The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means”, “step”, or a generic placeholder but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “valve component” in Claims 2, 16, and 17, “elastic component” in Claims 2 and 17, “automatic cleaning apparatus” in Claims 7-11 and 18-20, “stepped structure” in Claim 12, and “cleaning module” in Claim 18.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bo CN 209564073 U (hereafter Bo).
Regarding Claim 1, Bo anticipates:
1. (Original) A dust box (dust box 202), comprising:
a dust box body (body of dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9 below), comprising a bottom wall (labeled in attached Figure 8 below) and sidewalls (labeled in attached Figure 8 below) disposed around edges of the bottom wall (shown in attached Figure 8 below), wherein the sidewalls extend from the bottom wall away from the bottom wall (shown in attached Figure 8 below), the bottom wall and the sidewalls define an accommodation space (cavity space inside dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9); and
wherein the sidewall is defined with a first through hole (dust inlet 220), and the first through hole is a pathway for garbage to enter (enter to robot cleaning operation) or move out of the accommodation space, a check valve assembly (assembly comprising valve 204, valve spring 205, valve shaft 206, and fixing pipe 207 best shown in Figures 10 and 12 below) is disposed on the sidewall of the dust box (shown in attached Figure 8 below), and
the check valve assembly is biased (by valve spring 205) in a closed state (shown in attached Figure 8 below), and in response to an external acting force (suction force applied to face of valve 204) applied to the check valve assembly being greater than a threshold (opens valve 204 to position shown in Figure 9), the check valve assembly is switched from the closed state to an open state (Step 3.2 - shown in attached Figure 9 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
934
1657
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Bo anticipates:
2. (Original) The dust box according to claim 1, wherein the check valve assembly (valve 204 and valve shaft 206) comprises:
a second through hole (dust inlet end 2031, labeled in attached Figure 8 above) defined on the sidewall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above);
a valve component (valve 204 and valve shaft 206), wherein the valve component is configured to abut against an edge (sealing ring 222) of the second through hole to close the second through hole in response to the check valve assembly (assembly comprising valve 204, valve spring 205, valve shaft 206, and fixing pipe 207 best shown in Figures 10 and 12 above) being in the closed state (shown in Figures 8 and 12 above); and the valve component is configured to be separated from at least a portion of the edge of the second through hole in response to the check valve assembly being in the open state (shown in Figure 9 above), such that an airflow enters the accommodation space via the second through hole (suction airflow created by dust suction fan 107, airflow shown in Figure 9 above); and
an elastic component (valve spring 205) connected to the valve component, and configured to bias the valve component to a position where the second through hole is closed (shown in Figures 8 and 12 above).
Regarding Claim 6, Bo anticipates:
6. (Original) The dust box according to claim 1, further comprising: a dust box cover (box cover 214), wherein the dust box cover matches the dust box body (body of dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9 above) and is configured to cover a top of the accommodation space (cavity space inside dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9 above).
Regarding Claim 16, Bo anticipates:
16. (New) The dust box according to claim 2, wherein the valve component (valve 204 and valve shaft 206) comprises a plate-like structure (valve 204) and a pivoting portion (valve shaft 206) connected to the plate-like structure (best shown in Figures 10 and 11).
Regarding Claim 17, Bo anticipates:
17. (New) The dust box according to claim 16, wherein the elastic component (valve spring 205) is a spring, and the elastic component is connected with the pivoting portion (valve shaft 206)(best shown in Figures 10 and 11), and configured to bias the valve component (valve 204 and valve shaft 206) to a position where the second through hole (dust inlet end 2031, labeled in attached Figure 8 above) is closed (shown in Figures 8 and 12 above).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bo CN 209564073 U (hereafter Bo).
Regarding Claim 3, Bo teaches:
3. (Currently Amended) The dust box according to claim 2, wherein the sidewalls (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) comprise a first sidewall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) and a second sidewall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) adjacent to the first sidewall (see discussion below), wherein the first through hole (dust inlet 220) is defined on the first sidewall (shown in attached Figure 8 above), and configured as the pathway for the garbage to enter (enter during robot cleaning operation) or move out of the accommodation space (cavity of dust box 202), and the check valve assembly (assembly comprising valve 204, valve spring 205, valve shaft 206, and fixing pipe 207 best shown in Figures 10 and 12 above) is disposed on the second sidewall (shown in attached Figure 8 above).
Bo teaches a first and second sidewall as labeled in attached Figure 8 above. Bo teaches the second sidewall (and second through hole) is opposite the first sidewall (and first through hole) as shown. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the dust box 202 will operate equally well if either of the first or second through holes were modified to be through first and second sidewalls that are adjacent and therefore perhaps perpendicular without reducing the performance of the device. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the through holes, and therefore the sidewalls, to be located in adjacent sidewalls since the location is merely due to the arrangement of duct paths within the cleaning robot and since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claims 4, 5, 7-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bo CN 209564073 U (hereafter Bo) in view of Gao et al. CN 112401765 A (hereafter Gao et al. ).
Regarding Claim 4, Bo teaches:
4. (Original) The dust box according to claim 3, further comprising:
a filter screen assembly (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) detachably accommodated (obviously removable for replacement and manually emptying cavity of dust box 202) in the accommodation space (cavity space inside dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9),
wherein the filter screen assembly divides the accommodation space into a first accommodation space (cavity below labeled filter screen shown in Figures 8 and 9) and a second accommodation space (cavity above labeled filter screen shown in Figures 8 and 9), and the first accommodation space and the second accommodation space are disposed sequentially away from the bottom wall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above); and
the first through hole (dust inlet 220) and the second through hole (dust inlet end 2031, labeled in attached Figure 8 above) are both located between the filter screen assembly and the bottom wall (shown in attached Figure 8 above).
Bo discloses a cleaning robot with a dust box 202 configured with a check valve that allows for automated dust removal into a docking station. Bo was focused on the disclosing the features of the dust box that allow the emptying of dust and neglected identifying critical features of the device. For example, Bo does not disclose a fan, or connection thereto, which is necessary to create a vacuum to draw dust into the dust box. Additionally, Bo does not disclose a method, such as a filter, to separate the dust from the air stream. In other words, the Bo dust box 202 must include a filter and an outlet connected to the suction side of a fan in order to operate as disclosed. The reference Gao et al. discloses a dust box for a cleaning robot. Gao et al. discloses a dust box 101 with a filter screen 102 and an air outlet shown in Figure 4 that connects to the suction side of fan 100. As best shown in Figure 4 the filter divides the dust box 101 into a bottom cavity that stores the dust and a top “clean” cavity that flows into the air outlet in a sidewall of the box to the fan 100. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Bo device, if necessary, to apply a similar structure of the filter and air outlet as taught by the Gao et al. device. That being said, it seems that Bo actually includes an unlabeled filter screen as identified in Figure 8 above. Bo shows the dust box 202 removed from the device in Figure 3. Therefore, it would have been obvious to locate the dust box air outlet on the face that attaches to the robot body. Bo does not show any features that can specifically be identified as an air outlet, so, the most obvious location has been labeled in the Figures 3 and 8 above.
Regarding Claim 5, Bo teaches:
5. (Original) The dust box according to claim 4, wherein the sidewalls (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) further comprise a third sidewall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) defined with an air outlet (labeled in attached Figure 8 above); the air outlet is disposed at a side of the filter screen assembly (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) away from the bottom wall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above); and the second sidewall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) is opposite to the third sidewall (shown in attached Figure 8 above).
Regarding Claim 7, Bo teaches:
7. (Original) An automatic cleaning apparatus, comprising: the dust box according to claim 5;
a first fan (as presented in Claim 4, it would have been obvious that the Bo cleaning robot includes an internal fan to operate as a vacuum as disclosed) connected to the air outlet (labeled in attached Figure 8 above), wherein the first fan is configured to extract an airflow from the accommodation space (cavity space inside dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9) via the air outlet (necessary to create suction airflow into the dust box); and
a ventilation port (suction opening into brush area of cleaning robot as shown in Figure 7) communicated with the first through hole (dust inlet 220) to provide a pathway for the garbage to enter (selected) or move out (not selected) of the automatic cleaning apparatus (cleaning robot 200).
Regarding Claim 8, Bo teaches:
8. (Currently Amended) The automatic cleaning apparatus according to claim 7, wherein in response to the automatic cleaning apparatus (cleaning robot 200) being in a cleaning work mode, the first fan (as presented in Claim 4, it would have been obvious that the Bo cleaning robot includes an internal fan to operate as a vacuum as disclosed) generates the external acting force (suction force applied to face of valve 204) applied to the check valve assembly (assembly comprising valve 204, valve spring 205, valve shaft 206, and fixing pipe 207 best shown in Figures 10 and 12 below), and the external acting force is less than the threshold (suction force applied by the fan to the inside of the dust box would not be able to open the check valve assembly as designed by Bo – in fact the suction force will draw the valve 204 in the direction opposite the opening direction).
Regarding Claim 9, Bo teaches:
9. (Currently Amended) A dust collection pile (maintenance station 100), wherein the dust collection pile is configured to collect the garbage in the dust box (dust box 202) of the automatic cleaning apparatus (cleaning robot 200) according to claim 7, and the dust collection pile comprises:
a dust-collection air path provided with an inlet (labeled as 103 in Figure 15 that connects to suction tube 106 and opening of cleaning robot 200 at valve 204) and an outlet (outlet of dust suction fan 107), wherein the inlet of the dust-collection air path is configured to be communicated with the ventilation port (suction opening into brush area of cleaning robot as shown in Figure 7 – fluid communication through valve 204 (second through hole) and dust inlet 220 (first through hole)) when the automatic cleaning apparatus is connected to the dust collection pile to carry out a dust collection operation (docked for removal of dust from dust box 202);
a dust-collection container (bag 105 and bag housing box 104) provided with an air inlet (opening connected to suction tube 106) and an air outlet (through permeable bag wall and connection into dust suction fan 107), wherein the air inlet of the dust-collection container is communicated with the outlet of the dust-collection air path (best shown in Figures 17 and 18), and the dust-collection container is configured to accommodate the garbage from the dust box of the automatic cleaning apparatus (best shown in Figure 18); and
a second fan (dust suction fan 107) connected to the air outlet of the dust-collection container to extract the airflow from the accommodation space via the first through hole (air will enter dust box 202 via the dust inlet 220 (first through hole) entraining dust and moving it through the valve 204 assembly to the bag 105 as shown in Figure 18).
Regarding Claim 10, Bo teaches:
10. (Currently Amended) The dust collection pile according to claim 9, wherein in response to the automatic cleaning apparatus (cleaning robot 200) being in a dust exhaust mode (attached to maintenance station 100), the first fan (as presented in Claim 4, it would have been obvious that the Bo cleaning robot includes an internal fan to operate as a vacuum as disclosed) and the second fan (dust suction fan 107 – turns on during collection operation when cleaning robot is mounted on maintenance station 100 to open valve 204)
Regarding Claim 11, Bo teaches:
11. (Original) The dust collection pile according to claim 10, wherein a working power of the first fan (as presented in Claim 4, it would have been obvious that the Bo cleaning robot includes an internal fan to operate as a vacuum as disclosed) when the automatic cleaning apparatus (cleaning robot 200) is in the dust exhaust mode is less than or equal to a working power of the first fan when the automatic cleaning apparatus is in a cleaning work mode (in order to operate as shown in Figure 9, the second fan is capable of creating a suction force on the surface of valve 204 greater than the suction force created by the internal fan of the robot cleaner whether it is operating at the normal speed or turned off).
Regarding Claim 12, Bo teaches:
12. (New) The dust box according to claim 4, wherein the filter screen assembly (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) is a rectangular shaped plate (shown in attached Figure 8 above, also taught by Gao et al. ), an inner wall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) of the sidewall of the dust box body is provided with a stepped structure (shown in attached Figure 8 above), and the stepped structure is configured to support the filter screen assembly (shown in attached Figure 8 above).
Regarding Claim 13, Bo teaches:
13. (New) The dust box according to claim 4, wherein an orthographic projection of the first accommodation space on the first sidewall (perpendicular projection from cited first sidewall toward first accommodation space as labeled in Figure 8 above) covers the first through hole (labeled in attached Figure 8 above), and an orthographic projection of the first accommodation space on the second sidewall (perpendicular projection from cited second sidewall toward first accommodation space as labeled in Figure 8 above) covers the second through hole (labeled in attached Figure 8 above).
Regarding Claim 14, Bo teaches:
14. (New) The dust box according to claim 5, wherein an orthographic projection of the second accommodation space on the third sidewall (perpendicular projection from cited third sidewall toward second accommodation space as labeled in Figure 8 above) covers the air outlet (labeled in attached Figure 8 above).
Regarding Claim 15, Bo teaches:
15. (New) The dust box according to claim 6, wherein the dust box cover (box cover 214) is pivotally connected (see discussion below) to the sidewall (labeled in attached Figure 8 above) of the dust box body (body of dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9 above).
Bo discloses a manually opening box cover 214, however, he does not specifically identify the box cover as being pivotally connected. The reference Gao et al. discloses a dust box 101 that, as best shown in Figure 5, includes a pivotally connected cover that provides access to the filter 102. Therefore, since the Bo device cover is manually operable, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the box cover 214 of the Bo device to be pivotally connected as taught by Gao et al. with the motivation to allow opening without totally disconnecting the cover from the robot body.
Regarding Claim 18, Bo teaches:
18. (New) The automatic cleaning apparatus according to claim 7, further comprising a cleaning module (side brushes 218 and agitator brush shown in Figure 7) configured to clean at least a portion of a support surface (floor) when the automatic cleaning apparatus (sweeping robot 200) moves on the support surface, wherein the dust box (dust box 202) is communicated with the cleaning module (fluid communication allows debris collected by sweeping robot to be collected in dust box).
Regarding Claim 19, Bo teaches:
19. (New) The automatic cleaning apparatus according to claim 18, wherein the support surface is ground (floor).
Regarding Claim 20, Bo teaches:
20. (New) The automatic cleaning apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the dust box comprises a dust box cover (box cover 214), wherein the dust box cover matches the dust box body (body of dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9 above) and is configured to cover a top of the accommodation space (cavity space inside dust box 202 shown in Figures 8 and 9 above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in form PTO-892 Notice of References Cited. Specifically, the prior art references include pertinent disclosures of robotic vacuum cleaners with automatic emptying capability.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30am-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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached on (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.
/MARC CARLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723