DETAILED ACTION
SURFACE CLEANING ATTACHMENT SYSTEM
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01-08-2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 12-08-2025 has been entered. Claims 1,3-12,14-22 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 2 and 13 have been cancelled. Claims 21 and 22 are newly added. The previous rejection has been updated due to applicant’s amendments.
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) 1,3,7-10,12,14,18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armstrong (US5455982A) in view of Grave (US4488330A), Parise (US4075733A), Chicoine (US4329756A) and Hopkins (US10413147B2).
Regarding claim 1, Armstrong teaches an industrial surface agitator (col 1 lines 14-20 and lines 37-45) having an agitator housing (see 18, figure 2) a surface cleaning attachment system (38, figure 2) removably couplable (abstract) to the front of industrial surface agitator (figure 1-2); where the back of the surface cleaning attachment is removably coupled to the industrial surface agitator (abstract, figures 1-2).
Armstrong fails to teach removably couplable to an agitator housing of an industrial surface agitator, the surface cleaning attachment system comprising:
a spraying module comprising a sprayer housing and a sprayer assembly disposed within the sprayer housing, the sprayer housing comprising a back plate and a front plate, wherein the front plate of the sprayer housing defines one or more elongated slots, and wherein the one or more elongated slots are vertically elongated such that a longest dimension of the one or more elongated slots is in a vertical direction; and
a vacuum module adjustably coupled to the front plate such that the vacuum module is vertically movable relative to the spraying module.
Grave teaches a surface cleaning attachment system removably couplable to a surface agitator (col 2 lines 32-35); the surface cleaning attachment system comprising a spraying module (14, figure 4) figure comprising a sprayer housing (18, figure 4) and a sprayer assembly (31, figure 4) disposed within the sprayer housing, the sprayer housing comprising a back plate (25, figure 4) and a front plate (19, figure 4); and the front plate (19, figure 4) of the sprayer housing defines one or more elongated slots (opening where screw 62 sits, ; col 3 lines 64-lines 68, figure 4);
a vacuum module (16, figure 4) coupled to the front plate (19, figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Armstrong to include surface cleaning attachment with a vacuum module and a spraying module based on Grave teachings . This modification would help loosen soul within carpeted cleaning surfaces (see Grave col 5 lines 10-20).
Parise teaches a cleaning head (10, figure 1-3) that has a vacuum module (22, figure 1), a spray module (20, figure 1) with a front plate (44, figures 1-3) defines one or more elongated slots (32, figure 3) wherein the one or more elongated slots are vertically elongated (figure 3) such that a longest dimension of the one or more elongated slots is in a vertical direction (figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Grave so that the one or more elongated slots are vertically elongated such that a longest dimension of the one or more elongated slots is in a vertical direction based on the teachings of Parise. This modification would allow the distance and area the spray module impacts to be varied (see Parise abstract).
Chicoine teaches a carpet cleaning machine (abstract) that includes a spraying module (48, figures 1-5) and vacuum module (21, figures 1-5) where spraying module vertically adjustable relative to vacuum module (21, figures 1-5) through the means of hand operated screws (col 3 lines 48-57)
Hopkins teaches carpet cleaning machine that includes spraying module (106 + 108, figure 1e and 5) and vacuum module (104, figure 1e) where sections of the cleaning machine can be movable in any angle relative to other sections of the cleaning machine (col 2 lines 36-55, col 6 lines 34-49)
Chicoine and Hopkins teach cleaning machines designed to have adjustable portions of the cleaning machine. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Grave to include a mechanism that allows the vacuum module to be vertically movable relative to the spraying module . This modification would allow the machine’s vacuum module to be tailored for different uses (see Hopkins col 6 lines 35-40).
Further, Armstrong as modified would teach a back plate removably couplable to the industrial surface agitator (see Armstrong figures 1-2; Graves figure 4).
Regarding claim 3, modified Armstrong teaches the vacuum module (Grave 16, figure 4; col 3 lines 20-21) includes a vacuum head.
Regarding claim 7, modified Armstrong teaches the sprayer assembly (Grave 14, figure 4) includes an inlet line (Grave 36, figure 4) , a manifold (Grave 29, figure 5), and a plurality of nozzles (Grave 31-34, figures 3-5) extending from the manifold (Grave 29, figure 4-5).
Regarding claim 8, modified Armstrong teaches the sprayer housing (Grave 18, figure 4) defines an interior (Grave 65, figures 3-5), and wherein the sprayer housing (Grave 18, figure 4) further includes one or more brackets (Grave 44 and 42, figure 4) extending within the interior (Grave 65, figure 4)
Regarding claim 9, modified Armstrong teaches the manifold (Grave 29, figure 5) of the sprayer assembly is coupled to the one or more brackets (Grave 44 and 42, figure 4) within the interior (Grave 65, figure 4) of the sprayer housing.
Regarding claim 10, Armstrong teaches an industrial surface agitator (col 1 lines 14-20 and lines 37-45) having an agitator housing (see 18, figure 2) a surface cleaning attachment system (38, figure 2) removably couplable (abstract) to the front of industrial surface agitator (figure 1-2); where the back of the surface cleaning attachment is removably coupled to the industrial surface agitator (abstract, figures 1-2).
Armstrong fails to teach surface cleaning attachment system comprising:
a spraying module comprising a sprayer housing and a sprayer assembly disposed within the sprayer housing, the sprayer housing comprising a back plate and a front plate; and wherein the front plate of the sprayer housing defines one or more elongated slots, and wherein the one or more slots are vertically elongated such that a longest dimension of the one or more elongated slots is in a vertical direction
a vacuum module adjustably coupled to the front plate such that the vacuum module is vertically movable relative to the spraying module.
Grave teaches a surface cleaning attachment system removably couplable to a surface agitator (col 2 lines 32-35); the surface cleaning attachment system comprising:
a spraying module (14, figure 4) comprising a sprayer housing (18, figure 4) and a sprayer assembly (31, figure 4) disposed within the sprayer housing, the sprayer housing comprising a back plate (25, figure 4) and a front plate (19, figure 4); and
a vacuum module (16, figure 4) coupled to the front plate (19, figure 4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Armstrong to include surface cleaning attachment with a vacuum module and a spraying module based on Grave teachings . This modification would help loosen soul within carpeted cleaning surfaces (see Grave col 5 lines 10-20).
Parise teaches a cleaning head (10, figure 1-3) that has a vacuum module (22, figure 1), a spray module (20, figure 1) with a front plate (44, figures 1-3) defines one or more elongated slots (32, figure 3) wherein the one or more elongated slots are vertically elongated (figure 3) such that a longest dimension of the one or more elongated slots is in a vertical direction (figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Armstrong so that the one or more elongated slots are vertically elongated such that a longest dimension of the one or more elongated slots is in a vertical direction based on the teachings of Parise. This modification would allow the distance and area the spray module impacts to be varied (see Parise abstract).
Chicoine teaches a carpet cleaning machine (abstract) that includes a spraying module (48, figures 1-5) and vacuum module (21, figures 1-5) where spraying module vertically adjustable relative to vacuum module (21, figures 1-5) through the means of hand operated screws (col 3 lines 48-57).
Hopkins teaches carpet cleaning machine that includes spraying module (106 + 108, figure 1e and 5) and vacuum module (104, figure 1e) where sections of the cleaning machine can be movable in any angle relative to other sections of the cleaning machine (col 2 lines 36-55, col 6 lines 34-49).
Chicoine and Hopkins teach cleaning machines designed to have adjustable portions of the cleaning machine. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Armstrong to include a mechanism that allows the vacuum module to be vertically movable relative to the spraying module . This modification would allow the machine’s vacuum module to be tailored for different uses (see Hopkins col 6 lines 35-40).
Further, Armstrong as modified would teach a back plate removably couplable to the industrial surface agitator (see Armstrong figures 1-2; Graves figure 4).
Regarding claim 12, modified Armstrong teaches a back wall (Armstrong figures 1-2) and a front wall (Armstrong figures 1-2) wherein the surface cleaning attachment system (Armstrong figures 1-2;Grave 38, figure 1-2) is removably couplable (Armstrong figures 1-2;Grave abstract, 38) to the front wall of the industrial surface agitator(Grave abstract, col 1 lines 14-20 and lines 37-45).
Regarding claim 14, modified Armstrong teaches the vacuum module (Grave 16, figure 4; col 3 lines 20-21) includes a vacuum head.
Regarding claim 18, modified Armstrong teaches the sprayer assembly ( Grave 14, figure 4) includes an inlet line (Grave 36, figure 4) , a manifold (Grave 29, figure 5), and a plurality of nozzles (Grave 31-34, figures 3-5) extending from the manifold (Grave 29, figure 4-5).
Regarding claim 19, modified Armstrong teaches the sprayer housing (Grave 18, figure 4) defines an interior (Grave 65, figures 3-5), and wherein the sprayer housing (Grave 18, figure 4) further includes one or more brackets (Grave 44 and 42, figure 4) extending within the interior (Grave 65, figure 4).
Regarding claim 20, modified Armstrong teaches the manifold (Grave 29, figure 5) of the sprayer assembly is coupled to the one or more brackets (Grave 44 and 42, figure 4) within the interior (Grave 65, figure 4) of the sprayer housing.
Claim(s) 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armstrong (US5455982A) in view of Grave (US4488330A), Parise (US4075733A), Chicoine (US4329756A) and Hopkins (US10413147B2).) as applied to claims 1 and 14 further in view of Cyphert (US4019218).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, modified Armstrong teaches all limitations stated above and a fastener (see Grave 62, figure 4) that extends through the vacuum head, one of the elongated slot (see Grave the opening where screw 62 sits, ; col 3 lines 64-lines 68, figure 4 and Parise figure 3) to couple the vacuum module (Grave 16, figure 4) to the spraying module (Grave 14, figure 4) ,but fails to teach a nut to couple the vacuum module to the spraying module.
Cyphert teaches a carpet cleaning extractor (abstract) that uses bolt and nut as attachment device to secure components to the base of the cleaning extractor (col 4 lines 65-col 5 lines 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Armstrong for fastener to be a nut and bolt fastener for purpose of using any known alternative fastener capable of attaching and securing components together such as a bolt and nut. The substitution would have resulted in the predicable result of coupling components together.
Claim(s) 6-7 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armstrong (US5455982A) in view of Grave (US4488330A), Parise (US4075733A),Chicoine (US4329756A) and Hopkins (US10413147B2) as applied to claims 1 and 10 further in view of Cox (WO 2021045998 A1).
Regarding claims 5-6 and 16 and 17, modified Armstrong teaches all limitations stated above ,but fails to teach the vacuum module further comprises a glide assembly coupled to the vacuum head and wherein the glide assembly includes a glide plate and one or more wheels rotatably coupled to the glide plate.
Cox teaches a cleaning machine that has a vacuum head (17, figure 1; para 0027) , wheel assembly (212, figure 5b) that includes a glide assembly (202 figure 5b and 5c) that has a glide plate (208, figure 5b and 5c)coupled to the wheel assembly (212, 5c and 5b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Armstrong to include glide assembly coupled to wheel assembly based on the teachings of Cox. This modification would help improve cleaning efficiency of the cleaning machine (para 0075 of Cox).
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armstrong (US5455982A) in view of Grave (US4488330A), Parise (US4075733A) Chicoine (US4329756A) and Hopkins (US10413147B2) as applied to claim 10 further in view of Wulff (US5611106A).
Regarding claim 11, modified Armstrong teaches all limitations stated above ,but fails to teach the industrial surface agitator further comprises counter rotating brushes disposed within the housing.
However, Armstrong as modified above does disclose the industrial surface agitator comprises a brush (Armstrong 88, figure 2).
Wulff teaches an industrial carpet cleaning machine (abstract) that comprises counter rotating brushes disposed within the housing (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Armstrong to include counter rotating brushes within an industrial surface agitator based on the teachings of Wulff. This modification would help maintain a carpeted floor surface on a steady basis and reduce the chances of excessive soil, wear and loss appeal. (see Wulff col 1 lines 34 – 60)
Claim(s) 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Armstrong (US5455982A) in view of Grave (US4488330A), Parise (US4075733A) Chicoine (US4329756A) and Hopkins (US10413147B2) as applied to claim 10 further in view of Nguyen (US11771286B2)
Regarding claims 21 and 22, modified Armstrong teaches the back plate (see Grave 25, figure 4) is vertically longer than the front plate such that the back plate includes a guard portion (see Grave 23, figure 4), but fails to teach wherein the back plate includes tab portions extending vertically from the guard portion such that the tab portion and the guard portion collectively define an opening to an interior defined by the sprayer housing and wherein one or more flanges are coupled to the tab portions of the back plate for removably coupling the spraying module to an agitator housing of the industrial surface agitator.
Nguyen teaches a carpet extractor teaches that has a base housing that holds vacuum cleaner module and sprayer module; wherein the base housing has a wide range attachments to connect the base housing to carpet extractor (see figures 5-15; col 6 lines 35-65) including bosses and ribs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Armstrong to back plate includes tab portions extending vertically from the guard portion such that the tab portion and the guard portion collectively define an opening to an interior defined by the sprayer housing and wherein one or more flanges are coupled to the tab portions of the back plate for removably coupling the spraying module to an agitator housing of the industrial surface agitator based on the teachings of Nguyen in attempt to ensure there is proper connection between the surface cleaning attachment and industrial surface cleaning apparatus as a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue known options within his or her technical grasp.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 12-08-2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 10 their dependent claims under 35 U.S.C.103 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection (as necessitated by amendment) relies on a different combination of prior art references, not applied in the prior rejection of record to teach the new amendments.
Further, in response to applicant's argument that the prior art fails to disclose “a back plate removably couple to the industrial surface agitator”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Additionally, prior art Arnold discloses a surface cleaning attachment that is removably coupled to an industrial surface agitator through the back wall of the surface cleaning attachment (figures 1-2); Arnold as modified by Graves teaches a backplate located at the back of the surface cleaning attachment and connects to the agitator through the backplate (see Graves abstract, col 2 lines 1 – col 5 lines 50, figures 1-4) therefore would be capable of having the backplate attach to an industrial surface agitator of Arnold.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH AKYAA FORDJOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-0390. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:30am - 5:30pm and Friday 6:00am-3:00pm.
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.
/SARAH AKYAA FORDJOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723