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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group 1, Claims 1-20, and Species 1a and Species 2a in the reply filed on 29 DECEMBER 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that the office action has not shown a serious search burden because the different inventions are indicated to be long in the same search classification and so there would not be a serious search burden to examine the different inventions. This is not found persuasive because burden is established when one of the following is applicable to the inventions:
Separate classification thereof
Separate status in the art when they are classifiable together
Different field of search
In this case, (a)/(c) applies. While the previously mentioned classification does apply to all inventions, Group 1, claims 1-20, are also drawn to B01D35/30, Group 2, claims 21-22, pertains to D06F37/145, and Group 3, claim 23, pertains to B01D2201/301. The inventions share a classification, but they also diverge and require search of additional separate areas of art in which the other inventions are unlikely to be found.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 21-23 and species 1b/1c and 2b/2c/2d/2e are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention/species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 29 DECEMBER 2025.
Claim Status
Rejected Claims: 1 and 4-20
Objected to Claims: 2-3
Withdrawn Claims: 21-23
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
In Paragraph 0031, the tub labeled 107.
In Paragraph 0049, the generally U-shaped or semi-circular hinge channel 338.
In Paragraph 0066, the snaps 372.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
In Fig. 8D, 354.
In Fig. 11, 199.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Paragraph 0035, “the drum 106 and may defines” in lines 3-4 should read “the drum 106 and may define”.
In Paragraph 0046, “Returning to FIG. 4” should read “Returning to FIG. 3” because the filter element is not pictured in FIG. 4.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, “the rectangular bottom” in line 3 of the claim should read “the open rectangular bottom”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 4-5 and 16-20 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.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "its length" in line 3 of the claim. It is unclear what “its” is referring to.
Claim 5 is rejected because if its dependence upon claim 4.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the rectangular base" in line 2 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 17-20 are rejected because of their dependence upon claim 16.
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.
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 1, 4-10, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al Chinese Patent No. CN 109402952 A (hereinafter Zhou) in view of Lee Korean Patent No. KR 20060122256 A (hereinafter Lee) in view of Choi et al US Patent Application No. 20130081432 A1 (hereinafter Choi).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhou teaches a washing machine lifting rib for a drum washing machine to improve the filtration effect of the washing machine lifting rib (i.e., a removable filter apparatus for a laundry treating appliance, comprising; Paragraph 0007, Machine Translation) comprising a lifting rib body (i.e., a lifter cover; Fig. 3, #11) shown to be in a trapezoidal prism shape (i.e., defining a generally trapezoidal prism shape; Fig. 3; Paragraph 0035, Machine Translation) with a water hole (Fig. 5, #15) located on the bottom, shown to be rectangular in shape (i.e., with an open rectangular bottom; Fig. 5; Paragraph 0039, Machine Translation) and snap-fit to a base (i.e., the lifter cover being attachable along the open rectangular bottom to a lifter base; Fig. 7, #21) shown to be located on the inner surface of a washing machine drum (i.e., of an inner circumferential surface of a drum of the laundry treating appliance; Fig. 10; Paragraph 0052, Machine Translation) with water inlet holes (i.e., through openings; Fig. 4, #12 & 13) located on the outside working surfaces of the lifting rib body (i.e., the lifter cover defining through openings to allow for free flow of water; Paragraph 0035, Machine Translation)
where blocking members (Fig. 9, #16, 17 & 18) form a filter structure and filter cavity (i.e., a filter element; Fig. 3, #19) within the lifting rib body (i.e., the filter element sized to fit within the lifter cover; Paragraphs 0035 and 0040, Machine Translation) that filters out lint and debris in the water (i.e., to allow the filter element to capture particulate within the water flow; Paragraph 0037, Machine Translation).
Zhou does not teach a filter element, selectively attachable to the lifter cover, the filter element sized to fit within the lifter cover.
However, Lee teaches a filter (i.e., a filter element; Fig. 9, #60), with a first hook (Fig. 9, #66) and a second hook (Fig. 9, #68) that secure the filter in the cover (i.e., selectively attachable to the lifter cover; Fig. 3, #40; Page 13, Machine Translation), for filtering foreign material installed in the lifter body of a drum washing machine (i.e., the filter element sized to fit within the lifter cover to allow the filter element to capture particulate within the water flow; Page 6, Lines 1-6, Machine Translation) for the purpose of enabling easy cleaning of the strainer in which foreign substances have accumulated (Page 8, Lines 9-17, Machine Translation).
Lee is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a lifter for a drum washing machine and a filter installed in the lifter (Page 6, Lines 1-6, Machine Translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the lifting rib as taught by Zhou with the removable filter as taught by Lee because the removable filter would make it easier to clean the strainer of foreign substances that have accumulated.
Zhou in view of Lee do not teach that the lifter cover is slidingly attachable to the drum.
However, Choi teaches a style of attachment of lifters (Fig. 2b, #40a) to the internal surface of a washing machine drum (Fig. 2b, #31) involving slidingly attachable hooks and guide holes (i.e., the lifter cover is slidingly attachable; Figs. 2b & 3a) for the purpose of firmly mounting the lifters without requiring separate fasteners (Paragraphs 0081-0093).
Choi is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to lifters mounted on a drum of a washing machine (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the lifting rib made obvious by Zhou in view of Lee with the sliding attachment as taught by Choi because the sliding attachment would not require separate fasteners for firm mounting of the lifters.
Regarding Claim 4, Zhou further teaches a slot (Fig. 7, #32), four depicted in the figure, on the mounting groove (i.e., wherein the lifter base defines a plurality of engaging hooks; Fig. 7, #23) and the use of a claw (Fig. 3, #31), with four depicted in the figure, on the lifting rib body (i.e., and the lifter cover defines a corresponding plurality of internal projections along its length; Fig. 3, #11) wherein the claw is installed in the slot and this configuration ensures the stability of the lifting rib (i.e., the engaging hooks being sized and positioned to receive respective ones of the internal projections of the lifter cover when the lifter cover is slid onto the lifter base; Paragraph 0055, Machine Translation).
Regarding Claim 5, Zhou further teaches that the slots on the base have a length along which the claws will slide in an insertion direction (i.e., wherein the lifter base further defines guide rails extending outward along at least a portion of the length of the lifter base, allowing the projections to slide along the guide rails into the engaging hooks, thereby securing the lifter cover to the lifter base; Fig. 7, #P1; Paragraph 0055, Machine Translation).
PNG
media_image1.png
432
444
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Zhou further teaches a filter cavity (Fig. 3, #19), where the cavity is seen to be generally trapezoidal in shape with trapezoidal walls and ends, with the ends being close to a triangular shape as the top of the trapezoid is much smaller than the bottom (i.e., wherein the lifter cover defines two generally trapezoidal longitudinal walls of a generally consistent thickness along the longitudinal direction of the lifter cover, and two generally triangular end caps at either end of the lifter cover that connect between the longitudinal walls to collectively define the open rectangular bottom; Fig. 3; Paragraph 0035, Machine Translation).
PNG
media_image2.png
326
434
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Choi further teaches in Fig. 3b that the profile of the lifter is a generally trapezoidal shape and that the ends of the lifter is in a generally triangular shape (i.e., wherein the lifter cover defines two generally trapezoidal longitudinal walls of a generally consistent thickness along the longitudinal direction of the lifter cover, and two generally triangular end caps at either end of the lifter cover that connect between the longitudinal walls to collectively define the open rectangular bottom).
PNG
media_image3.png
312
434
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, Choi further teaches in Fig. 3b that the ends of the lifters is in a triangular shape and slopes towards the top of the lifter (i.e., wherein the end caps taper inwards towards an apex of the lifter cover, such that the length at the apex is less than the length of the lifter cover at the rectangular bottom).
PNG
media_image3.png
312
434
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8, Choi further teaches a plurality of ribs (Fig. 3a, #106a) inside the lifter for providing sufficient strength even if the inside of the lifter is vacant (i.e., wherein the lifter cover defines one or more lateral ribs connecting between the longitudinal walls to increase rigidity of the lifter cover; Paragraph 0071).
Regarding Claim 9, Zhou further teaches a locking block (i.e., a resilient cantilever arm defining a locking lug; Fig. 5, #41) on the lifter cover and a locking slot (Fig. 7, #42) on the lifter base to prevent the two from moving opposite of the insertion direction of P1 (i.e., the locking lug having an angled cam surface onto which the open rectangular bottom of the lifter cover rides during slide attachment, such that the cantilever arm flexes downwards as the lifter cover is slid onto the lifter base and resiliently flexes back to lock the exterior of the lifter cover into place against the locking tug; Paragraph 0056, Machine Translation). Zhou does not explicitly teach that the resilient cantilever arm is defined by the lifter base, rather that it is defined by the lifter cover.
However, the placement of the resilient cantilever arm on the lifter cover or the lifter base is simply a rearrangement of parts. Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950)); (See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)). The resilient cantilever arm and receiving part can be swapped between the lifter cover and lifter base and the functioning of the parts does not change.
Regarding Claim 10, Lee further teaches wherein the filter (i.e., the filter element; Fig. 9, #64) installed on both sides and the bottom of the filter frame (i.e., defines a rectangular base) where foreign substances are filtered downward and captured by the filter which can be seen to be perpendicular to the rectangular base, and extending upwards from a midpoint of the center of the sides of the base and along the length of the filter element (i.e., and a perpendicular surface extending upward from a midpoint of the rectangular base along the length of the filter element; Fig. 9; Page 13, Lines 1-10, Machine Translation).
PNG
media_image4.png
369
423
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14, Lee further teaches unlabeled filter stops located between the inside of the top of the lifter cover and the top of the filter frame, seen below in Figs. 4 and 7 (i.e., wherein the lifter cover defines a series of stops onto which the filter element rests inside the lifter cover in a closed position, wherein the stops collectively serve to limit the movement of the filter element into the lifter cover).
PNG
media_image5.png
722
253
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
736
216
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 15, Lee further teaches that the cover has a first mounting hole (Fig. 7, #46) and a second mounting hole (Fig. 7, #47) that receive a first hook (Fig. 9, #66) and second hook (Fig. 9, #68) to install the filter in the cover (i.e., wherein the lifter cover defines one or more filter latches to secure the filter element into the lifter cover; Page 13, Machine Translation) and is seen to be spaced apart from the stops in Fig. 4 (i.e., the stops and the filter latches being spaced apart and arranged to define a gap into which the filter element snaps into place).
Claims 11 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Monacchi et al US Patent Application No. 20130213095 A1 (hereinafter Monacchi).
Regarding Claim 11, Lee further teaches the filter (Fig. 9, #64) installed on both sides and the bottom of the filter frame where foreign substances are filtered downward and captured by the filter which can be seen to be centered along the midpoint of the base and the bottom is open as it is only covered by the filter material (Fig. 9; Page 13, Lines 1-10, Machine Translation).
Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi does not teach wherein the rectangular base and the perpendicular surface are formed of an overmolded mesh to provide filtration surfaces within the rectangular base and the perpendicular surface.
However, Monacchi teaches that it is known to form filter elements by molding for the purpose of embedding materials within them (i.e., wherein at least a portion of the rectangular base and the filtration surface are formed of an overmolded mesh to provide filtration surfaces within the rectangular base and/or the filtration surface; Paragraph 0010).
Monacchi is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a washing machine with a filter element (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the filter made obvious by Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi with the molding method as taught by Monacchi because the molding process would allow materials to be embedded within the filter element.
Regarding Claim 16, Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi does not teach wherein the filter element further defines a pull formed into the rectangular base of the filter element, wherein the pull allows an operator to grip the filter element to move the filter element from the closed position into an open position.
However, Monacchi teaches a filter (Fig. 2, #16) with a grip (i.e., a pull; Fig. 2, #24) that is provided as part of the base of the filter (i.e., wherein the filter element further defines a pull formed into the rectangular base of the filter element, wherein the pull allows an operator to grip the filter element to move the filter element from the closed position into an open position) for the purpose of convenient handling (Paragraph 0035).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the filter frame made obvious by Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi with the grip as taught by Monacchi because the grip would provide more convenient handling of the filter frame.
Regarding Claim 17, Monacchi further teaches that the grip is in the shape of a half circle (i.e., wherein the pull is formed as a hemispherical finger relief into the rectangular base of the filter element; Fig. 2, #24; Paragraph 0035).
PNG
media_image7.png
356
396
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 19, Monacchi further teaches a filter (Fig. 2, #16) with a grip (i.e., a pull; Fig. 2, #24) that is provided as part of the base of the filter (i.e., further comprising a flexible pull to allow the flexible pull to be grabbed and pulled upwards to move the filter element into the open position) for the purpose of convenient handling (Paragraph 0035).
Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi in view of Monacchi teaches the claimed invention except for the removable pull. In a court ruling on making an element separable, the claimed structure, a lipstick holder with a removable cap, was fully met by the prior art except that in the prior art the cap is "Press fitted" and therefore not manually removable. The court held that "if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the end of [the prior art's] holder to which the cap is applied, it would be obvious to make the cap removable for that purpose. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to make a removable pull since it have been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in art. One would have been motivated to make the elements separable for the purpose of keeping the pull clean, since the pull would be out of the filter when not in use.
Regarding Claim 20, the limitation “further comprising a pull insert applied to the pull, wherein the pull insert indicates an attribute of functionality of the filter element” pertains to printed matter as the pull insert is simply an insert indicating an attribute of the filter element according to instant claim 20. In this case, the printed matter is most closely related to the case where the product merely serves as a support for printed matter. These situations may arise where the claim as a whole is directed towards conveying a message or meaning to a human reader independent of the supporting product. For example, a hatband with images displayed on the hatband but not arranged in any particular sequence was found to only serve as support and display for the printed matter. (See Gulack, 703 F.2d at 1386, 217 USPQ at 404); (MPEP 2111.05(I)(B)). The attributes of functionality on the pull insert simply convey a message about a feature of the filter element. While there is information about the filter element, no functional relationship exists between the filter element and the printed material. Comparing to another claim in the instant application, instant claim 18, the indication directs an operator on the direction to actuate the pull, while the pull insert of instant claim 20 simply teaches the operator an attribute of the filter element but does not directly relate to the functioning of the filter element.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi as applied to claims 10 and 1 above, and further in view of Jung US Patent Application No. 20220243384 A1 (hereinafter Jung).
Regarding Claim 12, Lee further teaches a first hook (Fig. 9, #66) and a second hook (Fig. 9, #68) that secure the filter in the cover (i.e., the filter element is attachable to a lift cover; Fig. 3, #40; Page 13, Machine Translation).
Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi does not teach wherein the filter element is hingedly attachable to a lift cover by a snap-on hinge assembly.
However, Jung teaches that a case (Fig. 5, #140) with a filter (i.e., the filter element; Fig. 5, #62) may be attached with hinges (i.e., is hingedly attachable; Fig. 5, #143) to a second body (Fig. 5, #170) with a cover (i.e., to a lift cover by a snap-on hinge assembly; Fig. 5, #150) for the purpose of allowing the case to be rotatably coupled with the body and cover (Paragraphs 0085-0086).
Jung is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a washing machine with a filter device located on the inner wall of the spin basket (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the filter made obvious by Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi to be connected to the cover by hinges as taught by Jung because the hinges would allow a rotatable connection between the filter and the cover.
Regarding Claim 13, Jung further teaches in Fig. 5, shown below, that the hinge has a pin that is parallel to and spaced from the filter frame (i.e., wherein the snap-on hinge assembly includes a pivot pin defined by the filter element; the pivot pin being parallel to and spaced away from the rectangular base)
PNG
media_image8.png
602
506
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
112
114
media_image9.png
Greyscale
and in Fig. 7, shown below, that the body has a reciprocating hole (i.e., and a hinge snap defined by the lifter cover) that allows rotation (i.e., the hinge snap sized to be snapped to the pivot pin to allow the filter element to rotate freely about the pivot pin; Paragraph 0085).
PNG
media_image10.png
576
522
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
92
176
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi in view of Monacchi as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Kim US Patent Application No. US 20080282747 A1 (hereinafter Kim).
Regarding Claim 18, Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi in view of Monacchi does not teach further comprising an indication formed into the rectangular base to instruct the operator on the function of the pull.
However, Kim teaches an indication arrow on the rectangular surface of the case of the filtering unit (Fig. 3, #40) instructing an operator how to detachably remove the filtering unit from the lifter body (i.e., further comprising an indication formed into the rectangular base to instruct the operator on the function of the pull; Paragraph 0042) where the purpose of the cover with the printed arrow is to allow a user to easily remove foreign matter trapped by the filters (Fig. 9, #46) after detaching the filtering unit from the lifter body (Paragraph 0044).
PNG
media_image12.png
426
510
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Kim is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a washing machine with a lifter capable of filtering foreign matter from water (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the filter made obvious by Zhou in view of Lee in view of Choi in view of Monacchi with the printed arrow as taught by Kim because the printed arrow would help the user easily remove the filter to clear foreign material trapped inside.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The instant application pertains to a removable filter for a front-loading drum laundry apparatus that is integrated into the lifters of the apparatus. The filter apparatus then includes a lifter base, lifter cover and filter element which combine together to form the removable filter that allows an operator to open the lifter cover, clean and/or replace the filter, and then reinstall the lifter cover.
The closest prior art includes Zhou et al Chinese Patent No. CN 109402952 A (hereinafter Zhou), Lee Korean Patent No. KR 20060122256 A (hereinafter Lee), Choi et al US Patent Application No. 20130081432 A1 (hereinafter Choi), Monacchi et al US Patent Application No. 20130213095 A1 (hereinafter Monacchi), Kim US Patent Application No. US 20080282747 A1 (hereinafter Kim), and Jung US Patent Application No. 20220243384 A1 (hereinafter Jung).
Zhou teaches a lifter with a filtering mechanism and the use of a lifter cover and lifter base and the attachment mechanisms between the lifter cover and lifter base.
Lee teaches a removable filter inside the lifter cover and attachment mechanisms of the filter to the lifter cover.
Choi teaches the general shape of the lifter and the attachment of lifters to the drum via hooks.
Monacchi teaches filter elements with grips or tabs to help replacement.
Kim teaches indications molded into a device for aiding the use of an attachment mechanism.
Jung teaches hinge attachments of filters to lifter covers.
The prior art teaches a multitude of attachment involving sliding, screws, friction/pressure fits, hinges, and snaps, a variety of shapes of lifters, a variety of combinations of filter elements inside lifters, and also replacement aids such as pull tabs and indications.
However, the prior art is silent on squeeze latch functions for lifter covers, typically preferring sliding hooks in combination with screws for the stability, due to the need of the lifter to withstand the weight of the tumbling laundry. These attachment mechanisms are likely more stable, but take much longer to remove and replace compared to the squeeze latch of the instant application. Therefore, it would not be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the lifter cover to have a squeeze latch to attach the lifter cover to the lifter base.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ADRIEN GERMAIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5499. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30-4:30.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571)272-5954. 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.A.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 1777
/Bobby Ramdhanie/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights