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 .
Objections to the Drawings
1. 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 piece of pool equipment must be shown or the feature canceled from the claims. 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.
Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 112
2. 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 1-8 and 21-23 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.
In particular, independent claim 1 is rejected since the specification is silent on a piece of pool equipment associated with an automatic swimming pool (APC) cleaner that includes the APC, a trolley or docking station. At first glance, the term “associated with” is vague since it is not even clear what the term “pool equipment” relates in the context of the APC since it is not defined in the specification as to be related to the battery, motor, etc. Further, the disclosure does not clearly delineate nor the do the drawings depict how this element is juxtaposed with APC, the trolley or the docking station.
In particular independent claim 6 is rejected since the specification does not define what material would constitute scratch resistant material since the phrase itself is relative and readily defined.
Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)
3. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WIPO Publication (2017/046808) to Witelson et al.
Regarding independent claim 1, Witelson et al. discloses a reflective surface (801) (See paragraphs [0016] and [00220]-[0221]) configured to reflect visual information, wherein the reflective surface (801) is on a piece of pool equipment (807) associated with an automatic swimming pool cleaner (800) with the piece of pool equipment (807) includes the APC (801), a trolley for the APC, or a docking station for the APC (deck) (See paragraph [00220] and claim 4) and the reflective surface is an external surface arranged on the piece of pool equipment (807) to reflect the light as the visual information (See claim 4).
Regarding claim 2, Witelson et al. discloses that the reflective surface (810) is on the APC (800), and that the reflective surface (810) is configured to reflect visual information from a first location to a second location (See claim 3).
Regarding claim 6, Witelson et al. discloses that the reflective surface includes at least one of a scratch-resistant material (battery material) or a fog-resistant material.
Regarding claim 8, Witelson et al. discloses that the reflective surface (810) is backlit (seen from the bottom or back; See paragraph [0220]).
Response to the Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed April 7, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant at page 3 of the remarks, alleges that WIPO Publication (2017/046808) to Witelson et al. includes a spectroscopic device (801) lacks a reflective surface which is “an external surface arranged on the piece of equipment”. However, Witelson et al. discloses that the spectroscopic device (801) as being positioned on the bottom of the pool cleaner (800) and positioned on the navigation system (807). Witelson et al. discloses that the spectroscopic device (801) as further described in claim 4 includes a reflected radiation beam.
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.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D. JENNINGS whose telephone number is (571)270-1536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30pm. EST.
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 S. 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.
/MICHAEL D JENNINGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights