DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-15 are pending. Claims 16-20 have been canceled.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
EP 3016566 cited in the IDS filed 8/10/2023 was not considered because a copy of the reference was not provided.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 9, the space in front of the period at the end of the claim should be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13 and 15 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.
In claim 13, it is unclear how the valve housing 124 includes three ports for the delivery line 120, fluid delivery pathway 112, and the fluid port 111, because it is unclear what constitutes the fluid delivery pathway. The drawings of the fluid delivery pathway 112 points to the pathway through the valve assembly 118 for fluid FCL(Fig. 3A), but parts of the specification and claims suggest that the fluid delivery pathway is specifically upstream of said pathway through the valve assembly 118 (such as connecting the fluid delivery pathway to the fluid recovery pathway 122 via valve plug 132, as disclosed in paragraph 48), while other parts suggest that the fluid delivery pathway is specifically downstream of said pathway through the valve assembly 118 (such as claims 13 and 15 suggest, or paragraph 45 reciting that the fluid delivery pathway can be represented by the S-shaped barb fitting 114).
Similarly, in claim 15, it is unclear what constitutes the fluid delivery pathway, because the fluid delivery pathway is supposed to be selectively connected to the fluid recovery pathway 122 and selectively connected to a fluid delivery system 12. It appears that the selective connection between the fluid delivery pathway and fluid delivery system recited in regard to the valve assembly, instead refers to the selective opening of fluid flow through the valve assembly 118 by the valve body 130 from the delivery line 120 to a downstream pathway or outlet.
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.
Claims 1, 9, 11, and 13-14 (as understood: 13) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Royale et al. (US 2019/0104906).
Regarding claim 1, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 a wand assembly for an extraction cleaner having a fluid delivery system and a fluid recovery system, the wand assembly comprising:
a wand body 248, the wand body 248 including:
a fluid delivery pathway (comprising the congruent pathway(s) through the Y-connector 278, and alternatively including any of the pathways downstream of the Y-connector 278) configured to receive a cleaning liquid via a delivery line (comprising an upstream portion of the fluid delivery pathway, like the applicant’s fluid delivery pathway 112 and delivery line 120, and/or 262) and dispense the cleaning liquid through a distributor outlet 259;
a fluid recovery pathway 250 configured to evacuate debris received via a working airflow pathway (comprising the portion of the fluid recovery pathway 250 opposite from the end that connects to the hose 246, like the applicant’s fluid recovery pathway 122 and working airflow pathway 109);
a fluid port (comprising outlet port 281 in connector 278 and/or at least one of the ports through the second valve 274) fluidly connecting the fluid delivery and recovery pathways (paragraph 85); and
a valve assembly (comprising first and second valves 270, 274) actuable between an inactive state (in which both valves 270, 274 are closed), in which the valve assembly seals the fluid port and blocks a supply of fluid from the delivery line, to a delivery state (in which the second valve 274 is closed and the first valve 270 is open), in which the valve assembly seals the fluid port and unblocks the supply of fluid from the delivery line, and a cleanout state (in which the second valve 274 is open and the first valve 270 is closed), in which the valve assembly unseals the fluid port and blocks the supply of fluid toward the distributor outlet 259.
Regarding claim 9, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 that the valve assembly includes: a valve housing (comprising the contiguous housing and conduits of the valves 270, 274 and Y-connector 278) defining therein a valve chamber fluidly connected to the fluid delivery pathway and the fluid recovery pathway; and a valve body (comprising the inherent valve structure in the first valve 270) movably mounted to the valve housing and slidable from an inactive position, where the valve body blocks the supply of fluid from the delivery line, to a fluid dispensing position, where the valve body unblocks the supply of fluid from the delivery line .
Regarding claim 11, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 that the valve assembly further includes a valve plug (comprising the inherent valve structure in the second valve 274) movably mounted to the valve housing and slidable from a sealing position, where the valve plug seals the fluid port when the valve assembly is in the inactive state, to a cleanout actuating second active position, where the valve plug unseals the fluid port when the valve assembly is in the cleanout state.
Regarding claim 13, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 the valve housing includes: a first valve port (such as on the inlet 279 of the Y-connector 278) fluidly connected to the delivery line; a second valve port (such as on the outlet of the first valve 270) fluidly connected to the fluid delivery pathway; and a third valve port (such as on the outlet of the second valve 274) fluidly connected to the fluid recovery pathway via the fluid port.
Regarding claim 14, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 that a first end 260 of the wand body 248 includes a first opening and a first coupler configured to mate with an accessory tool (paragraph 83), and a second end (that connects to the accessory hose 146) of the wand body 248 includes a second opening and a second coupler configured to mate with an accessory hose 246.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2-3, 10, 12, and 15 (as understood: 15) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale in view of itself.
Regarding claim 2, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 an actuator button 276 moveable between a deactivated position, in which the actuator button 276 is disengaged from the valve assembly, and an activated position, in which the actuator button 276 transitions the valve assembly to the cleanout state (by engaging the second valve 274). Royale lacks teaching that the actuator for transitioning the valve assembly to the cleanout state is an actuator lever, because Royale instead discloses a button 276.
Royale teaches in Figs. 13-15 an actuator lever 272 for the first valve 270, wherein the actuator lever 272 is movable between a deactivated position, in which the actuator lever 272 is disengaged from the valve assembly, and an activated position, in which the actuator lever 272 transitions the valve assembly.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the actuator for the second valve 274 disclosed by Royale to be an actuator lever instead of the button 276 disclosed by Royale, as Royale teaches with the actuator lever 272 for the first valve 270, because Royale discloses that the button 276 is simply an example of an actuator for the second valve 274 (paragraph 85), the lever would simply be a duplication of a part (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)), and duplicating the actuators for the valves simplifies the assembly by negating the need for developing manufacturing for the button and negating the possibility of mixing up the actuators for the valves.
Regarding claim 3, Royale teaches in Figs. 13-15 that the actuator lever 272 includes a finger-actuated lever arm 272 located outside of and pivotably mounted to the wand body 248.
Regarding claim 10, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 a valve assembly, valve housing, and valve body (comprising the inherent valve structure in the first valve 270), as previously discussed, but is silent with regard to specific structures and operations of the valve assembly, including that the valve assembly further includes a valve body-regulating biasing member interposed between the valve housing and the valve body and biasing the valve body to the inactive position.
Royale teaches in Figs. 2-6 a valve assembly 84 comprising a valve body-regulating biasing member (the unlabeled spring that resembles the spring 222 of the similar valve 176 in Fig. 9) interposed between the valve housing and the valve body (comprising the unlabeled reciprocating plunger that resembles the plunger 202 of the similar valve 176 in Fig. 9) and biasing the valve body to the inactive position.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a valve body-regulating biasing member interposed between the valve housing and the valve body to bias the valve body to the inactive position, as Royale teaches, to ensure that the valve body isn’t moved to the fluid dispensing position until intentionally actuated by the user.
Regarding claim 12, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 that the valve plug (comprising the inherent valve structure in the second valve 274) is movable to the sealing position whereat the valve plug seals the fluid port, as previously discussed, but is silent with regard to specific structures and operations of the valve assembly, including that the valve assembly further includes a valve plug-regulating biasing member interposed between the valve housing and the valve plug and biasing the valve plug to the sealing position.
Royale teaches in Figs. 2-6 a valve assembly 84 comprising a valve plug-regulating biasing member (the unlabeled spring that resembles the spring 222 of the similar valve 176 in Fig. 9) interposed between the valve housing and the valve plug (comprising the unlabeled reciprocating plunger that resembles the plunger 202 of the similar valve 176 in Fig. 9) and biasing the valve plug to the sealing position.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a valve body-regulating biasing member interposed between the valve housing and the valve body to bias the valve plug to the inactive position, as Royale teaches, to ensure that the valve plug isn’t moved to the cleanout actuating second active position until intentionally actuated by the user.
Regarding claim 15, Royale discloses in Figs. 13-15 a self-cleaning hose system for an extraction cleaner having a fluid delivery system (comprising an upstream portion of the fluid delivery pathway, like the applicant’s fluid delivery pathway 112 and delivery line 120, and/or 262) and a fluid recovery system (comprising any portion(s) of flow path(s) 250, 254), the self-cleaning hose system comprising:
a wand having a wand body 248 containing a fluid delivery pathway (comprising the congruent pathway(s) through the Y-connector 278, and alternatively including any of the pathways downstream of the Y-connector 278) and a fluid recovery pathway 250 fluidly connected via a fluid port (comprising outlet port 281 in connector 278 and/or at least one of the ports through the second valve 274), the fluid delivery pathway configured to receive a cleaning liquid, and the fluid recovery pathway configured to transfer debris received via the wand;
a valve assembly (comprising first and second valves 270, 274) actuable from an inactive state (in which both valves 270, 274 are closed), in which the valve assembly seals the fluid port and blocks a fluid connection between the fluid delivery pathway and the fluid delivery system, to a first active state ( in which the second valve 274 is closed and the first valve 270 is open), in which the valve assembly seals the fluid port and fluidly connects the fluid delivery pathway to the fluid delivery system, and to a second active state (in which the second valve 274 is open and the first valve 270 is closed), in which the valve assembly unseals the fluid port and blocks the fluid connection between the fluid delivery pathway and the fluid delivery system; and
an actuator button 276 movable between a deactivated position, in which the actuator button 276 is disengaged from the valve assembly, and an activated position, in which the actuator button 276 pushes the valve assembly to the second active state (in which the second valve 274 is open and the first valve 270 is closed).
Royale lacks teaching that the actuator for transitioning the valve assembly to the second active state is an actuator lever, because Royale instead discloses a button 276.
Royale teaches in Figs. 13-15 an actuator lever 272 for the first valve 270, wherein the actuator lever 272 is movable between a deactivated position, in which the actuator lever 272 is disengaged from the valve assembly, and an activated position, in which the actuator lever 272 transitions the valve assembly.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the actuator for the second valve 274 disclosed by Royale to be an actuator lever instead of the button 276 disclosed by Royale, as Royale teaches with the actuator lever 272 for the first valve 270, because Royale discloses that the button 276 is simply an example of an actuator for the second valve 274 (paragraph 85), the lever would simply be a duplication of a part (MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)), and duplicating the actuators for the valves simplifies the assembly by negating the need for developing manufacturing for the button and negating the possibility of mixing up the actuators for the valves.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Royale in view of itself and taken with Berfield et al. (US 4,938,421).
Regarding claim 6, Royale in view of itself teaches an actuator lever for the valve assembly as discussed above in the rejection of claim 2, but Royale lacks teaching that there is a lever-regulating biasing member biasing the actuator lever to the deactivated position.
Berfield teaches in Fig. 6 a lever-regulating biasing member 163 biasing an actuator lever 160 to a deactivated position.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Royale in view of itself so that the actuator lever for transitioning the valve assembly to the cleanout state has a lever-regulating biasing member attached thereto to bias the lever to the deactivated position, as Berfield teaches, to ensure the lever isn’t moved until intentionally moved by the user.
Regarding claim 7, Berfield teaches in Fig. 6 that the lever-regulating biasing member 163 includes a torsion spring or a leaf spring 163 interposed between and pressing against the actuator lever 160 and the wand body 144.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. The prior art fails to disclose or render obvious, in combination with the other limitations recited:
regarding claim 4, the actuator lever further includes a lever hammer located inside of the wand body and fixedly coupled to the lever arm to rotate in unison therewith, and the lever arm includes a first cuff having a first semicircular cross-section and a finger tab projecting at an oblique angle from the first cuff; and
regarding claim 8, a detent nub projecting from one of the actuator lever and the wand body, and a detent pocket recessed into the other of the actuator lever and the wand body, the detent pocket seating therein the detent nub and thereby retaining the actuator lever in the deactivated position.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Jonathan Waddy, whose telephone number is 571-270-3146. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (10:00AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881 or Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/J. W./
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/KEVIN F MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights