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 .
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendments filed August 7, 2026. Claims 1,4,6,8 and 14-26 are pending. Claims 2,3,5,7 and 9-13 have been cancelled. Claims 1,15 and 21 have been amended.
All prior rejections are maintained for the reasons set forth below.
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 1,4,6,8 and 14-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (EP 437713) in view of Dailey (WO 2011/106158), Scheper (US 2005/0183208) and Kawanishi (JP 2008172031A).
Jung teaches treating laundry by adding a water softening agent flushed through by running water from the dispensing drawer of a washing machine into the washing machine tub and onto the dry clothing followed by treating with a laundry detergent in a wash cycle (abstract; page 6, claim 1, page 12). The benefit of pretreatment with the water softener first is that hardness is pre bonded in the wash water before the detergent is supplied and a much better result in the cleaning performance by the detergent is achieved (page 11). Jung teaches completely softened water is used and is done in advance (page 6, advantages) and washing water is softened prior to being delivered to the washing tub and that softening allows the detergent to work more effectively and immediately develop its full washing power (page 11). Jung teaches the fresh water used can be first treated with the water softener before being added into the tub, indicating 100% of the wash water would be softened prior to using on laundry (page 12, next to last paragraph).
Jung does not teach claimed GLDA chelants, surfactants or builders. Jung does not teach the inline mixer with an injector, water flowmeter and ratio controller.
Dailey teaches that builder compositions are conventionally used in laundering to soften water (paragraph 0040) and emulsify greases and soils (paragraphs 0003-0004). Dailey teaches the builder compositions (paragraph 0025) are used to treat fabrics containing tea, alcohol, coffee grease, body oil and sebum stains (paragraph 0027). Daily teaches the builder compositions comprise chelating agents L-glutamic acid N,N-diacetatic acid (GLDA) or salts thereof to inactivate hardness minerals or metallic ions in water (paragraph 0037-0042), sodium citrate builders (paragraph 0046-0047,0050) to sequester hardness minerals (paragraph 0051) and surfactants (paragraph 0103). Dailey also teaches detergent composition used in removing soil from laundered fabric comprise surfactants (paragraph 0103).
Scheper teaches that in-line mixers used in washing machine apparatus conventionally comprise injectors wherein the inline mixers combine two or more fluid streams which can be manipulated by mixing speed, mixing time to combine the fluids and metering can be controlled to maintain a desired ratio between the water and other fluid (paragraphs 0183-0188).
Kawanishi teaches a device used in washing machine which mixes a chemical liquid and pure water to prepare a mixed solution for use in the cleaning machine (paragraph 0006,0022). Kawanishi teaches flow meters monitor the flow of the chemical liquid and the flow of the pure water (paragraph 0011), and wherein the flows are directed to an in line mixer which mixes the two components at a desired controlled flow rate to form a predetermined concentration of cleaning liquid. Kawanishi teaches the flow meter flow rate data is used to control the blending of the water and chemical solution to the optimum value (paragraph 0037,0046). Kawanishi teaches simultaneously controlling the flow rates of both the chemical liquid and the water and therefore controlling the mixing ratio of the chemical liquid and water for blending control in the piping lines (paragraph 0025).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the water softening agent of Jung by incorporating GLDA chelants, sodium citrate builders and surfactants because Dailey teaches these compounds are conventionally added to water softening builder compositions to effectively soften the wash water by inactivating hardness minerals or metallic ions in the water and to sequester hardness minerals before the water contacts the unwetted fabrics, followed by washing with a detergent containing additional surfactant to enhance soil removal on fabrics containing tea, alcohol, coffee grease, body oil and sebum stains.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the methods of Jung by incorporating an in-line mixer with an injector into the washing machine as Scheper teaches that in-line mixers used in washing machine apparatus conventionally comprise injectors wherein the inline mixers combine two or more fluid streams which can be manipulated by mixing speed, mixing time to combine the fluids and metering can be controlled to maintain a desired ratio between the water and other fluid. Using a known injection device attached to a inline mixer would be obvious for the benefit of injecting different fluids to be mixed at desired ratios to produce a final liquid which is further injected into the washing machine. While Scheper refers to producing emulsions with water and a lipophilic fluid, mixing can obviously be achieved with any two fluids including non-lipophilic fluids to produce a solution instead of an emulsion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the methods of Jung and Scheper by incorporating the inline mixer with flow meters and ratio controller of Kawanishi as Kawanishi teaches that flow sensors can collect data on the flow rate of a chemical solution and pure water and this data can be used to control the mixing ratio of the two components which are blended in an inline mixer to provide a mixed solution of a predetermined composition and concentration. Using the blending device of Kawanishi to combine the water and pre-treatment composition of Jung and Scheper is obvious as Kawanishi teaches the device is effective at controlling flow of the two components to provide a desired ratio of chemical liquid and water to be blended in an inline mixer and delivered to the washing machine and Scheper invites the inclusion of inline mixers with ratio controlling and controlled mixing of fluid components and fabric washing applications. Using the mixing apparatus known to combine two separate fluid streams is obvious whether a solution or emulsion is being made.
