DETAILED ACTION
This is the first action in response to US Patent Application No. 18/538,285, filed 13 December, 2023, with no earlier priority date.
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 .
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1&2) as being anticipated by Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Pierre teaches a deodorized receptacle (10) comprising a body (receptacle base 34) configured to temporality contain articles therein (receptacle 34 receives waste material 40 in a cavity 32 formed by sidewall 34—column 2, lines 52-58); a lid (20) being pivotably attached to said body and configured to open and close an opening of said body (lid 20 pivotably connected by a hinge 36 to a top of receptable base 30—column 2, lines 59-61); each of said body and said lid comprising airtight material (receptacle formed from plastic or metal—column 2, lines 19-22; lid 20 provides hermetic seal—column 2, lines 61-62; also see claims 2-3; thus evident that base 34 and lid 20 are formed of an airtight plastic or metal material); a seal arrangement (latch 24 and catch 38) being disposed at the edge of said lid and the edge of said body to seal said deodorizing receptacle in an airtight manner (lid 20 provides a hermetic seal of the cavity 32 from the outside environment…the lid 20 further including a latch 24 that latches onto a catch 38 provided on the sidewall 38 of the receptacle base—Figs. 2-3, column 2, lines 61-64; thus, the latch 24 and catch define a seal arrangement at the edge of the lid and body which form an airtight seal); and a deodorizing arrangement (50)being configured to deliver deodorizing media into the interior of said body to deodorize at least one of the interior of said body and articles therein (deodorant dispensing system 50 mounted to bottom surface 22 of lid 20…comprising microprocessor 52, tilt switch 54, battery pack 56, reservoir 60, pump 62, passageway 64, nozzle 66, and a deodorant 70 contained within the reservoir—column 3, lines 1-17; the automatic deodorant dispensing system sprays an air freshener or deodorant wherever the lid is closed at a preset time interval—column 2, lines 17-32 and 38-44).
See the receptacle (10) in Fig. 1 of Pierre below
PNG
media_image1.png
388
270
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The receptacle of Pierre is disclosed for use with waste products such as used diapers (storing used diapers—column 1, lines 7-10, 28-31, 46-47; diaper odors or garbage odors form food scraps—column 2, lines 32-38), whereas the invention of claim 1 is recited as being used as a deodorizing laundry hamper for containing and deodorizing laundry articles. The examiner finds that a diaper may fairly be considered a type of laundry article, such that Pierre clearly teaches all elements of claim 1. Alternatively, if the applicant should find that a diaper is distinct from a laundry article as claimed, the receptacle of Pierre is clearly capable of use as a laundry hamper which stores and treats laundry articles (i.e., the cavity 32 of Pierre is sufficiently sized to receive various laundry articles) and thus Pierre remains anticipatory of the invention of claim 1; see MPEP 2114(II.) regarding how a recitation of an intended use does not differentiate a claimed apparatus form a prior art apparatus which teaches all structural limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 2, Pierre discloses the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 1. Pierre further teaches said deodorizing arrangement (50) is configured to actively dispense deodorizing media (70) into the interior (32) of said body (30) according to an automated schedule (the automatic deodorant dispensing system [50] sprays an air freshener or deodorant wherever the lid is closed at a preset time interval—column 2, lines 17-32 and 38-44; also see column 3, lines 1-17; Figs. 1-2 clearly depict the deodorant being dispensed from system 50 into the cavity 32 of receptacle base 30 and onto articles 40 within said cavity).
Regarding claim 9, Pierre discloses the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 2. Pierre further teaches an actuation arrangement (tilt switch 54) configured to permit actuation of said dispensing arrangement upon said lid being closed and prevent actuation of said dispensing arrangement upon said lid being open (automatic deodorant dispensing system is operative only when the mercury or tilt switch 54 is in a closed circuit, or when the lid is in a closed or downward position such as that shown in FIG. 4. When the lid is in an upright position, such as that shown in FIG. 3, the automatic deodorant dispensing system 50 is non-operative or deactivated such that the deodorant 70 is not wasted by spraying into open air—column 3, lines 18-25).
Regarding claim 12, Pierre teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 1. Claim 12 further indicates that said seal arrangement comprises: a lid portion disposed at the perimeter edge of said lid; a body portion disposed at the perimeter edge of said opening in said body; and said lid portion and said body portion are configured to engage with one another upon said lid being closed to create an airtight seal. The terms “lid portion” and “body portion” are not recited as comprising a particular structure beyond being located at the perimeter edge of the lid and perimeter edge of the opening of the body, respectively. Thus, claim 12 is interpreted as including any seal arrangement in which the perimeter edge of the lid airtightly seals to the perimeter edge of the opening of the body. The seal arrangement of Pierre yields an airtight seal between the lid and body (lid 20 provides a hermetic seal of the cavity 32 from the outside environment—column 2, lines 61-6; also column 1, lines 54-57, column 2, lines 22-25, and claim 1), and viewing the Figures it is evident the perimeter edge of the lid (20) engages with the perimeter edge of the opening of the body (30) when the lid is closed (see Figs. 1-3), which engagement is secured by the latch (24) and catch (38) (see column 2, lines 21-25 and 62-64). Accordingly, the seal arrangement of Pierre meets the limitations of claim 12.
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 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1), as applied to claims 1-2 above, in view of Schneider et al. (US 2013/0341328 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Pierre discloses the deodorizing laundry hamper according to claim 2. Pierre further teaches said dispensing arrangement comprises: a dispensing aperture (nozzle 66—column 3, lines 8-11) facing the interior of said body to dispense or spray deodorizing media into the interior of said body (see Figs. 1-2 and 4, it is evident that deodorant 70 is ejected from nozzle into the cavity 32 of the receptacle base 30); a pump (motorized pump 62—column 3, line 10) operatively connected to said dispensing aperture (see Fig. 4, pump 62 connected to nozzle 66 by fluid passageway 64); a reservoir (deodorant reservoir 60—column 3, lines 9-10) configured to contain a supply of deodorizing media (deodorant 70 contained in the reservoir 60—column 3, lines 16-17) and operatively connected to said pump (see Fig. 4, evident that pump 62 delivers deodorant 70 from reservoir 62 to nozzle 66 via fluid pathway 64); and a controller (microprocessor 52) operatively connected to said pump and configured to actuate said pump (62) to pump deodorizing media from said reservoir (60) and out through said dispensing aperture (66) (microprocessor 52 includes a timer for activating the pump 62 at a desired time interval—column 3, lines 11-14; from Fig. 4 it is evident the deodorant 70 flows from the reservoir, through pump 62 and pathway 64, and out through nozzle 66).
See Fig. 4 of Pierre below.
PNG
media_image2.png
310
422
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Pierre does not teach that the dispensing aperture is mounted to a wall of said body, with Pierre instead teaching that the dispensing system including the aperture (nozzle 66) is mounted to a bottom surface of the lid (column 3, lines 3-5).
However, in the analogous art of containers with odor control (title), Schneider teaches an embodiment (Fig. 4) of a waste container (400) comprising a body (410) having a pivotably attached lid (cover 420 connected by hinge 430) and a deodorizing arrangement (components 440, 450, 460, 470, 495); the deodorizing arrangement includes an aperture (odor control dispenser 460) mounted to an inner wall of the body (410), a reservoir (490) mounted to an inner wall of the body, and tubing (495) positioned within the sidewalls of the body (410) for connecting the aperture and reservoir so that an odor control composition from the reservoir can be ejected into the body via the aperture (Fig. 4, [0074]). Additionally, Schneider indicates that the activation of the dispensers can be dependent on the position of the lid with respect to the body ([0074]), and that a light sensor (light sensitive switch) is suitable for detecting an open or closed position of the lid ([0021],[0026],[0098]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to rearrange the deodorizing arrangement (50) of Pierre (including aperture/nozzle 66 thereof) such that it is mounted to an inner wall of the receptacle body, as substantially seen in Schneider, to maintain the expected benefit of dispensing an odor control agent into the receptacle body for deodorizing the space and any articles within the receptacle (see Schneider at abstract, [0006], [0020], [0070], [0074]); also see MPEP(VI.)(C.) regarding the rearrangement of parts of the prior art which do not modify the operation of a claimed device with respect to the prior art.
Additionally, it is acknowledged that the tilt switch (54) of Pierre would not be expected to work properly when the deodorizing arrangement (50) of Pierre is moved off of the lid and onto the body. However, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to overcome this challenge by substituting the tilt switch of Pierre for the light switch of Schneider for the benefit of detecting the open or closed condition of the lid based on the amount of light within the body (see Schneider at [0021], [0026], [0098]). It is noted that as per MPEP 2141.03(I.), "A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton." KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1397 (2007).
Regarding claim 4, Pierre in view of Schneider teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 3. As modified with respect to claim 3 above, each of said pump (62), reservoir (60), and said controller (52) of Pierre (which are part of a deodorant dispensing system 50 contained within a housing 72—see Fig. 4, column 3, lines 1-35) are arranged to be mounted on a wall of said body in view of the dispensing arrangement of Pierre (see Fig. 4, [0074]). Pierre does not particularly suggest arranging the components to be disposed within the wall of the boy.
However, in the embodiment of Schneider (Fig. 4) cited above, Schneider teaches at least parts of a deodorant dispensing arrangement positioned within the walls of a container ([0074] indicates that tubing 496 which creates a fluid connection between a reservoir 490 and dispenser 460 may run within a sidewall of a vessel body 410). Furthermore, Schneider teaches related embodiments of containers (700) with odor control systems, wherein an odor control dispenser (750) rests within a cavity (722) formed within the sidewalls (712, 717) of the container body (vessel body 710) (see Figs. 9-10 and especially Figs. 14-15, [0083]). Additionally, making parts integral is prima facie obvious absent evidence of significance, i.e., a new or unexpected result; see MPEP 2144.04(V.)(B.). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Pierre such that the dispensing arrangement (dispensing system 50), including all of the pump (62), reservoir (60), and controller (52), is arranged within a cavity formed within the sidewall—as substantially seen in Schneider ([0083] discusses arranging a deodorant dispensing arrangement within a cavity formed by sidewalls of a container body, see Figs. 9-10 and 14-15)—for the benefit of maintaining an arrangement which enables an odor control composition to be sprayed directly into the interior space of the container ([0083] of Schneider indicates that a nozzle 752 of the odor control dispenser is sized to be able to spray directly into the inner vessel 715; odor control composition neutralize offensive odors emitted by waste in the container—see [0011], [0070]).
Regarding claim 5, Pierre in view of Schneider teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 4. Pierre discloses an actuation arrangement (tilt switch 54) configured to permit actuation of said dispensing arrangement upon said lid being closed and prevent actuation of said dispensing arrangement upon said lid being open for the benefit of efficient use of the deodorant composition (automatic deodorant dispensing system is operative only when the mercury, or tilt switch 54 is in a closed circuit, or when the lid is in a closed or downward position such as that shown in FIG. 4. When the lid is in an upright position, such as that shown in FIG. 3, the automatic deodorant dispensing system 50 is non-operative or deactivated such that the deodorant 70 is not wasted by spraying into open air. This unique feature of the present invention allows the efficient use of the deodorant 70 and furthermore, allows the maximized effect of deodorization inside the cavity 32 of the waste receptacle 10—column 3, lines 18-28).
As discussed with respect to claim 3 above, the tilt switch of Pierre may not be operable when the dispensing arrangement of Pierre is rearranged to a sidewall of the container body, but it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the tilt switch of Pierre with a an alternative sensor/switch arrangement. Particularly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the tilt switch of Pierre with a light sensitive switch as an alternative arrangement for detecting the open or closed status of the container lid (as seen in Schneider at [0021], [0026], and [0098]) to maintain the benefit of efficiently applying the deodorant composition (Pierre at column 3, lines 18-28, suggest only applying the deodorant composition when the lid is closed so that deodorant is not wasted by spraying into open air and so that its effect within the cavity of the waste receptacle is maximized).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1) in view of Schneider et al. (US 2013/0341328 A1), as applied to claims 3-5 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2022/0258968 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Pierre in view of Schneider teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 5. Pierre fairly indicates the actuation arrangement is operatively connected to the controller to actuate said controller (Fig. 4 shows connection between microprocessor 52 and tilt switch 54, and column 3, lines 18-28 indicate the tilt switch 54 only allows activation of the dispenser when the lid is closed; it is thus fairly implied that the tilt switch acts as an input to the microprocessor which determines when the microprocessor is allowed to activate the pump for dispensing the deodorant). Also, as discussed with respect to claims 3 and 5 above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to consider alternative types of switches or sensors for detecting the open or closed state of the lid in place of the tilt switch of Pierre. Nonetheless, Pierre and Schneider do not particularly suggest embodiments wherein said actuation arrangement comprises: a magnetic switch mounted in or on a portion of said body adjacent said lid; said magnetic switch is operatively connected to said controller to actuate said controller; and a magnet mounted on or in said lid and configured to actuate said magnetic switch upon said lid being closed and said magnet being sufficiently close to said magnetic switch to actuate said magnetic switch.
However, the claimed arrangement amounts to the use of a hall sensor to detect the open or closed state of the container lid instead of the tilt switch of Pierre or light sensitive switch of Schneider. Furthermore, in the analogous art of deodorization bins (title), Wang teaches a container (sterilization and deodorization waste bin—title) including a magnetic switch (Hall element 131) mounted on a body portion (bin body 2) of the container, and a magnet (132) mounted on a lid (1) of the container, wherein a controller (control circuit 13) of the container determines an open or closed state of the container lid based on a signal from the magnetic switch, and wherein the controller actuates application of a deodorizing treatment (ultraviolet light) only when the container lid is closed (a control switch is mounted on the bin body 2…in this embodiment, the control switch is a Hall element 131…a magnet 132 is mounted on the lid 1, and when the lid 1 is opened, the magnet 132 leaves the measurement range of the Hall element 131 along with the lid 1; after the control circuit 13 receives a signal from the Hall element 131, an ultraviolet tube drive circuit 34 controls the dual-band ultraviolet tube 33 to light off to stop generating ultraviolet light to protect the skin and eyes of users against harm. Only when the lid 1 is closed in place and the Hall element 131 detects that the magnet 132 is approaching, the control circuit 13 will control the dual-band ultraviolet tube 33 to light up, otherwise, the dual-band ultraviolet tube 33 will be kept off all the time—[0043]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the tilt switch of Pierre and/or the light sensitive switch of modified Pierre with the hall sensor arrangement of Wang, which includes a magnetic switch mounted on a container body portion, a magnet mounted on a container lid portion, and control circuitry configured so that a deodorizing treatment is only allowed to be applied when the magnet is sufficiently close to the magnetic switch (see Wang at [0043]), for the benefit of only applying a deodorizing treatment when the lid is closed (see Wang at [0033]) so that the deodorant is used efficiently (see Pierre at column 3, lines 18-28).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1) in view of Schneider et al. (US 2013/0341328 A1) and Wang et al. (US 2022/0258968 A1), as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Mosely (US 10,058,628 B1).
Regarding claim 7, Pierre in view of Shneider and Wang teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 6. Pierre teaches the reservoir including a spout (opening 66) comprising a cap (68) for refilling the reservoir with deodorizing media (The deodorant reservoir 60 is further provided with an opening 66 and a cap 68 such that the deodorant 70 contained in the reservoir 60 can be replenished when necessary—Fig. 4, column 3, lines 14-17). Thus, Pierre teaches a filling spout connected to said reservoir; and said filling spout comprises a cap (68) configured to be removed to open said filling spout and permit the filling of said reservoir with deodorizing media.
Pierre does not teach the filling spout disposed to project out of a wall of said body. Schneider and Wang also do not teach a filling spout projecting out of a wall of said body.
However, in the analogous art of containers with scent control devices (trash can with fragrant oil dispensary—title, abstract), Mosley teaches a reservoir (102) positioned within a body of a waste container (101) which contains a composition for masking objectionable odors (reservoir 102 is attached to an interior surface of waste container 101 and releases essential oils 161 and volatile materials for masking objectionable odors—column 2, lines 39-53), wherein the composition is provided to the reservoir via a filling spout (channel 104) with an opening (receiving port 131) external to the container, the filling spout (104) extending into the reservoir through an opening (142) in a wall of the body portion (channel 104 is accessed from the exterior of the waste container 101 and transports essential oil 161 through the storage bin 141 of the waste container 101 to the reservoir 102, the channel 104 including a receiving port 131, transfer pipe 132, and receiving end 133—column 4, lines 4-12; the receiving port 131 is a pipe attached to an exterior surface 151 of the waste container which receives essential oil at its receiving end 133 and transports the essential oil to transfer pipe 132 which connects to reservoir 102 and enters the container through an aperture 142—see column 4, lines 13-26). Viewing Figs. 1 and 3-4 of Mosely, it is evident the filling spout (channel 104) facilitates easier refilling of the reservoir by making a receiving end of the spout readily accessible to a user. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Pierre such that the filling spout is disposed to project out of a wall of said body, as substantially seen in Mosely, for the benefit of facilitating easier refilling of the reservoir by a user (see channel 104 of Mosely in Figs. 1 and 3-4, the channel 104 having a receiving end 133 of a receiving port 131 which is external to the walls of the waste container body and which is positioned to assist a user in refilling a reservoir 102 with an odor control composition).
Regarding claim 8, Pierre in view of Schneider, Wang, and Mosely, teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 7. Claim 8 further indicates that said seal arrangement comprises: a lid portion disposed at the perimeter edge of said lid; a body portion disposed at the perimeter edge of said opening in said body; and said lid portion and said body portion are configured to engage with one another upon said lid being closed to create an airtight seal. The terms “lid portion” and “body portion” are not recited as comprising a particular structure beyond being located at the perimeter edge of the lid and opening of the body, respectively. Thus, claim 8 is interpreted as including any seal arrangement in which the perimeter edge of the lid airtightly seals to the perimeter edge of the opening of the body. The seal arrangement of Pierre yields an airtight seal between the lid and body (lid 20 provides a hermetic seal of the cavity 32 from the outside environment—column 2, lines 61-6; also column 1, lines 54-57, column 2, lines 22-25, and claim 1), and viewing the Figures it is evident the perimeter edge of the lid (20) engages with the perimeter edge of the opening of the body (30) when the lid is closed (see Figs. 1-3), which engagement is secured by the latch (24) and catch (38) (see column 2, lines 21-25 and 62-64). Accordingly, the seal arrangement of Pierre meets the limitations of claim 8.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1), as applied to claim 9 above, in view Wang et al. (US 2022/0258968 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Pierre teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 9. Pierre does not teach said actuation arrangement comprises: a magnetic switch mounted in or on a portion of said body adjacent said lid; said magnetic switch is operatively connected to said controller to actuate said controller; and a magnet mounted on or in said lid and configured to actuate said magnetic switch upon said lid being closed and said magnet being sufficiently close to said magnetic switch to actuate said magnetic switch.
However, as discussed in the rejection of claim 6 above, the claimed arrangement amounts to the use of a hall sensor to detect the open or closed state of the container lid instead of the tilt switch of Pierre. Furthermore, in the analogous art of deodorization bins (title), Wang teaches a container (sterilization and deodorization waste bin—title) including a magnetic switch (Hall element 131) mounted on a body portion (bin body 2) of the container, and a magnet (132) mounted on a lid (1) of the container, wherein a controller (control circuit 13) of the container determines an open or closed state of the container based on a signal from the magnetic switch and applies a deodorizing treatment (ultraviolet light) only when the container lid is closed ([0043]; see rejection of claim 6 above). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the tilt switch of Pierre with the hall sensor arrangement of Wang, which includes a magnetic switch mounted on a container body portion, a magnet mounted on a container lid portion, and control circuitry configured so that a deodorizing treatment is only allowed to be applied when the magnet is sufficiently close to the magnetic switch (see Wang at [0043]), for the benefit of only applying a deodorizing treatment when the lid is closed (see Wang at [0033]) so that the deodorant is used efficiently (see Pierre at column 3, lines 18-28).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1) in view of Schneider et al. (US 2013/0341328 A1), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Mosely (US 10,058,628 B1).
Regarding claim 11, Pierre in view of Schneider teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 3. Pierre teaches a filling spout (opening 66) connected to said reservoir (60), said filling spout comprising a cap (68) configured to be removed to open said filling spout and permit the filling of said reservoir with deodorizing media (Fig. 4, column 3, lines 15-17; see rejection of claim 7 above).
Pierre and Schneider do not teach the filling spout is disposed to project out of a wall of said body. However, as discussed with respect to claim 7 above, Mosley teaches a filling spout (channel 104) including an opening (receiving end 133 of receiving port 131) which extends out from a container body and is used to deliver an odor control composition to a reservoir (102) positioned on an interior surface of the container (column 2, lines 39-53; column 4, lines 4-12; column 4, lines 13-26). Viewing Figs. 1 and 3-4 of Mosely, it is evident that the filling spout (channel 104) facilitates easier refilling of the reservoir by making a receiving end of the spout readily accessible to a user. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Pierre such that the filling spout is disposed to project out of a wall of said body, as substantially seen in Mosely, for the benefit of facilitating easier refilling of the reservoir by a user (see channel 104 of Mosely in Figs. 1 and 3-4, the channel 104 having a receiving end 133 of a receiving port 131 which is external to the walls of the body and which is positioned to assist a user in refilling a reservoir 102 with an odor control composition).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schatz (US 2010/0032431 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Schatz teaches a deodorizing laundry hamper (clothes hamper assembly including air-freshening device to reduce odor buildup inside the hamper—abstract) comprising: a body (outer case 60—[0024]) being configured to temporarily contain laundry articles therein (clothes hamper for collection of soiled or wet athletic clothing—[0002],[0010]; see Fig. 1); a lid (lid 80) being pivotably attached to said body and configured to open and close an opening of said body (lid 80 covers opening of outer case 60 when in closed position—[0025]; lid 80 pivotally attached to lid receptacle 26 with pivot point knobs 52 and 54—see [0026], Figs. 1 and 4); each of said body and said lid comprising airtight material (outer case 60 constructed of plastic optionally treated with anti-bacterial agent—[0024]; lid 80 constructed of plastic optionally treated with an antimicrobial agent—[0025]; it is fairly implied that such plastic is airtight); a seal arrangement being disposed at the edge of said lid and the edge of said body to seal said deodorizing laundry hamper in an airtight manner (lid 80 includes skirts44, 46, and 48, which prevent odors from escaping the hamper—[0027]; hamper prevents odors from escaping into the surrounding air—[0035]; Figs. 1-5 show how the skirts at the edge portion of the lid align with the edges of the opening to the outer case 60; since the hamper prevents odors from escaping, the engagement between the lid and outer case is fairly implied to define an airtight seal); and a deodorizing arrangement (air freshening device) being configured to deliver deodorizing media into the interior of said body to deodorize at least one of the interior of said body and laundry articles therein (deodorizer compartment 56 holds an air-freshening device of the owners choosing, the air freshener being dispersed through ventilation holes 59 of the compartment 56 to fight odors within the hamper—[0028]; deodorizer compartment 56 may be located on the outer case walls—[0036]; .
To the extent that Schatz is not explicitly clear in teaching that the arrangement of the lid and body include a sealing arrangement which provides an airtight seal when the lid is closed, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the lid and body of Schatz to form an airtight seal for the evident benefit of eliminating the chance of unpleasant odors within the hamper from being released from the hamper to the surrounding environment when the lid is closed (Schatz suggests a lid design which prevents odors from escaping the hamper—[0027]; outer case and lid prevent odors form escaping into the surrounding air—abstract).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schatz (US 2010/0032431 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Mele (US 3,346,140 A).
Regarding claim 13, Schatz teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to claim 1. Schatz indicates that the deodorizing arrangement includes at least one deodorizing structure which dispenses deodorizing media into the interior of said body (air freshening device placed into deodorizer compartment 56 and disperse air freshener via ventilation holes 59—see [0028]). A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the design of deodorizer compartment (56) of Schatz is intended for a solid material which passively and continuously releases a deodorizing/air freshening substance to the interior of the hamper (consider how the design of compartment and ventilation holes would allow a sheet, cartridge, or tablet to be secured within the compartment while releasing a deodorizing substance, and how the compartment is not specially arranged to accommodate a spray nozzle or outlet of an active dispensing device). Nonetheless, Schatz does not explicitly indicate the deodorizing structure (air freshener) is configured to continuously and passively dispense deodorizing media. However, in the analogous art of deodorant holders for diaper hampers (title), Mele teaches a deodorant tablet (26) which is secured in a deodorant holder (16) of a diaper hamper (10), the deodorant holder including a wall (22) with perforations (24) which permit vapors from the deodorant tablet to pass into the body of the hamper (10) (column 2, lines 26-29 and 39-42). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to select a deodorant tablet, as seen in Mele, as the air freshener of Schatz for the benefit of permitting vapors from the deodorant tablet to pass into the hamper and deodorize objects therein (see Mele at column 2, lines 39-42). Such a tablet evidently operates to continuously and passively dispense deodorizing media.
Regarding claim 14, Schatz in view of Mele teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to claim 13. Schatz teaches said deodorizing arrangement comprises a first holder disposed on an interior surface of said lid, and said first holder is configured to hold one of said at least one deodorizing structure (deodorizer compartment 56 is located int eh center on the underside of the lid top and it is a small box that is used to hold a deodorizer—[0028], Fig. 4). Schatz further suggests embodiments wherein the deodorizer compartment (56) is instead located on an interior surface of the body (Deodorizer compartment 56…may be located on one of the outer case walls—[0036]), and thus such embodiments include a second holder disposed on an interior surface of said body, said second holder configured to hold one of said at least one deodorizing structure. It is noted that claim 14 only requires at least one of the recited first holder and second holder.
Regarding claim 15, Schatz in view of Mele teaches the deodorizing laundry hamper according to Claim 14. Claim 15 includes identical claim language as claims 8 and 12, wherein said claim language has been interpreted as requiring that the perimeter edge of the lid and the perimeter edge of the body portion engage each other to form an airtight seal when the lid is closed. Viewing Figs. 1 and 3-5 of Schatz, it is evident that the perimeter edge of the lid (80) and the perimeter edge of the opening of the body (60) engage each other when the lid is closed. Additionally, as discussed with respect to claim 1 above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the engagement of the lid and body of Schatz to form an airtight seal for the evident benefit of eliminating the chance of odors within the hamper from being released from the hamper when the lid is closed. Thus modified, the hamper of Schatz fairly includes a seal arrangement comprising a lid portion disposed at the perimeter edge of said lid; a body portion disposed at the perimeter edge of said opening in said body; and said lid portion and said body portion are configured to engage with one another upon said lid being closed to create an airtight seal.
Additionally, Mele also teaches a hamper (diaper hamper 10) with a lid (cover 12) which searingly engages with the open end of the hamper body (open topped container 10) (column 2, lines 26-29), fairly implying an airtight seal, and clearly depicted in Figs. 1-2 as including engagement of the perimeter edge of the lid (12) with the perimeter edge of the opening of the body (10). Thus, should the teachings of Schatz discussed in the above paragraph be considered insufficient to teach the limitations of claim 15, it would otherwise be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the hamper of Schatz with the sealing arrangement of Mele for the benefit of improving the air tightness of the hamper so that no unpleasant odors escape from the hamper.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1) in view of Nardi (US 3,307,902 A).
Regarding claim 16, the method is recognized as essentially a method of using an embodiment of the laundry hamper of claim 1. Accordingly, see the rejection of claim 1 above regarding how Pierre discloses a receptacle including a lid (20) and body (base 30) made of airtight material (plastic or metal—column 2, lines 19-22; claims 2-3), the lid being pivotably attached to the body (30) of the receptacle (hinge 36—Figs. 2-3, column 2, lines 59-60), a sealing arrangement forming an airtight seal between the lid and body when the lid is closed (hermetic seal—column 2, liens 61-62), and a deodorizing arrangement (deodorant dispensing system 50) for delivering deodorizing media into the interior of said body to deodorize at least one of the interior of said body and articles therein (column 2, lines 17-32 and 38-44; see Figs. 1-2 and 4 showing deodorant 70 from reservoir 60 being delivered to the cavity 32 of base 30 by pump 62 and nozzle 66). Pierre indicates that that the receptacle is for use in storing and deodorizing used diapers (storing used diapers—column 1, lines 7-10, 28-31, 46-47; diaper odors or garbage odors form food scraps—column 2, lines 32-38).
From the above, it is evident that regular use of device of Pierre as disclosed would define a method including opening a lid (20) made of airtight material and being pivotably attached (see hinge 36, Fig. 3) to a body (30) of the receptacle made of airtight material (metal or plastic—see claims 2-3, and column 2, lines 19-22); placing used diapers into said body (30); closing said lid (10) and forming a seal at the edge of said lid and the edge of said body to seal said deodorizing receptacle with a seal arrangement in an airtight manner (hermetic seal—column 2, lines 61-63); and operating a deodorizing arrangement (50) to deliver deodorizing media (70) into the interior (cavity 32) of said body (30) and deodorizing at least one of the interior of said body and the used diapers therein (column 2, lines 17-32 and 38-44; also see Figs. 1-2 and 4; used diapers—column 1, lines 7-10, 28-31, and 46-47; diaper odors—column 2, lines 32-38).
The examiner finds that a diaper may fairly be considered a type of laundry article. Accordingly, the disclosure of Pierre fairly teaches all elements of the method of claim 16. However, if the applicant should find that a diaper is distinct from a laundry article as claimed, the method of using the receptacle of Pierre to deodorize used diapers does not teach that the articles being deodorized are laundry articles. Nonetheless, Nardi, in the analogous art of disinfecting and deodorizing receptacles, recognized that articles of clothing, bed-linens, and the like are typically stored in a hamper or similar receptacle for a period of time before washing, and that such articles amassed in a hamper for laundering can release offensive odors into the surrounding room from dirt, perspiration, and bacteria present on the articles (column 1, lines 21-35). To address this challenge, Nardi suggests storing such articles in a receptacle configured to disperse a deodorizing composition onto the articles which enter the receptacle (column 1, lines 42-47). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the receptacle of Pierre as a laundry hamper in which laundry articles are placed and treated with a deodorizing spray, as suggested by Nardi (column 1, liens 42-47), for the benefit of eliminating foul odors associated with accumulated laundry articles (consider Nardi at column 1, liens 21-35, and Pierre at column 2, lines 44-47).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1) in view of Nardi (US 3307902 A), as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Schneider et al. (US 2013/0341328 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Pierre in view of Nardi teaches the method according to claim 17. Pierre further teaches said step of actuating said dispensing arrangement comprises: activating a controller (microprocessor) operatively connected to a pump (motorized pump 62); pumping deodorizing media (70) from a reservoir (60) and to a dispensing aperture (nozzle 66) facing the interior (cavity 32) of said body (30); and dispensing deodorizing media out of said dispensing aperture and into the interior of said body (see column 3, lines 1-17, and Figs. 1-2 and 4; it is evident the microprocessor 52 control activation of pump 62 to dispense deodorant 70 from reservoir 60 into cavity 32 via nozzle 66).
Pierre and Nardi do not teach that all of the controller, pump, and reservoir are disposed in said body, and that the dispensing aperture is mounted toa wall of said body. However, as substantially discussed with respect to claims 3-4 above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the invention of Pierre in view of Schneider such that the dispensing arrangement (50) is arranged on or within a sidewall of the receptacle body such that the nozzle is mounted to said sidewall, as substantially seen in Schneider (Fig. 4, [0074]), to maintain the expected benefit of positioning the dispenser to deliver a deodorizing composition to the interior of the receptacle for deodorizing articles therein (see the rejections of claims 3-4 above, and Shneider at Fig. 4 and [0074]). Thus modified, the controller, pump, and reservoir of the dispensing arrangement of Pierre are disposed within the body as they are part of the dispensing arrangement (50). Also, to the extent such rearrangement would impede the function of the tilt switch (54) of the dispensing arrangement (50) of Pierre, it would be within the creativity of a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the tilt switch of Pierre for a light sensitive switch, as suggested by Schneider (see Schneider at [0021], [0026], [0098]), to maintain the expected benefit of detecting when the receptacle lid is open and controlling the odor dispenser based on the open or closed state of the lid (see rejection of claims 3-5 above).
Regarding claim 19, Pierre in view of Nardi and Schneider teaches the method according to Claim 18. Pierre further teaches that closing said lid permits actuation of said dispensing arrangement; and opening said lid prevents actuation of said dispensing arrangement (column 3, lines 18-28). Although Pierre teaches such function being accomplished with a tilt switch (54), it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to retain such function within the rearranged invention of Pierre by substituting the tilt switch (54) of Pierre with an alternative means for detecting the open or closed state of the lid, such as the light sensitive switch of Schneider (see Schneider at [0021], [0026], [0098]; also see the rejections of claims 3, 5, and 18 above).
Claims 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pierre (US 7,516,865 B1) in view of Nardi (US 3307902 A) and Schneider et al. (US 2013/0341328 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2022/0258968 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Pierre in view of Nardi and Schneider teaches the method according to Claim 19. Pierre, Nardi, and Schneider do not teach said step of actuating said dispensing arrangement comprises: closing said lid and thereby moving a magnet mounted on or in said lid sufficiently close to a magnetic switch mounted in or on a portion of said body adjacent said lid and operatively connected to said controller; and actuating said magnetic switch and thereby actuating said controller.
However, the limitations of claims 20 correspond to the limitations of claims 6 and 10. Therefore, see the rejections of claims 6 and 20 above regarding how it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the invention of Pierre such that a hall sensor arrangement comprising a magnet switch mounted on a body portion and magnet mounted on a lid portion, as seen in Wang ([0043]), is substituted in place of the tilt switch of Pierre and/or the light sensitive switch of modified Pierre as a means for detecting the open or closed state of the lid. Said substitution maintains the expected benefit of enabling the controller to limit the application of a deodorizing treatment only to times when the lid is closed (see Wang at [0043] and Pierre at column 3, lines 18-28).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wigley (US 2018/0200398 A1, cited in IDS filed 13 December, 2023) teaches a deodorizing storage container (10) comprising a hollow body (12) and lid (22) with airtight seal (23) (abstract, [0028]) which may be configured as a laundry hamper ([0031]), wherein the seal (23) may include neoprene seal, gasket, or seal of other suitable material, to ensure an airtight container when lid is in closed position ([0032]).
VonPless (US 5,381,574, cited in IDS filed 13 December, 2023) teaches a hamper (10) for pre-treating soiled fabrics to enhance cleaning (abstract; column 10, liens 59-68), the hamper including an open upper end with a peripheral edge (32) (column 11, liens 3-6) that engages with a contoured peripheral edge (36) of a hinged cover (35) to form an air tight sealing when the cover is closed (column 11, lines 7-12).
Razouki (US 2020/0362505 A1) teaches a system (100) including an enclosure (130) which may be configured as laundry hamper ([0012], [0043]), wherein an electronic module (120) delivers ionized air into the enclosure for refreshing articles within the enclosure ([0044]), and an associated method for treating laundry articles with the system (Fig. 8).
Gavelli et al. (US 2007/0071933 A1) teaches an odor-reducing sheet (abstract) and suggests placing the odor-reducing sheet within a laundry basket (claim 12).
Fore (US 5,891,391) teaches a clothing deodorizer comprising an outer container (2) inside of which a perforated inner container (4) is arranged, the inner container housing a granular material (10) for absorbing human odor and an abrader (8), wherein in use the abrader pulverizes the granular material into a powder which is distributed over the clothes for deodorization (column 2, lines 19-43).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADY C PILSBURY whose telephone number is (571)272-8054. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30a-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, MICHAEL MARCHESCHI can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/BRADY C PILSBURY/Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/JENNIFER WECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797