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 .
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election of Invention I (claims 1-10) is acknowledged. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/16/2026. Claims 1-16 are pending. Claims 11-16 are withdrawn from further consideration under 37 C.F.R. § 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 09/11/2024 fails to comply with 37 C.F.R. § 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 C.F.R. § 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on Chinese Application No. 2021110805968.1 and International Application No. PCT/CN2021/137566 is acknowledged. However, Applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Chinese Application as required by 37 C.F.R. § 1.55.
Drawings
Although the drawings are sufficiently clear for examination purposes, they are compromised in terms of clarity. That is, due to the submitted format of the drawings, Figs. 3-5, 10, 15D, and 19-21 are dithered and in grayscale/halftones, where lines intended to be solid, clean, and black appear jagged and grayed. It is Examiner’s understanding that should this application issue as a patent, the drawings published on the issued patent will look exactly like those in the U.S. Patent Application Publication (US 20240148215 A1), unless Applicant resubmits the drawings in a different format.
The drawings are not objected to at this time for clarity. Nevertheless, Examiner suggests submitting clearer drawings for the purpose of proper notice to the general public. Applicant should note the following drawing standards:
Black and white drawings are normally required; India ink, or its equivalent that secures solid black lines, must be used for drawings. 37 C.F.R. § 1.84(a)(1);
Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black, sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined, and the weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. 37 C.F.R. § 1.84(l);
The clarity of the drawings must be sufficient for clear reproduction to two-thirds size. 37 C.F.R. § 1.84(k).
For examples of acceptable drawing clarity and quality, see US 20220362902 A1, US 20230076152 A1, US 20230286103 A1, and US 20240009795 A1. Examiner suggests outputting and resubmitting the drawings as vector graphics instead of raster images (bitmap) and uploading them to USPTO Patent Center as “Drawings-other than black and white line drawings”, which should cause the filed image file to be stored in the SCORE database without any image conversion.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it uses the phrase “The present disclosure”. Examiner suggests deleting the entirety of the first sentence as it is superfluous to the remainder of the abstract. Correction is required. MPEP § 608.01(b). No new matter should be entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“during maintaining the cleaning robot” (claim 5, line 2) should be changed to --during maintenance of the cleaning robot--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, the Applicant) regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein the cleaning pad is operable to move between a first position and a second position lower than the first position” (lines 5-6). This limitation is indefinite because it is unclear and fails to inform a person of ordinary skill in the art what this means. Specifically, the preamble indicates that the subject matter of claim 1 is a “base station”. The “cleaning pad”, however, is part of a cleaning robot that is capable of interfacing with the base station. Thus, this limitation pertains to the movement of the cleaning pad of the robot, which is not positively claimed and not part of the claimed “base station”. Therefore, it is unclear what the scope of claim 1 is—does claim 1 include the base station along with a robot and its cleaning pad that can move as recited, or does claim 1 pertain only to the base station? For examination purposes, this limitation is interpreted as best understood. Examiner suggests deleting this limitation. Claims 2-10 are rejected on the basis they incorporate this limitation of claim 1.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein the cleaning assembly cleans the cleaning pad of the cleaning robot when the cleaning pad is in the second position.” Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein the cleaning assembly cleans the cleaning pad of the cleaning robot when the cleaning pad moves relative to the base station.” These claims are indefinite because they are each a single claim that claims both an apparatus and method steps of using the apparatus. IPXL Holdings, L.L.C. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 430 F.3d 1377, 1384 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“it is unclear whether infringement...occurs when one creates a system that allows the user to change the predicted transaction information...or...when the user actually uses the input means to change transaction information”); MPEP § 2173.05(p). The limitations “cleans...when...” recite a method step of being performed by the base station. Examiner suggests using the phrasing “is configured to clean...when...” instead.
Claim Rejections – 35 U.S.C. § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims, the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 C.F.R. § 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Qian1 in view of Qian2
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230389769 A1 (“Qian1”) in view of US 20230404351 A1 (“Qian2”).
Qian1 pertains to a base station for a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 1-21). Qian2 pertains to a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 5A-D). These references are in the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 1, Qian1 discloses a base station for maintaining a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 1-21, base station 100 is for maintaining a cleaning robot), comprising:
a base station body comprising a cleaning basin (Fig. 9, body of base station 100 as shown including cleaning basin 55);
a cleaning assembly, disposed in the cleaning basin, and configured to clean a cleaning pad of the cleaning robot through a relative motion in a substantial horizontal plane between the cleaning assembly and the cleaning pad (Figs. 8-9; ¶ 0101, cleaning assembly 61 moves relative to a docked cleaning robot 200 in a horizontal plane located between the cleaning assembly 61 and a cleaning pad 24 of a docked cleaning robot 200),
a liquid storage container, disposed on the base station body and above the cleaning assembly, and configured to supply liquid to a liquid storage tank of the cleaning robot (Fig. 9; ¶ 0101, liquid storage container 51 provides clean water to basin 55; Fig. 12; ¶¶ 0149-0151, 0161-0162, liquid storage container 601 is capable of providing liquid to a liquid storage tank of a cleaning robot);
a collection container, disposed on the base station body and above the cleaning assembly, and configured to collect liquid from the cleaning basin (Fig. 9; ¶ 0101, collection container 53 is above cleaning assembly 61 and collects dirty liquid from basin 55).
Qian1 does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the cleaning pad is operable to move between a first position and a second position lower than the first position.
However, the Qian1/Qian2 combination makes obvious this claim.
Qian2 discloses:
wherein the cleaning pad is operable to move between a first position and a second position lower than the first position (Figs. 5A-D; ¶¶ 0162-0165, cleaning pad (bottom of element 40) is operable to move between a first position (Fig. 5D) and a second position (Fig. 5A) lower than the first position; see § 112(b) rejection).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to combine the teachings of Qian2 with Qian1 by modifying the cleaning robot of Qian1 (Fig. 8) to have its cleaning pad 24 capable of moving between positions as recited. This would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art because this movement would result in a more efficient cleaning robot (e.g., better cleaning, lower battery usage) because it would allow for multiple modes, where the cleaning pad 24 could be lowered when needed to clean a floor surface, and raised when it is not needed (e.g., when cleaning carpet or when returning to the base station (so as not to interfere with either type of function)) (Qian2 ¶¶ 0162-0165). Examiner notes that the inventors are the same for Qian1 and Qian2.
To the extent the embodiment of Qian1 Fig. 12 is different from that of Qian1 Fig. 9, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to combine the teachings of these two embodiments and modify the base station of Fig. 9 to have an additional liquid storage container to supply cleaning liquid to a tank of a docked cleaning robot (via nozzle 603), or modify the existing liquid storage container 51 to also supply cleaning liquid to a tank of a docked cleaning robot in addition to supply cleaning liquid to the basin 55. This would have been obvious because this would give the cleaning station of Fig. 9 the additional capability of being able to refill the cleaning liquid supply of a cleaning robot as well refill the cleaning fluid in the basin 55, which would give a docked cleaning robot a clean cleaning pad and a refilled cleaning liquid tank.
Regarding claim 4, the Qian1/Qian2 combination makes obvious the base station of claim 1 as applied above. Qian1 further discloses wherein the liquid storage container is further configured to supply liquid for cleaning the cleaning pad of the cleaning robot (Fig. 9; ¶ 0101, liquid storage container 51 provides clean water to basin 55, which is used with cleaning assembly 61 to clean the cleaning pad 24 of a docked cleaning robot 200).
Qian1 in view of Qian2 and Zheng
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230389769 A1 (“Qian1”) in view of US 20230404351 A1 (“Qian2”) and US 20220211241 A1 (“Zheng”).
Qian1 pertains to a base station for a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 1-21). Qian2 pertains to a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 5A-D). Zheng pertains to a cleaning robot and base station (Abstr.; Figs. 1-63). These references are in the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 2, the Qian1/Qian2 combination makes obvious the base station of claim 1 as applied above. Qian1 and Qian2 do not explicitly disclose wherein the cleaning assembly cleans the cleaning pad of the cleaning robot when the cleaning pad is in the second position. However, the Qian1/Qian2/Zheng combination makes obvious this claim.
Zheng discloses wherein the cleaning assembly cleans the cleaning pad of the cleaning robot when the cleaning pad is in the second position (Figs. 24-26; ¶¶ 0182-0190, robot 100 has a cleaning pad (“wiping member”) that is capable of being raised and lowered between a first position and a second position, where when docked and in the second position (Fig. 26), the cleaning pad is replaced with a new cleaning pad (see discussion below re “cleans”)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to combine the teachings of Zheng with the Qian1/Qian2 combination by modifying the base station and the cleaning robot of Qian1 (as modified by Qian2) to have its cleaning pad 24 cleaned when it is docked to the base station and lowered to the second position to make contact with the cleaning apparatus 61. Zheng teaches the analogous lowering motion of the cleaning pad in the context of replacing the cleaning pad. This modification would have been obvious for similar reasons stated for claim 1, because lowering the cleaning pad only when necessary (e.g., to make contact with the cleaning apparatus 61 to be cleaned) results in a more efficient cleaning robot, and also “prevent[s] the dirty wiping unit from polluting the ground” when the robot is returning to the base station (Zhang ¶ 0119).
Regarding claim 3, the Qian1/Qian2 combination makes obvious the base station of claim 1 as applied above. Qian1 and Qian2 do not explicitly disclose wherein the cleaning assembly cleans the cleaning pad of the cleaning robot when the cleaning pad moves relative to the base station. However, the Qian1/Qian2/Zheng combination makes obvious this claim.
Zheng discloses wherein the cleaning assembly cleans the cleaning pad of the cleaning robot when the cleaning pad moves relative to the base station (Figs. 24-26; ¶¶ 0182-0190, robot 100 has a cleaning pad (“wiping member”) that is capable of being raised and lowered between a first position and a second position, where when docked and moving relative to the base station (i.e., to the second position (Fig. 26)), the cleaning pad is replaced with a new cleaning pad).
The obviousness rationale for claim 3 is the same as for claim 2.
Qian1 in view of Qian2 and Machida
Claims 5-6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230389769 A1 (“Qian1”) in view of US 20230404351 A1 (“Qian2”) and US 20170196430 A1 (“Machida”).
Qian1 pertains to a base station for a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 1-21). Qian2 pertains to a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 5A-D). Machida pertains to a cleaning robot and base station (Abstr.; Figs. 1-16). These references are in the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 5, the Qian1/Qian2 combination makes obvious the base station of claim 1 as applied above. Qian1 and Qian2 do not explicitly disclose an arcuate inner bay at least partially housing the cleaning robot during [maintenance of] the cleaning robot. However, the Qian1/Qian2/Machida combination makes obvious this claim.
Machida discloses an arcuate inner bay at least partially housing the cleaning robot during [maintenance of] the cleaning robot (Figs. 1-7, arcuate inner bay (including surface at reference 58 (Fig. 3)) partially houses a docked cleaning robot).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to combine the teachings of Machida with the Qian1/Qian2 combination by modifying the base station of Qian1 to have an arcuate inner bay. This would have been obvious because the cleaning robot 200 has an arcuate outer surface, and an arcuate inner bay (e.g., as opposed to a rectangular inner bay) would match the arcuate outer surface of the cleaning robot (due to the proximity of the cleaning robot’s arcuate outer surface to the arcuate inner bay). This would allow for more connections other than at the centerline of the cleaning robot (e.g., connections to the left and right of the centerline, for multiple functions such as cleaning liquid refilling, battery recharging, and electronic interfacing) to be mounted inside the bay sidewall as opposed to outside the bay or on the bottom surface underneath the cleaning robot for a simpler design (Qian ¶ 0172, “The liquid outlet 603 is arranged on the rear side wall 102 in cooperation with the water injection port arranged on the side surface of the framework 2001, thereby making the layout of the liquid outlet 603 more reasonable.”). It is unclear whether Qian1 discloses an arcuate inner bay (see Qian 1 Fig. 17), but Qian1 discloses multiple connections that are needed to be made with the cleaning robot, including liquid supply tube 602, charging electrodes 901, and infrared sensor 801.
Regarding claim 6, the Qian1/Qian2/Machida combination makes obvious the base station of claim 5 as applied above. Qian1 further discloses a liquid injection nozzle, connected to the liquid storage container, and configured to inject the liquid in the liquid storage container to the liquid storage tank of the cleaning robot, wherein the liquid injection nozzle is movably disposed on a side wall of the arc inner bay (Figs. 12, 17; ¶¶ 0161-0162, 0172, as modified in claim 1, liquid injection nozzle 603 is connected to liquid storage container 601 for injecting liquid to the liquid storage tank of the cleaning robot 200, wherein the liquid injection nozzle is movably disposed on a side wall of the arc inner bay (¶ 0172, “The liquid outlet 603 is arranged on a rear side wall 102 and can extend out of or retract into an inner surface of the rear side wall 102.”)).
Regarding claim 10, the Qian1/Qian2/Machida combination makes obvious the base station of claim 5 as applied above. Qian1 further discloses wherein the arcuate inner bay houses a rear portion of the cleaning robot when the cleaning assembly cleans the cleaning pad of the cleaning robot or the liquid storage container supplies the liquid to the liquid storage tank of the cleaning robot (Figs. 8-9, a rear portion of docked robot 200 is housed in the arcuate inner bay (as modified in claim 5) when the cleaning assembly 61 is cleaning the cleaning pad 24 of the robot 200).
Qian1 in view of Qian2, Machida, and Wurm
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230389769 A1 (“Qian1”) in view of US 20230404351 A1 (“Qian2”), US 20170196430 A1 (“Machida”), and US 20190069749 A1 (“Wurm”).
Qian1 pertains to a base station for a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 1-21). Qian2 pertains to a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 5A-D). Machida pertains to a cleaning robot and base station (Abstr.; Figs. 1-16). Wurm pertains to a cleaning robot and base station (Abstr.; Figs. 1, 3-4). These references are in the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 7, the Qian1/Qian2/Machida combination makes obvious the base station of claim 6 as applied above. Qian1, Qian2, and Machida do not explicitly disclose at least one second guider, disposed on the side wall of the arcuate inner bay, and configured to incorporate to a first guider disposed on the cleaning robot to facilitate a liquid filling port connected to the liquid storage tank aligning to the liquid injection nozzle. However, the Qian1/Qian2/Machida/Wurm combination makes obvious this claim.
Wurm discloses at least one second guider, disposed on the side wall of the arcuate inner bay, and configured to incorporate to a first guider disposed on the cleaning robot to facilitate a liquid filling port connected to the liquid storage tank aligning to the liquid injection nozzle (Figs. 1, 3-4; ¶ 106, second guider (outside surfaces of connector body 146 or the fins adjacent to fluid nozzle 94) of base station 14 is configured to unite with first guider (inner surfaces of connector body 82 or the fins adjacent to port 40) of cleaning robot 12 to perform the recited function; “to incorporate” as used in this context is interpreted to include the meaning of to unite, to connect, to mate, or to match (see Spec. Fig. 17)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to combine the teachings of Wurm with the Qian1/Qian2/Machida combination by adding a first guider and second guider to the cleaning robot and base station respectively, as taught by Wurm. This would have been obvious because the first and second guiders allow for an initial misalignment between the liquid nozzle 603 of the base station and the liquid filling port of the cleaning robot 200 when the cleaning robot starts docking with the base station, where the first and second guiders would cause the liquid nozzle 603 and the liquid filling port to properly align as the cleaning robot gets closer to and fully docks with the base station.
Regarding claim 8, the Qian1/Qian2/Machida/Wurm combination makes obvious the base station of claim 7 as applied above. Wurm further discloses wherein in a case that there are two second guiders, the two second guiders are symmetrically disposed on a left side and a right side of the liquid injection nozzle respectively (Figs. 1, 3-4; ¶ 106, there are two second guiders (the fins adjacent to fluid nozzle 94) on base station 14, which are symmetrically disposed on a left side and a right side of the liquid injection nozzle 94).
The obviousness rationale for claim 8 is the same as for claim 7.
Qian1 in view of Qian2, Machida, Wurm, and Ebrahimi
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230389769 A1 (“Qian1”) in view of US 20230404351 A1 (“Qian2”), US 20170196430 A1 (“Machida”), US 20190069749 A1 (“Wurm”), and US 20210089040 A1 (“Ebrahimi”).
Qian1 pertains to a base station for a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 1-21). Qian2 pertains to a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 5A-D). Machida pertains to a cleaning robot and base station (Abstr.; Figs. 1-16). Wurm pertains to a cleaning robot and base station (Abstr.; Figs. 1, 3-4). Ebrahimi pertains to a cleaning robot (Abstr.; Figs. 11A-12C). These references are in the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 9, the Qian1/Qian2/Machida/Wurm combination makes obvious the base station of claim 8 as applied above. Qian1, Qian2, Machida, and Wurm do not explicitly disclose wherein the liquid injection nozzle is wrapped with a flexible seal. However, the Qian1/Qian2/Machida/Wurm/Ebrahimi combination makes obvious this claim.
Ebrahimi discloses wherein the liquid injection nozzle is wrapped with a flexible seal (Figs. 11A-12C; ¶ 0260, water nozzle 402 has gasket 403 (“flexible seal”) wrapped around it).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this application to combine the teachings of Ebrahimi with the Qian1/Qian2/Machida/Wurm combination by adding a gasket to nozzle 603 because this would provide for a fluid seal when the nozzle 603 of the base station is connected to the liquid filling port of the cleaning robot 200, and liquid is allowed to flow therebetween (Ebrahimi ¶ 0260, “the water pump 400 is positioned outside the module 401 and is connected to the module via connecting tube 402 with gasket 403 to seal fluid and prevent it from escaping at the connection point”).
Status of Claims
Claims 1-16 are pending. Claims 11-16 have been withdrawn from further consideration under 37 C.F.R. § 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENT N SHUM whose telephone number is (703)756-1435. The examiner can normally be reached 1230-2230 EASTERN TIME M-TH.
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, MONICA S CARTER can be reached at (571)272-4475. 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.
/KENT N SHUM/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights