DETAILED ACTION
Cleaning Implement
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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 03-10-2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9,32-35 are currently pending and have been examined. Claims 31-35 are newly added. The previous rejection has been updated due to applicant’s amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 03-10-2026, with respect to the
rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and their dependent claims under 35 U.S.C.102 and 103 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection (as necessitated by amendment) relies on a different combination of prior art references, not applied in the prior rejection of record to teach the amendment.
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 32-33 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 32 recites the limitation "the mount arm" in lines 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the " in line . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1,3-9,32-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (WO2017121360A1) in view of Courtney (US20050235454A1) and Damrath (US20070044258A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yu teaches a foot (5, figure 3) having a foot plate (12, figure 2) and an oscillation plate(16, figure 2)movably coupled to the foot plate; a motor (10, figure 2)coupled to at least one of the foot plate and the oscillation plate, the motor
including a rotor (“A rotating shaft of the main motor 10 is connected to an eccentric wheel 17 which is in turn connected to the eccentric connection rods 9.”) rotatable; and
an eccentric mass (17, figures 2-3) coupled to the rotor to generate an oscillating force between the foot plate and the oscillation plate upon rotation of the rotor (“rotating shaft of the main motor 10 is connected to an eccentric wheel 17 which is in turn connected to the eccentric connection rods 9”).
Yu fails to teach a motor axis extending at a non-perpendicular transverse angle relative to the surface when the foot is supported upon the surface; and the oscillating force having a planar component parallel to the oscillation plate and a perpendicular component perpendicular to the oscillation plate.
Courtney discloses surface treating appliance (200, figure 3) that includes motor (520, figure 13) including a rotor (see annotated figure below) rotatable about a motor axis extending at a non-perpendicular transverse angle relative to the surface when the foot is supported upon the surface (“The fan and motor unit 520 is mounted within the motor bucket 515 at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the motor bucket 515 and the roller shell 510. This serves two purposes: firstly, it distributes the weight of the motor 520 evenly about the centre of the roller shell, i.e. the centre of gravity of the fan and motor unit is aligned with the centre of the gravity of the overall roller assembly”)
PNG
media_image1.png
677
880
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yu to include a motor axis extending at a non-perpendicular transverse angle relative to the surface when the foot is supported upon the surface based on the teachings of Courtney. This modification would help distribute the weight of the motor evenly (para 0053 of Courtney).
Damrath discloses a wiping device (abstract) eccentric mass (4a and 4b) that generates the oscillating force having a planar component parallel (f1, figure 3)to a oscillation plate (9, figure 3) and a perpendicular (f2, figure 3)component perpendicular to the oscillation plate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yu to include the oscillating force having a planar component parallel to the oscillation plate and a perpendicular component perpendicular to the oscillation plate based on the teachings of Damrath. This modification would help provide an improved drive for moving the device along the surface (see para 0004,0016 of Damrath).
Regarding claim 3, modified Yu teaches a sprayer assembly (“an added water injection mechanism can properly spray water to remove the stubborn stains when its switch is pressed down.”) comprising a solution tank (Yu 7, figure 2) configured to store cleaning solution, an outlet nozzle (Yu 11, figure 2), and a sprayer pump (Yu 8, figure 2) in fluid communication with the solution tank and the outlet nozzle, the sprayer pump configured to pump cleaning solution from the solution tank and out the outlet nozzle.
Regarding claim 4, Yu as modified in claim 1 teaches all limitations stated above ,but fails to explicitly teach wherein the angle is between 10 and 20 degrees from perpendicular relative to the surface.
Since modified Klaus does disclose an angle at a degree from perpendicular relative to the surface. (see figure 13 of Courtney) there would be reasonable expectations of success.
Accordingly, it would have been a matter of obvious design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have wherein the angle is between 10 and 20 degrees from perpendicular relative to the surface because the claimed angles do not appear to provide any unexpected results.
Furthermore, the angles from perpendicular relative to the surface are recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e. variable which achieves a recognized result. In this case, the recognized result is that if the angle is too big than may negatively affect vibration assembly. Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim are met (e.g. in this case modified Yu discloses the rotor at an angle) then it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range/value by routine experimentation. Thus, as set forth above, it would have not been inventive to discover the optimum workable range by routine experimentation, and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified have the angle is between 10 and 20 degrees from perpendicular relative to the surface. Further, no criticality for the claimed recitation is apparent in applicant’s disclosure.
Regarding claim 5, modified Yu teaches
wherein the planar component is parallel to the surface and the perpendicular component is perpendicular to the surface (see Damrath F1, F2; figure 3).
Regarding claim 6, modified Yu teaches
wherein the motor (see Yu 10, figure 2) is coupled to the oscillation plate (see Yu 16, figure 2).
Regarding claim 7, modified Yu teaches wherein the motor (10, figure 2) is coupled to a motor mount (see annotated figure below and see Courtney 515, figure 13), and the motor mount is coupled to the oscillation plate (16, figure 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
421
736
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, modified Yu teaches wherein the motor mount (see annotated figure above and see Courtney 515, figure 13) includes a mount surface (see Courtney 515, figure 13) provided at the non-perpendicular transverse angle, and the motor rests upon the mount surface.
Regarding claim 9, modified Yu teaches
wherein the eccentric mass (see Yu 17, figure 3) defines a center of mass offset from the motor axis.
Regarding claim 32, modified Yu teaches a generally planar mount arm (see annotated figure below) protruding from the mount arm (see annotated figure below) at an angle corresponding with the non-perpendicular transverse angle, the motor arm defining the mount surface (see Courtney 515, figure 13).
PNG
media_image3.png
604
728
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 33, Yu as modified above teaches all limitations stated above, but fails to teach wherein the motor mount comprises a fastener receiver operable to receive a fastener to couple the motor mount to the oscillation plate
Courtney teaches a cleaner (abstract) that includes a motor mount (515, figure 13) comprises a fastener receiver (522, figure 13) operable to receive a fastener to couple (para 0053) the motor mount to a component (figure 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yu to include the motor mount comprises a fastener receiver operable to receive a fastener to couple the motor mount to the oscillation plate based on the teachings of Courtney. This modification would help support the motor mount. (para 0053 of Courtney).
Regarding claim 34, modified Yu teaches a pin (see Yu 15) configured to inhibit separation of the oscillation plate from the foot plate.
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (WO2017121360A1) in view of Courtney (US20050235454A1) and Damrath (US20070044258A1) as applied to claim 34 further in view of Kwon (US 20180084961 A1).
Regarding claim 35, Yu as modified above teaches all limitations stated above, but fails to teach wherein the pin is elastic.
Kwon teaches a cleaner that includes a vibrating unit that includes elastic component members.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yu to include wherein the pin is elastic based on the teachings of Kwon. This modification would allow the pin to be able to elastically move (see para 0032-0047 of Kwon).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (WO2017121360A1) in view of Courtney (US20050235454A1) and Damrath (US20070044258A1) as applied to claim 1 further in view of Bloemendaal (US20180116476A1).
Regarding claim 2, Yu as modified in claim 1 teaches all limitations stated above and comprises a vacuum assembly comprising
a suction motor configured to generate suction to move dirty air through a dirty air inlet ( “The basic device 14 has, although not shown in detail, a suction device. The required suction air flow is via a in the base unit 14 arranged blower unit generates. Furthermore, in the base unit 14 preferably a filter bag or a dust receiving chamber arranged”) and a dust bin (“dust receiving chamber”) configured to collect the debris ,but fails to teach an impeller and a separator configured to separate the dirty air into debris and a clean air outlet configured to outlet clean air to the surroundings.
Bloemendaal teaches a surface cleaning apparatus that includes
a vacuum assembly (abstract) comprising
a suction motor (18; para 0042) and impeller (98, para 0042) configured to generate suction to move dirty air through a dirty air inlet (para 0042),
a separator (24; para 0029) configured to separate the dirty air into debris and clean air, a dust bin (para 0041) configured to collect the debris, and
a clean air outlet (para 0066-0068) configured to outlet clean air to the surroundings.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Yu’s apparatus to include impeller and a separator configured to separate the dirty air into debris and a clean air outlet configured to outlet clean air to the surroundings based on the teachings of Bloemendaal. This modification would help provide an improved surface cleaning apparatus that can easily remove spent cleaning fluid and debris from the air stream. (see para 0028-0034 of Bloemendaal)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH AKYAA FORDJOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-0390. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:30am - 5:30pm and Friday 6:00am-3:00pm.
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.
/SARAH AKYAA FORDJOUR/ Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights