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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 19, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 objected to because of the following informalities: “the bar,” in line 9, should read --the spray bar.-- Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 12-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boyd (US 3428985).
With respect to claim 12, Boyd discloses a spray bar assembly for a dispenser (Figs. 1-3) adapted to (capable of) dispense cleaning solution, the spray bar assembly comprising: a spray bar (49) adapted to (capable of) receive a cleaning solution from a supply line (16); an angled fitting (45) coupled to a downstream side of the spray bar; a nozzle (47) coupled to a downstream side of the angled fitting and adapted to (capable of) receive the cleaning solution from the spray bar; an aerator (37 and 39) disposed between the angled fitting and the spray bar, the aerator adapted to (capable of) generate soap foam; and a wheel (6 and unmarked wheel in Fig. 1) coupled to the bar.
With respect to claim 13, Boyd discloses the spray bar assembly of claim 12, wherein the nozzle has a nozzle angle relative to the spray bar that is less than 90 degrees (Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 14, Boyd discloses the spray bar assembly of claim 12, wherein the nozzle is adapted to (capable of) produce an adjustable spray (ON/OFF, or high and low pressures) pattern.
With respect to claim 15, Boyd discloses the wherein the nozzle is (axially rotatable joint provided by 49) pivotably coupled to the bar.
With respect to claim 16, Boyd discloses the spray bar assembly of claim 12, wherein the wheel is adapted to (capable of) swivel relative to the spray bar (Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 17, Boyd discloses the spray bar assembly of claim 12, further comprising at least four nozzles (Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 18, Boyd discloses a foam dispenser (Figs. 1-3), comprising:
a handle (1) adapted to (capable of) receive pressurized water;
a soap reservoir (2) coupled to the handle and adapted to contain a cleaning solution;
a first supply line (16) coupled to the soap reservoir;
a spray bar (49) coupled to the first supply line;
a first fitting (35) having an inner tube (defining 29) that is smaller than an outer diameter of the first fitting, the first fitting coupled to the spray bar (Fig. 3);
a second fitting (43) having an inner diameter (defining 41), the second fitting coupled to the first fitting (via 49);
a nozzle (47) coupled to the second fitting;
an aerator (37 and 39) disposed across the inner diameter of the second fitting such that an (left) end of the inner tube abuts the aerator when the second fitting is coupled to the first fitting; and
a wheel (6 and unmarked wheel in Fig. 1) coupled to the spray bar.
With respect to claim 19, Boyd discloses wherein the aerator is a mesh aerator (stainless steel screen 39 abutting the sponge member 37).
With respect to claim 20, Boyd discloses wherein the nozzle is adapted to (capable of) produce an adjustable spray (ON/OFF, or high and low pressures) pattern.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyd (US 3428985) in view of Haworth et al. (US9919347. Haworth hereinafter).
With respect to claim 1, Boyd discloses a soapy foam dispenser (Figs. 1-3) comprising:
a handle (1) adapted to (capable of) receive pressurized water;
an aspirator (3 and elements in 25) coupled to the handle;
a first supply line (18) coupled to the aspirator;
a second supply line (16) coupled to the first supply line and disposed at an angle relative to the first supply line (Fig. 2);
a spray bar (49) coupled to a downstream side of the second supply line;
an angled fitting (45) coupled to a downstream side of the spray bar;
a nozzle (47) coupled to a downstream side of the angled fitting; and
an aerator (37 and 39) disposed between the angled fitting and the spray bar.
Boyd fails to disclose the aspirator having a rotatable knob, wherein selective rotation of the knob determines a variable amount of cleaning solution that is added to the pressurized water, and wherein the variable amount is selected by a position of the rotatable knob between zero amount of the cleaning solution and a maximum amount of the cleaning solution.
However, Haworth teaches a soapy foam dispenser (Figs. 1-8) comprising an aspirator (Fig. 3) coupled to the handle (5), the aspirator having a rotatable knob (16, 17, 18. Fig. 3), wherein selective rotation of the knob determines a variable amount of cleaning solution that is added to the pressurized water, and wherein the variable amount is selected by a position of the rotatable knob between zero amount of the cleaning solution and a maximum amount of the cleaning solution (ON/OFF supply).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of an aspirator with a rotatable knob, as taught by Haworth, to Boyd’s dispenser, in order to provide control spraying of the dispenser (Col. 5, lines 1-54 and Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 2, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses the dispenser further comprising a pivot joint (axially rotatable joint provided by 49) pivotably coupling the first and second supply lines to each other.
With respect to claim 3, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses wherein the spray bar includes (equipped with) a wheel (6 and unmarked wheel in Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 4, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses wherein the nozzle is adapted to (capable of) produce an adjustable (ON/OFF, or high and low pressures) spray pattern.
With respect to claim 6, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses wherein the aerator is disposed between the spray bar and the angled fitting (Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 7, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses the dispenser further comprising an actuator (3) coupled to the handle that is adapted to control the flow of pressurized water through the handle.
With respect to claim 8, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses the soapy foam dispenser of claim 2, wherein the pivot joint is adapted to (capable of) selectively retain the (rotational) angle.
With respect to claim 9, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses wherein the nozzle is disposed on a top of the spray bar and perpendicular to the spray bar and the second supply line (Figs. 1-3).
With respect to claim 10, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses wherein the nozzle is disposed on the top of the spray bar, and the nozzle forms a nozzle angle (90 degrees) relative to the second supply line (Fig. 2).
With respect to claim 11, Boyd’s dispenser modified by Haworth’s aspirator and rotatable knob, Boyd further discloses the dispenser of claim 1, further comprising at least four nozzles (Fig. 2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4 and 6-20 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 CHEE-CHONG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am -5pm.
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.
/CHEE-CHONG LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 June 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights