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 .
Status
In response to the amendment filed on 05/19/2026, claims 1, 3, 5-8, 10-12, 17, and 18 have been amended, claim 2 is cancelled, and new claims 19-22 are added. Claims 1 and 3-22 are pending and under examination.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 19, line 15, the phrase may be amended as “… has an indentation; and[[,]]”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kataoka et al. (DE 112020003375T5, cited on 02/01/2024 IDS, hereinafter Kataoka).
Regarding claim 21, Kataoka discloses, in fig. 1, a blower apparatus (blower 1) comprising:
a handle for guiding the blower apparatus during operation (Kataoka English translation, p. 5:35-36, an operator grasps a handle portion 5 [corresponds to the recited handle] of the blower 1 to perform work);
a blower tube (fig. 1 a nozzle 50, a housing 2, a fan case part 3, and a battery mounting part 4 form the recited blower tube);
a blower unit arranged in said blower tube (fig. 3, an inner tubular part 32 and a motor holder 30 [correspond to the recited blower unit] hold a motor 11 and a fan 16);
wherein the blower apparatus defines an intake opening (inlet openings 7b) and a discharge opening (outlet opening 51);
wherein said intake opening and said discharge opening are formed on opposite end sides of said blower tube (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 below, the inlet openings 7b [corresponds to the recited intake opening] and the outlet opening 51 [corresponds to the recited discharge opening] are formed on opposite end sides of the blower tube);
said blower unit having at least one blower wheel configured to be driven rotationally about a rotational axis, the rotational axis being aligned in a direction of an air flow flowing out from said at least one blower wheel during operation (fig. 1, the fan 16 [corresponds to the recited blower wheel] rotates about a rotation axis A1. The rotation axis A1 is aligned in a direction of an air flow from the fan 16);
an electric motor configured to drive said at least one blower wheel (Kataoka English translation, p. 9:12-13, when a power button of a control panel is pressed, the motor 11 rotates and the fan 16 [corresponds to the recited blower wheel] rotates);
a battery configured to supply said electric motor with energy (Kataoka English translation, p. 10:13-15, the motor 11 is powered by the electric power of a battery pack 80);
the blower apparatus defining a central plane, which contains said rotational axis of said blower wheel (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 below);
wherein said blower tube has an indentation (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 below), and
wherein, in at least one intersecting plane which intersects said indentation and is perpendicular to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, a first distance of a top side of said blower tube at said indentation to said rotational axis of said blower unit is smaller than a second distance of said top side of said blower tube at said intake opening to said rotational axis of said blower unit (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 below, the first distance between the rotational axis and a bottom of the indentation of the blower tube is smaller than the second distance between the rotational axis and a top side of the blower tube at the intake opening. The end of the indentation near the handle is raised compared with the bottom of the indentation. The intake opening is disposed below a connecting part 5c of the handle 5, therefore, the second distance is greater than the first distance).
PNG
media_image1.png
930
1361
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kataoka Fig. 1
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 10, 11, 14-16, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka et al. (DE 112020003375T5, cited on 02/01/2024 IDS, hereinafter Kataoka), in view of Suzuki (US 2022/0233036) and Ichihashi et al. (WO 2020189226A1, hereinafter Ichihashi).
Regarding claim 1, Kataoka discloses, in fig. 1, a handheld blower apparatus (blower 1) comprising:
a handle for guiding the blower apparatus during operation (Kataoka English translation, p. 5:35-36, an operator grasps a handle portion 5 [corresponds to the recited handle] of the blower 1 to perform work);
a blower tube (fig. 1 a nozzle 50, a housing 2, a fan case part 3, and a battery mounting part 4 form the recited blower tube);
a blower unit arranged in said blower tube (fig. 3, an inner tubular part 32 and a motor holder 30 [correspond to the recited blower unit] hold a motor 11 and a fan 16);
wherein the blower apparatus defines an intake opening (inlet openings 7b) and a discharge opening (outlet opening 51);
said blower unit having at least one blower wheel configured to be driven rotationally about a rotational axis, the rotational axis being aligned in a direction of an air flow flowing out from said at least one blower wheel during operation (figs. 1 and 2, the fan 16 [corresponds to the recited blower wheel] rotates about a rotation axis A1. The rotation axis A1 is aligned in a direction of an air flow from the fan 16);
an electric motor configured to drive said at least one blower wheel (Kataoka English translation, p. 9:12-13, when a power button of a control panel is pressed, the motor 11 rotates and the fan 16 [corresponds to the recited blower wheel] rotates);
a battery configured to supply said electric motor with energy (Kataoka English translation, p. 10:13-15, the motor 11 is powered by the electric power of a battery pack 80);
wherein said battery and said handle are arranged on opposite sides of said blower tube and a handle opening extends between said handle and said blower tube (see annotated Kataoka Fig. 1 above);
the blower apparatus defining a central plane, which intersects said handle and said battery and which contains said rotational axis of said blower wheel (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above);
said handle opening having a length measured parallel to said rotational axis (annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above, the handle opening has a length); and,
said blower tube having a top side which, when viewed in a direction perpendicular to said central plane, has an indentation (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above for the recited indentation), but does not disclose explicitly the indentation extends over at least 50% of said length. Fig. 1 of Kataoka shows an indentation which may be about 50% of the length of the handle opening.
Suzuki teaches, in an analogous handheld cleaning device field of endeavor, the indentation extends over at least 50% of said length (see annotated Suzuki fig. 1A below, a length of indentation is greater than 50% of a handle opening length. Suzuki discloses a vacuum instead of a blower, but it is a handheld device having a handle. Thus, the teaching regarding the handle is applicable to the handle of Kataoka’s blower).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the handheld blower apparatus of Kataoka to provide the indentation length greater than 50% of the handle length opening as taught by Suzuki. It provides more room for a user to grasp the handle for accurate handling of the device.
Kataoka as modified by Suzuki does not disclose in at least one intersecting plane which intersects said handle opening and is perpendicular to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, a first distance of said rotational axis of said blower unit from said top side of said blower tube running adjacent to said handle opening is smaller than a second distance of said rotational axis from an opposite bottom side of said blower tube.
Examination of Kataoka fig. 1 shows the recited first distance may be smaller than the recited second distance, but it is not definitely shown.
Ichihashi teaches, in an analogous blower apparatus field of endeavor, in at least one intersecting plane which intersects said handle opening and is perpendicular to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, a first distance of said rotational axis of said blower unit from said top side of said blower tube running adjacent to said handle opening is smaller than a second distance of said rotational axis from an opposite bottom side of said blower tube (see annotated Ichihashi fig. 8 below, the distance from the rotational axis to a top side of a blower tube is smaller than the distance from the rotational axis to a bottom side of the blower tube).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blower apparatus of Kataoka to provide the recited first distance smaller than the recited second distance as taught by Ichihashi. It may provide a large handle opening so that a user can grab a handle comfortable and handle the blower conveniently.
PNG
media_image2.png
680
1246
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Suzuki Fig. 1A
PNG
media_image3.png
768
1307
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Ichihashi Fig. 8
Regarding claim 4, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein said battery defines a longitudinal axis running parallel to said central plane (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 7, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose a third distance of said top side of said blower tube from said rotational axis at said intake opening is greater than a fourth distance of a bottom side of said blower tube from said rotational axis.
Fig. 1 of Kataoka shows the third distance between the top of the blower tube and the rotational axis at the intake opening 7b is smaller than the fourth distance between the bottom of the blower tube and the rotational axis at the intake opening 7b. However, specification of the instant application does not explain why the third distance needs to be greater than the fourth distance. It appears the designated third and fourth distances have altering function regarding intake of the air into the blower. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blower apparatus of Kataoka to provide the third distance to be smaller than the fourth distance instead of making it larger. Applicant has not disclosed that by doing so produce any unexpected results or negative effect. The inlet opening 7b of the Kataoka’s blower would perform equally as well. A person of ordinary skill in the art would readily make the third distance to be smaller than the distance fourth as long as it can properly intake the air into the blower.
Regarding claim 10, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein said battery is at a fifth distance, measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, from said discharge opening, said fifth distance being greater than a sixth distance, also measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, of said handle opening from said discharge opening (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above, the fifth distance between the outlet opening 51 [corresponds to the recited discharge opening] and the battery 80 is greater than the sixth distance between the outlet opening 51 and the handle opening).
Regarding claim 11, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein said electric motor is at a seventh distance, measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, from said discharge opening, said seventh distance being smaller than a sixth distance, also measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, of said handle opening from said discharge opening (see annotated Kataoka fig. 3 below, the seventh distance between the motor 11 and the outlet opening 51 [corresponds to the recited discharge opening] is smaller than the sixth distance between the fan 16 [corresponds to the recited blower wheel] and the outlet opening 51).
PNG
media_image4.png
662
1156
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Kataoka Fig. 3
Regarding claim 14, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose explicitly, in an operating position, a center of gravity of the work apparatus is disposed under said handle (see Kataoka figs. 1 and 2, all heavy components such as the motor 11, the fan 16, and the battery 80 are disposed below the handle 5. Therefore, a center of gravity of the blower is located under the handle).
Regarding claim 15, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein said electric motor is arranged in said blower tube (Kataoka fig. 3, the motor 11 is disposed in the fan case part 3 which is a part of the blower tube).
Regarding claim 16, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein said electric motor is arranged in an interior of said blower unit (Kataoka fig. 3, the motor 11 is arranged in the motor holder 30 [corresponds to the recited blower unit]).
Regarding claim 22, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, wherein said intake opening and said discharge opening are formed on opposite end sides of said blower tube (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above, the inlet openings 7b [corresponds to the recited intake opening] and the outlet opening 51 [corresponds to the recited discharge opening] are formed on opposite end sides of the blower tube).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka in view of Suzuki and Ichihashi, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Andro (CN 103572725A).
Regarding claim 3, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose in at least one intersecting plane which intersects said handle opening and is perpendicular to said rotational axis, a width, measured perpendicular to said central plane, of said blower tube is greater than a height, measured in the central plane, of the blower tube in said intersecting plane. Kataoka discloses a circular blower tube, thus the width and the height are the same.
Andro teaches, in an analogous blower field of endeavor, in at least one intersecting plane which intersects said handle opening and is perpendicular to said rotational axis, a width, measured perpendicular to said central plane, of said blower tube is greater than a height, measured in the central plane, of the blower tube in said intersecting plane (Andro English translation, p. 2:4-5, the blower tube can be an oval tube. Thus, the width can be greater than the height).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blower tube of Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi to provide the oval shape as taught by Andro. This shape is easy to manufacture by molding (Kataoka English translation, p. 2:5).
Claims 5, 6, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka in view of Suzuki and Ichihashi, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Barth et al. (US 2016/0208449, cited on 02/01/2024 IDS, hereinafter Barth).
Regarding claim 5, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose when viewed in the direction perpendicular to said central plane, a longitudinal center axis of said blower tube in said discharge opening encloses an angle lying in a range of 120° to 175° with said rotational axis of said blower wheel. Kataoka discloses its blower tube is not angled with respect to the tube body including the motor and the blower wheel.
Barth teaches, in an analogous blower field of endeavor, when viewed in the direction perpendicular to said central plane, a longitudinal center axis of said blower tube in said discharge opening encloses an angle lying in a range of 120° to 175° with said rotational axis of said blower wheel. Kataoka discloses its blower tube is not angled with respect to the tube body including the motor and the blower wheel (fig. 1 and ¶ 0064, a blowing-out angle α may range from approximately 10° to approximately 70°. The angle range converted to the angle β of the instant application is from approximately 110° to approximately 170°. Therefore, the angle range of Barth overlaps with the recited angle range).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blower apparatus of Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi to provide the recited angle range as taught by Barth. The angled blower tube allows air is blown to a ground surface without intentionally tilting the blower. It adds convenience to a user.
Regarding claim 6, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki, Ichihashi, and Barth teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 5, wherein the angle, when viewed in the direction perpendicular to said central plane, lies in a range of 140° to 170° (Barth, fig. 1 and ¶ 0064, Barth discloses the equivalent angle β range from approximately 110° to approximately 170°. The angle range of Barth overlaps with the recited angle range).
Regarding claim 17, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose a maximum distance, measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, of a side of said electric motor, which is remote from said discharge opening, is larger than a sixth distance, also measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, of said handle opening from said discharge opening.
Barth teaches, in an analogous blower field of endeavor, a maximum distance, measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, of a side of said electric motor, which is remote from said discharge opening, is larger than a sixth distance, also measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, of said handle opening from said discharge opening (fig. 2, the distance between a blow-out opening 8 [corresponds to the recited discharge opening] and a motor 14 is greater than the distance between the blow-out opening 8 and a handle opening).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blower apparatus of Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi to provide the distance between the discharge opening and the motor to be greater than the sixth distance as taught by Barth. This arrangement allows the motor to be disposed directly below the handle so that it may be easier for a user to operate the blower.
Kataoka as modified by Suzuki, Ichihashi, and Barth does not disclose the distance difference is at most 5 centimeters. Specification of the instant application presents the recited distance difference allows a compact arrangement and favorable weight distribution of the blower apparatus (¶ 0026).
As discussed above, Barth discloses the claimed invention that the distance between the discharge opening and the motor is greater than the sixth distance without disclosing numerical value of the distance difference. The greater distance difference would make a center of gravity away from the handle so that a user may have to constantly adjust a position of the blower. Because relative positions of the motor and the handle opening are taught as shown in fig. 2 of Barth, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the distance difference to be at most 5 centimeters, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the handle length from the intake opening 7. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Regarding claim 18, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki, Ichihashi, and Barth teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 17, wherein said maximum distance, measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, of said side of said electric motor, which is remote from said discharge opening, is smaller than said sixth distance, also measured parallel to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, of said handle opening from said discharge opening (see annotated Kataoka figs. 1 and 3 above, the distance between the outlet opening 51 [corresponds to the recited discharge opening] and a motor 11 is smaller than the sixth distance between the outlet opening 51 and the handle opening).
Claims 8, 9, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka in view of Suzuki and Ichihashi, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Tirone et al. (US 2016/0265540, cited on 02/01/2024 IDS, hereinafter Tirone).
Regarding claim 8, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose viewed in the direction perpendicular to said central plane, said battery defines a longitudinal axis which encloses an angle of more than 2° with said rotational axis of said blower wheel, wherein said angle opens in said blower tube counter to said air flow direction.
Tirone teaches, in an analogous blower field of endeavor, viewed in the direction perpendicular to said central plane, said battery defines a longitudinal axis which encloses an angle of more than 2° with said rotational axis of said blower wheel, wherein said angle opens in said blower tube counter to said air flow direction (the intended meaning of the claim is that the rotational axis and the longitudinal axis are not parallel to each other. As shown in annotated Tirone fig. 2 below the two recited axes are not parallel to each other, and a difference of angle is clearly more than 2°).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blower apparatus of Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi to provide the recited angle relation between the rotational axis and the longitudinal axis as taught by Tirone. The angle of two axes allows the blower tube to point downward. Thus, a user can naturally blow dust on the ground surface without intentionally tilting the blower.
PNG
media_image5.png
574
1322
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Tirone Fig. 2
Regarding claim 9, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, further comprising:
a housing (Kataoka fig. 1, fan case part 3 and battery mounting part 4);
a mechanical locking unit arranged at least partially between said battery and said blower tube and having an actuating element; said battery being held on said housing via said mechanical locking unit (Kataoka figs. 1 and 2, an axial groove 9a [corresponding to the recited actuating element] of a mounting groove part 9 [corresponds to the recited mechanical locking unit] is located between the battery mounting part 4 and the battery 80. The battery 80 is held below the battery mounting part 4 by the mounting groove part 9), but does not disclose said blower tube having a bulge into which said actuating element projects.
Tirone teaches, in an analogous blower field of endeavor, said blower tube having a bulge into which said actuating element projects (figs. 1 and 4, a battery 22 is attached to a blower housing 12 [corresponds to the recited blower tube] through a battery housing 20. The battery housing 22 can be designated as a part of the blower tube and it is formed as a recess to receive the battery. Examiner notes that fig. 7 of the instant application shows the bulge 48 as a recess at the bottom of the blower tube for receiving the battery. The axial groove of Kataoka can be disposed within the recess of Tirone to form the mechanical locking unit for the battery).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified blower apparatus of Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi to provide the blower tube having the bulge as taught by Tirone in order to provide a secure holding place for the battery.
Regarding claim 12, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose a largest distance, measured parallel to said rotational axis, of said intake opening from said discharge opening is greater than an eighth distance of an end of said battery, which is remote from said intake opening, from said discharge opening.
Tirone teaches, in an analogous blower field of endeavor, a largest distance, measured parallel to said rotational axis, of said intake opening from said discharge opening is greater than an eighth distance of an end of said battery, which is remote from said intake opening, from said discharge opening (annotated Tirone fig. 2 above, the distance between an exhaust end 18B [corresponds to the recited discharge opening] and an air intake grill 16 [corresponds to the recited intake opening] is greater than the eighth distance between the exhaust end 18B and the battery 22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blower apparatus of Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi to provide the distance between the intake opening and the discharge opening to be greater than the eighth distance as taught by Tirone. Otherwise the battery would be located close to or at a rear end of the blower and it makes the end of the blower to be heavy. This arrangement would easily make the blower tube to point upward, and it would be inconvenient to blow dust on the ground surface.
Regarding claim 13, Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 1, but does not disclose said intake opening has a first end-side intake area and a second intake area on a circumference of said blower tube. The intake opening of Kataoka is not circular to designate the areas on a circumference of the blower tube.
Specification of the instant application states the reason for having the first end-side intake area and the second intake area is to have an open intake area when one of them is blocked (¶ 0023). However, the instant application does not present two air paths within the blower tube. The first and second intake areas are just different parts of the same intake opening, thus they do not separate the air flow.
Tirone teaches, in an analogous blower field of endeavor, said intake opening has a first end-side intake area and a second intake area on a circumference of said blower tube (fig. 4, Tirone discloses a circular air intake grill 16 [corresponds to the recited intake opening]. An upper circumference of the air intake grill 16 can be designated as the recited first end-side intake area and a lower circumference of the air intake grill 16 can be designated as the recited second intake area. Fig. 6 of the instant application shows the first end-side intake area 51 is simply an upper circumference of the intake area and the second intake area is simply a lower circumference of the intake area).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the intake opening of Kataoka as modified by Suzuki and Ichihashi to provide the first end-side intake area and the second intake area on the circumference of the blower tube as taught by Tirone so that air enters the blower to be propelled out to the discharge opening.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kataoka et al. (DE 112020003375T5, cited on 02/01/2024 IDS, hereinafter Kataoka), in view of Ichihashi et al. (WO 2020189226A1, hereinafter Ichihashi).
Regarding claim 19, Kataoka discloses, in fig. 1, a blower apparatus (blower 1) comprising:
a handle for guiding the blower apparatus during operation (Kataoka English translation, p. 5:35-36, an operator grasps a handle portion 5 [corresponds to the recited handle] of the blower 1 to perform work);
a blower tube (fig. 1 a nozzle 50, a housing 2, a fan case part 3, and a battery mounting part 4 form the recited blower tube);
a blower unit arranged in said blower tube (fig. 3, an inner tubular part 32 and a motor holder 30 [correspond to the recited blower unit] hold a motor 11 and a fan 16);
wherein the blower apparatus defines an intake opening (inlet openings 7b) and a discharge opening (outlet opening 51);
said blower unit having at least one blower wheel configured to be driven rotationally about a rotational axis, the rotational axis being aligned in a direction of an air flow flowing out from said at least one blower wheel during operation (fig. 1, the fan 16 [corresponds to the recited blower wheel] rotates about a rotation axis A1. The rotation axis A1 is aligned in a direction of an air flow from the fan 16);
an electric motor configured to drive said at least one blower wheel (Kataoka English translation, p. 9:12-13, when a power button of a control panel is pressed, the motor 11 rotates and the fan 16 [corresponds to the recited blower wheel] rotates);
a battery configured to supply said electric motor with energy (Kataoka English translation, p. 10:13-15, the motor 11 is powered by the electric power of a battery pack 80);
the blower apparatus defining a central plane, which contains said rotational axis of said blower wheel (annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above and fig. 2, the blower 1 defines the recited central plane which contains the rotational axis A1. The rotation axis A1 is aligned in a direction of an air flow from the fan 16 [corresponds to the recited blower wheel]);
wherein said blower tube has an indentation (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above); but does not disclose in at least one intersecting plane which intersects said indentation and is perpendicular to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, a first distance of said rotational axis of said blower unit to said indentation is smaller than a second distance of said rotational axis to an opposite side of said blower tube.
Examination of Kataoka fig. 1 shows the recited first distance may be smaller than the recited second distance, but it is not definitely shown.
Ichihashi teaches, in an analogous blower apparatus field of endeavor, in at least one intersecting plane which intersects said indentation and is perpendicular to said rotational axis of said blower wheel, a first distance of said rotational axis of said blower unit to said indentation is smaller than a second distance of said rotational axis to an opposite side of said blower tube (see annotated Ichihashi fig. 8 above, the distance from the rotational axis to an indentation is smaller than the distance from the rotational axis to a bottom of a blower tube).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the blower apparatus of Kataoka to provide the recited first distance smaller than the recited second distance as taught by Ichihashi. It may provide a large handle opening so that a user can grab a handle comfortable and handle the blower conveniently.
Regarding claim 20, Kataoka as modified by Ichihashi teaches the blower apparatus as in the rejection of claim 19, wherein said indentation is formed on a top side of said blower tube (see annotated Kataoka fig. 1 above and annotated Ichihashi fig. 8 above).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Suzuki does not disclose an indentation as claimed in claim 1 of the instant application because the indentation is not disposed in a region of a suction tube. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Suzuki is a secondary reference cited for teaching that the indentation extends over at least 50% of a handle opening length. A primary reference, Kataoka teaches a handle and an indentation are disposed in a region of a suction tube (see Kataoka fig. 1). The figures 1 and 2 of Kataoka do not show clearly whether the length of the indentation extends over 50% of the handle opening. Thus, Suzuki is cited to teach the claim limitations because it clearly shows the indentation extends over 50% of the handle opening length.
Examiner notes that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of those references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2145 III.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. §103 and claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. §102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Ichihashi.
Applicant argues Kataoka and Suzuki do not teach or suggest a first distance between a rotational axis and a top side of the blower tube/indentation is smaller than a second distance between the rotational axis and a bottom side of the blower tube. Kataoka does not describe the recited distances in the specification. Examination of Kataoka fig. 1 may show the relation of the recited distances, but the figure does not show the relation clearly.
Instead, Ichihashi is cited to teach the relation of the recited first and second distances. Ichihashi shows the rotational axis is very close to the top side of the blower tube/the indentation of the handle. Thus, the recited first distance is clearly shorter than the recited second distance, which the distance between the rotational axis and the bottom side of the blower tube.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUKWOO JAMES CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7402. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00a-5:00p.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/S.J.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/DAVID S POSIGIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights