DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed 1/5/2026. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-11, 13, and 15-20 are pending. Claims 1, 2, 10, 11, 13, and 18 have been amended.
The objection to claim 3 has been withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendments.
The rejection of claims 1-4, 6-13, and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2015/0240406) is withdrawn in response to Applicant’s amendments. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 5 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Hettinger et al. (US 2016/0201247) is also withdrawn.
In response to Applicant’s amendments, new ground(s) of rejection are applied below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-11, 13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, there is no apparent original support for “initiating the spin cycle . . . accelerate the wash basket to a first rotational speed, whereby additional wash fluid is accumulated with the remaining portion of wash fluid from laundry articles in the wash basket . . . . operating the drain pump to an on condition . . . reaching the first rotational speed . . . draining, periodically, the additional wash fluid from the remaining portion of wash fluid during the spin cycle, whereby the remaining portion of wash fluid maintains partial submergence with the portion of the bottom wall.” Instead, the specification appears to provide support for operating the drain pump periodically to maintain a wash fluid level in the tub prior to the spin cycle initiation and the acceleration to the first rotational speed (paragraphs 44-45). Upon reaching the first rotational speed, the drain pump is operated to an on condition to drain the remaining portion of wash fluid (paragraph 46).
Regarding claim 10, there is no apparent original support for “initiating the spin cycle . . . accelerate the wash basket to a first rotational speed, whereby additional wash fluid is accumulated with the remaining portion of wash fluid from laundry articles in the wash basket . . . . operating the drain pump to an on condition . . . reaching the first rotational speed . . . draining, periodically, the additional wash fluid from the remaining portion of wash fluid during the spin cycle, whereby the remaining portion of wash fluid maintains partial submergence with the portion of the bottom wall.” Instead, the specification appears to provide support for operating the drain pump periodically to maintain a wash fluid level in the tub prior to the spin cycle initiation and the acceleration to the first rotational speed (paragraphs 44-45). Upon reaching the first rotational speed, the drain pump is operated to an on condition to drain the remaining portion of wash fluid (paragraph 46).
Regarding claim 18, there is no apparent original support for “initiating . . . the spin cycle . . . accelerate a wash basket in a wash tub to a first rotational speed, the wash tub containing a remaining portion of a total amount of wash fluid . . . the spin cycle accumulates additional wash fluid with the remaining portion of wash fluid . . . operating, by the controller, a drain pump, periodically, to drain the additional wash fluid from the remaining portion of wash fluid during the spin cycle, whereby the remaining portion of wash fluid maintains partial submergence with the portion of the bottom wall.” Instead, the specification appears to provide support for operating the drain pump periodically to maintain a wash fluid level in the tub prior to the spin cycle initiation and the acceleration to the first rotational speed (paragraphs 44-45). Upon reaching the first rotational speed, the drain pump is operated to an on condition to drain the remaining portion of wash fluid (paragraph 46).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID G CORMIER whose telephone number is (571)270-7386. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30 - 6:00.
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, Michael Barr can be reached at (571) 272-1414. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
DAVID G. CORMIER
Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/DAVID G CORMIER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights