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 .
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 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.
Response to Amendment
Amendments to the claims, filed on 07/06/2026, are acknowledged.
Previous Double Patenting rejections are provisionally withdrawn because Applicant has introduced the limitation of “wherein the water outlet is positioned within a plane defined by the opening” in both independent claims 1 and 11. Examiner notes that U.S. Patent 12,076,735, which was used as the basis for the Double Patenting rejection, does not claim this limitation. Furthermore, it would not be appropriate to make a Double Patenting rejection with a secondary reference that teaches this feature, because modifying Patent 12,076,735 so that the water outlet is positioned within a plane defined by the opening would be considered hindsight rationale; and is a feature, that although is not claimed, it is already disclosed in its drawings. For these reasons, Examiner provisionally withdraws the Double Patenting rejections.
Claims 1 and 3-16 are pending; claim 2 is cancelled.
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 “the water outlet positioned within a plane defined by the opening” as required by claims 1 and 11 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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The specification does not disclose “the water outlet is positioned within a plane defined by the opening”, as required by claims 1 and 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 and 3-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claims 1 and 11 disclose: “wherein the water outlet is positioned within a plane defined by the opening”. Examiner notes that the original drawings and disclosure do not teach the water outlet 20 being positioned within any plane defined by opening (34). See Applicant’s Fig 4 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
298
460
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown above, the opening 34 defines three planes. However, the water outlet 20 is not positioned within any of these planes, as required by the claim. The outlet may be aligned with or projecting water through some of these planes, but it is not positioned within any of the planes. This is considered new matter.
Claims 3-10 are rejected under 112(a) for depending on claim 1.
Claims 12-16 are rejected under 112(a) for depending on claim 11.
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 and 3-16 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.
Independent claims 1 and 11 disclose: “wherein the water outlet is positioned within a plane defined by the opening ”. Examiner notes that in Applicant’s drawings and disclosure, the water outlet 20 is not positioned within any plane defined by opening (34). See Applicant’s annotated fig 4 above. As shown above, the opening 34 defines three planes. However, the water outlet 20 is not positioned within any of these planes, as required by the claim. Based on lack of disclosure, this limitation is considered indefinite, as it is unclear how the outlet 20 can be within any of these planes.
Claims 3-10 are indefinite for depending on claim 1.
Claims 12-16 are indefinite for depending on claim 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ross (U.S. 4,072,397).
Regarding claim 1, Ross teaches a showerhead (10) comprising:
a base (11);
a water inlet (defined by end 13) supported by the base (as seen in Fig 1);
a water outlet (defined by 12) supported by the base and in fluid communication with the water inlet (as seen in Fig 1);
a deflector (panel 26; col 8, line 66 discloses the panel intended for water deflecting) in fixed axial spaced relation to the water outlet (as seen in Fig 2, the deflector is spaced from the outlet 12; and it is fixed in place by wing nut 29, as such it is considered “fixed”) and including a water contact surface (30) facing the water outlet (as seen in Fig 2);
a first support arm (27) coupled to the base and the deflector (as seen in Fig 1, the arm 27 is coupled to the base via band 20 and to deflector 26);
a second support arm (28) coupled to the base and the deflector (as seen in Fig 1, the arm 28 is coupled to the base via band 20 and to deflector 26); and
an opening (shown below) defined axially between the base and the deflector, and laterally between the first support arm and the second support arm (as seen below), wherein the water outlet is positioned within a plane defined by the opening (as seen below, the opening is positioned within the plane; Examiner notes that the “plane” is broadly claimed because the opening can define three different planes; Furthermore as best understood, Fig 2 of Ross resembles Applicant’s drawings, which show the outlet 12 aligned with the plane or projecting water through the plane depicted in the annotated figure below).
Regarding claim 3, Ross teaches the showerhead of claim 1, wherein the water contact surface is concave in a vertical direction (concave surface shown below; if the user rotates the base 11 or band 20 by 90 degrees, the concave surface is concave in a vertical direction, as seen below).
Regarding claim 4, Ross teaches the showerhead of claim 3, wherein the water contact surface is concave in a lateral direction (concave surface shown below, which is concave in the lateral position, seen in Fig 2).
Regarding claim 6, Ross teaches the showerhead the showerhead of claim 1, further comprising a housing (defined by inner structure of base 11) defining a water chamber (defined by inner volume of the housing) supported by the base (as seen in Fig 1), and a faceplate (defined where outlets 14 are present) coupled to the housing (as seen in Fig 1) and including a plurality of water outlet openings (outlets 14).
Regarding claim 8, Ross teaches the showerhead the showerhead of claim 1, wherein water discharged from the water outlet is configured to extend axially through the opening and impact the deflector (as seen in Fig 2, the water outlet 12 extends through the opening, shown below) to form a sheet-like layer of water (Ross teaches all of the claimed structure of the deflector, as such it is deemed capable of forming a sheet-like layer of water).
Regarding claim 10, Ross teaches the showerhead the showerhead of claim 1, wherein the water inlet includes a coupler (defined by swivel joint) to fluidly couple with a shower arm (as seen in Fig 1, the coupler 17 attaches the showerhead to shower arm 15).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ross (U.S. 4,072,397) in view of Mei (U.S. 2017/0189919).
Alternatively, Regarding claims 3 and 4, Ross teaches the showerhead of claim 1. However, if it is found that Ross does not teach the showerhead wherein the water contact surface is concave in a vertical direction; and wherein the water contact surface is concave in a lateral direction, Mei teaches a showerhead water deflector (16) that has a contact surface (seen in Fig 3F), wherein the surface is concave in a vertical direction and concave in a lateral direction (as seen below).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ross to incorporate the teachings of Mei to provide the contact surface with a concave shape in a vertical and lateral direction in order to facilitate unidirectional flow of water downward along the tilt of the deflector as indicated by the arrows in FIGS. 3F (as disclosed in Par 0048 of Mei). This would ensure that water does not splash everywhere when the deflector of Ross is deployed.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ross (U.S. 4,072,397).
Regarding claim 5, Ross teaches the showerhead of claim 1. However, the embodiment of Ross seen in Figs 1 and 2 does not teach the deflector including an upper shield extending axially in a rearward direction toward the water outlet.
Nonetheless, the embodiment of Fig 3 teaches an upper shield (39) that extends axially in a rearward direction toward the water outlet (as seen in Fig 3, 39 extends parallel with the main axis of the showerhead from the deflector 36 towards the outlet 12).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Figs 1-2 of Ross to incorporate the teachings of Fig 3 to provide an upper shield in order to deflect water from going upwards (as disclosed in col 4, lines 16-31, which states that 39 behaves in the same manner as deflecting lips 38; hence 39 works to prevent water from splashing upwards).
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ross (U.S. 4,072,397) in view of Rosko et al (U.S. 2007/0194148).
Regarding claim 7, Ross teaches the showerhead the showerhead of claim 6. However, Ross does not teach the showerhead further comprising a diverter valve configured to select water between the water outlet and the water outlet openings.
Rosko teaches a sprayer comprising an outlet (spray head 14) that includes a diverter valve (24) configured to select water between a water outlet (132) and water outlet openings (nozzles 98).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ross incorporate the teachings of Rosko to provide a diverter valve and two different sets outlets in order to have the option of providing different types of spray patterns (as disclosed in Par 0003 of Rosko).
Regarding claim 9, Ross teaches the showerhead the showerhead of claim 1. However, Ross does not teach the showerhead wherein the water outlet includes a conical shaped discharge nozzle and a stream straightener in fluid communication with the discharge nozzle.
Rosko teaches a sprayer comprising a water outlet (spray head 14) that includes a conical shaped discharge nozzle (132, which has a conical inner wall 128; see Par 0083) and a stream straightener (110) in fluid communication with the discharge nozzle (as seen in Fig 5 and disclosed in Par 0083).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ross to incorporate the teachings of Rosko to provide a conical discharge nozzle and a flow straightener in order to provide a laminar flow to the showerhead (as described in Par 0083 of Rosko) which would result in a more focused stream that would aid in cleaning/scrubbing (as disclosed in Par 0086 of Rosko).
Claims 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ross (U.S. 4,072,397) in view of Rosko et al (U.S. 2007/0194148) and Mei (U.S. 2017/0189919).
Regarding claim 11, Ross teaches a showerhead (10) comprising:
a base (11);
a water inlet (defined by end 13) supported by the base (as seen in Fig 1);
a water outlet (defined by 12) supported by the base and in fluid communication with the water inlet (as seen in Fig 1);
a deflector (panel 26; col 8, line 66 discloses the panel intended for water deflecting) in fixed axial spaced relation to the water outlet (as seen in Fig 2, the deflector is spaced from the outlet 12; and it is fixed in place by wing nut 29, as such it is considered “fixed”);
wherein the deflector includes a water contact surface (30) facing the water outlet (as seen in Fig 2); wherein the water contact surface is concave in a vertical direction (concave surface shown below; if the user rotates the base 11 or band 20 by 90 degrees, the concave surface is concave in a vertical direction, as seen below), and the water contact surface is concave in a lateral direction (concave surface shown below, which is concave in the lateral position, seen in Fig 2).
a first support arm (27) coupled to the base and the deflector (as seen in Fig 1, the arm 27 is coupled to the base via band 20 and to deflector 26);
a second support arm (28) coupled to the base and the deflector (as seen in Fig 1, the arm 28 is coupled to the base via band 20 and to deflector 26), the second support arm in laterally spaced relation to the first support arm (as seen in Fig 2, arm 27 is laterally spaced from arm 28); and
an opening (shown below) defined axially between the base and the deflector (as seen below), and extending laterally between the first support arm and the second support arm (as seen below), wherein the water outlet is positioned within a plane defined by the opening (as seen below, the opening is positioned within the plane; Examiner notes that the “plane” is broadly claimed because the opening can define three different planes; Furthermore as best understood, Fig 2 of Ross resembles Applicant’s drawings, which show the outlet 12 aligned with the plane or projecting water through the plane depicted in the annotated figure below).
However, Ross does not teach the showerhead wherein the water outlet includes a conical shaped discharge nozzle and a stream straightener in fluid communication with the discharge nozzle.
Rosko teaches a sprayer comprising a water outlet (spray head 14) that includes a conical shaped discharge nozzle (132, which has a conical inner wall 128; see Par 0083) and a stream straightener (110) in fluid communication with the discharge nozzle (as seen in Fig 5 and disclosed in Par 0083).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ross to incorporate the teachings of Rosko to provide a conical discharge nozzle and a flow straightener in order to provide a laminar flow to the showerhead (as described in Par 0083 of Rosko) which would result in a more focused stream that would aid in cleaning/scrubbing (as disclosed in Par 0086 of Rosko).
Moreover, if it is found that Ross does not teach the showerhead wherein the water contact surface is concave in a vertical direction; and wherein the water contact surface is concave in a lateral direction, Mei teaches a showerhead water deflector (16) that has a contact surface (seen in Fig 3F), wherein the surface is concave in a vertical direction and concave in a lateral direction (as seen below).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ross to incorporate the teachings of Mei to provide the contact surface with a concave shape in a vertical and lateral direction in order to facilitate unidirectional flow of water downward along the tilt of the deflector as indicated by the arrows in FIGS. 3F (as disclosed in Par 0048 of Mei). This would ensure that water does not splash everywhere when the deflector of Ross is deployed.
Note: references made in parenthesis hereafter are referencing Ross, unless otherwise stated.
Regarding claim 12, Ross, Rosko and Mei teach the showerhead of claim 11. However, the embodiment of Ross seen in Figs 1 and 2 does not teach the deflector including an upper shield extending axially in a rearward direction toward the water outlet.
Nonetheless, the embodiment of Fig 3 teaches an upper shield (39) that extends axially in a rearward direction toward the water outlet (as seen in Fig 3, 39 extends parallel with the main axis of the showerhead from the deflector 36 towards the outlet 12).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Figs 1-2 of Ross to incorporate the teachings of Fig 3 to provide an upper shield in order to deflect water from going upwards (as disclosed in col 4, lines 16-31, which states that 39 behaves in the same manner as deflecting lips 38; hence 39 works to prevent water from splashing upwards).
Regarding claim 13, Ross, Rosko and Mei teach the showerhead of claim 11, further comprising a housing (defined by inner structure of base 11) defining a water chamber (defined by inner volume of the housing) supported by the base (as seen in Fig 1), and a faceplate (defined where outlets 14 are present) coupled to the housing (as seen in Fig 1) and including a plurality of water outlet openings (outlets 14).
Regarding claim 14, Ross, Rosko and Mei teach the showerhead the showerhead of claim 13, further comprising a diverter valve (valve 24 of Rosko) configured to select water between the water outlet and the water outlet openings (valve 24 dictates whether water goes to water outlet 132 of openings 104, as disclosed at least in Par 0078 of Rosko).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ross incorporate the teachings of Rosko to provide a diverter valve and two different sets outlets in order to have the option of providing different types of spray patterns (as disclosed in Par 0003 of Rosko).
Regarding claim 15, Ross, Rosko and Mei teach the showerhead of claim 11, wherein water discharged from the water outlet is configured to extend axially through the opening and impact the deflector (as seen in Fig 2, the water outlet 12 extends through the opening, shown below) to form a sheet-like layer of water (Ross and Mei teach all of the claimed structure of the deflector, as such it is deemed capable of forming a sheet-like layer of water).
Regarding claim 16, Ross, Rosko and Mei teach the showerhead of claim 11, wherein the water inlet includes a coupler (defined by swivel joint) to fluidly couple with a shower arm (as seen in Fig 1, the coupler 17 attaches the showerhead to shower arm 15).
Ross Annotated Figures:
PNG
media_image2.png
316
602
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
443
580
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Mei Annotated Figure:
PNG
media_image4.png
276
506
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 3-16 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply in view of new grounds of rejection. Applicant's amendments filed on 07/06/2026 have resulted in the new grounds of rejection found above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN C BARRERA whose telephone number is (571)272-6284. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F Generally 10am-4pm and 6-8pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ARTHUR O. HALL can be reached on 571-270-1814. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If there are any inquiries that are not being addressed by first contacting the Examiner or the Supervisor, you may send an email inquiry to TC3700_Workgroup_D_Inquiries@uspto.gov.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUAN C BARRERA/
Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/CHEE-CHONG LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 July 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights