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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made to the amendment received January 20, 2026, amending Claims 1-3.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-3 in the reply filed on April 17, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “cleaner system” in Claims 1-3 and “dust suction module” in Claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 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.
As necessitated by amendment, Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. US 2017/0319035 (hereafter Kim et al.) in view of Nam et al. US 2017/0280951 (hereafter Nam et al.) in further view of Kim et al. US 2021/0052121 (hereafter Samsung).
Regarding Amended Claim 1, Kim et al. teaches:
[Claim 1] A cleaner system (assembly shown in Figure 5 comprising cleaner holder 10 and cleaner 300) comprising:
a cleaner (cleaner 300) comprising:
a suction part (extension tube 330) having a suction flow path (through suction nozzle and into cleaner body 310) through which air flows,
a suction motor (suction motor inside cleaner body 310, Paragraph [0043]) configured to generate a suction force for suctioning the air along the suction part,
a dust separating part (dust separator 312, Paragraph [0043]) having a cyclone part (see Nam et al. discussion below) configured to separate dust from the air introduced through the suction part,
a dust bin (dust container 314, Paragraph [0043]) configured to store the dust separated by the dust separating part, and
a handle (handle shown in Figure 5) having a grip portion; and
a cleaner station (cleaner holder 10) comprising:
a coupling part (second body 130) to which the dust bin is coupled,
a dust collecting part (dust collector (not illustrated), Paragraph [0074]) into which the dust in the dust bin is collected (described in Paragraph [0074]), the dust collecting part being disposed below the coupling part (see Samsung discussion below), and
a dust suction module having a dust collecting motor (separate device provided in the dust collector, Paragraph [0074]), the dust collecting motor being disposed below the dust collecting part (see Samsung discussion below) and configured to generate a suction force for suctioning the dust in the dust bin into the dust collecting part (described in Paragraph [0074]),
wherein an imaginary plane (plane formed through cited lines below resulting in a vertical plane through the center of the device) is defined by:
a suction flow path through line (vertical line through center of extension tube 330 shown in Figure 5) that extends through the suction flow path in a longitudinal direction of the suction part (vertical axis through center of extension tube 330 labeled and shown in Figure 5 below), and
a suction motor axis (see discussion below – axis A1 of suction motor is horizontal and concentric with dust container 314 when cleaner 300 is held by cleaner holder 10 as shown in Figure 5) that is defined by extending a rotation axis of the suction motor, [[and]]
wherein, based on [[when]] the cleaner being coupled to the cleaner station, the imaginary plane passes through at least a part of the cleaner station, and the suction flow path through line intersects with the suction motor axis (Figure 5), and
wherein, based on the cleaner being coupled to the cleaner station (shown in attached Figure 5), a longitudinal axis of the dust bin (labeled and shown in attached Figure 5 below) intersects (labeled and shown in attached Modified Figure 5 below) with a dust collecting motor axis (labeled and shown in attached Modified Figure 5 below) defined by extending a rotation axis of the dust collecting motor (labeled and shown in attached Modified Figure 5 below).
Kim et al. discloses a cleaner 300 that includes a dust separator 312 in Paragraph [0043] that is configured to separate dust from the air introduced through the suction part. Kim et al. does not disclose that the dust separator 312 is a cyclone as claimed. The reference Nam et al. discloses a cleaner 1 from the same assignee that appears to be the same device as the cleaner disclosed by Kim et al. Nam et al. discloses in Paragraph [0054] a dust separation unit 10 that may include a first cyclone unit 110 using cyclonic flow and a suction unit 5 arranged with a motor rotation axis A1 of suction motor 230 as best shown in Figure 4. Due to the obvious similarity between the two devices, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Kim et al. device, if necessary, to include a cyclone and suction motor arranged to fit inside the cleaner body as shown in Nam et al. Figure 4, resulting in the claimed suction motor axis A1 with the motivation to equip the Kim et al. device with a functional suction source and dust separator that, due to the lack of reliance on a filter bag, allows the dust collector to easily emptied with the separating device within the cleaner holder 10 disclosed by Kim et al. in Paragraph [0074].
Kim et al. discloses in Paragraph [0074] a dust collector that may be provided in the first body 110 that collects dust from dust container 315 by moving the dust by suction force generated by a separate (motor driven) device provided in the dust collector with the motivation to improve user’s convenience. Unfortunately, Kim et al. does not provide a drawing depicting this arrangement.
The reference Samsung discloses a cleaner station (docking station 100) that has a dust collector (collector) provided in the first inner space 111 located below the dust collecting chamber 20 of the cleaner 10 with a suction force generated by a separate device (suction fan 131) provided in a vertical orientation located below the first inner space 111. Therefore, Samsung is locationally arranged to take advantage of gravity and to generally form a shape where the vertical size is larger than the horizontal size as shown in Figure 2. Therefore, in combination with the references Nam et al. and Samsung, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Kim et al. device to be modified to place the disclosed dust collecting part (dust collector) below the coupling part (second body 130) as taught by Samsung. It would also have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for Kim et al. device to be modified to place the disclosed dust collecting motor (separate device) below the dust collecting part (dust collector) as taught by Samsung. Both modifications motivated to take advantage of gravity and arranged to not interfere with the coupling portion where cleaner 300 is installed from the top. Obviously, the size and shape of these elements being adjusted to best fit the holder concept of the Kim et al. disclosure. For clarity, the Examiner has illustrated the obvious combination of teachings and created a Modified Figure 5 that reflects the combined device as explained.
PNG
media_image1.png
933
1777
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Amended Claim 2, Kim et al. in view of Nam et al. teaches:
[Claim 2] The cleaner system of claim 1, wherein [[a]] the dust collecting motor axis (labeled and shown in attached Modified Figure 5 above) is
Kim et al. discloses in Paragraph [0074] a dust collector provided in the first body 110 with a suction force generated by a separate device provided. Kim et al. does not illustrate the arrangement of components within the first body 110. Therefore, Kim et al. does not specifically show a dust collecting motor axis. The reference Nam et al. discloses details regarding the suction motor inside the cleaner device. As shown in Figure 4, Nam et al. discloses the use of a rotating suction motor 230 with a rotation axis A1 in the device that appears to be the same as the device disclosed in Kim et al. The reference Samsung discloses a cleaner station (docking station 100) that has a dust collector (collector) provided in the first inner space 111 with a suction force generated by a separate device (suction fan 131) provided in a vertical orientation relative to each to match a shape where the vertical size is larger than the horizontal size as shown in Figure 2. As taught by Samsung, the axis of the motor of suction fan 131 is oriented vertically and centered in the device.
Therefore, in combination with the references Nam et al. and Samsung, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the dust collecting motor to be a rotating motor with a rotation axis, and therefore the imaginary dust collecting motor axis oriented vertically and aligned with the claimed imaginary plane in the center of the device with the motivation to provide a symmetrical flow and symmetrical center of gravity of the motor preventing a tipping bias. Therefore, the vertical axis of the dust collection motor will extend collinear to the imaginary plane as claimed.
Regarding Amended Claim 3, Kim et al. in view of Nam et al. teaches:
[Claim 3] The cleaner system of claim 1, wherein, based on the cleaner (cleaner 300) being coupled to the cleaner station (cleaner holder 10), the suction motor axis (as presented in Claim 1 - axis A1 of suction motor is horizontal and concentric with dust container 314 when cleaner 300 is held by cleaner holder 10 as shown in Figure 5) intersects with [[a]] the dust collecting motor axis (vertically oriented axis centered side to side as discussed in Claim 2)
wherein a height from a ground surface to an intersection point between the suction motor axis and the dust collecting motor axis is equal to or less than a maximum height of the cleaner station (see discussion below).
Kim et al. discloses in Paragraph [0074] a dust collector provided in the first body 110 with a suction force generated by a separate device provided. Kim et al. does not illustrate the arrangement of components within the first body 110. Therefore, Kim et al. does not specifically show the orientation of the longitudinal axis of the dust collecting motor. It is common knowledge that the dust collector traditionally requires a cavity upstream of the suction fan. When looking at the shape of the first body 110, it appears to be longer in the vertical dimension than the horizontal. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to orient the cavity and suction fan vertically relative to each other to best match the existing shape. That being said, the reference Samsung discloses a cleaner station (docking station 100) that has a dust collector (collector) provided in the first inner space 111 with a suction force generated by a separate device (suction fan 131) provided in a vertical orientation relative to each to match a shape where the vertical size is larger than the horizontal size as shown in Figure 2. As taught by Samsung, the axis of the motor of suction fan 131 is oriented vertically and centered in the device. Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Kim et al. device to orient the axis of the suction source with a vertical axis of rotation as taught by Samsung with the motivation to orient the parts to best fit the disclosed shape of the first body 110. That being said, a longitudinal axis of the dust collecting motor (suction source) would be vertical as taught by Samsung and the longitudinal axis of the dust bin (dust container 314) would be horizontal as shown in Figure 5.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for the dust collecting motor to be oriented vertically and centered in the cleaner station resulting in the imaginary dust collecting motor axis being coincident with the cited imaginary plane and intersecting with the suction motor axis A1 of suction motor that is horizontal and concentric with dust container 314. As shown in Figure 5, the intersection will always be along suction motor axis A1 which is below a maximum height of the cleaner station. Therefore, the height from the ground surface to the cited intersection point will always be less than the maximum height of the cleaner station as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant’s arguments with amendments, filed August 7, 2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(s) of Claim 1-3 under Kim et al. US 2017/0319035 in view of Nam et al. US 2017/0280951 in further view of Kim et al. US 2021/0052121 (Samsung) have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
Based on the Applicant’s arguments, the Examiner has added figures that illustrate how it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive at a modified version of the Kim et al. device since Kim et al. did not provide drawing details for his disclosed dust collecting part or dust collecting motor. These new details further clarify how the obvious combination includes the claim limitations that the Applicant argued were missing from the previous rejections.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30am-3:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BRIAN KELLER can be reached on (571) 272-8548. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARC CARLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723