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 .
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.
Claims 12 and 13 are 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 12, it is unclear fi the control circuit board of clai12 is the same as in claim 1, or if it is an additional control circuit board.
Claim 13 is rejected for depending from claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9, 11-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munn et al. (8,628,029) in view of Sun et al. (2022/0274123)
Munn et al. shows a hand-held paint sprayer comprising: a housing (20) having a handle (21); a spray head (90); a fan motor (42); and a pressurized chamber (23) disposed within the housing, the pressurized chamber having a receptacle space formed therein (fig 2): - wherein the receptacle space receives at least a portion of the fan motor (fig 2); wherein the pressurized chamber comprises an air inlet (46a) defining a first air flow axis and an air outlet (25) defining a second air flow axis; and wherein the first air flow axis and the second air flow axis intersect approximately orthogonally (fig 2),
But fails to disclose a control circuit board
However, Sun et al. teaches a handheld sprayer that includes a control circuit board (206)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to add the control circuit board of Sun et al. to the sprayer of Munn et al. in order to a control an operation of the brushless motor as taught by Sun et al. [0015].
Regarding claim 2, wherein the air inlet includes a first plane defining a cross sectional area of the air inlet (fig 2), the first plane and the first air flow axis intersect approximately orthogonally (fig 2), and wherein the air outlet includes a second plane defining a cross sectional area of the air outlet, the second plane and the second air flow axis intersect approximately orthogonally (fig 2)
Regarding claim 3, the above combination fails to disclose that the control circuit board is disposed in an aperture of the pressurized chamber
Sun et al shoes the circuit board (206) located in an aperture of a pressurized chamber (16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to locate the circuit board in an aperture of the pressurized chamber in order have the the components in the fan module be fully integrated and concentrated, which reduces and simplifies assembly procedures and reduces the assembly cost (Sun [0072])
Regarding claim 4, the above combination fails to disclose that the pressurized chamber comprises a seal ring, and wherein the seal ring is disposed on an internal side of the pressurized chamber such that the seal ring encircles the aperture.
Seal rings are well known in the art of sprayers and pressurized chambers.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to add a seal to the internal side of the pressurized chamber, encircling the aperture, in order to seal the aperture and keep the chamber pressurized.
Regarding claim 7, a rotation axis of the fan motor is aligned eccentrically to a central axis 10 a central axis of a motor receptacle region of the pressurized chamber (fig 2, the fan motor is aligned with a central axis of the chamber).
Regarding claim 9, wherein a longitudinal axis defined by the handle, and a rotation axis of the fan motor are aligned so as to be approximately parallel to one another (fig 2).
Regarding claim 11, the fan motor comprises an electric drive and a fan (42, 44), the paint sprayer comprises a power accumulator (50); and the handle comprises a coupling for mechanically and electrically coupling the power accumulator (fig 1, 2). and the handle has a first end (top) and a second end (bottom), the first end being connected to the housing and the second end being connected to the coupling (fig 2)
Regarding claim 12, the above combination shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 11, and comprises a control circuit board (Sun et al.) connected to a motor housing (of Munn et al.), wherein the control circuit board is disposed between the fan and the first end of the handle (the circuit board is located in the pressurized chamber so it has to be disposed between the fan and the first end of the handle)
but fails to disclose the electric drive is configured as a BLDC electric drive
the examiner notes that BLDC (brushless direct current) motors are well known int her art.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use a BLDC motor to drive the fan in order to make the fan spin more efficiently.
Regarding claim 13, the fan is driven by the electric drive comprises a fan housing (40, 46) having an intake duct and an exhaust duct (fig 2) a flow of induction air passes through the intake duct in a direction of a rotation axis of the electric drive (fig 2); a flow of exhaust air passes through the exhaust duct in the direction of the rotation axis of the electric drive, the fan housing has an annular cross section (fig 2); and the fan comprises a radial fan wheel (44) which is received in the fan housing (fig 2)
Regarding claim 14, wherein the pressurized chamber is received in an interior space of the housing, and wherein a cavity (26) is formed between the pressurized chamber and the housing (fig 2).
Regarding claim 15, wherein a cavity is formed as a region of the air inlet of the pressurized chamber (fig 2), and wherein the cavity is positioned above the pressurized chamber, or above and behind the pressurized chamber (fig 2, above 44), and wherein the housing, in a region of the cavity which lies behind the pressurized chamber when viewed in the spraying direction, comprises an air inlet mesh 46a having air inlet slots (46a).
Regarding claim 17, wherein the control circuit board is connected to the motor housing of the electric drive of the fan motor (this has to be true since they are in the same spray gun housing).
Regarding claim 18, the above combination shows A hand-held paint sprayer comprising: a housing (20); a handle (21) coupled to the housing; a fan housing (40) including an electric drive (42) and a fan (44); a control circuit board (206, Sun); a pressurized chamber (23) disposed within the housing, the pressurized chamber having a receptacle space formed therein that receives at least a portion of the fan housing (fig 2); an air inlet formed within the pressurized chamber (46a), the air inlet defining a first air flow axis; and an air outlet (25) formed within the pressurized chamber, the air outlet defining a second air flow axis; wherein the first air flow axis and the second air flow axis intersect approximately orthogonally (fig 2);
But fails to disclose the air inlet is disposed on a first side of the pressurized chamber and the control circuit board is disposed on a second side of the pressurized chamber, the first side being opposite to the second side.
Sun et al. teaches the air inlet is disposed on a first side of the pressurized chamber and the control circuit board is disposed on a second side of the pressurized chamber, the first side being opposite to the second side (fig 2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to locate the circuit board on a second side of the pressurized chamber, opposite to the air intake, in order to have the components fully integrated and concentrated, which reduces and simplifies assembly procedures and reduces the assembly cost (Sun [0072]).
Regarding claim 19, the above combination shows a hand-held paint sprayer comprising: a housing (20); a handle (21) coupled to the housing; a fan housing (40) including an electric drive (42) and a fan (44); a control circuit board (206 Sun) connected to the fan housing (the circuit board must connected to the fan housing because it is part of the spray gun), a pressurized chamber (23) disposed within the housing, the pressurized chamber having a receptacle space formed therein that receives at least a portion of the fan housing (fig 2); an air inlet (46a) formed within the pressurized chamber, the air inlet defining a first air flow axis; and an air outlet (25) formed within the pressurized chamber, the air outlet defining a second air flow axis; wherein the first air flow axis and the second air flow axis intersect approximately orthogonally (fig 2);
But fails to disclose wherein the control circuit board is positioned between the handle and the fan; and wherein the air inlet is disposed on a first side of the pressurized chamber and the control circuit board is disposed on a second side of the pressurized chamber, the first side being opposite to the second side.
Sun et al. teaches the control circuit board is positioned between the handle and the fan (fig 2); the air inlet is disposed on a first side of the pressurized chamber and the control circuit board is disposed on a second side of the pressurized chamber, the first side being opposite to the second side (fig 2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to locate the circuit board on a second side of the pressurized chamber between the handle and the fan, opposite to the air intake, in order to have the components fully integrated and concentrated, which reduces the assembly cost (Sun [0072]).
Regarding claim 20, wherein the pressurized chamber includes an upper shell (46) and a lower shell (20), wherein the upper shell is coupled to the lower shell, and wherein the control circuit board is disposed within the lower shell (it has to because the upper shell is full with the fan).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Munn et al. (8,628,029) as modified by Sun et al. (2022/0274123) above, further in view of Krayer (10,293,351)
Regarding claim 16, Munn et al. as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 15, but fails to disclose an air filter is disposed between the pressurized chamber and the air inlet mesh.
Krayer teaches a spray gun that includes an air filter (15) disposed between the pressurized chamber and the air inlet mesh.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field add an air filter to the air inlet disposed between the pressurized chamber and the air inlet mesh in order to filter incoming air.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 3, 5-12, 14-20 of copending Application No. 18,577,537 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of 18,577,537 read on the claims of the present invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6, 8 and 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 5 would be allowable because of the limitation wherein the control circuit board comprises a connecting cable which is routed via the aperture into the handle.
Claim 8 would be allowable due to the first and second flow duct structure
Claim 10 would be allowable due to the semicircular third opening
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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 5/19/2026
Prosecution Insights