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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/04/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 and 2 have been amended. Claims 1-15 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 6-7, filed 11/04/2025, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the claims have been amended and the new grounds of rejection do not rely on the reference or combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9, 12, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0146521 A1) and HAMM (EP 2326227 B1).
Referring to Claim 1: Kim et al. teaches a robot vacuum (shown in Figs. 1-6) comprising: a main body (10 Figs. 1-4) including a suction part (leading lines shown in Fig. 3; Paragraph 0055) configured to suction dust; and a dust canister (100 Figs. 1 and 2), attachable to and detachable (shown in Figs. 1 and 2) from the main body (10 Figs. 1-4), to separate dust (Paragraph 0048) from air suctioned through the suction part and store the separated dust (“store the dust” Paragraph 0048), wherein the dust canister (100 Figs. 1 and 2) includes:
a first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) which is configured to separate dust from air introduced from the suction part (leading lines shown in Fig. 3) and store the separated dust (shown in Figs. 4 and 5), the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) including:
a first surface (FS Fig. 1-A inserted below) including an inlet (111 Figs. 4-6) through which the dust and the air suctioned through the suction part (leading lines shown in Fig. 3; Paragraph 0055) is introduced into the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5), and an inclined surface (IC shown next to vertical line VL in Fig. 1-A inserted below) opposite the inlet (111 Figs. 4-6);
so that a lower area (LA Fig. 1-A inserted below) of the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) is narrower (shown in Fig. 1-A inserted below) than an upper area (UA Fig. 1-A inserted below) of the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5),
and a second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) which includes a cyclone unit (130 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6), the second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) being configured to separate dust from air introduced (“second chamber 120 may include a communication hole 121 connecting the first chamber 110” Paragraph 0061) from the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) and store the separated dust.
But is silent on wherein the first chamber further includes a rib formed along the inclined surface, the rib configured to extend toward the first surface so that the inclined surface is open toward the lower area on either side of the rib, to facilitate discharge of dust along the lower area of the first chamber.
HAMM in an analogous vacuum (30 Fig. 2) wherein the similar configuration first chamber (11 Figs. 2, 6, and 6-A inserted below) including a similar configuration inlet (13 Figs. 2 and 6-A inserted below) and further including a rib (18 and 20 Figs. 6 and 6-A inserted below) formed along the similar configuration inclined surface (IS-2 Fig. 6-A inserted below),
the rib (18 and 20 Figs. 6 and 6-A inserted below) configured to extend toward the first surface (FS-2 Fig. 6-A inserted below) so that the similar configuration inclined surface (IS-2 Fig. 6-A inserted below) is open toward the lower area (shown open toward the lower area in Fig. 6-A inserted below) on either side of the rib (18 and 20 Figs. 6 and 6-A inserted below), to facilitate discharge of dust along the lower area of the similar configuration first chamber (11 Figs. 2, 6, and 6-A inserted below).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dust chamber of Kim et al. with the rib structure as taught by HAMM for the purpose of, as it is well known in the art, to direct the air flow flowing into the dust chamber [0012 of HAMM].
PNG
media_image1.png
450
830
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1166
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Referring to Claim 2: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 1,
but is silent on a distance between the rib and the first surface is substantially uniform between an upper side of the rib and a lower side of the rib.
HAMM in an analogous vacuum (30 Fig. 2) wherein a distance between the rib (18 and 20 Figs. 6 and 6-A inserted above) and the first surface (FS-2 Fig. 6-A inserted above) is substantially uniform (distance between “A” of 18/20 shown in Fig. 6-A inserted above) between an upper side (US Fig. 6-A inserted above) of the rib and a lower side (LS Fig. 6-A inserted above) of the rib.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ribs of Kim et al. as modified with the rib distances as taught by HAMM for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, maximizing the efficiency of the rib while accommodating them in the limited space.
Referring to Claim 3: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 1, wherein the cyclone unit (130 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) includes a cyclone separator (131 and 132 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) configured to separate the dust from the air introduced from the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) using a centrifugal force of a vortex (“cyclone dust separator,” Paragraph 0006), and the cyclone separator includes: a cyclone inlet (CI Fig. 2-A inserted below) formed by a side surface (SS-B Fig. 2-A inserted below) of the cyclone separator (131 and 132 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) to allow air to enter; a cyclone dust outlet (CDO Fig. 3-A inserted below) formed by a lower surface (LS-1 Fig. 3-A inserted below) of the cyclone separator to allow discharge of dust separated from air introduced through the cyclone inlet (CI Fig. 2-A inserted below): and a cyclone outlet (CO Fig. 3-A inserted below) formed by an upper surface (shown in Fig. 3-A inserted below) of the cyclone separator to allow discharge of the air introduced through the cyclone inlet (CI Fig. 2-A inserted below).
PNG
media_image3.png
559
485
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
552
874
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Referring to Claim 4: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 3 wherein: the cyclone unit (130 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) further includes a cyclone upper cover (UC Fig. 4-A inserted below) on an upper side (shown in Fig. 4-A inserted below) of the cyclone separator (131 and 132 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6): and the cyclone upper cover (UC Fig. 4-A inserted below) covers an upper portion (shown in Fig. 4-A inserted below) of an outer side of the cyclone separator (131 and 132 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) in the second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6).
PNG
media_image5.png
544
445
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Referring to Claim 5: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 4. wherein: the dust canister further includes a cyclone holder (CH Fig. 5-A) coupleable to the cyclone separator (131 and 132 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) so that the cyclone separator is fixed inside (shown Fig. 5-A inserted below) the second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6); and while the cyclone holder (CH Fig. 5-A inserted below) is coupled to the cyclone separator (131 and 132 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6), the cyclone holder (CH Fig. 5-A inserted below) forms a cyclone chamber (CC chamber which hold the separators Fig. 5-A inserted below) in the second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6), together with the cyclone separator (131 and 132 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) and the cyclone upper cover (UC Fig. 4-A inserted above).
PNG
media_image6.png
520
727
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Referring to Claim 7: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 5, wherein the cyclone holder (CH Fig. 5-A inserted above) is positioned lower than the cyclone inlet (CI Fig. 2-A inserted above) and higher than the cyclone dust outlet (CDO Fig. 3-A inserted above).
Referring to Claim 9: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 5, wherein: the second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) includes a dust chamber (122 Fig. 5) below the cyclone chamber (CC chamber which hold the separators Fig. 5-A inserted above) to store dust discharged through the cyclone dust outlet (CDO Fig. 3-A inserted above); and the dust chamber (122 Fig. 5) and the (CC chamber which hold the separators Fig. 5-A inserted above) are partitioned (partitioned via PC Fig. 5-A inserted above) to be separated from each other.
Referring to Claim 12: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 1, wherein: the dust canister (100 Figs. 1 and 2) further includes a grille portion (112 Figs. 2-5; “mesh; perforated plate ” [0060]) between the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) and the second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6), the grille portion (112 Figs. 2-5; “mesh” [0060]) to filter dust (“separate relatively large dust” [0060]) from air introduced into the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5);
and the grille portion (112 Figs. 2-5) extends from one side surface of the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) to (“first filter 112 may be arranged to be inclined within a predetermined angle range with respect to the bottom surface” []0057) an upper surface of the first chamber.
Referring to Claim 14: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 1, wherein: the main body (10 Figs. 1-4) includes a pair of wheels (20 Fig. 3) to move the main body and configured to rotate about an axis of rotation (AR Fig. 8-A inserted below); and the dust canister (100 Figs. 1 and 2) is between the pair of wheels (20 Fig. 3) while mounted on the main body (10 Figs. 1-4).
PNG
media_image7.png
487
512
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Referring to Claim 15: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 14, wherein the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) and the second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) are side by side (shown in Figs. 3 and 8-A inserted above) along a direction in which the axis of rotation (AR Fig. 8-A inserted above) extends.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0146521 A1) and HAMM (EP 2326227 B1), as applied above in claim 12, and in further view of Conrad (U.S. Pub. No. 2010/0212104 A1).
Referring to Claim 13: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 12, but is silent on wherein the grille portion includes at least one bent portion to increase a surface area of the grille portion.
Conrad in an analogous cyclonic vacuum (10 Figs. 1-3) teaches a similar configuration grille portion (78 Fig. 3) includes at least one bent portion (“curved” [0067]) to increase a surface area (“to increase the surface area of the screen” [0067]) of the grille portion.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the grille portion of Kim et al. as modified with the bent portion as taught by Conrad for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, maximizing the available space and efficiency of the dust catching material.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0146521 A1) and HAMM (EP 2326227 B1), as applied above in claim 9, and in further view of Amaral et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0177367A1).
Referring to Claim 10: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 9, but is silent on wherein: the first chamber further includes a first dust outlet in a lower surface of the first chamber to discharge dust stored in the first chamber; the second chamber further includes a second dust outlet in a lower surface of the dust chamber to discharge dust stored in the dust chamber; and the dust canister further includes an outlet cover to allow the first dust outlet and the second dust outlet to simultaneously open or close.
Amaral et al. in an analogous robot vacuum (102 Figs. 1 and 2), wherein: the similar configuration first chamber (116 Figs. 3B and 5B) further includes a first dust outlet (dust outlet of 116 Figs. 3B and 5B) in a lower surface (lower surface of 116 which closes with 502) of the similar configuration first chamber (116 Figs. 3B and 5B) to discharge (shown in Figs. 5B and 7-A inserted below) dust stored in the first chamber;
the similar configuration second chamber (SC-2 Fig. 7-A inserted below) further includes a second dust outlet (dust outlet of 128 Figs. 3B and 5B) in a lower surface (lower surface of 128 which closes with 502) of the similar configuration dust chamber (128 Figs. 3B and 5B) to discharge (shown in Figs. 5B and 7-A inserted below) dust stored in the dust chamber; and
the similar configuration dust canister (100 Figs. 1, 2, 3A, 5A, and 5B) further includes an outlet cover (502 Fig. 5B) to allow the first dust outlet and the second dust outlet (dust outlets of 116 and 128 Figs. 3B and 5B) to simultaneously (shown in Figs. 5B and 7-A inserted below) open or close.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dust canister of Kim et al. as modified with the articulating cover as taught by Amaral et al. for the purpose of simplifying the cleaning/ removal of debris.
PNG
media_image8.png
408
600
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0146521 A1) and HAMM (EP 2326227 B1), as applied above in claim 4, and in further view of Nam et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,463,212 B2).
Referring to Claim 11: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 4, wherein: the dust canister further includes a filter (140 Fig. 6) to filter dust from air discharged through the cyclone outlet (CO Fig. 3-A inserted below) via the cyclone separator; but is silent on the filter is specifically disposed to face the cyclone upper cover.
Nam et al. in an analogous robot vacuum (100 Fig. 1) teaches the similar configuration filter (141F Fig. 21) is specifically disposed to face the similar configuration cyclone upper cover (141d Fig. 21).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot vacuum of Kim et al. as modified with the upper cover facing filter as taught by Nam et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, having and alternate filter configuration which catches the any dust/debris as they leave the cyclone.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 8 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: Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0146521 A1), HAMM (EP 2326227 B1), and Amaral et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0177367A1).
Regarding claim 6: Kim et al. as modified teaches the robot vacuum of claim 5, wherein: the dust canister (100 Figs. 1 and 2) further includes a partition (PA Fig. 5-A inserted above) configured to partition the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5) and the second chamber (120 Figs. 2, 3, 5, and 6) from each other and a protruding portion (PR Fig. 5-A inserted above) formed to protrude from the partition (PA Fig. 5-A inserted above) toward the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5).
But Kim et al., alone or in combination, does not teach, suggest, or make obvious on the protruding portion specifically including a plurality of cyclone holes to allow dust accumulated in the cyclone chamber to be discharged from the cyclone chamber to the first chamber.
Protruding portion (PR Fig. 5-A inserted above) specifically including a plurality of cyclone holes to allow dust accumulated in the cyclone chamber (CC chamber which hold the separators Fig. 5-A inserted above) to be discharged from the cyclone chamber (CC) to the first chamber (110 Figs. 2-5). There are no holes which reintroduce dust into the start chamber 110.
Such a reconstruction would be extensive and there is no motivation to do so. Thus, one would only arrive at the claimed invention by using improper hindsight reasoning knowledge gleaned only from the Applicant’s disclosure, and such a reconstruction would be improper.
PNG
media_image6.png
520
727
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 8 would also be allowable because of its dependency to claim 6.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER SOTO whose telephone number is (571)272-8172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
CHRISTOPHER SOTO
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/CHRISTOPHER SOTO/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights