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 .
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 “hook disposed within the interface region” as recited in claim 8 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Examiner notes that a "hook" is only referred to in the specification in paragraph 0029 to be another term for the latch (122) which is associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool (100), not the wet/dry containment vacuum tool (200). 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 Objections
Claims 1-9, 12, 14, 18-19, and 21-23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 1-2, 4-9, and 12 "the body" should read --the tool body-- to maintain consistent terminology throughout the claims.
Regarding claim 3, "controllable couple" should read --controllably couple-- to make the record clear.
Regarding claim 4, “and a permitting fluid to flow” should read --and permitting fluid to flow-- to make the record clear.
Regarding claims 4 and 21, "to be biased the first position" should read --to be biased towards the first position-- to make the record clear.
Regarding claims 4 and 21, "causes the slidable piston conduit and the release valve to be the second position" should read --causes the slidable piston conduit and the release valve to be moved toward the second position-- to make the record clear.
Regarding claim 14, “a vacuum orifice fluidly coupled through the body” should read --a vacuum orifice fluidly coupled through the first tool body-- to maintain consistent terminology throughout the claims.
Regarding claim 14, “a removable canister coupled to the body” should read --a removable canister coupled to the first tool body-- to maintain consistent terminology throughout the claims.
Regarding claims 18 and 21-23, “the first body” should read --the first tool body-- to maintain consistent terminology throughout the claims.
Regarding claims 19 and 22-23, “the second body” should read --the second tool body-- to maintain consistent terminology throughout the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“cleaning fluid nozzle assembly” in claims 1 and 14.
“agitator assembly” in claims 2, 12, and 18-19.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale et al. (US11191414), hereinafter Royale, in view of Clancy et al. (US20040016899), hereinafter Clancy.
Regarding claim 1, Royale discloses a wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 13 element 244), comprising: a tool body (Fig. 13 element 248) including a grip region (see annotated Fig. 13 below), the grip region is configured to couple to a vacuum source (Fig. 1 element 18) and a cleaning fluid source (Fig. 1 element 34); the tool body further including a wet/dry cleaning region disposed opposite the grip region end (see annotated Fig. 13 below); the wet/dry cleaning region includes: a cleaning fluid nozzle assembly (Fig. 14 element 258) including a fluid nozzle (Fig. 14 element 258, where the fluid nozzle is a subset of the fluid nozzle assembly which encompasses the entirety of the fluid nozzle assembly), wherein the fluid nozzle is fluidly coupled to the cleaning fluid source (13:4-10, where the fluid nozzle being used to distribute "cleaning fluid onto a surface to be cleaned" means that the fluid nozzle is fluidly coupled to the cleaning fluid source), and the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly is configured to sealingly couple to a different wet/dry vacuum tool (12:45-48, where the accessory cleaning tool shown as element 142 in Fig. 8 corresponds to a different wet/dry vacuum tool); a controllable fluid delivery actuator (Fig. 15 element 270, where examiner notes that element 270 is the same type of valve as element 176 shown in Figs. 8-12 (i.e. both are spring actuated valves) but the two valves are actuated differently and element 270 either blocks or allows flow whereas element 176 always allows flow but diverts the flow in one of two directions and therefore in this action, any reference to element 176 is being used to teach a corresponding structure present in element 270) to controllably couple and decouple the cleaning fluid source from the fluid nozzle (12:56-62); and a vacuum orifice (the opening shown at element 250 in Fig. 13) fluidly coupled through the body to the vacuum source (Fig. 1, 12:33-39 and 12:29-31).
Royale fails to disclose that the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly includes a flanged ring surrounding the fluid nozzle and the flanged ring configured to sealingly couple to a different wet/dry vacuum tool.
Clancy is also concerned with solving the problem of providing a liquid tight fluid connection between two elements and teaches the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly (Fig. 2 element 26) includes a flanged ring (Fig. 2 element 110) surrounding the fluid nozzle (see annotated Fig. 2 below) and the flanged ring configured to sealingly couple to a different wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 1, 0052, where elements 50 and 205 corresponds to a different wet/dry vacuum tool and where "inner O-ring 162" and "outer O-ring 164" provide a sealing connection). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale discloses the invention except that the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly only has a fluid nozzle instead of having a fluid nozzle and a flanged ring surrounding the fluid nozzle. Clancy shows that a cleaning fluid nozzle assembly having a fluid nozzle and a flanged ring surrounding the fluid nozzle is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide a liquid tight seal between the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly and another structure). Therefore, because these two cleaning fluid nozzle assembly types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a cleaning fluid nozzle assembly having a fluid nozzle and a flanged ring surrounding the fluid nozzle for a cleaning fluid nozzle assembly only having a fluid nozzle.
PNG
media_image1.png
396
504
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
557
808
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses the controllable fluid delivery actuator comprising: a slidable piston conduit (Royale, Fig. 10 element 206) coupled to the cleaning fluid source (Royale, 12:56-62) and to a trigger actuator (Royale, Fig. 15 element 272 (which examiner notes is equivalent to elements 234 and 228 in Fig. 11) corresponds to a trigger actuator, 12:56-62); a release valve (Royale, Fig. 10 elements 208 and 212) coupled to one end of the slidable piston conduit (Royale, Fig. 10); the release valve defined in a chamber of the body (Royale, Figs. 13-15, where the open interior defined by element 248 corresponds to a chamber of the body) and including a gasket (Royale, Fig. 10 element 212) having a liquid tight seal in a first position of the release valve (Royale, 10:26-44, 12:56-62, and 13:26-28, where the controllable fluid delivery actuator (270) being closed corresponds to a first position and the controllable delivery actuator not delivering fluid in the first position means that there is a liquid tight seal) and a permitting fluid to flow around the gasket and release valve in a second position of the release valve (Royale, 12:56-62 and 13:26-28, where the controllable fluid delivery actuator (270) being opened corresponds to a second position); and a spring (Royale, Fig. 9 element 222) surrounding the piston conduit (Royale, Fig. 9), the spring causing the slidable piston conduit and the release valve to be biased the first position (Royale, 12:56-62, where the controllable fluid delivery actuator (270) being "normally closed" means that the spring is biasing the slidable piston and release valve to be biased towards the first position); wherein movement of the trigger actuator causes the slidable piston conduit and the release valve to be the second position to cause cleaning fluid to be delivered to the nozzle (Royale, 12:56-62 and 13:26-28).
Regarding claim 5, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, and further discloses an abutment surface disposed between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region of the body, the abutment surface to sealingly mate with an interface surface of the different wet/dry vacuum tool (Royale, see annotated Fig. 13 above and see Fig. 7 which shows the abutment surface being capable of sealingly mating with an interface surface (the endmost surface shown at element 154 in Fig. 8) of the different wet/dry vacuum tool).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale et al. (US11191414), hereinafter Royale, in view of Clancy et al. (US20040016899), hereinafter Clancy, and in further view of Luyckx (US20210153709).
Regarding claim 2, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to disclose an agitator assembly coupled to wet/dry cleaning region of the body, the agitator assembly including a plurality of filaments extending from the body.
Luyckx is also concerned with a wet/dry vacuum tool and teaches an agitator assembly (Fig. 12 element 156) coupled to wet/dry cleaning region of the body (see annotated Fig. 12 below, where element 150 corresponds to a body), the agitator assembly including a plurality of filaments extending from the body (Fig. 12, 0084, where "a plurality of bristles" corresponds to filaments). It 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 to modify the wet/dry vacuum tool of Royale, as modified, to include an agitator assembly coupled to wet/dry cleaning region of the body, the agitator assembly including a plurality of filaments extending from the body, as taught by Luyckx, because Luyckx teaches that the agitator assembly is used for "scrubbing the surface to be cleaned" (0084), which would increase the cleaning action provided by the wet/dry vacuum tool.
PNG
media_image3.png
591
408
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale et al. (US11191414), hereinafter Royale, in view of Clancy et al. (US20040016899), hereinafter Clancy, and in further view of Marsh et al. (US20150297050), hereinafter Marsh.
Regarding claim 3, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to disclose a controllable latch disposed between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region, the latch configured to controllable couple and decouple the wet/dry vacuum tool to and from the different wet/dry vacuum tool.
Marsh is also concerned with solving the problem of connecting cleaning tools together and teaches a controllable latch (Fig. 5 element 50, 0035), the latch configured to controllable couple and decouple the wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 2 element 22) to and from the different wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 2, 0043, where element 20 corresponds to a different wet/dry vacuum tool). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale, as modified, discloses the invention except that the connection structure between the wet/dry vacuum tool and the different wet/dry vacuum tool is unspecified instead of a controllable latch. Marsh shows that a connection structure being a controllable latch is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide connection between two cleaning structures). Therefore, because these two connection structure types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a connection structure being a controllable latch for an unspecified connection structure.
Royale, as modified, then yields a controllable latch (Marsh, Fig. 5 element 50, 0035) disposed between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region (the controllable latch of Marsh being attached between the abutment surface and the outer surface shown in annotated Fig. 4 below corresponds to the same region as the region in Royale between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region shown in annotated Fig. 13 above), the latch configured to controllable couple and decouple the wet/dry vacuum tool to and from the different wet/dry vacuum tool (Marsh, Fig. 2, 0043, where element 20 corresponds to a different wet/dry vacuum tool).
PNG
media_image4.png
484
445
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to disclose an alignment rail disposed between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region of the body, the alignment rail to mate with an alignment slot associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool.
Marsh is also concerned with solving the problem of connecting cleaning tools together and teaches an alignment rail (see annotated Fig. 4 above), the alignment rail to mate with an alignment slot associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool (see annotated Fig. 3 below and see annotated Fig. 4 above and see Fig. 2 which shows the alignment rail installed in the alignment slot). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale, as modified, discloses the invention except that the mating structure between the wet/dry vacuum tool and the different wet/dry vacuum tool is unspecified instead of an alignment rail and alignment slot interaction. Marsh shows that a mating structure being an alignment rail and alignment slot interaction is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide mating connections between two cleaning structures). Therefore, because these two mating structure types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a mating structure being an alignment rail and alignment slot interaction for an unspecified connection structure.
Royale, as modified, then yields an alignment rail (Marsh, see annotated Fig. 4 above) disposed between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region of the body (the alignment rail of Marsh being attached between the abutment surface and the outer surface shown in annotated Fig. 4 above corresponds to the same region as the region in Royale between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region shown in annotated Fig. 13 above), the alignment rail to mate with an alignment slot associated with the different wet/dry vacuum too (Marsh, see annotated Fig. 3 below and see annotated Fig. 4 above and see Fig. 2 which shows the alignment rail installed in the alignment slot).
PNG
media_image5.png
646
598
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 1, as described above, but fails to disclose at least one alignment recess disposed between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region of the body, the alignment recess to mate with an alignment tab associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool.
Marsh is also concerned with solving the problem of connecting cleaning tools together and teaches an alignment recess (see Marsh annotated Fig. 2 below, where the alignment recess corresponds to the space between the first and second recess walls), the alignment recess to mate with an alignment tab associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 2 and see Marsh annotated Fig. 2 below, 0036, where element 20 corresponds to a different wet/dry vacuum tool). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale, as modified, discloses the invention except that the mating structure between the wet/dry vacuum tool and the different wet/dry vacuum tool is unspecified instead of an alignment recess and alignment tab interaction. Marsh shows that a mating structure being an alignment recess and alignment tab interaction is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide mating connections between two cleaning structures). Therefore, because these two mating structure types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a mating structure being an alignment recess and alignment tab interaction for an unspecified connection structure.
Royale, as modified, then yields at least one alignment recess (Marsh, see Marsh annotated Fig. 2 below, where the alignment recess corresponds to the space between the first and second recess walls) disposed between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region of the body (the at least one recess of Marsh being attached between the abutment surface and the outer surface shown in annotated Fig. 4 above corresponds to the same region as the region in Royale between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region shown in annotated Fig. 13 above), the alignment recess to mate with an alignment tab associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool (Marsh, Fig. 2 and see Marsh annotated Fig. 2 below, 0036, where element 20 corresponds to a different wet/dry vacuum tool)
Claims 8, 11-12, 14, 17, 19, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale et al. (US11191414), hereinafter Royale, in view of Clancy et al. (US20040016899), hereinafter Clancy, and in further view of Johnson et al. (US20220142445), hereinafter Johnson.
Regarding claim 8, Royale discloses a wet/dry containment vacuum tool Fig. 7 element 142) for cooperating with a different wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 13 element 244), the wet/dry containment vacuum tool comprising: a tool body (Fig. 7 element 148) comprising: an interface region (see annotated Fig. 7 below), the interface region comprising: a tool interface surface (Fig. 8, where the endmost surface shown at element 154 in Fig. 8) to mate with an abutment surface of the different wet/dry vacuum tool (see annotated Fig. 13' below for the abutment surface and Fig. 7 which shows the tool interface surface mating with the abutment surface of the different wet/dry vacuum tool); a cleaning fluid interface (Figs. 7 and 8, 11:50-60, where the portion of element 194 shown in Fig. 8 which mates with element 242 shown in Fig. 7 corresponds to a cleaning fluid interface); wherein the cleaning fluid interface is configured to sealingly receive a nozzle associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 7 and Fig. 13, 11:50-54 and 12:45-55, where element 258 shown in Fig. 13 corresponds to a nozzle associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool and is equivalent to element 242 shown in Fig. 7); and a vacuum interface (Fig. 8 element 154) to sealingly mate with a vacuum orifice (the opening shown at element 250 in Fig. 13) associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool (9:3-17); and a wet/dry cleaning region (see annotated Fig. 7 below), the wet/dry cleaning region comprising: a cleaning fluid nozzle (Fig. 11 element 178) fluidly coupled to the cleaning fluid interface (Fig. 11, 10:3-9); and a vacuum orifice (Figs. 7 and 11 element 152) fluidly coupled through the body to the vacuum interface (Fig. 11).
Royale fails to disclose the cleaning fluid interface comprising a ring member and an annular gasket, the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket; wherein the annular gasket is configured to sealingly receive the nozzle associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool; and a containment region disposed between the wet/dry cleaning region and the interface region, the containment region comprising: a removable canister coupled to the body, the canister to receive liquid and/or solids in an airflow path defined between the vacuum orifice and the vacuum interface.
Clancy is also concerned with solving the problem of providing a liquid tight fluid connection between two elements and teaches the cleaning fluid interface (Fig. 1 elements 50 and 205) comprising a ring member (Fig. 1 element 205) and an annular gasket (see annotated Fig. 1 below, 0052, where the annular gasket shown in annotated Fig. 1 below corresponds to "inner O-ring 162" discussed in paragraph 0052), the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket (see annotated Fig. 1 below); wherein the annular gasket is configured to sealingly receive the nozzle (see annotated Fig. 2 above) associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool (0052). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale discloses the invention except that the cleaning fluid interface has an unspecified structure instead of having a ring member and an annular gasket, the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket. Clancy shows that a cleaning fluid interface having a ring member and an annular gasket, the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide a liquid tight seal between the cleaning fluid interface and another structure). Therefore, because these two cleaning fluid interface types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a cleaning fluid interface having a ring member and an annular gasket, the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket for a cleaning fluid interface having an unspecified structure.
Royale, as modified, fails to disclose a containment region disposed between the wet/dry cleaning region and the interface region, the containment region comprising: a removable canister coupled to the body, the canister to receive liquid and/or solids in an airflow path defined between the vacuum orifice and the vacuum interface.
Johnson is also concerned with a wet/dry containment vacuum tool and teaches a containment region (see annotated Fig. 26A below) disposed between the wet/dry cleaning region and the interface region (see annotated Fig. 26A below), the containment region comprising: a removable canister (Fig. 26A element 332, where the removable canister is a subset of the containment region which encompasses the entirety of the containment region) coupled to the body (Fig. 23, 0106, where element 318 corresponds to the body), the canister to receive liquid and/or solids (0106) in an airflow path (the airflow path shown in Fig. 26A) defined between the vacuum orifice (Fig. 24 element 326) and the vacuum interface (Fig. 24 element 338). It 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 to modify the wet/dry containment vacuum tool of Royale, as modified, to include a containment region disposed between the wet/dry cleaning region and the interface region, the containment region comprising: a removable canister coupled to the body, the canister to receive liquid and/or solids in an airflow path defined between the vacuum orifice and the vacuum interface, as taught by Johnson, because Johnson teaches that providing the containment region allows for “a user to pick up large dry debris with the extraction cleaner 10 instead of having to separately vacuum the surface to be cleaned prior to operating the extraction cleaner 10, which is the typical process” (0123).
PNG
media_image6.png
626
794
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
322
494
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
292
590
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
509
856
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 8, as described above, and further discloses the cleaning fluid interface is also configured to receive a flange ring member (Clancy, Fig. 2 element 110) associated with the different wet/dry tool (Clancy, 0050 and 0079), the flange ring member to be sealingly received in the space between the ring member and the annular gasket (Clancy, Figs. 1 and 2, 0052, where "outer O-ring 164" is used to create a seal when the flange ring is received in the space between the ring member and the annular gasket).
Regarding claim 12, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 8, as described above, and further discloses an agitator assembly (Royale, Fig. 7 element 172) coupled to wet/dry cleaning region of the body (Royale, see annotated Fig. 7 above), the agitator assembly including a plurality of filaments extending from the body (Royale, Fig. 7, 9:34-40, where "a plurality of bristles" corresponds to a plurality of filaments).
Regarding claim 14, Royale discloses a cooperating wet/dry vacuum tool set (Fig. 7 element 142 and Fig. 13 element 244, where element 142 is connected to element 244 instead of element 144), comprising: a first tool (Fig. 13 element 244), the first tool having a first tool body (Fig. 13 element 248) including a grip region (see annotated Fig. 13 above), the grip region is configured to couple to a vacuum source (Fig. 1 element 18) and a cleaning fluid source (Fig. 1 element 34); the first tool body further including a first wet/dry cleaning region disposed opposite the grip region end (see annotated Fig. 13 above); the first wet/dry cleaning region includes: a cleaning fluid nozzle assembly (Fig. 14 element 258) including a first fluid nozzle (Fig. 14 element 258, where the first fluid nozzle is a subset of the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly which encompasses the entirety of the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly), wherein the fluid nozzle is fluidly coupled to the cleaning fluid source (13:4-10, where the fluid nozzle being used to distribute "cleaning fluid onto a surface to be cleaned" means that the fluid nozzle is fluidly coupled to the cleaning fluid source); a controllable fluid delivery actuator (Fig. 15 element 270, where examiner notes that element 270 is the same type of valve as element 176 shown in Figs. 8-12 (i.e. both are spring actuated valves) but the two valves are actuated differently and element 270 either blocks or allows flow whereas element 176 always allows flow but diverts the flow in one of two directions and therefore in this action, any reference to element 176 is being used to teach a corresponding structure present in element 270) to controllably couple and decouple the cleaning fluid source from the fluid nozzle (12:56-62); and a vacuum orifice (the opening shown at element 250 in Fig. 13) fluidly coupled through the body to the vacuum source (Fig. 1, 12:33-39 and 12:29-31); and a second tool (Fig. 7 element 142), the second tool having a second tool body (Fig. 7 element 148) that includes an interface region (see annotated Fig. 7 above), a second wet/dry cleaning region (see annotated Fig. 7 above), wherein: the interface region comprising: a tool interface surface (Fig. 8, where the endmost surface shown at element 154 in Fig. 8) to mate with the first wet/dry tool (see annotated Fig. 13' above and Fig. 7 where the abutment surface shown in Fig. 13' above is the mating surface of the first wet/dry tool which the tool interface surface mates with as shown in Fig. 7); a cleaning fluid interface (Figs. 7 and 8, 11:50-60, where the portion of element 194 shown in Fig. 8 which mates with element 242 shown in Fig. 7 corresponds to a cleaning fluid interface); wherein the cleaning fluid interface is configured to sealingly receive the first fluid nozzle associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 7 and Fig. 13, 11:50-54 and 12:45-55, where element 258 shown in Fig. 13 corresponds to a first fluid nozzle associated with the different wet/dry vacuum tool and is equivalent to element 242 shown in Fig. 7); and a vacuum interface (Fig. 8 element 154) to sealingly mate with a vacuum orifice of the first tool (9:3-17); and the second wet/dry cleaning region comprising: a second fluid nozzle (Fig. 11 element 178) fluidly coupled to the cleaning fluid interface (Fig. 11, 10:3-9); and a second vacuum orifice (Figs. 7 and 11 element 152) fluidly coupled through the second tool body to the vacuum interface (Fig. 11).
Royale fails to disclose that the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly includes a flanged ring surrounding the fluid nozzle; a containment region disposed between the wet/dry cleaning region and the interface region; the cleaning fluid interface comprising a ring member and an annular gasket, the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket; wherein the annular gasket is configured to sealingly receive the first fluid nozzle associated with the first tool; and the containment region comprising: a removable canister coupled to the body, the canister to receive liquid and/or solids in an airflow path defined between the second vacuum orifice and the vacuum interface.
Clancy is also concerned with solving the problem of providing a liquid tight fluid connection between two elements and teaches the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly (Fig. 2 element 26) includes a flanged ring (Fig. 2 element 110) surrounding the fluid nozzle (see annotated Fig. 2 above); the cleaning fluid interface (Fig. 1 elements 50 and 205) comprising a ring member (Fig. 1 element 205) and an annular gasket (see annotated Fig. 1 above, 0052, where the annular gasket shown in annotated Fig. 1 above corresponds to "inner O-ring 162" discussed in paragraph 0052), the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket (see annotated Fig. 1 above); wherein the annular gasket is configured to sealingly receive the first fluid nozzle (see annotated Fig. 2 above) associated with the different first tool (0052). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale discloses the invention except that the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly only has a fluid nozzle instead of having a fluid nozzle and a flanged ring surrounding the fluid nozzle and the cleaning fluid interface has an unspecified structure instead of having a ring member and an annular gasket, the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket. Clancy shows that a cleaning fluid nozzle assembly having a fluid nozzle and a flanged ring surrounding the fluid nozzle is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide a liquid tight seal between the cleaning fluid nozzle assembly and another structure) and that a cleaning fluid interface having a ring member and an annular gasket, the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide a liquid tight seal between the cleaning fluid interface and another structure). Therefore, because these two cleaning fluid nozzle assembly types and cleaning fluid interface types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a cleaning fluid nozzle assembly having a fluid nozzle and a flanged ring surrounding the fluid nozzle for a cleaning fluid nozzle assembly only having a fluid nozzle and also to substitute a cleaning fluid interface having a ring member and an annular gasket, the ring member surrounding and spaced from the annular gasket for a cleaning fluid interface having an unspecified structure.
Royale, as modified, fails to disclose a containment region disposed between the wet/dry cleaning region and the interface region, the containment region comprising: a removable canister coupled to the body, the canister to receive liquid and/or solids in an airflow path defined between the vacuum orifice and the vacuum interface.
Johnson is also concerned with a wet/dry containment vacuum tool and teaches a containment region (see annotated Fig. 26A above) disposed between the wet/dry cleaning region and the interface region (see annotated Fig. 26A above); and the containment region comprising: a removable canister (Fig. 26A element 332, where the removable canister is a subset of the containment region which encompasses the entirety of the containment region) coupled to the body (Fig. 23, 0106, where element 318 corresponds to the body), the canister to receive liquid and/or solids (0106) in an airflow path (the airflow path shown in Fig. 26A) defined between the vacuum orifice (Fig. 24 element 326) and the vacuum interface (Fig. 24 element 338). It 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 to modify the wet/dry containment vacuum tool of Royale, as modified, to include a containment region disposed between the wet/dry cleaning region and the interface region; and the containment region comprising: a removable canister coupled to the body, the canister to receive liquid and/or solids in an airflow path defined between the vacuum orifice and the vacuum interface, as taught by Johnson, because Johnson teaches that providing the containment region allows for “a user to pick up large dry debris with the extraction cleaner 10 instead of having to separately vacuum the surface to be cleaned prior to operating the extraction cleaner 10, which is the typical process” (0123).
Regarding claim 17, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 14, as described above, and further discloses the cleaning fluid interface is also configured to receive the flange ring member of the first tool (Clancy, 0050 and 0079), the flange ring member to be sealingly received in the space between the ring member and the annular gasket (Clancy, Figs. 1 and 2, 0052, where "outer O-ring 164" is used to create a seal when the flange ring is received in the space between the ring member and the annular gasket).
Regarding claim 19, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 14, as described above, and further discloses an agitator assembly (Royale, Fig. 7 element 172) coupled to the second wet/dry cleaning region of the second body (Royale, see annotated Fig. 7 above), the agitator assembly including a plurality of filaments extending from the second body (Royale, Fig. 7, 9:34-40, where "a plurality of bristles" corresponds to a plurality of filaments).
Regarding claim 21, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 14, as described above, and further discloses the controllable fluid delivery actuator comprising: a slidable piston conduit (Royale, Fig. 10 element 206) coupled to the cleaning fluid source (Royale, 12:56-62) and to a trigger actuator (Royale, Fig. 15 element 272 (which examiner notes is equivalent to elements 234 and 228 in Fig. 11) corresponds to a trigger actuator, 12:56-62); a release valve (Royale, Fig. 10 elements 208 and 212) coupled to one end of the slidable piston conduit (Royale, Fig. 10); the release valve defined in a chamber of the body (Royale, Figs. 13-15, where the open interior defined by element 248 corresponds to a chamber of the body) and including a gasket (Royale, Fig. 10 element 212) having a liquid tight seal in a first position of the release valve (Royale, 10:26-44, 12:56-62, and 13:26-28, where the controllable fluid delivery actuator (270) being closed corresponds to a first position and the controllable delivery actuator not delivering fluid in the first position means that there is a liquid tight seal) and permitting fluid to flow around the gasket and release valve in a second position of the release valve (Royale, 12:56-62 and 13:26-28, where the controllable fluid delivery actuator (270) being opened corresponds to a second position); and a spring (Royale, Fig. 9 element 222) surrounding the piston conduit (Royale, Fig. 9), the spring causing the slidable piston conduit and the release valve to be biased the first position (Royale, 12:56-62, where the controllable fluid delivery actuator (270) being "normally closed" means that the spring is biasing the slidable piston and release valve to be biased towards the first position); wherein movement of the trigger actuator causes the slidable piston conduit and the release valve to be the second position to cause cleaning fluid to be delivered to the nozzle (Royale, 12:56-62 and 13:26-28).
Regarding claim 22, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 14, as described above, and further discloses an abutment surface disposed between the grip region and the first wet/dry cleaning region of the first body, the abutment surface to sealingly mate with the interface surface of the second body (Royale, see annotated Fig. 13' above and Fig. 7 where the abutment surface shown in Fig. 13' above is the mating surface of the first tool which the interface surface of the second body mates with as shown in Fig. 7).
Claims 9-10 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale et al. (US11191414), hereinafter Royale, in view of Clancy et al. (US20040016899), hereinafter Clancy, in further view of Johnson et al. (US20220142445), hereinafter Johnson, and in further view of Holsten (US20160102675).
Regarding claim 9, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 8, as described above, but fails to disclose an airflow director plate disposed adjacent the removable canister within the body, the airflow director plate to direct airflow in the airflow path toward a bottom end of the canister.
Holsten is also concerned with a wet/dry containment vacuum tool and teaches an airflow director plate (Figs. 2 and 4B elements 206 and 210) disposed adjacent the removable canister (Fig. 2 element 102) within the body (Fig. 2, 0029, where element 106 corresponds to a body), the airflow director plate to direct airflow in the airflow path toward a bottom end of the canister (Figs. 2 and 4B, where the cyclonic airflow which contacts element 206 will be directed in the airflow path toward a bottom of the canister). It 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 to modify the wet/dry containment vacuum tool of Royale, as modified, to include an airflow director plate disposed adjacent the removable canister within the body, the airflow director plate to direct airflow in the airflow path toward a bottom end of the canister, as taught by Holsten, because Holsten teaches that the airflow director plate (specifically element 206) is used to mount a filter inside of the removable canister and examiner finds that providing a filter to the removable canister would further improve the filtration capabilities of the removable canister.
Regarding claim 10, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 9, as described above, and further discloses the airflow director plate comprises a first lobe (Holsten, Figs. 2 and 4B element 206) for directing airflow from the vacuum orifice toward the bottom end of the canister (Holsten, Figs. 2 and 4B, where the cyclonic airflow which hits contacts the first lobe will be directed in the airflow path toward a bottom of the canister), and a second lobe (Holsten, Figs. 2 and 4B element 210) to direct airflow from the canister to the vacuum interface (Holsten, Fig. 4B, 0029, where the second lobe directs airflow further along the airflow path and the vacuum interface is further along the airflow path from the canister and therefore the second lobe directs airflow from the canister to the vacuum interface).
Claims 13, 20, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale et al. (US11191414), hereinafter Royale, in view of Clancy et al. (US20040016899), hereinafter Clancy, in further view of Johnson et al. (US20220142445), hereinafter Johnson, and in further view of Marsh et al. (US20150297050).
Regarding claim 13, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 8, as described above, but fails to disclose a hook disposed within the interface region, the hook configured to controllably couple and decouple the wet/dry containment vacuum tool to and from the different wet/dry vacuum tool.
Marsh is also concerned with solving the problem of connecting cleaning tools together and teaches a hook (see Marsh annotated Fig. 2 above, where the alignment tab corresponds to a hook) disposed within the interface region (Fig. 2 and see Marsh annotated Fig. 2 above, where the area of element 28 which is between the first and second recess walls corresponds to an interface region), the hook configured to controllably couple and decouple the wet/dry containment vacuum tool (Fig. 2 element 20) to and from the different wet/dry vacuum tool (Fig. 2, 0043, where element 22 corresponds to a different wet/dry vacuum tool). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale, as modified, discloses the invention except that the connection structure between the wet/dry containment vacuum tool and the different wet/dry vacuum tool is unspecified instead of a hook. Marsh shows that a connection structure being a hook disposed within the interface region is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide connection between two cleaning structures). Therefore, because these two connection structure types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a connection structure being a hook disposed within the interface region for an unspecified connection structure.
Regarding claim 20, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 14, as described above, but fails to disclose a controllable latch disposed between the grip region and the first wet/dry cleaning region, the latch configured to controllably couple and decouple the first tool to and the second tool.
Marsh is also concerned with solving the problem of connecting cleaning tools together and teaches a controllable latch (Fig. 5 element 50, 0035), the latch configured to controllably couple and decouple the first tool (Fig. 2 element 22) to and the second tool (Fig. 2, 0043, where element 20 corresponds to a second tool). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale, as modified, discloses the invention except that the connection structure between the first tool and second tool is unspecified instead of a controllable latch. Marsh shows that a connection structure being a controllable latch is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide connection between two cleaning structures). Therefore, because these two connection structure types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a connection structure being a controllable latch for an unspecified connection structure.
Royale, as modified, then yields a controllable latch (Marsh, Fig. 5 element 50, 0035) disposed between the grip region and the first wet/dry cleaning region (the controllable latch of Marsh being attached between the abutment surface and the outer surface shown in annotated Fig. 4 above corresponds to the same region as the region in Royale between the grip region and the first wet/dry cleaning region shown in annotated Fig. 13 above), the latch configured to controllably couple and decouple the first tool and the second tool (Marsh, Fig. 2, 0043, where element 20 corresponds to a second tool).
Regarding claim 23, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 14, as described above, but fails to disclose an alignment rail disposed between the grip region and the first wet/dry cleaning region of the first body, and an alignment slot disposed in the interface region of the second body, the alignment rail to mate with the alignment slot.
Marsh is also concerned with solving the problem of connecting cleaning tools together and teaches an alignment rail (see annotated Fig. 4 above), and an alignment slot (see annotated Fig. 3 above) disposed in the interface region of the second body (Fig. 3, where element 28 corresponds to the interface region of the second body), the alignment rail to mate with the alignment slot (see annotated Fig. 3 above and see annotated Fig. 4 above and see Fig. 2 which shows the alignment rail installed in the alignment slot). Pursuant of MPEP 2144.06-II, it has been held obvious to substitute equivalents for the same purpose. Royale, as modified, discloses the invention except that the mating structure between the wet/dry vacuum tool and the different wet/dry vacuum tool is unspecified instead of an alignment rail and alignment slot interaction. Marsh shows that a mating structure being an alignment rail and alignment slot interaction is an equivalent structure known in the art (i.e. both provide mating connections between two cleaning structures). Therefore, because these two mating structure types were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to substitute a mating structure being an alignment rail and alignment slot interaction for an unspecified connection structure.
Royale, as modified, then yields an alignment rail (Marsh, see annotated Fig. 4 above) disposed between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region of the body (the alignment rail of Marsh being attached between the abutment surface and the outer surface shown in annotated Fig. 4 above corresponds to the same region as the region in Royale between the grip region and the wet/dry cleaning region shown in annotated Fig. 13 above), the alignment rail to mate with an alignment slot associated with the different wet/dry vacuum too (Marsh, see annotated Fig. 3 above and see annotated Fig. 4 above and see Fig. 2 which shows the alignment rail installed in the alignment slot).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale et al. (US11191414), hereinafter Royale, in view of Clancy et al. (US20040016899), hereinafter Clancy, in further view of Johnson et al. (US20220142445), hereinafter Johnson, and in further view of Luyckx (US20210153709).
Regarding claim 18, Royale, as modified, discloses the limitations of claim 14, as described above, but fails to disclose an agitator assembly coupled to the first wet/dry cleaning region of the body, the agitator assembly including a plurality of filaments extending from the first body.
Luyckx is also concerned with a wet/dry vacuum tool and teaches an agitator assembly (Fig. 12 element 156) coupled to the first wet/dry cleaning region of the first body (see annotated Fig. 12 above, where element 150 corresponds to a first body), the agitator assembly including a plurality of filaments extending from the first body (Fig. 12, 0084, where "a plurality of bristles" corresponds to filaments). It 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 to modify the wet/dry vacuum tool of Royale, as modified, to include an agitator assembly coupled to the first wet/dry cleaning region of the first body, the agitator assembly including a plurality of filaments extending from the first body, as taught by Luyckx, because Luyckx teaches that the agitator assembly is used for "scrubbing the surface to be cleaned" (0084), which would increase the cleaning action provided by the wet/dry vacuum tool.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB A HOLIZNA whose telephone number is (571)272-5659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-4:30.
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.
/C.A.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723