It would have been further obvious to use at least 50% treated water by the total volume of water used by the automatic laundry machine for treating fabrics during one wash cycle as Jung teaches all the water including the fresh water can be pre-softened by contact with the softening agent prior to be admitted into the washing machine tub for use in a wash cycle. Jung recognizes the wash water when pretreated with softener enhanced the detergent cleaning and softening allows the detergent to work more effectively and immediately develop its full washing power. It would be obvious to use the maximal amount of pre-softened water to increase detergent efficiency and get the best soil removal results. Since Jung teaches all the water can be passed through the softening unit before entering the washing machine tub this means 100% treated water by the total volume of water used by the automatic laundry machine for treating fabrics during one wash cycle is encompassed in the teachings. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the pre-treated water to the claimed concentration as Jung clearly recognizes the softener as a result effective variable with greatly enhances laundering efficiency.
Since Jung teaches using 2-5 liters and it is standard in the art to saturate/submerge laundry with wash fluid, it would be obvious to achieve a substantial wetting level of the fabric. Furthermore, fabrics are conventionally submerged in water in machine washing and Jung clearly teaches the required level of wash water can be determined, and would be obvious to treat unwetted fabric with a sufficient amount of water to substantially wet said fabrics.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed Kawanishi have been fully considered but they are not persuasive as they apply to the new rejections above. The examiner highlights that Jung teaches completely softened water is used and is done in advance (page 6, advantages) and washing water is softened prior to being delivered to the washing tub and that softening allows the detergent to work more effectively and immediately develop its full washing power (page 11). Jung teaches the fresh water used can be first treated with the water softener before being added into the tub, indicating 100% of the wash water would be softened prior to using on laundry (page 12, next to last paragraph). The benefit of pretreatment with the water softener first is that hardness is pre bonded in the wash water before the detergent is supplied and a much better result in the cleaning performance by the detergent is achieved (page 11). Daily teaches known builder compositions comprise chelating agents L-glutamic acid N,N-diacetatic acid (GLDA) or salts thereof to inactivate hardness minerals or metallic ions in water (paragraph 0037-0042), The examiner argues that applying the same treatments which are known to sequester hardness (heavy metals) in the water is the same process as applicant even if the prior art calls it softening instead of prevention of stain formation. The same sequestering or chelating or softening compounds applied in water before treating laundry inherently provide the same benefit even if it is not explicitly recited by the prior art, but in this case both Jung and Dailey highlight hardness sequestering or inactivation and Jung teaches improved cleaning of laundry fabrics from this pretreatment process. It is elementary that the mere recitation of a newly discovered function or property, inherently possessed by things in the prior art does not cause a claim drawn to distinguish over the prior art. Additionally where the Patent Office has reason to believe that a functional limitation asserted to be critical for establishing novelty in the claimed subject matter may, in fact, be an inherent characteristic of the prior art, it possesses the authority to require the applicant to prove that the subject matter shown to be in the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied on." In re Swinehart, 169 USPQ 226 (CCPA 1971). Applicant is simply using conventional water softening chemicals, which are routinely employed in the art for their complexing of heavy metals in water to soften the water in a pretreatment before laundering, in the same process but highlighting that this same process also provides the benefit that the same sequestered heavy metals are not available to stain fabric. The prior art process already achieves this benefit without explicitly reciting it.
Regarding Scheper, the examiner repeats the arguments that Scheper is reasonably pertinent to the problem of mixing liquids using known in-line mixing equipment. Scheper teaches clearly that surfactants, polar solvents, and aqueous solutions can be used with this type of mixing device with controllable mixing speed and mixing time. Scheper teaches the same mixer can be used to apply finishing compositions which are premixed solutions or dispersions and do not need to contain lipophilic fluid (paragraphs 0075,0078,0175,0182,0183 0267). Paragraph 0187 teaches mixing fluids, water and cleaning agents. Mixers are well known to be used to combine any fluids and not limited to only producing emulsions of non-miscible fluids as Scheper teaches the known mixing of water and polar solvents (paragraph 0075,0078). Scheper is not relied upon for the type of cleaning process (lipophilic fluid vs. aqueous fluid) or solvent recovery or recycling, rather just to demonstrate conventional in-line mixing equipment effective for combining two fluids before application to laundry.
The examiner repeats arguments that Kawanishi is a reasonably pertinent disclosure at it teaches the application of a device used in a washing machine for substrates which mixes a chemical liquid and pure water to prepare a mixed solution for use in the cleaning machine. Disclosures teaching mixing apparatus for providing cleaning solutions to apply to substrates to clean them are relevant prior art even if the substrate is not the same. Further Scheper teaches it is known to add in line mixers to washing machines to combine fluids to apply introduce into the washing machine for washing a fabric. Using a known in-line mixer configuration for mixing fluids and applying them is reasonably pertinent and relevant since the clothes washing machines are already known to encompass these devices for mixing fluids to be applied into the washing machine.
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 AMINA S KHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5573. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9am-5:30pm 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached on 571-272-2817. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/AMINA S KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights