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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2015/0135428 (hereinafter Laera).
Regarding claim 1, Laera discloses a bathtub (2, for a user such as a small child) comprising: a basin (2) delimited by an upstanding peripheral wall (5) and a bottom (4); a main drain (10) disposed in the bottom (4); an overflow drain (15) having an overflow opening (15) disposed in the upstanding peripheral wall (5) and spaced apart from the bottom (4) (fig. 2), an overflow cavity (20) adjacent the overflow opening, the overflow opening (15) fluidly connecting the overflow cavity to the basin (fig. 2), and an overflow conduit (30) fluidly connecting the overflow opening (15) to the main drain (10) (fig. 2); a receptacle (40) at least partially disposed in the overflow cavity (20) and configured to contain a fragrance solution (configured to contain soap which is capable of being fragrant), an emission device (48) coupled to the receptacle (40) and electrically connected (100); and a removable cover (25, capable of being removed if a user so desires) configured to cover the overflow opening, the removable cover comprising an aperture (22) disposed above a rim (41) of the receptacle (40) (fig. 4).
Regarding claim 3, the emission device is considered a vibration generator since it is a peristaltic pump which would create vibrations during strokes (par. 22).
Regarding claim 4, the receptacle (40) is curved (see fig. 4 – spigot 41 which is part of receptacle 40 is curved on its lower half) and protrudes outwardly from the overflow opening (fig. 5 shows the spigot 41, which is part of the receptacle 40, extending outwardly from the overflow opening).
Regarding claim 5, the overflow cavity (20) comprises a seat (sidewall that forms housing 20 provides a resting surface i.e. seat that supports the receptacle 40; fig. 3, 5, 6).
Regarding claim 6, the removable cover (25) is tethered to the receptacle (40) (fig. 4, 5).
Regarding claim 7, the aperture in the removable cover is a horizontal slit-shaped aperture (note fig. 4, there are two slits each having a horizontal component).
Regarding claim 8, the emission device (48) is considered ‘removably coupled to the receptacle and removable from the overflow cavity’ since a user could detach/remove if so desired.
Regarding claim 9, Laera discloses further comprising an electrical connector (95) electrically connecting the emission device (48) and the electrical wire (100).
Regarding claim 11, Laera discloses further comprising an additional aperture in the removable cover (the space where the spigot 41 extends is an additional aperture; see fig. 7) disposed below the aperture (22) and fluidly connecting the basin to the overflow conduit (fig. 7).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laera.
Regarding claim 2, Laera shows the emission device (48) is electrically connected to an electrical wire (98) but fails to show the electrical wire extends in the overflow conduit. Applicant appears to have placed no criticality on the specific location of the electrical wires, and moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the device of Laera to function equally with the electrical wires extending though the overflow conduit as it maintains a pathway to the electrically controlled elements within the housing (20). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to route the electrical wire in the overflow conduit as a matter of rearrangement of parts; such a rearrangement of parts would not affect the functionality or operation of the device. See MPEP 2144.04 VI C; In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laera in view of US Patent Application Publication 2008/0149180 (hereinafter Parris).
Regarding claim 10, Laera fails to show the electrical connector is one of a magnetic connector, a pogo pin connector, or an inductive connector. Attention is turned to Parris which shows common electrical connectors includes an inductive connection (par. 94). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to select an electrical connector such as an inductive connector since the selection of a known part for its intended use involves only routine skill in the art as evidenced by the teachings above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent 9,814,358 is directed to the state of the art of aromatherapy dispensers in bathtubs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANIE M LOEPPKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
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.
/JANIE M LOEPPKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights