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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/19/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant first argues with respect to claim 1 that Yu discloses a structure layered over the entirety of the filter mesh, which is a separate structure than the filter mesh itself, and not actual fibers of the fiber material that are impregnated and or the like with the state changing material that are a part of the filter medium. Examiner does not find this argument persuasive. As mentioned by Applicant in their argument, The identification structure is identified as a coating layer (Para [0013] “Furthermore, the identification structure is a coating that is transparent when in contact with water.”). The Amended claim 1 requires that the filter comprises fibers some of which are impregnated saturated soaked and/or coated with the state-changing material. The identification structure being a coating fulfils the coated requirement of the limitation. As such Examiner does not find this argument persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that Conrad’s mechanism is not moisture-responsive, color changing or integrated into the fibres to indicate residual moisture content, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case, Examiner maintains that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to learn from the teachings of Conrad to modify the coating layer of Yu such as applying the coating layer of Yu to form a textural graphical, symbolic or pictorial indication.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). In this case, Conrad states in [0167] “Referring to FIG. 19, one embodiment of a filter 32a that includes and indicator mechanism 36 is shown. The filter 32a is generally similar to filter 32, and can be used in combination with the surface cleaning apparatus 1. In the illustrated embodiment, the indicator mechanism 36 is a graphic element that includes the text "Wash Me" in addition to a plurality of cross hatch lines. Any particular graphic may be used. Preferably, the graphics 36 are formed from a material that has the same colour as a clean, unsoiled filter 32a (typically white, but may be any suitable colour), but that has different dirt absorption properties than the filter material used to make filter 32a (typically a foam material). For example, if the filter 32a is formed from a generally porous foam-like material, the portion containing the graphics 36 may be formed from a less porous material or it may be treated to be less porous, such as by silk-screening graphic 36 onto the upstream surface of the filter. In this configuration, the portion of filter 32a containing the graphics 36 may be less permeable than the rest of the filter 32a, and dirt may have less penetration into the upstream side of this portion of the filter. As a result, the portion with the graphics may remain "whiter" than the foam filter 32a after being exposed to a dirty air flow. When the colour of the foam 32a darkens due to the accumulated dirt, the contrast between the filter 32a and the graphics 36 increases, thereby making the graphics 36 visible to the user.” Discussing the use of a graphical indicator on the filter assembly in order to alert a user and providing a motivation for why one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the use of a graphic on a filter in order to alert a user that the filter needs to be cleaned or replaced.
In response to applicant's argument that Conrad 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). Both Yu and Conrad as pointed towards components of a filter to indicate to an operator that the filter is not currently suited for use.
As such Examiner does not find this argument persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that Fradens sensing target is particulate loading, not moisture content of a fibrous medium, and that Fradens senses during use of the cleaner, not with the filter being wet the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
In this case, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a sensor assembly for monitoring the color (State) of the state-changing material (of Yu) and for providing an output of the user based on the sensed state, as doing so would just be a matter of offloading the user task of visual inspecting the filter to a sensor assembly, and would allow for this monitoring to be done continually during use. As such Examiner does not find this persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In this case Fraden discusses using a sensor as an electronic equivalent of a visual inspection See Para [0019] “A possible method of indicating the air filter clogging is an electronic equivalent of a visual inspection. A clogged filter's surface usually changes color and that can be measured and detected. FIG. 5 illustrates an optical detector that is positioned at inlet side 9 of filter 7, inside air duct 4.”. Examiner maintains it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a sensor assembly for monitoring the color (State) of the state-changing material (of Yu) and for providing an output of the user based on the sensed state, as doing so would just be a matter of offloading the user task of visual inspecting the filter to a sensor assembly, and would allow for this monitoring to be done continually during use. As such Examiner does not find this persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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) 1-6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu (CN 209490573 U)
Regarding Claim 1, Yu discloses: A filter assembly for a vacuum cleaner, the filter assembly comprising a filter medium (310) having fibers integrated (see Fig. 5) with a state-changing material (320) which changes state in dependence on the quantity of liquid to which the filter medium is exposed (See Para [0067] “FIG5 is a schematic structural diagram of a water-washing filter screen 300 from one perspective according to an exemplary embodiment 5 , the water-washing filter 300 includes a filter layer 310 and an identification structure 320.The identification structure 320 is disposed on the filter layer 310 . That is, the identification structure 320 can be disposed on the surface of the filter layer 310 or inside the filter layer 310. Furthermore, the identification structure 320 displays different colors when in contact with water and when in a dry state. In this embodiment, the identification structure 320 changes color when exposed to water and can return to its original color when dried.”) to provide a first status indication to a user that the filter assembly is suitable for use in the vacuum cleaner when the state-changing material is in a first state and a second status indication to the user that the filter assembly is not suitable for use in the vacuum cleaner when the state-changing material is in a second state (First see Para [0004] “The filters installed on cleaning equipment such as sweepers and air purifiers need to be cleaned and maintained by users. In order to reduce the difficulty of cleaning for users, washable filters have appeared, that is, users only need to rinse the filters with water to clean them. However, due to the long drying time of the washable filter, it cannot be put into use immediately after cleaning. It is also difficult for users to determine whether the filter has dried through simple instructions.” And Para [0080] “It is understandable that the identification structure 320 can also be made of other materials that change color when exposed to water and recover after dehydration, and be set on the surface or inside of the filter layer 310 to serve as an identification, making it convenient for users to identify the dryness and wetness of the filter layer 310. For example, the identification structure 320 can be made of materials such as copper sulfate, which appears white in a dry state and turns blue when exposed to water.”) wherein the filter medium is washable (See Para [0082] “It can be understood that the filter layer 310 of the water-washable filter 300 provided in this embodiment is pre-dyed and appears in a first color, such as blue, both when dry and after contact with water. The first identification layer 321 and the second identification layer 322 coated on the outer surface and the inner surface of the filter layer 310 appear in a second color, such as white, when dry.”) and comprises fibres of material, at least some of which are impregnated, saturated, soaked and/or coated with the state-changing material (See Para [0074] “As an embodiment, the first identification layer 321 and the second identification layer 322 are both water-transparent coating layers. The first identification layer 321 completely covers the outer surface of the filter layer 310 , and the second identification layer 322 completely covers the inner surface of the filter layer 310 .”).
Regarding Claim 2, Yu discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition discloses wherein the state-changing material is a hydrochromic material which changes state depending on the quantity of water to which the filter medium is exposed (See Para [0080] “It is understandable that the identification structure 320 can also be made of other materials that change color when exposed to water and recover after dehydration, and be set on the surface or inside of the filter layer 310 to serve as an identification, making it convenient for users to identify the dryness and wetness of the filter layer 310. For example, the identification structure 320 can be made of materials such as copper sulfate, which appears white in a dry state and turns blue when exposed to water.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Yu discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition discloses, wherein the state-changing material is a reversible state-changing material so that it can switch back and forth between the first and second states in dependence on the quantity of liquid to which the filter medium is exposed (See Para [0080] “It is understandable that the identification structure 320 can also be made of other materials that change color when exposed to water and recover after dehydration, and be set on the surface or inside of the filter layer 310 to serve as an identification, making it convenient for users to identify the dryness and wetness of the filter layer 310. For example, the identification structure 320 can be made of materials such as copper sulfate, which appears white in a dry state and turns blue when exposed to water.”).
Regarding Claim 4, Yu discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition discloses Wherein the state-changing material takes the form of an ink, gel or dye (See Para [0077] “The coating layer should also be flexible to facilitate rubbing and cleaning. This coating layer can be made of ink whose main component is silicon dioxide and which is transparent in water. Furthermore, it is understandable that the thickness of the coating layer can be arbitrarily set according to the usage conditions and is not limited here.”).
Regarding Claim 5, Yu discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and in addition discloses wherein the first and second status indications are visual indications (Color Change, See Para [0080] “It is understandable that the identification structure 320 can also be made of other materials that change color when exposed to water and recover after dehydration, and be set on the surface or inside of the filter layer 310 to serve as an identification, making it convenient for users to identify the dryness and wetness of the filter layer 310. For example, the identification structure 320 can be made of materials such as copper sulfate, which appears white in a dry state and turns blue when exposed to water.”).
Regarding Claim 6, Yu discloses all the limitations of claim 5 and in addition discloses wherein the first and second status indications are of different colour and or transparency and/or capacity (See Para [0080] “It is understandable that the identification structure 320 can also be made of other materials that change color when exposed to water and recover after dehydration, and be set on the surface or inside of the filter layer 310 to serve as an identification, making it convenient for users to identify the dryness and wetness of the filter layer 310. For example, the identification structure 320 can be made of materials such as copper sulfate, which appears white in a dry state and turns blue when exposed to water.”).
Regarding Claim 10, Yu discloses a vacuum cleaner (100, See Fig. 3) comprising the filter assembly as claimed in claim 1 (See rejection of claim 1 above).
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) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (CN 209490573 U) in view of Conrad (US 20140237752 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Yu discloses A filter assembly for a vacuum cleaner, the filter assembly comprising a filter medium (310) having fibers integrated (see Fig. 5) with a state-changing material (320) which changes state in dependence on the quantity of liquid to which the filter medium is exposed (See Para [0067] “FIG5 is a schematic structural diagram of a water-washing filter screen 300 from one perspective according to an exemplary embodiment 5 , the water-washing filter 300 includes a filter layer 310 and an identification structure 320.The identification structure 320 is disposed on the filter layer 310 . That is, the identification structure 320 can be disposed on the surface of the filter layer 310 or inside the filter layer 310. Furthermore, the identification structure 320 displays different colors when in contact with water and when in a dry state. In this embodiment, the identification structure 320 changes color when exposed to water and can return to its original color when dried.”) to provide a first status indication to a user that the filter assembly is suitable for use in the vacuum cleaner when the state-changing material is in a first state and a second status indication to the user that the filter assembly is not suitable for use in the vacuum cleaner when the state-changing material is in a second state (First see Para [0004] “The filters installed on cleaning equipment such as sweepers and air purifiers need to be cleaned and maintained by users. In order to reduce the difficulty of cleaning for users, washable filters have appeared, that is, users only need to rinse the filters with water to clean them. However, due to the long drying time of the washable filter, it cannot be put into use immediately after cleaning. It is also difficult for users to determine whether the filter has dried through simple instructions.” And Para [0080] “It is understandable that the identification structure 320 can also be made of other materials that change color when exposed to water and recover after dehydration, and be set on the surface or inside of the filter layer 310 to serve as an identification, making it convenient for users to identify the dryness and wetness of the filter layer 310. For example, the identification structure 320 can be made of materials such as copper sulfate, which appears white in a dry state and turns blue when exposed to water.”) but does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the first and second status indications includes at least one of a textual, graphical, symbolic, and/or pictorial indication.
However, Conrad discloses a cleaner with a filter with a graphical indicator (See Para [0167] “Referring to FIG. 19, one embodiment of a filter 32a that includes and indicator mechanism 36 is shown. The filter 32a is generally similar to filter 32, and can be used in combination with the surface cleaning apparatus 1. In the illustrated embodiment, the indicator mechanism 36 is a graphic element that includes the text "Wash Me" in addition to a plurality of cross hatch lines. Any particular graphic may be used. Preferably, the graphics 36 are formed from a material that has the same colour as a clean, unsoiled filter 32a (typically white, but may be any suitable colour), but that has different dirt absorption properties than the filter material used to make filter 32a (typically a foam material). For example, if the filter 32a is formed from a generally porous foam-like material, the portion containing the graphics 36 may be formed from a less porous material or it may be treated to be less porous, such as by silk-screening graphic 36 onto the upstream surface of the filter. In this configuration, the portion of filter 32a containing the graphics 36 may be less permeable than the rest of the filter 32a, and dirt may have less penetration into the upstream side of this portion of the filter. As a result, the portion with the graphics may remain "whiter" than the foam filter 32a after being exposed to a dirty air flow. When the colour of the foam 32a darkens due to the accumulated dirt, the contrast between the filter 32a and the graphics 36 increases, thereby making the graphics 36 visible to the user.”).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the filter of Yu to have a, textual, graphical, symbolic and/or pictorial indicator as advantageously described by Conrad, as doing so would allow for a user to be clearly informed about when a filter might not be useable or may need to be replaced by explicitly stating what the color change of the filter indicated to the user, so as to not rely on the users prior knowledge of what the color change of the filter would indicate.
Claim(s) 11-14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (CN 209490573 U) in view of Fraden (US 20060100796 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Yu discloses A filter assembly for a vacuum cleaner, the filter assembly comprising a filter medium (310) having fibers integrated (see Fig. 5) with a state-changing material (320) which changes state in dependence on the quantity of liquid to which the filter medium is exposed (See Para [0067] “FIG5 is a schematic structural diagram of a water-washing filter screen 300 from one perspective according to an exemplary embodiment 5 , the water-washing filter 300 includes a filter layer 310 and an identification structure 320.The identification structure 320 is disposed on the filter layer 310 . That is, the identification structure 320 can be disposed on the surface of the filter layer 310 or inside the filter layer 310. Furthermore, the identification structure 320 displays different colors when in contact with water and when in a dry state. In this embodiment, the identification structure 320 changes color when exposed to water and can return to its original color when dried.”) to provide a first status indication to a user that the filter assembly is suitable for use in the vacuum cleaner when the state-changing material is in a first state and a second status indication to the user that the filter assembly is not suitable for use in the vacuum cleaner when the state-changing material is in a second state (First see Para [0004] “The filters installed on cleaning equipment such as sweepers and air purifiers need to be cleaned and maintained by users. In order to reduce the difficulty of cleaning for users, washable filters have appeared, that is, users only need to rinse the filters with water to clean them. However, due to the long drying time of the washable filter, it cannot be put into use immediately after cleaning. It is also difficult for users to determine whether the filter has dried through simple instructions.” And Para [0080] “It is understandable that the identification structure 320 can also be made of other materials that change color when exposed to water and recover after dehydration, and be set on the surface or inside of the filter layer 310 to serve as an identification, making it convenient for users to identify the dryness and wetness of the filter layer 310. For example, the identification structure 320 can be made of materials such as copper sulfate, which appears white in a dry state and turns blue when exposed to water.”)
But does not explicitly disclose comprises a sensor assembly for sensing the state of the state-changing material and for providing an output to the user based on the sensed state.
However, Fraden discloses a method of monitoring a filters state (See Para [0019] “A possible method of indicating the air filter clogging is an electronic equivalent of a visual inspection. A clogged filter's surface usually changes color and that can be measured and detected. FIG. 5 illustrates an optical detector that is positioned at inlet side 9 of filter 7, inside air duct 4.”) and providing an output based on the sense state (See Para [0056] “When the air filter clogging is detected, the alarm is enabled.”)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify Yu to utilize a sensor to monitor the state of the filter, as doing so would allow for the automatic monitoring of the filter, and to prevent the cleaner from operating while the filter is wet and causing damage to the cleaner.
Regarding Claim 12, Yu as modified discloses all the limitations of claim 11 and in addition discloses wherein the sensor assembly includes a display for displaying the output (See Para [0050] “When the threshold is reached, alarm 19 is enabled. Alarm 19 can be audible, visual or both or, alternatively, it can be any other type of an indicator.”).
Regarding Claim 13, Yu as modified discloses all the limitations of claim 11 and in addition discloses wherein the sensor assembly includes a speaker for providing an audible output (See Para [0050] “When the threshold is reached, alarm 19 is enabled. Alarm 19 can be audible, visual or both or, alternatively, it can be any other type of an indicator.”).
Regarding Claim 14, Yu as modified discloses all the limitations of claim 13 and in addition discloses wherein the cleaner has an in-use position, a printed circuit board (130) including a controller for the vacuum cleaner (See Para [0046] “The automatic cleaning device 100 may include a device body 110, a sensing system 120, a control system 130, a driving system 140, an energy system 160, a cleaning system 150 and a human-computer interaction system 170, etc. The various systems coordinate with each other so that the automatic cleaning device 100 can move autonomously to achieve the cleaning function.”), and suggests the vacuum cleaner comprising wherein the printed circuit board resides beneath the filter assembly when the vacuum cleaner is in the stowed position (See Figures 1 and 3 of Yu showing the location of circuit 130 and the location of the filter cartridge 200 containing filter 300).
But does not disclose wherein the cleaner has a stowed position, in which it is used to clean surfaces wherein the printed circuit board resides beneath the filter assembly when the vacuum cleaner is in the stowed position.
However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the cleaner to have a stowed position, such as picking up the cleaner or tilting it or having it on its side, as doing so would only require the operator to pick up and move the cleaner and would allow for the cleaner to be easily stored out of the way of the operator when the cleaner is not in use. It would be further obvious to modify the location of the printed circuit board to be beneath the filter assembly in the stowed position, as doing so would be convenient for utilizing a sensor to sense the state of the filter, and the location of the printed circuit board would be a matter of design choice that would not impact the function of the invention, See MPEP 2144.04 VI B.
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 Tyler James McFarland whose telephone number is (571)272-7270. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-5PM (E.S.T), Flex First Friday.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/T.J.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723