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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 26, 31-32, and 34 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 26, line 6, “which at least one” should be changed to --wherein the at least one--.
In claim 26, line 23, “at least a lower one of said first and second inner parts” should be changed to --at least a lower portion of one of said first and second inner parts--.
In claim 31, line 6, “at least a series of fluid nozzles” should be changed to --a series of fluid nozzles--.
In claim 31, line 7, “which series of fluid nozzles” should be changed to --wherein the series of fluid nozzles--.
In claim 31, line 9, “wherein the series of fluid nozzles are” should be changed to --wherein the series of fluid nozzles is--.
In claim 31, line 19 and 22, “and second outer parts”, “and second inner parts”, and “second outer part” should be changed to --and the second outer parts--, --and the second inner parts--, and --said second inner part--, respectively.
In claim 32, line 2, “and second inner part” should be changed to --and the second inner part--.
In claim 34, line 6, “which at least one” should be changed to --wherein the at least one--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 6 is 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “a drainage area disposed in between the inner contour of the body and the diffusor”. It is unclear since it has not been established that there is a difference between the inner contour and the location of the diffusor on the inner surface, since both are part of the peripheral wall. Therefore, it is unclear how there is an area between the two cited locations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 4, 7, 14, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Eriksson et al. (US 6321682).
Regarding claim 4, Eriksson et al. discloses a spray head (Figs. 3-4) configured to clean a teat (54) of a dairy animal, comprising: a body (51) comprising an inner contour at least partly enclosing a cleaning zone that is configured to receive the teat of the dairy animal (Fig. 4 shows the teat (54) being received within at least partly enclosed cleaning zone through opening (55) and sealing collar (56)); a fluid inlet (65); a series of nozzles (col.4, lines 2-4, at least one, which would include a series of nozzles (59)), said nozzles configured to discharge a fluid jet (col. 4, lines 13-21), which the nozzles are in fluid connection with the fluid inlet (65) and are arranged along at least part of the inner contour of the body (Fig. 4, col. 4, lines 2-21), wherein said inner contour is formed by a wall peripheral to the cleaning zone (Fig. 4, wall (75)); and wherein each nozzle is formed by an opening through said peripheral wall (Fig. 4), and a diffusor (col. 4, lines 17-27) configured to break up the fluid jet discharged through the nozzles, and wherein the diffusor comprises a plurality of ribs (77) arranged along an inner surface of the peripheral wall of the body (Fig. 4), wherein each one of the ribs is arranged and configured to break up a fluid jet jetted from one of said series of nozzles (col. 4, lines 17-21), wherein the plurality of ribs have a longitudinal direction such that spaces are provided between adjacent ribs, said spaces open towards the cleaning zone and to a lower end of the spray head (Fig. 4 shows the ribs (77) having a longitudinal direction and spaces between each, wherein the spaces open towards the cleaning zone in the center of the space).
Regarding claim 7, Eriksson et al. discloses the spray head of claim 4, and discloses wherein the body is a housing having an inner space (space surrounded by (75)), wherein the fluid connection is arranged in the inner space of the housing and is defined by the inner space of the housing (through hose (65), see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 14, Eriksson et al. discloses the spray head of claim 4, and discloses the spray head further comprises a fluid guide arranged downstream of the cleaning zone (Fig. 4 shows a narrowing of the interior towards the drain line where (71) is pointing to within the space, the shape helps guide the fluid towards the valve (73)).
Regarding claim 23, Eriksson et al. discloses the spray head of claim 4, and discloses a milking apparatus comprising the spray head according to claim 4 (col. 1, lines 13-46, the cleaning and pre-milking is part of a larger milking apparatus as is known in the art).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 11-12, 15-17, 21, 24-25, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eriksson et al. (US 6321682) in view of Neal et al. (US 2019/0281784, submitted with 12/27/2024 IDS).
Regarding claim 11, Eriksson et al. discloses the spray head of claim 4, and discloses wherein the series of nozzles are configured to discharge the fluid jet therefrom at an angle towards a center of the cleaning zone at or near which said nozzles are disposed (col. 4, lines 24-26, the tangential angle would be towards the center of the cleaning zone). Eriksson et al. does not explicitly teach the angle is downward.
Regarding claim 12, Eriksson et al. discloses the spray head of claim 11. Eriksson et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the angle is between 15-35 degrees.
Neal et al., like Eriksson et al., teaches a spray head and teaches wherein the series of nozzles are configured to discharge the fluid jet at an angle between 15-35 degrees (paragraph [0053] discloses a downward angle of ((80),(81),(82),(83)) of about 16-18 degrees and about 25 degrees, which are within the range listed in the claim).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. to include a specific angle range as taught by Neal et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide an angle that is dependent upon the size and shape of the animal’s teat and the diameter of the treatment cavity (Neal et al.: paragraph [0053]).
Regarding claim 15, Eriksson et al. discloses the spray head of claim 4. Eriksson et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein each of the nozzles has a slit shape having a width and a height.
Neal et al., like Eriksson et al., teaches a spray head and further teaches wherein each of the nozzles has a slit shape having a width and a height (Figs. 6A and 8A shows a slit shape to the at least one nozzle ((81),(82),(83)) and shows a width (Fig. 8A) and a height (Fig. 6A)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. to have nozzles having a slit shape with a width and a height as taught by Neal et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to pin point the angle and direction of the jet of fluid exiting the nozzle for an improved coverage of the cleaning fluid.
Regarding claim 16, Eriksson et al. as modified by Neal et al. teaches the spray head of claim 15, and teaches (references to Neal et al.), wherein the width of each of the nozzles extends along the inner contour of the body (Figs. 2, 6A, and 8A shows a width of the at least one nozzle ((80),(81),(82),(83)) having a width extending along the inner contour of the body).
Regarding claim 17, Eriksson et al. discloses the spray head of claim 4, and discloses wherein the series of nozzles are configured to jet fluid in a direction that is angled relative to the teat when received in the cleaning zone (col. 4, lines 24-26, the tangential angle would be at an angle relative to the teat). However, Eriksson et al. does not explicitly disclose the angle is relative to a radial direction of the teat.
Neal et al., like Eriksson et al., teaches a spray head, and further teaches wherein the series of nozzles are configured to jet fluid in a direction that is angled relative to a radial direction of the teat when received in the cleaning zone (Figs. 6A and 8A show the angled jet fluid relative the radial direction of the teat, see paragraph [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. to have nozzles having an angle relative to the radial direction of the teat as taught by Neal et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to pin point the angle and direction of the jet of fluid exiting the nozzle for an improved coverage of the teat.
Regarding claim 21, Eriksson et al. discloses the spray head of claim 4, and discloses the fluid inlet is connected to a cleaning fluid supply (col. 4, lines 4-8). Eriksson et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the fluid inlet comprises a connector configured to attach the fluid inlet to a fluid gun, said connector comprising a flexible plug and/or screw threads for the attachment
Neal et al., like Eriksson et al., teaches a spray head and further teaches wherein the fluid inlet (at (29)) comprises a connector (29) configured to attach the fluid inlet (at (29)) to a fluid gun (Fig. 1), said connector comprising a flexible plug and/or screw threads for the attachment (Fig. 2, paragraph [0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. to include a connector for a fluid gun as taught by Neal et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to better control the amount of fluid that enters the apparatus when operated manually.
Regarding claim 24, Eriksson et al. as modified by Neal et al. teaches the spray head of claim 12, and teaches (references to Neal et al.), wherein the angle is between 20-30 degrees (paragraph [0053] discloses a downward angle of ((80),(81),(82),(83)) of about 25 degrees, which is within the range listed in the claim).
Regarding claim 25, Eriksson et al. as modified by Neal et al. teaches the spray head of claim 24, and teaches (references to Neal et al.), wherein the angle is about 25 degrees (paragraph [0053] discloses a downward angle of ((80),(81),(82),(83)) of about 25 degrees).
Regarding claim 40, Eriksson et al. discloses an assembly comprising the spray head of claim 4, and discloses the fluid inlet is connected to a cleaning fluid supply (col. 4, lines 4-8). Eriksson et al. does not explicitly disclose a handheld fluid gun, wherein the fluid inlet of the spray head is connected to the handheld fluid gun using a flexible plug and/or screw threads.
Neal et al., like Eriksson et al., teaches a spray head and further teaches a handheld fluid gun, wherein the fluid inlet (at (29)) of the spray head is connected to the handheld fluid gun (Fig. 1) using a flexible plug and/or screw threads (Fig. 2, paragraph [0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the assembly comprising the spray head of Eriksson et al. to include a handheld fluid gun as taught by Neal et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to better control the amount of fluid that enters the apparatus when operated manually.
Claims 26 and 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eriksson et al. (US 6321682) in view of Duke et al. (WO 2021/116690) and Adriansson et al. (US 11304399).
Regarding claim 26, Eriksson et al. discloses a spray head (Figs. 3-4) configured to clean a teat (54) of a dairy animal, comprising: a body (51) comprising an inner contour at least partly enclosing a cleaning zone that is configured to receive the teat of the dairy animal (Fig. 4 shows the teat (54) being received within at least partly enclosed cleaning zone through opening (55) and sealing collar (56)); a fluid inlet (65); and at least one nozzle (col.4, lines 2-4, at least one nozzle (59)) configured to discharge a fluid jet (col. 4, lines 13-21), which at least one nozzle is in fluid connection with the fluid inlet (65) and is arranged along at least part of the inner contour of the body (Fig. 4, col. 4, lines 2-21), wherein said inner contour is formed by a wall peripheral to the cleaning zone (Fig. 4, wall (75)); and wherein the at least one nozzle is formed by an opening through said peripheral wall (Fig. 4), and wherein at least a lower portion comprises inward reaching ribs (col. 4, lines 17-27, (77)), wherein the at least one nozzle (59) is provided in proximity of an upper edge of the first inner part offset from a longitudinal center plane of the cleaning zone (Fig. 3).
Eriksson et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the body is defined by a housing, comprising a first outer part and a second outer part, connectable to each other along a mid-sectional plane perpendicular to an insertion direction, wherein between said first outer part and said second outer part a first inner part and a second inner part are provided, wherein an inner space of the spray head is formed between the first and second outer parts and the first and second inner parts, wherein the at least one nozzle is provided in proximity of an upper edge of the first inner part.
Duke et al., like Eriksson et al., teaches a device to clean a teat of a dairy animal, and further teaches a body defined by a housing, comprising a first outer part (20) and a second outer part (10), connectable to each other along a mid-sectional plane perpendicular to an insertion direction (26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. to include a first outer part and a second outer part as taught by Duke et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide ease of maintenance since the opening of the device would be easily handled by unscrewing the peripheries of the outer parts, which could potentially be helpful if there is an issue with the teat while in the device at the time (Duke et al.: p. 3, lines 11-18, inlet for liquid, ease of access and replacement). Further, it has been held that if it were considered desirable for any reasons to obtain access to the portion not separable in the prior art’s container it would be obvious to make the container removable for that purpose. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). Here, Duke et al. teaches benefits to having a separable housing.
Adriansson et al., like, Eriksson et al., teaches a spray head configured to clean a teat of a dairy animal, and further teaches wherein between a first outer part (upper portion of (220)) and a second outer part (lower portion of (220)), a first inner part (upper portion of (270)) and a second inner part (lower portion of (270)) are provided, wherein an inner space ((291), (292)) of the spray head is formed between the first and second outer parts (220) and the first and second inner parts (270), wherein the at least one nozzle (275) is provided in proximity of an upper edge of the first inner part (Fig. 2B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. modified by Duke et al. with inner and outer parts to provide an inner space as taught by Adriansson et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide additional storage of cleaning fluid and to provide a smooth liquid transition without pressure loss (Adriansson et al.: col. 4, lines 63-67).
Regarding claim 31, Eriksson et al. discloses a spray head (Figs. 3-4) configured to clean a teat (54) of a dairy animal, comprising: a body (51) comprising an inner contour at least partly enclosing a cleaning zone that is configured to receive the teat of the dairy animal (Fig. 4 shows the teat (54) being received within at least partly enclosed cleaning zone through opening (55) and sealing collar (56)); a fluid inlet (65); and at least a series of fluid nozzles (col.4, lines 2-4, at least one, which would include a series of nozzles (59)), each nozzle configured to discharge a fluid jet (col. 4, lines 13-21), which series of fluid nozzles is in fluid connection with the fluid inlet (65) and is arranged along at least part of the inner contour of the body (Fig. 4, col. 4, lines 2-21), wherein the series of fluid nozzles are configured to discharge the fluid jet therefrom at an angle towards a center of the cleaning zone (Fig. 4), wherein said inner contour is formed by a wall peripheral to the cleaning zone (Fig. 4, wall (75)); and wherein at least one fluid nozzle from the series of fluid nozzles is formed by an opening through said peripheral wall (Fig. 4), wherein the series of fluid nozzles is provided in proximity of an upper edge of the inner part, offset from a longitudinal center plant of the cleaning zone (Fig. 3), and wherein at least a lower portion comprises inward reaching ribs extending inward from the peripheral wall (col. 4, lines 17-27, (77)), said inward reaching ribs defining spaces therebetween, open towards the cleaning zone and towards a lower end of the spray head for during use diffusing jets of liquid discharged by the series of fluid nozzles and guiding said liquid away from the cleaning zone (Fig. 4 shows the ribs (77) and spaces therebetween which help direct the liquid).
Eriksson et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the body is defined by a housing, comprising a first outer part and a second outer part, connectable to each other along a mid-sectional plane perpendicular to an insertion direction, wherein between said first outer part and said second outer part a first inner part and a second inner part are provided, wherein an inner space of the spray head is formed between the first and second outer parts and the first and second inner parts.
Duke et al., like Eriksson et al., teaches a device to clean a teat of a dairy animal, and further teaches a body defined by a housing, comprising a first outer part (20) and a second outer part (10), connectable to each other along a mid-sectional plane perpendicular to an insertion direction (26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. to include a first outer part and a second outer part as taught by Duke et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide ease of maintenance since the opening of the device would be easily handled by unscrewing the peripheries of the outer parts, which could potentially be helpful if there is an issue with the teat while in the device at the time (Duke et al.: p. 3, lines 11-18, inlet for liquid, ease of access and replacement). Further, it has been held that if it were considered desirable for any reasons to obtain access to the portion not separable in the prior art’s container it would be obvious to make the container removable for that purpose. In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). Here, Duke et al. teaches benefits to having a separable housing.
Adriansson et al., like, Eriksson et al., teaches a spray head configured to clean a teat of a dairy animal, and further teaches wherein between a first outer part (upper portion of (220)) and a second outer part (lower portion of (220)), a first inner part (upper portion of (270)) and a second inner part (lower portion of (270)) are provided, wherein an inner space ((291), (292)) of the spray head is formed between the first and second outer parts (220) and the first and second inner parts (270), wherein the at least one nozzle (275) is provided in proximity of an upper edge of the first inner part (Fig. 2B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. modified by Duke et al. with inner and outer parts to provide an inner space as taught by Adriansson et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide additional storage of cleaning fluid and to provide a smooth liquid transition without pressure loss (Adriansson et al.: col. 4, lines 63-67).
Regarding claim 32, Eriksson et al. as modified by Duke et al. and Adriansson et al. teaches the spray head of claim 31, and teaches (references to Eriksson et al.) wherein a brush is provided between the first inner part and second inner part (col. 5, lines 1-7).
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eriksson et al. (US 6321682) in view of Duke et al. (WO 2021/116690) and Adriansson et al. (US 11304399) as applied to claim 31 above, and further in view of Neal et al. (US 2019/0281784, submitted with 12/27/2024 IDS).
Regarding claim 33, Eriksson et al. as modified by Duke et al. and Adriansson et al. teaches the spray head of claim 31. Eriksson et al. as modified by Duke et al. and Adriansson et al. does not explicitly teach wherein the nozzles are formed by slits.
Neal et al., like Eriksson et al., teaches a spray head and further teaches wherein the nozzles are formed by slits (Figs. 6A and 8A shows a slit shape to the at least one nozzle ((81),(82),(83))).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the spray head of Eriksson et al. as modified by Duke et al. and Adriansson et al. to have nozzles formed by slits as taught by Neal et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to pin point the angle and direction of the jet of fluid exiting the nozzle for an improved coverage of the cleaning fluid.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 34-35 are allowed with a claim objection for claim 34 above.
Claims 6 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 6: Although the references of record show features similar to those of Applicant’s spray head, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious the combined limitations of applicant’s claimed invention. Specifically, a drainage area disposed in between the inner contour of the body and the diffusor, along with the other limitations.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 13: Although the references of record show features similar to those of Applicant’s spray head, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious the combined limitations of applicant’s claimed invention. Specifically, a fluid guard arranged downstream of the series of nozzles along with the other limitations.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claims 34-35: Although the references of record show features similar to those of Applicant’s spray head, the prior art fails to teach or make obvious the combined limitations of applicant’s claimed invention. Specifically, ribs provided, wherein between adjacent ribs a space is provided, said spaces being open towards the longitudinal axis and extending a downward direction along with the other limitations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Eriksson (US 6591784), Guo (US 2002/0185071), Nicolini et al. (EP 2179644), Dole et al. (US 9756831), Malecki (US 11819005), and Mottram et al. (US 5673650) teach cleaning devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLY W. LYNCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30am-5:30pm, Eastern Time, alternate 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, Peter M Poon can be reached on 571-272-6891. 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.
/CARLY W. LYNCH/Examiner, Art Unit 3643