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
Receipt is acknowledged of a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) and a submission, filed on January 20, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's amendments and arguments filed December 9, 2025, as well as the RCE filed January 20, 2026, which request consideration of the amendment and reply filed on December 8, 2025, have been fully considered.
The obviousness rejection based on US 854 has been withdrawn.
The obviousness rejection based on US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, has been maintained.
In the response, it was argued that “Morelli discloses that the pad is intended to "allow[ing] a person to remove the collection pad for disposal of debris," thus further teaching away from the use of a screw to fasten the pad to the strainer basket” (see Response page 8). This argument is deemed unpersuasive. As discussed below, a screw is capable of being screwed to connect a first structural element to a second structural element as well as being capable of being unscrewed, which would disconnect the first and second structural elements. Thus, a screw does not teach away from the removal of a collection pad for disposal of debris.
In the response, it was argued that Amazon does not disclose the newly claimed limitation, “the strainer fastened via a screw to the cleaning device”, wherein the same screw limitation is used for the prefilter to be fastened to the strainer limitation (see Response page 9). In the response, it was argued that “while Morelli discloses, "The supporting elements 500 may take the form of screws … that supports the strainer basket 204 when it is inserted inside the skimmer basin 200," the disclosure of "supporting elements," is limited to supporting the "strainer basket 204 when it is inserted inside the skimmer basin 200." Morelli ,i [0040]” (see Response page 9). This argument is deemed unpersuasive since a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments” (see MPEP 2123, I). It is noted that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) (see MPEP 2143). Thus, a prima facie case of obviousness can be established based on the general knowledge one of ordinary skill in the art would have regarding a screw.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8-10, 13, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20080217229 A1 (hereinafter US 229) in view of US 2018/0313049 A1 (hereinafter US 049) and Malcom Thompson Pumps “3 Benefits of Using Centrifugal Pumps to Pump Chemicals and Liquids (https://www.mtp.com.au/news/3-benefits-using-centrifugal-pumps/) (posted on April 19, 2017; site captured on March 7, 2019) (hereinafter Malcom), OR in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, https://www.amazon.com/EZ-FLO-30011-Sink-Strainer-Spin-Seal/dp/B00068UUGU?th=1 (hereinafter Amazon) and Malcom.
Regarding claim 1, US 229 discloses a vacuum skimmer for swimming pools (which is deemed buoyant cleaning device for an above-ground pool) comprising a housing that has an opening for taking in water (which is deemed a housing including an upper housing and a lower housing), a dirt collecting container that collect coarse materials that is present in the upper portion of the housing (which is deemed a strainer contained in the upper housing), a pump having one or more suction intakes as well as a water outlet and is present in the lower portion of the housing (which is deemed a pump contained in the lower housing, the pump comprising a pump inlet and pump outlet), and one or more float bodies that may be removed from the skimmer for easier transportation and storage of the skimmer (which is deemed one or more floatation devices detachably attached to the housing) (see US 229 abstract, figures 1-3, claims 1, 7, 10-12, , and paragraphs [0005], [0013]-[0015], [0017]).
Statements in the preamble reciting the purpose or intended use of the claimed invention which do not result in a structural difference (or, in the case of process claims, manipulative difference) between the claimed invention and the prior art do not limit the claim and do not distinguish over the prior art apparatus (or process). See, e.g., In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 938, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); In re Sinex, 309 F.2d 488, 492, 135 USPQ 302, 305 (CCPA 1962). If a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble, then it meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997) and cases cited therein, as it has been held that the recitation of a new intended use for an old product does not make a claim to that old product patentable. In re Schreiber, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See also MPEP § 2111.02, §2112.02 and 2114-2115.
US 229 does not disclose the strainer fastened via a screw to the cleaning device
The claimed lower housing is defined in terms of the presence of another element of the claimed apparatus, i.e. the claimed centrifugal pump being contained in the claimed lower housing. Thus, the claimed lower housing is not defined in terms of a structural feature or dimensions of said lower housing. Hence, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the claimed lower housing is understood to be a portion of an apparatus that contains a centrifugal pump.
US 229 discloses that the housing may comprise “coarse, fine and/or very fine filters as well as biological purifying devices, for example, a UVC lamp (ultraviolet C), can be provided (not illustrated separately) and integrated into the device” (see US 229 paragraph [0013]). US 229 does not disclose a prefilter placed on top of the strainer.
US 049 discloses an in-pond water filtration maintenance system (see US 049 abstract, figures 1 & 11 and paragraph [0003]). US 049 discloses that the system comprises a “skimmer basin includes an upper opening configured to permit a flow of water and debris from a pond surface into the skimmer basin, a strainer basket positioned within the skimmer basin and configured to trap at least some debris that enters the skimmer basin through the upper opening, a skimmer pump positioned within the skimmer basin below the strainer basket, the skimmer pump configured to draw water through the strainer basket and to pump the water out of the skimmer basin” (see US 049 paragraph [0003]). US 049 discloses a collection pad that is contained within the strainer basket, which “may help to further collect debris, and may simplify a cleaning process by allowing a person to remove the collection pad 400 for disposal of debris” (see US 049 paragraph [0039; see also US 049 figure 4).
US 049 is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor, i.e. skimmer device and/or filtration system.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify US 229 to incorporate a collection pad, as disclosed in US 049, within the strainer basket, as disclosed in US 229, because it would assist with the collection/removal of debris and/or because it would assist with simplifying the cleaning process (see US 049 paragraph [0039]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify US 229 to incorporate a collection pad, as disclosed in US 049, as a coarse, fine and/or very fine filters, as disclosed in US 229, in the strainer basket, as disclosed in US 049, because US 229 discloses the additional coarse, fine and/or very fine filters but does not disclose a location within the system and US 049 discloses that the collection pad within the strainer basket assist with purifying/treating a body of water.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the strainer basket, as disclosed in US 229, with the collection pad/strainer basket, as disclosed in US 049, because the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.). This substitution would yield the predictable result of filtering a body of water.
US 229 in view of US 049 does not disclose a prefilter fastened by the screw to connect the prefilter to the strainer, which is contained in the upper housing and US 229 in view of US 049 does not disclose the strainer fastened via a screw to the cleaning device.
US 229 in view of US 049 discloses that the skimmer basin may contain “screws, bolts, one or more molded plastic shelves, plastic tabs or any other suitable form that supports the strainer basket 204 when it is inserted inside the skimmer basin 200” (see US 049 paragraph 0040).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a screw, as disclosed in US 229 in view of US 049, to secure the prefilter to the strainer and the strainer to the system because it would assist with the prefilter staying connected to the strainer and the strainer staying connected to the system, when the system is being used in an aquatic environment.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a screw, as disclosed in US 229 in view of US 049, to secure the prefilter to the strainer and the strainer to the system and reasonably expect the resulting apparatus to work as the prior art intended, i.e. the screw to secure the two components together.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a screw, as disclosed in US 229 in view of US 049, to secure the prefilter to the strainer and the strainer to the system because it would assist with preventing the prefilter from moving or shifting away from the skimmer basin/strainer and thereby allow debris from entering said basin/strainer and because it would assist with securing the strainer to the system and preventing the strainer from moving or disconnecting from the system while in use in an aquatic environment.
It is noted that a reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments” (see MPEP 2123, I). It is noted that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) (see MPEP 2143). Thus, a prima facie case of obviousness can be established based on the general knowledge one of ordinary skill in the art would have regarding a screw.
One of ordinary skill in the art, such as a high school graduate specializing in carpentry or engineering, would have knowledge in using a screw to fasten one structural element to another structural element as well benefits of using a screw, such as achieving connection between two elements together, disconnecting or unscrewing two elements from one another, controlling the tension of the connection/achieving a tight or loose connection and capable of reusing a screw. Such features are illustrated in an entry level carpentry or engineering class as well as being illustrated in simple toddler toys involving screws. Hence, it is common knowledge for one of ordinary skill in the art to understand that a screw can be used to fasten one structural element to another structural element. One of ordinary skill in the art would use a screw to fasten one element to another. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a screw would assist with keeping the elements connected. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a screw can be undone/unscrewed, can be tightened, can be screwed loosely or can be reused.
In the alternative, if US 229 in view of US 049 does not disclose a “the strainer fastened via a screw to the cleaning device” and “a prefilter fastened by the screw to connect the prefilter to the strainer”, then this feature is nonetheless rendered obvious by Amazon.
Amazon discloses a kitchen sink strainer with a spin and seal basket (see Amazon title page). Amazon discloses that the strainer is connected to the basket with a joint nut/screw (see Amazon figures and pages 1 & 4). Amazon discloses that the joint nut/screw is able to secure the strainer to the basket and is easy to use (see Amazon pages 1 & 4).
Amazon is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor, i.e. skimmer device and/or filtration system.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a joint nut/screw, as disclosed in Amazon, into the system of US 229 in view of US 049, in order to secure the prefilter to the strainer because it would assist with would assist with securing the prefilter and the strainer together and provides a connection between the two elements.
Herein, Amazon discloses a strainer/prefilter being secured to another element, i.e. the basket, as in Amazon, or a strainer, as disclosed in US 229 in view of US 049. Thus, the combination of US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon is deemed to disclose a prefilter fastened by a screw to connect the prefilter to the strainer.
Regarding the strainer fastened via a screw to the cleaning device limitation, it is noted that Amazon discloses a rubber flange between the basket and the strainer, which is connected to both the basket and the strainer via the screw/nut element (see Amazon page 1, first and last image of Kitchen Sink Strainer). The rubber flange of Amazon would necessarily be another element that is capable of catching food while allowing water to flow over the edge and thus, necessarily may act as an intermediate between the strainer element and the basket element with the screw/nut providing a connection between all three elements. Under this interpretation, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a prefilter with a rubber flange joined to a basket/strainer, as disclosed in Amazon, into the system of US 229 in view of US 049, because it would assist with would assist with securing the prefilter, as disclosed in US 049 and Amazon, with an intermediate rubber flange, as disclosed in Amazon to the strainer/basket, as disclosed in US 229 and Amazon, and would assist with securing a connection between all three elements while allowing a secure seal/connection while also allowing the elements to be disconnected via unscrewing the screw.
Another interpretation by the Examiner is that the prefilter, as disclosed by US 049, is connected to the dirt collecting container, as disclosed in US 229, via a screw, as disclosed in Amazon, which discloses a strainer being connected to a basket via a screw connection. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form a connection via the screw from the prefilter, to the direct collecting contain, to the housing of the system of US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, because one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a screw would be capable of securing a connection between the three elements, i.e. prefilter, dirt collecting container, and housing, while also assisting with disconnecting the three elements from one another in order to allow the prefilter and the dirt collecting container to be removed from the housing and assisted with cleaning out any debris.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form a connection via the screw from the prefilter, to the direct collecting contain, to the housing of the system of US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, because one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a screw would be capable of securing a connection between the three elements, i.e. prefilter, dirt collecting container, and housing,
US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, discloses the “surface vacuum skimmer has a housing 1 having in its upper area a dirt collecting container 2 that with the aid of the handle 3 can be easily removed upwardly for emptying it. In a housing part arranged below the dirt collecting container 2, a pump 4 is integrated in the illustrated embodiment so that the device operates as an independent filtering device” (see US 0013 paragraph [0013]). US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, discloses that the skimmer has housing that has an upper component, which contains the direct collecting container, that can be removed, i.e. is detached from, a portion of the housing that contains the pump (see US 0013 paragraph [0013] and figures 1 & 3). Figure 3 of US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, (reproduced and annotated below) illustrates that an upper portion of the housing can be lifted from and detached from the lower housing/housing. Conversely, the lower housing of US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, can be lifted from and detached from the upper housing/housing.
PNG
media_image1.png
712
1054
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In the alternative, even if US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, does not explicitly disclose the lower housing being detachably attach to the upper housing, then this feature is nonetheless rendered obvious by US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon. That is, in the manufacturing of the housing, the upper housing and the lower housing of US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, both the upper housing and the lower housing are detached from one another. Thus, the upper housing and the lower housing would be detachable during the manufacturing process. The upper housing and the lower housing of US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, will become attached when in use and then detached when removing the upper housing/dirt connecting container via the handle
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to form the upper housing and the lower housing of US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, to be detachable from one another because it would assist with cleaning the dirt connecting container in the upper housing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the upper housing and the lower housing of US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, separable (see MPEP 2144.04 V, C), since said separation would be desirable because it would assist with cleaning the dirt connecting container in the upper housing and/or because it would assist with providing one of ordinary skill in the art with easier access to the components of the lower housing, i.e. pump. This easier access may be desirable to one of ordinary skill in the art because it would be easier to fix any potential problems and/or clogs or debris formed in said lower housing (see MPEP 2144.04 V, C “The court held that "if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the end of [the prior art’s] holder to which the cap is applied, it would be obvious to make the cap removable for that purpose.").
Additionally, regarding product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.). Herein, the structure of U US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, is substantially identical to the claimed lower housing of the present application, and therefore, the structure of US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, is presumed inherently capable of being detachably attach to the upper housing.
US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, does not disclose centrifugal pump.
Malcom discloses that there are three benefits to using a centrifugal pump to pump liquids, such as water (see Malcom title). Malcom discloses that 1) “Centrifugal pumps work well with large volumes of liquid transfer”, 2 “Centrifugal pumps are typically simple in design” and 3) “Centrifugal pumps are comparatively compact” (see Malcom page 1).
Malcom is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor, i.e. water systems and/or moving fluid.
Malcom is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention. “[a] reference is analogous art to the claimed invention if: (1) the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (even if it addresses a different problem); or (2) the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention). See Bigio, 381 F.3d at 1325, 72 USPQ2d at 1212.” See MPEP 2141.01(a). Malcom is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, i.e. treatment of swimming pools and/or pool of fluid with a circulation and treatment system with a pump (see Applicant’s specification paragraphs [0003] & [0034]).), because Malcom discloses the benefits of a specific type of pump to move fluid, such as water.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, to incorporate a centrifugal pump, as disclosed in Malcom, because it would assist with moving fluid, such as water in a swimming pool, and/or because it would assist the vacuum skimmer with filtering the water in the swimming pool.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, to incorporate a centrifugal pump, as disclosed in Malcom, because 1) “Centrifugal pumps work well with large volumes of liquid transfer”, 2 “Centrifugal pumps are typically simple in design” and 3) “Centrifugal pumps are comparatively compact” (see Malcom page 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, to incorporate a centrifugal pump, as disclosed in Malcom, and reasonably expect the resulting apparatus to work as the prior art intended, i.e. move fluid, such as water.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify US 229 in view of US 049, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049 and Amazon, to incorporate a centrifugal pump, as disclosed in Malcom, because the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.). This substitution would yield the predictable result of moving water.
Hence, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, is deemed to disclose a buoyant cleaning device for an above-ground pool, comprising a housing including an upper housing and a lower housing; a strainer contained in the upper housing; a centrifugal pump contained in the lower housing, the centrifugal pump comprising a pump inlet and a pump outlet; and one or more floatation devices detachably attached to the housing.
Regarding claim 2, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the upper housing comprises an inlet aperture (see rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 4, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the lower housing comprises an outlet aperture in fluid communication with the pump outlet (see rejection of claim 1; see US 229 figures 1 & 3 paragraph [0017]).
Regarding claim 5, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses a filter disposed within the housing between the strainer and the pump, the filter configured to detachably attach from the housing (see rejection of claim 1; see US 229 paragraph [0013]).
Regarding claim 8, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the upper housing comprises an upper chamber defined by an interior space between the strainer and the lower housing, and wherein the lower housing comprises a lower chamber in fluid communication with the pump (see rejection of claim 1; see also US 229 figures 1 & 3).
The term “an upper chamber” is defined in Applicant’s specification as “upper chamber consisting of an interior void of the upper housing (see Applicant’s specification paragraph [0053]). Further, Applicant’s specification states that the “upper chamber can comprise an open top spanned by the strainer. In other words, the strainer can entrain large debris while allowing fluid to flow through the inlet aperture and into the upper chamber“ (see Applicant’s specification paragraph [0053]). US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, is understood as having a space or void between the strainer and the pump, in which fluid can travel from the strainer to the pump.
Applicant’s specification states “In some embodiments, the lower housing can further comprise a lower chamber in fluid communication with the pump inlet and the pump outlet. In other words, fluid can flow out of the upper housing, into the pump inlet, through the lower chamber, out the pump outlet, and out the outlet aperture to the pool” (see Applicant’s specification paragraph [0058]). The term “lower chamber” is understood to be any space or area or void within the lower housing, wherein the lower housing comprises the pump.
Regarding claim 9, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 8. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the pump inlet is in fluid communication with the upper chamber (see rejection of claim 1; see also US 229 figures 1 & 3 and paragraphs [0015] & [0017]).
Regarding claim 10, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 8. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the upper housing comprises one or more latches, each of the one or more latches corresponding to a respective flotation device of the one or more flotation devices (see rejection of claim 1; see US 229 figures 2 & 3 and paragraph [0014] (US 229 discloses “designed to be self-supporting on water and floats by means of the provided float bodies 6 on the water surface 7…. the float bodies 6 are relatively far-reaching, they can be removed for transport and storage purposes …. They are preferably inserted with projections 10 provided for this purpose into matching recesses 9 shown in FIG. 3 …. Between the projections 10 and the housing 1 a locking connection 11 is preferably provided that, if required, can be released from the interior” (see US 229 paragraph [0014]).).
The term “latch” and/or “latches” is understood to be any device that has mating mechanical parts engage to fasten. Herein, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, comprises both a projection/recess latch device and a locking connection device, both of which may be deemed a latch or latches. In US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, the projection/recess latch device and the locking connection device are present on each float body (see US 229 figures 2 & 3).
Regarding claim 13, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the strainer comprises a pattern to induce laminar flow of fluid through the strainer (see rejection of claim 1).
The device of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, will necessarily achieve induce laminar flow of fluid through the strainer due to the pattern on said strainer. The device and strainer of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, appears to be substantially identical to the claimed device and strainer, i.e. a strainer with a pattern of pores, and thus inherently would possess the claimed functional properties—unless these properties arise from features not yet claimed.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Amazon sales page of Glacier Bay Spin Lock Sink Strainer in Stainless steel (https://www.amazon.com/Glacier-Bay-Strainer-Stainless-steel/dp/B085X4SKQ8#customerReviews) (posted on April 7, 2017; captured image is September 15, 2024) (hereinafter Glacier Bay).
Regarding claim 3, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 2. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses strainer is disposed within the inlet aperture (see rejection of claim 1; see US 229 figure 2-3 paragraphs [0015], [0017]).
US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, does not disclose strainer is removably fastened to the upper housing with a strainer screw.
The term “strainer screw” is understood to be any screw that assist with securing the strainer within the housing. It is noted that the specification of the present application states “The attachment of the strainer to the housing can be provided in a number of ways, such as rotatable screw threading, interference fit, friction fit, gaskets, and the like. For example, the center of the strainer can comprise screw threading such that a strainer screw can be tightened to fasten the strainer to the top of the housing.” (see Applicant’s specification paragraph [0052]).
Glacier Bay discloses a spin lock type of strainer that provides “Easily control flow of draining water Twist handle closed to create a tight, lasting seal” (see Glacier Bay page 1). Glacier Bay discloses that one of ordinary skill in the art can “Twist the stopper basket's wing nut handle open or closed to control the flow of draining water” and that the “Spin lock operation creates a tight seal that lasts” (see Glacier Bay page 2).
Glacier Bay is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor, i.e. filtering water and/or catching debris device.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify or substitute the dirt collecting container of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, with the spin lock type of strainer, as disclosed in Glacier Bay, because it would assist with catching debris in fluid; because the twisting/screwing of the wing nut handle will assist with controlling the flow of fluid through the strainer; and/or because the twisting/screwing of the wing nut handle will assist creating a tight seal and/or preventing leakage.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify or substitute the dirt collecting container of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, with the spin lock type of strainer, as disclosed in Glacier Bay, because the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.). This substitution would generate the predictable result catching debris and/or filtering fluid, such as water.
In the alternative, if US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, does not disclose a “strainer is disposed within the inlet aperture”, then this feature is nonetheless rendered obvious by Glacier Bay.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the intake flap and the dirt collecting container of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, with the strainer basket of Glacier Bay because modifying the intake flap to an opening, as illustrated in Glacier Bay, the proposed modification would assist with more water entering and being filtered in the strainer basket and because it would assist with allowing more water to flow into the strainer basket thereby assisting with treatment of said water.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the intake flap and the dirt collecting container of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, with the strainer basket of Glacier Bay because the simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are achieved. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, USPQ2d 1385, 1395 – 97 (2007) (see MPEP § 2143, B.). This substitution would yield the predictable result of creating an opening in the housing and/or straining fluid.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the intake flap and the dirt collecting container of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, with the strainer basket of Glacier Bay and reasonably expect the resulting apparatus to work as the prior art intended, i.e. allow water to flow into the skimmer.
Hence, US 229 in view of US 049, Malcom and Glacier Bay, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon, Malcom and Glacier Bay, is deemed to disclose the strainer is disposed within the inlet aperture and removably fastened to the upper housing with a strainer screw.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2012021935 A1 (hereinafter WO 935).
Regarding claim 5, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, discloses the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, does not disclose a filter disposed within the housing between the strainer and the pump, the filter configured to detachably attach from the housing.
WO 935 discloses a skimmer device comprising a housing having an opening wherein “Below the strainer basket 16 is a cartridge filter element 22 which is positioned such that the water must pass through the nitration medium in the form of the cartridge filter element 22 to a central chamber 34 of the cartridge filter element 22, before passing through outlets 36a-c…. the driving force for this water movement is a pump 50 positioned below the filter medium 22” (see WO 935 page 7 line 37 – page 8 line 2; see also WO 935 abstract and figures 1-4, 6-10, 12-15, 18).
WO 935 is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor, i.e. skimmer device and/or filtration system.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a cartridge filter element between the strainer and the pump, as disclosed in WO 935, into the device of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, because it would assist with the treatment and/or purification of water.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a cartridge filter element between the strainer and the pump, as disclosed in WO 935, into the device of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, because it would assist with removal of impurities that passed through the strainer and/or because would assist with removal of impurities before the fluid enters the pump, thereby assist with the longevity of said pump.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a cartridge filter element between the strainer and the pump, as disclosed in WO 935, into the device of US 229 in view of US 049 and Malcom, or in the alternative, US 229 in view of US 049, Amazon and Malcom, and reasonably expect the resulting apparatus to work as the prior art intended, i.e. treatment and/or purification of fluid, such as water.
Other Applicable Prior Art
All other art cited not detailed above in a rejection is considered relevant to at least some portion or feature of the current application and is cited for possible future use for reference. Applicant may find it useful to be familiar with all cited art for possible future rejections or discussion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BERNADETTE K MCGANN whose telephone number is (571)272-5367. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 am -3:30 pm (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, Ben Lebron can be reached on 571-272-0475. 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.
/BERNADETTE KAREN MCGANN/Examiner, Art Unit 1773
/BENJAMIN L LEBRON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1773