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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 09/22/2023, 07/16/2025, 12/02/2025. 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 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 an 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.
Regarding claim 1, claim limitation that do not use the word “means” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: cleaning element. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. In this case, the limitation “cleaning element” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 00017 “the cleaning element may be embodied as a textile mop”.
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
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 1-2, 5-8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrdoljak (US 20100236018 A1) in view of Gava (EP 0579947 A1and see PDF translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Vrdoljak discloses, cleaning appliance (see cleaning appliance 1300 in Fig. 16) comprising:
a cleaning element (see floor cleaning head 1318 in Fig. 16 and see the same configuration of cleaning pad support 128 in Fig. 1 with steam pad 600 in Fig. 6 attached thereon and as disclosed in para 0060 “Areas 602 are positioned to correspond with attachment areas 408 of cleaning pad support 128 or floor cleaning head 112”, wherein steam pad 600 may be formed with any suitable steam-permeable fabric, for example, cotton or a synthetic fabric such as polyester or polyolefin fiber, a microfiber, such as a polyester microfiber may be used in some embodiments, wherein a floor-contacting side (not shown) of steam pad 600 may have a smooth surface, a quilted surface, a shaggy material surface, a towel surface, or any other suitable surface texture as disclosed in para 0059);
a liquid container (see reservoir 1302 in Fig. 16);
an electrically operated heater (see boiler 1312 in Fig. 16 as see the same configuration of boiler 1411 in Fig. 18); and
a controller (see a switch and functional component arrangement 1400 for control of a cleaning appliance having steam cleaning and vacuuming functionality in Fig. 18 and disclosed in para 0104) for controlling the heater (see boiler 1411 in Fig. 18), wherein the controller has an electronic circuit (see Fig. 18), and the electronic circuit is structured such that a thermal behavior of the heater is modeled therein (see Fig. 18 and disclosed in para 0104 “a flash boiler, is controlled by a thermostat 1432”), and wherein a temperature characteristic of the heater is in the electronic circuit (see Fig. 18 with the thermostat 1432, wherein it is known in the art that the thermostat regulates the temperature by automatically turning heater on or off to maintain a desired setpoint).
However, Vrdoljak does not explicitly disclose, wherein a temperature characteristic of the heater is represented by a voltage characteristic in the electronic circuit.
Nonetheless, Gava teaches, in Fig. 1, a washing machine having an electric resistance (3) which is connectable to a power source (10), through a switch controlled by the programmer (17), to heat up a fluid contained in a wash tub, wherein a measurement arrangement (13) associated with the programmer (17) includes a pair of terminals (11,12) capable of detecting voltage across the heating resistance (3), wherein the detected voltage is proportional to the actual ohmic value of the resistance of heating resistance (3), and therefore indicative of the actual temperature of the heating resistance (3) (see the specification “During the steps in which the resistance 3 is connected to the measurement arrangement 13, just the constant current from generator 14 flows through the resistance itself, and the measurement arrangement 13 detects between its terminals 11, 12 (more particularly, between inputs 12 and 20 of amplifier 15) a voltage which is proportional to the ohmic value of resistance 3 and is, therefore, indicative of the actual temperature of the heating resistance”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the thermostat of Vrdoljak with the measurement arrangement 13 associated with the programmer 17 of Gava such that the temperature characteristic of the heater is represented by the voltage characteristic in the electronic circuit as taught/suggested by Gava in order to control the actual working temperature of the heating resistance/heater in a precise manner without the need for any traditional thermostatic control element (see the speciation of Gava).
Regarding claim 2, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the cleaning appliance as claimed in claim 1, Vrdoljak further discloses, wherein the electronic circuit (see Fig. 18) comprises a plurality of electronic components (see switches 1414, 1412 and fuses 1426, 1428 in Fig. 18) and at least one electric energy store (see low voltage DC power supply 1424 in Fig. 18).
Regarding claim 5, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the cleaning appliance as claimed in claim 1, and a method for controlling the cleaning appliance as claimed in claim 1, Vrdoljak further discloses wherein the heater (1411) and the electronic circuit (see Fig. 18) can be supplied with energy from an electrical power source (see 120VAC in Fig. 18), wherein the electronic circuit is supplied with voltage when the heater is supplied with voltage (see Fig. 18), wherein, when the cleaning appliance is activated (see activation switch 1412, 1414 in Fig. 18) and the thermostat (1432) check the temperature of the boiler (see Fig. 18 and disclosed in para 0104 “a flash boiler, is controlled by a thermostat 1432”).
However, Vrdoljak does not explicitly disclose, an actual voltage in the electronic circuit is checked, and wherein, if the voltage is below a limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power to heat a liquid.
Nonetheless, Gava teaches, an actual voltage in the electronic circuit is checked, and wherein, if the voltage is below a limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power to heat a liquid (disclosed in the specification “If the general operation of the machine is correct the resistance 3 shall never be overheated; thus, the voltage between terminal 11, 12 of the measurement arrangement 13 will not exceed the maximum value mentioned above. Hence, the operation of the machine goes on as described before, with alternating steps in which the heating resistance 3 is supplied and measured, respectively.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the thermostat of Vrdoljak with the measurement arrangement 13 associated with the programmer 17 of Gava such that an actual voltage in the electronic circuit is checked, and wherein, if the voltage is below a limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power to heat a liquid as taught/suggested by Gava in order to control the actual working temperature of the heating resistance/heater in a precise manner without the need for any traditional thermostatic control element (see the speciation of Gava).
Regarding claim 6, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the method as claimed in claim 5.
However, Vrdoljak does not explicitly disclose, wherein, if the voltage is below the limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power for a duration of a fixed interval.
Nonetheless, Gava teaches, wherein, if the voltage is below the limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power for a duration of a fixed interval (disclosed in the specification “If the general operation of the machine is correct the resistance 3 shall never be overheated; thus, the voltage between terminal 11, 12 of the measurement arrangement 13 will not exceed the maximum value mentioned above. Hence, the operation of the machine goes on as described before, with alternating steps in which the heating resistance 3 is supplied and measured, respectively.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the thermostat of Vrdoljak with the measurement arrangement 13 associated with the programmer 17 of Gava such that wherein, if the voltage is below the limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power for a duration of a fixed interval as taught/suggested by Gava in order to control the actual working temperature of the heating resistance/heater in a precise manner without the need for any traditional thermostatic control element (see the speciation of Gava).
Regarding claim 7, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the method as claimed in claim 6.
However, Vrdoljak does not explicitly disclose, wherein, if the voltage is below the limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power for a duration of a variable interval, and the variable interval derives from a time that is expected until a setpoint voltage is attained.
Nonetheless, Gava teaches, wherein, if the voltage is below the limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power for a duration of a variable interval, (disclosed in the specification “If the general operation of the machine is correct the resistance 3 shall never be overheated; thus, the voltage between terminal 11, 12 of the measurement arrangement 13 will not exceed the maximum value mentioned above. Hence, the operation of the machine goes on as described before, with alternating steps in which the heating resistance 3 is supplied and measured, respectively.”) and the variable interval derives from a time that is expected until a setpoint voltage is attained (disclosed in the specification “By contrast, in case the resistance 3 is overheated for any reason, its ohmic value raises accordingly and the voltage applied between the measurement terminals 11, 12 exceeds the predetermined maximum value. As a result, microprocessor 17 receives a relatively high voltage at its input 16, in response to which it de-energizes relay 9, thereby de-energizing the heating resistance 3”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the thermostat of Vrdoljak with the measurement arrangement 13 associated with the programmer 17 of Gava such that wherein, if the voltage is below the limit voltage, the heater is supplied with power for a duration of a variable interval, and the variable interval derives from a time that is expected until a setpoint voltage is attained as taught/suggested by Gava in order to control the actual working temperature of the heating resistance/heater in a precise manner without the need for any traditional thermostatic control element (see the speciation of Gava).
Regarding claim 8, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the method as claimed in claim 7.
However, Vrdoljak does not explicitly disclose, wherein, if the voltage is below the setpoint voltage, the heater is supplied with power for the duration of the variable interval.
Nonetheless, Gava teaches, wherein, if the voltage is below the setpoint voltage, the heater is supplied with power for the duration of the variable interval (disclosed in the specification “If the general operation of the machine is correct the resistance 3 shall never be overheated; thus, the voltage between terminal 11, 12 of the measurement arrangement 13 will not exceed the maximum value mentioned above. Hence, the operation of the machine goes on as described before, with alternating steps in which the heating resistance 3 is supplied and measured, respectively.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the thermostat of Vrdoljak with the measurement arrangement 13 associated with the programmer 17 of Gava such that wherein, if the voltage is below the setpoint voltage, the heater is supplied with power for the duration of the variable interval as taught/suggested by Gava in order to control the actual working temperature of the heating resistance/heater in a precise manner without the need for any traditional thermostatic control element (see the speciation of Gava).
Regarding claim 11, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the cleaning appliance as claimed in claim 1, Vrdoljak further discloses, wherein the heater has a steam generator (see a steam generator, such as a boiler 1312 in Fig. 16 or 1411 in Fig. 18) for heating a liquid (see Fig. 16).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrdoljak (US 20100236018 A1) in view of Gava (EP 0579947 A1and see PDF translation attached) and in further view of Stange (EP 2846606 A1 and see PDF translation attached).
Regarding claim 3, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the cleaning appliance as claimed in claim 1, Vrdoljak further discloses electrical power (120 VAC in Fig. 18).
However, Vrdoljak in view of Gava does not explicitly disclose a thermal insulation of the heater and a heat storage capacity of the heater are represented in the electronic circuit.
Nonetheless, Stange teaches, a thermal insulation (see thermal insulation 6 in Fig. 2) of the heater (see heating element 2 in Fig. 2) and a heat storage capacity (see heat storage 7 in Fig. 2) of the heater (see Fig. 2) are represented in the electronic circuit (see Fig. 2).
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 circuit of Vrdoljak wherein a thermal insulation of the heater and a heat storage capacity of the heater are represented in the electronic circuit as taught/suggested by Stange in order to obtain a compensation layer or the compensation element have a high heat capacity for the heater with the heat storage and in order to suppress a radiation of the heat in the direction away from the user with the thermal insulation (see the specification of Stange “The compensation layer or the compensation element have a high heat capacity, so that a passive heat storage 7 can be created thereby” and “a thermal insulation 6 is arranged, which suppresses a radiation of the heat in the direction away from the user”).
Regarding claim 4, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the cleaning appliance as claimed in claim 1, except for wherein the electronic circuit is embodied as a PT1 element.
Nonetheless, Stange teaches, the electronic circuit is embodied as a PT1 element (disclosed in the specification “In order to suppress the high-frequency radiation components generated by the steep flanks of the energy pulses, the energy pulses are filtered in a preferred embodiment of the invention by a low-pass filter. In this way, the flanks are flattened and voltage changes are rounded off so that high-frequency radiation does not even arise”).
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 circuit of Vrdoljak wherein the electronic circuit is embodied as a PT1 element as taught/suggested by Stange in order to suppress the high-frequency radiation so as to obtain accuracy and reliability of electronic heating circuit.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vrdoljak (US 20100236018 A1) in view of Gava (EP 0579947 A1and see PDF translation attached) and in further view of Alexander (US 20150245723 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the method as claimed in claim 6, except for wherein in a next step a release signal is generated to signal that the cleaning appliance is ready for use.
Nonetheless, Alexander teaches, wherein in a next step a release signal is generated to signal that the appliance is ready for use (disclosed in para 0569 “FIG. 75B shows a ready (READY) " notice to the user indicating liquid in the container 7300 has been heated to a desired temperature (or temperature range) and ready for drinking”).
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 circuit of Vrdoljak in view of Gava wherein in a next step a release signal is generated to signal that the cleaning appliance is ready for use as taught/suggested by Alexander in order to notify the user when the cleaning appliance is ready to use for the user’s convenience.
Regarding claim 10, Vrdoljak in view of Gava discloses, the method as claimed in claim 7, except for wherein in a next step a release signal is generated to signal that the cleaning appliance is ready for use.
Nonetheless, Alexander teaches, wherein in a next step a release signal is generated to signal that the appliance is ready for use (disclosed in para 0569 “FIG. 75B shows a ready (READY) " notice to the user indicating liquid in the container 7300 has been heated to a desired temperature (or temperature range) and ready for drinking”).
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 circuit of Vrdoljak in view of Gava wherein in a next step a release signal is generated to signal that the cleaning appliance is ready for use as taught/suggested by Alexander in order to notify the user when the cleaning appliance is ready to use for the user’s convenience.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday approx. 6:00 am-3:30 pm ET.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached on (571) 272-9059. 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.
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761