FINAL 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Claims 13-27 were withdrawn in the previous Office action from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected groups, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/18/2025.
Claim 2 has been cancelled. Claims 1, 3-12 are currently pending examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 5/6/2026, with respect to the claim interpretation in the previous Office action have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-2 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Franco describes two motors that are “merely terminal power sources used to drive two brushes. [t]he brushes do not have… the capability to provide power…”. Applicant did not explain 1) what is meant by “merely terminal power sources”, 2) why one would use the brushes to “provide power”, and 3) how the motors differentiate from Applicant’s motors. A motor is defined as a machine powered that supplies motive power. The combination is based on adding the two-motor system of Franco, not a motor with a brush, to Li. Both, Franco’s motors, and Applicant’s motors, are machines that supply motive power. For this reason, the argument is not persuasive.
Applicant further argues Franco dose not show a solution that employs two independent power sources to respectively control different types of modules through driving components. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Franco teaches two independent motors (power source, “two motors are used for driving the brush unit BU”) that can drive different modules (“brush units BU”) through driving components (gears, fig. 3, “brushes B2 and B5 are directly driven by respective motors, while the rotation of the other brushes B1, B3, B4, B6 results from the gear-shaped elements G”). For this reason, the argument is not persuasive.
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(s) 1, 3, 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li CN 112690713 A in view of Espin Franco US 2022/0061610.
Re claim 1, Li discloses an automatic cleaning apparatus, comprising:
a mobile platform 100 configured to automatically move on an operating surface;
a cleaning module 150 disposed on the mobile platform and comprising:
a wet cleaning module 400 configured to clean at least a part of the operation surface by means of wet cleaning;
a lifting and lowering structure connected with the wet cleaning module and configured to enable the wet cleaning module to move vertically relative to the mobile platform [“the cleaning module 150 and the mobile platform 100 is provided with a lifting module”];
a cleaning liquid supplier comprising a clean water pump 4219 and a water tank [“the clean water pump makes the clean water flow out from the clear water tank”], wherein the clean water pump 4219 is configured to pump cleaning liquid from the water tank and supply the cleaning liquid to the wet cleaning module 400;
a driving mechanism [figs. 11, 17-18] comprising a first driving component [4212] and a second driving component [4212’, fig. 13], wherein:
the first driving component [4212] is configured to be capable of providing power for at least one of the wet cleaning module, the lifting and lowering structure and the cleaning liquid module [the term “providing power” can be construed under BRI as transferring power from a motor to another component, in this case, transferring power from motor 4211 to the lifting structure];
the second driving component 4212’ is configured to be capable of providing power [i.e., transferring power from the motor 4211 to the module 400] for at least one of the wet cleaning module 400.
wherein the driving mechanism comprises at least one power structures 4211, connected with the first driving component.
Li does not disclose a second power structure connected to the second driving component for providing driving force.
However, Espin Franco teaches it was known to use one or two motors for the same gear system [¶14, “the brushes B rotate. They may rotate in a continuous rotation. Alternatively, they may regularly reverse the rotation direction. Adjacent brushes B may have opposite rotation directions. While each brush B may be driven by a separate motor, it is alternatively possible that only one or two motors are used for driving the brush unit BU, while the other brushes B are driven by gears, e.g. as shown in FIG. 3, which shows adjacent brushes B having gear-shaped elements G”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the two motor/same gear set system of Espin Franco with the cleaning apparatus of Li, in order to yield the predictable result of rotating the gear set in well-known mechanical arrangements.
Re claim 3, Li further teaches wherein the driving mechanism further comprises: a gear set [fig. 11], connected to the power structure 4211 and configured to output driving force for the first driving component and/or the second driving component.
Re claim 8, Li further teaches wherein the power structure is a motor configured to provide driving force for forward rotation and reverse rotation [“the motor 4211 comprises a forward output mode and a reverse output mode”].
Re claim 9, Li further teaches wherein the power structure is a clean water pump 4219, configured to provide power for the cleaning liquid module and provide cleaning liquid for the wet cleaning module.
Re claims 10-11, Li further teaches wherein the clean water pump is a peristaltic pump [“clean water pump can be…a peristaltic pump”], is meshed with the gear set to provide power for the cleaning liquid module under the driving of the gear set, and provides cleaning liquid for the wet cleaning module. Li does not specifically teach an air pump, however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an air pump since it has been held that a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results, in this case, a water pump, support a conclusion of obviousness.
Re claim 12, Li further teaches wherein the driving mechanism comprises a third driving component 4219, and the first driving component, the second driving component and the third driving component are connected with the wet cleaning module, the lifting and lowering structure and the cleaning liquid module, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 would be allowable if rewritten to include 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 best prior art of Li teaches a motor and clutch system used for forward and reverse direction to operate different elements of the cleaning apparatus. However, the prior art of record does not show or fairly render obvious wherein [the] clutch…provides driving force when the clutch is in reverse-direction engagement with the gear set, and provides no driving force when the clutch is in forward-direction non-engagement with the gear set in combination with the other claim limitations.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Carlos A. Rivera whose telephone number is (571)270-5697. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM -4PM.
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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
C. A. R.
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/C. A. RIVERA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights