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 .
Status of Claims
In reply to filed on 20 February 2026 the following changes have been made: amendments to claims 1, 6, and 10. Claims 2-5 and 9 have been canceled. Claim 13 has been added.
Claims 1, 6-8, and 10-13 are currently pending and have been examined.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 63/539,698 fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. For claim 1, the prior-filed application does not provide support for an electric massage seat that is positioned within the interior space; a microphone; a camera; an HVAC unit that is positioned along the main body, said HVAC unit being configured to selectively supply cold and hot air to the interior space; wherein the wireless communication unit is configured to send and receive information with an external computer to conduct a two way remote therapy session, and wherein an operation of each of the speaker, the display screen the massage chair and the HVAC unit is controlled by an operator of the external computer during the remote therapy session. Examiner cannot find disclosure for these claimed features in the prior filed application. For claim 10, the prior-filed application does not provide support for wherein the orientation of the massage chair is controllable by each of a user sitting in the massage chair and the operator of the external computer. Examiner cannot find disclosure for this claimed feature in the prior filed application. For claim 13, the prior-filed application does not provide support for an ultraviolet lighting unit that is positioned within the interior space; and a motion sensor that is positioned within the interior space, wherein the motion sensor is configured to determine the interior space is unoccupied by a user, and wherein the ultraviolet lighting unit is configured to sanitize the interior space of the main body between uses. Examiner cannot find disclosure for this claimed feature in the prior filed application.
Accordingly, claims 1, 6-8, and 10-13 are not entitled to the benefit of the prior application.
Claim Objection
Claim 1 is objected to due to a minor informality: missing a comma in the list of “display screen the microphone.”
Claim 13 is object to due to a minor informality: misspelling. Examiner believes “unoccupied” should actually be occupied. Paragraph [0031] indicates that the motion sensor be a redundancy safety feature to ensure […] when the person is inside; not clear how applicant derived unoccupied from inside. Hence, examiner will interpret unoccupied as actually meaning occupied.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 6-7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN114613474A) in view of Madhavan et al. (WO2018218162A1), Donohue et al. (US12247753B1), and further in view of Powell (US20200307436A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jiang discloses a main body having a plurality of sides that define an interior space ([pg. 2] “the interior of the coaming is divided into […] by partition boards, and the functional rooms comprise a consulting room”)
a door for permitting access to the interior space ([pg. 2] “bounding wall corresponds consulting room […] is equipped with entry door”)
an electric massage that is positioned within the interior space ([pg. 4 to 5] “consulting room, be equipped with […] equipped with the massage armchair of spaceflight formula in the room. […] the massage armchair are controlled by a computer”)
a display screen that is positioned within the interior space ([pg. 4] “is equipped with the display screen on the baffle between office and the consulting room”)
a microphone, a camera and a speaker that is positioned within the interior space, ([pg. 5] “the position that corresponds each function room on the roof is rigid coupling has the lamp stand, the lower surface center rigid coupling of lamp stand has the camera […] Further, the rigid coupling has the speaker in the lamp stand, has still seted up the sound transmission hole on the lamp stand, the rigid coupling has the microphone on the desk, microphone and speaker electric connection.”)
and a system controller that is in communication with each of the […] the massage chair ([pg. 6] “computer 25 and display screen 24 electric connection are used for controlling the display content on the display screen 24 […] the massage chair 23 are controlled by the computer 25.”)
wherein an operation of each of the speaker, the display screen the massage chair […] is controlled by an operator of the external computer during the remote therapy session ([pg. 3] “The psychologist can control the display screen 24 to play a relaxing video or picture through the computer 25, create a delicate environment so that the patient can relax, and then can make a consultation on the words through the microphone 30.” [pg. 5] “microphone and speaker electric connection” [pg. 6] “[…] the massage chair 23 are controlled by the computer 25.”)
Jiang does not explicitly disclose however Madhavan teaches a control panel that is positioned within the interior space ([0032] “In an example, each of the one or more computing devices 104, 105, and 106 further includes one or more standard input devices such as a keyboard, a mouse, speech processing means, and/or a touchscreen.” [0186] “In an example, the system 10, 12, 14 interacts with standard room.”)
and a system controller that is in communication with each of the control panel, the speaker, the display screen the microphone, the camera, ([0046] “In an example, the base station 106 includes input devices, such as a video camera, microphone, and/or keyboard. In an example, the base station 106 includes output devices, such as a display screen and/or speaker.” [0124] “In an example, the base station serves as the coordinator of the ZigBee network, with each of the associated devices acting as nodes.”)
wherein the system controller includes a wireless communication unit ([0046] “The base station 106 is configured to transmit and receive information (e.g., audio, video, and/or other data) and commands. In an example, the base station is further connected to a LAN, either wirelessly using a communication protocol such as ZigBee (a specification based on the IEEE 802.15 standard), Bluetooth (formerly the IEEE 802.15.1 standard), or Wi-Fi (the IEEE 802.1 1 standard) or via a wired connection using a communications protocol such as Ethernet or RS-232.”)
wherein the wireless communication unit is configured to send and receive information with an external computer to conduct a two way remote therapy session ([0046] “The video camera and microphone may record the patient and transmit that information directly to the physician […]. In an example, the physician is similarly recorded by a video camera and/or microphone; this information is transmitted to the base station where it is presented to the patient.” [0051] “The system 200 illustrates an example of patient care when the doctor (or other healthcare professional) and the patient are located remote from one another.”)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang a control panel, and a system controller that is in communication with each of the control panel, the speaker, and the display screen; a system controller that is in communication with each of the control panel, the speaker, the display screen the microphone, the camera; the system controller includes a wireless communication unit; and, the wireless communication unit is configured to send and receive information with an external computer to conduct a two way remote therapy session as taught by Madhavan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Jiang in view of Madhavan does not explicitly disclose however Donahue teaches and a system controller that is in communication with each of […] the HVAC unit ([pg. 15] “System 200 is similar to system 100. System 200 includes various zones in a monitored property and a corresponding HVAC system that provides conditioned air to the zones. […] System 200 illustrates how various zones can be controlled by a zone controller 210 in response to thermostat calls in the respective zones.”)
wherein an operation of each of […] the HVAC unit is controlled by an operator of the external computer ([pg. 15] “A technician located at the security system 154 can change the settings of the HVAC system 124 remotely to increase or decrease the number of cubic feet of air that is pushed through the ventilation of the HVAC system 124. Thus, this setting can be controlled remotely and locally.”)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang and Madhavan a system controller that is in communication with each of […] the HVAC unit; and, an operation of each of […] the HVAC unit is controlled by an operator of the external computer as taught by Donahue since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Jiang in view of Madhavan and Donahue does not explicitly disclose however Powell teaches an HVAC unit that is positioned along the main body, said HVAC unit being configured to selectively supply cold and hot air to the interior space ([0026] “vehicle 10 may also include a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) unit 32 which is provided to supply the interior space of the vehicle 10 with conditioned and filtered air.”)
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang, Madhavan, and Donohue an HVAC unit that is positioned along the main body, said HVAC unit being configured to selectively supply cold and hot air to the interior space as taught by Powell since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 6, Jiang does not explicitly disclose however Madhavan teaches wherein the two-way remote therapy session comprises a live exchange of video and sound between the user and the counselor who is the operator of the external computer ([0210] “In an example, the software is configured to permit […] evaluations that may be conducted […] remotely, […] and securely communicate with a patient using video, audio, and text communications.” [0211] “In an example, a secure portal is provided for enabling remote doctor/patient interaction. The secure portal combines high-quality audio and video conferencing”)
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang a live exchange of video and sound between the user and the counselor who is the operator of the external computer as taught by Madhavan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 7, Jiang does not explicitly disclose however Madhavan teaches wherein the system controller includes a memory that is configured to store content ([0046] “The video camera and microphone may record the patient and transmit that information directly to the physician or to the server 102, where the information may be stored or processed.”)
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang a memory that is configured to store content as taught by Madhavan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN114613474A) in view of Madhavan et al. (WO2018218162A1), Donohue et al. (US12247753B1), Powell (US20200307436A1), and further in view of Rahman et al. (US20160096072A1).
Regarding claim 8, Jiang in view of Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell does not explicitly disclose however Rahman teaches wherein a user can utilize the control panel to select the stored content for playback on the display, and at least one speaker ([0048] “the patient may use the system to either record or playback therapy sessions.”)
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell utilizing the control panel to select the stored content for playback on the display, and at least one speaker as taught by Rahman since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN114613474A) in view of Madhavan et al. (WO2018218162A1), Donohue et al. (US12247753B1), Powell (US20200307436A1), and further in view of Sugawa et al. (US5813727A).
Regarding claim 10, Jiang discloses and wherein the orientation of the massage chair is controllable by […] the operator of the external computer ([pg. 6] “The psychologist can control […] through the computer 25” [pg. 8] “[…] A mobile patient psychological counseling room according to claim 2 wherein: the massage armchair (23) is provided […] the massage armchair (23) are controlled by a computer (25).”)
Jiang in view of Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell does not explicitly disclose however Sugawa teaches wherein the massage chair is configured to transition between an upright orientation and a lay flat orientation ([pg. 5] “The massaging chair in accordance with the present invention comprises a seat, a reclining backrest pivotally connected about a pivot axis to the seat so as to be movable between an upright position and a horizontal position with respect to the seat.”)
and wherein the orientation of the massage chair is controllable by each of a user sitting in the massage chair ([pg. 5] “The control unit is provided with a magnet which is magnetically attached to a desired portion of the leg made of a magnetic material such that the user can locate the control unit at a suitable position which may be different when the user is in a sitting position on the chair from when the user is in a reclined position lying on the backrest.”)
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang, Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell the massage chair configured to transition between an upright orientation and a lay flat orientation; and, wherein the orientation of the massage chair is controllable by each of a user sitting in the massage chair as taught by Sugawa since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim(s) 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN114613474A) in view of Madhavan et al. (WO2018218162A1), Donohue et al. (US12247753B1), Powell (US20200307436A1), and further in view of Jin et al. (CN113192270A).
Regarding claim 11, Jiang in view of Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell does not explicitly disclose however Jin teaches an access panel that is positioned along an exterior portion of the main body ([pg. 9] “Embodiments disclosed herein may selectively open and close an access door exposed to the outside by means of a door lock hidden by a security panel.”)
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang, Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell an access panel as taught by Jin since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 12, Jiang in view of Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell does not explicitly disclose however Jin teaches wherein the access panel includes functionality for selectively locking and unlocking the door ([pg. 9] “a security assembly having a security panel or case for locking and unlocking the access door.”)
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang, Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell selectively locking and unlocking the door as taught by Jin since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (CN114613474A) in view of Madhavan et al. (WO2018218162A1), Donohue et al. (US12247753B1), Powell (US20200307436A1), and further in view of Cashman et al. (US20150199783A1).
Regarding claim 13, Jiang does not explicitly disclose however Madhavan teaches a motion sensor that is positioned within the interior space, wherein the motion sensor is configured to determine the interior space is unoccupied by a user ([0194] “The system 1300 may include one or more motion detectors 1304 to monitor patient movement. For example, a motion detector 1304 may include a sensor such as an IR sensor or an ultrasonic sensor to detect movement.” [0195] “Sensors are located in one or more locations; for example, sensors may be located in multiple rooms”)
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang a motion sensor that is positioned within the interior space, wherein the motion sensor is configured to determine the interior space is unoccupied by a user as taught by Madhavan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Jiang in view of Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell does not explicitly disclose however Cashman teaches an ultraviolet lighting unit that is positioned within the interior space ([0135] “The medical kiosk can optionally include a cleaning system that is designed to clean one or more portions of the interior of the medical kiosk […] the UV sanitizing system 220 can be connected to or positioned adjacent to the ceiling panel and rear panels.”)
and wherein the ultraviolet lighting unit is configured to sanitize the interior space of the main body between uses ([0135] “The UV sanitizing system generally includes one or more UV lights that are designed to kill some or all of the germs and/or other micro-organisms in the medical kiosk.”)
Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the system of Jiang, Madhavan, Donahue, and Powell an access panel as taught by Jin since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed on 20 February 2026 have been considered, but are not fully persuasive.
Regarding the USC 103 rejection, applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot since they do not apply to the newly cited references of record: Donahue and Powell. Claim 13 and the remaining dependent claims are still rejected under USC 103. Examiner suggests additional narrowing limitations, especially limitations unique to the applicant’s invention. The field of art in the applicant’s area is heavy with references.
Prior Art Cited but Not Relied Upon
Jiang, Q., Lin, Q., Zhang, R., & Huang, H. (2020, September). Shared massage chair application in the context of IoT: take “lemobar” as an example. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1631, No. 1, p. 012173). IOP Publishing.
This reference is relevant because is discloses a massage chair application in the context of IoT.
KR20180052339A: this reference is relevant because it discloses a telemedicine massage chair system.
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 WINSTON FURTADO whose telephone number is (571)272-5349. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM EST.
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, Mamon Obeid can be reached at (571) 270-1813. 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.
/WINSTON R FURTADO/Examiner, Art Unit 3687