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, 4, 1-11, 14 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Green (3,126,570) in view of Murphy et al. (2004/0134022) and Pullins et al. (2007/0209142).
Regarding claim 1, Green discloses a surface cleaning apparatus comprising:
a) an air flow passage (effectively the entire apparatus) extending from a dirty air inlet to a clean air outlet;
b) a surface cleaning head (A) having the dirty air inlet, the surface cleaning head having a pivoting connector (25/27) an upper end of the pivoting connector providing an air outlet of the surface cleaning head (suction tube 25 forming part of the pivotal connection, via linkages 27, to the rear wheel assembly, and fluidly communicating with the duct 16 forming the inlet opening;
c) a support (arms 27) pivotally mounted to the surface cleaning head by the pivoting connector (axle 10),
d) a surface cleaning unit (B; to be referred to hereinafter as SCU) that is vertically mounted to an upper end of the support (shown to be connected thereto), the surface cleaning unit comprising:
(i) a collection unit (30) positioned in the air flow passage, the collection unit comprising a separation chamber having
(ii) a pre-motor filter (57) positioned in the air flow passage downstream from the cyclone air outlet;
(iii) a suction motor (31) positioned in the air flow passage downstream from the pre-motor filter; and,
e) a mounting member (26/28) at a rear side of the surface cleaning unit, the mounting member having an upper portion and a lower portion which project rearwardly from the rear side of the surface cleaning unit, wherein in use to clean a floor, the lower portion is mounted to the upper end of the support (25/27) whereby the surface cleaning unit is mounted to the support.
However, Green fails to disclose that the support consists of an upflow duct, the SCU comprises a cyclone, that the SCU as a whole is removable from the support or that a wand is drivingly connected to the surface cleaning head.
Regarding the upflow duct and removable SCU (20), Murphy discloses a similar cleaning apparatus, also having a head (10), support (42) pivotally extending therefrom and forming the airflow path from the head to the SCU, performing equivalent function to the pivotal support structures (25/27) of Green, but Murphy teaches that the support consists solely of a rigid upflow duct (42) pivotally mounted to a surface cleaning head. Further, Murphy teaches that the remainder of suction unit (equivalent to SCU of Green) may be removed from the upflow duct (paragraph 27), which would be understood to anyone of ordinary skill in the art to allow the vacuum to be used with other accessories for different cleaning functions, wands between the cleaning head and the SCU to adjust the cleaning reach and/or angle (similar to wands 3 shown by Matsumoto et al. 6,766,558, provided as extrinsic evidence) or may be used without the cleaning head as a more compact hand held cleaner. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to replace the multi-part pivotal support of Green with a simpler single component, in the form of the rigid upflow duct, as taught by Murphy and understood to be known alterative structure in the art that will simplify the mechanism for the pivotal support and airflow path. Further, it also would have been obvious to configure the SCU of Green to also optionally be removed from the support (when configured similar to the support 42 of Murphy), also taught by Murphy, to provide known advantages of use with accessories, wands or in a handheld configuration.
Regarding the cyclone structure for the SCU, Murphy also discloses a more modern collection unit, comprising a cyclone air inlet (at 54)), a cyclone air outlet (114), a dirt outlet (space 150 between baffle 130 and cyclone wall, as viewed in Fig. 8) and a dirt collection chamber (space below baffle 130) external to the cyclone chamber, wherein cyclone collectors are known in the art to be substantially more efficient and effective at removing debris from the airflow, compared to older bag type separators of Green. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to replace the bag type SCU of Green with a more modern, efficient and effective cyclone separator, similar to Murphy.
Regarding the wand, Green discloses that the cleaner has a rigid and removable handle (40), and a flexible hose (41) connecting the airflow path from the head (A) and support (26), via the mounting member, but fails to disclose a removable wand forming a handle. Pullins discloses an upright vacuum cleaner, having a similar configuration to Green, but Pullins discloses that the handle used for driving the upright vacuum may be formed as a removable wand, which is connected to the airflow path of the cleaner via a flexible hose, wherein the configuration allows the vacuum cleaner to be converted between "on-the-floor cleaning" and "above-the-floor cleaning” and Pullins teaches that the wand functions as the handle of the cleaner in the floor cleaning mode (Fig. 1A), when the wand is mounted to a mounting member (entire rear shell portion shown in Fig. 2 may be considered to be the mourning member) that projects rearwardly from the rear side of the surface cleaning unit (shown to be rearward of the all of the components of the SCU, including the collection unit 22, the motor and any pre-motor filters provided therein). Further Pullins discloses that in the floor cleaning mode, the cyclone chamber is in flow communication with the dirty air inlet of the surface cleaning head, and wherein, when the wand is removed, the surface cleaning apparatus is operable in an above floor cleaning mode in which the cyclone chamber is in flow communication with the inlet of the wand through the flexible hose (via a valve 52). Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to look to Pullins for increased functionality of the handle and the cleaner as a whole, by providing the wand of Pullins, configured as a removable handle, being connected to the off-the-floor suction hose, wherein removal of the wand from the cleaner will automatically convert the airflow path from the on-the-floor to off-the-floor suction modes. Further, the wand of Pullins functioning as the handle in the on-the-floor mode will function to eliminate the need for the separate, removable handle (40) of Green, as well as providing a storage space for the wand, and multiple functions for the wand to improve functionality of the cleaner of Green, with what is now known as relatively common vacuum structure to allow for multiple modes of use (upright and off-floor cleaning using the removed wand), similar to the increased usage (upright or hand held) provided by Murphy. Thus, it would have been obvious to provide the wand, as structured and drivingly connected to the body in the manner taught by Pullins, with the most obvious equivalent structure to Green, having the wand connected to the upper end of the mounting member of Green, to allow the wand to operate as the handle in the on-the-floor cleaning mode, and automatically convert to off-the-floor cleaning mode when removed from the body, to provide the functions disclosed by Pullins.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Green, Murphy and Pullins provides the cleaner of claim 1, with the mounting member at a rear side of the surface cleaning unit (as discussed above for Green and Pullins) with the support (upflow duct, as taught by Murphy) positioned such that when the surface cleaning unit is mounted to the support by the mounting member and the support extends vertically, the cyclone unit, the pre- motor filter, and the suction motor are positioned at fully forward (in a horizontal direction) of the support and overlie the surface cleaning head.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Green further discloses that when the surface cleaning unit is mounted to the support and the support extends vertically, the surface cleaning unit overlies the surface cleaning head (clearly seen in Fig. 1) and the dirty air inlet (16) is provided at a front end of the surface cleaning head and, when the surface cleaning unit is mounted to the support and the support extends vertically, a rear side of the portable cleaning unit is mounted to the support and the portable cleaning unit is positioned forward of the support (as shown by Green and Pullins).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, when Green is provided with cyclone unit of Murphy, as discussed for claim 1, when the surface cleaning unit is mounted to the support and the support extends vertically (orientation of Fig. 1 of Green), the cyclone air inlet and the cyclone air outlet will be provided at one end (upper portion) of the cyclone chamber and a dirt outlet is provided at an opposed end of the cyclone chamber (dirt outlet 150).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Murphy further discloses that the dirt collection chamber comprises a portion that is positioned axially from of the cyclone chamber (dirt collection chamber defined axially below the cyclone chamber, separated by baffle (130).
Regarding claims 9 and 17, as discussed supra, it would have been obvious to provide the wand/handle and on/off-the-floor conversion mechanism taught by Pullins, including the valve (52) provided to convert the suction flow between the two modes. 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 valve and wand to the cleaner of Green, having a suction hose for off-floor cleaning, to allow for similar conversion between cleaning modes as taught by Pullins, wherein the rotatable valve will be in a first position to define a first air flow path portion that extends from the dirty air inlet (of the cleaner head) to the cyclone chamber, wherein the surface cleaning unit of Green would necessarily be mounted to the support (42 of Murphy) to provide suction to the cleaner head), and the rotatable valve is in a second position when a wand is removed to place the cyclone chamber in flow communication with an inlet of the wand.
Regarding claims 10 and 18, the valve of Pullins is discloses to be provided as part of the mounting member that projects rearwardly from the remainder of the portable cleaning unit and is located at an upper end of the inlet duct that communicates with the cleaning head, such that a similar location of the valve and wand to the cleaner of Green, would position the valve at an upper end of the support when the surface cleaning unit is mounted to the support and the support extends vertically.
Regarding claim 19, as discussed above, Murphy teaches that the support may consist of an upflow duct (as discussed for claim 1).
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 filed 22 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant has amended claims 1 and 11 to overcome the previous claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and objection to the drawing. Regarding the prior art, the examiner does not concede that the previous rejection is overcome, but does modify the rejection, based on the newly found Green reference, due to closer resemblance to the claimed and disclosed invention of the current application. However, much of the same concepts from the previous rejections are applied to the Green reference in a manner that makes obvious the pending structure of all claims, as amended.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of Scalfani et al. (6,146,434), Gammack (7,036,183), Dyson (RE. 32,257), Beskow et al. (2008/0040883) and Matsumoto et al. (6,766,558) disclose cleaners having similar structure as the applicant’s claimed invention.
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 18 March 2026