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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species 2, figure 8, in the reply filed on 3/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 5 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/27/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the water diversion valve in combination with the water outlet device of claims 7 and 11-13 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The water outlet device is clearly shown and the diversion valve is clearly show, but what is not shown is these two elements in the same device. This is required by claims 7 and 11-13. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 1, in the terms “at least one water inlets” and “at least one second water intents,” the word “inlets” should be changed to “inlet”. This issue is also found in a few dependent claims as well. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 10 is 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.
Regarding claim 10, it is unclear what is meant by the term “intelligent closestool.” Secondly, It is unclear how a closestool can be intelligent. Nothing in claim 10 or claim 1 have provide any structure or function that would make the closestool intelligent.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 7, 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by Rong (2019/0283048).
Regarding claim 1, Rong shows a water outlet device (250), comprising: a core (252), wherein the core comprises a mixing chamber (inside 252), at least one first water inlet (246, 258), at least one second water inlet (254), and a water outlet (260), wherein the water outlet connects with the mixing chamber (fig 6); wherein a tangential direction of the mixing chamber, a radial direction of the mixing chamber, and an axial direction of the mixing chamber are defined (figure 6, the mixing chamber has all those directions); the at least one first water inlet are disposed in the mixing chamber along the tangential direction (fig 6) so that a water flow entering the mixing chamber from the at least one first water inlet is capable of forming a vortex; and the at least one second water inlets are disposed in the mixing chamber along the axial direction (fig 6) so that a water flow entering the mixing chamber from the at least one second water inlet is capable of forming a stable water flow; and the water outlet is capable of spraying water flows in different states by adjusting a water intake ratio of the at least one first water inlet and the at least one second water inlet (fig 7a-7c).
Regarding claim 2, wherein a centerline of the water outlet coincides with an axis of the mixing chamber (fig 6).
Regarding claim 6, wherein an inner wall surface of the mixing chamber is an arc-shaped curved surface, and a shape of the arc-shaped curved surface is a truncated cone, a cone, an ellipsoid, or a cylinder (fig 6 shows a cylinder shaped mixing chamber).
Regarding claims 7 and 11, further comprising a water diversion valve (270), wherein the water diversion valve is configured to enable the water flow to selectively enter at least one of: the at least one first water inlets, or the at least one second water inlets (fig 6)
Regarding claim 10, Rong shows an intelligent closestool (the shower head 100 is being considered a closestool because it have be used as one), comprising the water outlet device of claim 1.
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) 3 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rong (2019/0283048) in view of Tilton et al. (2007/0018017)
Regarding claim 3, Rong shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein a cross-sectional area of the mixing chamber closer to the water outlet gradually decreases.
However, Tilton et al. teaches a very similar device where a cross-sectional area of the mixing chamber closer to the water outlet gradually decreases (165, fig 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to have the cross section of the mixing chamber of Rong gradually decrease towards the outlet, in order to increase flow velocity towards the outlet of the mixing chamber.
Regarding claim 12, further comprising a water diversion valve (270), wherein the water diversion valve is configured to enable the water flow to selectively enter at least one of: the at least one first water inlets, or the at least one second water inlets (fig 6)
Claim(s) 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rong (2019/0283048).
Regarding claim 4, Rong shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1, but fails to show wherein an aperture of the water outlet is between 1 mm and 2 mm; or a flow area of the water outlet is between 0.8 mm2 and 3 mm2.
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 device of Rong to so that the an aperture of the water outlet is between 1 mm and 2 mm; or a flow area of the water outlet is between 0.8 mm2 and 3 mm2, since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 77 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984).
In this case, the device of Rong would not operate differently with the aperture of the water outlet being between 1 mm and 2 mm; or a flow area of the water outlet being between 0.8 mm2 and 3 mm2. , since the nozzle of Rong and the claimed nozzle are identical in every other way and changing the proportion of the proximal end will not affect the function of the nozzle. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality in the claimed range.
Regarding claim 13, further comprising a water diversion valve (270), wherein the water diversion valve is configured to enable the water flow to selectively enter at least one of: the at least one first water inlets, or the at least one second water inlets (fig 6).
Claim(s) 8, 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rong (2019/0283048) in view of Hamilton (1,968,391)
Regarding claims 8, 15 and 17, Rong and Rong as modified above, shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claims 7, 11 and 13 respectively, but fails to disclose that the water diversion valve comprises: a valve seat comprising a first water diversion hole and a second water diversion hole, wherein the first water diversion hole connects with the at least one first water inlets, and the second water diversion hole connects with the at least one second water inlets; and a moving member movably connected to the valve seat and comprising a third water diversion hole, wherein the third water diversion hole is capable of connecting with a water supply pipe; wherein when the moving member moves relative to the valve seat, the third water diversion hole selectively corresponds to at least one of: the first water diversion hole, or the second water diversion hole.
Hamilton shows a diversion valve that includes a valve seat (18) comprising a first water diversion hole (inlet to one of 19) and a second water diversion hole (inlet to the other 19), wherein the first water diversion hole connects with the at least one first water inlet (19), and the second water diversion hole connects with the at least one second water inlet (the other 19); and a moving member (20) movably connected to the valve seat and comprising a third water diversion hole (21), wherein the third water diversion hole is capable of connecting with a water supply pipe (5); wherein when the moving member moves relative to the valve seat, the third water diversion hole selectively corresponds to at least one of: the first water diversion hole, or the second water diversion hole (pane 1, lines 85-90).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use the diversion valve of Hamilton in place of the diversion valve of Rong, in order to be able to easily connect each the first and second inlets to the fluid supply by simply rotating one part relative to another.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rong (2019/0283048) as modified by Tilton et al. (2007/0018017) above, further in view of Hamilton (1,968,391)
Regarding claim 16, Rong as modified above, shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 12, but fails to disclose that the water diversion valve comprises: a valve seat comprising a first water diversion hole and a second water diversion hole, wherein the first water diversion hole connects with the at least one first water inlets, and the second water diversion hole connects with the at least one second water inlets; and a moving member movably connected to the valve seat and comprising a third water diversion hole, wherein the third water diversion hole is capable of connecting with a water supply pipe; wherein when the moving member moves relative to the valve seat, the third water diversion hole selectively corresponds to at least one of: the first water diversion hole, or the second water diversion hole.
Hamilton shows a diversion valve that includes a valve seat (18) comprising a first water diversion hole (inlet to one of 19) and a second water diversion hole (inlet to the other 19), wherein the first water diversion hole connects with the at least one first water inlet (19), and the second water diversion hole connects with the at least one second water inlet (the other 19); and a moving member (20) movably connected to the valve seat and comprising a third water diversion hole (21), wherein the third water diversion hole is capable of connecting with a water supply pipe (5); wherein when the moving member moves relative to the valve seat, the third water diversion hole selectively corresponds to at least one of: the first water diversion hole, or the second water diversion hole (pane 1, lines 85-90).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use the diversion valve of Hamilton in place of the diversion valve of Rong as modified above, in order to be able to easily connect each the first and second inlets to the fluid supply by simply rotating one part relative to another.
Claim(s) 9, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rong (2019/0283048) as modified by Hamilton (1,968,391) above, further in view of Roderick (1,120,975).
Regarding claims 9, 18 and 20 Rong as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claims 8, 15 and 17 respectfully, including wherein the valve seat and the moving member are both disc-shaped and rotatably stacked on each other (Hamilton), the first water diversion hole and the second water diversion hole extend along a circumferential direction of the valve seat and are arranged at intervals (Hamilton); and the third water diversion hole extends along a circumferential direction of the moving member (Hamilton).
But fails to disclose the first water diversion hole, the second water diversion hole, and the third water diversion hole are all waist-shaped holes.
Roderick teaches waste shaped holes in a rotary diversion valve (fig 2-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to make the holes in the diversion valve waist shaped, in order to allow more fluid to flow through them per unit to time compared to round holes of the same diameter as the witch of the waist shaped holes.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rong (2019/0283048) as modified by Tilton et al. (2007/0018017) and Hamilton (1,968,391) above, further in view of Roderick (1,120,975).
Regarding claim 19 Rong as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 16 respectfully, including wherein the valve seat and the moving member are both disc-shaped and rotatably stacked on each other (Hamilton), the first water diversion hole and the second water diversion hole extend along a circumferential direction of the valve seat and are arranged at intervals (Hamilton); and the third water diversion hole extends along a circumferential direction of the moving member (Hamilton).
But fails to disclose the first water diversion hole, the second water diversion hole, and the third water diversion hole are all waist-shaped holes.
Roderick teaches waste shaped holes in a rotary diversion valve (fig 2-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to make the holes in the diversion valve waist shaped, in order to allow more fluid to flow through them per unit to time compared to round holes of the same diameter as the witch of the waist shaped holes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON J BOECKMANN whose telephone number is (571)272-2708. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/JASON J BOECKMANN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 4/29/2026
Prosecution Insights