Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/311,088

CONFIGURATION OF A SURFACE CLEANING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 02, 2023
Examiner
MULLER, BRYAN R
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Omachron Intellectual Property Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
44%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
74%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 44% of resolved cases
44%
Career Allow Rate
407 granted / 933 resolved
-26.4% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+30.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
984
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§102
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
§112
29.7%
-10.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 933 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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. Claims 1 and 3-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumoto et al. (6,766,558) in view of Hakan et al. (8,225,456; earliest priority 10 February 2003), Shaver et al. (2004/0216264) and Fester (7,708,789). Regarding claims 1, Matsumoto discloses a portable vacuum cleaner (Figs. 2-4) comprising a portable vacuum cleaner (1), a surface cleaning head (4) and an upflow duct (3), the upflow duct has an air inlet end at the connection to the head and an upper air outlet (at the connection to the portable vacuum cleaner), the portable vacuum cleaner comprising: (a) an air flow passage extending from a dirty air inlet to a clean air outlet, a suction motor (1a) positioned in the air flow path; (b) an air treatment chamber (5; disclosed as having the same internal components of the first embodiment in Col. 10, lines 1-5, which is represented by Figs. 1-19) positioned in the air flow passage upstream from the suction motor and comprising a first (lower) end, a second opposed (upper) end, a longitudinal axis extending an axial distance in an axial direction from the first end to the second end, an air treatment chamber air inlet (5a in Fig. 3) and an air treatment chamber air outlet (5b in Fig. 3), the first end is openable (as shown in Figs. 16-18) and comprises an openable first (lower) end wall and the second end comprises a second (upper) end wall and the air treatment chamber air outlet, which comprises a port (aperture through which pipe 10b extends in Fig. 3) in the second end wall; (d) a body (1) including the suction motor, the suction motor is positioned in the air flow passage downstream from the pre-motor filter, the suction motor having a motor axis and a motor inlet end (lower end); and, (e) a handle (10a) provided on the body, and wherein the longitudinal axis and the motor axis extend in the same direction (all clearly shown in Fig. 25). - Regarding the new clause added to claim 1, Matsumoto discloses that the upflow duct (3) is “coupled” to the portable vacuum cleaner (Col. 5, lines 22-24, relative to the first embodiment), which suggests that the portable vacuum cleaner may be removed from the upflow duct, and Matsumoto also discloses, when the portable vacuum cleaner is mounted to the upflow duct (Fig. 25) and the upflow duct extends upwardly from the surface cleaning head, the upper air outlet of the upflow duct is positioned a distance above the surface cleaning head that is greater than the axial distance (of the air treatment chamber) such that the portable vacuum cleaner will be solely supported by the upflow duct - However, Matsumoto fails to disclose that the surface cleaning head comprises a pivoting connector, a pre-motor filter between the air treatment chamber and the motor or to specifically disclose that the portable vacuum cleaner is removable. - Hakan discloses a similar vacuum cleaner, also having a surface cleaning head, portable vacuum cleaner and upflow duct connecting the two, and teaches that the head is pivotally connected to the upflow duct, which is very old and well known in the art of vacuum cleaners to allow for tilting of the head relative to the handle for maneuvering of the vacuum cleaner along a floor surface. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the connection of the head to the upflow duct of Matsumoto with a similar pivoting connector, as is very well known in the art, to allow for tilting of the head relative to the handle for maneuvering of the vacuum cleaner. - Further, Fester discloses another similar vacuum cleaner having a cyclonic separator and discloses that a cylindrical filter is also provided downstream from the cyclonic separator, to function as well-known pre-motor filter for further preventing any dust or debris from reaching the suction motor to prevent damage thereto. Fester further teaches that the cylindrical filter is aligned with the outlet of the cyclone chamber, similar to the chamber 5 of Matsumoto, and being understood to anyone of ordinary skill in the art that a cylindrical filter may provide substantially more surface area than a more basic flat filter. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a similar pre-motor filter between the cyclonic separator and the motor of Matsumoto, as taught by Fester, and to provide advantages of increased filter surface area, which will reduce clogging and maintain optimal airflow through the filter. Thus, when the filter taught by Fester is provided for Matsumoto, the filter will be positioned in the air flow passage downstream from the air treatment chamber air outlet wherein air exits thorough the port in the second end wall in the axial direction at a location upstream of the pre-motor filter and will comprise a first end, an axially spaced apart second end, a sidewall that extends between the first end of the pre-motor filter and the axially spaced apart second end, wherein the sidewall comprises a filter material (86) surrounding an open interior providing a filtered air flow path, the axially spaced apart second (lower) end is open whereby, after passing through the sidewall, air enters the filtered air flow path and passes through the open axially spaced apart second end. Further, when provided to the cleaner of Matsumoto, between the cyclonic chamber and the motor, in a similar chamber taught by Fester, the longitudinal axis and the motor axis will both extend through the open interior of the filter taught by Fester. - Finally, although Matsumoto does not specifically disclose that the portable vacuum cleaner is removable from the upflow duct, Shaver discloses another very similar portable vacuum cleaner, that may be attached to a suction head via an upflow duct (Fig. 19D), or may be removed from the upflow duct for use as a handheld cleaner with a range of different accessories and connections for different applications (Figs. 19A-C and 19E-G). Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to configure the portable vacuum cleaner of Matsumoto to be removable from the upflow duct, as taught y Shaver, to allow for use as a handheld cleaner with a range of different accessories and connections for different applications, to increase the functionality of the cleaner. Regarding claims 9 and 11 (11 is substantial duplicate of claim 1, with the addition of the limitations of claim 9), Fester further discloses that the pre-motor filter is positioned in a filter housing (cyclone insert 80) and an annular space is located between the filter housing and the pre-motor filter (clearly seen in Fig. 4). Regarding claim 3, Matsumoto further provides the first end of the air treatment chamber with a radial center, with the motor axis extending through the radial center (clearly shown to be axially aligned in Fig. 25). Regarding claims 4 and 12, Matsumoto further discloses that the motor axis is co-axial with the longitudinal axis (clearly shown to be axially aligned in Fig. 25). Regarding claims 5 and 13, Matsumoto discloses the handle (10a), is provided at an end wall of the portable cleaner (the handle clearly connecting to the body at the upper end wall of the cleaner body). Regarding claims 6 and 14, although Matsumoto fails to disclose a location of an outlet of the portable vacuum cleaner body, Matsumoto does disclose that the body has a first end and an axially spaced apart second end, the axially spaced apart second end has an end face and the handle is provided on the end face (as shown in Fig. 25). Hakan and Shaver both further discloses, on very similar handheld portable vacuum cleaners, that the outlet is positioned on the housing at a location rearward of the motor, which is in the direction of airflow out of the motor. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to position the outlet of the body of Matsumoto in a similar location, as taught by Hakan and Shaver, being known in the art and to simplify the airflow from the motor, which will locate the outlet at the axially spaced apart second end. Regarding claims 7 and 15, Matsumoto, as modified by Shaver, further discloses that the portable vacuum cleaner is operable both when mounted to the upflow duct and when removed from the upflow duct. Regarding claims 8 and 16, Matsumoto, as modified by Shaver, further discloses that the portable vacuum cleaner is removably mountable to the upflow duct at the upper air outlet. Regarding claims 10 and 17, Matsumoto further discloses that the air treatment chamber comprises a cyclone. Regarding claims 18 and 19, Matsumoto, as modified by Fester, further discloses that, in operation to clean a floor, the suction motor is positioned above the pre-motor filter. Regarding claim 20, Matsumoto, as modified by Fester, further discloses that the motor inlet end faces the axially spaced apart second end of the pre-motor filter (best seen in Fig. 11A). Regarding claims 21 and 22, the pre-motor filter taught by Fester, and applied to the cleaner of Matsumoto as discussed supra, is configured such that after exiting the port in the second end wall, air travels outwardly into the annular space between the filter housing and the sidewall of the pre-motor filter. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 7 May 2024 and 11 December 2024 have been considered by the examiner. However, the examiner notes that the IDS documents include an extensive number of references, many/most of which have little to no relevance to the specifics of the claimed invention of the current application. Although the examiner has reviewed the applicant’s submitted references, the examiner does request that the applicant submit additional disclosure of any particularly relevant references to the current claimed invention for more focused review by the examiner. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks/Arguments, filed 8 December 2025, with respect to prior art rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Matsumoto, Fester, Shaver and Hakan, as discussed above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN R MULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4489. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm. 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, Brian Keller can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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. /BRYAN R MULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 30 December 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 02, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 04, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 04, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 04, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 08, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588790
SYSTEM AND METHOD OF LOOSENING, REMOVING AND COLLECTING DEBRIS FROM NEWLY MACHINED ARTICLES USING COMPRESSED AIR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575707
A WET DUSTER MODULE FOR A CLEANER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12569099
SURFACE CLEANING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569097
CLEANING MODULE, STORAGE SYSTEM, AND CLEANING METHOD FOR STORAGE APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557954
DEBRIS CLEANING MECHANISM AND CLEANING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
44%
Grant Probability
74%
With Interview (+30.0%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 933 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month