DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Lanew (EP 3431650 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Lanew discloses a laundry treating apparatus comprising:
a cabinet (Fig. 1, 10) defining an external surface of the laundry treating apparatus;
a drum (Fig. 1, 11) rotatably disposed in the cabinet and configured to receive laundry therein;
an air circulating channel (Fig. 2, 15) configured to receive air from the drum and resupply the air to the drum;
a heat exchanger assembly including an evaporator (Fig. 1, 17) disposed inside the air circulating channel and configured to condense moisture contained in the air (abstract), and a condenser (Fig. 1, 18) disposed at a position spaced apart from the evaporator and configured to heat the air (pg. 8, “In the Fig. 1…”);
a communication hole (Fig. 5; 36c and/or 37c) defined at one face of the air circulating channel and configured to discharge water condensed in the evaporator to an outside of the air circulating channel;
a water collector (Figs. 2/3; 21) disposed outside the air circulating channel and configured to be in fluid communication with the communication hole and to collect the water discharged from the communication hole;
a water storage tank (removable condensate collector) disposed inside the cabinet and configured to receive the water collected in the water collector (pg. 9, “By the bottom module…”) (note: the removable condensate collector is not shown in the figures but it is removable from within the dryer 1 to be emptied outside the dryer); and
a pump (Fig. 2; condensate pump in chamber 4) disposed in the water collector and configured to supply the water to the water storage tank or to the heat exchanger assembly (pg. 9, “By the bottom module…”),
wherein a bottom face of the water collector includes:
a first inclined portion (Fig. 2, 21a) inclined to decrease in height from one side of the communication hole toward the pump, and
a second inclined portion (Fig. 3, 22) inclined to decrease in height from the other side of the communication hole toward the pump,
wherein a bottom face of the air circulating channel has a third inclined portion (Fig. 5; 36d) inclined to decrease in height toward the communication hole.
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.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanew (EP 3431650 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Lanew discloses the laundry treating apparatus of claim 20, except wherein each of an inclination angle of the first inclined portion and an inclination angle of the second inclined portion are greater than an inclination angle of the third inclined portion.
However, a review of the specification shows that the limitation does not serve any advantage or particular purpose, or that it solves a particular problem. Moreover, the inclined portions in Lanew would perform equally well with the claimed inclined portions since they would all drain the condensate toward the pump.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-30 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 31-38 are allowed.
Reasons for Allowance
Lanew is the closest prior art for claim 31.
Regarding claim 31, Lanew discloses the following limitations (see rejection of claim 20 for citations) except for the bolded limitations: a laundry treating apparatus comprising: a cabinet defining an external surface of the laundry treating apparatus; a drum rotatably disposed in the cabinet and configured to receive laundry therein; an air circulating channel receive air from the drum and resupply the air to the drum; a heat exchanger assembly including an evaporator disposed inside the air circulating channel and configured to condense moisture contained in the air, and a condenser disposed at a positions spaced apart from the evaporator and configured to heat the air; a communication hole defined at one face of the air circulating channel and configured to discharge water condensed in the evaporator to an outside of the air circulating channel; a water collector disposed outside the air circulating channel and configured to be in fluid communication with the communication hole and to collect the water discharged from the communication hole; a water storage tank disposed inside the cabinet and configured to receive the water collected in the water collector; and a pump disposed in the water collector and configured to supply the water to the water storage tank or to the heat exchanger assembly, wherein a bottom face of the water collector has an inclined portion decreasing in height from an outer circumferential face of the water collector toward the pump, and wherein a bottom face of the air circulating channel has an inclined portion decreasing in height toward the communication hole.
Response to Arguments
Applicant asserts the following on page(s) 8 of the 4/20/2026 Remarks:
PNG
media_image1.png
326
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s response:
The air circulating channel is cited to be the process air space 15, and this air space is located above the water collector 21. Therefore, the water collector 21 is disposed outside the air circulating channel. Moreover, the pump 4 is located in the water collector as shown by Figure 2.
Applicant asserts the following on page(s) 8 of the 4/20/2026 Remarks:
PNG
media_image2.png
192
634
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s response:
The surfaces 21a and 22 are inclined toward the pump (pump in chamber 4), as shown by Figures 2 and 3, so that the water can flow down towards the pump.
Conclusion
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 JASON LAU whose telephone number is (571)270-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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 Hoang can be reached at 571-272-6460. 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.
/JASON LAU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights