DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the communication filed 12/31/2025.
Claims 1-15 are pending and have been examined.
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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeji (JP2020058601A) (cited by Applicant) (machine translation attached in prior action) in view of Kwon et al. (US 2018/0305851 A1) (previously cited) and Kim et al. (US 2020/0096954 A1).
Re claim 1, Takeji discloses a user terminal device (ref. 5 or ref. 13) comprising: an input interface (¶ [0019] touch panel, ¶ [0014] touch panel); a communication interface (¶ [0013] Internet, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth) configured to communicate with an external device; and a processor (¶ [0119] computer, ¶ [0015] control device 10) operatively connected with the input interface and the communication interface, wherein the processor is configured to:
based on clothing information being input through the input interface, control the communication interface to transmit the clothing information to a server (¶ [0022] based on the user’s washing machine usage environment, for example, a large amount of clothes once, a large amount of clothes that are heavily soiled, ¶ [0027] type of clothes, the amount of clothes, and the type of stains), and
receive, from the server through the communication interface, recommended course information generated by the server based on the clothing information (¶ [0022] recommended driving course,¶ [0028]), wherein the recommended course information comprises first course information corresponding to a first clothing treating device (¶ [0022], [0028] recommended driving course)
generate user-customized course information by editing the recommended course information based on an editing command being input to the input interface (¶ [0022], [0026], [0032]-[033] driving course can be created by oneself….function of correct and editing the content of the washing operaton regarding the downloaded driving course), and
control the communication interface to transmit the user-customized course information to the server (¶ [0026], [0030]-[0031] upload to the website),
wherein the user-customized course information comprises course name information and course description information, based on the editing command (¶ [0020] photograph, [0024] driving course name, [0026] images and explanations, [0028] user’s comments),
wherein a first clothing treating operation is performed by the first clothing treating device (¶ [0031] execute).
Takeji does not explicitly disclose wherein the recommended course information comprises both first course information and a second course information corresponding to a second clothing treating device, wherein the second clothing treating device is configured to perform a second clothing treating operation after the first clothing treating operation. However, Kwon discloses it is well-known in the washing machine and dryer art to provide a server (ref. 10 ¶ [0256]-[0257] provide a customized course) recommending course information (abstract, recommendation) for both a first treating device and a second treating device (¶ [0117]-[0120] course used in a washing machine and a drying course, see also figs. 1a-d with ref. 1d clearly depicting a dryer; see also ¶ [0042] “recommend any one course or option of random courses for setting a method for performing one or more of a washing cycle for removing particles of laundry and a drying cycle for removing water of laundry…”), and a second clothing treating operation after a first clothing treating operation (inherent, drying occurs after washing; see also ¶ [0019] perform washing of laundry from beginning to end. At this time, the course may also include a drying cycle).
Examiner further notes Claim 1 is drawn to a user terminal device, whereas the operation of the clothing treating devices and/or the information on the server are merely intended uses of the processor of the user terminal device. See MPEP 2114.
Examiner asserts that Takeji/Kwon fully satisfies the limitation of “both”, as claimed, in that Kwon teaches the physically separate dryer (fig. 1) and recommending a drying cycle, and further explicitly stating that the invention as applied to the washing machine embodiment is applicable to a drying course used in a dryer (¶ [0118]), such that even separate recommendation requests for the washing machine and the dryer satisfy the limitations as claimed.
Nonetheless, to any extent Kwon does not explicitly state the washing course and the drying course are related to the same clothing information/batch of laundry, Kim clearly discloses recommended course information comprises both first course information corresponding to a first clothing treating device (claim 17, ¶ [0027], [0043] set a wash mode of a washing machine…according to the result of analyzing the clothing image) and second course information corresponding to a second clothing treating device (claim 18, ¶ [0028], [0044] set a dry mode of a clothes dryer…to dry the clothes taken out of the washing machine according to the result of analyzing the clothing image) configured to perform a second clothing treating operation corresponding to the second course information after a first clothing treating operation corresponding to the first course information is performed by the first clothing treating device (¶ [0028], [0044] dry the clothes taken out of the washing machine) (see also ¶ [0045] automatically set a wash mode and/or a dry mode…only needs to put clothes into the washing machine and/or the clothes dryer).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to modify the server of Takeji to further include a second course information for a second clothing treating device, as suggested by Kwon, in order to provide control and recommendations for the entire laundry process from wash to dry; and to further include both a first course information and a second course information, as suggested by Kim, in order to fully automate setting of courses and only needing to put clothes into the washing machine and the dryer.
Re claims 2-3, Takeji further discloses further comprising a memory (¶ [0019] memory, ¶ [0017] storage device 14) configured to store a course list comprising a plurality of clothing treatment courses, and wherein the processor is further configured to update the course list to comprise the generated user-customized course information, and store the updated course list in the memory (¶ [0022]-[0023] constantly updated). wherein the processor is further configured to control the communication interface to transmit, to the server, editing information based on the editing command being input to the input interface (¶ [0017], [0020], [0022], [0026], [0030]-[0031] created driving course can be uploaded; [0032]-[003] editing the content).
Re claims 4-5, Takeji further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to control the communication interface to transmit, to a clothing treating device, the user- customized course information (¶ [0008]-[0009] smartphone as an external information terminal….connected to the respective washing machines), wherein the user-customized course information comprises course name information and course description information, based on the editing command (see fig. 4 Upper title is the course name and the course description below the photo; see also ¶ [0026] uploading…with images and explanations). wherein the processor is further configured to control the communication interface to transmit, to the first clothing treating device, a control signal to perform a processing operation corresponding to the user-customized course information corresponding to an operation of the first clothing treating device, based on a start command for executing a user-customized course being an input to the input interface (¶ [0008]-[0009]).
Re claims 6-7, Takeji further discloses further comprising a display (¶ [0019] a display device; ¶ [0014] display device), wherein the processor is further configured to control the display to display a user interface for receiving the clothing information (¶ [0016] type, weight, and type of dirt of clothes, [0022], [0027]). wherein the clothing information comprises at least one of a material, a type, a color, or dryness of clothes (¶ [0016], [0022], [0027] type).
Re claims 8-14, Claims 8-14 read as a method claim to processor steps of claim 1 and is therefore satisfied by Takeji as discussed above.
Re claim 15, Independent claim 15 defines over the above only in a system including the server and a first clothing treating device and a second clothing treating device. Takeji further discloses the server (ref. 4) and clothing treating device (ref. 2), and it being prima facie obvious to duplicate the updating and storage course list and edited user-customized course information to all clothing treating devices of Kwon.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments as to Kwon, Examiner respectfully disagrees. As cited in the rejection above, Kwon explicitly discloses both a washing machine and a dryer, and providing recommended courses and execution of said courses on all of such machines. Here, Applicant appears to admit and Kwon explicitly discloses “a laundry treating apparatus, which may recommend any one course or option of random courses for setting a method for performing one or more of a washing cycle for removing particles of laundry and a drying cycle for removing water of laundry…” (¶ [0042]).
Moreover, Applicant’s arguments are not commensurate with the scope of the claim. Here, Kwon makes it clear that the teachings are equally applicable to a standalone dryer and its drying course (see fig. 1, ¶ [0118]). It follows that assuming arguendo, even if, Kwon only taught the recommended courses “independently”, here, a first recommendation request for a first course information for the washing machine, followed by a second recommendation request after completion of the washing machine for a second course information for the dryer, would still read on the limitations as claimed since the server provides “both” information, albeit at separate times, and each based on clothing information being input. And here, it is obvious that the clothing information going into the washing machine will be the same clothing information going into the dryer, since it is the same laundry.
Nonetheless, Examiner has cited Kim et al. (US 2020/0096954 A1) for explicitly disclosing a server using the same clothing information input, to output both a first information for a washing machine and a second information for a dryer [and additional clothing treatment apparatuses].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7299. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am to 6:30pm.
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, Michael Barr can be reached on 571-272-1414. 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.
KEVIN G. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/KEVIN G LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights