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 of Claims
Claims 1 and 4-6 have been amended. Claims 3 and 10-24 have been canceled. Claims 25-40 have been added. Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 25-40 have been examined on the merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 11, filed 04/22/2026, with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections are persuasive. The previous 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 11-12, filed 04/22/2026, with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) rejections of specifically claim 1 is not persuasive. With respect to the newly added independent claims 27 and 33 are persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 2, 4, 5, 25, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krajicek (US 4945933 A).
Referring to claim 1: Krajicek discloses a cleaning system (shown in Fig. 1; “cleaning the interior of storage tanks of the type used for storing large volumes of liquids” Abstract) for cleaning a floor (floor of 100 shown in Fig. 3) of a closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3) containing liquid, the system comprising:
a box system (B Fig. 1-A inserted below; Box as defined by Merriam-Webster: 3: “an often small space, compartment, or enclosure”; 4: “a box or boxlike container and its contents: such as
a: a usually self-contained piece of electronic equipment” ) configured to engage a wall of the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3) from an exterior position with respect to the closed system, the box system (B) having an interior volume;
a deployment chamber (DC Fig. 1-A inserted below) within the interior volume of the box system (B);
a wash chamber (WC Fig. 1-A inserted below) within the interior volume of the box system (B);
wherein the deployment chamber (DC) and wash chamber (WC) are fluidly connected via a wash chamber aperture (aperture of WC);
wherein the deployment chamber (DC) and wash chamber (WC) are configured such that as the deployment chamber (DC) fills with a waste material, the waste material moves into the wash chamber (WC) through the wash chamber aperture (aperture of WC);
a cleaner (300/ 500 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the cleaner is configured to clean the floor (floor of 100 shown in Fig. 3) of the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3); and
wherein the cleaner (300/ 500 Figs. 2 and 3) is configured to selectively enter and exit (selectively enter and exit via 110/116 Figs. 2 and 3) the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3) from the box system.
PNG
media_image1.png
478
780
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Referring to claim 2: Krajicek discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising:
a gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3; “gate valve 110” Col. 14, lines 33-38);
wherein the gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3) is configured to allow selective access (selective access via 116 Figs. 2 and 3) into the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3) is located below the surface level (surface level of 102 shown in Figs. 2 and 3) created by the liquid within the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3).
Referring to claim 4: Krajicek discloses the system of claim 1, wherein:
a gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the gate complex is configured to allow selective access (selective access via 116 Figs. 2 and 3) into the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3) is located below the surface level (surface level of 102 shown in Figs. 2 and 3) created by the liquid within the closed system;
the gate complex having a gate (116 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the gate is configured to be selectively moved between an open position and a closed position (“a valve plate 116 may be raised and lowered” Col. 14, lines 36-37); and
wherein when the gate (116 Figs. 2 and 3) is in the open position (shown in Fig. 3), the cleaner (300/ 500 Figs. 2 and 3) is configured to enter the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3) through the gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3) located below the surface level (surface level of 102 shown in Figs. 2 and 3) created by the liquid within the closed system.
Referring to claim 5: Krajicek discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising:
a gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the gate complex is configured to allow selective access (selective access via 116 Figs. 2 and 3) into the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3) is located below a surface level (surface level of 102 shown in Figs. 2 and 3) created by the liquid within the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3);
the gate complex having a gate (116 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the gate is configured to be selectively moved between an open position and a closed position (“a valve plate 116 may be raised and lowered” Col. 14, lines 36-37);
a box system (200 Figs. 2 and 3);
the box system having an interior volume (shown in Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the box system (200 Figs. 2 and 3) is configured to operably connect to the gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the cleaner (300/ 500 Figs. 2 and 3) is initially positioned at least partially within the interior volume (shown partially within in Fig. 2) of the box system (200 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein when the gate (116 Figs. 2 and 3) is in the open position (shown in Fig. 3), the cleaner is configured to enter the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3) through the gate complex (110/116 Figs. 2 and 3) located below the surface level (surface level of 102 shown in Figs. 2 and 3) created by the liquid within the closed system.
Referring to claim 25: Krajicek discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the deployment chamber (DC Fig. 1-A inserted above) and wash chamber (WC Fig. 1-A inserted above) cooperate to equalize pressure (pressure between both systems are secured via “bolts” and “seals” Col. 13, lines 57-60, and equalized in order to maintain the fluid levels in the closed system 100) between the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3) and the box system (B Fig. 1-A inserted above).
Referring to claim 26: Krajicek discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the box system is further defined as being sealed (“the flanges 108, 113 and 201 being interconnected in any suitable manner, such as through the provision of interconnecting nuts and bolts and seals, (not shown.)” Col. 13, lines 57-60) to minimize waste seepage from the box system.
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krajicek (US 4945933 A) and Tatum (US 3543948 A).
Referring to claim 9: Krajicek discloses the system of claim 1, but is silent on wherein the cleaner is an auger cleaner.
Tatum in an analogous removal system (shown in Fig. 1) wherein the cleaner (12 Fig. 1) is an auger cleaner (shown in Fig. 1)
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 cleaning system of Krajicek with the auger as taught by Tatum for the purpose of having a mechanism which is capable of extracting the unnecessary matter.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The most relevant art is: Krajicek (US 4945933 A) and Tatum (US 3543948 A)
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 27: Krajicek discloses a cleaning system (shown in Fig. 1; “cleaning the interior of storage tanks of the type used for storing large volumes of liquids” Abstract) for cleaning a floor (floor of 100 shown in Fig. 3) of a closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3) containing liquid, the system comprising:
a box system (B Fig. 1-A inserted above; Box as defined by Merriam-Webster: 3: “an often small space, compartment, or enclosure”; 4: “a box or boxlike container and its contents: such as
a: a usually self-contained piece of electronic equipment” ) having an interior volume, wherein the box system is configured to operably connect to an exterior of the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3) in a sealed manner at a location below a liquid level (shown in Figs. 2 and 3) within the closed system;
a cleaner (300/ 500 Figs. 2 and 3) configured to clean the floor of the closed system, wherein the cleaner is initially positioned (shown in Fig. 2) at least partially within the interior volume of the box system (B);
a transfer carriage (302 Fig. 4) positioned in the interior volume of the box system (B);
wherein the transfer carriage (302 Fig. 4) is selectively engageable (selectively engageable via 306 Fig. 4) with the cleaner (300/ 500 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the transfer carriage (302 Fig. 4) is configured to translate the cleaner from a position (shown in Fig. 2) within the interior volume of the box system (B) to a second position (shown in Fig. 3) in the closed system (100 Figs. 2 and 3);
wherein the transfer carriage (302 Fig. 4) is configured to securely engage (engage via 306 Fig. 4) the cleaner (300/ 500 Figs. 2 and 3) during movement from the position within the interior of the box system to the second position (positions shown in Figs. 2 and 3).
But Krajicek, alone or in combination, does not teach, suggest, or make obvious wherein the transfer carriage is specifically positioned in the box system and is specifically configured to disengage from the cleaner in the second position such that the cleaner moves independently from the transfer carriage.
Such a reconstruction would be extensive and there is no motivation to do so. Thus, one would only arrive at the claimed invention by using improper hindsight reasoning knowledge gleaned only from the Applicant’s disclosure, and such a reconstruction would be improper.
Therefore claim 27 is allowed.
For similar reasons claim 33 is also allowed.
Claims 28-32 and 34-40 are also allowed based on their dependency to claims 27 and 33, respectively.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 CHRISTOPHER SOTO whose telephone number is (571)272-8172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8a.m. - 5 p.m..
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 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.
CHRISTOPHER SOTO
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/CHRISTOPHER SOTO/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights