DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the application filed on 27 December 2023.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted was/were considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claim 1, the claim language, "a rotary member" is interpreted to be merely an intended use of the rotary brush.
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.
Examiner note: no 112(f) invocations have been identified by the Office.
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 1-20 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.
Regarding Claim 1:
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the cap member" in the last limitation of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, the mention of “a first cap member,” previously in the claim calls to question whether the cap member is the same structure as a first cap member, or if an additional structure is required. For purposes of examination the first cap member and the cap member are considered to be the same structures, and the claim language is interpreted to instead be, “the first cap member.”
Regarding Claims 2-20:
Claims 2-20 are rejected by virtue of dependence on a rejected claim.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xing et al (US 11540684), hereafter referred to as Xing.
Regarding Claim 1, Xing discloses the following:
A rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) comprising:
a base member (body of 411) having a first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12), into which a cleaning body (413) is inserted, the base member (body of 411) being rotatable about a rotational axis (V4); and
a first cap member (either the left or right caps; FIG. 10-11) fixed to a first end portion of the base member (body of 411) in the axial direction and having a second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11), into which the cleaning body (413) is also inserted;
wherein the cap member (right side cap; FIG. 10) has a recessed portion (as seen in FIG. 10; also see Col. 6, lines 12-20 which discloses the brush is driven by the driving shaft of the motor), into which a rotary member (Col. 6, lines 12-20 discloses the brush is driven by the driving shaft of the motor) is insertable.
Regarding Claim 2, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 1,
wherein the recessed portion (as seen in FIG. 10; also see Col. 6, lines 12-20 which discloses the brush is driven by the driving shaft of the motor) extends from a first end surface of the first cap member (either the left or right caps; FIG. 10-11) to a second end portion of the first cap member (either the left or right caps; FIG. 10-11)(*As seen in FIG. 10, the recessed portion begins at the far right of the cap and extends to the left inner cap portion.).
Regarding Claim 4, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 1, wherein:
the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12) extends up to the first end portion of the base member (body of 411); and
the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) is continuous with the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12).
Regarding Claim 5, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 4,
wherein the cleaning body (413) extends across the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12) and the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11).
Regarding Claim 6, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 5, wherein:
the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12) includes a portion that is bent in the axial direction; and
the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) has a straight shape.
Regarding Claim 7, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 6,
wherein the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) extends in the axial direction.
Regarding Claim 8, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 5,
wherein the width of the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) is larger than the width of the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12).
Regarding Claim 9, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 1, wherein:
the first cap member (either the left or right caps; FIG. 10-11) comprises a cap-body part, in which the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) is defined; and a flange part (axial end portion of space between tabs; FIG. 10-11), which is disposed at a first end portion of the cap-body part; and
a first end portion of the cleaning body (413) makes contact with the flange part (axial end portion of space between tabs; FIG. 10-11) in the state in which the first end portion has been inserted into the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11).
Claim(s) 1-5, 9-11, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hong et al (US 20230180981), hereafter referred to as Hong.
Regarding Claim 1, Hong discloses the following:
A rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) comprising:
a base member (210) having a first groove (211), into which a cleaning body (231) is inserted, the base member (210) being rotatable about a rotational axis; and
a first cap member (250) fixed to a first end portion of the base member (210) in the axial direction and having a second groove (253a), into which the cleaning body (231) is also inserted;
wherein the cap member (250) has a recessed portion (255), into which a rotary member (240; FIG. 3-4; [0150]) is insertable.
Regarding Claim 2, Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) according to claim 1,
wherein the recessed portion (255) extends from a first end surface of the first cap member (250) to a second end portion of the first cap member (250).
Regarding Claim 3, Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) according to claim 2,
wherein the recessed portion (255) and at least a portion of the second groove (253a) overlap each other in the axial direction.
Regarding Claim 4, Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) according to claim 1, wherein:
the first groove (211) extends up to the first end portion of the base member (210); and
the second groove (253a) is continuous with the first groove (211).
Regarding Claim 5, Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) according to claim 4,
wherein the cleaning body (231) extends across the first groove (211) and the second groove (253a).
Regarding Claim 9, Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) according to claim 1, wherein:
the first cap member (250) comprises a cap-body part, in which the second groove (253a) is defined; and a flange part (251), which is disposed at a first end portion of the cap-body part; and
a first end portion of the cleaning body (231) makes contact with the flange part (251) in the state in which the first end portion has been inserted into the second groove (253a).
Regarding Claim 10, Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) according to claim 9, wherein:
the first cap member (250) comprises a protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7), which protrudes from a second end surface of the cap-body part in the axial direction; and
the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7) is inserted into an opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7), which is defined in a first end surface of the base member (210).
Regarding Claim 11, Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) according to claim 10,
wherein, in the state in which the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7) has been inserted into the opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7), the first end surface of the base member (210) and the second end surface of the cap-body part oppose each other, and the second groove (253a) is continuous with the first groove (211).
Regarding Claim 19, Hong discloses the following:
A nozzle (120) comprising:
a main body (121; FIG. 1-2), which has a lower surface configured to oppose a surface to be cleaned;
the rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4) according to claim 1,
which is supported on the main body (121; FIG. 1-2) in a rotatable manner; and
a motor (synonymous with first power module 13a, [0150]) configured to generate a rotational force for rotating the rotary brush (200; FIG. 3-4).
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 3 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xing et al (US 11540684), hereafter referred to as Xing.
Regarding Claim 3, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 2,
Xing does not explicitly disclose the following:
wherein the recessed portion and at least a portion of the second groove overlap each other in the axial direction.
However the Examiner notes the following:
Xing discloses a cap having a recessed portion and a second groove. In other words, Xing discloses the same structure as the Applicant, except the relative dimensions claimed. The Instant Application has not disclosed the limitation(s) of: wherein the recessed portion and at least a portion of the second groove overlap each other in the axial direction solves any stated problem or is of any particular purpose. Note that the mere existence of these relative dimensions themselves in the claim cannot impart criticality as any cap member could be described in such a way. Therefore without explicit support for the relative dimensions of the claim(s) providing a critical result, it appears Xing would perform equally well with the relative values as claimed by Applicant. Since the courts have held that, “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device,” 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 relative dimensions of the recess and the second groove, as disclosed by Xing, by utilizing the specific value(s) (relative dimensions) as described above, with the reasonable expectation of successfully specifically providing a relative depth of the recess. (see MPEP 2144.04, IV, A).
Regarding Claim 16, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 3, wherein:
the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12) extends up to the first end portion of the base member (body of 411);
the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) is continuous with the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12);
the cleaning body (413) extends across the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12) and the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11);
the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12) includes a portion that is curved in the axial direction;
the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) has a straight shape extending in the axial direction; and
the width of the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) is larger than the width of the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12).
Claim 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al (US 20230180981), hereafter referred to as Hong.
Regarding Claim 15, Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 1,
The embodiment of Hong depicted in FIG. 3-7 does not teach the following:
wherein, within a plane orthogonal to the rotational axis, the shape of an inner surface of the recessed portion is hexagonal, and the shape of an outer surface of the rotary member is hexagonal.
However the embodiment depicted in FIG. 8 of Hong discloses the following:
wherein, within a plane orthogonal to the rotational axis, the shape of an inner surface of the recessed portion is hexagonal, and the shape of an outer surface of the rotary member is hexagonal (see FIG. 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the square shaped recessed portion and outer surface of the rotary member, as disclosed by the embodiment shown in FIG. 3-7 of Hong, with the hexagonal shaped recessed portion and outer surface of the rotary member, as disclosed by the embodiment shown in FIG. 8, with the reasonable expectation of providing a known shape of a recessed portion and rotary member. The Examiner notes, the simple substitution of the square shape, as taught by Hong, with the hexagonal shape, as taught by Hong, yields the predictable result of providing a known rotary member and recessed portion shape (i.e. substituting one shape for another known shape). This rationale further supports a conclusion of obviousness to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (see MPEP 2143, I, B).
Claims 10-14 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xing et al (US 11540684), hereafter referred to as Xing, in view of Hong et al (US 20230180981), hereafter referred to as Hong.
Regarding Claim 10, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 9, wherein:
Xing does not explicitly disclose the following:
the first cap member comprises a protruding part, which protrudes from a second end surface of the cap-body part in the axial direction; and
the protruding part is inserted into an opening, which is defined in a first end surface of the base member.
However Hong teaches the following:
the first cap member (250) comprises a protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7), which protrudes from a second end surface of the cap-body part (as seen in FIG. 7) in the axial direction; and
the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7) is inserted into an opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7), which is defined in a first end surface of the base member (210).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the unknown details of the inner cap portion and inner portion of the base member of Xing, which is merely silent on the details of how the inner cap portion cooperates with the inner base member portion, with the inner cap and inner base member portion comprising protruding tabs that engage with an inner portion of the base member, as disclosed by Hong, with the reasonable expectation of successfully providing a known inner cap to inner base member connection (see FIG. 6A of Hong). The Examiner notes, the simple substitution of the unknown details of the inner cap and inner base member portions, as taught by Xing, with the known inner cap and inner base member portions, as taught by Hong, yields the predictable result of providing a known inner cap to inner base member connection (i.e. substituting one unknown means to connect the inner portion of the cap to the inner portion of the base member for a known means to connect the inner portion of the cap to the inner portion of the base member). This rationale further supports a conclusion of obviousness to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (see MPEP 2143, I, B).
Regarding Claim 11, Xing as modified by Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 10,
Hong continues to teach the following:
wherein, in the state in which the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7) has been inserted into the opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7),
Xing continues to teach the following:
the first end surface of the base member (body of 411) and the second end surface of the cap-body part (tabs between 413; FIG. 9-10 of Xing) oppose each other (as seen in FIG. 10), and the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) is continuous with the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12).
Regarding Claim 12, Xing as modified by Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 11,
Xing continues to teach the following:
wherein the first cap member (either the left or right caps; FIG. 10-11) comprises a projection part (tabs between 413; FIG. 9 of Xing), which opposes at least a portion of an outer surface of the base member (body of 411);
Hong continues to teach the following:
in the state in which the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7) has been inserted into the opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7) (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7).
Regarding Claim 13, Xing as modified by Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 12,
wherein the projection part (tabs between 413; FIG. 9 of Xing) extends more radially outward than the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7 of Hong) and protrudes from the cap-body part toward the base member (body of 411).
Regarding Claim 14, Xing as modified by Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 13, wherein:
Hong continues to teach the following:
the base member (250) comprises a base-body part, which has the opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7), and
Xing continues to teach the following:
a plurality of rib parts (ribs holding 413, as best seen in FIG. 12), which protrude radially outward from an outer surface of the base-body part (411);
the rib parts (ribs holding 413, as best seen in FIG. 12) are spaced apart in a circumferential direction; and
the projection part (tabs between 413; FIG. 9 of Xing) is disposed between two of the rib parts (ribs holding 413, as best seen in FIG. 12) that are adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction.
Regarding Claim 17, Xing discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 16, wherein:
the first cap member (either the left or right caps; FIG. 10-11) comprises a cap-body part, in which the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) is defined; and a flange part (axial end portion of space between tabs; FIG. 10-11), which is disposed at a first end portion of the cap-body part;
a first end portion of the cleaning body (413) makes contact with the flange part (axial end portion of space between tabs; FIG. 10-11) in the state in which the first end portion has been inserted into the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11);
the first end surface of the base member (body of 411) and the second end surface of the cap-body part (tabs between 413; FIG. 9 of Xing) oppose each other, and the second groove (space between tabs of the cap; as seen in FIG. 10-11) is continuous with the first groove (groove holding 413; as best seen in FIG. 12).
Xing does not teach the following:
the first cap member comprises a protruding part, which protrudes from a second end surface of the cap-body part in the axial direction;
the protruding part is inserted into an opening, which is defined in a first end surface of the base member; and
However Hong teaches the following:
the first cap member (250) comprises a protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7), which protrudes from a second end surface of the cap-body part in the axial direction (as seen in FIG. 7);
the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7) is inserted into an opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7), which is defined in a first end surface of the base member (body of 411).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the unknown details of the inner cap portion and inner portion of the base member of Xing, which is merely silent on the details of how the inner cap portion cooperates with the inner base member portion, with the inner cap and inner base member portion comprising protruding tabs that engage with an inner portion of the base member, as disclosed by Hong, with the reasonable expectation of successfully providing a known inner cap to inner base member connection (see FIG. 6A of Hong). The Examiner notes, the simple substitution of the unknown details of the inner cap and inner base member portions, as taught by Xing, with the known inner cap and inner base member portions, as taught by Hong, yields the predictable result of providing a known inner cap to inner base member connection (i.e. substituting one unknown means to connect the inner portion of the cap to the inner portion of the base member for a known means to connect the inner portion of the cap to the inner portion of the base member). This rationale further supports a conclusion of obviousness to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (see MPEP 2143, I, B).
Regarding Claim 18, Xing as modified by Hong discloses the following:
The rotary brush (411; FIG. 10-12) according to claim 17, wherein:
Xing continues to teach the following:
the first cap member (either the left or right caps; FIG. 10-11) comprises a projection part (tabs between 413; FIG. 9 of Xing), which opposes at least a portion of an outer surface of the base member (body of 411) in the state in which the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7) has been inserted into the opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7);
the projection part (tabs between 413; FIG. 9 of Xing) extends more radially outward than the protruding part (tabs that engage with 210 and 234; see FIG. 7 of Hong as applied to Xing) and protrudes from the cap-body part toward the base member (body of 411);
a plurality of rib parts (ribs holding 413, as best seen in FIG. 12), which protrude radially outward from an outer surface of the base-body part;
the rib parts (ribs holding 413, as best seen in FIG. 12) are spaced apart in a circumferential direction;
the projection part (tabs between 413; FIG. 9 of Xing) is disposed between two of the rib parts (ribs holding 413, as best seen in FIG. 12) that are adjacent to each other in the circumferential direction; and
within a plane orthogonal to the rotational axis (V4), the shape of an inner surface of the recessed portion (as seen in FIG. 10; also see Col. 6, lines 12-20 which discloses the brush is driven by the driving shaft of the motor) is hexagonal, and the shape of an outer surface of the rotary member (Col. 6, lines 12-20 discloses the brush is driven by the driving shaft of the motor) is hexagonal.
Hong continues to teach the following:
the base member (210) comprises a base-body part (210), which has the opening (space between 234 and 210; FIG. 7).
Claim 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong et al (US 20230180981), hereafter referred to as Hong, in view of Xing et al (US 11540684), hereafter referred to as Xing.
Regarding claim 20, Hong teaches the following:
A cleaner (FIG. 1-2) comprising:
the nozzle (120) according to claim 19; and
Hong does not teach the following:
a suction fan in fluid communication with the nozzle.
However Xing teaches the following:
It is well known in the art for vacuum cleaners to have a suction device comprising a motor and a fan (Col. 1, lines 20-40).
Hong as modified by Xing results in the following.
a suction fan (Col. 1, lines 20-40 of Xing) in fluid communication with the nozzle (120 of Hong).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the unknown details of the suction portion of the vacuum cleaner of Hong, which is merely silent on the details of the suction portion of the vacuum, with the suction fan and motor as disclosed by Xing, with the reasonable expectation of successfully providing a suction device for a vacuum (see Col. 1, lines 20-40 of Xing). The Examiner notes, the simple substitution of the unknown details of the suction portion of the vacuum cleaner, as taught by Hong, with the known suction fan and motor of the suction portion of the vacuum cleaner, as taught by Xing, yields the predictable result of providing suction for a vacuum cleaner (i.e. substituting one unknown means to provide suction for a vacuum cleaner for a known means to provide suction for a vacuum cleaner). This rationale further supports a conclusion of obviousness to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (see MPEP 2143, I, B).
Conclusion
See form No. 892 for other references pertinent to the application that may not have been cited within the Office Action.
For references which show similar vacuum arrangements see Pages 1-3.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN C DELRUE whose telephone number is (313)446-6567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday; 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM (Eastern).
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, Nathaniel E. Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-8648. 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.
/BRIAN CHRISTOPHER DELRUE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745