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 .
Status
In response to the amendment filed on 06/26/2025, claims 1, 6, 11, 14, 15, and 19 have been amended, and claims 8 and 18 are canceled. Claims 2, 3, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, and 20 were previously withdrawn. Claims 1, 4-7, 11, 14, 15, and 19 are pending and under examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/24/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 14, line 8, the term may be amended as “the var[[ying]]iable magnetic field” to be consistent with the term in claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “restoration component” in claims 1 and 15.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 4 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.
In claim 4, lines 1-2, the phrase “wherein the at least one mopping plate includes a first mopping plate and a second mopping plate” is already recited in claim 1, lines 7-8. Because claim 4 depends from claim 1, the recited phrase is redundant and it needs to be removed from claim 4. Examiner notes that Applicant has removed the same phrase in amended claim 14 which also depends from claim 1.
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 1, 4, 5, 6, 11, 14, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma (CN 108272397A, cited on 06/11/2022 IDS), in view of Niu (CN 209360573U, cited on 06/11/2022 IDS), Kong et al. (CN 107314526A, hereinafter Kong), and Guo (CN 107981789A, cited on 06/11/2022 IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Ma discloses a mopping mechanism (Ma English translation, p. 2:36, and fig. 1, full-automatic mopping machine), comprising:
at least one mopping plate movably mountable to a bottom surface of a cleaning device (Ma English translation, p. 5:5-12, 7:26-27 and fig. 1, a mopping cloth 32 is provided on a rotating mopping ring belt 3 and is supported by a supporting plate 31 [the mopping belt and the supporting plate form the recited mopping plate] at a bottom of the mopping machine); and
a magnetic element assembly including a primary magnetic element and a secondary magnetic element, and configured to generate a variable magnetic field to drive the at least one mopping plate to move reciprocatively relative to the bottom surface (Ma English translation, p. 2:36, 5:18-25 and fig. 1, a fully-automatic mopping machine comprises electromagnetic post array 41 [corresponds to the recited primary magnetic element] and a permanent magnetic block 43 [corresponds to the recited secondary magnetic element]; p. 6:10-20, adjusting column array of electromagnetic current direction [corresponds to the recited magnetic field] attracts and repels the permanent magnet block 43 to beat and smash a mopping cloth 32 on the mopping belt 3 and the supporting plate 31 [correspond to the recited mopping plate]), but does not disclose the at least one mopping plate includes a first mopping plate and a second mopping plate.
Niu teaches, in an analogous mopping cleaner field of endeavor, the at least one mopping plate includes a first mopping plate and a second mopping plate (Niu English translation, p. 2:19-23, 11:5-8, 11:40-42 and fig. 2, a cleaning robot comprises a cleaning component and a self-balancing wiping cloth device. The self-balancing wiping cloth device further comprises a first sliding component 41 [corresponds to the recited first mopping plate] and a second sliding component 42 [corresponds to the recited second mopping plate] at a bottom surface of the cleaning robot).
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 mopping mechanism of Ma to provide the two mopping plates as taught by Niu in order to increase mopping area so that cleaning may be done in a short time.
However, the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate of Ma as modified by Niu are not moved by electromagnetic field.
Kong teaches, in a dust cleaning device field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate are moved by the electromagnetic field (Kong English translation, p. 6:9-18 and fig. 4, an air conditioner comprises a filter screen and a dust removing device. The dust removing device further comprises two dust removing components 1 [correspond to the recited first mopping plate and second mopping plate] wherein an electromagnetic device 2 [corresponds to the recited primary magnetic element] is disposed at a surface between the two dust removing components, and a magnet 11 [corresponds to the recited secondary magnetic element] is disposed at each dust removing component 1. The electromagnetic device 2 and the two magnets 11 induce relative reciprocating movement).
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 mopping mechanisms of Ma as modified by Niu to provide the primary and secondary magnetic elements as taught by Kong in order to remove dust from a dust piece by means of a relative motion (Kong English translation, abstract).
Ma as modified by Niu and Kong does not disclose the mopping mechanism further includes a restoration component (this element is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The restoration component may be a spiral spring, an elastic plate, a rubber band, a magnetic element, etc. ¶ 0082), configured to provide a restoration force on the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate.
Guo teaches, in an analogous dust removing device field of endeavor, the mopping mechanism further includes a restoration component, configured to provide a restoration (Guo English translation, p. 2:15-34, 3:24-26, 4:29-32, a dust removal mechanism for a bed comprises an electromagnet 12 and a permanent magnet wherein a spring 13 [corresponds to the recited restoration component] is connected between the two magnets. The magnets attract each other under the action of the spring).
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 mopping mechanism of Ma as modified by Niu and Kong to provide the restoration component as taught by Guo in order to increase dedusting (Guo English translation, p. 5:19-20).
Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo does not disclose the restoration component connects a portion of the first mopping plate facing the second mopping plate and a portion of the second mopping plate facing the first mopping plate.
However, Niu as modified by Kong teaches the first and second mopping plates movable by the electromagnetic field, and Guo teaches the mopping mechanism can include the restoration component. As discussed above, Guo teaches the dust removal mechanism for a bed comprising the electromagnet and the permanent magnet connected by the spring. The one end of the spring is connected to the electromagnet 12 coupled with a second sleeve 11. The other end of the spring is connected to the permanent magnet coupled with a third sleeve 11 and a brush plate 19. The spring is effectively connected to the sleeve 11 and the brush plate 19 at each end wherein the brush plate 19 moves back and forth with respect to the sleeve 11. Therefore, the spring of Guo can be disposed to the first and second mopping plates of Niu as modified by Kong by connecting them as recited in order to enhance the oscillating motion of the cleaning device for effective cleaning. Because the magnets are coupled to the mopping plates as taught by Kong, the same restoration force is produced and it would perform equally as well. A person of ordinary skill in the art would readily dispose the restoration component connecting the two magnets as long as it can provide restoration force to the coupled mopping plates.
Regarding claim 4, Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo teaches the mopping mechanism as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein
the at least one mopping plate includes a first mopping plate and a second mopping plate (Niu English translation, p. 2:19-23, 11:5-8, 11:40-42 and fig. 2, as discussed in claim 1 above, the self-balancing wiping cloth device further comprises a first sliding component 41 [corresponds to the recited first mopping plate] and a second sliding component 42 [corresponds to the recited second mopping plate] at a bottom surface of the cleaning robot),
the primary magnetic element is disposed at the bottom surface between the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate, and the secondary magnetic element includes a first secondary magnetic element disposed at the first mopping plate facing the primary magnetic element, and a second secondary magnetic element disposed at the second mopping plate facing the primary magnetic element (Kong English translation, p. 6:9-18 and fig. 4, an air conditioner comprises a filter screen and a dust removing device. The dust removing device further comprises two dust removing components 1 [correspond to the recited first mopping plate and second mopping plate] wherein an electromagnetic device 2 [corresponds to the recited primary magnetic element] is disposed at a surface between the two dust removing components, and a magnet 11 [corresponds to the recited secondary magnetic element] is disposed at each dust removing component 1. The electromagnetic device 2 and the two magnets 11 induce relative reciprocating movement).
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 mopping mechanisms of Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo to provide the primary and secondary magnetic elements as taught by Kong in order to remove dust from a dust piece by means of a relative motion (Kong English translation, abstract).
Regarding claim 5, Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo teaches the mopping machine as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein at least one of the primary magnetic element or the secondary magnetic element is an electromagnetic element or a permanent magnetic element (Ma English translation, p. 6:10-13, the electromagnetic post array 41 [corresponds to the recited primary magnetic element] is an electromagnetic element and the permanent magnetic block 43 [corresponds to the recited secondary magnetic element] is a permanent magnetic element).
Regarding claim 6, Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo teaches the mopping machine as in the rejection of claim 1, further comprising: a controller configured to control the magnetic element assembly to generate the variable magnetic field (Ma English translation, p. 6:10-12, 6:26-27, a control chip 11 [corresponds to the recited controller] adjusts column array of electromagnetic current direction periodically and controls each permanent magnet pole for changing the electromagnetic current).
Regarding claim 14, Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo teaches the mopping mechanism as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the secondary magnetic element includes a first secondary magnetic element disposed at the first mopping plate and a second secondary magnetic element disposed at the second mopping plate, and the mopping mechanism further includes a controller configured to change magnetic poles of the primary magnetic element facing the first secondary magnetic element and the second secondary magnetic element to provide the varying magnetic field to drive the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate to move in an opposite direction or in a same direction (Kong English translation, p. 6:9-18 and fig. 4, an air conditioner comprises a filter screen and a dust removing device. The dust removing device further comprises two dust removing components 1 [correspond to the recited first mopping plate and second mopping plate] wherein the magnets 11 [correspond to the recited secondary magnetic element] is disposed at each dust removing component 1), and the mopping mechanism further includes a controller configured to change magnetic poles of the primary magnetic element facing the first secondary magnetic element and the second secondary magnetic element to provide the varying magnetic field to drive the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate to move in an opposite direction or in a same direction (Kong English translation, p. 6:9-18, Kong does not disclose a controller explicitly, however, it teaches a system drives the electromagnetic device 2 [corresponds to the recited primary magnetic element] to change the magnetic pole to induce attraction/repulsion with the magnets 11 [correspond to the recited first and second secondary magnetic elements]. Thus, it induces the variation of the magnetic field).
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 mopping mechanisms of Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo to provide the varying magnetic field by the primary and secondary magnetic elements as taught by Kong in order to remove dust from a dust piece by means of a relative motion (Kong English translation, abstract).
Regarding claim 15, Ma discloses a mobile device (Ma English translation, p. 2:36, and fig. 1, full-automatic mopping machine), comprising:
at least one driving device configured to move the mobile device (Ma English translation p. 5:5-8, driving rollers 2 [correspond to the recited driving device] coupled to the mopping cloth 32 are configured to move the mopping machine);
a bottom surface; and a mopping mechanism disposed at the bottom surface, the mopping mechanism including: at least one mopping plate movably mounted to the bottom surface (Ma English translation, p. 5:5-12, 7:26-27 and fig. 1, a mopping mechanism comprising a mopping cloth 32 provided on a rotating mopping ring belt 3 and supported by a supporting plate 31 [the mopping belt and the supporting plate form the recited mopping plate] is disposed at a bottom of the mopping machine); and a magnetic element assembly including a primary magnetic element and a secondary magnetic element, and configured to generate a variable magnetic field to drive the at least one mopping plate to move reciprocatively relative to the bottom surface (Ma English translation, p. 2:36, 5:18-25 and fig. 1, a fully-automatic mopping machine comprises electromagnetic post array 41 [corresponds to the recited primary magnetic element] and a permanent magnetic block 43 [corresponds to the recited secondary magnetic element]; p. 6:10-20, adjusting column array of electromagnetic current direction [corresponds to the recited magnetic field] attracts and repels the permanent magnet block 43 to beat and smash a mopping cloth 32 on the mopping belt 3 and the supporting plate 31 [correspond to the recited mopping plate]), but does not disclose the at least one mopping plate includes a first mopping plate and a second mopping plate.
Niu teaches, in an analogous mopping cleaner field of endeavor, the at least one mopping plate includes a first mopping plate and a second mopping plate (Niu English translation, p. 2:19-23, 11:5-8, 11:40-42 and fig. 2, as discussed in claim 1 above, a cleaning robot comprises a cleaning component and a self-balancing wiping cloth device. The self-balancing wiping cloth device further comprises a first sliding component 41 [corresponds to the recited first mopping plate] and a second sliding component 42 [corresponds to the recited second mopping plate] at a bottom surface of the cleaning robot).
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 mopping mechanism of Ma to provide the two mopping plates as taught by Niu in order to increase mopping area so that cleaning may be done in a short time.
However, the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate of Ma as modified by Niu are not moved by electromagnetic field.
Kong teaches, in a dust cleaning device field of endeavor and capable of solving primary problem, the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate are moved by the electromagnetic field (Kong English translation, p. 6:9-18 and fig. 4, an air conditioner comprises a filter screen and a dust removing device. The dust removing device further comprises two dust removing components 1 [correspond to the recited first mopping plate and second mopping plate] wherein an electromagnetic device 2 [corresponds to the recited primary magnetic element] is disposed at a surface between the two dust removing components, and a magnet 11 [corresponds to the recited secondary magnetic element] is disposed at each dust removing component 1. The electromagnetic device 2 and the two magnets 11 induce relative reciprocating movement).
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 mopping mechanisms of Ma as modified by Niu to provide the primary and secondary magnetic elements as taught by Kong in order to remove dust from a dust piece by means of a relative motion (Kong English translation, abstract).
Ma as modified by Niu and Kong does not disclose the mopping mechanism further includes a restoration component (this element is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The restoration component may be a spiral spring, an elastic plate, a rubber band, a magnetic element, etc. ¶ 0082), configured to provide a restoration force on the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate.
Guo teaches, in an analogous dust removing device field of endeavor, the mopping mechanism further includes a restoration component, configured to provide a restoration (Guo English translation, p. 2:15-34, 3:24-26, 4:29-32, a dust removal mechanism for a bed comprises an electromagnet 12 and a permanent magnet wherein a spring 13 [corresponds to the recited restoration component] is connected between the two magnets. The magnets attract each other under the action of the spring).
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 mopping mechanism of Ma as modified by Niu and Kong to provide the restoration component as taught by Guo in order to increase dedusting (Guo English translation, p. 5:19-20).
Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo does not disclose the restoration component connects a portion of the first mopping plate facing the second mopping plate and a portion of the second mopping plate facing the first mopping plate.
However, Niu as modified by Kong teaches the first and second mopping plates movable by the electromagnetic field, and Guo teaches the mopping mechanism can include the restoration component. As discussed above, Guo teaches the dust removal mechanism for a bed comprising the electromagnet and the permanent magnet connected by the spring. The one end of the spring is connected to the electromagnet 12 coupled with a second sleeve 11. The other end of the spring is connected to the permanent magnet coupled with a third sleeve 11 and a brush plate 19. The spring is effectively connected to the sleeve 11 and the brush plate 19 at each end wherein the brush plate 19 moves back and forth with respect to the sleeve 11. Therefore, the spring of Guo can be disposed to the first and second mopping plates of Niu as modified by Kong by connecting them as recited in order to enhance the oscillating motion of the cleaning device for effective cleaning. Because the magnets are coupled to the mopping plates as taught by Kong, the same restoration force is produced and it would perform equally as well. A person of ordinary skill in the art would readily dispose the restoration component connecting the two magnets as long as it can provide restoration force to the coupled mopping plates.
Regarding claims 11 and 19, Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo teaches the mopping mechanism as in the rejection of claim 1 (as to claim 11) and the mobile device as in the rejection of claim 15 (as to claim 19), wherein the primary magnetic element and the secondary magnetic element are electromagnetic elements (Kong English translation, p. 9:1-3, magnet 11 [corresponds to the recited secondary magnet element] can be an electromagnet capable of changing the current direction of the magnetic pole to cooperate with the electromagnetic device 2 [corresponds to the recited primary magnet element]).
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 mopping mechanism of Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo to provide the primary and secondary magnetic elements to be electromagnetic elements as taught by Kong. It may provide convenient variation of the electromagnetic field.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma in view of Niu, Kong, and Guo, as applied to claim 6 above, and in further view of Liu et al. (CN 207412074U, hereinafter Liu).
Regarding claim 7, Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo teaches the mopping mechanism as in the rejection of claim 6, but does not disclose an electric motor configured to rotate at least one of the primary magnetic element or the secondary magnetic element, wherein the controller is configured to control the electric motor to rotate at least one of the primary magnetic element or the secondary magnetic element to change the magnetic field.
Liu teaches, in a tool field of endeavor which utilizes a magnetic field, an electric motor configured to rotate at least one of the primary magnetic element or the secondary magnetic element, wherein the controller is configured to control the electric motor to rotate at least one of the primary magnetic element or the secondary magnetic element to change the magnetic field (Liu English translation, p. 9:11-15, a motor drives rotation of a magnet to generate a change of a magnetic field; p. 7:39-40, a control main board [corresponds to the recited controller] controls the rotation of the magnet. Since the rotation of the magnet is driven by the motor, the control main board is configured to control the motor).
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 mopping mechanism of Ma as modified by Niu, Kong, and Guo to provide the electric motor and the controller as taught by Liu in order to change the magnetic field of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, Applicant argues Guo reference is non-analogous to the claimed invention of a mopping mechanism or a mobile device because Guo discloses a bed. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
MPEP 2141.01(a) states a reference is analogous art to the claimed invention if: (1) the reference is from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (even if it addresses a different problem); or (2) the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention).
Guo teaches a mechanism for cleaning dust of a bed. It utilizes an electromagnet connected with a restoration component. A spring is used for the restoration component and it helps attracting two sleeves together. Guo teaches the mechanism of the restoration component used in the instant application for attracting the two mopping plates together. Thus, Guo reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor.
Next, Applicant argues Guo does not teach the amended claim limitations that the restoration component connects a portion of the first mopping plate facing the second mopping plate and a portion of the second mopping plate facing the first moping plate. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Although Guo does not disclose explicitly its spring 13 is directly connected to the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate, it is connected to the sleeves 11, 15 which oscillate with respect to each other. Because Niu teaches the mobile cleaning robot comprises the first mopping plate and the second mopping plate, the spring of Guo can be combined to teach the restoration component connected to the first and second mopping plates.
Applicant also argues the term “restoration component” does not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the term itself connotes sufficient, definite structure to a person having ordinary skills in the art. Applicant asserts the term “restoration” is a structural modifier. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Specification of the instant application presents the restoration component may be one of various means such as a spiral spring, an elastic plate, a rubber band, a magnetic element, etc. (¶ 0082). It would be difficult for a person ordinary skill in the art to figure out which component suffice the term “restoration” because the generic placeholder is not further modified by sufficient structure or material for performing the claimed function. The term “restoration component” may not be interpreted as a spiral spring or an elastic plate by the term itself, thus the term “restoration component” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUKWOO JAMES CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00a-5:00p.
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.
/S.J.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723