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 .
This Office action is in response to amendments filed on 04/13/2026. Claims 1-20 are pending. The previously filed specification objection is withdrawn, as necessitated by the amendments. The previously filed claim objections and 35 USC 112(b) rejections are withdrawn, as necessitated by the amendments. The previous claim interpretation(s) for claims 10 and 12-13 remain in place and a new claim interpretation is presented for claim 20, as necessitated by the amendments.
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 do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) are:
“a locking mechanism including a user-operable locking member…a corresponding locking element…the locking mechanism configured to lock the wet cleaning device on the main body” in claim 20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Figs. 10-13, pp. [0099-0103] disclose the sufficient structure for a locking mechanism includes a locking member with the sufficient structure of a finger and a locking element with the sufficient structure of an opening/groove in which finger inserts into, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 2019/0290089) in view of Xiong (CN111588317), as provided by the Examiner in previous Office action filed on 01/13/2026.
Regarding claim 1, Johnson (US 2019/0290089) discloses an autonomous cleaning robot (item 10; pp. [0036]; figs. 3-4) comprising:
a main body (item 12; pp. [0064]; figs. 3-4) including a lower face (defined as face of main body 12 in view of fig. 4) configured to be oriented towards a surface to be cleaned (lower face of main body 12 is capable of facing towards a surface to be cleaned during use, i.e. hardwood, tile, stone, etc., pp. [0035]; fig. 5),
a wet cleaning device (item 60; figs. 1 and 4-5) including first and second mop supports (items 64; pp. [0071]; fig. 5) each movably mounted relative to the main body (pp. [0071]; mop supports 64 are rotatably mounted relative to main body), and first and second mops removably mounted respectively on the first and second mop supports (pp. [0045] and [0072]; the mops 61 are removably for cleaning or replacement), the first and second mops configured to be in contact with the surface to be cleaned (pp. [0062]; first and second mops 61 are capable of being in contact with the surface to be cleaned during certain modes of operation), and
first and second drive wheels (items 71; pp. [0046]; fig. 4) configured to roll over the surface to be cleaned (pp. [0046]; first and second wheels 71 are capable of rolling over surface to be cleaned in order to driving the robot 10 across the floor) and movably mounted in rotation on the main body respectively about first and second rotation axes (designated in annotated fig. 4 below) which are parallel (rotation axes are colinear, i.e. parallel to one another; similar to applicant’s disclosure, pp. [0078] in instant disclosure),
wherein the first and second mop supports are located behind the first and second rotation axes of the first and second drive wheels (relative to forward motion, i.e. item 17, the first and second mop supports 64 are behind, i.e. rearward, of the rotation axes defined by wheels 71; figs. 3 and 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
491
689
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Johnson Annotated Fig. 4.
Though Johnson discloses circular first and second mop supports and mops configured to be rotated on the surface to aid or improve cleaning during a wet cleaning mode (pp. [0062] and [0076]), Johnson does not explicitly disclose first and second mop supports each movably mounted in translation relative to the main body in a direction of translation, wherein the direction of translation extends parallel to the first and second rotation axes of the first and second drive wheels.
However, Xiong (CN111588317), as provided by the Examiner, teaches an analogous autonomous cleaning robot (item 100; fig. 2; pp. [0007] in NPL) comprising a main body (defined as outer structure of item 100; fig. 2), first and second drive wheels (items 130; pp. [0067]; fig. 2) movably mounted in rotation on the main body about first and second rotation axes (designated in annotated fig. 2 below), a suction unit (pp. [0048]; fig. 1) and a wet cleaning device (items 152, 153; pp. [0048]; fig. 1) including first and second mop supports (items 1522, 1532; fig. 1) each movably mounted in translation (pp. [0049-0050]; defined as synchronous and symmetrical reciprocating motion, i.e. mop supports 1522, 1532 moving in opposite directions and in the same axis; figs. 1-2) relative to the main body in a direction of translation (designated in annotated fig. 2 below as left-right direction), wherein the direction of translation extends parallel to the first and second rotation axes of the drive wheels (pp. [0068]; translation movement defined as left-and-right reciprocating movement relative to a forward direction of robot; fig. 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
417
498
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Xiong Annotated Fig. 2.
Both Johnson and Xiong disclose means for two mop pads to agitate the surface to be cleaned to improve the cleaning effect of the autonomous cleaning robot (pp. [0062], [0076] in Johnson; pp. [0067] in Xiong). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the circular first and second mop supports and pads rotatably moving relative to the main body, as disclosed in Johnson, with the first and second mop supports and pads translationally moving relative to the main body, as taught in Xiong, to achieve the predictable result of agitating, i.e. scrubbing, the surface and removing stubborn stains from the surface.
Further, though the embodiment of figs. 1-5 in Johnson discloses a receptacle for collecting dirt and debris (item 44R; fig. 5), figs. 1-5 embodiment does not explicitly disclose a suction unit housed at least partly in the main body and configured to generate an air flow through a suction opening provided in a front part of the main body and opening into the lower face of the main body.
However, the embodiment of figs. 16-23 in Johnson teach an autonomous cleaning robot (item 410; pp. [0092-0093]; figs. 16-23) comprising a main body (outer structure of item 410) including a lower face (defined as face in contact with surface to be cleaned) and a suction opening (defined as opening below chamber in which brush roll mounts into, i.e. lower opening of chamber 422; fig. 23) provided in a front part of the main body (defined as part of body in which brush roll mounts to, corresponding to front part designated in annotated fig. 5 below) and opening into the lower face of the main body (suction opening extends from brush roll chamber, i.e. item 422, through lower face to open towards bottom surface), and a suction unit (item 438; fig. 18) housed at least partly in the main body (suction unit 438 is housed within main body structure of robot) and configured to generate an air flow through the suction opening (pp. [0105-0106]; suction unit 438 is capable of generating a working airstream through the suction opening into dirt receptacle 444).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cleaning robot, as disclosed in figs. 1-5 embodiment of Johnson, to include a suction unit and suction opening (i.e. opening through which brush roll 41 is mounted in; fig. 5), as taught in figs. 16-23 embodiment of Johnson, in order to assist in pulling debris and excess debris from the brush roll and surface to be cleaned (pp. [0108] in Johnson).
Regarding claim 2, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first and second mop supports are movably mounted relative to each other between a close configuration (Xiong; not explicitly shown; defined as configuration in which mop supports 1522, 1532 are not reciprocated away from each other, i.e. close together) in which the first and second mop supports are close to each other (Xiong; mop supports 1522, 1532 are close to medial line, i.e. designated in annotated fig. 2 above as median longitudinal plane, in which the supports reciprocate away during translational movement), a remote configuration (Xiong; not explicitly shown; defined as configuration when mop supports 1522, 1532 move in synchronous and symmetrical movement from the medial line, i.e. opposite directions from medial line) in which the first and second mop supports are spaced apart from each other (Xiong; not explicitly shown; during reciprocating movement, the mop supports 1522, 1532 move away from each other, i.e. spaced apart).
Regarding claim 3, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first and second mop supports are arranged on either side of a median longitudinal plane (Xiong; designated in annotated fig. 2 above) of the main body (Xiong; mop supports 1522, 1532 are defined on left and right sides of median longitudinal plane).
Regarding claim 4, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, wherein, when the autonomous cleaning robot rests on the surface to be cleaned (defined as position in view of fig. 5), a rear part of the autonomous cleaning robot (designated annotated fig. 5 below; similar to applicant’s disclosure in which rear part of robot is rear part of the main body, pp. [0085] in instant disclosure) is configured to rest on said surface to be cleaned directly by the first and second mops (rear part of cleaning robot 10 rests on surface to be surface directly via first and second mops 61, corresponding to mops modified in from Xiong; fig. 5).
PNG
media_image3.png
379
628
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Johnson Annotated Fig. 5.
Regarding claim 5, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first and second mop supports are positioned relative to the main body such that the first and second mop supports are not intersected by any vertical plane passing through the first and second rotation axes of the first and second drive wheels (rotation axes, as designated in annotated fig. 4 above, and any vertical plane extending from these rotation axes do not intersect any portion of the first and second mop supports 64 and/or mops 61), and such that the first and second mop supports are not located at least partly between two vertical planes passing respectively through the first and second rotation axes of the first and second drive wheels (similarly, first and second mop supports and mops, as modified from Xiong, are located entirely rearward of rotation axes of the drive wheels 71 and thereby, entirely rearward of any vertical plane passing through the rotation axes of the drive wheels; fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a power battery (item 81; pp. [0049]; figs. 3 and 5) configured to electrically power the autonomous cleaning robot (pp. [0049]; power battery 81 electrically powers motor drives 43, 55, 63, 73 which power and drive the cleaning robot 10), the power battery located at least partly above one of the first and second mop supports (designated in annotated fig. 5 above; power battery 18 extends over portion of mop supports, corresponding to mop supports 1522, 1532 in Xiong which are same size and shape of mops).
Regarding claim 7, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, wherein the suction unit is located at least partly above (according to Merriam-Webster, “above” is defined as in or to a higher place) one of the first and second mop supports (as modified from embodiment of figs. 16-23 in Johnson; suction source 438 is within main body disposed above bottom portion of main body therefore, suction source 438 is at a higher position, i.e. partly above, the mop supports).
Regarding claim 8, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, wherein the wet cleaning device is removably mounted relative to the main body (pp. [0072] in Johnson, mop supports 64 and mop holders 61 are detachably to cleaning or replacement; similarly, as modified from Xiong, pp. [0026] and [0064-0065] wet cleaning device is detachable from main body to facilitate maintenance and repair).
Regarding claim 9, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 8, wherein the wet cleaning device is configured to be removed from the main body by a translation movement directed towards a rear of the main body (pp. [0072] in Johnson and pp. [0026] in Xiong; wet cleaning device is detachable from main body and is thereby, capable of being moved in a translation movement towards a rear of the main body, as designated in annotated fig. 5 above, during the detachment process).
Regarding claim 18, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a rotating cleaning brush (item 41; fig. 5) movably mounted in rotation in the main body about a brush rotation axis (designated in annotated fig. 4 above; pp. [0041], defined as horizontal axis across robot 10).
Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 2019/0290089) in view of Xiong (CN111588317), as provided by the Examiner, and further in view of Ebrahimi Afrouzi (US Patent No. 11,864,715).
Regarding claim 10, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 9, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the wet cleaning device comprises first guide means configured to cooperate with second guide means provided on the main body during a mounting of the wet cleaning device on the main body, so as to guide the wet cleaning device in a guide direction.
However, Ebrahimi Afrouzi (US Patent No. 11,864,715) teaches an autonomous cleaning robot (item 412, figs. 5-6) comprising a detachable wet cleaning device (item 400; figs. 4A-6) comprising a first guide means (item 415; fig. 6) configured to cooperate with a second guide means (item 414; fig. 6) provided on a main body (outer structure of item 412; fig. 6) during a mounting of the wet cleaning device on the main body (defined as process in which wet cleaning device 400 is being secured to main body via arrow in fig. 6), so as to guide the wet cleaning device in a guide direction (defined as left-right direction in view of fig. 6 in which first guide means 415 inserts into second guide means 414; fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the autonomous cleaning robot, as disclosed in Johnson as modified by Xiong, to include a first guide means on the wet cleaning device and a second guide means on the main body, as taught in Ebrahimi Afrouzi, in order to efficiently position the wet cleaning device into place during use and efficiently transfer movements from an electric motor positioned within the main body to the wet cleaning device (Ebrahimi Afrouzi; col. 4, ll. 50-53).
Regarding claim 19, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 9, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the wet cleaning device comprises a first guide rib configured to cooperate with a second guide groove provided on the main body during a mounting of the wet cleaning device on the main body, so as to guide the wet cleaning device in a guide direction.
However, Ebrahimi Afrouzi (US Patent No. 11,864,715) teaches an autonomous cleaning robot (item 412, figs. 5-6) comprising a detachable wet cleaning device (item 400; figs. 4A-6) comprising a first guide rib (item 415; fig. 6) configured to cooperate with a second guide groove (item 414; fig. 6) provided on a main body (outer structure of item 412; fig. 6) during a mounting of the wet cleaning device on the main body (defined as process in which wet cleaning device 400 is being secured to main body via arrow in fig. 6), so as to guide the wet cleaning device in a guide direction (defined as left-right direction in view of fig. 6 in which first guide means 415 inserts into second guide means 414; fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the autonomous cleaning robot, as disclosed in Johnson as modified by Xiong, to include a first guide rib on the wet cleaning device and a second guide groove on the main body, as taught in Ebrahimi Afrouzi, in order to efficiently position the wet cleaning device into place during use and efficiently transfer movements from an electric motor positioned within the main body to the wet cleaning device (Ebrahimi Afrouzi; col. 4, ll. 50-53).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 2019/0290089) in view of Xiong (CN111588317), as provided by the Examiner, and further in view of Yang (US 2022/0071470).
Regarding claim 11, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 8. Though Johnson discloses a battery to power and control the devices within the autonomous cleaning robot, Johnson does not explicitly disclose wherein the wet cleaning device comprises a first electrical connector configured to cooperate with a second electrical connector mounted on the main body during a mounting of the wet cleaning device on the main body in a mounting direction which is towards a front of the main body.
However, Yang (US 2022/0071470) teaches an autonomous cleaning robot (figs. 8-9) comprising a detachable wet cleaning device (item 1; figs. 8-9) from a main body (item 9; figs. 8-9) of the robot, and wherein the wet cleaning device comprises a first electrical connector (defined as first electrical connectors, i.e. items 6, on wet cleaning device; fig 2) configured to cooperate with a second electrical connector (defined as second connectors on main body portion; pp. [0067]) mounted on the main body during a mounting of the wet cleaning device (defined as process in which wet cleaning device 1 is being attached to main body 9 and ready for use) on the main body in a mounting direction (defined as direction in which wet cleaning device 1 inserts into main body 9 to secure in place) which is towards a front of the main body (designated in annotated fig. 9 below; corresponding to front of main body in Johnson, i.e. wet cleaning device in Johnson and Xiong are positioned at a rear of main body).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the autonomous cleaning robot, as disclosed in Johnson as modified by Xiong, to include a first and second electrical connector on the wet cleaning device and main body of the robot, as taught in Yang, in order for the autonomous cleaning robot to function as intended and electrically connect the wet cleaning device to the main body, which houses the power of the robot (i.e. battery).
PNG
media_image4.png
560
604
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Yang Annotated Fig. 9.
Claims 12-13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 2019/0290089) in view of Xiong (CN111588317), as provided by the Examiner, and further in view of Xie (US 2021/0045612).
Regarding claim 12, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 8, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising a locking mechanism configured to lock the wet cleaning device on the main body.
However, Xie (US 2021/0045612) teaches an autonomous cleaning robot (item 100; figs. 1-2) comprising a detachable wet cleaning device (item 40; fig. 1) comprising a mop (item 42; fig. 4), wherein the wet cleaning device comprises a locking mechanism (includes items 44, 45; fig. 4) configured to lock the cleaning device on the main body (pp. [0096], when user presses item 45, hook 44 retracts releases from projection within main body to release the wet cleaning device; fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the autonomous cleaning robot, as disclosed in Johnson as modified by Xiong, to include a locking mechanism, as taught in Xie, in order to releasably secure the wet cleaning device onto the main body to function as intended and thereby, allow the wet cleaning device to be released from the main body for maintenance and repair of the wet cleaning device (pp. [0072] in Johnson; and pp. [0026] and [0064-0065] in Xiong).
Regarding claim 13, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 12, wherein the locking mechanism comprises a locking member (Xie; item 45; fig. 4) operable by a user provided on the wet cleaning device (Xie; locking member 45 is intended to be pressed by user; pp. [0096]; fig. 4) , the locking member movably mounted between a locking position (Xie; defined as position when items 44 on engaged with projection on main body and wet cleaning device is secured to main body; pp. [0096]) in which the locking member is configured to cooperate with a locking element (pp. [0096]; not explicitly shown, defined as projection on main body) provided on the main body so as to lock the wet cleaning device to the main body and a release position (Xie; defined as position when user presses locking member 45 and hook 44 is disengaged from locking element, i.e. projection, on main body and wet cleaning device can be released from main body) in which the locking member is configured to release the locking element so as to authorize a removal of the wet cleaning device from the main body (Xie; pp. [0096]; wet cleaning device can be released from main body by pressing the locking member 45 which releases item 44 from locking element).
Regarding claim 20, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 8, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising a locking mechanism including a user-operable locking member on one of the main body or the wet cleaning device and a corresponding locking element on the other of the main body or the wet cleaning device, the locking mechanism being configured to lock the wet cleaning device on the main body.
However, Xie (US 2021/0045612) teaches an autonomous cleaning robot (item 100; figs. 1-2) comprising a detachable wet cleaning device (item 40; fig. 1) comprising a mop (item 42; fig. 4), wherein the wet cleaning device comprises a locking mechanism (includes items 44, 45; fig. 4) including a user-operable locking member (pp. [0096]; pressing portion 45 is activated by the user) on the wet cleaning device (fig. 4) and a corresponding locking element (pp. [0096]; locking element defined as projection on main body in which hook 44 engages) on the main body (not explicitly shown, pp. [0096]), the locking mechanism being configured to lock the wet cleaning device on the main body (pp. [0096], when user presses item 45, hook 44 retracts releases from projection within main body to release the wet cleaning device; fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the autonomous cleaning robot, as disclosed in Johnson as modified by Xiong, to include a user-operable locking mechanism, as taught in Xie, in order to releasably secure the wet cleaning device onto the main body to function as intended and thereby, allow the wet cleaning device to be released from the main body for maintenance and repair of the wet cleaning device (pp. [0072] in Johnson; and pp. [0026] and [0064-0065] in Xiong).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 2019/0290089) in view of Xiong (CN111588317), as provided by the Examiner, Xie (US 2021/0045612), and Zhou (CN 208301603), as provided by the Examiner.
Regarding claim 14, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 13. Though Xie discloses the locking member is displaceable in translation, i.e. pressing direction, in a horizontal direction relative to a horizontal surface, Xie does not explicitly wherein an actuation direction is vertical when the autonomous cleaning robot rests on a horizontal surface.
However, Zhou (CN 208301603), as provided by the Examiner, teaches a wet cleaning device (item 1; fig. 1) detachably connected to an autonomous cleaning robot (pp. [0021]; defined as sweeping robot, not explicitly shown), wherein the wet cleaning device comprises a locking member (item 8; pp. [0021]; fig. 1) displaceable in translation wherein an actuation direction is vertical, i.e. vertical pressing direction, when the wet cleaning device rests on a horizontal surface (pp. [0021]; locking element 8 is a button configured to be pressed by user in vertical direction).
Both Xie and Zhou teach locking elements configured to be pressed by a user to detach the wet cleaning device from a main body of the robot. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the horizontal pressing portion, as disclosed in Johnson as modified by Xie, with the vertical pressing button, as taught in Zhou, to achieve the predictable result of detachably connecting the wet cleaning device from the main body for maintenance and repair.
Claim 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson (US 2019/0290089) in view of Xiong (CN111588317), as provided by the Examiner, and further in view of Li (US 2024/0122436).
Regarding claim 15, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1, wherein the autonomous cleaning robot comprises a cleaning liquid reservoir (item 51; pp. 0042]; fig. 5).
Though Johnson suggests the autonomous cleaning robot can include a fluid distributor is the form of one more spray nozzles with an orifice of sufficient size (pp. [0042]), i.e. plurality of liquid outlet orifices, Johnson does not explicitly disclose wherein the wet cleaning device explicitly includes a plurality of liquid outlet orifices configured to be connected to the cleaning liquid reservoir and configured to supply cleaning liquid to the first and second mops mounted on the first and second mop supports, the liquid outlet orifices located in front of the first and second mop supports.
However, Li (US 2024/0122436) teaches an autonomous cleaning robot (fig. 1) comprising a main body (outer structure of item 100; figs. 1-2), a suction unit (via item 151; pp. [0064]; fig. 2), a cleaning liquid reservoir (pp. [0079]; defined as liquid container), and a wet cleaning device (item 400; pp. [0070]; figs. 2 and 9-10) including a mop support (item 411; fig. 9), a mop (item 412; fig. 9) movably mounted in translation relative to the main body (pp. [0082]; item 412 conducts reciprocating movement along surface to be cleaned), and a lifting device (item 420; fig. 9) including a plurality of liquid outlet orifices (pp. [0106], liquid outlet device 4217 may be several discontinuous openings, i.e. plurality of outlet orifices) configured to be fluidly connected to the cleaning liquid reservoir (pp. [0106]; item 4217 connected to cleaning liquid outlet of liquid container, i.e. reservoir) and configured to supply cleaning liquid to the mop mounted on the mop support (pp. [0106-0109]; item 4217 is capable of supplying cleaning fluid to surface to be cleaned which indirectly supplies liquid to mop which scrubs liquid onto surface to clean), the liquid outlet orifices located in front of the mop support (relative to a front direction, i.e. downward in view of fig. 2, the liquid outlet orifices are closer to the front than the mop supports; figs. 2 and 9).
Both Johnson and Li disclose means to raise and lower the mop supports and mop pads (pp. [0074-0075], fig. 6 in Johnson). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the lifting means, as disclosed in Johnson, with the lifting ramp and surface with a plurality of liquid orifices directly next to the mop and mop support, as taught in Li, to achieve the predictable result of lifting the mop off the floor surface whenever the robot comes to a complete stop and/or changes cleaning modes.
PNG
media_image5.png
473
733
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Li Annotated Fig. 2.
Regarding claim 16, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 1. Though Johnson discloses a lifting means to raise the mopping assembly off of the floor surface (pp. [0074-0075]; fig. 6), Johnson does not explicitly disclose comprising a lifting ramp extending parallel to the first and second rotation axes of the first and second drive wheels and located at a front of the first and second mop supports, the lifting ramp comprising a lifting surface oriented towards the surface to be cleaned and inclined backwards and downwards, the lifting surface configured to cause a lifting of a rear part of the main body when an obstacle, presenting itself frontally to the autonomous cleaning robot during a forward displacement of the main body, comes into contact with said lifting surface and slides on said lifting surface.
However, Li (US 2024/0122436) teaches an autonomous cleaning robot (fig. 1) comprising a main body (outer structure of item 100; figs. 1-2), a suction unit (via item 151; pp. [0064]; fig. 2), and a wet cleaning device (item 400; pp. [0070]; figs. 2 and 9-10) including a mop support (item 411; fig. 9), a mop (item 412; fig. 9) movably mounted in translation relative to the main body (pp. [0082]; item 412 conducts reciprocating movement along surface to be cleaned), and a lifting device (item 420; fig. 9) comprising a lifting ramp (Li; item 421; figs. 9-10) extending parallel to the first and second rotation axes of the first and second drive wheels (Li; length of lifting ramp 421 extends parallel to rotation axes of drive wheels) and located at a front of the first and second mop supports (Li; portion of lifting ramp 421 is position closer to a front of mop supports, i.e. along the forward direction; designated in annotated fig. 2 above),
the lifting ramp comprising a lifting surface (Li; designated in annotated fig. 9 below by gray highlighted area) oriented towards the surface to be cleaned (when in use, lifting surface is positioned on the surface to be cleaned, i.e. oriented towards) and inclined backwards and downwards (Li; designated in annotated fig. 9 below; at least a portion of the lifting surface is inclined downwards and backwards, i.e. towards the rear which corresponds to direction opposite the forward direction in view of annotated fig. 2 above), the lifting surface configured to cause a lifting of a rear part of the main body (defined as part of main body which includes wet cleaning device, i.e. mop supports and mops; similar to applicant’s disclosure) when an obstacle, presenting frontally to the autonomous cleaning robot during a forward displacement of the main body (defined as forward direction, as designated in annotated fig. 2 of Li above), comes into contact with said lifting surface and slides on said lifting surface (Li; lifting surface is capable of lifting, i.e. raising, when obstacle is encountered).
Both Johnson and Li disclose means to raise and lower the mop supports and mop pads. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the lifting means, as disclosed in Johnson, with the lifting ramp and inclined lifting surface, as taught in Li, to achieve the predictable result of lifting the mop off the floor surface whenever the robot comes to a complete stop and/or changes cleaning modes.
PNG
media_image6.png
438
842
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Li Annotated Fig. 9.
Regarding claim 17, Johnson as modified discloses the autonomous cleaning robot as claimed in claim 15, further comprising a lifting ramp (Li; item 421; figs. 9-10) extending parallel to the first and second rotation axes of the first and second drive wheels (Li; length of lifting ramp 421 extends parallel to rotation axes of drive wheels) and located at a front of the first and second mop supports (Li; portion of lifting ramp 421 is position closer to a front of mop supports, i.e. along the forward direction; designated in annotated fig. 2 above),
the lifting ramp comprising a lifting surface (Li; designated in annotated fig. 9 above by gray highlighted area) oriented towards the surface to be cleaned (when in use, lifting surface is positioned on the surface to be cleaned, i.e. oriented towards) and inclined backwards and downwards (Li; designated in annotated fig. 9 above; at least a portion of the lifting surface is inclined downwards and backwards, i.e. towards the rear which corresponds to direction opposite the forward direction in view of annotated fig. 2 above), the lifting surface configured to cause a lifting of a rear part of the main body (defined as part of main body which includes wet cleaning device, i.e. mop supports and mops; similar to applicant’s disclosure) when an obstacle, presenting frontally to the autonomous cleaning robot during a forward displacement of the main body (defined as forward direction, as designated in annotated fig. 2 of Li above), comes into contact with said lifting surface and slides on said lifting surface (Li; lifting surface is capable of lifting, i.e. raising, when obstacle is encountered),
wherein the liquid outlet orifices are provided on the lifting ramp and are distributed along the lifting ramp (Li; pp. [0106], liquid outlet device 4217 may be several discontinuous openings, i.e. plurality of outlet orifices, which is included directly next to item 4213 on lifting surface; figs. 9-10).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that the combination of Johnson’s embodiment is improper and Johnson (the primary art of record) teaches away from, not toward, the combination of a rotating mop embodiment and a suction unit embodiment (p. 9 of Remarks), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Though the primary reference discloses an embodiment with a suction unit and a separate embodiment with a mopping unit, merely expressing a general preference for an alternative invention does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage investigation into the robot body having both the suction and mopping unit to perform both functions and therefore, does not teach away.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references and that there is “no reason to discard an effective agitation system for a different, more complex one from an unrelated reference”, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. In this case, both Johnson and Xiong disclose means for two mop pads to agitate the surface to be cleaned to improve the cleaning effect of the cleaning robot; therefore, by substituting the circular first and second mop supports and pads with rotatable agitation means, as disclosed in Johnson, with the first and second mop supports and pads with translational agitation means, as taught in Xiong, the predictable result of agitating, i.e. scrubbing, the surface and removing stubborn stains will be performed. Further, the examiner notes the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art (please refer to MPEPM 2141 and 2143.01). Therefore, by both references, Johnson and Xiong, performing an agitation means on the surface to scrub dirt off the surface, it would be obvious to substitute one agitation means with the other agitation means.
In response to applicant's argument that the proposed combination is technically infeasible since “the combination would require a complete and non-obvious reconstruction of the Johnson robot” (p. 10 of Remarks), the Examiner respectfully disagrees. A person of ordinary skill in the art is also a person of ordinary creativity, not an automaton and in many cases a person of ordinary skill will be able to fit teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle (refer to MPEP 2143.03). Therefore, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art (please refer to MPEP 2141 and 2143.01). For this reason, the rejection involving the combination of Johnson in view of Xiong remains in place.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xing (US 2022/0296068) discloses a mopping mechanism with mopping plate movably mountable to a main body of a cleaning robot.
Ueda (US 2003/0172480) discloses a cleaning robot comprising a main body, a suction unit, a wet cleaning device including first and second mop supports movably mounted in translation relative to the main body in a direction of translation, and first and second drive wheels.
Xing (CN212879154), as provided by the Examiner, discloses a cleaning robot comprising a main body and a mopping mechanism including first and second mop supports movably mounted in translation relative to the main body.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIDNEY D FULL whose telephone number is (571)272-6996. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00a.m.-2:30p.m..
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.
/SIDNEY D FULL/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights