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 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 14th, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed April 14th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4, 6-14, and 16-20 remain pending in the application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the rotational mechanism in claim 7, ln. 2 and the hose in claim 11, ln. 2 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a rotational mechanism in claim 7, ln. 2 and claim 17, ln. 2.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 7 and 17 are 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 limitation “a rotational mechanism” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification does not describe or explain the structure of the rotational mechanism in pg. 2 and 3. The specification does describe rotating the nozzle face 24 along a predetermined length in pg. 12, ln. 21-23, but this is not clearly linked to the rotational mechanism and it is unclear if there is a further specific structure for the rotational mechanism. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. For examination purposes, it will be interpreted that a rotational mechanism is a handle, knob, or dial.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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.
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 1-4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (EP 4079416 A1) in view of Chen (US Patent 7,434,751, herein referenced to as Chen ‘751).
With respect to claim 1, Chen teaches an adjustable handle (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising:
a body (1, Figs. 1-14) having a connecting member (4, Fig. 2) extending therefrom (shown in Fig. 2), a first end (left end of nozzle body 1, shown in Fig. 1), a second end (right end of nozzle body 1, shown in Fig. 1), and an interior channel (internal channel within nozzle body 1, shown in Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 10-11) extending from the first end (shown in Fig. 1) to the second end (shown in Fig. 1);
a nozzle (11, Figs. 1-2) configured to discharge a fluid that exits from the first end of the body (Paragraph 0012), wherein the nozzle (11, Figs. 1-2) includes a nozzle body (external surface of water outlet portion 11, shown in Figs. 1-2);
a grip (3, Figs. 1-14) having a central opening (hollow opening at the center of the handle 3, shown in Fig. 1) and a cavity (61, Fig. 2) for receiving the connecting member (4, shown in Fig. 2) of the body (1, Figs. 1-14) to connect the body (1, Figs. 1-14) with the grip (3, shown in Figs. 1-14); and
a grip position adjuster (5, Figs. 1-2) at least partially disposed in the cavity (61, shown in Fig. 2) of the grip (101, Figs. 1-3, 5), the grip position adjuster (11, Figs. 1-3, 5) including a button (51, 52, Figs. 2, 6-7, 11) extending into the central opening (hollow opening at the center of the handle 3, shown in Fig. 1) of the grip (3, Figs. 1-14),
wherein adjustment of the grip position adjuster (5, Figs. 1-2) by depressing of the button (51, 52, Figs. 2, 6-7, 11) of the grip position adjuster (5, Figs. 1-2) permits rotational movement of the grip (3, Figs. 1-14) from being locked a first position to being locked in a second position (handle 3 can be turned to various positions parallel and perpendicular to the nozzle body 1 when the positioning member 5 is pushed creating rotational movement, shown in Figs. 12-13, Paragraphs 0017-0019).
However, Chen does not explicitly disclose the nozzle includes a nozzle body and a nozzle face that is rotatably attached to a first end of the nozzle body, and wherein a second end of the nozzle body is removably attached to the first end of the body, the second end of the nozzle body being opposite to the first end of the nozzle body.
Chen ‘751 teaches an adjustable handle (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising the nozzle (70, 80, Figs. 1-2) includes a nozzle body (70, Figs. 1-2) and a nozzle face (80, Figs. 1-2) that is rotatably attached to a first end of the nozzle body (end of rotation member 70 connecting to nozzle module 80, nozzle module 80 is rotatable relative to water outlet seat 50 and mounted within rotation member 70, shown in Fig. 2, Col. 3, Ln. 4-18, Col. 4, Ln. 21-37), and wherein a second end of the nozzle body (end of rotation member 70 connecting to main body 10, shown in Figs. 1-2) is removably attached to the first end of the body (end of main body 10 connecting to rotation member 70, shown in Fig. 2), the second end of the nozzle body (end of rotation member 70 connecting to main body 10, shown in Figs. 1-2) being opposite to the first end of the nozzle body (end of rotation member 70 connecting to nozzle module 80, shown in Fig. 2).
Chen and Chen ‘751 are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of adjustable handles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the nozzle taught in Chen ‘751’s adjustable handle to Chen’s adjustable handle, to have the motivation of having different water outlet modes controlled by rotation of the parts, which enhances versatility of the water spraying gun and facilitates the user to control the water outlet mode (Chen ‘751, Col. 1, Ln. 34-49).
Regarding claim 2, Chen, as modified by Chen ‘751, discloses the adjustable handle according to claim 1. Chen further discloses the grip position adjuster (5, Figs. 1-2) further includes one or more side protrusions (51, shown in Figs. 1-2) capable of assisting the grip in locking in the first position or the second position (Paragraphs 0004, 0019-0020).
Regarding claim 3, Chen, as modified by Chen ‘751, discloses the adjustable handle according to claim 1. Chen further discloses the first position of the grip (3, shown in Fig. 12) is parallel to the channel (internal channel within nozzle body 1, shown in Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 10-11) of the body (1, shown in Fig. 12), and wherein the second position of the grip (3, shown in Fig. 14) is perpendicular to the channel (internal channel within nozzle body 1, shown in Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 10-11) of the body (1, shown in Fig. 14).
With respect to claim 4, Chen, as modified by Chen ‘751, discloses the adjustable handle according to claim 1. Chen discloses the second end of the body (right end of nozzle body 1, shown in Fig. 1) is configured for reversible connection to a hose capable of providing a fluid such the fluid traverses the body from the first end of the body to the second end of the body via the channel (internal channel within nozzle body 1, right end of nozzle body 1 has threads that are configured for a reversible connection to a hose such the fluid traverses the body from the first end of the body to the second end of the body via the channel, shown in Figs. 1-2, 5-7, 10).
In regards to claim 6, Chen, as modified by Chen ‘751, discloses the adjustable handle according to claim 1. Chen ‘751 further teaches the nozzle (70, 80, Figs. 1-2) includes one or more spray modes permitting a user of the adjustable handle to select a manner in which to discharge the fluid from the nozzle (Col. 4, Ln. 38-67).
Regarding claim 7, Chen, as modified by Chen ‘751, discloses the adjustable handle according to claim 6. Chen ‘751 further teaches the nozzle face (80, Figs. 1-2) includes a rotational mechanism (20, Figs. 1-2) that allows the user of the adjustable handle to select the spray mode by operating the rotational mechanism (user can adjust the flow rate of the water sprinkled from the water sprinkling holes 84 of nozzle module 80 by rotation of the control handle 20, Col. 4, Ln. 48-67).
With respect to claim 8, Chen, as modified by Chen ‘751, discloses the adjustable handle according to claim 6. Chen ‘751 further teaches the nozzle face (80, Figs. 1-2) includes one or more discharge openings (84, shown in Fig. 1) that discharge the fluid according to the spray mode selected by the user (Col. 4, Ln. 38-67).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (EP 4079416 A1) in view of Chen (US Patent 7,434,751) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (US 20190240684 A1, herein referenced to as Chen ‘684).
Regarding claim 9, Chen, as modified by Chen ‘751, discloses the adjustable handle according to claim 1. However, Chen and Chen ‘751 do not teach the body includes a valve that controls the flow of a fluid from the second end of the body to the first end of the body.
Chen ‘684 teaches an adjustable handle (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising the body (10, Fig. 1) includes a valve (11, Fig. 1) that controls the flow of a fluid from the second end of the body to the first end of the body (valve 11 controls on/off operation of the water within the water spray gun, Paragraph 0016).
Chen, Chen ‘751, and Chen ‘684 are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of adjustable handles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of the valve taught in Chen ‘684’s adjustable handle to Chen’s adjustable handle, as modified by Chen ‘751, to have the motivation of providing improved control of water flow in the system (Chen ‘684, Paragraph 0016).
In regards to claim 10, Chen, as modified by Chen ‘751 and Chen ‘684, discloses the adjustable handle according to claim 9. Chen ‘684 further teaches the valve (11, Fig. 1) includes a selection member that is operable by a user of the adjustable handle to block the fluid from flowing from the second end of the body to the first end of the body (user controls on/off operation of the water within the water spray gun by pulling the water control valve 11, Paragraph 0016).
Claims 11-14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (EP 4079416 A1) in view of Rogers (US 20050252994 A1) and Chen (US Patent 7,434,751).
With respect to claim 11, Chen discloses a system (entire structure, Fig. 1) for transporting a fluid (Paragraph 0002), the system (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising:
an adjustable handle (1, 3, Figs. 1-14) that is connected to the hose (11, shown in Fig. 1), the adjustable handle (1, 3, Figs. 1-14) comprising:
a body (1, Figs. 1-14) having a connecting member (4, Fig. 2) extending therefrom (shown in Fig. 2), a first end (left end of nozzle body 1, shown in Fig. 1), a second end (right end of nozzle body 1, shown in Fig. 1), and an interior channel (internal channel within nozzle body 1, shown in Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 10-11) extending from the first end (shown in Fig. 1) to the second end (shown in Fig. 1);
a nozzle (11, Figs. 1-2) configured to discharge a fluid that exits from the first end of the body (Paragraph 0012), wherein the nozzle (11, Figs. 1-2) includes a nozzle body (external surface of water outlet portion 11, shown in Figs. 1-2);;
a grip (3, Figs. 1-14) having a central opening (hollow opening at the center of the handle 3, shown in Fig. 1) and a cavity (61, Fig. 2) for receiving the connecting member (4, shown in Fig. 2) of the body (1, Figs. 1-14) to connect the body (1, Figs. 1-14) with the grip (3, shown in Figs. 1-14); and
a grip position adjuster (5, Figs. 1-2) at least partially disposed in the cavity (61, shown in Fig. 2) of the grip (101, Figs. 1-3, 5), the grip position adjuster (11, Figs. 1-3, 5) including a button (51, 52, Figs. 2, 6-7, 11) extending into the central opening (hollow opening at the center of the handle 3, shown in Fig. 1) of the grip (3, Figs. 1-14),
wherein adjustment of the grip position adjuster (5, Figs. 1-2) by depressing of the button (51, 52, Figs. 2, 6-7, 11) of the grip position adjuster (5, Figs. 1-2) permits rotational movement of the grip (3, Figs. 1-14) from being locked a first position to being locked in a second position (handle 3 can be turned to various positions parallel and perpendicular to the nozzle body 1 when the positioning member 5 is pushed creating rotational movement, shown in Figs. 12-13, Paragraphs 0017-0019).
However, Chen does not teach a hose and an adjustable handle that is reversibly connected to the hose as claimed. Rogers teaches a system (entire system, Fig. 1) comprising a hose (104, not explicitly shown, but an end of the handle 111 is reversibly attached to a hose through air inlet 104, Paragraph 0024); and
an adjustable handle (111, Fig. 1) that is reversibly connected to the hose (104, not explicitly shown, but an end of the handle 111 is reversibly attached to a hose through air inlet 104, Paragraph 0024).
Chen and Rogers are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for transporting fluids. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of the hose and adjustable handle taught in Rogers’ system to Chen’s system, to have the motivation of providing interchangeability of parts (Rogers, Paragraphs 0023-0024).
However, Chen and Rogers do not teach the nozzle includes a nozzle body and a nozzle face that is rotatably attached to a first end of the nozzle body, and wherein a second end of the nozzle body is removably attached to the first end of the body, the second end of the nozzle body being opposite to the first end of the nozzle body.
Chen ‘751 teaches an adjustable handle (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising the nozzle (70, 80, Figs. 1-2) includes a nozzle body (70, Figs. 1-2) and a nozzle face (80, Figs. 1-2) that is rotatably attached to a first end of the nozzle body (end of rotation member 70 connecting to nozzle module 80, nozzle module 80 is rotatable relative to water outlet seat 50 and mounted within rotation member 70, shown in Fig. 2, Col. 3, Ln. 4-18, Col. 4, Ln. 21-37), and wherein a second end of the nozzle body (end of rotation member 70 connecting to main body 10, shown in Figs. 1-2) is removably attached to the first end of the body (end of main body 10 connecting to rotation member 70, shown in Fig. 2), the second end of the nozzle body (end of rotation member 70 connecting to main body 10, shown in Figs. 1-2) being opposite to the first end of the nozzle body (end of rotation member 70 connecting to nozzle module 80, shown in Fig. 2).
Chen and Chen ‘751 are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of adjustable handles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the nozzle taught in Chen ‘751’s adjustable handle to Chen’s adjustable handle, to have the motivation of having different water outlet modes controlled by rotation of the parts, which enhances versatility of the water spraying gun and facilitates the user to control the water outlet mode (Chen ‘751, Col. 1, Ln. 34-49).
