotor” which is confusing because “the eccentric position” has been previously recited to be “of said motor rotor,” not an eccentric position of one side of the motor rotor.
Claim 8, line 4 recites “said massage head units” which is confusing because only a single “massage head unit” is previously recited.
Claim 9, lines 2-3 recite “said plurality of side massage heads” which lacks antecedent basis. Claim 9 depends from claim 3, which depends from claim 1. Neither claim has antecedent basis for the plurality of side massage heads.
Claim 14, line 4 recites “said anti-detachment chambers” which is confusing because only a single “anti-detachment chamber” is previously recited.
Claim 18, line 9 recites “high-frequency vibrations” and the specification does not provide any explanation of what range of frequencies would be considered “high-frequency.” Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are indefinite, as it is unclear what frequency ranges would read on “high-frequency vibrations.”
The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependence on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 9-10, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iwamoto et al. (4,825,853).
Regarding claim 1, Iwamoto discloses a vibrating massager (Fig. 1, see title), comprising a vibrating massage section (applicator head 20, Fig. 2; “self-contained applicator head effecting vibration” see col. 2, lines 29-31) and a handheld section (hand grip 10, Fig. 2),
wherein said vibrating massage section (20) is connected (via coil spring 30 and corrugated cover 31, Fig. 2) to said handheld section (10, Fig. 2), and said vibrating massage section (20) provided with a massage head unit (convex end plate 23, side face annulus 22, Figs. 1-2), said vibrating massage section (20) comprises a vibration generating system (“motor 40 is mounted within the core barrel 21 together with a flyweight 50 so that the applicator head 20 is made as a self-contained vibration-generating unit” see Fig. 2 and col. 3, line 66 through col. 4, line 1) and a flexible connecting body (coil spring 30 and/or corrugated cover 31, Fig. 2),
wherein said vibration generating system is utilized to generate high-frequency vibrations (the hand grip 10 has a control dial 12 “for adjusting the rate of vibration effected by the applicator head 20” and thus the control dial is able to generate relatively higher frequency vibrations when at the higher settings. See col. 3, lines 55-57. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the higher rate of vibration would read on high-frequency vibrations) and synchronously drive said vibrating massage section (20) for high-frequency vibrations (the vibration motor 40 is mounted in the massage section 20, to vibrate the massage section),
wherein said flexible connecting body (30, 31) is connected in between said vibrating massage section (20) and said handheld section (10, see Fig. 2) is utilized to flexibly fix said vibrating massage section (20) onto said handheld section (10; see col. 4, lines 18-34),
by utilizing said vibration generating system and said flexible connecting body (30, 31), said vibrating massage section (20) can perform high-frequency vibrations relative to said handheld section (the vibrations are generated in the vibrating applicator head 20, by motor 40, see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Iwamoto discloses wherein said vibration generation system comprises a motor (motor 40, Fig. 2), an eccentric counterweight block (flyweight 50, Fig. 2, shown to be eccentrically positioned), and a motor frame (casing 42, which includes base plate 42a, cylindrical cover 42b, and extension bracket 42c, Fig. 2), wherein said motor (40) is fixedly arranged in said motor frame (motor 40 is within casing 42 as seen in Fig. 2), said motor (40) comprises a motor stator (stator 43, Fig. 2), a motor rotor (rotor 44, Fig. 2), and a shaft (output shaft 41, Fig. 2), said eccentric counterweight block (50) is fixedly arranged in the eccentric position of said motor rotor (counterweight 50 is fixedly arranged at an end of output shaft 41, in an eccentric position relative to the motor rotor 44, see Fig. 2), said flexible connecting body (30, 31) is connected between said motor frame (coil 30 “extends into the ring 25 of the applicator head 20” which is where the base plate 42a connects, see Fig. 2 illustrating the 30, 31, connection) and said handheld section (spring 30 and corrugated cover 31 extend to the handheld section 10, see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Iwamoto discloses wherein said motor (40) serves as external rotor (the motor 40 comprises a rotor 44, see Fig. 2), and said rotor (44) serves as the rotating casing of the motor (the rotor 44 rotates and encases the output shaft 41, Fig. 2), said eccentric counterweight block (50) is fixedly arranged in the eccentric position of one side of said rotor (flyweight 50 is fixedly arranged at an end of output shaft 41, in an eccentric position relative to one side of the motor rotor 44, see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Iwamoto discloses wherein said shaft (41, Fig. 2) comprises a bottom extension shaft (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 45 is considered the “bottom extension shaft” see Fig. 2. This interpretation conforms with Applicant’s own “bottom extension shaft” which is depicted as reference character 340 in Fig. 6, and is part of shaft 313), wherein the bottom extension shaft is extendedly arranged at the lower end of the shaft (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 45 is at a lower end of the shaft 41, see Fig. 2), said bottom extension shaft is positioned outside of said motor (the bearing 45 is not part of the motor, and thus this portion of shaft 41 is considered outside the motor), said motor frame (42) is provided with a bottom bearing (bearing 45 is mounted on base plate 42a, see Fig. 2) at the bottom, wherein said bottom extension shaft is arranged in said bottom bearing (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 45 is considered the “bottom extension shaft” see Fig. 2), by utilizing said bottom extension shaft and said bottom bearing (45), said motor (40) is positioned in the motor frame (the motor 40 is within the frame 42, see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Iwamoto discloses wherein the shaft (41) comprises a bottom extension shaft (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 45 is considered the “bottom extension shaft” see Fig. 2. This interpretation conforms with Applicant’s own “bottom extension shaft” which is depicted as reference character 340 in Figs. 6-7, and is part of shaft 313) and a top extension shaft (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 46 is considered the “top extension shaft” see Fig. 2. This interpretation conforms with Applicant’s own “top extension shaft” which is depicted as reference character 350 in Fig. 7, and is part of shaft 313), wherein said bottom extension shaft is extendedly arranged at the lower end of said shaft (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 45 is at a lower end of the shaft 41, see Fig. 2), while said top extension shaft is extendedly arranged at the upper end of said shaft (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 46 is at a top end of the shaft 41, see Fig. 2), both said bottom extension shaft and said top extension shaft are positioned outside said motor (the bearings 45, 46, are not part of the motor, and thus the portions of shaft 41 within bearings 45, 46, are considered outside of the motor 40), said motor frame (42) is provided with a bottom bearing (bearing 45 is mounted on base plate 42a, see Fig. 2) at the bottom and a top bearing (bearing 46, Fig. 2) at the top (at cylindrical cover 42b, Fig. 2), wherein said bottom extension shaft is arranged in said bottom bearing (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 45 is considered the “bottom extension shaft” see Fig. 2), while said top extension shaft is arranged in said top bearing (the portion of shaft 41 within bearing 46 is considered the “top extension shaft” see Fig. 2), by utilizing said bottom extension shaft and said bottom bearing (45), the bottom of said motor (40) is positioned in said motor frame (the motor 40 is within the frame 42, see Fig. 2), by utilizing said top extension shaft and said top bearing (46), the top of the motor (40) is positioned in said motor frame (the motor 40 is within the frame 42, see Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, Iwamoto discloses wherein a plurality of massage head connecting structures (base member 21a, top member 21b, shallow sink 21c, Fig. 2) are disposed around said motor frame (21a, 21b, 21c, are disposed outside of the motor frame 42, see Fig. 2), said plurality of side massage heads (plurality of circumferential ribs 27, see Fig. 1) are correspondingly connected to said plurality of massage head connecting structures (annulus 22 carries the circumferential ribs 27, and the annulus is directly connected to structures 21a, 21b, see Fig. 2; “annulus 22 … is connected at its inner ends to the core barrel 21 and is formed on its exterior with a number of circumferentially extending ribs 27” see col. 4, lines 35-39).
Regarding claim 10, Iwamoto discloses wherein said flexible connecting body (30, 31) is made of elastic or flexible materials (coil spring 30 is elastic/flexible due to being a spring. The corrugated cover is flexible due to providing a resilient coupling that allows the applicator head 20 to move in all directions, see col. 4, lines 18-34), said flexible connecting body (30, 31) comprises a deformable body (corrugated cover 31 is deformable to allow the applicator head 20 to move in all directions), wherein said deformable body (31) is connected in between of said motor frame (corrugated cover 31 extends from below the base plate 42a, to the hand grip 10, see Fig. 2) of said vibration generating system and said handheld section (the corrugated cover 31 extends between the two parts, see col. 4, lines 23-26 and Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, Iwamoto discloses wherein said flexible connecting body (30, 31) also comprises a handle fixing groove (the portion of corrugated cover 31 that engages the upper flange of hand grip 10 is considered the “handle fixing groove” see Fig. 2), wherein said handle fixing groove is arranged on the outer surface of said deformable body (the handle fixing groove is on the outer, exterior surface of corrugated cover 31, as it contacts the upper flange of the hand grip 10, see Fig. 2), while the top of said handheld section (top of 10, Fig. 2) is inserted into said handle fixing groove (see Fig. 2, the top of handheld section 10 has a flange that protrudes into the “handle fixing groove”, which is the lower portion of corrugated cover 31 that engages the handle 10 upper flange).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamoto et al. (4,825,853) in view of Teranishi (3,364,922).
Regarding claim 2, Iwamoto discloses wherein said massage head unit (22, 23, Fig. 1) comprises a plurality of side massage heads (plurality of circumferential ribs 27, see Fig. 1), wherein said plurality of massage heads (27) are arranged in a dispersed manner around the sides of said vibrating massage section (see 27 in Fig. 1).
Iwamoto is silent regarding a plurality of top massage heads positioned on the top of the vibrating massage section.
Teranishi teaches a related vibratory massager (Fig. 1) having a plurality of top massage heads (plurality of projections 14, Fig. 1) positioned on the top of the vibrating massage section (at least some of the projections 14, are positioned on the top side of the top member 6, see Fig. 1, Fig. 3). The massage heads (14) are configured to “touch the head, face, and other tender parts of the skin with adequate pressure, and flex to fit the contours of these parts, so that an extremely good massaging effect is produced” (see col. 2, lines 21-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the top of the vibrating massage section of Iwamoto to include a plurality of top massage heads as taught by Teranishi because these massage heads are configured to touch the head, face, and other tender parts of the skin with adequate pressure, and flex to fit the contours of these parts, so that an extremely good massaging effect is produced.
Regarding claim 8, Iwamoto discloses wherein said motor frame (42) also comprises a frame top cover (top member 21b, end plate 23, Fig. 2), wherein said frame top cover (21b, 23, Fig. 2) is arranged on the top of said motor frame (21b, 23, are above/on top of the motor frame 42, see Fig. 2), while said top bearing (46, Fig. 2) is positioned on the inner bottom of the frame top cover (bearing 46 is within the boundary defined by 21b, at the bottom half of 21b and thus on the inner bottom of the frame top cover).
Iwamoto is silent regarding said massage head unit(s) comprising a plurality of top massage heads positioned on the outer top of the frame top cover.
Teranishi teaches a related vibratory massager (Fig. 1) having a plurality of top massage heads (plurality of projections 14, Fig. 1) positioned on the outer top of a frame top cover (at least some of the projections 14, are positioned on the top side of the top member 6, which is a frame top cover. See Fig. 1, Fig. 3). The massage heads (14) are configured to “touch the head, face, and other tender parts of the skin with adequate pressure, and flex to fit the contours of these parts, so that an extremely good massaging effect is produced” (see col. 2, lines 21-27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the outer top of the frame top cover of Iwamoto to include a plurality of top massage heads as taught by Teranishi because these massage heads are configured to touch the head, face, and other tender parts of the skin with adequate pressure, and flex to fit the contours of these parts, so that an extremely good massaging effect is produced.
Claim(s) 7 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Iwamoto et al. (4,825,853).
Regarding claim 7, Iwamoto discloses wherein an assembly disc (ring 25, Fig. 2) is connected to said motor frame (42; “base plate 42a secured to ring 25” see col. 4, lines 5-6), said bottom bearing (45) is arranged on the assembly disc (bearing 45 is on ring 25, see Fig. 2).
Iwamoto does not specifically state the assembly disc is connected to the motor frame by screws. However, the use of screws to secure adjacent structures is well known in the art and merely provides predictable results.
Furthermore, Iwamoto demonstrates that screws may be used to secure adjacent structures (screws 24 are used to fasten base member 21a to top member 21b, and screws 61 are used to fasten weight 60 to shallow sink 21c, see Figs. 2-3 and see col. 3, lines 63-66 and col. 4, lines 54-58). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that screws could be used to fasten the disc (25) to the motor frame (at base plate 42a, Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connection between the assembly disc and the motor frame of Iwamoto to be secured by screws as generally taught by Iwamoto, because this is a combination of prior art elements according to known techniques (using one or more screws to secure adjacent structures) to provide predictable results (the structures are fastened together).
Regarding claim 11, Iwamoto discloses a motor frame wrapping body (soft shell 26, Fig. 2, shown to wrap around the motor 40), wherein said motor frame wrapping body (26) wraps around the exterior of the motor frame (soft shell 26 encloses motor frame 42, see Fig. 2).
Iwamoto is silent regarding the flexible connecting body (30, 31) also comprising the motor frame wrapping body. However, it has been held forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motor frame wrapping body and the corrugated cover of Iwamoto to be formed as one piece of soft, flexible material since this is merely making these flexible components integrally formed, and provides predictable results. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(B).
Regarding claim 12, Iwamoto discloses wherein said flexible connecting body (30, 31) also comprises a rigid fixing frame (upper flange of hand grip 10 that extends into the lower portion of corrugated cover as seen in Fig. 2), said rigid fixing frame (upper flange of 10, Fig. 2) is embedded in said deformable body (as seen in Figure 2, the upper flange of 10 extends into the corrugated cover 31).
Iwamoto does not specifically state wherein said rigid fixing frame (upper flange of hand grip 10) is made of hard materials. However, it has been held that to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. MPEP 2144.07. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the hand grip section (10, Figs. 1-2) should be rigid such as a relatively hard plastic in order to allow the device to be maneuvered and to protect and house the electrical components and controls (11, 12, Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material of the rigid fixing flame of Iwamoto to be a relatively hard plastic, since this would be recognized as a suitable material to allow the hand grip to be maneuvered while being sturdy enough to protect and house the electrical components and controls.
Regarding claim 13, Iwamoto discloses wherein said flexible connecting body (30, 31) also includes a rigid anti-detachment frame (coil spring 30, Fig. 2), wherein said rigid anti-detachment frame (30), said rigid anti-detachment frame (30) is inserted into the deformable body (spring 30 is within corrugated cover 31, see Fig. 2), and the top of said rigid anti-detachment frame (30) is fixedly connected to the bottom of said motor frame (“One end of the coil spring coupling member 30 extends into the ring 25 of the applicator head 20 and is threadedly engaged therewith” see col. 4, lines 18-20. The ring 25 in turn, is secured to the base plate 42a of the motor frame, see Fig. 2 and col. 4, lines 5-6).
Iwamoto does not specifically state the anti-detachment frame (coil spring 30) is made of hard materials. However, it has been held that to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. MPEP 2144.07. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that coil springs are often manufactured using a hard, but resilient material such as a metal spring.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material of the anti-detachment frame (coil spring) of Iwamoto to be a metal coil spring, since this would be recognized as a suitable material to allow the coil spring to be durable yet resilient.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamoto et al. (4,825,853) in view of and Jones et al. (2006/0116614).
Regarding claim 16, Iwamoto discloses wherein said handheld section comprises a first handle cover and a second handle cover (as seen in Figure 1, there is a longitudinal seam running the length of the handle 10, separating it into two “covers”), wherein said first handle cover and said second handle cover are joined together to form said handheld section (the handle covers are joined at the seam, as seen in Figure 1).
Iwamoto is silent regarding said handheld section also comprising an upper fixing ring and a lower fixing ring, wherein said upper fixing ring and said lower fixing ring are respectively threaded onto the upper ends and the lower ends of the handheld section.
Jones teaches a related handheld vibrating massager (Fig. 1) with a handheld section (handle 30, Fig. 8) comprising an upper fixing ring (electro-mechanical connection 32, Fig. 8) and a lower fixing ring (second electro-mechanical connection 34, Fig. 8), wherein said upper fixing ring and said lower fixing ring are respectively threaded onto the upper ends and lower ends of the handheld section (“the electro-mechanical connection 22 and first electro-mechanical connection 32 comprise male and female threaded connectors respectively” see para. [0028]; “the second electro-mechanical connection 34 and electro-mechanical connection 42 on the power cord 40 may comprise male and female threaded connectors respectively” see para. [0030]). These connections allow the massage head (20, Fig. 8) to be selectively detached/attached and allow the electrical cord (power cord 40, Fig. 8) to be selectively detached/attached while transmitting electrical power through the handle.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handheld section of Iwamoto to include an upper fixing ring and a lower fixing ring, wherein said upper fixing ring and said lower fixing ring are respectively threaded onto the upper ends and the lower ends of the handheld section as taught by Jones because this provides an expected result that the head, handheld section, and power cord can be selectively detached/attached which provides benefits such as allowing easier storage and access to the various parts for replacement/repair.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamoto et al. (4,825,853) in view of and Jones et al. (2006/0116614) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Gentry et al. (5,117,815).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Iwamoto/Jones device is silent regarding said handheld section also comprises a handle protective sleeve fitted around the exterior of said first handle cover and said second handle cover.
Gentry teaches a related handheld vibratory massager (Fig. 1) wherein the handheld section (handle 30, Fig. 1) comprises a handle protective sleeve (“grip 34 is preferably covered in a soft sponge elastomer which enables the user to securely hold the massager during operation even if the user has impaired hand motion or damp hands” see col. 2, lines 39-44) fitted around the exterior of a first handle cover and second handle cover (the grip portion 34 “comprises two half shells 48, 50” see Fig. 2 and col. 3, lines 21-23. As seen in Fig. 1, the protective sleeve is fitted around the exterior of each handle cover 48, 50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the handheld section of Iwamoto to include a handle protective sleeve fitted around the exterior of said first handle cover and said second handle cover as taught by Gentry because this cushioned material enables the user to securely hold the massager during operation even if the user has impaired hand motion or damp hands.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 14 and 18 have allowable subject matter because none of the prior art of record teaches, discloses, or fairly suggests the claimed invention when considered as a whole. For example, wherein the deformable body has a fixed groove and an anti-detachment chamber, wherein said rigid fixing frame is inserted into said fixed groove, while said rigid anti-detachment frame is inserted into said anti-detachment chambers.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Teranishi (3,468,304) discloses a related vibratory massager with a flexible connection and a plurality of side massage heads. Stanbridge et al. (2021/0259915 and 2016/0213558) discloses a related vibratory massager with a plurality of side massage heads and a top massage head. Luettgen et al. (2003/0009116) discloses a related vibratory massager with handles formed with a first handle cover and second handle cover, and interchangeable massage attachments. Moriwaki et al. (4,604,993) discloses a related vibratory massager with a flexible connection between the handle and the applicator. Iwamoto et al. (5,193,528) discloses a related vibratory massager with a flexible connection between the handle and the applicator. Farb (4,224,932) discloses a related vibratory massager with a motor wrapping. Ji (2025/0041154) discloses a related vibratory massager with a plurality of side massage heads.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1473. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30 (Eastern).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHRISTOPHER E MILLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights