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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/13/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
2. Amendments filed 2/13/2026 have been entered, wherein claims 23-46 are pending. Accordingly, claims 23-46 have been examined herein. The previous claim objections and 35 USC 112(b) rejections have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendments.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/10/2026 was filed prior to the mailing date of this action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 23-46 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 23, line 7, “the filter with” should read “the filter cartridge with” to provide increased clarity and in order to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 23, line 10, “the filter cartridge, is enclosed” should read the filter cartridge[[,]] is enclosed” to provide increased clarity
Claim 23, line 20, “by a nozzle” should read “by [[a]] the nozzle” to provide increased clarity and in order to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claims 24-43, “A vacuum cleaner as claimed” should read “[[A]] The vacuum cleaner as claimed” to provide increased clarity and in order to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 38, line 2, “a longitudinal axis” should read “[[a]] the longitudinal axis” to provide increased clarity and in order to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 44, line 7, “the filter with” should read “the filter cartridge with” to provide increased clarity and in order to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 44, line 10, “the filter cartridge, is enclosed” should read the filter cartridge[[,]] is enclosed” to provide increased clarity
Claim 45, line 7, “the filter with” should read “the filter cartridge with” to provide increased clarity and in order to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 45, line 10, “the filter cartridge, is enclosed” should read the filter cartridge[[,]] is enclosed” to provide increased clarity
Claim 46, line 7, “the filter with” should read “the filter cartridge with” to provide increased clarity and in order to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 46, line 10, “the filter cartridge, is enclosed” should read the filter cartridge[[,]] is enclosed” to provide increased clarity
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
5. 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. Such claim limitations are:
Claim 33, “biasing means which acts to urge the end-cap to the open configuration”. Additionally, proper corresponding structure is provided as a compression spring.
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
6. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 28 and 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically, the disclosure does not contain written description for the feature of the hinged rotation (claim 28) and the release latch mechanism (claims 31-33) in combination with the translational movement of the chamber wall portion, wherein the chamber wall portion is an end-cap of the vacuum chamber as required in claims 24 and 27. That is, claim 27 now depends from claim 24 and requires the translation of the embodiment of fig. 2, which creates written description issues for claims 28 and 31-33, which depend from claim 27. Overall, claims 28 and 31-33 require mutually exclusive features from the embodiments of instant fig. 2 and instant fig. 5, thereby creating a written description issue.
7. 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 23-43 are 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 claim 23, lines 15-16, the language recites “end region thereof a suction drive in fluid communication with the vacuum chamber disposed adjacent the suction drive”. However, the terms “a suction drive” and “the suction drive” lack proper antecedent basis. It is not precisely clear if the term “suction drive” is different or the same from the previously introduced “suction drive unit”. For purposes of examination, as best understood by the examiner, the language will be interpreted as “end region thereof [[a]] the suction drive unit in fluid communication with the vacuum chamber disposed adjacent the suction drive unit”.
Claims 24-43 are rejected for depending upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by Walker US 20090260179 A1.
Walker discloses,
Claim 44; A vacuum cleaner comprising a suction drive unit(8) in fluid communication with a vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows 8 is connected to 16) for accommodating a filter cartridge([0030] 13 is a filter), the vacuum chamber itself being fed by a fluid inlet port(see annotated fig. 1 below for interpretation of fluid inlet port) in communication with a nozzle(11 is a nozzle which is in communication with the fluid inlet port, as interpreted) via which air is drawn into the vacuum chamber when the suction drive unit is in operation(8 pulls in air from 10 and through 11 into 16), wherein the filter cartridge(13 and/or 15) comprises a gas-porous membrane(13 is a coarse filter element and 15 is a fine filter element making them gas-porous membranes) including wall portions which define a filter cartridge interior(Fig. 1 shows the filter is hollow), the filter cartridge having an airflow inlet at one end(12) through which air-entrained dirt enters the filter(Dirty air is pulled in from 10 and exits 12) with dirt retained in the filter cartridge interior and air passing through the gas-porous membrane(Air passes through 13 and 15 from 12 which traps the dirt), wherein the vacuum chamber is configurable between open and closed configurations(3 and 4 are connected by hinge 5 making the chamber configurable between open and closed), so that in the closed configuration the filter cartridge is enclosed and constrained within the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows when closed, the filter is enclosed within the vacuum chamber 16) with the filter cartridge inlet disposed so as to be fed by the fluid inlet port(12 is fed by fluid inlet port, as interpreted above), and in the open configuration the constraint is at least partially removed([0030] 3 seals 13 and 15) so that the filter cartridge is free to be removed from the vacuum chamber([0036]) by travel in a removal direction(13 is withdrawn from the main part 3) and wherein the vacuum chamber is generally cylindrical in form(Fig. 1), and in the open configuration a vacuum chamber wall portion is displaced to remove the constraint(When 3 is separated from 4 the seal is removed in 16),
wherein a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber (see annotated fig. 1 below, wherein the interpretation of the fluid inlet port has been annotated. In this interpretation, a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber.),
PNG
media_image1.png
572
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the vacuum chamber wall portion is an end-cap of the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows 3 is an end cap of the chamber) and the end-cap is displaced by opening thereof(3 is displaced when opening to access the filter), wherein the end-cap is provided at a nozzle-end region of the vacuum chamber(the vacuum chamber wall portion which is an end-cap of the vacuum chamber is provided at a nozzle-end region of the vacuum chamber. That is, the vacuum chamber wall portion which is an end-cap of the vacuum chamber is located “at” the nozzle end region (nozzle 11) of the vacuum chamber. The term “at” does not require any specific structural or spatial relationship).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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) 23-24, 26-30, 34-43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker US 20090260179 in view of Conrad US 20160015229.
Walker discloses,
Claim 23; A vacuum cleaner comprising a suction drive unit(8) in fluid communication with a vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows 8 is connected to 16) for accommodating a filter cartridge([0030] 13 is a filter), the vacuum chamber itself being fed by a fluid inlet port (see annotated fig. 1 below for interpretation of fluid inlet port) in communication with a nozzle (11 is a nozzle which is in communication with the fluid inlet port, as interpreted) via which air is drawn into the vacuum chamber when the suction drive unit is in operation(8 pulls in air from 10 and through 11 into 16), wherein the filter cartridge(13 and/or 15) comprises a gas-porous membrane(13 is a coarse filter element and 15 is a fine filter element making them gas-porous membranes) including wall portions which define a filter cartridge interior(Fig. 1 shows the filter is hollow), the filter cartridge having an airflow inlet at one end(12) through which air-entrained dirt enters the filter(Dirty air is pulled in from 10 and exits 12) with dirt retained in the filter cartridge interior and air passing through the gas-porous membrane(Air passes through 13 and 15 from 12 which traps the dirt), wherein the vacuum chamber is configurable between open and closed configurations(3 and 4 are connected by hinge 5 making the chamber configurable between open and closed), so that in the closed configuration the filter cartridge is enclosed and constrained within the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows when closed, the filter is enclosed within the vacuum chamber 16) with the filter cartridge inlet disposed so as to be fed by the fluid inlet port (12 is fed by fluid inlet port, as interpreted above), and in the open configuration the constraint is at least partially removed([0030] 3 seals 13 and 15) so that the filter cartridge is free to be removed from the vacuum chamber([0036]) by travel in a removal direction(13 is withdrawn from the main part 3) and wherein the vacuum chamber is configured as a hand-held vacuum cleaner having a longitudinal axis(Fig. 1), the vacuum chamber comprising a cylindrical portion (fig. 1, cylindrical portion of 16) being aligned co-axially with the longitudinal axis, or an axis parallel thereto(Fig. 1 shows 16 is aligned co-axially with the longitudinal axis extending from the front around 10 to the rear around 18), the fluid inlet port for air-entrained dirt being provided through a distal end wall of the vacuum chamber(as interpreted above, the fluid inlet port is provided through a wall of the vacuum chamber, wherein the respective wall is interpreted as a distal end wall because it extends to the distal side. Additionally, the fluid inlet port is distal with respect to the suction device 8), the fluid inlet port being fed by a nozzle provided at a distal end region of the hand-held vacuum cleaner(the fluid inlet port, as interpreted above, is fed by the nozzle which is provided at a distal end region of the hand-held vacuum cleaner),
wherein a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber (see annotated fig. 1 below, wherein the interpretation of the fluid inlet port has been annotated. In this interpretation, a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber.),
PNG
media_image1.png
572
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 24; wherein a chamber wall portion of the cylindrical portion is mounted for sliding travel along a base plate (A base plate is not positively claimed as being part of the vacuum, because of this when the invention disclosed by Walker is placed on something such as a table, the table can be considered a base plate and a chamber wall portion of the cylindrical wall portion does slide along the table) and is displaced by translational movement of the chamber wall portion in an axial direction (when the chamber wall portion is actuated about hinge 5 of Walker, this is interpreted as being displaced by translational movement of the chamber wall portion in an axial direction).
Claim 26; Wherein the chamber wall portion has a nozzle end which is provided with an aperture which serves as the fluid inlet port(As interpreted above, the chamber wall portion has a nozzle end (with respect to flow direction) which is provided with an aperture which severs as the fluid inlet port).
Claim 27; Wherein the chamber wall portion is an end-cap of the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows 3 is an end cap of the chamber) and the end-cap is displaced by opening thereof(3 is displaced when opening to access the filter).
Claim 28; Wherein the end-cap is hinged with respect to the vacuum chamber so as to be openable by hinged rotation(5).
Claim 29; Wherein the end-cap is provided at a nozzle-end region of the vacuum chamber(The term “at” does not require any specific structural or spatial relationship. Therefore, the end-cap is provided at a nozzle-end region of the vacuum chamber.).
Claim 30; Wherein the fluid inlet port is provided through the end-cap(Fig. 1, wherein the fluid inlet port, as interpreted above, is interpreted as being provided through the end-cap).
Claim 34; Configured and arranged so that in the open configuration the filter cartridge is free to drop-out from the vacuum chamber under gravity when the orientation of the vacuum chamber permits([0036]).
Claim 36; Wherein the filter cartridge is located in the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows 15 is inside 16) and has a generally cylindrical configuration(Fig. 1 shows 15 is cylindrical) with an annular distal end which defines the airflow inlet of the cartridge which opens into the filter cartridge interior(Fig. 1 shows air enters from 12 into 15 distal from 8), which airflow inlet of the cartridge is aligned with the fluid inlet port of the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows inlet 11 is aligned with 12).
Claim 37; Wherein a generally annular space is defined between the filter cartridge and an inside surface of the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows an annular space between 15 and 7), the generally annular space being in fluid communication with the suction drive(Fig. 1 shows the space is between 15 and 8) and providing an exit path for filtered air passing out of the filter cartridge filter(9 provides an exit path for the filtered air).
Claim 38; Wherein the filter cartridge is elongate and disposed in the vacuum coaxial with, or parallel to, a longitudinal axis(Fig. 1 shows 15 is elongate and coaxial to the longitudinal axis extending between 10 and 18).
Claim 39; Wherein the filter cartridge comprises a supporting structure which defines and locates the airflow inlet([0028] 13 is made of a durable plastic or metal making it a supporting structure).
Claim 40; Wherein the supporting structure comprises a rigid structure which is provided at an airflow inlet end of the cartridge(Fig. 2 shows 13 is a rigid structure made of metal or plastic providing airflow through 14).
Claim 41; Wherein the filter cartridge comprises supporting structure to make the filter cartridge self-supporting so to define and maintain an internal space in the cartridge(Fig. 1 shows 15 has ribs which is a supporting structure and 13 is made of a rigid material).
Claim 43; Wherein the vacuum chamber is generally cylindrical in form(Fig. 1) and in the open configuration a vacuum chamber wall portion is displaced to remove the constraint(When 3 is separated from 4 the seal is removed in 16), wherein the chamber wall portion comprises a generally cylindrical portion(Fig. 1) and is displaced by translational movement of the cylindrical wall portion in an axial direction([0036] 3 is displaced away from 4 causing a translational movement of 16).
However, Walker fails to disclose:
Claim 23; The vacuum cleaner comprising at a proximal end region thereof a suction drive in fluid communication with the vacuum chamber disposed adjacent the suction drive(Suction motor 148 is on a proximal end and is in fluid communication with 160 and is adjacent), and wherein a grip is provided at the proximal end region(112).
Claim 35; Wherein the grip is a pistol grip(112), which pistol grip extends in a generally radial direction so as to facilitate manual pointing of the vacuum cleaner chamber and nozzle along the longitudinal axis(Fig. 1 shows the grip extends in a radial direction to facilitate pointing).
Claim 42; Wherein the supporting structure includes a tongue or tab adjacent the airflow inlet(Fig. 7 shows the supporting structure 208 for screen 212 has a tab around 192), which tongue or tab serves to facilitate grasping or lifting the filter cartridge(Fig. 7 The tab around 192 would help with lifting the entire cartridge).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the vacuum cleaner comprising at a proximal end region thereof a suction drive in fluid communication with the vacuum chamber disposed adjacent the suction drive as taught by Conrad, for the purpose of [0139] improving the balance of the vacuum to reduce fatigue on the user.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein a grip is provided at the proximal end region as taught by Conrad, for the purpose of making it easier for a user to remove the filter for replacement or cleaning.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the supporting structure includes a tongue or tab adjacent the airflow inlet, which tongue or tab serves to facilitate grasping or lifting the filter cartridge as taught by Conrad, for the purpose of reducing the stress on a user’s wrist when using the vacuum in different angles.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the supporting structure includes a tongue or tab adjacent the airflow inlet, which tongue or tab serves to facilitate grasping or lifting the filter cartridge as taught by Conrad, for the purpose of making it easier for a user to remove the filter for replacement or cleaning.
Claim(s) 31-33, and 45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker US 20090260179 A1 in view of Conrad US 20160015229 A1 further in view of Yoo KR 20090079143 A .
Regarding claim(s) 31-33, Walker in view on Conrad discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim(s) 23.
However, Walker in view of Conrad fails to disclose:
Claim 31; Wherein a release latch mechanism is provided for the end-cap, operation of which causes the end-cap to be displaced from the closed to open configuration.
Claim 32; Wherein the latch mechanism comprises an axially slidable actuation shuttle, travel of which displaces a release latch.
Claim 33; Wherein the latch mechanism includes biasing means.
Claim 45; Wherein a release latch mechanism is provided for the end-cap, operation of which causes the end-cap to be displaced from the closed to open configuration, wherein the release latch mechanism comprises an axially slidable actuation shuttle, travel of which displaces a release latch
Yoo teaches a similar device in the same field of vacuums.
Yoo teaches,
Claim 31; Wherein a release latch mechanism is provided for the end-cap(Fig. 5 shows the release latch 143 at the end cap 130), operation of which causes the end-cap to be displaced from the closed to open configuration(Fig. 7).
Claim 32; Wherein the latch mechanism comprises an axially slidable actuation shuttle, travel of which displaces a release latch(143 is a sliding latch that engages with 144c to lock or release the cover 130).
Claim 33; Wherein the latch mechanism includes biasing means(This element is interpreted under 35 USC 112(f) as the corresponding structure and equivalents thereof, as detailed above; biasing means 145).
Claim 45; Wherein a release latch mechanism is provided for the end-cap(Fig. 5 shows the release latch 143 at the end cap 130), operation of which causes the end-cap to be displaced from the closed to open configuration(Fig. 7), wherein the release latch mechanism comprises an axially slidable actuation shuttle, travel of which displaces a release latch(143 is a sliding latch that engages with 144c to lock or release the cover 130).
Walker further discloses,
Claim 33; The end cap urged to the open configuration, so that on release the end-cap springs open(Fig. 1 shows the majority of the weight including the motor is located at the front and when the latch in Yoo is actuated the end cap would spring open, Note: the limitation "springs open" is an action and doesn't necessarily require an element).
Claim 45; A vacuum cleaner comprising a suction drive unit(8) in fluid communication with a vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows 8 is connected to 16) for accommodating a filter cartridge([0030] 13 is a filter), the vacuum chamber itself being fed by a fluid inlet port (see annotated fig. 1 below for interpretation of fluid inlet port) in communication with a nozzle (11 is a nozzle which is in communication with the fluid inlet port, as interpreted) via which air is drawn into the vacuum chamber when the suction drive unit is in operation(8 pulls in air from 10 and through 11 into 16), wherein the filter cartridge(13 and/or 15) comprises a gas-porous membrane(13 is a coarse filter element and 15 is a fine filter element making them gas-porous membranes) including wall portions which define a filter cartridge interior(Fig. 1 shows the filter is hollow), the filter cartridge having an airflow inlet at one end(12) through which air-entrained dirt enters the filter(Dirty air is pulled in from 10 and exits 12) with dirt retained in the filter cartridge interior and air passing through the gas-porous membrane(Air passes through 13 and 15 from 12 which traps the dirt), wherein the vacuum chamber is configurable between open and closed configurations(3 and 4 are connected by hinge 5 making the chamber configurable between open and closed), so that in the closed configuration the filter cartridge is enclosed and constrained within the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows when closed, the filter is enclosed within the vacuum chamber 16) with the filter cartridge inlet disposed so as to be fed by the fluid inlet port (12 is fed by fluid inlet port, as interpreted above), and in the open configuration the constraint is at least partially removed([0030] 3 seals 13 and 15) so that the filter cartridge is free to be removed from the vacuum chamber([0036]) by travel in a removal direction(13 is withdrawn from the main part 3) wherein an end-cap is provided at a nozzle-end region of the vacuum chamber(The term “at” does not require any specific structural or spatial relationship. Therefore, the end-cap 3 is provided at a nozzle-end region of the vacuum chamber),
wherein a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber (see annotated fig. 1 below, wherein the interpretation of the fluid inlet port has been annotated. In this interpretation, a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber.),
PNG
media_image1.png
572
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a release latch mechanism is provided for the end-cap, operation of which causes the end-cap to be displaced from the closed to open configuration as taught by Yoo, for the purpose of having a way to quickly open up the vacuum cleaner.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the latch mechanism comprises an axially slidable actuation shuttle, travel of which displaces a release latch as taught by Yoo, for the purpose of allowing the user to open the vacuum with one hand.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the latch mechanism includes biasing means as taught by Yoo, for the purpose of allowing users to empty the vacuum with one hand and not have to reset the latch.
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claim(s) 25 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 46 is allowed.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art fails to teach or render obvious the invention as essentially claimed.
Walker US 20090260179 A1 were considered most pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Walker discloses,
A vacuum cleaner comprising a suction drive unit(8) in fluid communication with a vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows 8 is connected to 16) for accommodating a filter cartridge([0030] 13 is a filter), the vacuum chamber itself being fed by a fluid inlet port(10) in communication with a nozzle(11 connects 10 to 16) via which air is drawn into the vacuum chamber when the suction drive unit is in operation(8 pulls in air from 10 and through 11 into 16), wherein the filter cartridge(13 and/or 15) comprises a gas-porous membrane(13 is a coarse filter element and 15 is a fine filter element making them gas-porous membranes) including wall portions which define a filter cartridge interior(Fig. 1 shows the filter is hollow), the filter cartridge having an airflow inlet at one end(12) through which air-entrained dirt enters the filter(Dirty air is pulled in from 10 and exits 12) with dirt retained in the filter cartridge interior and air passing through the gas-porous membrane(Air passes through 13 and 15 from 12 which traps the dirt), wherein the vacuum chamber is configurable between open and closed configurations(3 and 4 are connected by hinge 5 making the chamber configurable between open and closed), so that in the closed configuration the filter cartridge is enclosed and constrained within the vacuum chamber(Fig. 1 shows when closed, the filter is enclosed within the vacuum chamber 16) with the filter cartridge inlet disposed so as to be fed by the fluid inlet port(12 is fed by 10), and in the open configuration the constraint is at least partially removed([0030] 3 seals 13 and 15) so that the filter cartridge is free to be removed from the vacuum chamber([0036]) by travel in a removal direction(13 is withdrawn from the main part 3) and wherein the vacuum chamber is generally cylindrical in form(Fig. 1) and wherein the vacuum chamber is generally cylindrical in form(Fig. 1), and in the open configuration a vacuum chamber wall portion comprises a generally cylindrical portion(Fig. 1) and is displaced by translational movement of the generally cylindrical wall portion in an axial direction([0036] 3 is displaced away from 4 causing a translational movement of 16).
However, none of the prior art discloses or renders obvious the further combination of the translational movement is to an extent which is beyond a length of the filter cartridge, so that the
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
11. Applicant's arguments filed 2/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the prior art fails to teach the amended language of claims 23 and 44-45. Specifically, Applicant argues Walker fails to teach wherein a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber. Applicant argues the previous interpretation of the inlet port being 10 fails to teach the amended language (pages 11-16 of Applicant’s remarks). Applicant submits the additionally relied upon art fails to remedy the deficiencies of Walker.
However, the inlet port 10 of Walker is no longer interpreted as the fluid inlet port. Rather, Walker is relied upon to teach wherein a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber (see annotated fig. 1 below, wherein the interpretation of the fluid inlet port has been annotated. In this interpretation, a distal portion of the fluid inlet port is coaxial with the vacuum chamber.),
PNG
media_image1.png
572
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As detailed above, the prior art teaches the amended language and the additionally cited prior art was not relied upon to cure the deficiencies of Walker with respect to the amended language. The dependent claims have been rejected accordingly. See above rejection for more details.
Conclusion
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A GUMP whose telephone number is (571)272-2172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9:00-5:30.
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 Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/MICHAEL A GUMP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights