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 .
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 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.
Status of Claims
Below is the Final Action on the Merit for claims 1 – 8 and 10 – 21. Claim 9 is cancelled.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 8, 10 and 15 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chavana, Jr. et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0133398 A1) in view of Parr (GB 2420967 A).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Chavana teaches a surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1); comprising: a housing (Fig. 1) including a body (105) and a base (101), the base (101) pivotably coupled to the body (105) and configured to support the body(105) above a cleaning surface (Fig. 1); a recovery tank (recovery tank, 109) coupled to the housing (105; Fig. 1) having an upper portion (Annotated Fig. 7), a lower portion (Annotated Fig. 7), and a recovery tank inlet (701) disposed in the lower portion (Annotated Fig. 7), the recovery tank lower portion (Fig. 7) includes a tank bottom wall (Annotated Fig. 7);
PNG
media_image1.png
680
502
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the base (101) having a suction inlet port (111) in fluid communication with the recovery tank inlet (109; Paragraph [0032]), the suction inlet port (111) defining an inlet axis (Annotated Fig. 1) that extends centrally through the suction inlet port (111); a nozzle (nozzle, 103) removably coupled to the suction inlet port (111) connecting a nozzle inlet (121) to the recovery tank (109; Paragraph [0097]); wherein the suction inlet port (111) is accessible when the nozzle (103) is uncoupled from the base (101; inlet, 121 and passage, 111 are aligned and thus when the nozzle is removed, access to 111 is exposed; Paragraph [0022]); an accessory (1007; Fig. 10) having a hose connector (connector, 1001; Fig. 10) connectable to the suction inlet port (111) when the nozzle is uncoupled from the base, the accessory extending along the inlet axis when coupled (Paragraph [0037]).
PNG
media_image2.png
565
665
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Chavana does not teach the recovery tank inlet is in the tank bottom wall, the suction inlet port extending through the base under the tank bottom wall of the recovery tank.
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 recovery tank of Chavana to further include the recovery tank inlet is in the tank bottom wall, as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Parr, however, teaches the suction inlet port (inlet, 218; Fig. 3) extending through the base (base assembly, 64) under the tank bottom wall of the recovery tank (80; as shown in Fig. 3, 218 is located at an end of nozzle, 174 and assembled with the tank, 80 would extend through the base and under the tank bottom wall of the recovery tank.
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 recovery tank of Chavana to further include the suction inlet port extending through the base under the tank bottom wall of the recovery tank, as taught by Parr, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 2, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the recovery tank (109) is disposed above the inlet axis (Annotated Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) further comprising an agitator (agitator, 203) operably positioned in an agitator chamber (agitator cavity, 211; Fig. 2) having a top opening (with nozzle, 103 as shown in Fig. 5) and a bottom opening (Fig. 2), the agitator (203) configured to engage the cleaning surface through the bottom opening during operation (Paragraph [0043]), and the agitator (203) accessible through the top opening for cleaning when the nozzle is uncoupled (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 4, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the agitator (203) is removable from the agitator chamber (211) through the bottom opening (Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 5, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) further comprising a supply tank (cleaning fluid tank, 107) and a fluid distributor (first fluid coupling, 401 with first fluid output, 107) coupled to the housing (105), the fluid distributor in fluid communication with the supply tank (201) configured to deliver fluid to the cleaning surface (Paragraph [0035])
Regarding Claim 6, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) further comprising a fluid supply port (509) in fluid communication with the supply tank (107; Paragraphs [0029] and [0037]), the accessory (1007) including a fluid coupling (coupler, 1003), wherein the fluid coupling (1003) is connectable to the fluid supply port (509) when the hose connector is connected to the suction inlet port (111; Paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 7, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the fluid supply port (509) is positioned on the base (101) adjacent the suction inlet port (111; Fig. 5)) and below the recovery tank (109).
Regarding Claim 8, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the fluid supply port (509) and the suction inlet port (111) are arranged side by side (Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 10, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the accessory (1007) includes a latch (locking mechanism, 1013) engageable with the base (101) to retain the accessory (1007) when connected (Paragraph [0101; Fig. 10]).
Regarding Claim 15, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the accessory (1007) is in an orientation substantially parallel to the cleaning surface when the hose connector (1001) is connected (hose connector, 1001 is inserted into the suction inlet port (111), which is parallel to the cleaning surface, thus the accessory is orientated substantially parallel to the cleaning surface).
Regarding Claim 16, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the fluid supply port (509) is exposed when the nozzle (103) is uncoupled (Figs. 4 and 5).
Regarding Claim 17, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the accessory (1007) further comprises a protrusion (movable hooks, 1015) positioned to engage a slot adjacent the suction inlet port (recesses or sidewalls surrounding or near first air passage, 111; Paragraph [0101]), the protrusion and slot extending along the inlet axis when the accessory is coupled (Paragraph [0101]).
Regarding Claim 18, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the slot on the suction inlet port is positioned along an inside wall of the suction inlet port (111; (Paragraph [0101]).
Regarding Claim 19, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner of claim 1 as discussed above.
Chavana teaches the protrusions as movable hooks but does not teach wherein the protrusion is a guide rail; however, 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 protrusion of Chavana to further include a guide rail since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known connection on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 20, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) wherein the accessory (1007) includes a seal (1011) around the hose connector (1001} to engage around the suction inlet port when coupled (Paragraph [0101]).
Regarding Claim 21, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner (apparatus, 100; Fig. 1) further comprising an agitator (agitator, 203) operably positioned in an agitator chamber (Fig. 2) having a bottom opening (Fig. 2), the agitator (203) configured to engage the cleaning surface through the bottom opening during operation (Paragraph [0043]), wherein the inlet axis (Annotated Fig. 1) extends above the agitator chamber (Figs. 1 and 2).
Chavana does not teach wherein the inlet axis below the bottom wall of the recovery tank such that the suction inlet port is above the agitator and below the bottom wall of the recovery tank.
Parr, however teaches the inlet axis (Annotated Figs. 1 and 3) extends below the bottom wall (bottom wall of 80) of the recovery tank (80) such that the suction inlet port (218) is above the agitator (brush assembly, 70) and below the bottom wall of the recovery tank (80; Annotated Figs. 1 and 3).
PNG
media_image3.png
732
1115
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 recovery tank of Chavana to further include the inlet axis below the bottom wall of the recovery tank such that the suction inlet port is above the agitator and below the bottom wall of the recovery tank, as taught by Parr, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Claims 11 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chavana, Jr. et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0133398 A1) in view of Parr (GB 2420967 A) and Thorne (U.S. Patent No. 2016/0220080 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner of claim 3 as discussed above.
Chavana further teaches an agitator cover (101a; Fig. 5) positioned between the nozzle (103) and the agitator (203).
Chavana does not explicitly teach wherein the agitator cover is openable.
Thorne, however, teaches wherein the agitator cover (pivotable external cover, 722; Fig. 7B) is openable (Paragraph [0059]; Figs 7A and B).
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 cover of Chavana to further include the agitator cover is openable, a taught by Thorne, to provide a cover that allows for access from a top position or a bottom position, thus having ease in access.
Chavana, as modified by Thorne, would further teach the agitator cover is openable when the nozzle is uncoupled since Chavana teaches the nozzle being uncoupled and Thorne teaches an opening of the agitator cover.
Regarding Claim 12, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner of claim 11 as discussed above.
Chavana does not explicitly teach where the agitator cover is pivotably openable.
Thorne, however, teaches wherein the agitator cover (pivotable external cover, 722; Fig. 7B) is pivotably openable (Paragraph [0059]; Figs 7A and B).
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 cover of Chavana to further include the agitator cover is pivotably openable, a taught by Thorne, to provide a cover that allows for access from a top position or a bottom position, thus having ease in access.
Regarding Claim 13, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner of claim 11 as discussed above.
Chavana does not explicitly teach the agitator cover includes a user-graspable bail handle to move the agitator cover.
Thorne, however, teaches wherein the agitator cover (pivotable external cover, 722; Fig. 7B) includes a user-graspable bail handle (at 764a and b; Fig. 7B) to move the agitator cover (722).
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 cover of Chavana to further include teach the agitator cover includes a user-graspable bail handle to move the agitator cover, a taught by Thorne, to provide a cover that allows for access from a top position or a bottom position, thus having ease in access.
Regarding Claim 14, Chavana, as modified, teaches the surface cleaner of claim 11 as discussed above.
Chavana further teaches the surface cleaner wherein the agitator cover (101a) is positioned over the top opening of the agitator chamber (211; Fig. 5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicants Arguments/Remarks dated March 2, 2026 with respect to the rejection of claim 17 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicants Arguments/Remarks dated March 2, 2026 with respect to the rejection of claims 1 – 8 and 10 – 20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Parr.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am to 3:30pm.
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.
/KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights