DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 3,5-6,12 and 17-18 are withdrawn. Claims 7, 9, and 20 are currently amended.
Claim Objections
The examiner notes the use of non-black text in the amended claim set. The examiner notes that MPEP 608.01 provides that “Applicants must make every effort to file patent applications, and papers that are to become a part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application or a reexamination proceeding, in a form that is clear and reproducible” and further provides that “Legibility includes ability to be photocopied and scanned so that suitable reprints can be made and paper can be electronically reproduced by use of digital imaging and optical character recognition. This requires a high contrast, with black lines and a white background […] In order to enhance readability of electronic submissions, the USPTO strongly recommends use of a black colored font for text on a white background”. The instant filed amendments to the claim contain non-black text which interferes with the use of optical character recognition. Consider the use of black text and/or filing the amendment as a .docx file (.docx files can be generally processed without use of OCR).
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 20 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.
Claim 20 recites “each of the gaps [plural gaps] aligns with a corresponding one of the first cleaning surfaces along the traveling direction, each of the first cleaning surfaces is wider than a corresponding one of the gaps [plural gaps]”. The examiner notes that the claim does not previously recite plural gaps, only requiring a single gap as it recites “adjacent two of the second cleaning surfaces define a gap [single] therebetween”, and that the prior recitation in the claim requires only [plural or two] two second roller sets, each with a second cleaning surface. The examiner will interpret the claim to only require a single gap, that each of the first cleaning surfaces is wider than the gap [between the two second cleaning surfaces].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 8, 14, 15, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (KR 20030031506 A) in view of Miles (US 20210086560 A1), Pullen (US 2307156 A) and Taylor (US 2334732 A).
PNG
media_image1.png
776
649
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ann. fig. 2 (An)
With respect to claim 1, An discloses: A cleaning robot (automatic cleaner, [1]), comprising: a main body configured to move on a floor along a travelling direction (main body 4, fig. 1; [49], can be moved/move along floor [in traveling direction]); and a cleaning module (wheels/rollers 3, fig. 1; as a roll tape for a dry mop, wet mop, [51-52], the roll tape is adhesive has an adhesive layer 1, fig. 2, as in [49]), comprising: a first shaft connected with the main body (shaft shown in ann. fig. 2 above), the first shaft extending along a first axis perpendicular to the travelling direction (this depends on how the robot moves or is moved, assuming the robot moves in manner supported by the roller/tape rolling, such shaft would be perpendicular to that direction); and a first roller (roller 3, fig. 1, [51-53]; there are multiple rollers the first roller is shown in ann. fig. 2), a first tire comprising a first cleaning surface configured to abut against the floor (the first roller 3 itself, or outer surface of it understood to be a tire as it can travel across the floor, and having a wound outer surface 1, fig. 2, with adhesive/cleaning as in [49]); however does not explicitly disclose a plurality of first roller sets separated from each other, each of the first roller sets comprising: a first bearing, the first shaft penetrating through the first bearing and a first flexible structure comprising a first inner surface and a first outer surface, the first inner surface abutting against the first bearing, the first outer surface abutting against the first tire, the first flexible structure having a first elasticity.
As for a plurality of first roller sets separated from each other, Taylor, in the same field of endeavor, related to floor cleaning machines teaches of providing multiple roller sets separated from each other on a same shaft (15, figs. 2-3; on shaft 16, fig. 3; page 1 col 2, lines 5-18). Taylor teaches that this arrangement prevents bouncing when encountering floor surfaces of carpet (page 1 col 1 lines 30-45).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a plurality of first roller sets separated from each other, as taught by Taylor, to prevent bouncing over the floor.
As for each of the first roller sets comprising: a first bearing, the first shaft penetrating through the first bearing, Pullen, in the same field of endeavor, related to floor cleaning machines teaches of providing a [first] bearing on an wheel axle [shaft] (bearings 14 on axle 15, fig. 3; page 1 col 1 lines 45).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a first bearing, the first shaft penetrating through the first bearing, as taught by Pullen, so that the rollers/wheels move smoothly over the floor.
As for first flexible structure comprising a first inner surface and a first outer surface, the first inner surface abutting against the first bearing, the first outer surface abutting against the first tire, the first flexible structure having a first elasticity, Miles, reasonably pertinent to the problem being solved of providing resilient structures for tires/wheels, teaches of a tire with a first flexible structure comprising a first inner surface (inside surface towards center of 108, fig. 1, [0039-0040]) and a first outer surface (surface of 106 facing away from center, fig. 1; [0030-0031]), the first inner surface the first inner surface abutting against the first bearing (when applied to the teachings of Pullen, with a bearing on the center of the roller/wheel), the first outer surface abutting against the first tire (outer surface abutting against a thread band 110, fig. 1 [tire] which travels along the floor), the first flexible structure having a first elasticity (provided by resilient structure 102, fig. 2, [0042, 0051], [the resilient structure forms chevron shape holes using legs 132 and 134, fig. 3]). Miles teaches that this arrangement provides for compliance with low rolling resistance and mass ([0002,0005]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a first flexible structure comprising a first inner surface and a first outer surface, the first inner surface abutting against the first bearing, the first outer surface abutting against the first tire, the first flexible structure having a first elasticity, as taught by Miles, for the purpose of reducing weight while providing for a wheel/roller which can provide for low resistance while being compliant.
With respect to claim 2, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein each of the first flexible structures comprises: an inner ring, a corresponding one of the first inner surfaces is located at the inner ring (Miles, inner ring of 108, fig. 1; [0039-0040], inner surface is a surface of inner ring); an outer ring, a corresponding one of the first outer surfaces is located at the outer ring (Miles, outer ring 106 fig. 1; [0030-0031], outer surface is surface of outer ring); and a plurality of elastic portions elastically connected between the inner ring and the outer ring (Miles, resilient structure 102, fig. 1, [0042], legs 132 and 134, fig. 3 are plurality of elastic portions as in [0051]), two adjacent ones of the elastic portions define a through hole therebetween (Miles, resilient structure 102, fig. 2, forms holes between arrow shaped/curved bands).
With respect to claim 4, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 2 above, and further teaches wherein each of the through holes is of an arrow shape (Miles, resilient structure 102, fig. 2, forms holes between arrow shaped/curved bands using legs 132, 134, fig. 3, [0042]).
With respect to claim 8, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches a second shaft connected with the main body, the second shaft extends along a second axis parallel with the first axis (see ann. fig. 2 of An above); with a second roller (An, ann. fig. 2 above, which is structurally analogous to the first roller which was explained in the rejection of claim 1 above) , a second tire comprising a first cleaning surface configured to abut against the floor (as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, the roller itself, or outer surface of it understood to be a tire as it can travel across the floor, and having a wound outer surface 1, fig. 2, with adhesive/cleaning as in [49]). An, as modified does not explicitly teach a plurality of second roller sets separated from each other, each of the second roller sets comprises: a second bearing, the second shaft penetrates through the second bearing; and a second flexible structure comprising a second inner surface and a second outer surface, the second inner surface abuts against the second bearing, the second outer surface abuts against the second tire, the second flexible structure has a second elasticity, wherein two adjacent ones of the second cleaning surfaces define a gap therebetween, However, as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above, these the combination of Miles, Pullen, and Taylor teach these features with respect to the first roller, and for the same reasons provided in the rejection of claim 1 above, as applied to the first roller, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have provided these as part of the second roller. As for the limitation of each of the gaps aligns with a corresponding one of the first cleaning surfaces along the travelling direction, given that Taylor teaches of providing spaced wheels/rollers, and given that the second roller of An would be behind and aligned with the first roller (see ann. fig. 2 of An), a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found the arrangement to result in each of the gaps aligns with a corresponding one of the first cleaning surfaces along the travelling direction, given how the rollers are placed behind each other and aligned.
With respect to claim 14, An discloses: A cleaning robot (automatic cleaner, [1]), comprising: a main body configured to move on a floor along a travelling direction (main body 4, fig. 1; [49], can be moved/move along floor [in traveling direction]), and a cleaning module (wheels/rollers 3, fig. 1; as a roll tape for a dry mop, wet mop, [51-52], the roll tape is adhesive has an adhesive layer 1, fig. 2, as in [49]), comprising: a shaft connected with the main body (first shaft shown in ann. fig. 2 above), the shaft extending along an axis perpendicular to the travelling direction (this depends on how the robot moves or is moved, assuming the robot moves in manner supported by the roller/tape rolling, such shaft would be perpendicular to that direction); and a roller (roller 3, fig. 1, [51-53] - see first roller in ann. fig. 2 above), a tire comprising a cleaning surface configured to abut against the floor, the tire having a center (the roller 3 itself, or outer surface of it understood to be a tire as it can travel across the floor, and having a wound outer surface 1, fig. 2, with adhesive/cleaning as in [49]; physical objects/tires would have a center); however does not explicitly disclose a plurality of roller sets separated from each other, each of the roller sets comprising: a bearing, the shaft penetrating through the bearing and a flexible structure connecting between the bearing and the tire, the flexible structure being deformable such that the center is movable relative to the axis.
As for a plurality of roller sets separated from each other, Taylor, in the same field of endeavor, related to floor cleaning machines teaches of providing multiple roller sets separated from each other on a same shaft (15, figs. 2-3; on shaft 16, fig. 3; page 1 col 2, lines 5-18). Taylor teaches that this arrangement prevents bouncing when encountering floor surfaces of carpet (page 1 col 1 lines 30-45).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a plurality of roller sets separated from each other, as taught by Taylor, to prevent bouncing over the floor.
As for each of the first roller sets comprising: a bearing, the shaft penetrating through the first bearing, Pullen, in the same field of endeavor, related to floor cleaning machines teaches of providing a [first] bearing on an wheel axle [shaft] (bearings 14 on axle 15, fig. 3; page 1 col 1 lines 45).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a first bearing, the first shaft penetrating through the first bearing, as taught by Pullen, so that the rollers/wheels move smoothly over the floor.
As for a flexible structure connecting between the bearing and the tire, the flexible structure being deformable such that the center is movable relative to the axis, Miles, reasonably pertinent to the problem being solved of providing resilient structures for tires/wheels, teaches of a tire/roller with flexible structure connecting between the bearing and the tire (resilient structure 102, fig. 2, [0042, 0051], [the resilient structure forms chevron shape holes using legs 132 and 134, fig. 3], formed between two rings 108 and 106, fig. 1 [0030-0031, 0039-0040]; when applied to the teachings of An, as applied, above the flexible structure would be between the bearing at the center of the roller and the tire/thread at the outside surface as Miles provides for a thread/tire 110, fig. 1, as in [0030]), Miles teaches that this arrangement provides for compliance with low rolling resistance and mass ([0002,0005]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a flexible structure connecting between the bearing and the tire, the flexible structure being deformable such that the center is movable relative to the axis, as taught by Miles, for the purpose of reducing weight while providing for a wheel/roller which can provide for low resistance while being compliant.
With respect to claim 15, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 14 above, and further teaches wherein each of the flexible structures comprises: an inner ring connecting with the bearing (Miles, inner ring of 108, fig. 1; [0039-0040], connects directly/indirectly with bearing through assembly, and also by having a surface towards the center of the roller); an outer ring connecting with the tire (Miles, outer ring 106 fig. 1; [0030-0031], connects directly/indirectly with tire through assembly and also as Miles provides for a thread/tire 110, fig. 1, as in [0030], as the outer ring is adjacent to the tire 110); and a plurality of elastic portions elastically connected between the inner ring and the outer ring (Miles, legs 132, 134, fig. 3 within resilient [elastic] structure 102, fig. 1, [0042], [the resilient structure forms chevron shape holes using legs 132 and 134 which are elastic as in [0051]), two adjacent ones of the elastic portions define a through hole therebetween (Miles, 102, forms chevron/arrow shaped holes, [0042]).
With respect to claim 16, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 15 above, and further teaches wherein each of the through holes is shaped with at least one acute angle (Miles, the arrow shaped holes of resilient structure 102, fig. 1 between plurality of legs 132 and 134, have an acute angle as it is triangular shaped in part).
Claim(s) 7 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (KR 20030031506 A) in view of Miles (US 20210086560 A1), Pullen (US 2307156 A) and Taylor (US 2334732 A) and further in view of Yu (CN 201848407 U) and Hanada (US 20090211674 A1)
With respect to claim 7, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, however does not explicitly teach wherein each of the first tires comprises: a first sticky colloid, a corresponding one of the first cleaning surfaces is located at the first sticky colloid; and a first roller frame abutting between the first sticky colloid and a corresponding one of the first flexible structures, the first roller frame is harder than the first flexible structure.
Yu, in the same field of endeavor, related to tools which use adhesive for cleaning, teaches of providing an adhesive tool with a first sticky colloid on the cleaning surface (adhesive film 10, fig. 3 with sticky [adhesive] colloid as in [0024]). Yu teaches that this adhesive resists debonding and removes dust well.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a first sticky colloid at the cleaning surface [of the tire], using the teachings of Yu, as Yu teaches that using a sticky colloid is resistant to debonding and removes dust well.
Regarding a first roller frame abutting between the first sticky colloid and a corresponding one of the first flexible structures, the first roller frame is harder than the first flexible structure, Hanada, reasonably pertinent to the problem being solved of providing a resilient tire teaches of providing a first frame (3, fig. 1; hard as in [0028], the frame being located radially inward of the outer surface 1 of the tire; surface 1 is described in [0023]), the frame radially outwardly of a flexible structure (elastic [flexible] bag body 6, fig. 1; [0028]), the frame is harder than the flexible structure (Hanada describes, as noted above, the frame 3 as being hard and the bag body 6 being elastic). Hanada teaches that this arrangement prevents the tire from buckling ([0028]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a first frame abutting between the first sticky colloid and a corresponding one of the first flexible structures, the first frame is harder than the first flexible structure, using the teachings of Hanada, for the purpose of preventing bucking. The arrangement would have resulted in the claimed limitations of a first roller frame abutting between the first sticky colloid and a corresponding one of the first flexible structures, as the sticky colloid would have been the outer cleaning surface, and the roller frame would have corresponded to the first flexible structure as part of the same roller.
With respect to claim 19, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 14 above, however does not explicitly teach wherein each of the first tires comprises: a sticky colloid, a corresponding one of the cleaning surfaces is located at the sticky colloid; and a frame abutting connecting the first sticky colloid and a corresponding one of the flexible structures, the flexible structures are more flexible than the frames.
Yu, in the same field of endeavor, related to tools which use adhesive for cleaning, teaches of providing an adhesive tool with a first sticky colloid on the cleaning surface (adhesive film 10, fig. 3 with sticky [adhesive] colloid as in [0024]). Yu teaches that this adhesive resists debonding and removes dust well.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a sticky colloid at the cleaning surface [of the tire], using the teachings of Yu, as Yu teaches that using a sticky colloid is resistant to debonding and removes dust well.
Regarding a frame connecting between the sticky colloid and a corresponding one of the first flexible structures, the flexible structures are more flexible than the frames, Hanada, reasonably pertinent to the problem being solved of providing a resilient tire teaches of providing a first frame (3, fig. 1; hard as in [0028], the frame being located radially inward of the outer surface 1 of the tire; surface 1 is described in [0023]), the frame radially outwardly of a flexible structure (elastic [flexible] bag body 6, fig. 1; [0028]), the flexible structures are more flexible than the frames (Hanada describes, as noted above, the frame 3 as being hard and the bag body 6 being elastic). Hanada teaches that this arrangement prevents the tire from buckling ([0028]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a frame connecting between the first sticky colloid and a corresponding one of the first flexible structures, the flexible structures are more flexible than the frames, using the teachings of Hanada, for the purpose of preventing bucking. The arrangement would have resulted in the claimed limitations of a frame connecting between the sticky colloid and a corresponding one of the flexible structures, as the sticky colloid would have been the outer cleaning surface, and the frame would have corresponded to the flexible structure as part of the same roller.
Claim(s) 9, 10, 11, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (KR 20030031506 A) in view of Miles (US 20210086560 A1), Pullen (US 2307156 A) and Taylor (US 2334732 A) and further in view of Deng (CN 204122418 U) and Curtis (EP 0910981 A1).
With respect to claim 9, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein the main body comprises a main frame (An, outer shell of main body 4, fig. 1; [49]), two opposite ends of the first shaft are connected with the main frame (the shaft in ann. fig. 2 of an above, having a physical existence has two ends, which are directly or indirectly connected to the main frame), however does not explicitly teach the cleaning robot further comprises: a sticky roller configured to abut against and clean up the first tires; and
a lifting mechanism, comprising: a supporting frame; a plurality of wheels disposed on the supporting frame and supporting the sticky roller; a first connecting portion connected to a side of the supporting frame and movably connected with the main frame; a second connecting portion connected to another side of the supporting frame and having a screw hole; a driving device disposed on the main frame; and a threaded rod coupled with the screw hole, the driving device is configured to rotate the threaded rod.
PNG
media_image2.png
745
681
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Ann. figs. 1-2 (Deng)
Deng, in the same field of endeavor, related to sticky cleaning tools, teaches a sticky roller configured to abut against and clean up the first tires (sticky roller 30, figs. 1 and 2; [0021-0022] configured to clean up two different rollers 20, figs. 1 and 2, which are analogous to first tires), a lifting mechanism (including slot 13, fig. 1, [0024], the slot allows the roller 30 to be lifted), comprising: a supporting frame (12 figs. 1 and 2; [0024]); a plurality of wheels disposed on the supporting frame and supporting the sticky roller (ann. figs. 1-2, with a block in a slot described in [0010,0011,0014], on two support legs of bracket, with the roller between the two legs of the bracket, and kept under tension through the gap using rubber band 40, figs 1-2, as described in [0025]; thus this arrangement provides for two round wheels); a first connecting portion connected to a side of the supporting frame and movably connected with the main frame (first connecting portion at end of shaft, ann. fig. 2, above, moves up/down in slot because the rubber band 40 enables the movement while maintaining tension). Deng teaches that this arrangement improves the cleaning effect ([0025]), with the sticky roller providing for a self-cleaning effect for the cleaning tool, saving time ([0013-0014]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a sticky roller configured to abut against and clean up the first tires; and a lifting mechanism, comprises: a supporting frame; a plurality of wheels disposed on the supporting frame and supporting the sticky roller; a first connecting portion connected to a side of the supporting frame and movably connected with the main frame; using the teachings of Deng, for improving the self-cleaning effect of the tool, and saving time.
Regarding a second connecting portion connected to another side of the supporting frame and having a screw hole; a driver disposed on the main frame; and a threaded rod coupled with the screw hole, the driver is configured to rotate the threaded rod, Deng, further teaches that maintaining tight contact between the sticky roller and the cleaning surface improves the self-cleaning effect ([0014]).
Curtis, in the same field of endeavor, related to floor cleaning tools, teaches of a second connecting portion connected to another side of the supporting frame and having a screw hole (second connecting portion 146, 148, figs. 2 and 3, the portion would be connected directly/indirectly to the rest of the apparatus, including a [second] side of the supporting frame, having a screw hole to allow the screw rod 144 in as shown in fig. 3; [0021]; and the second connecting portion also having a pin 152, fig. 2-3 within a slot 154 to connect to the cleaning tool as described in [0022]) a driver disposed on the main frame (a motor 112 and gears 142, fig. 2 on an analogous main frame 128, [0020-0021]; disposed understood consistent with placement of instant driving device 145); and a threaded rod coupled with the screw hole (threaded rod screw rod 144 as shown in fig. 3, which shows how it is coupled), the driver is configured to rotate the threaded rod ([0021]). Curtis teaches that this arrangement ensures correct contact with the surface being cleaned, enabling repeatable cleaning ([0002-0003; 0007]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a second connecting portion connected to another side of the supporting frame and having a screw hole; a driving device disposed on the main frame; and a threaded rod coupled with the screw hole, the driving device is configured to rotate the threaded rod, as taught by Curtis, to ensure that the cleaning tool (when the teachings of Curtis are applied, it would be the sticky roller) maintains correct contact with the surface being cleaned (when the teachings of Curtis are applied, it would be the cleaning surface of the tire), enabling repeatable cleaning. This arrangement would have also been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the additional reason that Deng, as noted above, teaches that maintaining tight contact between the sticky roller and the cleaning surface improves the self-cleaning effect (Deng, [0014]).
With respect to claim 10, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 9 above, and further teaches a first subsidiary connecting portion connected with the supporting frame (Curtis, 146, fig. 3; [0021], connected directly or indirectly to supporting frame as part of assembly); a second subsidiary connecting portion, the screw is located at the second subsidiary connecting portion (Curtis, second subsidiary connecting portion 148, fig .3, with the screw 144 within, as shown in fig. 3; [0021]); and a connecting piece having a first end and a second end opposite to the first end, the first end is pivotally connected with the first subsidiary connecting portion, the second end is pivotally connected with the second subsidiary connecting portion (Curtis, connecting piece as pin 152, fig. 3, which, by being a bolt as shown in fig. 3 can pivot/be threaded relative to the first/second subsidiary connecting portions, also as in [0022], the pin travels within a slot and thus the pin pivots in position relative to the first/second subsidiary connecting portions.
With respect to claim 11, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 9 above, and further teaches wherein the first connecting portion is pivotally connected with the main frame (the first connecting portion in fig. 2 of Deng, as applied in the rejection of claim 9 above, can pivot as the sticky roller 30 (being a roller) can rotate).
With respect to claim 13, An, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 9 above, however does not explicitly teach wherein the first connecting portion comprises two connecting rods arranged in parallel, each of the connecting rods has a first end and a second end opposite to the first end, the first end is pivotally connected with the supporting frame, the second end is pivotally connected with the main frame.
Curtis further teaches of a connecting portion having two connecting rods arranged in parallel (rods 132, fig. 2; [0020]), each of the connecting rods has a first end and a second end opposite to the first end (the rods physically have two ends), the first end is pivotally connected with the supporting frame (analogous to frame 138 in Curtis; [0020] using pivot pins 136), the second end is pivotally connected with the main frame (analogous to frame 128 in Curtis, fig. 2; [0020], using pivot pins 134; in any case since the rods 132 pivot, they are connected indirectly/directly to the main frame of An, and supporting frame of Deng). Curtis, as noted in the rejection of claim 9, teaches that this arrangement ensures correct contact with the surface being cleaned, enabling repeatable cleaning ([0002-0003; 0007]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, such that the first connecting portion comprises two connecting rods arranged in parallel, each of the connecting rods has a first end and a second end opposite to the first end, the first end is pivotally connected with the supporting frame, the second end is pivotally connected with the main frame, using the teachings of Curtis, to ensure that the cleaning tool (when the teachings of Curtis are applied, it would be the sticky roller) maintains correct contact with the surface being cleaned (when the teachings of Curtis are applied, it would be the cleaning surface of the tire), enabling repeatable cleaning.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over An (KR 20030031506 A) in view of Taylor (US 2334732 A).
With respect to claim 20, An discloses: A cleaning robot (automatic cleaner, [1]), comprising: a main body configured to move on a floor along a travelling direction (main body 4, fig. 1; [49], can be moved/move along floor [in traveling direction]), the main body having a main frame (outer shell of main body 4, fig. 1; [49]), and a cleaning module (wheels/rollers 3, fig. 1; as a roll tape for a dry mop, wet mop, [51-52], the roll tape is adhesive as it has an adhesive layer 1, fig. 2, as in [49]), comprising: a first shaft extending along a first axis perpendicular to the travelling direction (the shaft in ann. fig. 2 of an above, the perpendicular nature depends on how the robot moves or is moved, assuming the robot moves in manner supported by the roller/tape rolling, such shaft would be perpendicular to that direction); two opposite ends of the first shaft are connected with the main frame (the shaft in ann. fig. 2 of an above, having a physical existence has two ends, which are directly or indirectly connected to the main frame) and a first roller (roller 3, fig. 1, [51-53] - see first roller in ann. fig. 2 above), the roller having a cleaning surface configured to about against a floor (a wound outer surface 1, fig. 2, with adhesive/cleaning as in [49]), a second shaft connected with the main body, the second shaft extending along an axis parallel with the first axis (see ann. fig. 2 of An above); a second roller (An, ann. fig. 2 above, which is structurally analogous to the first roller), the second roller comprising a tire having a second cleaning surface configured to abut against the floor (the roller 3 itself, or outer surface of it understood to be a tire as it can travel across the floor, and having a wound outer surface 1, fig. 2, with adhesive/cleaning as in [49]) however does not explicitly disclose a plurality of first roller sets separated from each other, the first shaft penetrating through the plurality of first roller sets, each of the first roller sets [plural] having a first cleaning surface configured to abut against the floor; a plurality of second roller sets separated from each other, the second shaft penetrating through the plurality of second roller sets, each of the second roller sets [plural] comprising a tire having a second cleaning surface configured to abut against the floor; wherein adjacent two of the second cleaning surfaces define a gap therebetween, each of the gaps aligns with a corresponding one of the first cleaning surfaces along the traveling direction, and each of the first cleaning surfaces is wider than a corresponding one of the gaps.
Regarding a plurality of first and second roller sets separated from each other, with the shaft penetrating through the roller sets, Taylor, in the same field of endeavor, related to floor cleaning machines teaches of providing multiple roller sets separated from each other on [or penetrating] a same shaft (15, figs. 2-3; on shaft 16, fig. 3; page 1 col 2, lines 5-18). Taylor provides that the outer surface which contacts the floor be wider than the gap between (page 1 col 1 lines 30-45; the thread part which contacts the floor is 5/8 inch while the gap/space is 1/8 inch to avoid bouncing; also see page 1 col 2 lines 19-28). Taylor teaches that this arrangement prevents bouncing when encountering floor surfaces of carpet (page 1 col 1 lines 30-45).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified An, to include a plurality of first and second roller sets separated from each other, as taught by Taylor, to prevent bouncing over the floor. The arrangement would have resulted in each of the first roller sets and second roller sets [plural] having [tire with] a first/second cleaning surface configured to abut against the floor, as the teachings of Taylor provides for two roller sets on the same shaft, therefore resulting in plural roller sets having a cleaning surface configured to abut against a floor, for each of the first and second roller sets on the first and second shaft respectively.
Regarding the limitation that each of the second roller sets [plural] comprising a tire having a second cleaning surface configured to abut against the floor; wherein adjacent two of the second cleaning surfaces define a gap therebetween, each of the gaps aligns with a corresponding one of the first cleaning surfaces along the traveling direction, and each of the first cleaning surfaces is wider than a corresponding one of the gaps, the teachings of Taylor, when applied to An provides for gaps between both cleaning surfaces in both the plurality of first roller sets and plurality of second roller sets, specifically providing that ideally the thread part (analogous to the cleaning surface which contacts the floor has a larger width than the gap between), and that this prevents bounding on a carpeted floor. The gaps of the second cleaning surface would “align” with a corresponding first cleaning surface [either one of the two first cleaning surfaces required by the claim], in the traveling direction, given that the gaps would be perpendicular to the roller, and the first roller sets and second roller sets, being on parallel shafts, would roll in a parallel direction, therefore, the gap would be parallel, and thus aligned in the traveling direction (“aligned” is a broad term, and does not necessarily mean, for example, where a line can be drawn across a center of the gap and a center of the wheel, perpendicular to the shaft or along the traveling direction).
Regarding the specific widths of the gaps, and the cleaning surface, the applicant explains the purpose of the gap (instant spec [0014,0054]) applicant does not provide any criticality to the specific relative widths (of the gap and the roller) as claimed. MPEP 2144.05 provides that discovering workable ranges/proportions would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, if the range/proportion has been shown to be a result effective variable, and if it has not been demonstrated that the range is critical. Given that the width of the roller at the interface to the floor [the cleaning surface], and the gap between would, as demonstrated by Taylor, affect the ability of the roller to navigate the floor without bounding, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have both selected a width of the first cleaning surfaces and a width of the gap, such that each of the first cleaning surfaces is wider than a corresponding one of the gaps between the second cleaning surfaces, as required by the claim.
Alternatively, MPEP 2144.04 provides that changes in size/proportion would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, providing that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device, thus it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art”. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have both selected a width of the first cleaning surfaces and a width of the gap, such that each of the first cleaning surfaces is wider than a corresponding one of the gaps between the second cleaning surfaces, as a change in relative dimensions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues (pages 14-18) that the rollers 15 of Taylor are not separated from each other, as required by the claim, but rather are connected with each other. The examiner respectfully disagrees, given that page 1, col. 2, lines 18-27 (cited by applicant), of Taylor teaches of having wheels 15 [plural] on the same shaft, and that the two wheels are otherwise the same to save on manufacturing costs, which implies two distinct wheels. Given that there are two distinct wheels [or rollers], one would understand that they are physically separate wheels, and because they are not fused with each other to make a monolithic piece (which would be contrary to the teaching of making two of them the same; and contrary to referenced fig. 3 of Taylor, which shows two wheels, and the wheels having their own boundaries/shape given the black line between the two of them). Furthermore, the examiner respectfully submits that all parts of the apparatus are “connected” with each other, either directly or indirectly. The examiner also respectfully submits that separated from each other, as recited in the claim, can also be interpreted to mean that there is a gap between part of the wheel, as Taylor mentions in page 1, col. 2, lines 18-27 (cited by applicant), and as shown in fig. 3, with a space between the threads of the wheel. The claims do not require a gap of a specific dimension at the point of attachment to the shaft of the roller sets (examiner submits that at least a small gap exists between the wheels as they are not made of one piece in Taylor - even if two parts are next to each other, there would be a gap unless they are unitary).
No specific arguments were presented with respect to the dependent claim. As for claim 20, while no specific agreements were presented with respect to the amended claim, the examiner respectfully submits that, the gaps, when applied to the first and second roller sets/cleaning surfaces thereof, would be aligned in the manner claimed, given that “aligned” is of a broad term, and can be interpreted to mean “parallel”, and with rollers on parallel axes the gap would “align” with the cleaning surface of the other roller. In addition, the applicant did not provide any criticality to the relative widths of the cleaning surface and roller, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would have selected widths to meet the claim, given that Taylor teaches that such withs of the surface which contacts the floor and the gap/space affects the stability of travel (bounding), or alternatively one of ordinary skill in the art would have selected the widths as a relative dimension. Any new ground of rejection in claim 20 was necessitated by amendment.
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 Steven Huang whose telephone number is (571)272-6750. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:30 am to 2:30 pm, Friday 6:30 am to 11:00 am (Eastern Time).
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.
/Steven Huang/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723