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 .
This Office action is in response to amendments filed on 11/20/2025. Claims 15-26 are pending. For clarify of the record and consideration for amendments, the Examiner notes the subject matter of the abstract is not entirely directed towards the claimed embodiment (Abstract recites, “Systems and methods for providing a vacuum cleaner with sliding vacuum head assembly” while claimed invention is only directed towards system claims).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 15-26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Newly amended claims 15 and 21 recite the limitation, “a duct interface configured to selectively couple in sealed flow communication with the vacuum tube only when positioned at the indexed preset positions” which is not supported by applicant’s originally filed disclosure. In the Remarks, applicant does not recite a specific area (col., page, and/or paragraph) of the disclosure that supports the amendments. Though fig. 5 shows the vacuum head assembly slidably disposed on the vacuum tube, the Examiner notes the figure(s) does not include any indexed preset locations in which the vacuum head assembly is selectively coupled to along the vacuum tube. Further, the Examiner notes the instant disclosure does not recite any “selectively couple”, “sealed flow,” and/or “duct interface,” language within the specification and does not recite any structure corresponding to the selectively coupled sealed flow only when positioned at the indexed preset locations. Therefore, the recitation introduces New Matter, and it does not appear the applicant had possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was filed.
Additionally, newly amended claims 17 and 23 recite the limitation, “one or more rechargeable batteries mounted on the vacuum head assembly to power the vacuum motor independent of the vacuum tube” which is not supported by the applicant’s originally filed disclosure. In the Remarks, applicant does not recite a specific area (col., page, and/or paragraph) of the disclosure that supports the amendments. The Examiner notes the disclosure does not recite or suggest any structure corresponding to the rechargeable batteries powering the vacuum motor independent of the vacuum tube. Further, the figures do not show a separate battery configuration that may be understood as the power for the vacuum tube. Therefore, the recitation introduces New Matter, and it does not appear the applicant had possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was filed.
Further, newly amended claims 20 and 26 recite the limitation, “via an automatically sealing port on the vacuum tube opened only when the vacuum head assembly is positioned at one of the indexed preset position” which is not supported by applicant’s originally filed disclosure. In the Remarks, applicant does not recite a specific area (col., page, and/or paragraph) of the disclosure that supports the amendments. Further, the Examiner notes the disclosure does not recite “automatically/automatic sealing port” and/or any structure corresponding to the automatically sealing port on the vacuum tube. Therefore, the recitation introduces New Matter, and it does not appear the applicant had possession of the claimed invention at the time the application was filed.
Claims 15 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
MPEP 2164.01 establishes the analysis required to determine the filed disclosure contains sufficient information regarding the subject matter of the claims as to one skilled in the art to make and use the claimed invention without undue experimentation. The factors to be considered to determine whether any necessary experimentation is undue, also known as the Wands factors include, but are not limited to:
The breadth of the claims;
The nature of the invention;
The state of the prior art;
The level of one of ordinary skill;
The level of predictability of the art;
The amount of direction provided by the inventor;
The existence of working examples; and
The quantity of experimentation needed to make use or use the invention based on the content of the disclosure.
Both newly amended claims 15 and 21 recite “a duct interface configured to selectively couple in sealed flow communication with the vacuum tube only when positioned at the indexed preset positions” and further, newly amended claims 19 and 25 recite similar limitations of “wherein the vacuum head assembly is in flow communication with the vacuum tube only at the preset locations” which have not been described in applicant’s specification.
The Examiner notes pp. [0024] in the specification recites: “Some embodiments provide that the vacuum head assembly and the main vacuum tube are only in flow communication when the vacuum head assembly is positioned at indexed or preset locations along the main vacuum tube.” However, the specification has not described, suggested, and/or shown any particular structure to accomplish the recited sealed flow communication only at the indexed preset positions. Further, it would not be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to know the required structure of the system when the vacuum head assembly is sealed only at the preset locations. Based on the content of the disclosure, there is no guidance on how the indexed preset locations are disposed along the vacuum tube and how the vacuum head assembly is selectively coupled only at these indexed locations. Therefore, the quantity of experimentation would be extensive as there is no guidance on the structure to achieve the sealed flow communication only at the preset locations along the vacuum tube.
Claims 16-19 and 22-25 are rejected accordingly under 35 USC 112(a) since they are dependent on claims 15 and 21.
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 15-20 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 15 recites the limitation "a handle fixed to the vacuum head assembly and positioned on a side of the vacuum tube opposite from the motor; and a vacuum motor that is operably on a side of the vacuum tube opposite from the handle” in ll. 5-7 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for a few limitations in the claim. First, ll. 6 recites “the motor” and then, ll. 7 recites “a vacuum motor”. As understood from the disclosure, there is only one vacuum motor and therefore, for examination purposes, “the motor” and “a vacuum motor” are the same. Further, a handle fixed “on a side of the vacuum tube” and the vacuum motor located “on a side of the vacuum tube opposite from the handle” lack insufficient antecedent basis. As best understood, these sides are different and the handle is located on a first side of the vacuum tube and the vacuum motor is located on a second side of the vacuum tube opposite from the first side. Therefore, for examination purposes, ll. 5-8 of claim 15 is interpreted as:
--a handle fixed to the vacuum head assembly and positioned on a first side of the vacuum tube opposite from [[the]]a vacuum motor; and
[[a]]the vacuum motor second side of the vacuum tube opposite from the first side, wherein the vacuum head assembly includes a duct interface configured—
Claims 16-20 are rejected accordingly under 35 USC 112(b) since they are dependent on claim 15.
Claim Objections
Claims 15-26 are objected to because of the following antecedent basis informalities:
Claim 15, ll. 4, consider amending to, --positions along the hollow vacuum tube, wherein the vacuum head assembly comprises:
Claim 15, ll. 5, consider amending to, --a handle [[ ]]fixed to the vacuum head assembly and positioned on a side of the hollow –
Claim 15, ll. 9, consider amending to, --to selectively couple in sealed flow communication with the hollow vacuum tube only when—
Claim 16, ll. 3, consider amending to, --moveable with the vacuum head assembly along the hollow vacuum tube.—
Claim 17, ll. 3, consider amending to, --assembly to power the vacuum motor independent of the hollow vacuum tube.—
Claim 18, ll. 1, consider amending to, --The system according to claim 15, wherein the vacuum—
Claim 19, ll. 2-3, consider amending to, --head assembly is movable along a length of the hollow vacuum tube to the indexed preset locations, wherein the vacuum head assembly is in flow communication with the hollow vacuum tube only at the indexed preset—
Claim 20, ll. 2-4, consider amending to, --vacuum head assembly is movable along [[a]]the length of the hollow vacuum tube to indexed preset locations, wherein the vacuum head assembly is in flow communication with the hollow vacuum tube only at the indexed preset locations via an automatically sealing port on the hollow vacuum tube opened only when the—
Claim 21, ll. 4, consider amending to, --the hollow tube, wherein the head assembly comprises:--
Claim 21, ll. 5-6, consider amending to, --a handle fixed to the head assembly and positioned opposite from [[the]]a motor, and [[a]]the motor hollow tube opposite from the--
Claim 21, ll. 8, consider amending to, --communication with the hollow tube only when positioned at the indexed preset positions.—
Claim 22, ll. 2-3, consider amending to, --head assembly comprises a dust container support by the hollow tube.—
Claim 23, ll. 2-3 consider amending to, --head assembly comprises one or more rechargeable batteries mounted on the hollow tube.—
Claim 24, ll. 2, consider amending to, --the head assembly comprises a fan.—
Claim 25, ll. 2-3, consider amending to, --head assembly is slidable along a length of the hollow tube to the indexed preset positions, wherein the head assembly is in flow communication with the hollow tube only at the indexed preset positions.—
Claim 26, ll. 2, consider amending to, --the head assembly is slidable along [[a]]the length of the tube to the indexed preset positions, wherein the head assembly is in flow communication with the hollow tube only at the indexed preset positions via an automatically sealing port on the hollow tube opened only when the
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 15-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GB1151990 (GB’990), as provided by the Examiner, in view of Abe (JP2017/169895), as provided by Examiner in previous Office action filed on 08/22/2025.
Regarding claim 15, GB’990 discloses a system (figs. 3-6 embodiment) comprising:
a hollow vacuum tube (item 11; fig. 3; p. 3, pp. 8 through p. 4, pp. 1 in NPL); and
a vacuum head assembly (item 10; fig. 3) operably configured to be slid to various indexed preset positions along the hollow vacuum tube (defined as preset positions along tube 11 in which openings 42 are positioned for vacuum head assembly 10 to mount along; p. 4, pp. 2), wherein the vacuum head assembly comprises:
a vacuum motor (item 14; p. 2, pp. 8 in NPL) that is operably located on a side of the vacuum tube, wherein the vacuum head assembly includes a duct interface (item 39; fig. 4; p. 3, pp. 8 through p. 4, pp. 1) configured to selectively couple in a sealed flow communication with the hollow vacuum tube only when positioned at the indexed preset positions (p. 4, pp. 2; at the preset positions, the duct interface 39 cooperates with the openings 42 in a sealed flow communication via resilient connecting member 43; fig. 4).
GB’990 does not explicitly disclose wherein the vacuum head assembly further includes a handle positioned on a side of the vacuum tube opposite from the vacuum motor. However, Abe (JP2017169895) teaches a system (item 100; figs. 1-4) comprising a tube (item 20, 21) and a vacuum head assembly (item 10; figs. 1-2 and 4), wherein the vacuum head assembly comprises a handle (item 33; fig. 2) disposed on one side of the tube and a motor (item 40; fig. 4) disposed on another side of the tube, opposite the handle (figs. 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vacuum head assembly, as disclosed in GB’990, to include a handle located on an opposite side of the vacuum tube opposite from the vacuum motor, as taught in Abe, in order for the user to comfortably grasp the vacuum head assembly and easily slide the assembly along the vacuum tube to move to the indexed preset locations (pp. [0074-0076] in Abe).
Regarding claim 16, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 15, wherein the vacuum head assembly comprises a dust container (item 15; fig. 1) supported by the vacuum head assembly and moveable with the vacuum head assembly along the vacuum tube (dust container 15 is within the vacuum head assembly 10 and therefore, moveable along the tube with the casing 10).
Regarding claim 17, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 15. Though GB’990 discloses the vacuum cleaner is an electric cleaner, GB’990 does not explicitly disclose how the vacuum cleaner is powered, such as wherein the vacuum head assembly comprises one or more rechargeable batteries mounted on the vacuum head assembly to power the vacuum motor independent of the vacuum tube, as required by the claim.
However, Abe (JP2017169895) further teaches wherein the vacuum head assembly further comprises a rechargeable battery (item 60; pp. [0018] in NPL translation; fig. 4), mounted on the vacuum head assembly (batteries 60 are mounted within vacuum head assembly 100; fig. 4) to power the vacuum motor independent of the vacuum tube (pp. [0018], batteries 60 power vacuum motor which is independent, i.e. separate, from the vacuum tube).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the power source of GB’990 to comprise rechargeable batteries, as taught in Abe, so that the system could function as intended. Additionally, it is old and well known in the art of vacuums to use a rechargeable battery within a vacuum system to achieve the predictable result of providing a power source for the electric motor.
Regarding claim 18, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 15, wherein the vacuum head assembly comprises a fan (item 14 is a motor-fan unit; p. 2, pp. 8; fig. 1).
Regarding claim 19, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 15, wherein the vacuum head assembly is movable along a length of the vacuum tube (defined as length of vacuum tube 11; figs. 7-9) to the indexed preset locations (p. 2, pp. 5 and p. 4, pp. 2; vacuum head assembly 10 is slidably along the vacuum tube 11 to indexed preset locations in which openings 42 are disposed for duct interface 39 to secure onto), wherein the vacuum head assembly is in flow communication with the hollow vacuum tube only at the preset locations (p. 4, pp. 2; vacuum head assembly is only in flow communication with hollow vacuum tube 11 only when secured at openings 42 along the tube, i.e. preset locations, and capable of collecting dirt; fig. 4).
Regarding claim 20, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 19, wherein the vacuum head assembly is movable along the length of the hollow vacuum tube to the indexed preset locations (p. 2, pp. 5 and p. 4, pp. 2; vacuum head assembly 10 is slidably along the vacuum tube 11 to indexed preset locations in which openings 42 are disposed for duct interface 39 to secure onto), wherein the vacuum head assembly is in flow communication with the vacuum tube only at the preset locations via an automatically sealing port on the vacuum tube opened only when the vacuum head assembly is positioned at one of the indexed preset positions (p. 4, pp. 2; when vacuum head assembly is moved to preset position, i.e. at an opening 42 along the hollow tube 11, a seal is created automatically, i.e. no manual operation from the user, via sealing member 43 to create a flow communication between the tube 11 and duct interface 39 of vacuum head assembly only at the preset position; fig. 4).
Regarding claim 21, GB’990 discloses a vacuum cleaner (figs. 3-6 embodiment) comprising:
a hollow tube (item 11; fig. 3; p. 3, pp. 8 through p. 4, pp. 1 in NPL); and
a head assembly (item 10; fig. 3) operably configured to be slid to various indexed preset positions along the hollow tube (defined as preset positions along tube 11 in which openings 42 are positioned for head assembly 10 to mount along; p. 4, pp. 2), wherein the head assembly comprises:
a motor (item 14; p. 2, pp. 8 in NPL) that is operably located on a side of the hollow tube, wherein the head assembly includes a duct interface (item 39; fig. 4; p. 3, pp. 8 through p. 4, pp. 1) configured to selectively couple in a sealed flow communication with the hollow tube only when positioned at the indexed preset positions (p. 4, pp. 2; at the preset positions, the duct interface 39 cooperates with the openings 42 in a sealed flow communication via resilient connecting member 43; fig. 4).
GB’990 does not explicitly disclose wherein the vacuum head assembly further includes a handle positioned on a side of the tube opposite from the motor. However, Abe (JP2017169895) teaches a system (item 100; figs. 1-4) comprising a tube (item 20, 21) and a vacuum head assembly (item 10; figs. 1-2 and 4), wherein the vacuum head assembly comprises a handle (item 33; fig. 2) disposed on one side of the tube and a motor (item 40; fig. 4) disposed on another side of the tube, opposite the handle (figs. 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the head assembly, as disclosed in GB’990, to include a handle located on an opposite side of the tube opposite from the motor, as taught in Abe, in order for the user to comfortably grasp the vacuum head assembly and easily slide the assembly along the vacuum tube to move to the indexed preset locations (pp. [0074-0076] in Abe).
Regarding claim 22, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 21, wherein the head assembly comprises a dust container (item 15; fig. 1) supported by the head assembly and moveable with the head assembly along the hollow tube (dust container 15 is within the vacuum head assembly 10 and therefore, moveable along the tube with the casing 10).
Regarding claim 23, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 21. Though GB’990 discloses the vacuum cleaner is an electric cleaner, GB’990 does not explicitly disclose how the vacuum cleaner is powered, such as wherein the head assembly comprises one or more rechargeable batteries mounted on the head assembly to power the motor independent of the hollow tube, as required by the claim.
However, Abe (JP2017169895) further teaches wherein the vacuum head assembly further comprises a rechargeable battery (item 60; pp. [0018] in NPL translation; fig. 4), mounted on the vacuum head assembly (batteries 60 are mounted within vacuum head assembly 100; fig. 4) to power the vacuum motor independent of the vacuum tube (pp. [0018], batteries 60 power vacuum motor which is independent, i.e. separate, from the vacuum tube).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the power source of GB’990 to comprise rechargeable batteries, as taught in Abe, so that the system could function as intended. Additionally, it is old and well known in the art of vacuums to use a rechargeable battery within a vacuum system to achieve the predictable result of providing a power source for the electric motor.
Regarding claim 24, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 21, wherein the head assembly comprises a fan (item 14 is a motor-fan unit; p. 2, pp. 8; fig. 1).
Regarding claim 25, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 21, wherein the head assembly is movable along a length of the hollow tube (defined as length of vacuum tube 11; figs. 7-9) to the indexed preset locations (p. 2, pp. 5 and p. 4, pp. 2; head assembly 10 is slidably along the tube 11 to indexed preset locations in which openings 42 are disposed for duct interface 39 to secure onto), wherein the head assembly is in flow communication with the hollow tube only at the preset locations (p. 4, pp. 2; vacuum head assembly is only in flow communication with hollow tube 11 only when secured at openings 42 along the tube, i.e. preset locations, and capable of collecting dirt; fig. 4).
Regarding claim 26, GB’990 as modified discloses the system as claimed in claim 25, wherein the head assembly is movable along the length of the hollow tube to the indexed preset locations (p. 2, pp. 5 and p. 4, pp. 2; head assembly 10 is slidably along the tube 11 to indexed preset locations in which openings 42 are disposed for duct interface 39 to secure onto), wherein the head assembly is in flow communication with the hollow tube only at the preset locations via an automatically sealing port on the vacuum tube opened only when the head assembly is positioned at one of the indexed preset positions (p. 4, pp. 2; when vacuum head assembly is moved to preset position, i.e. at an opening 42 along the hollow tube 11, a seal is created automatically, i.e. no manual operation from the user, via sealing member 43 to create a flow communication between the tube 11 and duct interface 39 of vacuum head assembly only at the preset position; fig. 4).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 15 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. As necessitated by the amendments, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of GB1151990 (GB’990) and further in view of Abe (JP2017/169895), which is a same teaching reference from previous Office action (Non-Final Rejection) filed on 08/22/2025.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SIDNEY D FULL whose telephone number is (571)272-6996. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00a.m.-2:30p.m..
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.
/SIDNEY D FULL/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723