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 of Claims
Claims 18 and 19 have been amended. Claims 8 and 14 have been canceled. Claims 1-7, 9-13, and 15-19 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to the amendments to the claim objections are persuasive. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-10, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) rejections and 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections are not persuasive.
With respect to: “Initially, nowhere does Erko disclose that its CPU 32 processes a generated sensor signal that is indicative of both the motion and the orientation of the vacuum cleaner”, and “However, this does not evidence that the motion detector 50 senses an orientation of the vacuum cleaner 10. Succinctly, this paragraph describes a plane in which the motion of the vacuum cleaner 10 is detected to subsequently determine an operable mode.”, the examiner disagrees.
First, Erko teaches all the structural requirements of the apparatus claim. Erko discloses in paragraph 0045: “sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane”. X-y plane relates to a cartesian coordinate system in a two-dimensional surface, namely to locate a point in space, or orientation in the given space. Given the broadness of the claim’s language, based on common definitions, Erko still reads on the claims.
With respect to: “Rather, these timers are implemented concurrently with the initiation of a determined mode of operation and thus are not part of a pre-processing step.”, the examiner disagrees.
The claim broadly claims “a pre-processing step”, it does not claim when the step specifically concludes nor finishes. Similarly, given the claim’s broadness, Erko meets the limitations of the claim, as disclosed below.
With respect to: “Additionally, Erko fails to disclose that these timers are extracted from time portions of the initial signal(s) generated by the motion detector 50.”, the examiner disagrees. See paragraph 0045, “The mechanical turning of the sensing wheel can generate a signal that low or high power operation is desired.”. See paragraphs 0050-0053 in regards to the timing system of the different power modes.
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 1-7, 9, 13, 15, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Erko (US 20140013540 A1).
Referring to claim 1: Erko discloses a vacuum cleaner (10 Fig. 1) comprising: a sensor (50; “inertial sensor to sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane”; “accelerometer” [0045]) that senses both motion of the vacuum cleaner and orientation of the vacuum cleaner (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]), and generates a sensor signals (“the motion detector 50 sends a raw signal to the wireless transmitter 46, which simply signals the type of movement taking place.” [0046]) based on both of the sensed motion and orientation (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]) of the vacuum cleaner;
a vacuum motor (14 Fig. 1); and
a controller (“CPU 32” [0046, 0047]) in operable communication with the sensor, wherein the controller: performs a pre-processing step on the generated sensor signal (processing step of “whether normal or aggressive cleaning is desired” [0047]), wherein the pre-processing step comprises extracting features from time portions of the sensor signals (“timing system” [0050-0053]);
processes the generated sensor signals that is indicative of both the motion and the orientation of the vacuum cleaner to determine a type of cleaning activity operably being performed by a user using the vacuum cleaner based on both the motion and orientation of the vacuum cleaner (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]; “aggressive cleaning motion (for example, a tap or a rapid back and forth motion” [0044]; “The CPU 32 or the motion detector internal processor analyzes the cleaning motion against a threshold movement criteria to determine whether normal or aggressive cleaning is desired” [0047]), and based on a time of the motion and time of the orientation (time for triggering the “aggressive cleaning motion (for example, a tap or a rapid back and forth motion” [0044]); and increases the power of the vacuum motor in response to determining that the type of cleaning activity (“the CPU 32 prompts the power electronics 30 to increase the voltage output to the motor 14” [0055]) comprises one or more of: spot cleaning, crevice cleaning, and elevated cleaning (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]).
Referring to claim 2: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 1, wherein elevated cleaning (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]) comprises cleaning a surface or an object above a head height of the user (capable of reaching a surface above the height of the user in the x-y plane).
Referring to claim 3: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 2, wherein the object comprises a window blind or a curtain (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]; capable of reaching a window blind or a curtain in the x-y plane).
Referring to claim 4: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 2, wherein the surface comprises a ceiling or a cornice (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]; capable of reaching a ceiling or a cornice in the x-y plane).
Referring to claim 5: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to increase the power of the vacuum motor by setting the power of the vacuum motor to a value greater than a pre-determined value (“The CPU 32 or the motion detector internal processor analyzes the cleaning motion against a threshold movement criteria to determine whether normal or aggressive cleaning is desired” [0047]; “the CPU 32 prompts the power electronics 30 to increase the voltage output to the motor 14” [0055]).
Referring to claim 6: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 5, wherein the pre-determined value corresponds to a default power of the vacuum motor (see steps 114 and 142 “low power mode” in Fig. 3; “For example, if the cleaning motion meets a first threshold movement criteria, the CPU 32 or motion detector internal process identifies the motion as "normal" cleaning motion.” [0047]).
Referring to claim 7: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to set the power of the vacuum motor to the default power when the vacuum cleaner is initially switched on (see steps 114 and 142 “low power mode” in Fig. 3; “For example, if the cleaning motion meets a first threshold movement criteria, the CPU 32 or motion detector internal process identifies the motion as "normal" cleaning motion.” [0047]).
Referring to claim 9: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 1, wherein the sensor comprises an inertial measurement unit, IMU (“inertial sensor to sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]).
Referring to claim 13: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to process the sensor signals by performing the pre-processing step and a classification step (processing step of “whether normal or aggressive cleaning is desired” [0047] and classifying the signal into “normal or aggressive”).
Referring to claim 15: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 13, wherein the pre- processing step comprises filtering the sensor signals (“the motion detector 50 sends a raw signal to the wireless transmitter 46, which simply signals the type of movement taking place.” [0046]).
Referring to claim 18: Erko discloses a method of controlling the power (“the CPU 32 prompts the power electronics 30 to increase the voltage output to the motor 14” [0055]) of a vacuum cleaner (10 Fig. 1), the method comprising: generating sensor signals (“inertial sensor to sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane”; “accelerometer” [0045]) based on both a sensed motion of the vacuum cleaner and an orientation of the vacuum cleaner (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]), pre-processing the generated sensor signals (processing step of “whether normal or aggressive cleaning is desired” [0047]), wherein the pre-processing step comprises extracting features from time portions (“timing system” [0050-0053]) of the sensor signals; processing the generated sensor signals that are indicative of both the motion and the orientation of the vacuum cleaner to determine a type of cleaning activity (“whether normal or aggressive cleaning is desired” [0047]; “the CPU 32 prompts the power electronics 30 to increase the voltage output to the motor 14” [0055]) operably being performed by a user using the vacuum cleaner based on both the motion and orientation of the vacuum cleaner, and based on a time of the motion and time of the orientation (time for triggering the “aggressive cleaning motion (for example, a tap or a rapid back and forth motion” [0044]; “timing system” [0050-0053]); and increases the power of the vacuum motor (“the CPU 32 prompts the power electronics 30 to increase the voltage output to the motor 14” [0055]) in response to determining that the type of cleaning activity comprises one or more of: spot cleaning, crevice cleaning, and elevated cleaning (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]).
Referring to claim 19: Erko discloses a computer program (see Fig. 3) comprising a set of instructions, which, when executed by a computerised device (“CPU 32” [0050]), cause the computerised device to perform a method of controlling the power (“the CPU 32 prompts the power electronics 30 to increase the voltage output to the motor 14” [0055]) of a vacuum cleaner (10 Fig. 1), the method comprising: generating sensor signals (generating sensor signals with 50; “inertial sensor to sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane”; “accelerometer” [0045]) based on both a sensed motion of the vacuum cleaner and an orientation of the vacuum cleaner (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]); pre-processing the generated sensor signals (processing signals of “whether normal or aggressive cleaning is desired” [0047]), wherein the pre-processing step comprises extracting features from time portions (“timing system” [0050-0053]) of the sensor signals; processing the generated sensor signals that are indicative of both the motion and the orientation of the vacuum cleaner to determine a type of cleaning activity (“The CPU 32 or the motion detector internal processor analyzes the cleaning motion against a threshold movement criteria to determine whether normal or aggressive cleaning is desired” [0047]) operably being performed by a user using the vacuum cleaner based on both the motion and orientation of the vacuum cleaner, and based on a time of the motion and time of the orientation (time for triggering the “aggressive cleaning motion (for example, a tap or a rapid back and forth motion” [0044]); and increases the power (“the CPU 32 prompts the power electronics 30 to increase the voltage output to the motor 14” [0055]) of the vacuum motor in response to determining that the type of cleaning activity comprises one or more of: spot cleaning, crevice cleaning, and elevated cleaning (“sense cleaning motion in an x-y plane” [0045]).
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erko (US 20140013540 A1) and Kumar (US 20210245081 A1).
Referring to claim 10: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 1, but is silent on further comprising: a cleaner head comprising an agitator; and one or more diagnostic sensors configured to generate further sensor signals based on sensed parameters of the cleaner head, wherein the controller is configured to process the generated further sensor signals to determine the type of cleaning activity being performed by the user using the vacuum cleaner.
Kumar, in an analogous vacuum cleaner teaches a cleaner head (105 Fig. 3A) comprising an agitator (135 Fig. 3A; “cleaning heads to improve cleaning efficiency by agitating and loosening dirt, dust, and debris” [0006]); and one or more diagnostic sensors (“The autonomous vacuum includes an automated cleaning head that adjusts its height for cleaning a mess based on the mess type, surface type, and/or size of the mess… a variety of sensors in a sensor system for collecting other visual, audio, lidar, IR, time of flight, and inertial data (i.e., sensor data) about the environment.” [0072]) configured to generate further sensor signals based on sensed parameters of the cleaner head, wherein the similar configuration controller (“one or more controllers and/or processors (henceforth referred to as a controller for simplicity) that operate in conjunction with the sensor system 175 to control movement of the cleaning head 105” [0076]) is configured to process the generated further sensor signals to determine the type of cleaning activity (“175 collects and uses sensor data to determine an optimal height for the cleaning head 105 given a surface type” [0076]) being performed by the user using the vacuum cleaner.
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 vacuum cleaner of Erko with the agitator and diagnostic sensors as taught by Kumar for the purpose of increasing the cleaning efficiency when encountering different surface types.
Referring to claim 11: Erko as modified teaches the vacuum cleaner of claim 10, wherein the cleaner head (105 Fig. 3A of Kumar) further comprises an agitator motor (140 Fig. 3A of Kumar) arranged to rotate the agitator (135 Fig. 3A of Kumar) and the sensed parameters of the cleaner head comprise an agitator motor current (“the sensor system 175 may be able to determine an amount of current required to spin each cleaning roller at a set number of rotations per minute (RPM), which may be used to determine a pressure being exerted by the cleaning roller.” [0079] of Kumar).
Referring to claim 12: Erko as modified teaches the vacuum cleaner of claim 10, wherein the sensed parameters of the cleaner head comprise the pressure (“In some embodiments, the sensor system 175 determines an amount of pressure needed to clean a mess (e.g., more pressure for a stain than for a spill), and the controller may alter the rotation of the cleaning rollers to match the determined pressure” [0079] of Kumar) applied to the cleaner head (105 Fig. 3A of Kumar).
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erko (US 20140013540 A1) and Szatmary et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,717,387 B1).
Referring to claim 16: Erko discloses the vacuum cleaner of claim 13, but is silent on wherein the classification step comprises processing the extracted features using a machine learning classifier.
Szatmary et al. in an analogous vacuum cleaner (“vacuum cleaner appliance” Abstract) teaches the similar configuration classification step comprises processing the extracted features using a machine learning classifier (“machine learning”; “Learning process of the component 552 may be adjusted in order to develop an association between an instance of the sensory input 538 (e.g., an object representation) and the discrepancy output 554. Various machine learning approaches may be utilized with the component 552, e.g., an artificial neuron network, a look up table, and/or other approaches.” Cols. 28-29, lines 63-2).
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 vacuum cleaner of Erko with the machine learning classifier as taught by Szatmary et al. for the purpose of, as it is known in the art, increasing the overall operation by enhancing the automated process.
Referring to claim 17: Erko as modified teaches the vacuum cleaner of claim 16, but is silent on wherein the machine learning classifier comprises one or more of: an artificial neural network, a random forest and a support-vector machine.
Szatmary et al. in an analogous vacuum cleaner (“vacuum cleaner appliance” Abstract) teaches wherein the machine learning classifier comprises one or more of: an artificial neural network, a random forest (“random forests” Col. 29, lines 2-15) and a support- vector machine.
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 vacuum cleaner of Erko as modified with the random forests machine learning as taught by Szatmary et al. for the purpose of increasing the overall operation by enhancing the automated process.
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 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