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
2. Claims 1-12 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “10” has been used to designate both “insertion shaft” (para. [0026], [0034]) and “U-shaped groove” (para. [0035]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “12” has been used to designate both “rotating shaft” (para. [0026]) and “rotating holes” (para. [0035]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “13” has been used to designate both “rotating hole” (para. [0026]) and “soft silica gel element” (para. [0036]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “14” has been used to designate both “soft silica gel element” (para. [0026]) and “soft silica gel cover” (para. [0037]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “15” has been used to designate both “soft silica gel cover” (para. [0026]) and “vibration motor” (para. [0038]-[0040]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “16” has been used to designate both “vibration motor” (para. [0026]) and “external thread” (para. [0039]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “17” has been used to designate both “external thread” (para. [0026]) and “internal thread” (para. [0039]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “18” has been used to designate both “internal thread” (para. [0026]) and “battery” (para. [0040]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “19” has been used to designate both “battery” (para. [0026]) and “magnetic charging assembly” (para. [0040]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “20” has been used to designate both “magnetic charging assembly” (para. [0026]) and “PCB” (para. [0040]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “21” has been used to designate both “PCB” (para. [0026]) and “upper shell” (para. [0041]).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “22” has been used to designate both “upper shell” (para. [0026]) and “lower shell” (para. [0041]).
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1-3 are exploded views, and should include brackets to embrace the separated parts to show the relationship or order of assembly (see 37 CFR 1.84(h)(1)).
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
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
In the instant case, the abstract states “The present disclosure discloses … and relates to the field of massage instruments” which is language that can be implied. The Examiner suggests –A massager with a fishtail swinging function, the massager including a hard outer shell…--.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 10 recites “the support base” and the Examiner suggests –the supporting base—to clarify the antecedent basis from line 2.
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.
Claim 6 is 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 6, lines 1-2 recite “a top shell for positioning” which is confusing because it is unclear what “for positioning” is referring to. For positioning what?
Claim 6, line 3 recites “mounted on at an upper end” which is confusing because it is unclear whether the element is mounted “on” an upper end or “at” an upper end.
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, 5, 7-9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by He (11,369,545).
Regarding claim 1, He discloses a massager (Fig. 1) with a fishtail swinging function (massage protrusion 6 swings back and forth via swing member 2, see Figs. 1-2; see col. 5, lines 21-24), comprising
a hard outer shell (hard shell 11, which includes a first hard shell 111 and a second hard shell 112, Fig. 2), a driving unit (rotary motor 3, Fig. 3), a swinging element (mouth structure 54, Fig. 6), a supporting base (rotating support pipe 511, second swing bar 53, sleeve 55, Fig. 6), and a massage part (massage protrusion 6, Figs. 2-4), wherein
the driving unit (3) is fixedly mounted in the hard outer shell (see Figs. 2-3, illustrating a portion of the shell that the motor 3 is mounted within), and drives the swinging element (54) to swing back and forth (“the eccentric shaft 40 rotates to drive the mouth structure 54 to move linearly back and forth, so that the whole nozzle member 50 swings around the rotation fulcrum 51 … the eccentric shaft 40 and the nozzle rod 50 are matched with each other to cooperatively convert the rotary motion of the rotary motor 3 into the reciprocating swing” see col. 6, lines 8-19);
a positioning shaft (shaft 1111, Figs. 2-3) is fixedly mounted in the hard outer shell (see Figs. 2-3, the shaft 1111 is mounted to the first hard shell 111. It is noted that the shaft 1111 still provides a rotatable fit, as in the instant invention); a through hole (hole associated with support pipe 511, Fig. 6) is provided in the supporting base (the hole is within the support pipe 511, see Fig. 6); the positioning shaft (1111, Figs. 2-3) is mounted in the through hole (see Figs. 2-3) in a rotatable fit manner (“the rotating support pipe 511 is a hollow pipe sleeved on the rotating shaft 1111, so that the whole nozzle member 50 can swing around the rotating shaft 1111” see col. 7, lines 27-32); the swinging element (54) drives the supporting base (511, 53, 55) to swing back and forth along the positioning shaft (see Fig. 6 and col. 6, lines 8-19; see col. 7, lines 27-32);
the massage part (6) is fixedly mounted at an upper end of the support base (mounted at, i.e., near, an upper end of sleeve 55, Fig. 6, see Figs. 3-4); and the massage part extends out of the hard outer shell (see Figs. 1-2, the massage part 6, extends out beyond hard shell 11, which includes first hard shell 111, second hard shell 112. See also col. 5, lines 21-24).
Regarding claim 5, He discloses wherein a soft silica gel element (soft shell 12, Fig. 2; “soft shell 12 can be made of silica gel” see col. 4, lines 65-66) is fixedly mounted on an outer side of the massage part (substantially surrounds the massage part 6, as it is mounted to shell(s) 111, 112, see Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 7, He discloses wherein the hard outer shell (11) comprises a left shell (first hard shell 111, Fig. 2) and a right shell (second hard shell 112, Fig. 2; see col. 5, lines 41-44); the left shell and the right shell are spliced (see Fig. 2) and assembled by a bolt (this is a product-by-process limitation. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” MPEP 2113(I). Thus, the use of a bolt is not required for the prior art. However, it is additionally noted that He clearly uses some sort of screw/bolt fastener in four locations to fasten the shells 111, 112 together as seen in Figs. 2-3); and a soft silica gel cover (soft shell 12, Fig. 2; “soft shell 12 can be made of silica gel” see col. 4, lines 65-66) sleeves the hard outer shell (11, see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, He discloses wherein the hard outer shell (11) comprises a left shell (first hard shell 111, Fig. 2) and a right shell (second hard shell 112, Fig. 2; see col. 5, lines 41-44); the left shell and the right shell are spliced (see Fig. 2) and assembled by a bolt (this is a product-by-process limitation. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” MPEP 2113(I). Thus, the use of a bolt is not required for the prior art. However, it is additionally noted that He clearly uses some sort of screw/bolt fastener in four locations to fasten the shells 111, 112 together as seen in Figs. 2-3); and a soft silica gel cover (soft shell 12, Fig. 2; “soft shell 12 can be made of silica gel” see col. 4, lines 65-66) sleeves the hard outer shell (11, see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9, He discloses wherein a vibration motor (first vibration motor 71, Fig. 4) is fixedly mounted (in sleeve 55, Figs. 4-6) between the supporting base (511, 53, 55, Fig. 6) and the massage part (6).
Regarding claim 12, He discloses wherein an upper shell (see “1. Upper Shell” in annotated Fig. A below; see Figs. 2-3) and a lower shell (see “2. Lower Shell” in annotated Fig. A below; see Figs. 2-3) are fixedly mounted in the hard outer shell (11, 111, 112, Figs. 2-3); and the driving unit (3) is mounted between the upper shell and the lower shell in a clearance fit manner (see annotated Fig. A below, the motor 3 is mounted in a hole that is larger than the size of the motor).
PNG
media_image1.png
542
716
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A (from Fig. 3 of He): He discloses an upper shell (1, shaded gray) and a lower shell (2, shaded black) and the driving unit (3) is mounted between the upper shell and the lower shell in a clearance fit manner.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He (11,369,545) in view of Wu (DE 202023103113) and Wang (2025/0332061).
Regarding claim 2, He discloses an eccentric seat (reversing member 4, Fig. 5) is fixedly mounted at a rotor of the driving unit (motor shaft of rotary motor 3 is inserted into first portion 40a of the eccentric seat 4, see Fig. 5, Fig. 9). He is silent regarding wherein the driving unit uses a deceleration driving motor; an oblique hole is provided in the eccentric seat; an insertion shaft is formed at a bottom of the swinging element; and the insertion shaft is inserted into the oblique hole in a clearance fit manner.
Wu teaches a related licking sex toy (Fig. 1, Fig. 14) that performs a swinging function. There is an eccentric seat (transmission member 26, Fig. 14) fixedly mounted at a rotor of the driving unit (mounted to motor shaft of drive motor 22, Fig. 14); an oblique hole is provided in the eccentric seat (shaft 241 is shown to be insertable into a hole within transmission member 26, at an oblique angle, see Fig. 14); an insertion shaft (shaft 241, Fig. 14) is formed at a bottom of the swinging element (oscillating member 24, Figs. 13-14); and the insertion shaft (241) is inserted into the oblique hole in a clearance fit manner (the shaft 241 is shown to be inserted into the hole in Figs. 13-14, and this would require a clearance fit). This provides an alternative means to produce a swinging motion that simulates the licking of a tongue.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the eccentric seat and swinging element of He to use an oblique hole is provided in the eccentric seat; an insertion shaft is formed at a bottom of the swinging element; and the insertion shaft is inserted into the oblique hole in a clearance fit manner as taught by Wu because this is a simple substitution of one known swinging mechanism for another known swinging mechanism that provides an expected result that the swinging mechanism would produce a motion that simulates the licking of a tongue.
The modified He/Wu device does not specifically state that the driving unit uses a deceleration driving motor. However, deceleration driving motors are well known and merely provide expected results.
For example, Wang teaches a related licking sexual massager (Fig. 2) with a driving unit that uses a deceleration driving motor (motor 1222 with reduction gearbox 1224, Fig. 9), so “the rotation speed of the driving shaft 1221 of the driving source 1220 is smaller than the rotation speed of the output shaft 1223 of the motor 1222, and thus the swing frequency of the first swing arm 1243 and the second swing arm 1253 is also small, improving the massage comfort” (see the last sentence of [0059]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the driving unit of He/Wu to use a deceleration driving motor as taught by Wang in order to slow down the swinging frequency of the massager, to improve the massage comfort.
Claims 3, 6, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He (11,369,545) in view of Huang (2024/0238155)
Regarding claim 3, He discloses wherein a U-shaped groove (cavity 543, Fig. 6) is provided in a top end of the swinging element (54, Fig. 6); but is silent regarding rotating shafts are formed on front and rear sides of a bottom end of the supporting base; rotating holes are provided in two sides in the U-shaped groove; the through hole and the rotating holes are arranged in a manner of being perpendicular to each other; and the rotating shafts are mounted in the rotating holes in a rotating fit manner based on one-to-one correspondence.
Huang teaches a related swinging massage device (Fig. 1) comprising a U-shaped groove (U-shaped groove of 15, Figs. 5-6) with rotating shafts (rivet shaft 14, guide rail shaft 16, Fig. 5) formed on front and rear sides of a bottom end of a supporting base (bottom end of swinging member 15, see Figs. 5-6. The front and rear sides have not been defined in the claims, and the shafts are on at least two opposite sides), and rotating holes are provided in two sides in the U-shaped groove (the U-shaped groove includes holes to receive at least the rivet shaft 14, at two sides, see Figs. 5-6), and a through hole (hole in the U-shaped member that receives connector 12, Figs. 5-6) and the rotating holes (holes for rivet shaft 14) are arranged in a manner of being perpendicular to each other (the through hole extends perpendicular to the holes for the rivet shaft 14 to allow connector 12 to pass transversely through) and the rotating shafts (14, 16) are mounted in the rotating holes (see Figs. 5-6) in a rotating fit manner based on one-to-one correspondence (the rivet shaft 14 and shaft 16 allow swinging motion). This provides an alternative means to produce a swinging motion that simulates the licking of a tongue.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the swinging element of He to use rotating shafts are formed on front and rear sides of a bottom end of the supporting base; rotating holes are provided in two sides in the U-shaped groove; the through hole and the rotating holes are arranged in a manner of being perpendicular to each other; and the rotating shafts are mounted in the rotating holes in a rotating fit manner based on one-to-one correspondence as taught by Huang because this is a simple substitution of one known swinging mechanism for another known swinging mechanism that provides an expected result that the swinging mechanism would produce a motion that simulates the licking of a tongue.
Regarding claim 6, He is silent regarding wherein a top shell for positioning is fixedly mounted between the hard outer shell (11) and the soft silica gel element; and the soft silica gel element is fixedly mounted on at an upper end of the hard outer shell through the top shell for positioning.
Huang teaches a related swinging massage device (Fig. 1) wherein a top shell for positioning (decorative ring 4, Figs. 1-3) is fixedly mounted between a hard outer shell (hard shell(s) 5, 6, Fig. 3) and a soft element (“soft stimulation member 2” Figs. 1-3; see the last sentence of [0035]); and the soft element (2) is fixedly mounted on at an upper end of the hard outer shell (see Figs. 1-3 and the last sentence of [0035]) through the top shell for positioning (see Figs. 1-3). Although Huang does not specify that this soft stimulation element (2) is made of silica gel, it is noted that silica gel is well known to be a suitable material for massage elements, and it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. MPEP 2144.07.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the massage device of He such that the massaging element is a soft silica gel element, with a top shell for positioning being fixedly mounted between the hard outer shell and the soft silica gel element, the soft silica gel element fixedly mounted on at an upper end of the hard outer shell through the top shell for positioning as taught by Huang because this provides a decorative ring to connect the hard shell to the soft silica gel massage stimulation element, and the use of silica gel is well known to be a suitable material for massage elements.
Regarding claim 11, He discloses wherein a battery (battery 15, Figs. 2-3), a charging assembly (charging interface 14, Fig. 3), and a printed circuit board (PCB) (circuit board 16, Fig. 2) are fixedly mounted in the hard outer shell (battery 15, charging interface 14, and circuit board 16 are each mounted within the hard outer shell 11, 111, 112, see Figs. 2-3); the battery (15) controls the driving unit and the vibration motor to work through the PCB (“rotary motor 3 is powered by the battery 15 and controlled to be started or stopped by the circuit board 16” see col. 5, lines 18-20. “first vibration motor 71 is controlled by the circuit board 16” see col. 7, lines 40-41. Thus, the battery powers the circuit board 16, which powers the rotary motor and vibration motor).
He is silent regarding the charging assembly (14) being a magnetic charging assembly that charges the battery through the PCB.
Huang teaches a related swinging massage device (Fig. 1) with a magnetic charging assembly (magnetic charging component 9, Fig. 2) that charges the battery (battery 10, Fig. 2) through the printed circuit board (PCB 8, Fig. 2; “a magnetic charging component 9 is embedded on the shell, and the magnetic charging component 9 charges the battery 10 through the PCB 8. The device is waterproof, and normal charging will not be affected” see para. [0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the charging assembly of He to be a magnetic charging assembly that charges the battery through the PCB as taught by Huang because this provides an expected result of allowing the battery to be charged through the magnetic charging component, while maintaining a waterproof structure.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He (11,369,545) in view of Lev et al. (2003/0028134).
Regarding claim 10, He is silent regarding wherein an external thread is formed on an outer side of an upper end of the supporting base; an internal thread is formed on an inner side of a lower end of the massage element; and the external thread is mounted in the internal thread in a spiral fit manner.
Lev teaches a related hand-held massage applicator (Fig. 1) wherein an external thread is formed on an outer side of an upper end of a supporting base (internal frame 98 includes an external thread as seen in Fig. 4a; see the last sentence of [0037]); an internal thread is formed on an inner side of a lower end of the massage element (“exterior surface members 100 are removably fastened to an external thread about the internal frames 98” see para. [0037], and see Fig. 5 where the threaded connection between exterior surface member 100 and internal frame 98 is visible), and the external thread is mounted in the internal thread in a spiral fit manner (they are screw threads; see para. [0037]). Lev states that this allows different sets of massage nodes to be provided that exhibit different densities or durometers to provide soft, medium, or hard massage application (see para. [0037]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connection of the massage element of He such that an external thread is formed on an outer side of an upper end of the supporting base; an internal thread is formed on an inner side of a lower end of the massage element; and the external thread is mounted in the internal thread in a spiral fit manner as taught by Lev so different massage elements can be selectively attached, providing different densities or durometers to provide soft, medium, or hard massage application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. None of the prior art of record teaches, discloses, or fairly suggests the invention as recited in claim 4, which includes the limitations of claims 1-2.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wang (2025/0186298) discloses a related licking simulation sexual massage device that has an eccentric body that has an aperture to obliquely receive a shaft. Leng (2026/0130818) discloses a related licking simulation sexual massage device that has a reduction gear for the motor, and a swinging motion. Leng (12,533,285) discloses a related licking simulation sexual massage device with swinging motion. Wu et al. (11,633,327) discloses a related licking simulation sexual massage device with similar shells, and a swinging element. Song (12,324,785) discloses a related sexual massage device with a U-shaped element that has multiple rotary shafts extending therethrough, in associated holes. Leng (CN 108743300 A) discloses a related licking simulation sexual massage device with a swinging motion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1473. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30 (Eastern).
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER E MILLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