Regarding claim 12, Chen, as modified by Rogers and Chen ‘751, discloses the system according to claim 11. Chen further discloses the grip position adjuster (5, Figs. 1-2) further includes one or more side protrusions (51, shown in Figs. 1-2) capable of assisting the grip in locking in the first position or the second position (Paragraphs 0004, 0019-0020).
With respect to claim 13, Chen, as modified by Rogers and Chen ‘751, discloses the system according to claim 11. Chen further discloses the first position of the grip (3, shown in Fig. 12) is parallel to the channel (internal channel within nozzle body 1, shown in Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 10-11) of the body (1, shown in Fig. 12), and wherein the second position of the grip (3, shown in Fig. 14) is perpendicular to the channel (internal channel within nozzle body 1, shown in Figs. 1-2, 6-7, 10-11) of the body (1, shown in Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 14, Chen, as modified by Rogers and Chen ‘751, discloses the system according to claim 11. Chen discloses the second end of the body (right end of nozzle body 1, shown in Fig. 1) is configured for reversible connection to a hose capable of providing a fluid such the fluid traverses the body from the first end of the body to the second end of the body via the channel (internal channel within nozzle body 1, right end of nozzle body 1 has threads that are configured for a reversible connection to a hose such the fluid traverses the body from the first end of the body to the second end of the body via the channel, shown in Figs. 1-2, 5-7, 10).
Regarding claim 16, Chen, as modified by Rogers and Chen ‘751, discloses the system according to claim 11. Chen ‘751 further teaches the nozzle (70, 80, Figs. 1-2) includes one or more spray modes permitting a user of the adjustable handle to select a manner in which to discharge the fluid from the nozzle (Col. 4, Ln. 38-67).
In regards to claim 17, Chen, as modified by Rogers and Chen ‘751, discloses the system according to claim 16. Chen ‘751 further teaches the nozzle face (80, Figs. 1-2) includes a rotational mechanism (20, Figs. 1-2) that allows the user of the adjustable handle to select the spray mode by operating the rotational mechanism (user can adjust the flow rate of the water sprinkled from the water sprinkling holes 84 of nozzle module 80 by rotation of the control handle 20, Col. 4, Ln. 48-67).
With respect to claim 18, Chen, as modified by Rogers and Chen ‘751, discloses the system according to claim 16. Chen ‘751 further teaches the nozzle face (80, Figs. 1-2) includes one or more discharge openings (84, shown in Fig. 1) that discharge the fluid according to the spray mode selected by the user (Col. 4, Ln. 38-67).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (EP 4079416 A1) in view of Rogers (US 20050252994 A1) and Chen (US Patent 7,434,751) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Chen (US 20190240684 A1, herein referenced to as Chen ‘684).
In regards to claim 19, Chen, as modified by Rogers and Chen ‘751, discloses the system according to claim 11. However, Chen, Rogers, and Chen ‘751 do not teach the body includes a valve that controls the flow of a fluid from the second end of the body to the first end of the body.
Chen ‘684 teaches a system (entire structure, Fig. 1) comprising the body (10, Fig. 1) includes a valve (11, Fig. 1) that controls the flow of a fluid from the second end of the body to the first end of the body (valve 11 controls on/off operation of the water within the water spray gun, Paragraph 0016).
Chen, Rogers, Chen ‘751, and Chen ‘684 are considered to be analogous art to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of systems for transporting fluids. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of the valve taught in Chen ‘684’s system to Chen’s system, as modified by Rogers and Chen ‘751, to have the motivation of providing improved control of water flow in the system (Chen ‘684, Paragraph 0016).
Regarding claim 20, Chen, as modified by Rogers, Chen ‘751, and Chen ‘684, discloses the system according to claim 19. Chen ‘684 further teaches the valve (11, Fig. 1) includes a selection member that is operable by a user of the adjustable handle to block the fluid from flowing from the second end of the body to the first end of the body (user controls on/off operation of the water within the water spray gun by pulling the water control valve 11, Paragraph 0016).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 6-14, and 16-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anna T Ho whose telephone number is (571)272-2587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM, First Friday of Pay Period off.
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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/ANNA THI HO/Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/STEVEN M CERNOCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights