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 .
Status of Claims
In an amendment filed 12/18/2025, Applicant amended claims 1, 4, 6-8 and cancelled claims 2-3, 5. This amendment is acknowledged. Claims 1, 4, and 6-14 are pending and are currently being examined.
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 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, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. KR 2002-0045629 in view of Anuskiewicz US Pat. No. 8,622,317.
In Reference to Claim 1
Lee teaches:
A decorative attachment system (decorative vacuum system, Fig. 1), comprising:
a robotic vacuum having a top surface (robotic vacuum body 100 having an upper surface with a coupling region 7/8 located therein to detachably receive different accessories therein, Fig. 1);
an ornamentation having an exterior surface (toy/ornamentation 200b having an exterior surface, Fig. 1);
a coupler releasably coupling the ornamentation to the top surface (a coupling arrangement is formed between the sleeve female connector 7/8 in the vacuum body upper surface and the male connector at the bottom of the toy/ornamentation 200b to allow removable attachment of the toy/ornamentation in the coupler of the vacuum, Fig. 1, abstract); and
the coupler comprising a pair of mating members being releasably coupled to each other, one of the mating members being attached to the exterior surface and the other of the mating members being attached to the top surface (Fig. 1 shows the male coupling portion extending from the exterior bottom of the toy/ornamentation head 200b is inserted into the female coupling sleeve 7/8 of the top surface of the vacuum body to releasably couple the ornamentation to the vacuum body in the same manner as the other replaceable portions, such as cleaner 200a, may be replaceably coupled thereto, Fig. 1, abstract), wherein one of the mating members defines a female coupler and the other of the mating members defines a male coupler (Fig. 1 shows the male coupling portion extending from the exterior bottom of the toy/ornamentation head 200b is inserted into the female coupling sleeve 7/8 of the top surface of the vacuum body to releasably couple the ornamentation to the vacuum body in the same manner as the other replaceable portions, such as cleaner 200a, may be replaceably coupled thereto, Fig. 1, abstract), the female coupler further comprising a plate and a sleeve extending away from the plate (sleeve 7 extends upward from the bottom plate at the bottom of the coupler 8), the male coupler further comprising a rod being removably extendable into the sleeve (Fig. 1 shows the male coupling portion/rod extending from the exterior bottom of the toy/ornamentation head 200b is inserted into the female coupling sleeve 7/8).
Lee fails to teach:
A pair of pins being positioned on the rod and extending laterally outwardly therefrom, the pair of pins extending in opposite directions with respect to each other; and the sleeve including a pair of slots positioned therein to releasably receive the pair of pins and a plurality of stops being mounted to the sleeve, each of the pair of slots having an edge having at least one of the stops positioned thereon to retain the pins within a respective one of the pair of slots.
Further, Anuskiewicz teaches:
A similar connecting means for securing a sleeve-like coupler with a rod-like coupler, including a pair of opposite laterally extending pins received in a pair of respective slots having edges with stop positioned therein to retain the pins with the respective slot (rod 14 with pair of opposite laterally extending pins 32 received within slots 30 of cylinder 28 with locking stops 34/32a, Fig. 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the invention of Lee to have further included a pair of locking pins with respective locking slots and stops in order to more securely lock the removably couplable portion (toy) in place on the base portion (vacuum) during use as taught by Anuskiewicz (Col. 1 lines 43-61, Col. 3 line 16 – Col. 4 line 19). Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the connecting means with any known equivalent locking means between the toy and the vacuum as the selection of the respective locking portions to have been any known equivalent and similar locking means that solve the same problems and provide the same function (secure releasable coupling) is merely a matter of design choice and further this type of couplings (pairs of rods received in slots with stops therein) is a known and common selective locking means between sleeve-like and rod-like coupling portions as taught by Anuskiewicz (Col. 1 lines 43-61, Col. 3 line 16 – Col. 4 line 19).
In Reference to Claim 4
Lee as modified by Anuskiewicz teaches:
The decorative attachment system of claim 1 wherein the sleeve has a cylindrical shape (Lee: sleeve 7 is cylindrical to accept the bottom of toy 200b therein, Fig. 1).
In Reference to Claim 6
Lee as modified by Anuskiewicz teaches:
The decorative attachment system of claim 1, further comprising a plurality of stops being mounted to the sleeve, each of the pair of slots having an edge having at least one of the stops positioned thereon to retain the pins within a respective one of the pair of slots (Anuskiewicz: rod 14 with pair of opposite laterally extending pins 32 received within slots 30 of cylinder 28 with locking stops 34/32a, Fig. 1-5).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee and Anuskiewicz as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Bradley US Pat. No. 9,895,621.
In Reference to Claim 7-8
Lee as modified by Anuskiewicz teaches:
The decorative attachment system of claim 1 as rejected above.
Lee fails to teach:
An adhesive securing the coupler to the top surface, wherein the adhesive is positioned on the plate opposite the sleeve.
Further, Bradley teaches:
A similar ornamental/toy display device (Fig. 1-2) having a mount coupling the toy to a playing surface, the mount including a plate (6) having an upper surface with a sleeve member extending upward therefrom to receive the ornament therein (sleeve member 4) and an opposite lower surface, the lower surface having adhesive placed thereon to secure the mount plate to a playing surface (base plate 6 having adhesive on the lower surface to secure the toy device to a surface for use, Fig. 1-2, Col. 4 lines 1-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the invention of Lee to have further included an adhesive on a bottom surface of the coupling mount in order to allow it to remain secured to the surface during use as well as allow the mount to be removed for use on another surface as desired as is known in the art and as taught by Bradley (Col. 4 lines 1-15).
Claims 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee and Anuskiewicz as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Teel et al. US Pub. No. 2012/0088434.
In Reference to Claims 9-13
Lee as modified by Anuskiewicz teaches:
The decorative attachment system of claim 1 as rejected above.
Lee fails to teach:
A light emitter being mounted on the ornamentation, a power supply including a battery being attached to and positioned within the ornamentation., a switch mounted on the ornamentation being electrically coupled to the power supply and light emitter, the switch being actuated to turn the light emitter on or off.
Further, Teel teaches:
A similar decorative ornamental toy figure (100, Fig. 1-8) having a character body and including a light emitter mounted to the body (light sources 204/206/208 mounted to the body 102, [0019]-[0020]), a power supply including a battery being attached to and positioned within the ornamentation, a switch mounted on the ornamentation being electrically coupled to the power supply and light emitter, the switch being actuated to turn the light emitter on or off (switch 302 allows light sources 204/206/208 to be selectively activated and deactivated (wherein the switch may be in numerous forms on the body, including a push button), [0021], wherein the light sources, switch, controller, and other common electronic features such as a speaker and microphone are inherently known in the toy art to be battery powered so they can be easily replaced and as needed and to provide cheap power to the electronic components that is inherently required in the teachings of Teel where Fig. 3 shows the body/housing having an unlabeled a battery compartment which is where the inherent batteries would be stored (right most figure shows the standard battery compartment just below the 304 label)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the invention of Lee to have further included electronic features, such as lights, in order to make the toy more fun, aesthetically pleasing, and interactive as adding light features to toy characters/ornamentations is common and known in the art and as taught by Teel ([0003], [0005], [0016]-[0024]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. KR 2002-0045629 in view of Anuskiewicz US Pat. No. 8,622,317, Teel et al. US Pub. No. 2012/0088434, and Bradley US Pat. No. 9,895,621.
In Reference to Claim 14
Lee teaches:
A decorative attachment system (decorative vacuum system, Fig. 1), comprising:
a robotic vacuum having a top surface (robotic vacuum body 100 having an upper surface with a coupling region 7/8 located therein to detachably receive different accessories therein, Fig. 1);
an ornamentation having an exterior surface (toy/ornamentation 200b having an exterior surface, Fig. 1);
a coupler releasably coupling the ornamentation to the top surface (a coupling arrangement is formed between the sleeve female connector 7/8 in the vacuum body upper surface and the male connector at the bottom of the toy/ornamentation 200b to allow removable attachment of the toy/ornamentation in the coupler of the vacuum, Fig. 1, abstract);
the coupler comprising a pair of mating members being releasably coupled to each other, one of the mating members being attached to the exterior surface and the other of the mating members being attached to the top surface (Fig. 1 shows the male coupling portion extending from the exterior bottom of the toy/ornamentation head 200b is inserted into the female coupling sleeve 7/8 of the top surface of the vacuum body to releasably couple the ornamentation to the vacuum body in the same manner as the other replaceable portions, such as cleaner 200a, may be replaceably coupled thereto, Fig. 1, abstract);
one of the mating members defining a female coupler;
one of the mating members defining a male coupler (Fig. 1 shows the male coupling portion extending from the exterior bottom of the toy/ornamentation head 200b is inserted into the female coupling sleeve 7/8 of the top surface of the vacuum body to releasably couple the ornamentation to the vacuum body in the same manner as the other replaceable portions, such as cleaner 200a, may be replaceably coupled thereto, Fig. 1, abstract);
the female coupler including a plate and a sleeve extending away from the plate, the sleeve having a cylindrical shape (the sleeve 7 extends upward in a cylindrical shape from a flat bottom plate at 8, Fig. 1);
the male coupler including:
a rod being removably extendable into the sleeve (Fig. 1 shows the male coupling portion/rod extending from the exterior bottom of the toy/ornamentation head 200b is inserted into the female coupling sleeve 7/8);
Lee fails to teach:
A pair of pins being positioned on the rod and extending laterally outwardly therefrom, the pair of pins extending in opposite directions with respect to each other; and the sleeve including a pair of slots positioned therein to releasably receive the pair of pins and a plurality of stops being mounted to the sleeve, each of the pair of slots having an edge having at least one of the stops positioned thereon to retain the pins within a respective one of the pair of slots; an adhesive securing the coupler to the top surface on the plate opposite the sleeve; and a light emitter being mounted on the ornamentation, a power supply including a battery being attached to and positioned within the ornamentation., a switch mounted on the ornamentation being electrically coupled to the power supply and light emitter, the switch being actuated to turn the light emitter on or off.
Further, Anuskiewicz teaches:
A similar connecting means for securing a sleeve-like coupler with a rod-like coupler, including a pair of opposite laterally extending pins received in a pair of respective slots having edges with stop positioned therein to retain the pins with the respective slot (rod 14 with pair of opposite laterally extending pins 32 received within slots 30 of cylinder 28 with locking stops 34/32a, Fig. 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the invention of Lee to have further included a pair of locking pins with respective locking slots and stops in order to more securely lock the removably couplable portion (toy) in place on the base portion (vacuum) during use as taught by Anuskiewicz (Col. 1 lines 43-61, Col. 3 line 16 – Col. 4 line 19). Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the connecting means with any known equivalent locking means between the toy and the vacuum as the selection of the respective locking portions to have been any known equivalent and similar locking means that solve the same problems and provide the same function (secure releasable coupling) is merely a matter of design choice and further this type of couplings (pairs of rods received in slots with stops therein) is a known and common selective locking means between sleeve-like and rod-like coupling portions as taught by Anuskiewicz (Col. 1 lines 43-61, Col. 3 line 16 – Col. 4 line 19).
Further, Teel teaches:
A similar decorative ornamental toy figure (100, Fig. 1-8) having a character body and including a light emitter mounted to the body (light sources 204/206/208 mounted to the body 102, [0019]-[0020]), a power supply including a battery being attached to and positioned within the ornamentation, a switch mounted on the ornamentation being electrically coupled to the power supply and light emitter, the switch being actuated to turn the light emitter on or off (switch 302 allows light sources 204/206/208 to be selectively activated and deactivated (wherein the switch may be in numerous forms on the body, including a push button), [0021], wherein the light sources, switch, controller, and other common electronic features such as a speaker and microphone are inherently known in the toy art to be battery powered so they can be easily replaced and as needed and to provide cheap power to the electronic components that is inherently required in the teachings of Teel where Fig. 3 shows the body/housing having an unlabeled a battery compartment which is where the inherent batteries would be stored (right most figure shows the standard battery compartment just below the 304 label)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the invention of Lee to have further included electronic features, such as lights, in order to make the toy more fun, aesthetically pleasing, and interactive as adding light features to toy characters/ornamentations is common and known in the art and as taught by Teel ([0003], [0005], [0016]-[0024]).
Further, Bradley teaches:
A similar ornamental/toy display device (Fig. 1-2) having a mount coupling the toy to a playing surface, the mount including a plate (6) having an upper surface with a sleeve member extending upward therefrom to receive the ornament therein (sleeve member 4) and an opposite lower surface, the lower surface having adhesive placed thereon to secure the mount plate to a playing surface (base plate 6 having adhesive on the lower surface to secure the toy device to a surface for use, Fig. 1-2, Col. 4 lines 1-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the invention of Lee to have further included an adhesive on a bottom surface of the coupling mount in order to allow it to remain secured to the surface during use as well as allow the mount to be removed for use on another surface as desired as is known in the art and as taught by Bradley (Col. 4 lines 1-15). Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have formed the plate on the top surface of the vacuum as it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, modification of the respective coupling portions between the rod-like and sleeve-like coupling sections of the primary reference could be modified to include other similar structural removable couplings between rod-like and sleeve-like coupling sections that allow for secure coupling during use and easy uncoupling when the portions need to be replaced or changed or removed as needed or preferred. The modification to further include a pair of opposite laterally extending pins received within slots of a cylinder with locking stops at the ends of the slots allows for a more secure and consistent coupling of the pins and prevent premature uncoupling within the slots as taught by Anuskiewicz (Col. 1 lines 43-61, Col. 3 line 16 – Col. 4 line 19 (Col. 4 lines 1-19)). Further, both the couplings of the primary and secondary references use the couplings in the same releasable manner to solve the same particular problem with which the invention was concerned (secure but removably coupling between an attachment portion and a base portion) and therefore one having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use other known and similar equivalent couplings that provide the same functional removable coupling relationship between respective couplable portions.
In response to applicant's argument that Anuskiewicz is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, modification of the respective coupling portions between the rod-like and sleeve-like coupling sections of the primary reference could be modified to include other similar structural removable couplings between rod-like and sleeve-like coupling sections that allow for secure coupling during use and easy uncoupling when the portions need to be replaced or changed or removed as needed or preferred, which is the same particular problem with which the invention was concerned (secure but removably coupling between an attachment portion and a base portion) and therefore one having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to use other known and similar equivalent couplings that provide the same functional removable coupling relationship between respective couplable portions.
Brief Discussion of Other Prior Art References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the references cited page for publications that are noted for containing similar subject matter as the applicant. For example, Todokoro (2015/0273352), Yamamoto (JP2013066497), Halloran (9,392,920), Tanaka (JP2003/070690), and Tonozuka (JP2000135186) teach a similar decorative toys/ornamentations attachable to a robotic vacuum cleaner or similar device.
Conclusion
If the applicant or applicant’s representation has any questions or concerns regarding this office action or the application they are welcome to contact the examiner at the phone number listed below and schedule and interview to discuss the outstanding issues and possible amendments to expedite prosecution of this application.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER R NICONOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-7419. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8-6 MST.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/ALEXANDER R NICONOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711