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 Amendments
The amendments filed April 1, 2026 have been entered. Accordingly, claims 1-21 are currently pending and have been examined. The Examiner acknowledges the amendments of claims 1 and 3-21. The previous specification objection has been withdrawn due to newly submitted and accepted “Abstract” dated 04/01/2026. The previous claim objections and previous 112 rejections are withdrawn due to applicant’s amendments. The previous 103 rejections has been modified due to applicant’s amendments. For the reason(s) set forth below, applicant’s arguments have not been found persuasive. The action is Final.
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 1-21 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.
The term “the main axis extends somewhat above the support plate” in claim 1, line 23 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “somewhat” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examining purposes, the examiner is to interpret the claim limitation to be wherein the main axis extends .
Claim 5 recites the limitation "a CO2 store" in line 4. It is unclear if the applicant is attempting to claim multiple/different CO2 store or if the applicant is referring back to the same CO2 store as introduced in claim 1, line 10, thus rendering the claim indefinite. For examining purposes, the examiner is to interpret the claim limitation to be referring to a single CO2 store.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "a CO2 store" in lines 11-12. It is unclear if the applicant is attempting to claim multiple/different CO2 store or if the applicant is referring back to the same CO2 store as introduced in claim 1, line 10, thus rendering the claim indefinite. For examining purposes, the examiner is to interpret the claim limitation to be referring to a single CO2 store.
Claims 2-4, 6-8, and 10-21 depend on claim 1 and are therefore rejected accordingly under 35 USC 112(b).
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Silva (US Pub. No. 2019/0076989) in view of Spivak (US Pub. No. 2006/0178092), Xiao (CN 107139085), Mister (DE 202007001220), and Thompson (US Patent No. 3,476,440).
Regarding claim 1, De Silva discloses: a cleaning appliance (Figures 1-8 element 10 and see also paragraph 0075) for blasting surfaces to be treated with a mixed stream of a pressurized gas and CO2 pellets (see paragraph 0075), comprising
an apparatus (elements 31/34/44) for producing the CO2 pellets from liquid or gaseous CO2 (see paragraphs 0077-0079/0104), wherein the apparatus comprises a compressing device (see paragraph 0077 where the prior art discloses element 31 (portion of apparatus) as “a pre-compressing device” and see also paragraph 0079 where the prior art discloses element 44 (portion of apparatus) as “a main compressing device”) for compressing CO2 snow to form the CO2 pellets (see paragraphs 0077-0079),
wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a drive device (element 100 and see also paragraph 0089 where the prior art discloses element 100 as “a drive”),
wherein the cleaning appliance is of mobile configuration and comprises a chassis (element 74 and see also paragraph 0082),
wherein the chassis comprises at least three wheels (element 72 and see also paragraph 0082 where the prior art discloses element 72 as “at least three wheels”),
wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a store holding device (element 78) for a CO2 store (element 24 and see also paragraph 0083), and
wherein the chassis defines a main axis (see figure 1 showing the chassis (element 74) would necessarily define a main axis that extends into the page).
Furthermore, the drive (element 100) is used to drive elements 86/92 (circular wheel) into rotation (see paragraph 0089). However, De Silva appears to be silent wherein the cleaning appliance comprises the drive device with a drive shaft for driving the compressing device, wherein, during an intended use of the cleaning appliance, the drive shaft defines a drive shaft axis which extends in parallel or substantially in parallel to a direction of gravity, wherein at least one of the three wheels is of steerable configuration, wherein two wheels of the at least three wheels of the chassis are configured in the form of two main axis wheels that are arranged or formed so as to be rotatable about the main axis, wherein the chassis comprises a chassis frame, wherein the main axis wheels are arranged or formed projecting laterally beyond the chassis frame, and wherein the store holding device comprises a support plate, which extends to the rear away from the chassis frame and defines a planar standing surface for the CO2 store, and wherein the main axis extends somewhat above the support plate.
Spivak is also concern in a cleaning appliance (Figures 1-15 and see also paragraph 0024) for blasting media (see abstract), wherein the appliance comprises a drive (element 8 and see also paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses element 8 as “a drive assembly” which includes “an electric motor” (element 110) to drive a compression device (element 76) which comprise element 124 (see figure 4 showing element 124 as a circular disk) into rotation (see paragraphs 0035-0036). Spivak further teaches wherein the cleaning appliance comprises the drive device with a drive shaft for driving the compressing device (See paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses element 8 (drive assembly) includes a motor (element 110, i.e. drive device) that is “drivingly connected” to a shaft (element 78, which the shaft drives the compressing device (see paragraph 0036) through “a right angle transmission” (element 112) and a coupling (element 114) which couples element 78, thus it is well known in the art that the drive device (motor) comprises a drive shaft (as best shown in figure 2 annotated below Detail A) in order to connect to the right angle transmission to drive a element 78 of the compression device.) and wherein, during an intended use of the cleaning appliance, the drive shaft defines a drive shaft axis which extends in parallel or substantially in parallel to a direction of gravity (see figure 2 annotated below showing the appliance during use having the drive shaft (Detail A) defining a drive shaft axis (X-X axis) which extends parallel to a direction of gravity).
PNG
media_image1.png
774
705
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Spivak to provide wherein the cleaning appliance comprises the drive device with a drive shaft for driving the compressing device, and wherein, during an intended use of the cleaning appliance, the drive shaft defines a drive shaft axis which extends in parallel or substantially in parallel to a direction of gravity. One of ordinary skill in the would recognize that providing a known driving means with a driving shaft would necessarily provide the predictable result of allowing the compression device wheel’s to rotate in an automated/control manner in order to automatically produce
C
O
2
pellets during operations.
However, De Silva modified appears to be silent wherein at least one of the three wheels is of steerable configuration, wherein two wheels of the at least three wheels of the chassis are configured in the form of two main axis wheels that are arranged or formed so as to be rotatable about the main axis, wherein the chassis comprises a chassis frame, wherein the main axis wheels are arranged or formed projecting laterally beyond the chassis frame, and wherein the store holding device comprises a support plate, which extends to the rear away from the chassis frame and defines a planar standing surface for the CO2 store, and wherein the main axis extends somewhat above the support plate.
Xiao is also concern in providing a portable appliance for blasting (Figure 1 and see also paragraph 0022) comprising a chassis (element 1) comprising wheels (element 26) and wherein the wheels is of steerable configuration (see paragraph 0023 where the prior art discloses utilizing element 26 “facilitates movement” and having element 27 which “fixes” element 26 to prevent movement, thus having a steerable configuration in the form of a steering roller (element 26) with a fixing device (element 27)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Xiao to provide wherein at least one of the three wheels is of steerable configuration. One of ordinary skill in the would recognize that providing known wheels with brakes would necessarily provide the predictable result of allowing the user to move the appliance at desired different locations while also fixing the appliance in place in order to prevent unwanted shaking or rolling during operations.
However, De Silva modified appears to be silent wherein two wheels of the at least three wheels of the chassis are configured in the form of two main axis wheels that are arranged or formed so as to be rotatable about the main axis, wherein the chassis comprises a chassis frame, wherein the main axis wheels are arranged or formed projecting laterally beyond the chassis frame, and wherein the store holding device comprises a support plate, which extends to the rear away from the chassis frame and defines a planar standing surface for the CO2 store, and wherein the main axis extends somewhat above the support plate.
Mister is also concern in providing a portable appliance for blasting (Figures 1-3 and see also paragraph 0001) comprising a chassis (see figures 1-2 annotated below Detail A), three wheels (elements 22/24/26 and see paragraph 0034), and wherein the chassis defines a main axis (see figure 1 annotated below X-X axis).
Mister further discloses wherein two wheels of the at least three wheels of the chassis are configured in the form of two main axis wheels (elements 22/24) that are arranged or formed so as to be rotatable about the main axis (see figure 1 annotated below) and wherein the chassis comprises a chassis frame (see figure 1 annotated below showing within the box of the chassis (Detail A) a structural outline that is supporting a plurality of different components, thus having a chassis frame), wherein the main axis wheels are arranged or formed projecting laterally beyond the chassis frame (see figure 1 annotated below) .
PNG
media_image2.png
480
642
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
680
575
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Mister to provide wherein two wheels of the at least three wheels of the chassis are configured in the form of two main axis wheels that are arranged or formed so as to be rotatable about the main axis, wherein the chassis comprises a chassis frame, wherein the main axis wheels are arranged or formed projecting laterally beyond the chassis frame. One of ordinary skill in the would recognize that providing known wheels including at least two wheels arranged beyond the chassis frame would necessarily provide the predictable result of allowing the user to move the appliance at desired different locations during operations.
However, De Silva modified appears to be silent wherein the store holding device comprises a support plate, which extends to the rear away from the chassis frame and defines a planar standing surface for the CO2 store, and wherein the main axis extends somewhat above the support plate.
Thompson is also concern in providing an appliance (Figures 1-4 and see also col. 1, ll. 65-72) comprising a chassis frame (elements 25/26) and a store holding device (see figure 1 annotated below Detail A) for holding a store (element 35). Schmidt further teaches wherein the store holding device comprises a support plate, which extends to the rear away from the chassis frame and defines a planar standing surface for the store (Per applicants disclosure on page 0025, ll. 10-11, “the support plate 94, which forms part of the chassis frame 26”, the prior art similarly discloses the store holding device in the form of a support plate (Detail A) that extends from a portion of the chassis frame (element 26) that extends to the rear away from different portions (element 25 and right portion of element 26) of the chassis frame and defines a planar standing surface (Detail B) for the store (element 35), and wherein the main axis extends somewhat above the support plate (see figure 1 annotated below showing a portion (element 25) of the chassis that defines a main axis (X-X axis that necessarily extends into the page in order to define the main axis) being above the support plate (Detail A)).
PNG
media_image4.png
476
859
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Thompson to provide wherein the store holding device comprises a support plate, which extends to the rear away from the chassis frame and defines a planar standing surface for the CO2 store, and wherein the main axis extends somewhat above the support plate. One of ordinary skill in the would recognize that having the support plate with a planar surface would necessarily provide the predictable result of supporting the CO2 store at multiple different locations during transportation to different work areas, thus preventing the CO2 store from falling off during transporting movements.
Regarding claim 2, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1, wherein at least one of
a) the drive device comprises an electric motor (As described above on the rejection of claim 1 (see page 6), the prior art of Spivak discloses in paragraph 0035 where the prior art discloses element 8 as “a drive assembly” which includes “an electric motor” (element 110)) and
b) the cleaning appliance comprises a transmission coupled to the drive device and wherein the transmission is coupled to the compressing device in a driving manner (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 2.).
Regarding claim 3, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1 wherein the cleaning appliance defines a main plane (see figure 1 showing the cleaning appliance (element 10) comprising a housing (element 18) having two-dimensional surfaces (outer surface of element 18) extending in the width and length direction, thus defining a main plane), wherein the main plane extends in parallel to the direction of gravity and reaches from a rear side to a front side of the cleaning appliance (see figure 1 showing the main plane of the housing (element 18) having portions (up-down) extending parallel to the direction of gravity (downward direction) and portions (left-right) reaching a rear side (surface of element 18 that is adjacent to element 78) and the front side (surface of element 18 that is adjacent to element 62)), wherein the main plane defines a symmetry plane or substantially defines a symmetry plane of the cleaning appliance (Giving that the prior art shows a main plane and no additional structure is provided, therefore the main plane would necessarily define the symmetry plane or substantially defines a symmetry plane of the cleaning appliance, as recited.), wherein, in particular, the drive shaft extends in the main plane.
However, De Silva modified does not explicitly disclose that the drive shaft extends in the main plane.
However, it would be have been it would have been to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Silva to provide the drive shaft extends in the main plane, since rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognized that having the drive shaft extending at a desired plane including the main plane would necessarily allow the drive shaft to continue to function appropriately as intended in order to allow the compression device wheel’s to rotate in an automated/control manner in order to automatically produce
C
O
2
pellets during operations. (See MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C))
Regarding claim 4, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1 wherein the compressing device comprises a pre-compression device (element 31 and see also paragraph 0077 where the prior art discloses element 31 as “a pre-compressing device”) and a main compressing device (element 44 and see also paragraph 0077 where the prior art discloses element 44 as “a main compressing device”),
wherein, in particular, at least one of
a) the pre-compression device is configured to pre-compress
C
O
2
snow produced by expansion of liquid or pressurized
C
O
2
(see paragraph 0104), wherein, in particular, the pre-compression device is configured in the form of a fluid mechanical pre-compression device (see paragraph 0104), and
b) the pre-compression device extends in parallel or substantially in parallel to the main plane (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 4.).
Regarding claim 5, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1 wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a
C
O
2
store (see rejection of claim 1 above on page 5 element 24).
Regarding claim 6, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 5, wherein the
C
O
2
store at least one of
a) contains liquid
C
O
2
or pressurized gaseous
C
O
2
(see paragraph 0076) and
b) is configured in the form of a
C
O
2
bottle, wherein the CO2 bottle defines a bottle longitudinal axis, and wherein the bottle longitudinal axis extends in parallel or substantially in parallel to the direction of gravity, wherein, in particular, the cleaning appliance defines a main plane, wherein the main plane extends in parallel to the direction of gravity and reaches from a rear side to a front side of the cleaning appliance, wherein the main plane defines a symmetry plane or substantially defines a symmetry plane of the cleaning appliance, wherein the bottle longitudinal axis extends in the main plane (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 6.), and
c) is arranged symmetrically relative to the main plane (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 6.) and
d) is fluidically connected to the compressing device, in particular to the pre-compression device (see figure 2) wherein the compressing device comprises the pre-compression device and a main compressing device (see paragraph 0077 where the prior art discloses element 31 (portion of apparatus) as “a pre-compressing device” and see also paragraph 0079 where the prior art discloses element 44 (portion of apparatus) as “a main compressing device”).
Regarding claim 7, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 5, wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a store holding device (element 78) for the
C
O
2
store (see paragraph 0082),
wherein, in particular, the store holding device at least one of
a) defines a store receptacle (see phantom lines of element 78 defining a store receptacle) for the
C
O
2
store, wherein, in particular, wherein the cleaning appliance defines a main plane (see figure 1 showing the cleaning appliance (element 10) comprising a housing (element 18) having two-dimensional surfaces (outer surface of element 18) extending in the width and length direction, thus defining a main plane), wherein the main plane extends in parallel to the direction of gravity and reaches from a rear side to a front side of the cleaning appliance (see figure 1 showing the main plane of the housing (element 18) having portions (up-down) extending parallel to the direction of gravity (downward direction) and portions (left-right) reaching a rear side (surface of element 18 that is adjacent to element 78) and the front side (surface of element 18 that is adjacent to element 62)), wherein the main plane defines a symmetry plane or substantially defines a symmetry plane of the cleaning appliance (Giving that the prior art shows a main plane and no additional structure is provided, therefore the main plane would necessarily define the symmetry plane or substantially defines a symmetry plane of the cleaning appliance, as recited.), wherein the store receptacle is configured symmetrically relative to the main plane (see figure 1 annotated below showing the bottom portion of the phantom lines of element 78 of the store receptacle being symmetrically relative to the main plane), and
b) comprises at least one securing element for the
C
O
2
store, wherein, in particular, the at least one securing element is configured in the form of a holding bracket or in the form of a holding band (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 7.).
PNG
media_image5.png
600
798
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1 wherein the at least one of the three wheels which is of steerable configuration, is in the form of a steering roller, in particular in the form of a steering roller with a fixing device (see rejection of claim 1 above on page 8 where the prior art of Xiao discloses in paragraph 0023 where the prior art discloses utilizing element 26 “facilitates movement” and having element 27 which “fixes” element 26 to prevent movement, thus having a steerable configuration in the form of a steering roller (element 26) with a fixing device (element 27)).
Regarding claim 9, De Silva modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claims 1 and 8 and further shows (see figure 1) the at least three wheels (element 72 and see also paragraph 0082 where the prior art discloses element 72 as “at least three wheels”) which being supported on the chassis (element 74). However, De Silva modified does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of a) the main axis wheels define a main axis wheel diameter, wherein the at least one wheel of steerable configuration defines a steering wheel diameter, and wherein the main axis wheel diameter is greater than the steering wheel diameter, in particular at least twice as great, and b) the store holding device is arranged or formed in such a way that a CO2 store of the cleaning appliance is positioned over the main axis and c) the CO2 store is configured in the form of a CO2 bottle, wherein the CO2 bottle defines a bottle longitudinal axis, wherein the bottle longitudinal axis extends in parallel or substantially in parallel to the direction of gravity, and wherein the bottle longitudinal axis intersects the main axis.
Mister is also concern in providing a portable appliance for blasting (Figures 1-3 and see also paragraph 0001) comprising a chassis (see figures 1-2 annotated below Detail A) and three wheels (elements 22/24/26 and see paragraph 0034). Mister further wherein at least one of
a) the main axis wheels define a main axis wheel diameter (see figure 1 annotated below Detail B), wherein the at least one wheel of steerable configuration defines a steering wheel diameter (see figure 1 annotated below Detail C), and wherein the main axis wheel diameter is greater than the steering wheel diameter (see figure 1 annotated below), in particular at least twice as great (see figure 1 annotated below), and
b) the store holding device is arranged or formed in such a way that a CO2 store of the cleaning appliance is positioned over the main axis (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 9.) and
c) the CO2 store is configured in the form of a CO2 bottle, wherein the CO2 bottle defines a bottle longitudinal axis, wherein the bottle longitudinal axis extends in parallel or substantially in parallel to the direction of gravity, and wherein the bottle longitudinal axis intersects the main axis (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 9.).
PNG
media_image2.png
480
642
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Mister to provide wherein at least one of a) the main axis wheels define a main axis wheel diameter, wherein the at least one wheel of steerable configuration defines a steering wheel diameter, and wherein the main axis wheel diameter is greater than the steering wheel diameter, in particular at least twice as great, and b) the store holding device is arranged or formed in such a way that a CO2 store of the cleaning appliance is positioned over the main axis and c) the CO2 store is configured in the form of a CO2 bottle, wherein the CO2 bottle defines a bottle longitudinal axis, wherein the bottle longitudinal axis extends in parallel or substantially in parallel to the direction of gravity, and wherein the bottle longitudinal axis intersects the main axis. One of ordinary skill in the would recognize that providing known wheels with desired diameters would necessarily provide the predictable result of allowing the user to move the appliance at desired different locations during operations.
Regarding claim 10, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1 wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a blasting conduit connection (element 62) for connecting to a first free end (see figure 1 annotated below Detail A) of a mixed jet conduit (element 64) and wherein the blasting conduit connection is arranged or formed projecting transversely, in particular perpendicularly, to the direction of gravity (see figure 1 annotated below showing a portion of the conduit (left-to-right) of the blasting conduit connection (element 62) projection transversely, in particular perpendicularly, to the direction of gravity).
PNG
media_image6.png
601
871
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 10, wherein the blasting conduit connection at least one of
a) is arranged or formed higher than the main axis relative to the direction of gravity (see figure 1 showing the chassis (element 74) would necessarily define a main axis that extends into the page and see the blasting conduit connection (element 62) higher than the chassis, thus the blasting conduit connection would necessarily be higher than the main axis relative to the direction of gravity) and
b) and the main axis extend transversely, in particular perpendicularly, to one another (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 11.) and
c) extends in parallel to a main plane, the cleaning appliance defines the main plane, wherein the main plane extends in parallel to the direction of gravity and reaches from a rear side to a front side of the cleaning appliance, wherein the main plane defines a symmetry plane or substantially defines a symmetry plane of the cleaning appliance, wherein, in particular, the blasting conduit connection is configured symmetrically relative to the main plane (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 11.), and
d) and a CO2 connection are arranged or formed pointing in linearly independent directions, in particular pointing in opposite directions (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 11.).
Regarding claim 12, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1 wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a housing (element 18), wherein the housing defines a housing inner space (see figure 1 annotated below Detail A), and wherein the compressing device is arranged or formed at least partially, or completely in the housing inner space (see figure 1 annotated below showing the compressing device (elements 31/44) arranged completely in the housing inner space (Detail A)).
PNG
media_image7.png
600
798
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1, wherein at least one of
a) the chassis, in particular the chassis frame, closes or substantially closes the housing from a bottom relative to the direction of gravity (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 13.) and
b) the store holding device is molded onto the housing at least in sections (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 13.) and
c) the housing is made of a plastic material, in particular by injection molding or in a rotational molding process (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 13.), and
d) the housing comprises a handlebar for holding and pushing of the cleaning appliance, wherein, in particular, the handlebar is arranged or formed immovably on the housing (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 13.), and
e) the cleaning appliance has a
C
O
2
housing connection (element 20 and see also paragraph 0076) and wherein the
C
O
2
housing connection is arranged or formed projecting from the housing on the outside (see figure 1 showing the
C
O
2
housing connection (element 20) projecting from the housing (element 18) on the outside).
Regarding claim 14, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 1 wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a pressurized gas connection (element 50) for connecting to a pressurized gas source (element 54 and see also paragraph 0080).
Regarding claim 15, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 14, wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a pellet delivery device (elements 58) for delivering
C
O
2
pellets into a pressurized gas stream (see paragraph 0081) and wherein the pressurized gas connection is fluidically connected to the pellet delivery device (see figure 1),
wherein, in particular, the pellet delivery device at least one of
a) is fluidically connected to the blasting conduit connection (see figure 1), wherein the cleaning appliance comprises the blasting conduit connection for connecting to a first free end of a mixed jet conduit (element 64) and
b) comprises a dosing device for dosing a number of
C
O
2
pellets and/or a
C
O
2
pellet volume before the delivery into the pressurized gas stream (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 15.).
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Silva (US Pub. No. 2019/0076989) in view of Spivak (US Pub. No. 2006/0178092), Xiao (CN 107139085), Mister (DE 202007001220), and Thompson (US Patent No. 3,476,440) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Coulson (US Pub. No. 2021/0162426).
Regarding claim 16, De Silva modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a control and/or regulating device for controlling and/or regulating the cleaning appliance, in particular the compressing device.
Coulson is also concern in providing a cleaning appliance (Figures 1-19 and see also paragraphs 0002/0029) comprising a housing (element 12), and a compressing device (element 18) which operably compresses ice into useful sizes that enables entrainment into a high-speed stream of pressurized air in order to blast a surface (see paragraph 0029). Coulson further teaches the cleaning appliance comprises a control and/or regulating device (see paragraph 0034 where the prior art discloses utilizing “a switch, controller” (control and/or regulating device) and further disclosing the switch is disposed on the frame (housing)) for controlling and/or regulating the cleaning appliance, in particular the compressing device (see paragraph 0034 where the prior art discloses utilizing “a switch and a controller” to automatically switch between two modes (water ice and dry ice modes) and see also paragraph 0030-0033 where the prior art discloses of “activating” element 18 (compressing device) into the different modes (dry ice mode), thus the “a switch and a controller (control and/or regulating device) operably control/regulate the compressing device).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Coulson to provide wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a control and/or regulating device for controlling and/or regulating the cleaning appliance, in particular the compressing device. One of ordinary skill in the would recognize that providing a controlling device would necessarily allow the user to accurately and automatically set desired modes/settings of the appliance during operations, thus enhancing the capabilities of the cleaning appliance.
Regarding claim 17, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 16, wherein the control and/or regulating device at least one of
a) is arranged or formed in the housing (As described above on the rejection of claim 16 (see pages 28-29), the prior art of Coulson discloses “a switch, controller” (control and/or regulating device) and further disclosing the switch is disposed on the frame (housing)), wherein the cleaning appliance comprises the housing (De Silva as modified would necessarily have the cleaning appliance housing (element 18) now modified with the “a switch, controller” (control and/or regulating device) of Coulson, now residing in the housing of De Silva), and
b) is arranged or formed at least partially below the compressing device and at least partially above the compressing device relative to the direction of gravity (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 17.) and
c) is configured to control the compressing device in such a way that mechanical properties of the CO2 pellets to be produced are specifiable (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 17.) and
d) comprises an input device for specifying the mechanical properties, in particular density and/or size, and/or a number of CO2 pellets to be produced, wherein, in particular, the input device is configured to be releasably connectable to the housing (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 17.).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Silva (US Pub. No. 2019/0076989) in view of Spivak (US Pub. No. 2006/0178092), Xiao (CN 107139085), Mister (DE 202007001220), and Thompson (US Patent No. 3,476,440) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Curran (US Pub. No. 2019/0039209).
Regarding claim 18, De Silva modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent wherein the cleaning appliance comprises an energy supply connection or a current supply connection, for connecting the cleaning appliance to an energy supply network, in particular to a current supply network.
Curran is also concern in providing a cleaning appliance for blasting surfaces (Figures 1-11a and see also “Abstract” and paragraph 0057) and wherein the cleaning appliance comprises an energy supply connection (element 120) or a current supply connection (see paragraph 0057), for connecting the cleaning appliance to an energy supply network (element 122/124), in particular to a current supply network (see paragraph 0057).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Curran to provide wherein the cleaning appliance comprises an energy supply connection or a current supply connection, for connecting the cleaning appliance to an energy supply network, in particular to a current supply network. One of ordinary skill in the would recognize that providing a known energy supply connection would necessarily provide the predictable result of powering the electric components of the cleaning appliance during operations, thus allowing the user to operate the appliance.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Silva (US Pub. No. 2019/0076989) in view of Spivak (US Pub. No. 2006/0178092), Xiao (CN 107139085), Mister (DE 202007001220), and Thompson (US Patent No. 3,476,440) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mayer (DE 202018106364).
Regarding claim 19, De Silva modified discloses all the limitations as stated in the rejection of claim 1, but appears to be silent wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a
C
O
2
exhaust gas outlet for discharging
C
O
2
gas that did not solidify in the compressing device or that was formed due to sublimation of the
C
O
2
pellets.
Mayer is also concern in providing an appliance for producing
C
O
2
pellets (Figures 1-4 and see also paragraph 0003) comprising a housing (element 3) and wherein the appliance comprises a
C
O
2
exhaust gas outlet (element 6 and see also paragraph 0036 where the prior art disclose element 6 as “exhaust gas screen”) for discharging
C
O
2
gas that did not solidify in the compressing device or that was formed due to sublimation of the
C
O
2
pellets (see paragraph 0027 where the prior art discloses the use of the exhaust screen (element 6) through which gaseous carbon dioxide (CO2) can be safely discharged from the housing, thus giving that the prior art discloses the structure
C
O
2
exhaust gas outlet and function of discharging and there is no additional structure or structural difference. Therefore, the prior art would be capable of having the
C
O
2
exhaust gas outlet be capable of discharging
C
O
2
gas that did not solidify in the compressing device or that was formed due to sublimation of
C
O
2
pellets, as recited.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Mayer to provide wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a
C
O
2
exhaust gas outlet for discharging
C
O
2
gas that did not solidify in the compressing device or that was formed due to sublimation of the
C
O
2
pellets. One of ordinary skill in the would recognize that providing exhaust would necessarily allow the user to safely discharge
C
O
2
gas from the housing and prevent overpressure as disclosed by Mayer (see paragraphs 0027 and 0036).
Regarding claim 20, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 19, wherein the CO2 exhaust gas outlet at least one of
a) pellet delivery device (element 80) and a pellet outlet (see figure 3 showing the outlet (hole) formed in the bottom of a portion of the compressing device (element 44) leading to element 80) of the compressing device wherein the cleaning appliance comprises the pellet delivery device for delivering the CO2 pellets into the pressurized gas stream (see figure 1),
and b) is arranged or formed in the region of the store holding device, in particular pointing in the opposite or substantially in the opposite direction relative to the blasting conduit connection, wherein the cleaning appliance comprises the blasting conduit connection for connecting to a first free end of a mixed jet conduit (Giving that the claim define the limitation “at least one of”, and since the prior art meets at least one of the following limitations, thus the prior art meets claim 17.).
However, De Silva appears to be silent wherein the CO2 exhaust gas outlet at least one of a) is fluidically connected to the pellet delivery device and a pellet outlet of the compressing device.
However, it would be have been it would have been to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified De Silva to provide wherein the CO2 exhaust gas outlet at least one of a) is fluidically connected to the pellet delivery device and a pellet outlet of the compressing device. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognized that having both exhaust gas outlet arranged at a desired location in order to fluidically connected to the claimed devices would necessarily provide a more compact appliance while in order to fit around compact areas. (See MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C))
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Silva (US Pub. No. 2019/0076989) in view of Spivak (US Pub. No. 2006/0178092), Xiao (CN 107139085), Mister (DE 202007001220), and Thompson (US Patent No. 3,476,440) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (US Patent No. 7,118,463).
Regarding claim 21, De Silva modified discloses: the cleaning appliance in accordance with Claim 10, wherein the cleaning appliance comprises a blasting nozzle (element 66) and the mixed jet conduit (element 64) and wherein the mixed jet conduit connects the blasting conduit connection to the blasting nozzle (see figure 1).
However, De Silva modified appears to be silent wherein, in particular, the cleaning appliance comprises a blasting nozzle holding device for holding the blasting nozzle in a storage position, wherein, further in particular, the blasting nozzle holding device is integrated into the housing or is molded onto the housing, wherein, in particular, the blasting nozzle device comprises a C-shaped receptacle for the blasting gun.
Chen is also concerned in providing an appliance for blasting (Figures 1-8 and see also col. 2, ll. 13-16) comprising a housing (element 11) and a blasting nozzle (element 16). Chen further teaches wherein the appliance comprises a blasting nozzle holding device (element 15) for holding the blasting nozzle in a storage position (see figure 4), wherein, further in particular, the blasting nozzle holding device is integrated into the housing (see figure 4) or is molded onto the housing, wherein, in particular, the blasting nozzle device comprises a C-shaped receptacle (see figure 4 elements 1524) for the blasting gun.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified De Silva to incorporate the teachings of Chen to provide a blasting nozzle holding device for holding the blasting nozzle in a storage position, wherein, further in particular, the blasting nozzle holding device is integrated into the housing or is molded onto the housing, wherein, in particular, the blasting nozzle device comprises a C-shaped receptacle for the blasting gun. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that having a nozzle holding device would necessarily provide the predicable result of appropriately storing the nozzle when not in use.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 04/01/2026 have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the current rejection.
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 ALBERTO SAENZ whose telephone number is (313)446-6610. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30PM EST.
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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights