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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/10/2026 has been entered.
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 1-8, 10-11, 13-15, and 19-20 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 "the infrared sensor" in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Specifically, it is unclear which or how many infrared sensors this is referencing as the claim previously recited an infrared sensor on each of the sanitaryware fixtures. The Examiner recommends language such as “each of the infrared sensors” or “at least one of the infrared sensors” depending on Applicant’s intention (or something similar) to overcome the rejection. Claims 2-8, 10-11, 13-15, and 19-20 will inherit this same issue since they depend from the rejected claim.
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(s) 1-8, 10-11, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20180038089 A1 (hereinafter Caldwell).
Regarding claim 1, Caldwell discloses a connected sanitaryware system, comprising
a plurality of sanitaryware fixtures (12);
an infrared sensor (14) located on a flush valve assembly of each of the sanitaryware fixtures (“infrared” par. 31); and
a controller (18) in electrical communication with the infrared sensor (par. 31);
wherein the controller is configured to communicate with a mobile computing device selected from a laptop computer, a mobile phone, or a tablet, directly and/or via a gateway (par. 30),
the controller is configured to collect data from the infrared sensor and to transmit the data to the mobile computing device (par. 33),
the mobile computing device comprises a dashboard having visual modules configured to monitor, display, and analyze the data (GUI is considered a dashboard; par. 30),
the dashboard allows a user to view settings of each of the plurality of sanitaryware fixtures (par. 30),
the dashboard allows the user to control the settings of each of the plurality of sanitaryware fixtures (par. 30), and
the settings include a user detection interval, a delay between detection and flush, a duration a flush valve is open during a flush, and a distance to which the infrared sensor measures (par. 25, 26, 27).
Regarding claim 2, Caldwell discloses wherein the sanitaryware fixtures (12) comprise a plurality of toilets or a plurality of urinals (par. 24).
Regarding claim 3, Caldwell discloses the settings include a duration a flush valve is open during a low volume flush or a high-volume flush measures (par. 27, 28).
Regarding claim 4, Caldwell discloses the controller is configured to communicate directly with the computing device (par. 30).
Regarding claim 5, Caldwell discloses a technician may initiate an action via the computing device (par. 30).
Regarding claim 6, Caldwell discloses wherein the settings include a frequency of a sanitaryware automatic rinse (“cleansing cycle” par. 33).
Regarding claim 7, Caldwell disclose wherein the data comprises a battery status (par. 29).
Regarding claim 8, Caldwell discloses wherein the data comprises a number of flushes over a time period (“number of times of operation” par. 36).
Regarding claim 10, Caldwell discloses wherein the data comprises a water consumption over a time period (“water flow volume usage” par. 29).
Regarding claim 11, Caldwell discloses wherein the computing device is configured to send instructions to the controller, and the controller is configured to initiate a sanitaryware action in response (par. 35, 36).
Regarding claim 13, Caldwell discloses wherein the data comprises a number of high volume flushes and a number of low volume flushes over a time period (par. 29).
Regarding claim 14, Caldwell discloses wherein the data comprises a number of second flushes over a time period (“number of times of operations” is considered to cover second flushes; par. 36).
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.
Claim(s) 15 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caldwell in view of US Patent Application Publication 2009/0119142 (hereinafter Yenni).
Regarding claim 15, Caldwell fails to show wherein the data comprises an average number of flushes over a time period. Attention is turned to Yenni which shows the data comprises an average number of flushes over a time period (par. 125) for monitoring a sanitary system. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to collect data based on an average number of flushes over a time period to, for example, determine if the fixture needs servicing as evidenced by the teachings of Yenni.
Regarding claim 19, Caldwell fails to show the data comprises an average daily usage. Attention is turned to Yenni which shows a control and monitoring system for a bathroom that collects data for daily usage for toilet fixtures (par. 160). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to collect data on average daily usage to help a maintenance or cleaner know how often a fixture needs attention as evidenced by the teachings of Yenni.
Regarding claim 20, Caldwell fails to show the data comprises a last date and time of the computing device communication with the controller. Attention is turned to Yenni which shows creating data with date and time stamps to monitor the status of a fixture in a restroom (par. 145). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to use data based on a last date and time of the computing device communication with the controller to monitor the status of a fixture in a restroom as evidenced by the teachings of Yenni.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANIE M LOEPPKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
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 Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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.
/JANIE M LOEPPKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights