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 .
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 8-9 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.
Claim 8 requires that in the low suction mode a first power set point provides stronger current to the suction source than a second power set point of the high suction mode (which is supported in Applicant’s specification, Par 0043) however the Applicant further discloses that in the low suction mode the suction source receives about 10% of the power provided to the suction source in high suction mode (Par 0042) which seems contradictory. While it is possible to provide lower power with higher current or higher power with lower current by changing the voltage the Applicant is silent regarding any voltage changing means and discloses only power and current, therefore Applicant’s disclosure hasn’t shown how to make or use within the context of the claimed invention.
Claim 9 depends from claim 8 and inherits all deficiencies of the parent claim; and further failes to comply with the enablement requirement for reasons substantially similar to those of claim 8 above regarding the suction source receiving about 10% of the power in the low suction mode than in the high suction mode in view of the higher current requirement of parent claim 8.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210169284 to Royale in view of JP 2001137165 to Ishii (see machine translation in file wrapper).
(a) Regarding claim 1:
(i) Royale discloses a handheld cleaner (see title), comprising:
a housing (body 12, Fig 2) at least partially defining an air pathway (“working air path”, Par 0049);
a suction nozzle (suction nozzle 16, Fig 2) defining a nozzle inlet (“dirty air inlet”, Par 0049) in communication with a suction pathway (portion of working air path from the nozzle inlet to suction source 18, Fig 2, Par 0049),
the suction pathway configured to extract at least one of debris or liquid from a surface (surface S, Fig 3) to the air pathway (Par 0048);
an exhaust defining an outlet to the air pathway (exhaust vents 22, Fig 3, Par 0049);
a suction source (suction source 18, Fig 2) in fluid communication with the suction nozzle via the suction pathway (Par 0049), and
the suction source configured to generate a working air stream (Par 0049).
(ii) Royale does not disclose:
an operation angle sensor configured to detect an operation angle of said handheld cleaner relative to the surface; and
a controller in electrical communication with the suction source and the operation angle sensor via an electrical pathway,
wherein the controller is configured to control an amount of suction generated by the suction source based on the detected operation angle.
(iii) Ishii is also in the field of cleaners (Par n0001) and teaches:
an operation angle sensor (gyro 43, Fig 8, Par 0021 which is also referenced as gyro IC 2 of inclination/tilt detecting unit 64, Fig 5, Par 0027) configured to detect an operation angle (α, Pars 0029/0034) of a cleaner relative to the surface (suction mouth body 1); and
a controller (circuit board 4, Fig 3; schematically shown in Fig 5, Par 0025) in electrical communication with a motor (electric motor 3, Pars 0020/0025) and the operation angle sensor (Fig 5, Par 0025) via an electrical pathway (pathway of “wiring”, Par 0021; circuit path shown in Fig 5),
wherein the controller is configured to control the motor based on the detected operation angle (Pars 0040-0041).
(iv) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the handheld cleaner as disclosed by Royale with the above aforementioned operation angle sensor and controller as taught by Ishii for the purpose of controlling the suction source based on the operation angle (Par 0040-0041, Fig 7).
(b) Regarding claim 2:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 1.
(ii) Ishii further teaches wherein the controller is configured to control the amount of suction generated by the suction source based on a determined suction nozzle engagement position (position wherein the operation angle is at or below α0, Par 0040, Fig 7).
(c) Regarding claim 3:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 1.
(ii) Royale as modified by Ishii further teaches wherein the operation angle sensor is configured to detect a desired cleaning angle (Ishii: the gyro can detect any angle, Fig 7).
(iii) The limitation “wherein the desired cleaning angle is an angle in which a portion of the nozzle inlet is spaced a predetermined distance relative to the surface” is a functional limitation defining how the cleaner is intended to be used and as the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim the handheld cleaner of the prior art can perform the claimed function, see MPEP 2114(II).
(d) Regarding claim 4:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 3.
(ii) The limitation “wherein the desired cleaning angle is in a range of approximately 3 degrees to 30 degrees relative to the surface” is a functional limitation defining how the cleaner is intended to be used and as the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim the handheld cleaner of the prior art can perform the claimed function, see MPEP 2114(II).
(e) Regarding claim 5:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 3.
(ii) The limitation “wherein the amount of suction generated by the suction source based on the desired cleaning angle is audibly distinct from the amount of suction generated by the suction source based on a non-desired cleaning angle” is a functional limitation defining how the cleaner is intended to be used and as the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim the handheld cleaner of the prior art can perform the claimed function, see MPEP 2114(II).
(f) Regarding claim 6:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 1.
(ii) Royale as modified by Ishii further teaches wherein the amount of suction generated corresponds to a speed of an impeller (this is true for all impellers), and wherein the speed of the impeller changes based on the detected operation angle (Ishii: Pars 0040-0041).
(g) Regarding claim 7:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 1.
(ii) Royale as modified by Ishii further teaches wherein the amount of suction generated is regulated by adjusting an amount of power provided to the suction source (Ishii: Pars 0040-0041; further, this is true for all motorized suction sources), and wherein the amount of power provided corresponds to a high suction mode (Ishii: during rotation of electric motor 3, Par 0040) or a low suction mode (when electric motor 3 is stopped, Par 0041).
(h) Regarding claim 8:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 7.
(ii) Ishii further teaches wherein the controller is configured to control the amount of suction generated by the suction source based on a determined suction nozzle engagement position (position wherein the operation angle is at or below α0, Par 0040, Fig 7).
(h) Regarding claim 10:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 1.
(ii) Royale further discloses: a recovery tank (recovery tank 20, Fig 2) in fluid communication with the suction nozzle through a conduit (separator 24, Fig 2), wherein the suction source draws the at least one of the debris or liquid from the surface (Pars 0048-0049), through the suction nozzle and the conduit to the recovery tank (Par 0049).
(i) Regarding claim 11:
(i) Royale discloses a surface cleaning apparatus for cleaning a surface (see title), comprising:
a suction nozzle (suction nozzle 16, Fig 2) in fluid communication with an air pathway (“working air path”, Par 0049);
an exhaust defining an outlet to the air pathway (exhaust vents 22, Fig 3, Par 0049;
a suction source (suction source 18, Fig 2) in fluid communication with the suction nozzle via the air pathway (Par 0049),
the suction source configured to generate a working air stream (Par 0049).
(ii) Royale does not disclose:
an operation angle sensor configured to determine an operation angle relative to said surface to be cleaned; and
a controller in electrical communication with the suction source and the operation angle sensor via an electrical pathway,
wherein the controller is configured to control an amount of suction generated by the suction source based on the determined operation angle.
(iii) Ishii is also in the field of cleaners (Par n0001) and teaches:
an operation angle sensor (gyro 43, Fig 8, Par 0021 which is also referenced as gyro IC 2 of inclination/tilt detecting unit 64, Fig 5, Par 0027) configured to determine an operation angle (α, Pars 0029/0034) of a cleaner relative to the surface (suction mouth body 1); and
a controller (circuit board 4, Fig 3; schematically shown in Fig 5, Par 0025) in electrical communication with a motor (electric motor 3, Pars 0020/0025) and the operation angle sensor (Fig 5, Par 0025) via an electrical pathway (pathway of “wiring”, Par 0021; circuit path shown in Fig 5),
wherein the controller is configured to control the motor based on the detected operation angle (Pars 0040-0041).
(iv) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the handheld cleaner as disclosed by Royale with the above aforementioned operation angle sensor and controller as taught by Ishii for the purpose of controlling the suction source based on the operation angle (Par 0040-0041, Fig 7).
(j) Regarding claim 12:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the cleaning apparatus of claim 11.
(ii) Royale as modified by Ishii further teaches wherein the operation angle is an angle of the suction nozzle relative to said surface (Ishii: Par 0029) and the operation angle sensor is configured to detect a desired cleaning angle (Ishii: can detect any angle, Fig 7).
(k) Regarding claim 15:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the cleaning apparatus of claim 12.
(ii) The limitation “wherein the desired cleaning angle is in a range of approximately 3 degrees to 30 degrees relative to said surface” is a functional limitation defining how the cleaner is intended to be used and as the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim the handheld cleaner of the prior art can perform the claimed function, see MPEP 2114(II).
(l) Regarding claim 16:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the cleaning apparatus of claim 11.
(ii) Ishii further teaches wherein the amount of suction generated is regulated by adjusting an amount of power provided to the suction source (Pars 0040-0041; further, true for all impellers).
(m) Regarding claim 17:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the cleaning apparatus of claim 16.
(ii) Royale as modified by Ishii further teaches wherein the amount of power provided corresponds to a high suction mode (Ishii: during rotation of electric motor 3, Par 0040) and a low suction mode (Ishii: when electric motor 3 is off, Par 0041), and wherein the low suction mode corresponds to a first power set point (must exist as defined) and the high suction mode corresponds to a second power set point (must exist as defined).
(n) Regarding claim 18:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the cleaning apparatus of claim 11.
(ii) Royale further discloses: a recovery tank (recovery tank 20, Fig 2) in fluid communication with the suction nozzle through a conduit (separator 24, Fig 2), wherein the suction source is in fluid communication with the conduit to draw at least one of debris or liquid from said surface (Pars 0048-0049), through the suction nozzle and the conduit to the recovery tank (Par 0049).
(o) Regarding claim 19:
(i) Royale discloses a handheld cleaner (see title), comprising:
a suction nozzle (suction nozzle 16, Fig 2) defining a suction channel (portion of working air path from the nozzle inlet to suction source 18, Fig 2, Par 0049),
the suction channel configured to extract at least one of debris or liquid from a surface through an air pathway (Par 0048);
an exhaust defining an outlet to the air pathway (exhaust vents 22, Fig 3, Par 0049);
a suction source (suction source 18, Fig 2) including a vacuum motor (vacuum motor 36, Fig 2) and an impeller that is driven by the vacuum motor (fan 38, Fig 2, Par 0051),
the suction source in fluid communication with the suction nozzle via the suction channel (Par 0049),
the suction source configured to generate a working air stream (Par 0049).
(ii) Royale does not disclose:
an operation angle sensor configured to detect an operation angle of said handheld cleaner relative to the surface; and
a controller in electrical communication with the suction source and the operation angle sensor via an electrical pathway,
wherein the controller is configured to control an amount of power to the vacuum motor to execute a high suction mode or a low suction mode based on the detected operation angle.
(iii) Ishii is also in the field of cleaners (Par n0001) and teaches:
an operation angle sensor (gyro 43, Fig 8, Par 0021 which is also referenced as gyro IC 2 of inclination/tilt detecting unit 64, Fig 5, Par 0027) configured to detect an operation angle (α, Pars 0029/0034) of a cleaner relative to the surface (suction mouth body 1); and
a controller (circuit board 4, Fig 3; schematically shown in Fig 5, Par 0025) in electrical communication with a motor (electric motor 3, Pars 0020/0025) and the operation angle sensor (Fig 5, Par 0025) via an electrical pathway (pathway of “wiring”, Par 0021; circuit path shown in Fig 5),
wherein the controller is configured to control an amount of power to the motor to execute a high mode (during rotation of electric motor 3, Par 0040) or a lower mode (when electric motor 3 is stopped, Par 0041) based on the detected operation angle (Pars 0040-0041).
(iv) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the handheld cleaner as disclosed by Royale with the above aforementioned operation angle sensor and controller as taught by Ishii for the purpose of controlling the suction source based on the operation angle (Par 0040-0041, Fig 7).
(p) Regarding claim 20:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the handheld cleaner of claim 19.
(ii) Royale as modified by Ishii further teaches wherein the operation angle sensor is configured to detect a non-desired cleaning angle (Ishii: can detect any angle, Fig 7).
(iii) The limitation “wherein the non-desired cleaning angle is an angle in which the suction channel is oriented approximately less than 3 degrees relative to the surface” is a functional limitation defining how the cleaner is intended to be used and as the prior art teaches all structural limitations of the claim the handheld cleaner of the prior art can perform the claimed function, see MPEP 2114(II).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210169284 to Royale in view of JP 2001137165 to Ishii (see machine translation in file wrapper) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of CN 118844849 to Zhang (see machine translation in file wrapper).
(a) Regarding claim 13:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii teaches the cleaning apparatus of claim 11.
(ii) Royale as modified by Ishii does not teach a suction nozzle engagement sensor configured to detect a desired nozzle engagement position that places the suction nozzle at the desired cleaning angle.
(iii) Zhang is also in the field of cleaners (Par n0001) and teaches:
a suction nozzle (main body 1, Fig 1),
a suction nozzle engagement sensor (pressure sensor 5 of universal ball wheel 4, Figs 1/5) configured to detect a desired nozzle engagement position that places the suction nozzle at a desired cleaning angle (when the pressure sensor detects pressure on the ball, Par n0021).
(iv) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cleaning apparatus as taught by the combined teachings of Royale as modified by Zhang with the above aforementioned nozzle engagement sensor as taught by Zhang for the purpose of knowing whether the suction nozzle is tilted and avoiding false indication of tilting by operating angle sensor (Par n0021).
(b) Regarding claim 14:
(i) Royale as modified by Ishii as further modified by Zhang teaches the cleaning apparatus of claim 13.
(ii) Royale as modified by Ishii as further modified by Zhang further teaches wherein the amount of suction generated by the suction source is based on the detection of the suction nozzle being in the desired nozzle engagement position (suction source is on or off depending upon whether the suction nozzle is tilted, see rejection of claim 11 above, and also whether the pressure sensor detects pressure, see rejection of claim 13 above; i.e. suction source is on or off depending of whether the suction nozzle is in or out of a desired nozzle engagement position).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. KR 960005008 to Song teaches cleaner which detects when a suction nozzle is tilted (Fig 3c) and when the suction head is tilted increases power delivered to a suction source (Cp1 and Cp2, Fig 5). US 20070209145 to Tullett teaches a cleaner having an angle sensor to determine an angle between a suction nozzle and a surface and to turn off a motor when that angle is greater than a predetermined angle of about 30 degrees (Claims 26, 29, and 32).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Justin A Pruitt whose telephone number is (571)272-8383. The examiner can normally be reached T-F 8:30am - 6:30pm.
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, Nathaniel 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.
/JUSTIN A PRUITT/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745