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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. DE10 2021 208 243.2, filed on 07/29/2021. Applicant is advised of possible benefits under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) and (f), wherein an application for patent filed in the United States may be entitled to claim priority to an application filed in a foreign country. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 07/29/2022, 07/07/2023, and 12/18/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim cannot depend from any other multiple dependent claim. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim 7 will be treated as only dependent on claims 3, 5, or 6.
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.
Claims 1 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 states that “the spray nozzle unit can be connected or is connected to the liquid supply source” and “can be moved by means of pressure.” Here, the use of the phrase “can be” and statement of both “can be connected or is connected” makes it unclear whether the action is required for the invention, and the scope of the claim is indefinite. Similarly, claim 8 states “a housing which can be arranged or is arranged in a vehicle component” and “a spray nozzle unit which can be moved linearly … and which can be moved.” Again, the use of the phrase “can be” and statement of both “can be arranged or is arranged” makes it unclear whether the action is required for the invention, and the scope of the claim is indefinite.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 9992388 (“Romack”).
As per claim 1, Romack discloses a cleaning device (1) for cleaning a vehicle element, comprising at least: - a liquid supply source (8), - a spray nozzle unit (3) and - a housing (2) which encloses the spray nozzle unit (3) at least in portions and which can be arranged or is arranged in a vehicle component (“The pop-up camera lens washing assembly 710 illustrated in FIGS. 14A-17 is preferably is configured as an integrated automotive camera module and nozzle assembly…” (Col. 25, lines 47-49)),
wherein the spray nozzle unit (3) is linearly movable relative to the housing (2), wherein the spray nozzle unit (3) can be connected or is connected to the liquid supply source (8) for the entry of a cleaning liquid (“Pop-up lens washing system 710 includes at least a first nozzle assembly configured to be supported and aimed toward the external lens 722 by the extendable aiming fixture 711,” (Col. 24, lines 48-51)), and wherein the spray nozzle unit(3) can be moved by means of pressure of the cleaning liquid when the cleaning liquid enters (“Preferably, lens washing nozzle 730 includes a first fluidic oscillator insert 731 with an interaction chamber configured to operate on a selectively actuated flow of pressurized washing fluid flowing through the first oscillator's chamber…” (Col. 25, lines 1-4)).
As per claim 2, Romack further discloses that the housing (2) has an entry opening (2.5) for the entry of the cleaning liquid, which entry opening is covered by the spray nozzle unit (3) when the latter is in an idle state, wherein when the cleaning liquid enters, the spray nozzle unit (3) is movable relative to the entry opening (2.5) and away therefrom (“…where nozzle assembly 730 has defined states, a first non-operating or quiescent state, as illustrated in FIG. 16A, has the housing nozzle extension 800 retracted and held in place by biasing spring 792. When the pop-up lens washer system 710 is activated, the second or washing state is provided, where nozzle extension 800 is extended…” (Col. 26, lines 44-49)).
As per claim 3, Romack further discloses that the spray nozzle unit (3) is arranged at a distance from the entry opening (2.5) in a use state and releases an inner space (2.6) of the housing (2) which is fluidically connected to the entry opening (2.5) (“…the first nozzle assembly includes a fluid inlet 742 in fluid communication with a first laterally offset washing nozzle 730 which distally projects from the aiming fixture's distal side.” (Col. 24, lines 51-54)).
As per claim 4, Romack further discloses that the spray nozzle unit (3) comprises a closed first end (301) and a second end (302) provided with a nozzle opening (3.2.2), wherein at least one inlet channel (303) for the cleaning liquid is formed between the ends (301, 302) (“The oscillator in fluid path 140 comprises a proximal inlet 142 for pressurized washer fluid, an interaction chamber defined within the housing fluid path 140 receives the pressurized washer fluid from inlet 142 and passes the pressurized fluid distally to outlets or nozzles 130,” (Col. 13, lines 13-18; Fig. 15)).
As per claim 7, Romack further discloses that the spray nozzle unit (3) comprises at least one check valve (3.3), which is arranged in the region of the closed first end (301) and/or in the inlet channel (303) (“The selectively projecting ("pop-up") embodiment of the present invention has a check valve located within the nozzle, so the waste of pumped washing fluid is minimized.” (Col. 6, lines 10-12)).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by international publication WO 2012/038645 A1 (“Hamza”).
As per claim 8, Hamza discloses a Cleaning device (1) for cleaning a vehicle element, comprising at least - a housing (2) which can be arranged or is arranged in a vehicle component, - a spray nozzle unit (3) which can be moved linearly relative to the housing (2) and which can be moved, in particular by means of the pressure of the cleaning liquid, when a cleaning liquid enters, wherein - the spray nozzle unit (3) comprises at least one piston (3.1) and a spray nozzle (3.2) which is fluidically connected to the piston (3.1) (“For this purpose, the present invention relates to a telescopic nozzle comprising a piston capable of slide in the chamber of a body under the thrust of a liquid, the piston comprising a nozzle at one of its ends and an annular protuberance ensuring sealing at the other end, and in that the annular protuberance is not in contact with the internal wall of the chamber of the body and has a shape capable of creating turbulence, in the flow of the liquid around the annular protuberance, sufficient to ensure sealing.” (0006, see Fig. 1-3)),
and wherein - the piston (3.1) and/or the spray nozzle (3.2) has at least one inlet opening (3.1.2, 3.2.5) formed on the side for conveying the cleaning liquid from an inner space (2.6) of the housing (2) in the direction of a nozzle opening (3.2.2) of the spray nozzle (3.2) (“The lower end of the piston 3 has, above the spherical cap 6, two transverse orifices 3c opening into an axial conduit 3d of the piston 3 making it possible to supply washing liquid to the nozzle 5 placed at the upper end of the piston 3.” (0019)).
As per claim 9, Hamza further discloses that the inlet opening (3.1.2, 3.2.5) formed on the side is covered by an inner wall (2.7) of the housing (2) when the spray nozzle unit (3) is in an idle state and is uncovered when the spray nozzle unit (3) is in a use state (“To overcome this drawback, the seal was removed and replaced by a passive sealing system.” (0004) and “Simultaneously the liquid is distributed at the lower end of the piston 3, then in the first groove occupying the volume completely, creating a pressure drop, then in the second with another pressure drop and less volume and so on until the liquid can no longer pass into the next groove. The sealing during the movement of the piston 3 is therefore achieved without a seal, only by the multiple groove sealing system, the principle of which consists in creating turbulence zones 21 by the juxtaposition of the grooves 22 and the walls 23 connected by a passage 24 with a reduced section compared to the cavities, which implies a significant successive pressure loss and passively achieves the sealing between the space of the body filled with liquid and the annular space receiving the compression spring.” (0021)).
As per claim 10, Hamza further discloses that the piston (3.1) and the spray nozzle (3.2) form an inlet channel (303) for the cleaning liquid, in which channel at least one check valve (3.3) is arranged (“Figure 1 is a plan view schematically representing a telescopic nozzle 1 comprising a non-return valve 2 in the closed position according to the prior art.” (0019)).
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.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 9992388 (“Romack”) in view of U.S. Pub. 2005/0150982 (“Lopez”).
As per claims 5-6, Romack discloses all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claims 1-4 above.
Regarding claim 5, Romack does not disclose wherein the spray nozzle unit (3) comprises, in the region of the closed first end (301), a lateral inlet opening (3.1.2, 3.2.5) for the entry of the cleaning liquid into the inlet channel (303).
However, Lopez does teach wherein the spray nozzle unit (3) comprises, in the region of the closed first end (301), a lateral inlet opening (3.1.2, 3.2.5) for the entry of the cleaning liquid into the inlet channel (303) (“The inner hollow cylinder 38 is displaceably arranged in the outer hollow cylinder 36 wherein one of its ends is connected to a guiding part 33 of said telescopic nozzle 20. The other end of the inner hollow cylinder 38 is T-shaped. The T-part sealingly abuts the inner wall of the outer hollow cylinder 36 supported by a sealing D. Furthermore, the inner hollow cylinder 38 qualifies by comprising an opening 30.” (0062, see Fig. 6)).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning device disclosed by Romack to have a lateral inlet opening in the spray nozzle unit as disclosed by Lopez. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification of adding a lateral channel to the spray nozzle unit in order to increase the flow of fluid through the inlet channel, therefore increasing pressure, and to allow the housing wall to more easily cover the opening when the device is in idle state.
Regarding claim 6, Romack does not disclose wherein the lateral inlet opening (3.1.2, 3.2.5) is covered by an inner wall (2.7) of the housing (2) when the spray nozzle unit (3) is in the idle state and is uncovered when the spray nozzle unit (3) is in the use state.
However, Lopez does teach wherein the lateral inlet opening (3.1.2, 3.2.5) is covered by an inner wall (2.7) of the housing (2) when the spray nozzle unit (3) is in the idle state and is uncovered when the spray nozzle unit (3) is in the use state (“The cleaning liquid cannot flow by the T-shaped end of the inner hollow cylinder 28 since it is prevented by a ring-shaped sealing D. During displacement of the inner hollow cylinder 28, the valve 24 remains closed. In case the inner hollow cylinder 28 reaches its final position, i.e. the spring 29 is in a completely compressed state, the pressure of the cleaning liquid in the inside of the inner hollow cylinder 28 is sufficiently high to open the valve 24 against the force of the spring 25 (confer FIG. SC).” (0061-0062, see Fig. 6)).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning device disclosed by Romack to have the lateral inlet opening in the spray nozzle unit be covered by the inner wall of the housing when in idle state and uncovered in use state as disclosed by Lopez. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification of having the inner housing wall cover and uncover the lateral inlet opening in order to minimize unwanted fluid flow when the device is in idle state and to increase the lifespan of the spray nozzle and other parts.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional references cited in form PTO-892 Notice of References Cited disclose inventions similar to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIANA KATHERINE BUSH whose telephone number is (571)272-4476. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.. 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, Gautam Ubale can be reached on (571) 272-9861. 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.
/JULIANA KATHERINE BUSH/Examiner, Art Unit 4167
/GAUTAM UBALE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 4167
Prosecution Insights