DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 12/30/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 9 have been amended. Claims 7 and 13 have been cancelled. Claims 29 and 30 have been newly added. Claims 1-2, 8-12, 14-15, and 20-30 remain pending in the instant application. Applicant’s amendments to the drawings and specification have overcome the drawing and specification objections raised in the non-final rejection mailed on 09/30/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/30/2025, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding double patenting, Applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the double patenting rejections for claims 1-2, 8-12, and 14-15. Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s request to hold the double patenting rejections in abeyance, and therefore the rejections regarding claims 20, 21, and 28 are not yet obviated. See MPEP 804(I)(B).
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“support mechanism” in claims 1, 22, and 28.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Examiner is interpreting “support mechanism” to be any structure capable of supporting a user of the massage chair.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20180185234A1 to Ishiguro in view of CN111616938A to Jiang et al. (hereinafter “Jiang”), CN106074129A to Lu et al. (hereinafter “Lu”), and CN111973419B to Lin et al. (hereinafter “Lin”).
Regarding claim 20, Ishiguro discloses a massage chair (Fig. 1 chair massager 1) comprising:
a seat portion (Fig. 1 seat portion 2);
a back portion (Fig. 1 backrest portion 3);
a massage carriage configured to move within the back portion (Fig. 3 massaging mechanism 7 within seat portion 2 and the backrest portion 3), wherein the massage carriage comprises:
a platform (Fig. 4A-D base plate 27),
a frame including a mount point, wherein the mount point is biased away from the platform (Fig. 3 first arm 12, second arm 13, third arm 18, and coupling shaft 26 comprises the frame and has base stand 27 indirectly mounted to it; Paragraph 0094 discloses coupling shaft 26 couples base plate 27; Paragraph 0019 discloses the first and second arms are joined together at the same base end, and the base end is pivotally mounted; See Annotated Fig. 4C designating the base end as the mount point; Examiner notes the designated mount point is biased away from base plate 27), and
a percussive massage assembly mounted to the mount point (Fig. 4C first massager piece 14 is mounted to the designated mounted point; Paragraphs 0064-0065 discloses the massager pieces provide advancing and retracting movements (percussive massage)).
PNG
media_image1.png
450
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ishiguro does disclose a percussive massage assembly with a motor, reciprocating head, and activation of the motor makes the arm/head reciprocate (Paragraph 0087 “The grabbing massage means has the grabbing arm 16, like the described first and second arms 12 and 13, advances toward a target of massage, and the grabbing massager piece 17 attached to the tip of the grabbing arm 16.”; Fig. 5 motor 22; Paragraph 0082 discloses motor 22 is an up-and-down motor).
Ishiguro does not explicitly disclose a percussive assembly which has a reciprocating shaft that reciprocates along a linear axis in response to activation of a motor, and a reciprocating massage head coupled to the reciprocating shaft. However, Jiang teaches a massage carriage which includes percussive assemblies that reciprocate along a linear axis and uses a controller (Figs. 1 and 2 third motor 31, eccentric connecting rod 32, massage block 33, eccentric wheel 34, and guide wheel 35; Examiner notes massage block 33 rotates linearly via third motor 31; Examiner notes that the massagers of Jiang would merely be mounted to the designated mount point of Ishiguro; Examiner further notes Jiang shows two percussive assemblies in Fig. 1; Paragraph 018 discloses a control module may be used to provide (intended) treatment).
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 device of Ishiguro to replace two kneading massage heads with percussive massage heads which reciprocate linearly, as taught by Jiang, to further provide percussion massage function (Paragraph 016 of attached machine translation for the written description).
Ishiguro in view of Jiang does not disclose wherein the force meter is configured to measure force applied by the reciprocating massage head. However, Lu teaches a massaging mechanism which has pressure sensors in a massage head to evaluate treatment force (Fig. 6 massaging finger 134; Paragraphs 05, 014, and 015 of written translation disclose pressure sensors in the massaging finger which realize digitization of the massage force.).
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 sensors of Lin to be in the massage heads, as taught by Lu, in order to provide an alternate means of sensing force and adjusting to provided intended treatment.
Modified Ishiguro does not disclose a controller which adjusts the magnitude of the bias on the mount point to bring a force measured by a force meter toward an intended value. However, Lin teaches a massage machine which has a controller which adjusts the magnitude of the bias on the mount point to bring a force measured by a force meter toward an intended value (Figs. 4a-c air source 51, first air bag 52, second air bag 53, electric control board 56; Figs. 4a-c shows a central mount point for the massage device 20 which is biased in different directions; Paragraph 0007 discloses first and second air pressure sensors connected to the electronic control board in the air bags which adjusts the bias the massage device 20 in real time to improve the comfort of massage and realize intelligent regulation; Examiner notes the sensors of Lu would inform the controller of Lin for adjusting the massage carriage based on force information).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Ishiguro to include a controller which adjusts magnitude of bias on a mount point to bring a force measured by a force meter toward an intended value, as taught by Lin, in order to improve the comfort of massage and realize intelligent regulation (Paragraph 0007).
Regarding claim 21, Ishiguro in view of Jiang, Lu, and Lin disclose the massage chair of claim 20, and Ishiguro as modified by Jiang and Lu further disclose wherein activation of the motor causes the force meter to reciprocate linearly along the reciprocation axis (Lu Paragraphs 05, 014, and 015 of written translation disclose pressure sensors in the massaging finger which realize digitization of the massage force.; Jiang Figs. 1 and 2 third motor 31, eccentric connecting rod 32, massage block 33, eccentric wheel 34, and guide wheel 35; Examiner notes massage block 33 rotates linearly via third motor 31; Examiner notes that the sensor of Lu would thus reciprocate linearly along the same linear axis as the massaged block of Jiang).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishiguro in view of Jiang, Lu, and Lin, as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of CN113509369A to Gang et al. (hereinafter “Gang”).
Regarding claim 28, Ishiguro in view of Jiang and Lu discloses the massage chair of claim 20, and Ishiguro as modified by Jiang further discloses the frame comprises an arm that is pivotably mounted to the platform and comprises the mount point, wherein the percussive massage assembly is mounted to the first arm (Ishiguro Fig. 3 first arm 12; Paragraph 0019 discloses the first and second arms are joined together at the same base end, and the base end is pivotally mounted; See Annotated Fig. 4C in the rejection of claim 21 designating the base end as the mount point; Examiner notes that Jiang’s percussive massage heads would be mounted to the first arm 12 of Ishiguro). Ishiguro does not disclose the massage carriage comprises a support configured to support a user's weight to provide room for the reciprocating massage head with room to reciprocate. However, Gang teaches a massage device which has a support configured to support a user’s weight (Fig. 1 carrier 101 and spine carrier 102; Paragraph 0014; Examiner notes the carrier will inherently support the weight of the user).
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 massage carriage of Ishiguro to further include a support configured to support a user’s weight, as taught by Gang, in order to provide a user with a more comfortable massage experience. Examiner notes the massage would be more comfortable because the user’s weight will be distributed over more pressure points. Examiner further notes Ishiguro as modified by Gang would naturally provide room for the reciprocating massage head to reciprocate because the user’s weight would be support away from the carriage at the point of contact. Examiner further notes Ishiguro as modified by Gang would have the support indirectly mounted to first arm.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 8-12, 14-15, and 29-30 are allowed.
Claims 22-27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, US20170360641A1 to Nakata et al. (hereinafter “Nakata”) in view of US20180185234A1 to Ishiguro et al. (hereinafter “Ishiguro”) and CN111616938A to Jiang et al. (hereinafter “Jiang”), the closest prior art combination of record, discloses a massage chair (Nakata Fig. 1 massage machine 1) comprising: a seat portion (Nakata Fig. 1 seat portion 3); a back portion (Nakata Fig. 1 backrest portion 4); a leg portion (Nakata Fig. 1 footrest 5); and a massage carriage configured to move within the seat portion, the back portion, and the leg portion (Nakata Figs. 1 & 10 massage unit 8; Paragraph 0033 discloses the massage unit is movable in the height direction between the seat, back, and leg portions), wherein the massage carriage comprises: a massage assembly (Nakata Figs. 1 & 10 base frame 81) comprising a motor (Nakata Fig. 18 motor M2; Fig. 17 shows the massage motor M2 is within massage unit 8), a reciprocating shaft coupled to the motor (Nakata Fig. 16 drive shaft 92; Paragraph 0053 discloses the drive shaft is coupled to the motor) and configured to reciprocate linearly along a reciprocation axis in response to activation of the motor (Nakata Paragraph 0053 discloses the drive shaft 92 moves in a rightward/leftward direction (linear direction) driven by motor M2), and a support mechanism associated with the percussive massage assembly, wherein the support mechanism is configured to support a weight of a user of the massage chair, thereby allowing the reciprocating shaft and the reciprocating massage head of the percussive massage assembly to reciprocate (Nakata Figs. 10-12 intermediate wall 89 is capable of supporting the weight of the user’s inner thigh which naturally allows the massaging mechanism to function; Examiner notes the wall of Nakata would be associated with the massaging mechanism of Ishiguro by being a part of the same device); wherein: the massage assembly is configured to apply massage to a user's back when the user is seated in the massage chair and the percussive massage assembly is in the back portion (Nakata Fig. 1 seat portion 3, backrest portion 4, footrest 5, massage unit 8; Paragraph 0033 discloses the massage unit 8 moves along the height direction from the backrest portion 4 to the footrest 5 via the seat portion 3; Paragraph 0043 discloses the massage unit 8 can perform a massage through openings 25; Examiner notes that massage unit is thus capable of providing massage to the user’s back while the user is seated and while the massage unit is in the back portion), and the massage assembly is configured to apply massage to a user's legs when the user is seated in the massage chair and the massage carriage is in the legs portion (Nakata Fig. 1 seat portion 3, backrest portion 4, footrest 5, massage unit 8; Paragraph 0033 discloses the massage unit 8 moves along the height direction from the backrest portion 4 to the footrest 5 via the seat portion 3; Paragraph 0043 discloses the massage unit 8 can perform a massage through openings 25; Examiner notes that massage unit is thus capable of providing massage to the user’s legs while the user is seated and while the massage unit is in the footrest portion); a motor, reciprocating head, and activation of a motor which makes the arm/head reciprocate; (Ishiguro Paragraph 0087 “The grabbing massage means has the grabbing arm 16, like the described first and second arms 12 and 13, advances toward a target of massage, and the grabbing massager piece 17 attached to the tip of the grabbing arm 16.” Paragraphs 0085 and 0088 disclose the grabbing arm 16 is connected to the rotary shaft 18 driven by motor 28.; Examiner notes the massager pieces of Nakata would be replaced by the kneading massage arms and heads of Ishiguro); a percussive assembly which has a reciprocating shaft that reciprocates along a linear axis in response to activation of a motor; (Jiang Figs. 1 and 2 third motor 31, eccentric connecting rod 32, massage block 33, eccentric wheel 34, and guide wheel 35; Examiner notes massage block 33 rotates linearly via third motor 31 and would replace one of Ishiguro’s massage heads); a kneading massage head (Nakata Fig. 6 first massager piece 14 and second massager piece 15 perform kneading operation and are a part of massaging mechanism 7; Paragraph 0086 discloses the arms perform the kneading which is on massaging mechanism 7); a platform (Nakata Figs. 4A-D base plate 27); a first arm that is pivotably mounted to the platform, wherein the percussive massage assembly and the support are mounted to the first arm, and a second arm that is pivotably mounted to the platform, wherein the kneading massage head is mounted to the second arm (Nakata as modified by Ishiguro and Jiang would have Ishiguro’s massage assembly in place of Nakata’s to have two massage ends. One end would be the kneading heads of Nakata and the opposite ends would be the percussive heads of Jiang; Ishiguro Fig. 3 first arm 12, second arm 13, third arm 18, and coupling shaft 26 comprises the frame and has base stand 27 indirectly mounted to it; Paragraph 0094 discloses coupling shaft 26 couples base plate 27; Paragraph 0019 discloses the first and second arms are joined together at the same base end, and the base end is pivotally mounted; See Annotated Fig. 4C in the rejection of claim 20 above designating the base end as the mount point; Examiner notes the designated mount point is biased away from base plate 27; Jiang would replace one of the arms with a linearly reciprocating percussive massage head as discussed above).
Nakata as modified by Ishiguro and Jiang does not disclose “the second arm is pivotably mounted independently of the first arm such that the kneading massage head can move independently of the support and the percussive massage assembly”. Nor would it have been obvious to make such modifications. The device of modified Nakata has a massage carriage having multiple massage arms mounted at one mount point (Ishiguro Figs. 3 and 4A massage carriage 7, first arm 12, second arm 13, third arm 18). All three of these arms are mounted in such a manner that they are dependent upon one another (i.e. when one arm moves, the other arms move as well). In order to make the required modifications, significant redesign of Nakata’s massage carriage would be necessary. Furthermore, the designated mount point and points where the arms attach to the mount point would need to be redesigned to allow for independent movement of the arms.
Absent any new prior art made of record, it would not have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make such modifications.
Claims 2, 8-12, 14-15, and 29-30 depend from claim 1 and thus are found to contain allowable subject matter by virtue of their dependency.
Regarding claim 22, the reasons for allowable subject matter have been previously discussed in the non-final rejection mailed on 09/30/2025 (See Sections 51-52).
Absent any new prior art made of record, it would not have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make such modifications.
Claims 23-27 depend from claim 22 and thus are found to contain allowable subject matter by virtue of their dependency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US-20030028134-A1 to Lev; US-20070055186-A1 to Hsieh; and US-20070167887-A1 to Tsukada.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER RAUBENSTRAW whose telephone number is (571)272-0662. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:30.
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, BRANDY LEE can be reached at 571-270-3525. 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.
/TYLER A RAUBENSTRAW/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/BRADLEY H PHILIPS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights