DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 12th, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-4, 7, 11 and 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claims 5, 6, 8-10, 13-17 and 19-21 are either allowed, or 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 as noted below.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Winslow et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0206373).
Concerning claims 1 & 2, Winslow discloses a docking station (500) for a domestic appliance comprising an attachment, the domestic appliance comprising an air outlet and the attachment comprising at least one nozzle, the docking station comprising:
A docking bay (504/505) for receiving and holding at least the attachment, the docking bay (504/505) configured to surround all sides of the attachment of the domestic appliance (Figures 5A-C);
A docking sensor for providing a docking signal when at least the part attachment of the domestic appliance is held in the docking bay (paragraphs 85, 87, 88, 91 and 92);
At least one light source (502) for emitting light with a wavelength of about 405 nm (paragraphs 22 & 26) light in a violet portion of the visual spectrum, the at least one light source being arranged in such a way as to illuminate the at least one nozzle by emitting the light while the attachment of the domestic appliance is being held in the docking bay (paragraphs 84-86); and
A docking station controller (506), operatively coupled to the docking sensor and the at least one light source (paragraph 85) and operative to receive the docking signal and to execute, in response thereto, a decontamination program, the decontamination program including using the at least one light source to illuminate the at least one nozzle for the decontamination thereof (paragraphs 85, 87, 88, 91 and 92).
Regarding claim 3, Winslow continues to disclose a communication unit, operatively coupled to the docking station controller (506), for enabling communication between the docking station controller and an appliance controller of the domestic appliance (paragraphs 95-98).
With respect to claim 11, the reference also discloses that the light source comprises a plurality of LEDs (paragraph 86).
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 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winslow et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0206373) in view of Jeon et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0298169).
Winslow discloses a combination comprising the docking station as claimed in claim 1 (See above), and an object that is decontaminated in the docking station (paragraphs 84-88). Winslow does not appear to disclose that the object is a domestic appliance comprising an air outlet with at least one nozzle. Jeon discloses a docking station (1) that is provided with a docking bay (15), and a light source (38) for decontaminating a surface of an object (2) as set forth in paragraphs 32, 33, 98-100 and 104. The reference continues to disclose that the object is a domestic appliance comprising an air outlet (302) with at least one nozzle (Figures 3 & 13). Because both Winslow and Jeon disclose the decontamination of an object with a light source in a docking bay of a docking station (See Winslow with reference to claim 1 above; See paragraphs 32, 33, 98-100 and 104); and that the light source (38) of Jeon merely decontaminates one of the surfaces of said domestic appliance object (Figure 2), while Winslow discloses decontamination of a plurality of surfaces of the object when said object is placed in the docking bay (Figure 5; paragraph 84); then it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to decontaminate a domestic appliance comprising an air outlet with at least one nozzle in Winslow because Jeon discloses that such appliances are predictably and successfully decontaminated with a light source, and Winslow discloses that the docking station set forth therein will decontaminate a plurality of surfaces of the object when said object is placed in the docking bay. Therefore, one of ordinary skill would readily see to utilize the docking station in Winslow to decontaminate a domestic appliance comprising an air outlet with at least one nozzle.
As such, the limitations of claim 4 are met by Winslow in view of Jeon. Thus, claim 4 is not patentable over Winslow in view of Jeon.
Concerning claim 7, Jeon continues to disclose that the domestic appliance comprises a filter (34) for filtering incoming air (paragraphs 37-45), and the light source (502) of Winslow is arranged in such a way as to illuminate the filter when said domestic appliance is placed correctly within the docking bay of Winslow (See Figures 5A-C). As such, the modification of Winslow with Jeon will meet these limitations.
Therefore, claim 7 is not patentable over Winslow in view of Jeon as well.
Claims 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winslow et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0206373) in view of Winslow et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2021/0046198) which will be herein referred to as ‘198.
Winslow is relied upon as set forth above. Winslow does not appear to disclose that the at least one light source comprises multiple light sources, each light source being arranged on each inner surface of the docking bay such that substantially all sides of the attachment of the domestic appliance are illuminated by the emitted light. ‘198 discloses an enclosure (Figures 1, 3, 18 and 21) for emitting disinfecting light from at least one light source (108/1802/2106) to an object within the enclosure (paragraphs 55, 87-90 and 93-105), wherein the enclosure includes inner surfaces therein. The reference continues to disclose that that the at least one light source comprises multiple light sources (Figures 1, 3, 18 and 21), wherein each light source (108/1802/2106) is arranged on each inner surface of the enclosure such that substantially all sides of the object is illuminated by the emitted light (Figures 1, 3, 18 and 21) in order to ensure that the entirety of the object is disinfected by the emitted light (paragraphs 55, 87-90 and 93-105). As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include multiple light sources, wherein each light source is arranged on each inner surface of the docking bay of Winslow such that substantially all sides of the attachment of the domestic appliance are illuminated by the emitted light in order to ensure that the entirety of the object is disinfected by the emitted light as exemplified by ‘198.
Thus, claim 12 is rejected over Winslow in view of ‘198.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-17 and 19-21 are allowed. Claims 5, 6 and 8-10 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN C JOYNER whose telephone number is (571)272-2709. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00AM-4:30PM.
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, MICHAEL MARCHESCHI can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/KEVIN JOYNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799