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 .
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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 30 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted 09/11/2023, 10/11/2023 and 06/24/2025 were filed before the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 4 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a blowing function satisfy following relationships: 16 N<F<23 N, and 53 dBA<LP<57 dBA; or 23 N<F540 N, and 53 dBA<LP0.0121F2-0.0603F+53.065 dBA”, in lines 9 – 11. The limitation is vague in that it is unclear what exactly is being claimed. The claim provided a range of performance values for the garden tool, but does not define any essential technical features of the garden tool that enable it to achieve it. Further, a look into the specification does not provide enough guidance to make all embodiments covered by the scope. For the purpose of examination, the blowing function is optional until the essential technical features of the equation are provided.
Claims 2 – 30 are further rejected as dependents of rejected claim 1.
Further, Claim 4 recites the limitation “a blowing function satisfy following relationships:23 N<F540 N, and 53 dBA<LP<0.0081F2+0.1374F+48.473 dBA” , in lines 3 – 4 . The limitation is vague in that it is unclear what exactly is being claimed. The claim provided a range of performance values for the garden tool, but does not define any essential technical features of the garden tool that enable it to achieve it. Further, a look into the specification does not provide enough guidance to make all embodiments covered by the scope. For the purpose of examination, the blowing function is optional until the essential technical features of the equation are provided.
Lastly, Claim 5 recites the limitation “a blowing function respectively satisfy following relationships:450 cfm<Q<1500 cfm, 1400 Pa<Ppressures5000 Pa, and 700 W<Ppower <3000 W” , in lines 3 – 4 . The limitation is vague in that it is unclear what exactly is being claimed. The claim provided a range of performance values for the garden tool, but does not define any essential technical features of the garden tool that enable it to achieve it. Further, a look into the specification does not provide enough guidance to make all embodiments covered by the scope. For the purpose of examination, the blowing function is optional until the essential technical features of the equation are provided.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 – 20 and 23 – 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao et al. (U. S. Patent Publications No. 2019/0162192 A1).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Gao teaches a garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) with a blowing function, comprising: a housing (housing, 200), provided with an air inlet (air inlet, 203; Abstract); a blowing tube (blowing tube, 600), connected with the housing (200), wherein the blowing tube (600) is provided with an air outlet (air outlet, 601) for air to be blown out (Fig. 2); a fan (fan, 500), rotating around a fan axis (fan axis, 501), for making air flow and blowing the air out from the air outlet (601; Paragraph [0096])); and a motor (motor, 300), configured for driving the fan (500) to rotate around the fan axis (501; Paragraph [0095]); wherein the motor (300) operates at a maximum rotational speed (Paragraph [0116]).
Regarding the limitations “wherein when the motor (300) operates at a maximum rotational speed blowing force F and noise LP of the garden tool (100) with a blowing function satisfy following relationships: 16 N<F<23 N, and 53 dBA<LP<57 dBA; or 23 N<F540 N, and 53 dBA<LP0.0121F2-0.0603F+53.065 dBA”, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to satisfy the blowing function equation, as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 2, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the rotational speed of the motor is 16000 r/min to 26000 r/min (Paragraph [0116]).
Regarding Claim 3, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) wherein a diameter of a projection profile of the fan (500) in a plane perpendicular to the fan axis (501) is 88 mm to 120 mm (Paragraph [0116]).
Regarding Claim 4, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) of claim 1 as discussed above.
Regarding the limitations “wherein when the motor operates at the maximum rotational speed, the blowing force F and the noise LP of the garden tool (100) with a blowing function satisfy following relationships:23 N<F540 N, and 53 dBA<LP<0.0081F2+0.1374F+48.473 dBA”, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to satisfy the blowing function equation, as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 5, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) of claim 1 as discussed above.
Regarding the limitations “wherein an air volume Q, pressure Ppressure, and input power Ppower of the motor of the garden tool (100) with a blowing function respectively satisfy following relationships:450 cfm<Q<1500 cfm, 1400 Pa<Ppressures5000 Pa, and 700 W<Ppower <3000 W”, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to satisfy the blowing function equation, as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 6, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the garden tool (100) is a blower for blowing leaves on the ground (Abstract), the blower (100) comprises an air intake shield (guard, 206; Fig. 1) connected to the air inlet (203; Fig. 1), and the fan (500) is configured to rotate around the fan axis (501) and introduce external air through the air intake shield (206); and the fan (500) comprises: a hub (hub, 504; Fig. 9); and a plurality of fan blades (impellers, 502; Fig. 9) extending outwards from the hub (504) in a radial direction and distributed around the fan axis (501; Fig. 9); the fan blade (502) comprises a pressure surface (Annotated Fig. 9) configured for generating airflow (Paragraph [0120]), and a suction surface (Annotated Fig. 9), the pressure surface (Annotated Fig. 9) and the suction surface (Annotated Fig. 9) intersect in the direction of the fan axis (501) to form a front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) and a rear edge (Annotated Fig. 9), the front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) is located in front of the rear edge (Annotated Fig. 9) in a rotating direction of the fan (Fig. 9), in the direction of the fan axis (501).
PNG
media_image1.png
815
873
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding the limitation “a minimum distance between the front edge (Fig. 9) of the fan blade of the fan (500) and the air intake shield (206) is D5, a length of the garden tool is LO; and wherein 0.15<D5:L0<0”, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to satisfy the blowing function equation, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 7, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the blower (100) further comprises a duct (duct, 400) connected with the housing (200); and the duct (400) comprises an outer guide cover (guide housing, 403), an inner guide cover (401), and first stationary vanes (vanes, 402) connected between the outer guide cover (403) and the inner guide cover (401); and the air inlet (203) and the outer guide cover (403) are sectioned by a plane perpendicular to the fan axis (Fig. 6).
Gao does not explicitly teach the motor is accommodated in the inner guide cover or a ratio of a cross sectional area S1 of a section of the air inlet to a cross sectional area S2 of a section of the outer guide cover is 1.6 to 4.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include the motor is accommodated in the inner guide cover, as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.(MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention modify the tool of Gao to further a ratio of a cross sectional area S1 of a section of the air inlet to a cross sectional area S2 of a section of the outer guide cover is 1.6 to 4, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 8, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the fan (50) comprises: a hub (hub, 504; Fig. 9); and a plurality of fan blades (impellers, 502; Fig. 9) extending outwards from the hub (504) in a radial direction and distributed around the fan axis (501; Fig. 9); the fan blade (502) comprises a pressure surface (S1; Fig. 10) configured for generating airflow (Paragraph [0120]), and a suction surface (opposite of S1), the pressure surface (S1) and the suction surface (opposite of S1) intersect in the direction of the fan axis (501) to form a front edge (Fig. 9) and a rear edge (Fig. 9), the front edge is located in front of the rear edge in a rotating direction of the fan (Fig. 9), in the direction of the fan axis (501) and projections of adjacent front edges and rear edges of two adjacent fan blades do not overlap in a plane perpendicular to the fan axis (501; Fig. 9); and an interval gap is provided between projections of the two adjacent fan blades (502) in the plane perpendicular to the fan axis (501), and the interval gap DO is greater than 0 mm (Fig. 9).
Gao does not explicitly teach a gap less than or equal to 4 mm; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include a gap less than or equal to 4 mm as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 9, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the fan axis (501) is defined as an X-axis (Fig. 9), a line passing through one end point of the front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) close to the hub (52) and perpendicular to and intersected with the fan axis (501) is defined as a Y-axis (Annotated Fig. 9), and a line perpendicular to and intersected with the X-axis and the Y-axis is defined as a Z-axis (Annotated Fig. 9); a maximum distance between projections of the suction surface (Annotated Fig. 9) and the pressure surface (Annotated Fig. 9) in a plane formed by the X-axis and the Z-axis is defined as a maximum thickness h of the fan blade (502; Fig. 9).
Gao does not explicitly teach a ratio of a value of the interval gap DO to a value of the maximum thickness h of the fan blade ranges from 1 to 1.5; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include a ratio of a value of the interval gap DO to a value of the maximum thickness h of the fan blade ranges from 1 to 1.5, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 10, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) according to claim 8, as discussed above.
Regarding the limitation “the fan blades are formed on the hub through injection molding or die casting”; even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). For more information, see MPEP§ 2113.
Regarding Claim 11, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the fan (500) comprises: a hub (504); and a plurality of fan blades (502) extending outwards from the hub (504) in a radial direction and distributed around the fan axis (501), the fan blade (502) comprises a root portion (Annotated Fig. 9) fixed to the hub (504), a top edge (Annotated Fig. 9) spaced from the hub (504), and a front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) and a rear edge (Annotated Fig. 9) extending between the root portion (Annotated Fig. 9) and the top edge (Annotated Fig. 9), and in a rotating direction of the fan (500), the front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) is located in front of the rear edge (Annotated Fig. 9); the fan axis (501) is defined as an X-axis (Annotated Fig. 9), a line passing through one end point of the front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) close to the hub (504) and perpendicular to and intersected with the fan axis (501) is defined as a Y-axis (Annotated Fig. 9), and a line perpendicular to and intersected with the X-axis and the Y-axis is defined as a Z-axis (Annotated Fig. 9); and midpoints of projections of the root portion (Annotated Fig. 9) and the top edge (Annotated Fig. 9) in a plane formed by the X-axis and the Y-axis are correspondingly defined as a first midpoint (Annotated Fig. 9) and a second midpoint (Annotated Fig. 9), a line passing through the first midpoint (Annotated Fig. 9) and parallel to the Y-axis is defined as a first vertical axis (Annotated Fig. 9), and in an airflow flowing direction, the second midpoint (Annotated Fig. 9) is located on a downstream side of the first vertical axis (Annotated Fig. 9) facing the air outlet (203) of the blowing tube (600; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 12, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) according to claim 11, as discussed above.
Gao does not explicitly teach an included angle p between a line connecting the first midpoint and the second midpoint and the first vertical axis is 0° to 9°; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include an included angle p between a line connecting the first midpoint and the second midpoint and the first vertical axis is 0° to 9°, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the angle size of a component. A change in angle size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 13, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein a projection of the front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) in a plane formed by the Y-axis and the Z-axis is defined as a front side projection (Annotated Fig. 9).
Gao does not explicitly teach a line connecting two opposite end points of the front side projection is defined as a chord line L and at least two positions of the front side projection are respectively located on two opposite sides of the chord line L; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include a line connecting two opposite end points of the front side projection is defined as a chord line L and at least two positions of the front side projection are respectively located on two opposite sides of the chord line L, as claimed, since it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 14, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1) according to claim 11, as discussed above.
Gao does not explicitly teach the front side projection at an outer profile of a part of the front edge away from the hub deviates from the chord line L and the part of the front edge away from the hub is concave away from one side of the blowing tube with the air outlet; and the front side projection at an outer profile of a part of the front edge close to the hub deviates from the chord line L and the part of the front edge close to the hub is convex towards the side of the blowing tube with the air outlet.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include the front side projection at an outer profile of a part of the front edge away from the hub deviates from the chord line L and the part of the front edge away from the hub is concave away from one side of the blowing tube with the air outlet; and the front side projection at an outer profile of a part of the front edge close to the hub deviates from the chord line L and the part of the front edge close to the hub is convex towards the side of the blowing tube with the air outlet, as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 15, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the front side projection (Annotated Fig. 9) bends and extends at the outer profile of the part of the front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) away from the hub (504) to form a concave structure (Fig. 9) on the front side projection (Annotated Fig. 9), an opening orientation of the concave structure (Fig. 9) is kept consistent with the rotating direction of the fan (500).
Gao does not explicitly teach a bending angle a between a tangent line, at an intersection point that is of outer profiles of the front edge and the top edge and that is away from the hub of the front side projection and the chord line L is 5 to 15°; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include a bending angle a between a tangent line, at an intersection point that is of outer profiles of the front edge and the top edge and that is away from the hub of the front side projection and the chord line L is 5 to 15°, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the angle size of a component. A change in angle size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 16, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), according to claim 11, as discussed above.
Gao does not explicitly teach the projection of the front edge in the plane formed by the X-axis and the Y-axis is located on one side of the Y-axis towards the air outlet of the blowing tube and an included angle 0 between the Y-axis and a tangent line, at one end point of the front edge close to the hub of the projection of the front edge in the plane formed by the X-axis and the Y-axis is 3° to 25°.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include the projection of the front edge in the plane formed by the X-axis and the Y-axis is located on one side of the Y-axis towards the air outlet of the blowing tube, as claimed, since it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include an included angle 0 between the Y-axis and a tangent line, at one end point of the front edge close to the hub of the projection of the front edge in the plane formed by the X-axis and the Y-axis is 3° to 25°, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the angle size of a component. A change in angle size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 17, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the fan (500) is sectioned by a plane perpendicular to the Y-axis (Annotated Fig. 9) a line connecting intersection points between the section and the front edge (Annotated Fig. 9) and the rear edge (Annotated Fig. 9) is defined as an installation line (Annotated Fig. 9).
Gao does not explicitly teach an installation included angle y between the installation line and the X-axis is gradually increased from the root portion to the top edge.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include an installation included angle y between the installation line and the X-axis is gradually increased from the root portion to the top edge, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the angle size of a component. A change in angle size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 18, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the fan blade (502) further comprises a curved surface transition portion (Annotated Fig. 9) located at a junction of the rear edge (Annotated Fig. 9) and the top edge (Annotated Fig. 9) and approaching the hub (504) from the top edge (Annotated Fig. 9), an arc surface of the curved surface transition portion (Annotated Fig. 9) is convex away from the hub (504).
Gao does not explicitly teach a corner radius of a projection of the curved surface transition portion in the plane formed by the X-axis and the Y-axis is 1 mm to 5 mm.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include a corner radius of a projection of the curved surface transition portion in the plane formed by the X-axis and the Y-axis is 1 mm to 5 mm, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 19, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the blower (100) further comprises a duct (duct, 400) connected with the housing (200); and the duct (400) comprises an outer guide cover (guide housing, 403), an inner guide cover (401), and first stationary vanes (vanes, 402) connected between the outer guide cover (403) and the inner guide cover (401); the first stationary vane (402) comprises a bottom (connected at 401) connected to the inner guide cover (401; Fig. 6), a top (Fig. 6) connected to the outer guide cover (403), and a first front side edge (front side of 402; Fig. 6) and a first rear side edge (rear side of 402; Fig. 6) located in an airflow flowing direction in a spaced manner (Fig. 6); the fan axis (501) is defined as an X-axis, and a plane passing through any point on the fan (501) and perpendicular to the X-axis is defined as a reference plane (also Y plane; Annotated Fig. 9).
Gao does not explicitly teach a distance between one end point of the first front side edge close to the bottom and the reference plane is less than a distance between one end point of the first front side edge close to the top and the reference plane.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include a distance between one end point of the first front side edge close to the bottom and the reference plane is less than a distance between one end point of the first front side edge close to the top and the reference plane, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the distance of a component. A change in distance is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 20, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), according to claim 19, as discussed above.
Gao does not explicitly teach a distance between one end point of the first rear side edge close to the bottom and the reference plane is less than a distance between one end point of the first rear side edge close to the top and the reference plane.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include a distance between one end point of the first rear side edge close to the bottom and the reference plane is less than a distance between one end point of the first rear side edge close to the top and the reference plane, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the distance of a component. A change in distance is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 23, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein a length of the first stationary vane (402) is L1 (Fig. 6), a mid-arc line chord length of the fan blade (502) of the fan (500) is L2 (Fig. 9); and the length of the first stationary vane (402) is defined as a distance between the first front side edge (Fig. 6) of the first stationary vane (402) and the first rear side edge (Fig. 6) of the first stationary vane (402) in the airflow flowing direction (Fig. 6).
Gao does not explicitly teach wherein 3<L1:L2<9;however, it would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include wherein 3<L1:L2<9, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the length of a component. A change in length is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 24, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), wherein the garden tool (100) further comprises a guide cone (406) connected to the inner guide cover (401), and first stationary vanes (402) arranged on the guide cone (406).
Gao does not teach second stationary vanes and the second stationary vanes are located downstream of the first stationary vanes in the airflow flowing direction.
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include second stationary vanes and the second stationary vanes are located downstream of the first stationary vanes in the airflow flowing direction, as claimed, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 25, Gao teaches the garden tool (blower, 100; Fig. 1), according to claim 24.
Gao does not teach a length of the second stationary vane is L3, a chord length of the first stationary vane is L4; wherein 0.2<L3:L4<1; and the length of the second stationary vane is defined as a size of the second stationary vane in the airflow flowing direction; however, it would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of Gao to further include a chord length of the first stationary vane is L4; wherein 0.2<L3:L4<1; and the length of the second stationary vane is defined as a size of the second stationary vane in the airflow flowing direction, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the length of a component. A change in length is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 and 26 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Although Gao teaches a garden tool, the reference fails to teach, suggest or make obvious
an axis of the inner guide cover (34) is defined as an X'-axis, a line passing through the end point of the first front side edge (366) close to the bottom (362) and perpendicular to and intersected with the X'-axis is defined as a Y'-axis, and a line perpendicular to and intersected with the X'-axis and the Y'-axis is defined as a Z'-axis; a part, close to the fan (50), of a stationary vane section (31) obtained by sectioning the first stationary vane (36) by a surface parallel to a plane formed by the X'-axis and the Z'-axis, crosses the X'-axis, and bends and extends in a circumferential direction of the inner guide cover, and a maximum height, in the direction of the Z'-axis, of the stationary vane section (31) obtained by sectioning the first stationary vane (36) by the surface parallel to the plane formed by the X'-axis and the Z'-axis is defined as a bending distance D4 of the first stationary vane (36); and the bending distance D4 of the first stationary vane (36) is gradually increased from the bottom (362) to the top (364); as required by claim 21; or an air intake shield (60) connected to the air inlet, and the fan (50) is configured to rotate around the fan axis (51) and introduce external air from the air inlet through the air intake shield (60); and the air intake shield (60) comprises a three-dimensional air inlet array grid with an outward convex outer envelope surface, and the three-dimensional air inlet array grid comprises: a web (61) extending in a first direction (612), wherein there are a plurality of webs (61), and the plurality of webs (61) are arranged in a second direction (661) at intervals; and a flow-breaking rib (66) extending in the second direction (661), wherein there are a plurality of flow-breaking ribs, each flow-breaking rib (66) is in lap joint to two adjacent webs (61) in the second direction (661), a plurality of grid units (62) arranged at intervals are defined by the plurality of flow-breaking ribs (66) and the plurality of webs (61), and air inlet holes (621) for airflow to penetrate through are formed between adjacent grid units (62);ejection portions (68) of the plurality of flow-breaking ribs (66) protrude relative to the webs (61) in a direction away from the air inlet to form the outward convex outer envelope surface of the three-dimensional air inlet array grid, and wherein the first direction (612) intersects with the second direction (661); as required by claim 26.
Claims 22 and 27 – 30 are further rejected as dependents of rejected claims 21 and 26
Conclusion
Art made of record, however, not relied upon for the current rejection is as follows: U. S. Patent Publication No. 20160108924 A1 to Conrad et al. teaches a backpack blower having a fan frame with an air inlet and an air outlet. A fan assembly is positioned within the fan frame. A motor rotates the fan assembly to move air out the air outlet. A controller is connected to the motor and to a battery pack, for using power from the battery pack to energize the motor and thus rotate the fan. A harness frame is connected to the fan frame and has an opening in air flow communication with the air inlet, so that, when the motor is rotating the fan assembly, air is drawn in through the harness frame opening.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am to 3:30pm.
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, 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.
/KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723