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 – 20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/22/2024 was 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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 – 20 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.
Regarding claim 1, the terms "preferably" and “particularly preferably” in line 6 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are optional or required. For the purpose of examination, the limitations following with be examined as optional.
Regarding claim 11, the phrase "in particular” in lines 1 and 2 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are optional or required. For the purpose of examination, the limitations following with be examined as optional.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, the terms "preferably" and “particularly preferably” in line 4 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are optional or required. For the purpose of examination, the limitations following with be examined as optional.
Claims 2 – 20 are further rejected as dependents of rejected claim 1.
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.
Claims 1 – 3, 5 – 6 and 8 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guhne et al. (U. S. Patent No. 5,353,471 A).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Guhne teaches a floor cleaning device preferably a floor scrubbing device (Fig. 1), particularly preferably a scrub vacuum floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), comprising: a floor unit (polishing unit, 1); a tool (working disks, 6a – 6c) which is assigned to the floor unit (1) and which, in an operating state, contacts a floor surface (work surface, 18); a guide member (wand, 8) for guiding the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1); a joint assembly (compensation device, 20) having a first pivot joint (pivot arm, 9) for pivoting the guide member (8; Col. 2, lines 60 – 68) relative to the floor unit (1) about a first pivot axis (pivot axis, 7); and a spring member (pressure springs, 11) for generating a spring force between the floor unit (1) and the guide member (8; Col. 2, lines 58 – 62), wherein the first pivot joint (9) has a neutral position (arm, 9 is in a vertical straight up and down position), wherein the spring member (11) is operatively connected to the floor unit (1) and the guide member (8) in such a way that, when pivoting from the neutral position in a first pivot direction (Fig. 3) to a deflected position (Fig. 3), a righting torque acting on the guide member (8) and resulting from the spring force about the first pivot axis (7) in the direction of the neutral position increases in a first angular range and decreases in a subsequent second angular range (Claim 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
656
510
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1) wherein the spring member (11) has a first mounting point (brackets, 30) coupled to the guide member (8; Fig. 3) at least in the first and second angular ranges (Fig. 3) and spaced from the first pivot axis (7) on one side of the first pivot joint (9).
Regarding Claim 3, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein a distance to the first pivot axis (7) of a force vector (F) acting on the first mounting point (30) due to the spring force decreases in the first angular range and/or in the second angular range at least at phases when pivoting in the first pivot direction (Fig. 3; Col. 2, lines 36 – 55 ).
Regarding Claim 5, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein the first mounting point (30) in the first angular range and/or second angular range (Fig. 3) at phases performs a movement along a segment of a circle (Col. 3, lines 18 – 30) about the first pivot axis (7; Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 6, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein a spring length (Fig. 4) of the spring member (11) increases at least at phases in the first angular range and in the second angular range when pivoting in the first pivot direction (7; Fig. 3; as the spring starts from a neutral position, it stretches and thus increases about the pivot axis, 7).
Regarding Claim 8, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein a spring length (Fig. 4) of the spring member (11) decreases at least at phases in the first angular range and in the second angular range when pivoting in the first pivot direction (7; Fig. 3; as the spring starts from a maximum position, it decreases in length about the pivot axis, 7).
Regarding Claim 9, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein the spring member (11) is a compression spring (pressure springs; Col. 3, lines 49 - 50 are compression springs).
Regarding Claim 10, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein the spring member (11) comprises a spring-damper member (guide part, 10).
Regarding Claim 11, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein the spring member (11) is further operatively connected to the floor unit (1) and the guide member (8) in such a way that the righting torque at a pivot angle relative to the neutral position in the first angular range (clockwise; Fig. 3) and/or in the second angular range (counterclockwise; Fig. 3) compensates for a torque acting on the first pivot joint (9; Fig. 3) about the first pivot axis (7; Column 2, Lines 50 - 56), in particular a torque resulting from the weight of the guide member (8; Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 12, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein the spring member (11) is further operatively connected to the floor unit (1) and the guide member (8) in such a way that the spring force and/or the righting torque in the neutral position amount to zero (Fig. 3, when the spring is at 90 degrees about the pivot axis).
Regarding Claim 13, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein, when pivoting in the first pivot direction (pivot to the left; Fig. 3), the second angular range (counterclockwise; Fig. 3) is followed by a third angular range (clockwise; Fig. 3) in which the righting torque has a negative sign (Col. 3, lines 31 – 42).
Regarding Claim 14, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1),wherein in the third angular range, the value of the righting torque increases when pivoting in the first pivot direction (pivot to the left; Fig. 3; Col. 3, lines 31 – 42).
Regarding Claim 15, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1),wherein the spring member (11) is further operatively connected to the floor unit (1) and the guide member (8) in such a way that at the transition from the second angular range (counterclockwise; Fig. 3) to the third angular range (clockwise; Fig. 3), a force vector (F1; Fig. 1) acting on the mounting point (30) due to the spring force runs through the first pivot axis (7).
Regarding Claim 16, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein at the end of the third angular range (clockwise; Fig. 3) facing away from the neutral position (when the spring is at 90 degrees; Fig. 3), the pivot angle relative to the neutral position is at least 70 degrees (Fig. 3), preferably at least 80 degrees, particularly preferably at least 90 degrees.
Regarding Claim 17, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein at the end of the second angular range facing away (counterclockwise; Fig. 3) from the neutral position (when the spring is at 90 degrees; Fig. 3), the pivot angle relative to the neutral position is at least 70 degrees (Fig. 3), preferably at least 80 degrees, particularly preferably at least 90 degrees.
Regarding Claim 18, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein the spring member (11) does not exert any spring force on the guide member (8) in a fourth angular range (counterclockwise; Fig. 3) when pivoting from the neutral position in a second pivot direction (pivot to the right; Fig. 3) opposite to the first pivot direction (pivot to the left; Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 19, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein the first mounting point (30) is configured on a sled (24) that can be moved in a sled guide (10) relative to the guide member (8) when pivoting from the neutral position in the second pivot direction (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 20, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), wherein the sled guide (10) specifies an arc-shaped movement of the sled (10; Fig. 3) relative to the guide member (8), the center of the circular arc shape being arranged on the first pivot axis (7; Fig. 3).
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.
Claims 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guhne et al. (U. S. Patent No. 5,353,471 A).
Regarding Claim 4, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), of claim 1 as discussed above.
Guhne does not explicitly teach wherein the distance is at a maximum in the neutral position ; 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 device of Guhne to further include since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 7, Guhne teaches the floor cleaning device (Fig. 1), of claim 1 as discussed above.
Guhne does not explicitly teach wherein the spring member is a tension spring; 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 device of Guhne to further include the spring member is a tension spring, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known component on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
Art made of record, however, not relied upon for the current rejection is as follows: U. S. Patent No. 2,881,465 to Duff teaches a suction cleaner having a pivotally mounted nozzle body the weight of which is supported from the cleaner propelling handle. A further abject is to provide a pivotally mounted cleaner body saving resilient means connected to the propelling handle and the nozzle to support the weight of the Latter. Another object is to provide a suction cleaner having a pivotally mounted nozzle connected to the cleaner propelling handle and a device for maintaining a constant lifting force at the nozzle in all operative positions of the propelling handle. A further object is to provide a suction cleaner wherein the cleaner nozzle is supported to obtain substantially a zero vertical force of the nozzle against the carpet surface.
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
Prosecution Insights