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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the:
“Sidewalls” structure/feature of the individual walls (‘side walls’, back wall and access wall) if that is a feature being claimed
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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 Objections
Claim 12 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 requires:
Cabin (1) according to claim 1, wherein the fact that it comprises
Claim 12 depends from claim 1 which defines a number of features and structures. The lack of any identified feature or structure prior to use of the term “it” appears to imply that the language is further defining the invention as a whole however this should be made clear such as through the use of ‘wherein the cabin further comprises’ or ‘Cabin (1) according to claim 1, further comprising:’.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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 2-12 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 2 recites the limitation "the sidewalls of at least one pair of said adjacent walls" in line 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 depends from claim 1 which establishes an access wall, a back wall and a pair of “side walls” as a plurality of walls. As best understood this phrase is intending to define that each “side wall” is adjacent to both the access and back walls and that the features being claimed are specified as being on the “side wall” of one such adjacent pairing.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "said joining means" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "said pair of adjacent walls" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the sidewalls of said pair of adjacent walls" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 depends from claim 1 which establishes an access wall, a back wall and a pair of “side walls” as a plurality of walls. As best understood the ‘pair of adjacent walls’ would be a side wall and either of the back and access walls. As such it is unclear how there would be multiple “side walls” in a pair of adjacent walls. If the use of “sidewall” instead of “side wall” is to differentiate between a portion of a wall and a type of wall it is noted that the portions of the walls are not defined/identified in the claims or the disclosure and as such it is unclear what would be considered to “fit between the sidewalls”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "said profiled element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "said pair of adjacent walls" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "said profiled element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "said main portion" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "said longitudinal direction" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "said profiled element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "said retaining portion" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "said retaining portion" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the sidewall of a wall of said pair of adjacent walls" in line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 depends from claim 1 which establishes an access wall, a back wall and a pair of “side walls” as a plurality of walls. The claims and disclosure do not appear to define ‘a sidewall of a wall’. Claims 1 and 7 also do not define ‘said pair of adjacent walls’.
As best understood the ‘pair of adjacent walls’ is a ‘side wall’ and either the ‘access’ or ‘back wall’ forming a corner. If the use of “sidewall” instead of “side wall” is to differentiate between a portion of a wall and a type of wall it is noted that the portions of the walls are not defined/identified in the claims or disclosure and as such it is unclear what would be considered to “fit between the sidewalls”.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "said first gasket element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "said contact surface" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the sidewall of a wall of said pair of adjacent walls" in line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 depends from claim 1 which establishes an access wall, a back wall and a pair of “side walls” as a plurality of walls. The claims and disclosure do not appear to define ‘a sidewall of a wall’. Claims 1 and 8 also do not define ‘said pair of adjacent walls’.
As best understood the ‘pair of adjacent walls’ is a ‘side wall’ and either the ‘access’ or ‘back wall’ forming a corner. If the use of “sidewall” instead of “side wall” is to differentiate between a portion of a wall and a type of wall it is noted that the portions of the walls are not defined/identified in the claims or disclosure and as such it is unclear what would be considered to “fit between the sidewalls”.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "said first gasket element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "said first profiled element" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "said main portion" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the sidewall of a wall of said pair of adjacent walls" in line 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 depends from claim 1 which establishes an access wall, a back wall and a pair of “side walls” as a plurality of walls. The claims and disclosure do not appear to define ‘a sidewall of a wall’. Claims 1 and 10 also do not define ‘said pair of adjacent walls’.
As best understood the ‘pair of adjacent walls’ is a ‘side wall’ and either the ‘access’ or ‘back wall’ forming a corner. If the use of “sidewall” instead of “side wall” is to differentiate between a portion of a wall and a type of wall it is noted that the portions of the walls are not defined/identified in the claims or disclosure and as such it is unclear what would be considered to “fit between the sidewalls”.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "said joining means" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "said opening" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "said at least one wall of said pair of adjacent walls" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "said profiled elements" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "said at least one wall of said plurality of side walls" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 2452666 (Turri) in view of WO 2007/069873 (Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Turri discloses a cabin (1) for wellness treatments, comprising:
a containment structure (1) comprising a plurality of walls (2) coupled to each other and defining at least one treatment space (4) adapted to accommodate at least one user;
said plurality of walls comprising:
at least one access wall (Fig. 2, annotated below; wall with access door 3) for the access to said treatment space,
at least one back wall opposite said access wall (Fig. 2, annotated below), and
at least one pair of side walls opposite each other and located between said access wall and said back wall (Fig. 2, annotated below); and
PNG
media_image1.png
463
573
media_image1.png
Greyscale
at least one air conditioning system (5/6/7/8) of said treatment space comprising at least heating means (5/6/7/8); and
wherein the fact that said air conditioning system is associated with said back wall (Fig. 2), each of said side walls being devoid of said heating means (Fig. 2).
Turri, however, does not disclose how the air conditioning system is controlled such as through an electronic control unit which isn’t associated with either side wall.
Kim teaches a cabin (100) for wellness treatments (Fig. 1) comprising a pair of side walls (151), a back wall (153) and an access wall (152) with an access door (140) wherein the back wall and access wall are opposite each other and separated by the pair of side walls which are opposite each other (Fig. 2). Kim further teaches the inclusion of an air conditioning system (300/350) comprising a plurality of heating means (300/350) and wherein the air conditioning system is controlled by an electronic management and control unit (400) which is located on the access wall.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide an electronic management and control unit on the access wall, as taught by Kim, to facilitate control of the air condition system as they enter or exit the cabin and/or to locate the controls for the cabin in a commonly accessible area (proximate the access door).
Regarding claim 13, Turri states that the heating means (5/6/7/8) comprises at least one steam production and dispensing unit (5/7).
Regarding claim 14, Turri states that the back wall comprises at least one housing seat (5 – conduit 5 passes through the backwall to container and provide passage of components and supplies for the air conditioning system) adapted to house at least partly said air conditioning system (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 15, Turri states the fact that the heating means are uniquely and directly associated with said back wall (Fig. 1 – the heating means extends through the back wall and as such is uniquely and directly associated with the back wall in so much as Applicant’s invention is with their back wall).
Claims 2-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turri in view of Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 8,037,556 (Lock).
Regarding claim 2, Turri does not state details of how the access, back and side walls are joined such as through a joining means.
Lock teaches a shower enclosure comprising a plurality of adjacent side walls (Fig. 7) (14/14). Lock further teaches that the side walls are provided with a joining means (34’) associated with the sidewalls of the adjacent side walls to enable them to be mutually associated with each other (Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a joining means associated with the sidewalls of adjacent sidewalls to allow them to be mutually associated, as taught by Lock, to facilitate the coupling or otherwise engagement of adjacent walls together to form the enclosed cabin structure.
Regarding claim 3, Turri does not state details of how the access, back and side walls are joined such as through a joining means having a profiled element extending along a longitudinal direction.
Lock teaches a shower enclosure comprising a plurality of adjacent side walls (Fig. 7) (14/14). Lock further teaches that the side walls are provided with a joining means (34’) comprising at least one profiled element (36’/38’) extending along a longitudinal direction intended to fit between the sidewalls of adjacent walls to enable them to be mutually associated with each other (Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a joining means comprising at least one profiled element extending along a longitudinal direction intended to fit between the sidewalls of adjacent walls to enable them to be mutually associated, as taught by Lock, to facilitate the coupling or otherwise engagement of adjacent walls together to form the enclosed cabin structure.
Regarding claim 4, Turri does not state details of how the access, back and side walls are joined such as through a joining means having a profiled element with a main portion defining a supporting surface for a sidewall of one of the walls.
Lock teaches a shower enclosure comprising a plurality of adjacent side walls (Fig. 7) (14/14). Lock further teaches that the side walls are provided with a joining means (34’) comprising at least one profiled element (36’/38’) with a main portion defining a supporting surface (22d) for a sidewall of one of the walls (Fig. 7, annotated below).
PNG
media_image2.png
286
516
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a joining means comprising at least one profiled element with a main portion defining a supporting surface for a sidewall of one of the adjacent walls, as taught by Lock, to provide a connecting structure configured to receive one of the walls and join it with an adjacent wall so as to facilitate construction of the cabin enclosure.
Regarding claim 5, Turri does not state details of how the access, back and side walls are joined such as through a joining means having a profiled element with a main portion and a retaining portion opposite said main portion extending parallel to a longitudinal direction.
Lock teaches a shower enclosure comprising a plurality of adjacent side walls (Fig. 7) (14/14). Lock further teaches that the side walls are provided with a joining means (34’) comprising at least one profiled element (36’/38’) with a main portion and a retaining portion opposite the main portion (Fig. 7, annotated below) with the main and retaining portions extending in a longitudinal direction.
PNG
media_image3.png
286
516
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a joining means comprising at least one profiled element with a main portion and a retaining portion opposite said retaining portion with both extending parallel to a longitudinal direction, as taught by Lock, to provide a connecting structure configured to secure to one of the walls with one portion of the profiled element while joining with another wall through the use of the opposite portion so as to facilitate construction/assembly of the cabin enclosure.
Regarding claim 6, Turri does not state details of how the access, back and side walls are joined such as through a joining means having a profiled element comprising a gasket associated with a retaining portion of the profiled element.
Lock teaches a shower enclosure comprising a plurality of adjacent side walls (Fig. 7) (14/14). Lock further teaches that the side walls are provided with a joining means (34’) comprising at least one profiled element (36’/38’) comprising a gasket (40) associated with a retaining portion of the profiled element (Fig. 7, annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image4.png
173
211
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a joining means comprising a profiled element comprising a gasket associated with a retaining portion of the profiled element, as taught by Lock, so as reduce the possibility of moisture leaking out of the assembled cabin enclosure through the wall joints/connections.
Regarding claim 7, Turri does not state details of how the access, back and side walls are joined such as through a joining means having a profiled element comprising a gasket associated with a contact surface of a retaining portion of the profiled element.
Lock teaches a shower enclosure comprising a plurality of adjacent side walls (Fig. 7) (14/14). Lock further teaches that the side walls are provided with a joining means (34’) comprising at least one profiled element (36’/38’) comprising a gasket (40) associated with a contact surface of a retaining portion of the profiled element configured to abut against another wall of the enclosure (Fig. 7, annotated figures below. In so much as applicant’s assembly achieves this, the contact surfaces abut an adjacent wall through the contact surface of that wall’s profiled element).
PNG
media_image4.png
173
211
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
263
387
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a joining means comprising a profiled element comprising a gasket associated with a contact surface of a retaining portion of the profiled element, as taught by Lock, so as to form a wall connection/joining configured to reduce the possibility of moisture leaking out of the assembled cabin enclosure.
Regarding claim 10, Turri does not state details of how the access, back and side walls are joined such as through a joining means having a profiled element comprising a gasket associated with a contact surface of a retaining portion of the profiled element.
Lock teaches a shower enclosure comprising a plurality of adjacent side walls (Fig. 7) (14/14). Lock further teaches that the side walls are provided with a joining means (34’) comprising at least one profiled element (36’/38’) comprising a main portion with an opening (Fig. 7, opening into 22d/annotated figure below) configured to receive substantially to size the sidewall of a wall of a pair of adjacent walls (Fig. 7).
PNG
media_image6.png
286
516
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a joining means comprising at least one profiled element with a main portion defining an opening for receiving a sidewall of one of the adjacent walls, as taught by Lock, to provide a connecting structure configured to receive one of the walls and join it with an adjacent wall so as to facilitate construction of the cabin enclosure.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turri in view of Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2022/0062031 (Geurtin).
Regarding claim 8, Turri states that the cabin is configured for containing steam/heat during use as previously discussed but does not state how the walls of the cabin enclosure are joined together.
Geurtin teaches an enclosure for thermal therapy comprising a plurality of wall elements (302/307) connected through joining means (202). Wherein the joining means are provided with a contact surface and a silicone gasket between the contact surface and sidewall of the wall having ‘a complementary conformation’ to said contact surface such that when the contact surface engages a sidewall of a wall of the enclosure the silicone gasket member forms an air-tight connection between the contact surface and wall (Para. 0118-0119).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide gasket member having a ‘complementary conformation’ to a contact surface such that it is configured to form an air-tight connection when abutting against a sidewall of a wall, as taught by Turri, so that once assembled the enclosure will be configured to maintain a controlled environment within the enclosure for therapeutic or recreational purposes.
Regarding claim 9, Turri states that the cabin is configured for containing steam/heat during use as previously discussed but does not state how the walls of the cabin enclosure are joined together.
Geurtin teaches an enclosure for thermal therapy comprising a plurality of wall elements (302/307) connected through joining means (202). Wherein the joining means are provided with a contact surface and a silicone gasket between the contact surface and sidewall of the wall having ‘a complementary conformation’ to said contact surface such that when the contact surface engages a sidewall of a wall of the enclosure the silicone gasket member forms an air-tight connection between the contact surface and wall (Para. 0118-0119).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a silicone gasket member between walls or otherwise within couplings/joining means, as taught by Turri, to facilitate air-tight connections/joints such that once assembled the enclosure will be configured to maintain a controlled environment within the enclosure for therapeutic or recreational purposes.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turri in view of Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 9,506,253 (Rosko)
Regarding claim 11, Turri does not state that a wall of the cabin is provided with a joining means comprising an opening for receiving a sidewall of a wall and a gasket element within the opening.
Rosko teaches a joining means (204) for shower walls (212/236/238) comprising an opening (248/250) for receiving an end/sidewall of a wall (236/238) with the opening further comprising a gasket element (252a/252b/254a/254b) configured to ‘tighten in a sandwich fashion’ the wall received in the opening.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a wall with a joining means comprising an opening with a gasket member configured to secure the wall within the opening of the joining means, as taught by Rosko, to facilitate securing the walls together through the joining means in a secure (gasket securing the wall in any joint) and moisture resistant (gasket) manner.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turri in view of Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of EP 2453061 (Turri2).
Regarding claim 12, Turri does not state details of how the access, back and side walls are joined such as through providing at least one wall with a plurality of profiled elements arranged to make a frame.
Turri2 teaches a cabin (1) for a sauna comprising a plurality of walls (6/8) which are each provided with a plurality of profiled elements (26) to make a frame of the wall for joining with other walls.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide at least one wall of the cabin with a plurality of profiled elements to form a frame of the wall, as taught by Turri2, so as to facilitate joining the wall element/frame with adjacent walls and/or a wall and ceiling of the cabin.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2008/0005980 (Lin) teaches a sauna cabinet comprising a plurality of walls and joining means.
US 4,712,942 (Brown) teaches a joining means for walls comprising profiled elements with a main portion with an opening and an opposite retaining portion.
US 6,662,503 (Cowell) teaches a bathing enclosure assembly comprising various joining means comprising profiled elements with main portions having an opening for receiving a sidewall of a wall and an opposite retaining portion.
US 11,773,600 (Micciantuono) teaches a wall paneling system comprising a plurality of profiled members comprising a main portion with an opening for receiving a wall and an opposing retaining side configured for joining with an adjacent wall.
US 11,821,195 (Farber) teaches a portable sauna comprising a plurality of walls joined by joining means comprising sealing members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS A ROS whose telephone number is (571)270-3577. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 9:00-6:00.
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, David Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
/NICHOLAS A ROS/Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/DAVID P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754