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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-11, filed 12/18/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3-10 and 13-15 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Senoo (JP 2013226176 A) in view of Davis (US 20040255426 A1), Quanttrini (US 20090059569 A1) and Blocker (US 7627927 B2).
Regarding Applicants arguments, Applicant first argues that Senoo does not show a front edge, rear edge, and mutually parallel spaced apart side walls extending between the front and rear edges and adjacent to one of the side walls, and instead discloses the lighting elements are disposed atop the cleaner. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Senoo discloses the lighting elements (light 27 and lens 28) to be inside the cleaning head (See Figure 3-5) for a clear figure showing the lighting elements inside the cleaning head. As such Examiner does not find this argument persuasive.
Regarding Applicants argument pointed towards Senoo requiring two separate beams. Examiner does not rely on Senoo to disclose a single beam, and instead relies on Quanttrini (US 20090059569 A1) to disclose a similar cleaning device with a single light on a forward side for similar purposes to that of Senoo. As such having a plurality vs a single light for the purposes of illuminating debris to be cleaned on the surface to be cleaned for a user to easily see are known equivalents in the art. And as such Examiner does not find this argument persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3-10, 13-15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Senoo (JP 2013226176 A) in view of Davis (US 20040255426 A1), Quanttrini (US 20090059569 A1), and Blocker (US 7627927 B2).
Senoo teaches:
A cleaner head comprising:
a front edge (Left side edge of Annotated Figure A), a rear edge (Right side edge of Annotated Figure A), and mutually laterally spaced apart side walls extending between the front and rear edges (See Annotated Figure A); an agitator rotatable about an axis that is collinear with a longitudinal axis of the agitator (agitator 21 see figure 5 showing longitudinal axis extending into the page); and
an optical system (25) located on one side of the cleaner head (Seen in Figure 2, where 25 is located toward top side of cleaner head) adjacent to one of the side walls, the optical system comprising:
a light source (25) and a lens (see Reflection cylinder 28),
the lens being operable to receive light from the light source and emit a light beam (See Fig. 4)
And suggests but does not explicitly disclose the light beam is limited in its extent of a single sector having a central angle in a range from 70 to 110° and bounded by two radii extending from the lens and an arc connecting ends of the two radii, the single sector having a central axis located angularly midway between the two radii and aligned at an angle in a range from 35 to 65° to the front edge of the cleaner head, and one of the radii extending from the lens bounding the single sector aligned at an acute angle of less than 20° relative to the front edge of the cleaner head (Light source 25 is capable of projecting a region in the described shape, Figure 2 of Senoo shows a region coming from light source 25, that has a central axis and a radii spaced away at an angle away from the cleaner head, the light beam being directed towards the planar work surface on which the cleaner head is disposed so as to illuminate a region of the planar work surface and debris in the region, said region being limited in its extent to within the shape of the single sector (optical system is capable of illuminating such a region).
Blocker discloses a cleaner with at least one forward facing light, (75, see Figs. 8-10) with a variable “Yaw” angle, and “pitch” angle. And discloses that these angles can be changed as desired to form a specific light pattern (See Col 4 Line 6-17 “The frame 71 and its sockets 81 are configured for mounting the LED devices 75, 77 at the appropriate angles to provide the desired light pattern. Specific examples of these angles are described below. In general, however, the LED devices 75, 77 are preferably held in an orientation such that the central axis 105 of the conical light beam emitted by each device is at a desired yaw angle "A", as viewed from above the cleaner (FIG. 9), with respect to a horizontal axis 107 extending in front-to-back direction relative to the cleaner (i.e., parallel to the longitudinal centerline 109 of the cleaner), and at a desired pitch angle "B", as viewed from the side of the cleaner (FIG. 10), relative to a vertical axis 115.”) and additionally discusses an additional angle of divergence representing the conical angle of the light beam (See Col 4 Line 36-41 “Each of the two inboard illumination LED devices 75 generates a conical beam having an angle of divergence of about 20 to 30 degrees (e.g., about 25 degrees), and the central axis 105 of the beam is angled inward toward the central longitudinal axis 109 of the machine at a yaw angle A of about 10 degrees (FIG. 9).”).
Senoo Para states [0038] states “At this time, the front of the suction tool 15 is irradiated by the left irradiation means 25 and the right irradiation means 26, but since the optical axis is set so as to face the center direction of the suction tool 15, the shadow of the dust on the surface to be cleaned is projected to both the right and left sides in a direction intersecting the line of sight of the user at an angle. That is, a shadow is obliquely displayed on both sides of the dust as viewed from the user. In addition, since the surface to be cleaned is irradiated at an angle of about 10°, a shadow having a length of 5 to 10 times the actual size of the dust is created.” Discussing the relationship between the irradiation angle and how this effects the visibility of the debris illuminated by the light by casting a shadow. Para [0033] states “While the left irradiation means 25 and the right irradiation means 26 constituting the illumination means in the present embodiment are disposed at a position deeper than the front end of the suction tool 15, since the irradiation angle can be set to about 10° by using the diagonal distance in the width direction of the suction tool 15” discussing that the chosen irradiation angle is related to the angle of the light in the diagonal direction towards the center and the width of the cleaner head.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the optical system of Senoo such that the light beam is limited in its extent to within a shape of a single sector having a central angle in a range from 70° to 110° and bounded by two radii extending from the lens and an arc connecting ends of the two radii, the single sector having a central axis located angularly midway between the two radii and aligned at an angle in a range from 35° to 65° to the front edge of the cleaner head, and one of the radii extending from the lens bounding the single sector aligned at an acute angle of less than 20° relative to the front edge of the cleaner head, the light beam being directed towards the planar work surface on which the cleaner head is disposed so as to illuminate a region of the planar work surface and debris in the region, said region being limited in its extent to within the shape of the single sector. As doing so would be a matter of routine experimentation regarding the pitch and yaw angles of light source and lens in order to properly illuminate debris and cast a shadow visible to the user appropriate for a given cleaner head width.
Senoo does not disclose the optical system located on only one single lateral side of the cleaner head, adjacent to one of the side walls, the light source and lens located between the longitudinal axis of the agitator and a bottom of the cleaner head configured to be disposed upon a planar work surface.
However, Quanttrini discloses a cleaning tool with a single light (16) on one single lateral side of forward side of the cleaner (See Fig. 1), adjacent to one of the side walls.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify Senoo to substitute the pair of lights for a single sided light source in its optical system as advantageously described in Quanttrini as doing so would allow for debris to be more easily seen (See Para [0044] “With a properly designed push broom a low grazing angle can be applied for the simple application of locating broken glass, dirt, or other small objects on a floor or flat surface. If a person is looking down onto a floor or flat surface that is illuminated with uniform low grazing angle light will observe that the light reflected from small objects will be much brighter than the light reflected from the surface. Furthermore, if the illumination is coming from only one direction, a long shadow will be cast immediately behind any object in the path of the light. This long shadow provides further contrast of normally hard to see particles on a surface and sets off the small object.”) similar to the light sources of Senoo, meaning that one a plurality of lights for the purpose of illuminating debris to assist a user in the cleaning process is an art recognized equivalent. See MPEP 2144.06 II.
Further, Davis discloses a similar cleaner with a light source (96) and an agitator (92) with a longitudinal axis, wherein the light source is located between the longitudinal axis of the agitator and a bottom of the cleaner head disposed upon a planar work surface (See Figure 2 showing light source and agitator in the described configuration).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the location of the light source as it has been held that the particular location of a part would be a design choice obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art so long that it does not modify the operation of the device, modifying the location of the light source of Senoo would not prevent the cleaner from acting as a cleaner.
PNG
media_image1.png
507
731
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A (Figure 4 of Senoo)
Regarding Claim 3, Senoo teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition teaches wherein the cleaner head (15) comprises a suction chamber (14); and the optical system is located between said one of the side walls and the suction chamber (See annotated Figure A, 25 is located between 14 and wall).
Regarding Claim 4, Senoo teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition teaches wherein: the optical system is located to one side of the agitator (agitator is located inside head but extends across head, since 25 is located on one end of the head it is located on one side of the agitator).
Regarding Claim 5, Senoo teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition teaches wherein the optical system is positioned so that a central axis of a light beam emitted by the optical system contacts the planar work surface on which the cleaner head is located at an acute angle in a range from 0 to 10° (See Para [0029] “That is, the left irradiation means 25 and the right irradiation means 26 disposed on both sides of the suction tool 15 face the center front direction of the suction tool 15, and the optical axis is disposed so as to illuminate the surface to be cleaned at an irradiation angle of about 10°”).
Regarding Claim 6, Senoo teaches all the limitations according to claim 1 but not explicitly teach, wherein the optical system is positioned so that a central axis of a light beam emitted by the optical system contacts the planar work surface on which the cleaner head is located acute angle is in the range from 0 to 5°.
However, Senoo [0029] teaches wherein the optical system is positioned so that a central axis of a light beam emitted by the optical system contacts a horizontal work surface on which the cleaner head is located an angle of about 10°, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to try modifying the irradiation angle of Senoo to be in the range of 0 to 5° as doing so would limit the range of the light (See Para [0030] of Senoo), concentrating the light in a given area making it easier to illuminate the debris on the surface to be cleaned. There are a finite range of angles that the light source can make with respect to the floor to be cleaner and would have a reasonable expectation of success, further there is no assigned criticality to the angle in applicants’ disclosure.
Regarding Claim 7, Senoo teaches all the limitations of claim 1 but does not explicitly teach wherein the optical system is positioned so that a light beam is emitted from the cleaner head at a height of less than 10mm from the planar work surface on which cleaner head is located,
However It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to try modify the optical system of Senoo so that a light beam is emitted from the cleaner head at a height of less than 10mm from a work surface on which cleaner head is located, as there is a limited, predictable number of options one can pursue to modify the size and shape of the illuminated area, such as the vertical or horizontal placement of the light on the cleaner head, or the lens used on the light, and one would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so the disclosure of the instant application has assigned no criticality to the described angle ranges or specific shape of the illumination.
Regarding Claim 8, Senoo teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition teaches wherein a majority of the region of the planar work surface upon which debris is illuminated by the optical system is bounded by two planes each containing a respective side wall of the cleaner head (Senoo as taught and modify in claim 1 would teach the majority of the region of the work surface upon which debris is illuminated by the optical system would be bounded by the side walls of the cleaner).
Regarding Claim 9, Senoo teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition teaches wherein the other one of the radii bounding the single sector is aligned at an obtuse angle to the front edge of the cleaner head (Senoo as taught and modify in claim 1 would teach the other radii bounding the sector is aligned at an obtuse angle to the front edge of the cleaner head).
Regarding Claim 10, Senoo discloses:
A cleaner head comprising:
a front edge (Left side edge of Annotated Figure A), a rear edge (Right side edge of Annotated Figure A), and mutually laterally spaced apart side walls extending between the front and rear edges (See Annotated Figure A);
an agitator rotatable about an axis that is collinear with a longitudinal axis of the agitator (agitator 21 see figure 5 showing longitudinal axis extending into the page); and
an optical system (25) located on one side of the cleaner head (Seen in Figure 2, where 25 is located toward top side of cleaner head) adjacent to one of the side walls, the optical system comprising:
a light source (25) and a lens (reflection cylinder 28), the lens being operable to receive light from the light source and emit a light beam;
and a suction source for drawing an airflow into the floor cleaner apparatus through the cleaner head (Para [0019] “The vacuum cleaner according to the fifth invention includes a suction tool for the vacuum cleaner according to any one of claims 1-4, and a vacuum cleaner body incorporating the electric blower”).
And suggests but does not explicitly disclose the light beam is limited to only within a shape of a single sector having a central angle in a range from 70 to 110° and bounded by two radii extending from the lens and an arc connecting ends of the two radii, the single sector having a central axis located angularly midway between the two radii and aligned at an angle in a range from 35 to 65° to the front edge of the cleaner head, and one of the radii extending from the lens bounding the single sector aligned at an acute angle of less than 20° relative to the front edge of the cleaner head (Light source 25 is capable of projecting a region in the described shape, Figure 2 of Senoo shows a region coming from light source 25, that has a central axis and a radii spaced away at an angle away from the cleaner head, the light beam being directed towards the planar work surface on which the cleaner head is disposed so as to illuminate a region of the planar work surface and debris in the region, said region being limited to only within the shape of the single sector (optical system is capable of illuminating such a region).
Blocker discloses a cleaner with at least one forward facing light, (75, see Figs. 8-10) with a variable “Yaw” angle, and “pitch” angle. And discloses that these angles can be changed as desired to form a specific light pattern (See Col 4 Line 6-17 “The frame 71 and its sockets 81 are configured for mounting the LED devices 75, 77 at the appropriate angles to provide the desired light pattern. Specific examples of these angles are described below. In general, however, the LED devices 75, 77 are preferably held in an orientation such that the central axis 105 of the conical light beam emitted by each device is at a desired yaw angle "A", as viewed from above the cleaner (FIG. 9), with respect to a horizontal axis 107 extending in front-to-back direction relative to the cleaner (i.e., parallel to the longitudinal centerline 109 of the cleaner), and at a desired pitch angle "B", as viewed from the side of the cleaner (FIG. 10), relative to a vertical axis 115.”) and additionally discusses an additional angle of divergence representing the conical angle of the light beam (See Col 4 Line 36-41 “Each of the two inboard illumination LED devices 75 generates a conical beam having an angle of divergence of about 20 to 30 degrees (e.g., about 25 degrees), and the central axis 105 of the beam is angled inward toward the central longitudinal axis 109 of the machine at a yaw angle A of about 10 degrees (FIG. 9).”).
Senoo Para states [0038] states “At this time, the front of the suction tool 15 is irradiated by the left irradiation means 25 and the right irradiation means 26, but since the optical axis is set so as to face the center direction of the suction tool 15, the shadow of the dust on the surface to be cleaned is projected to both the right and left sides in a direction intersecting the line of sight of the user at an angle. That is, a shadow is obliquely displayed on both sides of the dust as viewed from the user. In addition, since the surface to be cleaned is irradiated at an angle of about 10°, a shadow having a length of 5 to 10 times the actual size of the dust is created.” Discussing the relationship between the irradiation angle and how this effects the visibility of the debris illuminated by the light by casting a shadow. Para [0033] states “While the left irradiation means 25 and the right irradiation means 26 constituting the illumination means in the present embodiment are disposed at a position deeper than the front end of the suction tool 15, since the irradiation angle can be set to about 10° by using the diagonal distance in the width direction of the suction tool 15” discussing that the chosen irradiation angle is related to the angle of the light in the diagonal direction towards the center and the width of the cleaner head.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the optical system of Senoo such that the light beam to only within a shape of a single sector having a central angle in a range from 70° to 110° and bounded by two radii extending from the lens and an arc connecting ends of the two radii, the single sector having a central axis located angularly midway between the two radii and aligned at an angle in a range from 35° to 65° to the front edge of the cleaner head, and one of the radii extending from the lens bounding the single sector aligned at an acute angle of less than 20° relative to the front edge of the cleaner head, the light beam being directed towards the planar work surface on which the cleaner head is disposed so as to illuminate a region of the planar work surface and debris in the region, said region being limited to only within the shape of the single sector. As doing so would be a matter of routine experimentation regarding the pitch and yaw angles of light source and lens in order to properly illuminate debris and cast a shadow visible to the user appropriate for a given cleaner head width.
but does not explicitly teach the optical system is located on only one single lateral side of the cleaner head, adjacent to one of the side walls, the single-sided optical system comprising:
the light source and lens located between the longitudinal axis of the agitator and a bottom of the cleaner head configured to be disposed upon a planar work surface.
However, Quanttrini discloses a cleaning tool with a single light (16) on one single lateral side of forward side of the cleaner (See Fig. 1), adjacent to one of the side walls.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify Senoo to utilize a single light source in its optical system as advantageously described in Quanttrini as doing so would allow for debris to be more easily seen (See Para [0044] “With a properly designed push broom a low grazing angle can be applied for the simple application of locating broken glass, dirt, or other small objects on a floor or flat surface. If a person is looking down onto a floor or flat surface that is illuminated with uniform low grazing angle light will observe that the light reflected from small objects will be much brighter than the light reflected from the surface. Furthermore, if the illumination is coming from only one direction, a long shadow will be cast immediately behind any object in the path of the light. This long shadow provides further contrast of normally hard to see particles on a surface and sets off the small object.”) similar to the light sources of Senoo, meaning that one a plurality of lights for the purpose of illuminating debris to assist a user in the cleaning process is an art recognized equivalent. See MPEP 2144.06 II.
Further, Davis discloses a similar cleaner with a light source (96) and an agitator (92) with a longitudinal axis, wherein the light source is located between the longitudinal axis of the agitator and a bottom of the cleaner head disposed upon a planar work surface (See Figure 2 showing light source and agitator in the described configuration).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the location of the light source as it has been held that the particular location of a part would be a design choice obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art so long that it does not modify the operation of the device, modifying the location of the light source of Senoo would not prevent the cleaner from acting as a cleaner.
Regarding Claim 13, Senoo as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 10, but does not explicitly teach comprising a controller for controlling the optical system (operation part (button) 19 Para [0036]- [0038] “When the cleaner body 10 is operated by the operation of the operation unit 19, suction air is generated by the electric blower 12, and the dust on the cleaned surface is sucked from the suction tool 15 communicating with the hose 13 and the extension pipe 20.
At the same time, the rotary brush 21 of the suction tool 15 also rotates, and the dust that is not lifted by the suction force generated in the suction port 14 is scraped by the mechanical force and collected and sucked.
At this time, the front of the suction tool 15 is irradiated by the left irradiation means 25 and the right irradiation means 26, but since the optical axis is set to face the center direction of the suction tool 15,”).
Regarding Claim 14, Senoo as modified teaches all the limitation of claim 13 and in addition teaches wherein the controller is arranged to actuate the optical system when the suction source of the floor cleaner apparatus is switched on (See Par [0036]- [0038] cited above).
Regarding Claim 15, Senoo as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition teaches, Wherein:
The front edge, the rear edge, and the mutually spaced apart side walls of the cleaner head define a suction chamber (annotated Figure A, See Senoo Para [0024] “A suction tool 15 having a suction port 14 opened to face the surface to be cleaned is connected to the tip of the dust suction passage 35, that is, the tip of the extension pipe 20.”);
The agitator (21) disposed in the suction chamber (See Figure 5 of Senoo); and
The optical system is located between one of the mutually spaced apart side walls and the agitator (See Figures 3 and 5 of Senoo).
Regarding Claim 17, Senoo discloses:
A cleaner head comprising:
a front edge (Left side edge of Annotated Figure A), a rear edge (Right side edge of Annotated Figure A), and mutually laterally spaced apart side walls extending between the front and rear edges (See Annotated Figure A);
an agitator rotatable about an axis that is collinear with a longitudinal axis of the agitator (agitator 21 see figure 5 showing longitudinal axis extending into the page); and
an optical system (25) located on one side of the cleaner head (Seen in Figure 2, where 25 is located toward top side of cleaner head) adjacent to one of the side walls, the optical system comprising:
a light source (25) and a lens (light cylinder 28), the lens receiving light from the light source during operation of the cleaner head (See Para [0036]- [0038] of Senoo discussing the powering up and operation of the device) and emitting a light beam.
And suggests but does not explicitly disclose the light beam is limited in its extent of a single sector having a central angle in a range from 70 to 110° and bounded by two radii extending from the lens and an arc connecting ends of the two radii, the single sector having a central axis located angularly midway between the two radii and aligned at an angle in a range from 35 to 65° to the front edge of the cleaner head, and one of the radii extending from the lens bounding the single sector aligned at an acute angle of less than 20° relative to the front edge of the cleaner head (Light source 25 is capable of projecting a region in the described shape, Figure 2 of Senoo shows a region coming from light source 25, that has a central axis and a radii spaced away at an angle away from the cleaner head, the light beam being directed towards the planar work surface on which the cleaner head is disposed so as to illuminate a region of the planar work surface and debris in the region, said region being limited in its extent to within the shape of the single sector (optical system is capable of illuminating such a region).
Blocker discloses a cleaner with at least one forward facing light, (75, see Figs. 8-10) with a variable “Yaw” angle, and “pitch” angle. And discloses that these angles can be changed as desired to form a specific light pattern (See Col 4 Line 6-17 “The frame 71 and its sockets 81 are configured for mounting the LED devices 75, 77 at the appropriate angles to provide the desired light pattern. Specific examples of these angles are described below. In general, however, the LED devices 75, 77 are preferably held in an orientation such that the central axis 105 of the conical light beam emitted by each device is at a desired yaw angle "A", as viewed from above the cleaner (FIG. 9), with respect to a horizontal axis 107 extending in front-to-back direction relative to the cleaner (i.e., parallel to the longitudinal centerline 109 of the cleaner), and at a desired pitch angle "B", as viewed from the side of the cleaner (FIG. 10), relative to a vertical axis 115.”) and additionally discusses an additional angle of divergence representing the conical angle of the light beam (See Col 4 Line 36-41 “Each of the two inboard illumination LED devices 75 generates a conical beam having an angle of divergence of about 20 to 30 degrees (e.g., about 25 degrees), and the central axis 105 of the beam is angled inward toward the central longitudinal axis 109 of the machine at a yaw angle A of about 10 degrees (FIG. 9).”).
Senoo Para states [0038] states “At this time, the front of the suction tool 15 is irradiated by the left irradiation means 25 and the right irradiation means 26, but since the optical axis is set so as to face the center direction of the suction tool 15, the shadow of the dust on the surface to be cleaned is projected to both the right and left sides in a direction intersecting the line of sight of the user at an angle. That is, a shadow is obliquely displayed on both sides of the dust as viewed from the user. In addition, since the surface to be cleaned is irradiated at an angle of about 10°, a shadow having a length of 5 to 10 times the actual size of the dust is created.” Discussing the relationship between the irradiation angle and how this effects the visibility of the debris illuminated by the light by casting a shadow. Para [0033] states “While the left irradiation means 25 and the right irradiation means 26 constituting the illumination means in the present embodiment are disposed at a position deeper than the front end of the suction tool 15, since the irradiation angle can be set to about 10° by using the diagonal distance in the width direction of the suction tool 15” discussing that the chosen irradiation angle is related to the angle of the light in the diagonal direction towards the center and the width of the cleaner head.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the optical system of Senoo such that the light beam is limited to a shape of a single sector having a central angle in a range from 70° to 110° and bounded by two radii extending from the lens and an arc connecting ends of the two radii, the single sector having a central axis located angularly midway between the two radii and aligned at an angle in a range from 35° to 65° to the front edge of the cleaner head, and one of the radii extending from the lens bounding the single sector aligned at an acute angle of less than 20° relative to the front edge of the cleaner head, the light beam being directed towards the planar work surface on which the cleaner head is disposed so as to illuminate a region of the planar work surface and debris in the region, said region being limited in its extent to within the shape of the single sector. As doing so would be a matter of routine experimentation regarding the pitch and yaw angles of light source and lens in order to properly illuminate debris and cast a shadow visible to the user appropriate for a given cleaner head width.
Senoo does not disclose the optical system is single-sided, located on one single lateral side of the cleaner head.
The light source and lens located between the longitudinal axis of the agitator and a bottom of the cleaner head configured to be disposed upon a planar work surface
However, Quanttrini discloses a cleaning tool with a single light (16) on one single lateral side of forward side of the cleaner (See Fig. 1), adjacent to one of the side walls.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify Senoo to utilize a single light source in its optical system as advantageously described in Quanttrini as doing so would allow for debris to be more easily seen (See Para [0044] “With a properly designed push broom a low grazing angle can be applied for the simple application of locating broken glass, dirt, or other small objects on a floor or flat surface. If a person is looking down onto a floor or flat surface that is illuminated with uniform low grazing angle light will observe that the light reflected from small objects will be much brighter than the light reflected from the surface. Furthermore, if the illumination is coming from only one direction, a long shadow will be cast immediately behind any object in the path of the light. This long shadow provides further contrast of normally hard to see particles on a surface and sets off the small object.”) similar to the light sources of Senoo, meaning that one a plurality of lights for the purpose of illuminating debris to assist a user in the cleaning process is an art recognized equivalent. See MPEP 2144.06 II.
Further, Davis discloses a similar cleaner with a light source (96) and an agitator (92) with a longitudinal axis, wherein the light source is located between the longitudinal axis of the agitator and a bottom of the cleaner head disposed upon a planar work surface (See Figure 2 showing light source and agitator in the described configuration).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the location of the light source as it has been held that the particular location of a part would be a design choice obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art so long that it does not modify the operation of the device, modifying the location of the light source of Senoo would not prevent the cleaner from acting as a cleaner.
Claim(s) 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Senoo (JP 2013226176 A) in view of Davis (US 20040255426 A1), Quanttrini (US 20090059569 A1), and Blocker (US 7627927 B2) as modified in claim 1 and in further view of Conrad (US 20190254491 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Senoo teaches all the limitations of claim 10 but does not explicitly teach in the form of a handheld floor cleaner apparatus.
However, Conrad does teach a handheld cleaner (1000) that can be attached to a cleaning head (2100).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cleaner attached to the cleaning head in Senoo to be a handheld cleaner as doing so would allow for easy storage of the cleaner, and would allow for a user to detach the cleaner and use it as a hand cleaner as necessary.
Regarding Claim 12, Senoo as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 10 but does not explicitly teach in the form of a battery-powered floor cleaner apparatus.
However, Conrad does teach a similar cleaner with a cleaner head that does utilize battery power to power the cleaner (Para [0171] “As exemplified, hand vacuum cleaner 1000 may be powered by an onboard energy source, such as a battery pack or other energy storage member such as a capacitor, such as an ultracapacitor.”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cleaner of Senoo to include a battery as doing so would allow a user to operate the cleaner without concern for a power cord or distance to a wall socket.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tyler James McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-7270. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-5PM (E.S.T), Flex First Friday.
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.
/T.J.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723