DETAILED ACTION
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 plurality of recesses on the contact surface of the rotatable part (claims 1 and 14; surface 233a clearly shown in Fig. 4, but no recesses shown) 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.
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.
Claims 1, 10, 14, 15 and 18 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 14, it is unclear how the claimed recesses divide the support surfaces “into a plurality of discontinuous portions”, as claimed. The drawings show each recess as a circular recess that is located within the inner and outer perimeter of the support surface of the porous bearing in a manner that leaves a single interconnected surface, as opposed to any discontinuous surface as claimed.
Regarding claim 10, it is unclear how “the porous bearing” may be considered to be two separate porous bearings. It is suggested that the applicant amend the claim to recite a first porous bearing in claim 1, and introduce a second porous bearing in a claim 10.
Regarding claims 15 and 18, each of the respective orientations for the rotation shaft relative to the floor would be variable depending on the orientation of the claimed device as a whole. It is suggested that the applicant amend the claims to define the respective orientations for the rotation shaft relative to other components of the claimed device, in a manner that will be fixed regardless of overall orientation of the device.
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.
Claims 1, 6-12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ernolf (3,216,047) in view of Freeman (1,786,565) and/or Tallian et al. (3,484,143).
Regarding independent claim 1, Ernolf discloses a gearbox for an intelligent cleaning apparatus (intended use only), comprising: a rotatable part (30-33), configured to rotate around a rotation axis to provide power for a cleaning head of the intelligent cleaning apparatus; and a porous bearing (53a/54) fixedly disposed in the gearbox, wherein a contact surface of the rotatable part at least comprises a first portion (53A) being in contact with a second portion of a support surface (54) of the porous bearing to support rotation of the rotatable part; wherein the support surface is provided with a plurality of recesses (55). Ernolf does disclose that the support surface functions as a thrust bearing plate with the apertures provided to allow lubricant to flow from the upper surface to a lower surface of the bearing (Col. 5, lines 52-Col. 6, lines 17), but Ernolf fails to disclose that the contact surface also has a plurality of recesses or that the recesses are evenly distributed along a circumferential direction of the contact surface and the support surface. Freeman and Tallian both disclose old and well-known thrust bearings, each having opposing plates that both have a plurality of recesses on the faces that engage one another, wherein the recesses are configured to allow the bearing surfaces to self-lubricate via liquid lubricant placed within the recesses. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to optionally provide the thrust bearing (54) and the opposing surface on the contact surface of the rotatable part with similar recesses, as taught by Freeman and Tallian, to enable the lubricant taught by Ernolf to more evenly distribute throughout the contact surfaces and self-lubricate during operation thereof. Further, both Freeman and Tallian further disclose that the plurality of recesses comprise a plurality of first recesses (9 of Freeman, 309/313 of Tillian) provided on the first portion of the contact surface and a plurality of second recesses provided on the second portion of the support surface, and the plurality of second recesses divides the support surface into a plurality of discontinuous portions (between recesses 9 of Freeman, 307 of Tallian), where an area of each portion of the plurality of discontinuous portionsis larger than an area of a corresponding first recess.
Regarding independent claim 14, Ernolf further discloses that the apparatus comprises a cleaning head (14) and the gearbox, as modified by Freeman and Tallian, as discussed above for claim 1.
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Ernolf further discloses that the rotatable part is an output gear (30/31), which provides the power for the cleaning head of the intelligent cleaning apparatus by engaging an input gear (29) connected to a motor.
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Ernolf further discloses that the output gear engages a rotation shaft of the cleaning head by an engaging part protruding outward at an end of the output gear along the rotation axis (each gear 30 and 31 has extending fingers 46 and engage the internal shoulder 44, of the brush back, 41, see Col. 3: Lines 51 - 58).
Regarding claim 8, Ernolf further discloses that the porous bearing supports the output gear at an (upper) end of the output gear along the rotation axis.
Regarding claim 9, Ernolf further discloses that the output gear is made of plastic material (Col. 6, lines 18-20).
Regarding claim 10, Ernolf further discloses that the porous bearing comprises: the first porous bearing (54), disposed at a first end of the output gear along the rotation axis; and a second porous bearing (49; considered to be “porous” in the same manner as the disclosed bearings due to slots formed therein), disposed at a second end opposite to the first end of the output gear along the rotation axis.
Regarding claim 11, Ernolf (and Freeman and Tallian) further discloses that the support surface and the contact surface are both perpendicular to the rotation axis.
Regarding claim 12, Freeman and Tallian further discloses that each of the plurality of first recesses is positioned such that remaining portions separated by the plurality of first recesses of the contact surface are all prevented from falling into any of the plurality of second recesses as the rotatable part rotates around the rotation axis, and each of the plurality of second recesses is positioned such that remaining portions separated by the plurality of second recesses of the support surface are all prevented from falling into any of the plurality of first recesses as the rotatable part rotates about the rotation axis (due to the recesses being smaller than the contacting surfaces, the respective surfaces would not be capable of “falling into” any of the recesses.
Regarding claim 18, Ernolf further discloses that the cleaning head extends beyond a housing (16) perimeter of the intelligent cleaning apparatus, and is configured to rotate about a rotation shaft (33) generally perpendicular to a floor surface to remove debris beyond the housing perimeter.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, Ernolf discloses the limitations, as discussed supra relative to claims 6 and 7.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ernolf (3,216,047) in view of Freeman (1,786,565) and/or Tallian et al. (3,484,143) as applied to claim 14, and further in view of Kim et al. (2012/0090133).
Ernolf, as modified by Freeman and/or Tallian, provides the cleaning apparatus having a cleaning head and brushes driven by a gearbox, wherein the brushes of Ernolf have a rotational shaft that is perpendicular to the surface being cleaned when placed thereon for cleaning, but fails to disclose that the cleaning head includes a shaft that may be parallel to the floor surface when placed thereon for cleaning. Kim discloses another configuration for a floor cleaner, having a pair of brushes (200) on the cleaning head with rotational shafts that is perpendicular to the surface being cleaned, similar to Ernolf, and also includes a brush (100) having a shaft that may be parallel to the floor surface, wherein the combination of the three brushes will cover substantially more area than the two brushes with the vertical shafts, and will allow the vertical shaft (perpendicular to the surface) brushes to direct debris toward the horizontal shaft brush (parallel to the surface), to provide improved cleaning as a known alternative to a pair of vertical shaft brushes. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to optionally provide an additional brush to the cleaner head of Ernolf, having a shaft that is parallel to the floor surface being cleaned, as taught by Kim, to increase the area of the surface being cleaned or treated and to improve cleaning or treatment by allowing the vertical shaft brushes to direct debris toward the horizontal shaft brush. Further, Kim disclose that the same gear box may drive at least one of the vertical shaft brushes along with the horizontal shaft brush, such that the gearbox taught by Ernolf, having the bearings taught by Freeman and/or Tallian, would also drive the cleaning head having the shaft parallel to the floor surface.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 22 September 2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The applicant’s arguments focused on the previously applied secondary prior art teachings, for failing to disclose the new limitations of independent claims 1 and 14, but the Freeman and Tallian references have been applied to read on the new limitations. Further, the examiner has determined that the concept of the cleaner head with a gear box as claimed is not novel in the art, wherein the focus of the claims on the “porous bearings” is merely a matter of replacing one type of bearing with another. In the current instance, the “porous bearing” as disclosed by the applicant, is more commonly known as a “hydrodynamic thrust bearing”, which are well known in the art of bearings to reduce contact area between respective surfaces of the bearing, allow for large loads thereon, and function to distribute lubricant within the bearing surfaces to reduce wear, heat and friction between the bearing surfaces.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN R MULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4489. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Brian Keller can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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.
/BRYAN R MULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 13 April 2026
Prosecution Insights