DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 12/07/2025 has been entered. Claims 21-38 are pending in the application. Claims 1-20 are cancelled. Claims 21-38 are entered as “New”.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because they fail to comply with the following §1.84 sections.
New corrected drawings in compliance with §1.84(m) are required in this application because the shading, in each of the figures, makes it difficult to determine the structure of the claimed invention.
Examiner notes new replacement drawings were submitted. However, the replacement drawings were not entered, since the drawings are still not in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), specifically §1.84(m). Applicant must file drawings in accordance with each section of §1.84 to overcome the drawing objection.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 21-38 are objected to because of the following informalities.
Claim 21 should read --A portable air mover housing, comprising:
an air mover housing having:
a receiving chamber configured for installing an air flow generating apparatus therein,
an air inlet portion having a first inlet grid and a second air inlet grid formed on a left side and a right side of said air mover housing respectively,
an air outlet portion formed on a front side thereof,
a handle and cable organizer portion formed on a top side thereof,
an air direction adjustable stand portion, having a front stand, a rear stand and a back stand, wherein said front stand and said rear stand are provided on a bottom side thereof and said back stand is provided on a rear side thereof, such that when said front stand and said rear stand are arranged to stand on a supporting surface, said air outlet portion is directed to a horizontal position to provide air flow horizontally, wherein when said rear stand and said back stand are arranged [[to ]]on the supporting surface, said air outlet portion is directed to an upwardly inclined position for providing air flow inclinedly upwards,
a control panel portion provided on the front side thereof, and
a stackable storage arrangement portion provided on said left side and said right side thereof; and
a pivot stand pivotally mounted to said bottom side of said air mover housing and configured to be selectively folded between a first position and a second position, wherein in said first position, said pivot stand is pivotally folded on said bottom side of said air mover housing so that said front stand and said rear stand are stood on the supporting surface, wherein in said second position, said pivot stand is pivotally folded downwards to have an included angle with said bottom side of said air mover housing to elevate said front stand above the supporting surface such that said air outlet portion is elevated at a slightly upward direction to provide air flow upwards above the supporting surface, wherein said slightly upward direction is adjustable by adjusting the included angle of said pivot stand.--
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 do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are.
“air flow generating apparatus” in Claim 21, where the generic placeholder is “apparatus”, the function language is “air flow generating”, and sufficient modifying structure is not provided; instant application Paragraph 0004 describes the air flow generating apparatus as a fan and an electric motor, providing sufficient modifying structure
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 21-38 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 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.
As to Claim 21, applicant has failed to show possession of the claimed invention by failing to provide sufficient detail needed to understand what the invention is and how it works. Applicant claims said air outlet portion is directed to a horizontal position to provide air flow horizontally. This raises questions to what applicant had possession of, in that neither the specification nor the drawings, or a combination thereof, adequately describe the air flow being exactly horizontal.
The original claims described the air flow being generally horizontal, and the instant application describes the air flow being “horizontally close to the supporting surface”. However, none of the original disclosure describes the air flow being exactly horizontal, as claimed. As such, the limitation lacks sufficient written description, and is considered new matter. For the purpose of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as “substantially horizontal”.
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 27-38 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.
As to Claims 27-32, the limitation “a center portion of said handle bar is arranged above a downward weight force direction of said air mover housing” is indefinite.
It is not clear how any structure is able to be arranged with respect to a direction. For example, the claimed downward weight direction in instant application Figure 1 is down. The direction is down regardless of where the direction is shown in Figure 1 –i.e., the direction can be shown above the housing in Figure 1, to either side of the housing in Figure 1, or below the housing in Figure 1. As such, the direction in Figure 1 may be displayed above the housing in Figure 1, which would place the center portion below the direction. Similarly, the direction may be displayed below the housing in Figure 1, which would place the center portion above the direction. In light of the above, it is not clear how any structure may be placed relative to any direction, rendering the limitation indefinite.
As to Claims 33-38, the limitation “said handle and cable organizer portion further provides a cable outlet member rearwardly and downwardly extended from said rear handle support and integrated into said hand and cable organizer portion for a power cable to extend from outside said handle bar into said receiving chamber to electrically connected with said air flow generating apparatus for external electric power supply” is indefinite. The preamble states the claimed invention is for a portable air mover housing. However, the limitation positively claims the power cable, and the power cable providing power to the air flow generating apparatus. The power cable and the air flow generating apparatus are both outside the scope of the claimed air mover housing. As such, the scope of the claim is indefinite. Additionally, the limitation is grammatically confusing.
For the purpose of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as said handle and cable organizer portion further provides a cable outlet member rearwardly and downwardly extended from said rear handle support and integrated into said hand and cable organizer portion, the cable outlet member configured to allow a power cable to extend from outside said handle bar into said receiving chamber to be electrically connected with said air flow generating apparatus to be capable of providing external electric power supply.
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 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanders (U.S. Patent D849,924), in view of Turner (U.S. Patent 9,863,698), further in view of Cui (U.S. PGPub 2012/0141264).
As to Claim 21, Sanders teaches a portable air mover housing (Figures 1-7), comprising:
an air mover housing (Figures 1-7) having:
an air inlet portion (see Figures 4/5 below, where one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the first and second inlet portions shown in Figures 4/5 are may be used as air inlets) having (as shown in Figures 4/5) a first inlet grid (see Figures 4/5 below) and a second air inlet grid (see Figures 4/5 below) formed on a left side (Figure 5) and a right side (Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Figures 1-7) respectively,
an air outlet portion (see Figure 2 below) formed on (as shown in Figure 2) a front side (Figure 2) thereof,
a handle and cable organizer portion (see Figure 4 below, where one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the structure shown in Figure 4 may be used as a handle and to organize a cable) formed on (as shown in Figures 4/5) a top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Figure 4) thereof,
an air direction adjustable stand portion (see Figure 5 below), having a front stand (see Figure 7 below), a rear stand (see Figure 7 below) and a back stand (see Figure 3 below), wherein said front stand (see Figure 7 below) and said rear stand (see Figure 7 below) are provided on (as shown in Figure 7) a bottom side (Figure 7, which is the bottom of Figures 4/5) thereof and said back stand (see Figure 3 below) is provided on (as shown in Figure 3) a rear side thereof (Figure 7, which is the right of Figure 4 and left of Figure 5), such that when said front stand (see Figure 7 below) and said rear stand (see Figure 7 below) are arranged to stand on (as shown in Figure 5 below) a supporting surface (the dotted line shown in Figure 5 below), said air outlet portion (see Figure 2 below) is directed to a horizontal position (as shown in Figures 4/5) to provide air flow horizontally (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude air coming out of the air outlet portion would flow horizontally when the housing was standing on the dotted line, as shown in Figure 5), wherein when said rear stand (see Figure 7 below) and said back stand (see Figure 3 below) are arranged to on the supporting surface (the dashed line shown in Figure 5 below), said air outlet portion (see Figure 2 below) is directed to an upwardly inclined position (as shown in Sanders Figure 5 when Sanders Figure 5 is rotated so the dashed line is horizontal) for providing air flow inclinedly upwards (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude air coming out of the air outlet portion would flow upwardly inclined when the housing was standing on the dashed line, as shown in Figure 5),
a control panel portion (see Figure 2 below, where one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the structure shown in Figure 2 is a control panel) provided on (as shown in Figure 2) the front side (Figure 2) thereof, and
a stackable storage arrangement portion (see Figures 4/5 below, where one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the portions shown in Figures 4/5 below may broadly be used for stacking purposes) provided on (as shown in Figures 4/5) said left side (Figure 5) and said right side (Figure 4) thereof.
PNG
media_image1.png
491
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sanders Figure 2, Modified by Examiner
PNG
media_image2.png
471
629
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Sanders Figure 3, Modified by Examiner
PNG
media_image3.png
482
662
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Sanders Figure 4, Modified by Examiner
PNG
media_image4.png
508
653
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Sanders Figure 5, Modified by Examiner
PNG
media_image5.png
456
609
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Sanders Figure 7, Modified by Examiner
Sanders does not teach a receiving chamber configured for installing an air flow generating apparatus therein…a pivot stand pivotally mounted to said bottom side of said air mover housing and configured to be selectively folded between a first position and a second position, wherein in said first position, said pivot stand is pivotally folded on said bottom side of said air mover housing so that said front stand and said rear stand are stood on the supporting surface, wherein in said second position, said pivot stand is pivotally folded downwards to have an included angle with said bottom side of said air mover housing to elevate said front stand above the supporting ground such that said air outlet portion is elevated at a slightly upward direction to provide air flow upwards above the supporting surface, wherein said upward direction is adjustable by adjusting the included angle of said pivot stand.
Turner describes a similar air mover, and teaches a receiving chamber (14) configured for installing (as shown in Figure 3) an air flow generating apparatus (56/58) therein (as shown in Figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the fan/blower, as taught by Turner, within the housing, as taught by Sanders, to blow air (Column 3, Lines 8-12).
Cui describes a similar air mover, and teaches a pivot stand (42) pivotally mounted to (Paragraph 0068) said bottom side (the bottom of Figure 3) of said air mover housing (Figure 3) and configured to be selectively folded between (Paragraph 0068) a first position (the horizontal position, described in Paragraph 0068) and a second position (the tilted position, described in Paragraph 0068), wherein in said first position (the horizontal position), said pivot stand (42) is pivotally folded on (as shown in Figure 3) said bottom side (the bottom of Figure 3) of said air mover housing (Figure 3) so that said front stand (see Figure 3 below) and said rear stand (see Figure 3 below) are stood on (as shown in Figure 3 below) the supporting surface (the dotted line in Figure 3 below), wherein in said second position (the tilted position), said pivot stand (42) is pivotally folded downwards (as shown in Figure 3) to have an included angle (the angle between the dashed line and the dotted line in Figure 3 below) with said bottom side (the bottom of Figure 3) of said air mover housing (Figure 3) to elevate (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the front stand would be elevated with respect to the rear stand when the pivot stand is in the second position) said front stand (see Figure 3 below) above (as shown in Figure 3) the supporting ground (the dashed line shown in Figure 3 below) such that said air outlet portion (see Figure 3 below) is elevated at a slightly upward direction (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the air outlet portion shown in Figure 3 below would elevate depending on how much pivot stand 42 is pivoted with respect to the bottom of the housing) to provide air flow upwards (air would flow upwards with respect to the horizontal position when Figure 3 is rotated so the dashed line is horizontal) above the supporting surface (the dashed line shown in Figure 3 below), wherein said upward direction is adjustable by adjusting the included angle (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the angle of the air outlet portion would change depending on how much pivot stand 42 is pivoted with respect to the bottom of the housing) of said pivot stand (42).
PNG
media_image6.png
471
739
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Cui Figure 3, Modified by Examiner
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use a pivot stand, as taught by Cui, on the bottom of the housing, as taught by Sanders, “to selectively adjust an orientation of the air exit with respect to the ground surface (Paragraph 0068).”
As to Claim 22, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 21, and continues to teach said pivot stand (Cui 42) is pivotally mounted to (Cui Paragraph 0068, as shown in Cui Figure 3) said front stand (see Sanders Figure 7 in the Claim 21 rejection above) provided on (as shown in Sanders Figure 7) said bottom side (Sanders Figure 7) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7).
As to Claim 23, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 21, and continues to teach said stackable storage arrangement portion (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) comprises a ring shape stacking rim (see Sanders Figures 4/5 below) protruding on (as shown in Sanders Figure 3) said left side (Sanders Figure 5) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7) and a circular receiving recess (see Sanders Figures 4/5 below), having a diameter (see Sanders Figures 4/5 below) equal to or slightly larger than (as shown in Sanders Figures 4/5 below) an outer diameter (see Sanders Figures 4/5 below) of said stacking rim (see Sanders Figures 4/5 below), formed in said right side (Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), such that another portable air mover is able to be stacked on said portable air mover by inserting a stacking rim of said another portable air mover in said receiving recess of said portable air mover. One of ordinary skill in the art would conclude stacking a first air mover housing stacking rim into a second air mover housing receiving recess would prevent lateral movement of either of the first or second air mover housing with respect to the other of the first or second housing.
PNG
media_image7.png
523
1056
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Sanders Figures 4/5, Modified by Examiner
As to Claim 24, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21-22, and continues to teach said stackable storage arrangement portion (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) comprises a ring shape stacking rim (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) protruding on (as shown in Sanders Figure 3) said left side (Sanders Figure 5) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7) and a circular receiving recess (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above), having a diameter (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) equal to or slightly larger than (as shown in Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) an outer diameter (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) of said stacking rim (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above), formed in said right side (Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), such that another portable air mover is able to be stacked on said portable air mover by inserting a stacking rim of said another portable air mover in said receiving recess of said portable air mover. One of ordinary skill in the art would conclude stacking a first air mover housing stacking rim into a second air mover housing receiving recess would prevent lateral movement of either of the first or second air mover housing with respect to the other of the first or second housing.
As to Claim 25, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 21, and continues to teach said stackable storage arrangement portion (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) comprises a ring shape stacking rim (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) protruding on (as shown in Sanders Figure 3) said left side of said air mover housing and a circular receiving recess (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above), having a diameter (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) equal to or slightly larger than (as shown in Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) an outer diameter (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) of said stacking rim (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above), formed in said right side of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), such that another portable air mover is able to be stacked on said portable air mover by inserting a stacking rim of said another portable air mover in said receiving recess of said portable air mover. One of ordinary skill in the art would conclude stacking a first air mover housing stacking rim into a second air mover housing receiving recess would prevent lateral movement of either of the first or second air mover housing with respect to the other of the first or second housing.
Sanders, as modified teaches the ring shape stacking rim on the left side of the air mover housing, and teaches the circular receiving recess on the right side of the air mover housing. As such, Sanders, as modified does not teach the ring shape stacking rim on the right side of the air mover housing, and the circular receiving recess on the left side of the air mover housing, as claimed.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to place the ring shape stacking rim on the right side of the air mover housing, and the circular receiving recess on the left side of the air mover housing, since applicant has not disclosed placing stacking rim or the circular receiving recess on the right or left side specifically solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears the invention would perform equally well regardless of the side the stacking rim or receiving recess are placed on.
Additionally, it appears the only difference between Sanders, as modified, and the instant application is the sides the stacking rim and receiving recess are on. This is merely a rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)), since shifting the sides the stacking rim and receiving recess are on will not modify the operation of the device.
As to Claim 26, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21-22, and continues to teach said stackable storage arrangement portion (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) comprises a ring shape stacking rim (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) protruding on (as shown in Sanders Figure 3) said left side of said air mover housing and a circular receiving recess (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above), having a diameter (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) equal to or slightly larger than (as shown in Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) an outer diameter (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above) of said stacking rim (see Sanders Figures 4/5 in the Claim 23 rejection above), formed in said right side of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), such that another portable air mover is able to be stacked on said portable air mover by inserting a stacking rim of said another portable air mover in said receiving recess of said portable air mover. One of ordinary skill in the art would conclude stacking a first air mover housing stacking rim into a second air mover housing receiving recess would prevent lateral movement of either of the first or second air mover housing with respect to the other of the first or second housing.
Sanders, as modified teaches the ring shape stacking rim on the left side of the air mover housing, and teaches the circular receiving recess on the right side of the air mover housing. As such, Sanders, as modified does not teach the ring shape stacking rim on the right side of the air mover housing, and the circular receiving recess on the left side of the air mover housing, as claimed.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to place the ring shape stacking rim on the right side of the air mover housing, and the circular receiving recess on the left side of the air mover housing, since applicant has not disclosed placing stacking rim or the circular receiving recess on the right or left side specifically solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears the invention would perform equally well regardless of the side the stacking rim or receiving recess are placed on.
Additionally, it appears the only difference between Sanders, as modified, and the instant application is the sides the stacking rim and receiving recess are on. This is merely a rearrangement of parts (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)), since shifting the sides the stacking rim and receiving recess are on will not modify the operation of the device.
Claims 27-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanders, in view of Turner, further in view of Cui, further in view of Bartholmey (U.S. Patent D517,677).
As to Claim 27, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 21, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed on (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), comprises:
a front handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and a rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), each integrally and upwardly protruded from (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7) for a predetermined height (the height shown in in Sanders Figure 4),
a front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and a rear handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), which are integrally formed (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) at free ends (the top ends of the handle supports shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said front support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), and
a handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), sized and shaped for fitting hand gripping thereon (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude a hand is capable of gripping the handle bar shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed and extended between (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle and cable organizer (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), wherein a center portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) is arranged above (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) a downward weight force direction (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 107).
Sanders, as modified, does not teach the two rear handle and cable organizer heads are enlarged in a circular shape.
Bartholmey describes a similar air mover, and teaches the two handle and cable organizer heads (see Figure 6 below) are enlarged in a circular shape (as shown in Figure 6 below).
PNG
media_image8.png
543
692
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Bartholmey Figure 6, Modified by Examiner
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the two handle and cable organizer heads, as taught by Sanders, as modified, circularly enlarged, as taught by Bartholmey, to provide a larger power chord winding area and to provide a more ergonomic feel for the user’s hand.
As to Claim 28, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21-22, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed on (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), comprises:
a front handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and a rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), each integrally and upwardly protruded from (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7) for a predetermined height (the height shown in in Sanders Figure 4),
a front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above)and a rear handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), which are integrally formed (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) at free ends (the top ends of the handle supports shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said front support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), and
a handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), sized and shaped for fitting hand gripping thereon (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude a hand is capable of gripping the handle bar shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed and extended between (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle and cable organizer (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), wherein a center portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) is arranged above (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) a downward weight force direction (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 107).
Sanders, as modified, does not teach the two rear handle and cable organizer heads are enlarged in a circular shape.
Bartholmey describes a similar air mover, and teaches the two handle and cable organizer heads (see Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above) are enlarged in a circular shape (as shown in Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the two handle and cable organizer heads, as taught by Sanders, as modified, circularly enlarged, as taught by Bartholmey, to provide a larger power chord winding area and to provide a more ergonomic feel for the user’s hand.
As to Claim 29, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21 & 23, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed on (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), comprises:
a front handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and a rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), each integrally and upwardly protruded from (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7) for a predetermined height (the height shown in in Sanders Figure 4),
a front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above)and a rear handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), which are integrally formed (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) at free ends (the top ends of the handle supports shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said front support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), and
a handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), sized and shaped for fitting hand gripping thereon (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude a hand is capable of gripping the handle bar shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed and extended between (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle and cable organizer (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), wherein a center portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) is arranged above (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) a downward weight force direction (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 107).
Sanders, as modified, does not teach the two rear handle and cable organizer heads are enlarged in a circular shape.
Bartholmey describes a similar air mover, and teaches the two handle and cable organizer heads (see Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above) are enlarged in a circular shape (as shown in Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the two handle and cable organizer heads, as taught by Sanders, as modified, circularly enlarged, as taught by Bartholmey, to provide a larger power chord winding area and to provide a more ergonomic feel for the user’s hand.
As to Claim 30, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21-22 & 24, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed on (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), comprises:
a front handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and a rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), each integrally and upwardly protruded from (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7) for a predetermined height (the height shown in in Sanders Figure 4),
a front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above)and a rear handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), which are integrally formed (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) at free ends (the top ends of the handle supports shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said front support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), and
a handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), sized and shaped for fitting hand gripping thereon (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude a hand is capable of gripping the handle bar shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed and extended between (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle and cable organizer (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), wherein a center portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) is arranged above (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) a downward weight force direction (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 107).
Sanders, as modified, does not teach the two rear handle and cable organizer heads are enlarged in a circular shape.
Bartholmey describes a similar air mover, and teaches the two handle and cable organizer heads (see Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above) are enlarged in a circular shape (as shown in Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the two handle and cable organizer heads, as taught by Sanders, as modified, circularly enlarged, as taught by Bartholmey, to provide a larger power chord winding area and to provide a more ergonomic feel for the user’s hand.
As to Claim 31, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21 & 25, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed on (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), comprises:
a front handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and a rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), each integrally and upwardly protruded from (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7) for a predetermined height (the height shown in in Sanders Figure 4),
a front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above)and a rear handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), which are integrally formed (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) at free ends (the top ends of the handle supports shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said front support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), and
a handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), sized and shaped for fitting hand gripping thereon (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude a hand is capable of gripping the handle bar shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed and extended between (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle and cable organizer (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), wherein a center portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) is arranged above (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) a downward weight force direction (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 107).
Sanders, as modified, does not teach the two rear handle and cable organizer heads are enlarged in a circular shape.
Bartholmey describes a similar air mover, and teaches the two handle and cable organizer heads (see Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above) are enlarged in a circular shape (as shown in Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the two handle and cable organizer heads, as taught by Sanders, as modified, circularly enlarged, as taught by Bartholmey, to provide a larger power chord winding area and to provide a more ergonomic feel for the user’s hand.
As to Claim 32, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21-22 & 26, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed on (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7), comprises:
a front handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and a rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), each integrally and upwardly protruded from (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said top side (the top of the housing, as viewed in Sanders Figure 4) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 1-7) for a predetermined height (the height shown in in Sanders Figure 4),
a front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above)and a rear handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), which are integrally formed (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) at free ends (the top ends of the handle supports shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said front support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), and
a handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), sized and shaped for fitting hand gripping thereon (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude a hand is capable of gripping the handle bar shown in Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), integrally formed and extended between (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said front handle and cable organizer head (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and said rear handle and cable organizer (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above), wherein a center portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said handle bar (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) is arranged above (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) a downward weight force direction (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) of said air mover housing (Sanders Figures 107).
Sanders, as modified, does not teach the two rear handle and cable organizer heads are enlarged in a circular shape.
Bartholmey describes a similar air mover, and teaches the two handle and cable organizer heads (see Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above) are enlarged in a circular shape (as shown in Bartholmey Figure 6 in the Claim 27 rejection above).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the two handle and cable organizer heads, as taught by Sanders, as modified, circularly enlarged, as taught by Bartholmey, to provide a larger power chord winding area and to provide a more ergonomic feel for the user’s hand.
As to Claim 33, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21 & 27, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) further provides (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) a cable outlet member (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) rearwardly (to the left, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) and downwardly (down, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) extended from (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and integrated into (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said hand and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) for a power cable (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above, which shows what is probably a power cable).
Sanders, as modified, does not explicitly describe what is probably a power cable as a power cable, and is silent on the use of the power cable, so does not explicitly teach a power cable to extend from outside said handle bar into said receiving chamber to electrically connected with said air flow generating apparatus for external electric power supply, such that the power cable is able to selectively be organized to entangle around said handle bar or between said front and rear handle supports.
Cui continues to teach a power cable (25) to extend from (as shown in Figure 3) outside (the volume outside of 114/124 in Figure 3) said handle bar (114/124) into (as shown in Figure 3) said receiving chamber (14) to electrically connected with (via control panel 24; Paragraphs 0059/0060) said air flow generating apparatus (21/22) for external electric power supply (Paragraph 0061), such that the power cable (25) is able to selectively be organized to entangle around (as shown in Figure 2) said handle bar (114/124) or between said front and rear handle supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the power cable and arrange the power cable provide electric power, as taught by Turner, to the air flow generating apparatus, as taught by Sanders, as modified, to provide the power required to operate the air mover and prevent hassle for the user (Paragraph 0061).
As to Claim 34, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21-22 & 28, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) further provides (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) a cable outlet member (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) rearwardly (to the left, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) and downwardly (down, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) extended from (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and integrated into (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said hand and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) for a power cable (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above, which shows what is probably a power cable).
Sanders, as modified, does not explicitly describe what is probably a power cable as a power cable, and is silent on the use of the power cable, so does not explicitly teach a power cable to extend from outside said handle bar into said receiving chamber to electrically connected with said air flow generating apparatus for external electric power supply, such that the power cable is able to selectively be organized to entangle around said handle bar or between said front and rear handle supports.
Cui continues to teach a power cable (25) to extend from (as shown in Figure 3) outside (the volume outside of 114/124 in Figure 3) said handle bar (114/124) into (as shown in Figure 3) said receiving chamber (14) to electrically connected with (via control panel 24; Paragraphs 0059/0060) said air flow generating apparatus (21/22) for external electric power supply (Paragraph 0061), such that the power cable (25) is able to selectively be organized to entangle around (as shown in Figure 2) said handle bar (114/124) or between said front and rear handle supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the power cable and arrange the power cable provide electric power, as taught by Turner, to the air flow generating apparatus, as taught by Sanders, as modified, to provide the power required to operate the air mover and prevent hassle for the user (Paragraph 0061).
As to Claim 35, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21, 23 & 29, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) further provides (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) a cable outlet member (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) rearwardly (to the left, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) and downwardly (down, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) extended from (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and integrated into (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said hand and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) for a power cable (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above, which shows what is probably a power cable).
Sanders, as modified, does not explicitly describe what is probably a power cable as a power cable, and is silent on the use of the power cable, so does not explicitly teach a power cable to extend from outside said handle bar into said receiving chamber to electrically connected with said air flow generating apparatus for external electric power supply, such that the power cable is able to selectively be organized to entangle around said handle bar or between said front and rear handle supports.
Cui continues to teach a power cable (25) to extend from (as shown in Figure 3) outside (the volume outside of 114/124 in Figure 3) said handle bar (114/124) into (as shown in Figure 3) said receiving chamber (14) to electrically connected with (via control panel 24; Paragraphs 0059/0060) said air flow generating apparatus (21/22) for external electric power supply (Paragraph 0061), such that the power cable (25) is able to selectively be organized to entangle around (as shown in Figure 2) said handle bar (114/124) or between said front and rear handle supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the power cable and arrange the power cable provide electric power, as taught by Turner, to the air flow generating apparatus, as taught by Sanders, as modified, to provide the power required to operate the air mover and prevent hassle for the user (Paragraph 0061).
As to Claim 36, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21-22, 24 & 30, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) further provides (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) a cable outlet member (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) rearwardly (to the left, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) and downwardly (down, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) extended from (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and integrated into (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said hand and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) for a power cable (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above, which shows what is probably a power cable).
Sanders, as modified, does not explicitly describe what is probably a power cable as a power cable, and is silent on the use of the power cable, so does not explicitly teach a power cable to extend from outside said handle bar into said receiving chamber to electrically connected with said air flow generating apparatus for external electric power supply, such that the power cable is able to selectively be organized to entangle around said handle bar or between said front and rear handle supports.
Cui continues to teach a power cable (25) to extend from (as shown in Figure 3) outside (the volume outside of 114/124 in Figure 3) said handle bar (114/124) into (as shown in Figure 3) said receiving chamber (14) to electrically connected with (via control panel 24; Paragraphs 0059/0060) said air flow generating apparatus (21/22) for external electric power supply (Paragraph 0061), such that the power cable (25) is able to selectively be organized to entangle around (as shown in Figure 2) said handle bar (114/124) or between said front and rear handle supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the power cable and arrange the power cable provide electric power, as taught by Turner, to the air flow generating apparatus, as taught by Sanders, as modified, to provide the power required to operate the air mover and prevent hassle for the user (Paragraph 0061).
As to Claim 37, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21, 25 & 31, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) further provides (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) a cable outlet member (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) rearwardly (to the left, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) and downwardly (down, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) extended from (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and integrated into (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said hand and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) for a power cable (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above, which shows what is probably a power cable).
Sanders, as modified, does not explicitly describe what is probably a power cable as a power cable, and is silent on the use of the power cable, so does not explicitly teach a power cable to extend from outside said handle bar into said receiving chamber to electrically connected with said air flow generating apparatus for external electric power supply, such that the power cable is able to selectively be organized to entangle around said handle bar or between said front and rear handle supports.
Cui continues to teach a power cable (25) to extend from (as shown in Figure 3) outside (the volume outside of 114/124 in Figure 3) said handle bar (114/124) into (as shown in Figure 3) said receiving chamber (14) to electrically connected with (via control panel 24; Paragraphs 0059/0060) said air flow generating apparatus (21/22) for external electric power supply (Paragraph 0061), such that the power cable (25) is able to selectively be organized to entangle around (as shown in Figure 2) said handle bar (114/124) or between said front and rear handle supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the power cable and arrange the power cable provide electric power, as taught by Turner, to the air flow generating apparatus, as taught by Sanders, as modified, to provide the power required to operate the air mover and prevent hassle for the user (Paragraph 0061).
As to Claim 38, Sanders, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 21-22, 26 & 32, and continues to teach said handle and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) further provides (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) a cable outlet member (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above) rearwardly (to the left, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) and downwardly (down, as viewed in Sanders Figure 5) extended from (as shown in Sanders Figure 5) said rear handle support (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) and integrated into (as shown in Sanders Figure 4) said hand and cable organizer portion (see Sanders Figure 4 in the Claim 21 rejection above) for a power cable (see Sanders Figure 5 in the Claim 21 rejection above, which shows what is probably a power cable).
Sanders, as modified, does not explicitly describe what is probably a power cable as a power cable, and is silent on the use of the power cable, so does not explicitly teach a power cable to extend from outside said handle bar into said receiving chamber to electrically connected with said air flow generating apparatus for external electric power supply, such that the power cable is able to selectively be organized to entangle around said handle bar or between said front and rear handle supports.
Cui continues to teach a power cable (25) to extend from (as shown in Figure 3) outside (the volume outside of 114/124 in Figure 3) said handle bar (114/124) into (as shown in Figure 3) said receiving chamber (14) to electrically connected with (via control panel 24; Paragraphs 0059/0060) said air flow generating apparatus (21/22) for external electric power supply (Paragraph 0061), such that the power cable (25) is able to selectively be organized to entangle around (as shown in Figure 2) said handle bar (114/124) or between said front and rear handle supports.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the power cable and arrange the power cable provide electric power, as taught by Turner, to the air flow generating apparatus, as taught by Sanders, as modified, to provide the power required to operate the air mover and prevent hassle for the user (Paragraph 0061).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/07/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 103 rejection for Claim 21, Applicant argues the prior art does not teach the pivot stand with the associated pivot stand functionality. Examiner disagrees.
As described above, Cui teaches the use of a pivot stand with the claimed functionality.
Regarding the 103 rejection for Claim 22, Applicant argues the prior art does not teach the pivot stand mounted to the front stand. Examiner disagrees.
As described above, Cui teaches the use of a pivot stand mounted to the front stand.
Regarding the 103 rejection for Claims 23-26, Applicant argues the prior art does not teach the stackable storage arrangement with the particular components, as claimed. Examiner disagrees.
As described above, Sanders teaches this feature, specifically in Claims 23-24. Sanders does not teach the exact features in Claims 25-26. However, placing the specific components of the stackable storage arrangement on specific sides is merely a rearrangement of parts, since the operation of the claimed housing will not be modified by the side the specific components are placed upon. This is explained in greater detail in the Claim 25-26 rejections above.
Applicant argues the claimed invention must be considered as a whole, and “there must be something in the reference that suggests the combination or the modification.”
Applicant provides no evidence Examiner did not consider the claimed invention as a whole, so Examiner is unable to respond to Applicant’s allegations.
First, as described in the Claim 23-24 rejections above, Sanders teaches the claimed limitations. No modifications to Sanders are made. With respect to Claims 25-26, the only modification is rearrangement of parts, which is described in the rejections above, and is established case law.
Second, all modification with respect to the pivot stand use motivation directly from Cui.
However, it should be noted motivations do not need to come directly from the cited references. Examiner points Applicant to MPEP 2141, which describes options for combinations which do not rely on motivation from cited references.
Regarding using a design patent for a utility patent, Applicant argues only what is visually apparent may be used to teach structural aspects of a claimed apparatus. Examiner believes this guidance was followed.
Applicant argues the handle and cable organizer acting as an organizer of Claims 27-38 was not properly rejected. Examiner contends each of the identified structures in the cited references are capable of being used in the functional manner described in the claims. There is no requirement for references to explicitly define functionality for claimed structural features. This comes down to intended use.
The intention to use a structural feature a particular way is not a patentable limitation, as a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.” Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647; MPEP 2114(II). Also see MPEP 2115.
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 DAVID BRANDT whose telephone number is (303)297-4776. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10-6, MT.
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, Bhisma Mehta can be reached at (571) 272-3383. 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.
/DAVID N BRANDT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783