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 CRF 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/27/2026 has been entered.
Status
In response to the amendment filed on 04/27/2026, claims 1, 10, 11, 21, 23, and 27 have been amended, claims 2-4, 7-9, 20, 22, and 26 are cancelled, and new claim 28 is added. Claims 5 and 6 were previously cancelled. Claims 1, 10-19, 21, 23-25, 27, and 28 are pending and under examination.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 28 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, the phrases may be amended as “… toward the sidewall adjacent the baffle wall, [[and ]]wherein the inlet aperture is …” in lines 21-23, “… in a direction from the bottom wall to the top side, [[and ]]wherein the baffle wall is …” in lines 23-25, “… toward the top side of the recovery tank, and wherein the baffle wall is …” in lines 29-30.
In claim 28, line 2, the term may be amended as “the baffle wall”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 10-14, 17-19, 21, 23-25, 27, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rukavina et al. (US 2020/0205624, hereinafter Rukavina), in view of Brennan et al. (US 2005/0050671, hereinafter Brennan) and Pohlman et al. (US 2021/0204780, hereinafter Pohlman).
Regarding claim 1, Rukavina discloses, in fig. 1, a floor cleaner (portable extraction cleaner 100) comprising:
a supply tank configured to store a fluid (¶ 0034, a supply tank 106 holds a cleaning liquid);
a fluid distributor in fluid communication with the supply tank, the fluid distributor operable to dispense the fluid from the floor cleaner (¶ 0036, a cleaning tool 120 [corresponds to the recited fluid distributor] is in fluid communication with the supply tank 106 for dispensing cleaning liquid onto the surface to be cleaned);
a suction inlet (¶ 0039, a suction nozzle [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] of the cleaning tool 120);
a suction source in fluid communication with the suction inlet, the suction source operable to generate a suction airflow that is configured to draw the fluid through the suction inlet (¶ 0039, a suction source 130 may include a motor and a fan assembly and is operable to draw recovered liquid and dirt from the surface being cleaned through the suction nozzle [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] of the cleaning tool 120); and
a recovery tank in fluid communication with the suction inlet and the suction source, the recovery tank configured to receive the fluid and the suction airflow from the suction inlet and separate the suction airflow from the fluid (¶ 0039, the suction source 130 is in fluid communication with a recovery tank 108 and is operable to draw recovered liquid and dirt from the surface being cleaned through the suction nozzle [corresponds to the recited suction inlet] of the cleaning tool 120; ¶ 0040, the motor and fan assembly is coupled to the recovery tank 108 and draws working air out of the recovery tank 108, therefore, the air and fluid are separated in the recovery tank), the recovery tank including,
a top side, a bottom wall opposite the top side, a sidewall that extends from the bottom wall and defines a perimeter of the recovery tank (fig. 7, the recovery tank 108 includes a top side, a bottom wall opposing the top side, and a sidewall between the top side and the bottom wall for defining a perimeter of the recovery tank), the bottom wall and the sidewall at least partially define a storage volume of the recovery tank (¶ 0034, the recovery tank 108 receives and stores the recovered liquid, thus is have a storage volume),
an inlet duct having an inlet aperture configured to direct the fluid from the inlet duct into the storage volume (fig. 16 and ¶ 0059, a bottom of the recovery tank 108 has a recovery inlet 216 [corresponds to the recited inlet duct] which receives the recovered liquid and dirt into the recovery tank. The recovery inlet may be in the form of a pipe extending from the bottom of the recovery tank into the recovery tank. An end of the recovery inlet pipe is an inlet aperture),
wherein the inlet duct extends from the bottom wall toward the top side of the recovery tank (figs. 7-8, the hose connector 150 [corresponds to the recited inlet duct] extends from the bottom wall toward the top side of the recovery tank 108), but does not disclose a baffle wall in the sidewall and formed as a part of the sidewall, the baffle wall facing toward the top side of the recovery tank, wherein the inlet aperture is directed along an inlet direction toward the sidewall adjacent the baffle wall, and wherein the inlet aperture is disposed above the baffle wall in a direction from the bottom wall to the top side, and wherein the baffle wall is below the inlet aperture and above the bottom wall such that the baffle wall is between the inlet aperture and the bottom wall, wherein the sidewall includes the baffle wall such that the sidewall and the baffle wall are integrally formed as a single component, wherein the baffle wall slopes away from the sidewall, further comprising an inlet aperture axis that extends centrally through the inlet aperture, wherein the inlet aperture axis extends through the sidewall at a location between the top side of the recovery tank and the baffle wall.
Brennan teaches, in an analogous floor cleaner field of endeavor, a baffle wall in the sidewall and formed as a part of the sidewall, the baffle wall facing toward the top side of the recovery tank (annotated Brennan fig. 8 below, a baffle 254 [corresponds to the recited baffle wall] is disposed in a tank cavity 258 [corresponds to the recovery tank] and is coupled to a sidewall. The baffle faces upward toward the top side of the tank cavity. In broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim consistent with the specification, the baffle of Brennan is considered to be in the sidewall and a part of the sidewall because the baffle is directly connected to the sidewall and forms a continuous structure. The baffle and the sidewall perform the intended function as they are attached together, therefore, the baffle is considered as a part of the sidewall),
wherein the inlet aperture is directed along an inlet direction toward the sidewall adjacent the baffle wall, and wherein the inlet aperture is disposed above the baffle wall in a direction from the bottom wall to the top side (annotated Brennan fig. 8 below, an inlet aperture is directed toward a sidewall near the baffle, and the inlet aperture is disposed above the baffle), and
wherein the baffle wall is below the inlet aperture and above the bottom wall such that the baffle wall is between the inlet aperture and the bottom wall (annotated Brennan fig. 8 below, the baffle wall is disposed as recited),
wherein the sidewall includes the baffle wall such that the sidewall and the baffle wall are integrally formed as a single component (see annotated Brennan fig. 8 below, as discussed above, the sidewall of the recovery tank is continuously connected to the baffle 254 to form a single component),
wherein the baffle wall slopes away from the sidewall (annotated Brennan fig. 8 below, the baffle wall is extended away from the sidewall of the recovery tank. Claim does not recite whether the baffle wall has a positive slope, a negative slope, or a zero slope),
further comprising an inlet aperture axis that extends centrally through the inlet aperture, wherein the inlet aperture axis extends through the sidewall at a location between the top side of the recovery tank and the baffle wall (annotated Brennan fig. 8 below, an inlet aperture axis can be drawn as recited).
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 floor cleaner of Rukavina to provide the baffle wall as taught by Brennan. The baffle prevents dirty solution from splashing the dirty solution already collected in the tank so that it reduces formation of foam in the dirty solution (Brennan ¶ 0064).
Rukavina as modified by Brennan does not disclose explicitly the baffle wall is spaced a baffle height measured from the bottom wall, and the baffle height is greater than a maximum fill level of the storage volume measured from the bottom wall.
Pohlman teaches, in an analogous floor cleaner field of endeavor, the baffle wall is spaced a baffle height measured from the bottom wall, and the baffle height is greater than a maximum fill level of the storage volume measured from the bottom wall (fig. 8 and ¶ 0034, a tank body 230 of a recovery tank 118 includes a baffle surface 243 [corresponds to the recited baffle wall]. A height measured from a bottom wall to the baffle surface is greater than a maximum fluid level 251 [corresponds to the recited maximum fill level]. The recovery tank has the maximum fluid level so that a vacuum source drops to remain fluid below the predetermined maximum fluid level).
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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan to provide the maximum fill level as taught by Pohlman so that the recovery tank does not overflow.
PNG
media_image1.png
790
989
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Brennan Figure 8
Regarding claim 10, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the baffle height is greater than the maximum fill level of the storage volume measured from the bottom wall by at least 50% of the maximum fill level.
Specification of the instant application describes the fluid entering the recovery tank through the inlet aperture needs to engage the baffle wall before engaging the surface of the fluid (¶ 0022).
Pohlman discloses, in fig. 8, that fluid and air entering the recovery tank 118 out of an inlet duct 240 are directed to the baffle wall 243. The baffle wall is used for separating fluid from air in the recovery tank (¶ 0032). The baffle height can be measured from a bottom wall of the recovery tank. Pohlman further discloses the desired maximum fluid level 251 [corresponds to the recited maximum fill level] is selected to be at a level which does not exceed the height of the inlet duct (¶ 0036). Thus, the baffle wall can be positioned at an appropriate height with respect to the maximum fill level in order to make sure the fluid does not back flow to the inlet duct and there needs to be a space between the baffle wall and the maximum fill level so that air can be separated from fluid as the fluid and air are directed to the baffle wall.
Therefore, 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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to place the baffle wall to meet the recited baffle height in order to promote separation of air from fluid. It has been held that shifting position of a part would be unpatentable unless it modifies the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Regarding claim 11, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose the baffle height is greater than the maximum fill level in a range from 2 millimeters to 80 millimeters.
As discussed in claim 10 above, Pohlman teaches the baffle wall having the baffle height and the baffle wall can be positioned for air to be separated from fluid with respect to the maximum fill level. Therefore, 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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to place the baffle wall to meet the recited baffle height in order to separate the air from the fluid (Pohlman ¶ 0032). It has been held that shifting position of a part would be unpatentable unless it modifies the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Regarding claim 12, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 11, but does not disclose the baffle height is greater than the maximum fill level in a range from 30 millimeters to 60 millimeters.
As discussed in claim 11 above, Pohlman teaches the baffle wall having the baffle height and the baffle wall can be positioned for air to be separated from fluid with respect to the maximum fill level. Therefore, 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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to place the baffle wall to meet the recited baffle height in order to separate the air from the fluid (Pohlman ¶ 0032). It has been held that shifting position of a part would be unpatentable unless it modifies the operation of the device. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Regarding claim 13, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 1, further comprising an outlet duct including an outlet aperture configured to receive the suction airflow from the storage volume and direct the suction airflow toward the suction source (Rukavina, figs. 8 and 16 and ¶ 0040 and 0059, an air outlet 214 [corresponds to the recited outlet duct] having a form of a pipe in the recovery tank 108 draws the working air from the recovery tank. An end of the air outlet pipe is an outlet aperture. A distal open end 138 of a suction port 136 is connected to the air outlet 214. The recovery tank and the motor and fan assembly 134 [corresponds to the recited suction source] are coupled fluidly in order to deliver the working air from the recovery tank 108 to the motor and fan assembly 134).
Regarding claim 14, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein the outlet duct extends inside the recovery tank from the bottom wall of the recovery tank toward the top side of the recovery tank (Rukavina, fig. 16 and ¶ 0059, the air outlet 214 [corresponds to the recited outlet duct] may be in the form of a pipe that extends from an opening in the bottom wall 210 upwardly into the recovery tank 108).
Regarding claim 17, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 13, further comprising a float that closes the outlet aperture when the fluid reaches the maximum fill level (annotated Pohlman fig. 8 below and ¶ 0033, the recovery tank 118 includes a shutoff float 250 [corresponds to the recited float]. When the fluid in the recovery tank reaches the predetermined desired maximum fluid level 251, the shutoff float is in the upper most position to close a first suction air outlet 247 [corresponds to the recited outlet aperture]).
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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to provide the float as taught by Pohlman in order to decrease suction current by a vacuum source when fluid level in the recovery tank reaches the predetermined desired maximum level (Pohlman ¶ 0033).
PNG
media_image2.png
1145
1136
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Pohlman Fig. 8
Regarding claim 18, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 17, wherein the float moves along the outlet duct to close the outlet aperture (see annotated Pohlman fig. 8 above, the shutoff float 250 [corresponds to the recited float] moves along an outlet duct and closes the first suction air outlet 247 [corresponds to the recited outlet aperture]).
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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to provide the float to move along the outlet duct as taught by Pohlman in order to decrease suction current by a vacuum source when fluid level in the recovery tank reaches the predetermined desired maximum level (Pohlman ¶ 0033). It can prevent the recovery tank from overflowing.
Regarding claim 19, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 17, wherein the float includes a first portion and a second portion, wherein the first portion is at least partially below the baffle wall, between the baffle wall and the bottom wall, when the float is in the closed position, and the second portion extends above the baffle wall, between the baffle wall and the top side of the recovery tank, when the float is in the closed position (annotated Pohlman fig. 8 above, a first portion/lower portion of the shutoff float 250 [corresponds to the recited float] is located between a baffle wall and a bottom wall. A second portion/upper portion of the shutoff float 250 is located between the baffle wall and a top side when the float is in a closed position).
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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to provide the first and second portions of the float as taught by Pohlman so that the float detects the fluid level in the recovery tank and close the air outlet when the fluid level reaches the predetermined desired maximum level.
Regarding claim 21, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 1, further comprising an inlet duct axis that extends centrally through the inlet duct along a length of the inlet duct, wherein the inlet duct axis extends through the bottom wall (Rukavina, ¶ 0059 and fig. 16, the recovery inlet 216 [corresponds to the recited inlet duct] is the pipe extended in the recovery tank. An inlet duct axis can be defined as seen in annotated Rukavina fig. 8 below. A hose connector 150 is connected to the recovery inlet 216, and the axis extends centrally through the recovery inlet 216).
PNG
media_image3.png
748
1043
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Rukavina Figure 8
Regarding claim 23, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 21, wherein the inlet aperture axis is perpendicular to the inlet duct axis (see annotated Rukavina fig. 8 and Brennan fig. 8 above, Rukavina and Brennan disclose the vertical inlet duct axes and Brennan discloses the horizontal inlet aperture axis. The two axes are in perpendicular directions with each other).
Regarding claim 24, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the recovery tank includes a lid removably coupled to the sidewall, wherein the lid defines at least a portion of the top side of the recovery tank wherein the inlet aperture is adjacent the lid (Rukavina figs. 14, 16 and ¶ 0034, 0059, a tank lid 212 [corresponds to the recited lid] is coupled to the side wall of the recovery tank 108, and the lid 212 at least partially defines the top side; the recovery inlet 216 [corresponds to the recited inlet duct] extends upward from the bottom wall into the recovery tank, thus the inlet aperture is disposed adjacent the lid).
Regarding claim 25, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 1, further comprising an outlet duct including an outlet aperture configured to receive the suction airflow from the storage volume and direct the suction airflow toward the suction source (Rukavina, figs. 8 and 16 and ¶ 0040 and 0059, an air outlet 214 [corresponds to the recited outlet duct] having a form of a pipe in the recovery tank 108 draws the working air from the recovery tank. An end of the air outlet pipe is an outlet aperture. A distal open end 138 of a suction port 136 is connected to the air outlet 214. The recovery tank and the motor and fan assembly 134 [corresponds to the recited suction source] are coupled fluidly in order to deliver the working air from the recovery tank 108 to the motor and fan assembly 134),
wherein the baffle wall slopes in a direction away from the outlet aperture (Brennan fig. 7 and ¶ 0007, a vacuum source can be disposed at downstream of the recovery tank, and a recovery tank assembly 240 includes a tank vent 290. Thus the vent 290 can be an outlet aperture. The baffle 254 is disposed away from the vent 290. Claim does not recite whether the baffle wall has a positive slope, a negative slope, or a zero slope).
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 floor cleaner of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to provide the baffle wall away from the outlet aperture as taught by Brennan so that vacuumed air is separated from dirty liquid.
Regarding claim 27, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 1, further comprising an outlet duct including an outlet aperture configured to receive the suction airflow from the storage volume and direct the suction airflow toward the suction source (Rukavina, figs. 8 and 16 and ¶ 0040 and 0059, an air outlet 214 [corresponds to the recited outlet duct] having a form of a pipe in the recovery tank 108 draws the working air from the recovery tank. An end of the air outlet pipe is an outlet aperture. A distal open end 138 of a suction port 136 is connected to the air outlet 214. The recovery tank and the motor and fan assembly 134 [corresponds to the recited suction source] are coupled fluidly in order to deliver the working air from the recovery tank 108 to the motor and fan assembly 134), wherein the outlet duct extends inside the recovery tank from the bottom wall of the recovery tank toward the top side of the recovery tank (Rukavina, fig. 16 and ¶ 0059, the air outlet 214 [corresponds to the recited outlet duct] may be in the form of a pipe that extends from an opening in the bottom wall 210 upwardly into the recovery tank 108).
Regarding claim 28, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein the sidewall of the recovery tank forms an outer wall of the recovery tank, and wherein the baffle is formed by an inside surface of the outer wall of the recovery tank (see annotated Brennan fig. 8 above, the sidewall of the recovery tank forms an outer wall of the recovery tank, and the baffle is formed by an inside surface of the outer wall of the recovery tank).
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 floor cleaner of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to provide the baffle wall at inside surface of the wall of the recovery tank as taught by Brennan. The baffle prevents dirty solution from splashing the dirty solution already collected in the recovery tank so that it reduces formation of foam in the dirty solution (Brennan ¶ 0064).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rukavina in view of Brennan and Pohlman, as applied to claim 13, and in further view of Morphey et al. (US 2021/0127925, hereinafter Morphey).
Regarding claim 15, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein the recovery tank includes a lid removably coupled to the sidewall, wherein the lid defines at least a portion of the top side of the recovery tank (Rukavina fig. 14 and ¶ 0034, a tank lid 212 [corresponds to the recited lid] is coupled to the side wall of the recovery tank 108, and the lid 212 at least partially defines the top side), but does not disclose the outlet duct is disposed in the lid.
Morphey teaches, in an analogous floor cleaner field of endeavor, the outlet duct is disposed in the lid (fig. 2, a tank body 18 of a recovery tank 16 includes an outlet duct 28 wherein an end of the outlet duct 28 is disposed in a tank lid 20 [corresponds to the recited lid]).
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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to provide the outlet duct in the lid as taught by Morphey in order to facilitate the draw air out of the recovery tank.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rukavina in view of Brennan and Pohlman, as applied to claim 13, and in further view of Dawson et al. (US 2020/0060496, hereinafter Dawson).
Regarding claim 16, Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman teaches the floor cleaner as in the rejection of claim 13, wherein the recovery tank includes a lid removably coupled to the sidewall (Rukavina fig. 14 and ¶ 0034, a tank lid 212 [corresponds to the recited lid] is coupled to the side wall of the recovery tank 108), but does not disclose the lid includes a redirecting rib on an inner surface of the lid extending toward the bottom wall, disposed along the lid between the baffle wall and the outlet aperture.
Dawson teaches, in an analogous floor cleaner field of endeavor, the lid includes a redirecting rib on an inner surface of the lid extending toward the bottom wall, disposed along the lid between the baffle wall and the outlet aperture (annotated Dawson fig. 10A below, a redirecting surface 93 [corresponds to the recited redirecting rib] is disposed on an inner surface of a lid above a baffle wall extending toward the bottom wall; fig. 9 and ¶ 0045, a suction air outlet 92 [corresponds to the recited outlet aperture] is disposed higher than redirecting surface).
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 recovery tank of Rukavina as modified by Brennan and Pohlman to provide the redirecting rib as taught by Dawson in order to turn air and fluid toward downward of the recovery tank (Dawson ¶ 0045).
PNG
media_image4.png
790
627
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Dawson Fig. 10A
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Rukavina, Brennan, and Pohlman do not disclose all the features of amended claim limitations that a baffle wall in a sidewall, formed as a part of the sidewall, and the sidewall and the baffle wall are integrally formed as a single component. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The baffle of Brennan is directly connected to the sidewall such that the baffle is continuously formed from the sidewall. In applying broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim consistent with the specification, the baffle and the sidewall are considered to be integrally formed as a single component because the baffle has to be attached to the sidewall when it receives fluid from an inlet aperture.
Applicant further argues there is no proper rationale to combine Brennan to teach the baffle wall and the sidewall as the single component. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In Brennan, the baffle and the sidewall are directly coupled as the single component so that all dirty water must pass through the baffle to be dropped into a recovery tank, and the baffle helps reducing the formation of foam in the dirty solution already collected in the tank. Para. 0064 of Brennan explains the function of the baffle. Thus, Para. 0064 provides reason why the baffle and the sidewall need to be formed as the single component for passing the dirty water through it.
Applicant also argues claim 1 recites a baffle height is greater than a maximum fill level of a storage volume and the baffle wall is below the inlet aperture, but Pohlman does not teach the baffle wall is below the inlet aperture, thus it would be improper to combine Pohlman with Rukavina and Brennan. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
It is the Brennan reference that teaches the baffle is disposed below the inlet aperture. Pohlman teaches baffle height is greater than the maximum fill level. Therefore, the teaching of the maximum fill level by Pohlman is combined with Brennan to teach regarding the position of the baffle with respect to the inlet aperture. MPEP 2145(III) states the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of those references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, combination of Rukavina, Brennan, and Pohlman teaches the recited claim limitations.
For the reasons above the arguments are not persuasive.
Conclusion
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.
/SUKWOO JAMES CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights