The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
The following is a Final Office Action on the merits.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made to the amendment received October 23, 2025, amending Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10, and 15-19. Claim 13 was canceled. New Claim 21 was added.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: the first occurrence of the term “cover” should be “flexible cover” to be consistent with its use throughout the remaining claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the third occurrence of the term “cover” should be “flexible cover” to be consistent with its use throughout the remaining claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: the second occurrence of the term “cover” should be “flexible cover” to be consistent with its use throughout the remaining claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means”, “step”, or a generic placeholder but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “apparatus” in Claims 1-14, 17, 19, and 20, “panel member” in Claims 1-4, 7-14, and 17-20, and “frame member” in Claims 2-5, 13, 17, and 18.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 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.
As necessitated by amendment, Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8-12, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tozer et al. AU 2019100997 A4 (hereafter Tozer et al.) using US 2022/0074150 version for Figure and Paragraph numbering.
Regarding Amended Claim 1, Tozer et al. anticipates:
1. (Currently amended) An apparatus (sweeper 10) for sweeping a ground surface (ground surface 14), comprising:
a panel member (mat 12 – labeled in attached figure below) configured to be moved across the ground surface to sweep the ground surface, the panel member having an underside (bottom surface of mat 12 that contacts ground surface 14) that, in use, faces the ground surface to be swept, an upper side (upper surface 22) that provides a collection surface (grided spaces best shown in Figure 2) for collecting debris swept from the ground surface (best shown in Figure 2), and one or more openings (slots 18 – labeled in attached figure below) that extend between the underside and the upper side for conveying debris from the ground surface to the collection surface (best shown in Figures 2 and 19); and
a debris retaining assembly (assembly comprising frame and cover 24 labeled in attached figure below) that is provided or mounted on (labeled frame – provided on, cover 24 – mounted on) the panel member for trapping debris conveyed to the collection surface on the upper side of the panel member, the debris retaining assembly comprising a frame (labeled in attached figure below) and a flexible cover (cover 24) supported on the frame spaced above the collection surface, wherein the frame comprises at least one frame member (labeled in attached figure below) that is elongate and resiliently flexible (entire device is formed of rubber or polymeric material) and that, in use, spans or extends across a substantial width of the panel member (shown in attached figure below) to tension and shape the flexible cover spaced above the collection surface (Paragraph [0033] and Figure 19 – cover is supported by labeled frame members and tensioned by gravity between labeled frame members).
PNG
media_image1.png
1430
1645
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Amended Claim 2, Tozer et al. anticipates:
2. (Currently amended) The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the comprises a rib or a strut or a batten (shown in attached figure above) for supporting the flexible cover (cover 24) spaced above the collection surface (grided spaces best shown in Figure 2) panel member (mat 12 – labeled in attached figure above) is generally rectangular (shown in attached figure above) and the at least one frame member extends substantially parallel to a leading edge of the panel member (shown in figure above) and extends substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel (shown in figure above).
Regarding Claim 4, Tozer et al. anticipates:
4. The apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the at least one frame member (labeled in attached figure above) comprises a single frame member (shown in attached figure above), or wherein the at least one frame member defines a single span across the panel member (mat 12) and comprises a plurality of frame members in end-to-end relationship (best shown in Figures 9 and 10 and attached figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
917
1429
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Amended Claim 5, Tozer et al. anticipates:
5. The apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the cover (cover 24) comprises a flexible sheet of material (mesh cover, flexible as shown in Figure 8) and wherein the at least one frame member (labeled in attached figure above) shapes the flexible cover over the collection surface, wherein the flexible cover is configured to receive the at least one frame member (configured to be in contact with and supported by upwardly extending flange 26, Paragraph [0033]).
Regarding Amended Claim 6, Tozer et al. anticipates:
6. The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the flexible cover (cover 24) comprises a textile material [[and/]]or a mesh material (mesh, Paragraph [0038]) which is air-permeable, and/or wherein the flexible cover incorporates an elastic material to facilitate tensioning [[or]] and shaping of the cover over the frame of the debris retaining assembly (cover is supported between labeled frame members and tensioned by gravity between labeled frame members).
Regarding Amended Claim 8, Tozer et al. anticipates:
8. The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the flexible cover (cover 24), when mounted on the panel member (mat 12), defines an opening into a collection space (space between cover and mat 12) between the cover and the collection surface on the upper side of the panel member (shown in Figure 4), wherein the opening (slot 18) faces a forward direction or a direction of travel in which the apparatus is configured to be moved across the ground surface (best shown in Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 9, Tozer et al. anticipates:
9. The apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the opening (slot 18) extends across a substantial width of the panel member (mat 12), and/or wherein the cover (cover 24) includes a closure for covering or obscuring the opening into the collection space (shown in Figure 3).
Regarding Amended Claim 10, Tozer et al. anticipates:
10. An apparatus for sweeping (sweeper 10) a ground surface (ground surface 14), comprising:
a panel member (mat 12) configured to be moved across the ground surface to sweep the ground surface, the panel member having an underside (bottom surface of mat 12 that contacts ground surface 14) that, in use, faces the ground surface to be swept, and an upper side (upper surface 22) that provides a collection surface (grided spaces best shown in Figure 2) for collecting debris swept from the ground surface (best shown in Figure 2); and
a cover (cover 24) to be mounted on the panel member for trapping the debris conveyed to the collection surface on the upper side of the panel member (best shown in Figures 2-4),
wherein the cover, when mounted on the panel member, forms a canopy that is supported spaced above the panel member (by upwardly extending flange 26) to define a collection space (space between cover and mat 12 improves collection and retention, Paragraph [0033]) between the cover and the upper side of the panel member (Paragraph [0033]), wherein the cover is tensioned and shaped by at least one elongate and resiliently flexible frame member (upwardly extending flange 26 - entire device is formed of rubber or polymeric material) that, in use, spans or extends across a substantial width of the panel member to support the cover above the collection surface (Paragraph [0033] and Figure 19 – cover is supported by upwardly extending flanges 26 and tensioned by gravity between flanges).
Regarding Claim 11, Tozer et al. anticipates:
11. The apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the cover (cover 24), when mounted on the panel member (mat 12), presents an opening (slots 18) into the collection space (space between cover and mat 12 improves collection and retention, Paragraph [0033]) between the cover and the upper side (upper surface 22) of the panel member, the opening facing a direction in which the apparatus is configured to be moved across the ground surface to sweep the ground surface (best shown in Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 12, Tozer et al. anticipates:
12. The apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the opening (slots 18) extends across a substantial width of the panel member (mat 12)(best shown in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 14, Tozer et al. anticipates:
14. The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein each of the one or more openings (slots 18) in the panel member (mat 12) comprises, or is formed within, a guide structure (teeth 30 or transverse blade 32) for guiding transfer or conveyance of debris from the ground surface to the collection surface (grided spaces best shown in Figure 2) of the apparatus (best surface of Figures 2 and 6), and wherein the guide structure includes an inclined surface which extends upwards and rearwards (best shown in Figure 2), in use, from a position close to the ground surface to a rear edge of a respective opening adjacent the collection surface (grided spaces best shown in Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 15, Tozer et al. anticipates:
15. A sweeper (sweeper 10) for a ground surface (ground surface 14), comprising:
a mat-like panel (mat 12 – labeled in attached figure below) configured to be moved across the ground surface to sweep the ground surface, the panel having an underside (bottom surface of mat 12 that contacts ground surface 14) that, in use, faces the ground surface to be swept, an upper side (upper surface 22) that provides a collection surface (grided spaces best shown in Figure 2) for collecting debris swept from the ground surface (best shown in Figure 2), and one or more openings (slots 18 – labeled in attached figure below) that extend between the underside and the upper side for conveying debris from the ground surface to the collection surface on the upper side of the panel (best shown in Figures 2 and 19); and
a flexible cover (cover 24) configured to be mounted on the upper side of the panel for trapping the debris conveyed to the collection surface (Paragraph [0033] and Figure 8), the flexible cover being supported spaced above the collection surface when mounted on the panel by at least one frame member (labeled in attached Figure 14 below) that is elongate and resiliently flexible (entire device is formed of rubber or polymeric material) and that tensions and shapes the flexible cover (Paragraph [0033] and Figure 19 – cover is supported by labeled frame members and tensioned by gravity between labeled frame members), the at least one frame member spanning or extending across a substantial width of the panel in use (shown in attached figure below), and the flexible cover being open in a forward-facing direction (as shown in Figure 19, the cover opens in a forward-facing direction).
Regarding Amended Claim 16, Tozer et al. anticipates:
16. The sweeper according to claim 15, wherein the panel is rectangular (shown in attached Figure 14 above) and the at least one frame member extends substantially parallel to a leading edge of the panel (shown in attached Figure 14 above)and substantially perpendicular to a direction of travel (shown in attached Figure 14 above), and wherein the flexible cover is open in [[a]] the forward-facing direction across a substantial width of the panel (mat 12)(best shown in Figure 1).
PNG
media_image3.png
1025
1525
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Amended Claim 17, Tozer et al. anticipates:
17. A debris retaining assembly (assembly comprising mat 12, frame structure, and cover 24 that creates the cavity space for debris collection on sweeper 10 as shown below) for an apparatus for sweeping a ground surface (ground surface 14) with a panel member (mat 12), an underside (bottom surface of mat 12 that contacts ground surface 14) of the panel member in use facing the ground surface to be swept, and an upper side (upper surface 22) of the panel member providing a collection surface (grided spaces best shown in Figure 2) for collecting debris swept from the ground surface (best shown in Figure 2),
wherein the debris retaining assembly (assembly comprising upwardly extending flange 26 and cover 24) is configured to be mounted on (upwardly extending flange 26 – provided on, cover 24 – mounted on) the panel member for trapping the debris conveyed to the collection surface on the upper side of the panel member, wherein the debris retaining assembly comprises a frame (frame shown in attached figure below) [[with]] having at least one frame member (labeled in attached figure below) and a flexible cover (cover 24) supported on the frame so as to be spaced above the collection surface when the debris retaining assembly is mounted on the panel member (Paragraph [0033] and Figure 8), and
wherein the at least one frame member is elongate and flexible (entire device is formed of rubber or polymeric material) and spans or extends across a substantial width of the panel member (shown in attached figure below) in user to tension and shape the cover spaced above the collection surface (Paragraph [0033] and Figure 19 – cover is supported by labeled frame members and tensioned by gravity between labeled frame members).
PNG
media_image1.png
1430
1645
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Amended Claim 18, Tozer et al. anticipates:
18. The debris retaining assembly according to claim 17, wherein the comprises a rib or a strut or a batten (shown in attached figure above) for supporting the cover (cover 24) spaced above (best shown in Figure 9) the collection surface (grided spaces best shown in Figure 2); wherein the cover is a flexible textile material or mesh material (mesh cover, flexible as shown in Figure 8)
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tozer et al. AU 2019100997 A4 (hereafter Tozer et al.) using US 2022/0074150 version for Figure and Paragraph numbering in view of design choice.
Regarding Amended Claim 7, Tozer et al. teaches:
7. The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the debris retaining assembly (assembly comprising upwardly extending flange 26 and cover 24) is configured to be releasably mounted on (cover 24 – releasably mounted on) or fixed (upwardly extending flange 26 – fixed) to the panel member (mat 12) via one or more straps or releasable fasteners provided on the flexible cover and/or on the frame.
Tozer et al. discloses a cover 24 that is releasably mounted on the mat 12 such that it the collection surfaces can be emptied as shown in Figures 1, 3, and 4. Tozer et al. does not disclose the details for securing the cover, such as releasable fasteners. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ common knowledge straps or releasable fasteners that allow a user to quickly and easily remove the cover without tools with the motivation to allow the device to be easier to use.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but it would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claims 19-21, a search of the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest the device as claimed in the context of the entire scope of the claims. Thus, for at least the foregoing reasons, the instant invention is neither anticipated nor rendered obvious by the prior art because the device is not taught nor suggested as set forth in the entire context of the claims.
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 MARC CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30am-3:30pm.
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 on (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.
/MARC CARLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723