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 . Claims 1-8 of the amended claim set received 2/09/2026 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powal (US 2020/0154691) in view of Hong (US 2023/0015593).
Regarding Claim 1, Powal discloses in Figs. 1-4, a blower attachment comprising a hose 70 attaching a tank 50 containing liquid to a clip body 10 with a proximal end 31 and a distal end 32, wherein the proximal end of the clip body is attached to an exhaust end 61 of a blower, the hose runs through the clip body via a collar 37, the hose 70 ends in a hose hole 71. Powal further discloses the blower attachment is for spraying insecticide (para. 0006).
Powal does not disclose the hose hole attached to one or more interchangeable nozzles, wherein each of the one or more interchangeable nozzles comprises an atomizer and an adjustable threaded cap.
Hong discloses in Fig. 2, a hose 200 carrying an insecticide to a hose hole (at the outlet end of the hose) and teaches the hose hole attached to one or more interchangeable nozzles (at 100, nozzles as shown in Fig. 3) using a nozzle assembly body 110 at an exhaust end of a blower 14 wherein each of the one or more nozzles comprises an atomizer 134 (see Fig. 4) and an adjustable threaded cap 138 (cap can be screwed in or out from element 132 as can be seen in Figs. 6 and 7 and read at para. 0034; the one or more nozzles 134+138 can be removed interchanged as suggested by Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Powal to include the nozzle assembly body having the one or more interchangeable nozzles, wherein each of the one or more interchangeable nozzles comprises an atomizer and an adjustable threaded cap as taught by Hong in order to employ a greater number of nozzles and spread the insecticide over a wider area.
Regarding Claim 2, Powal in view of Hong teaches the claimed invention as discussed above. Hong teaches the one or more interchangeable nozzles 134+138 of the combination including wherein the adjustable threaded cap 138 provides an adjustable spray pattern and amount of spray (as can be understood looking at Fig. 4, tightening cap 138 will push element 134 towards spindle 114 and affect the spray pattern and amount of spray).
Claims 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powal (US 2020/0154691) in view of Hong (US 2023/0015593) as applied to claim 3 and further in view of Duprez (US 3,924,308).
Regarding Claim 3, Powal in view of Hong teaches the claimed invention as discussed above. Powal additionally discloses in Fig. 1 a clamp slot 33 and where the means of attachment between the blower attachment and blower is a [hose] clamp 33 (read para. 0031).
Powal does not explicitly disclose the clamp with a turn key adjustment feature.
Duprez discloses in figure 1, a hose clamp and teaches the hose clamp with a turn key adjustment feature 40+44.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Powal further to include the turn key adjustment feature as taught by Duprez in order to provide a clamp that prevents loosening with vibration (Duprez col. 1, ll. 35-40).
Regarding Claim 6, Powal in view of Hong and Duprez teaches the claimed invention as discussed above. Hong teaches the one or more nozzles 134+138 of the combination including wherein the number of nozzles is four, five or seven, with at least four nozzles located equidistant (see Figs. 3 and 4) around a circumference and at least one nozzle facing directly away from the blower exhaust (all nozzles 134+138 face directly away from the incoming blower exhaust as they would be when installed in Powal).
Claims 1, 4, 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powal (US 2020/0154691) in view of Clarke (US 2018/0325798).
Regarding Claim 1, Powal discloses in Figs. 1-4, a blower attachment comprising a hose 70 attaching a tank 50 containing liquid to a clip body 10 with a proximal end 31 and a distal end 32, wherein the proximal end of the clip body is attached to an exhaust end 61 of a blower, the hose runs through the clip body via a collar 37, the hose 70 ends in a hose hole 71. Powal further discloses the blower attachment is for spraying insecticide (para. 0006).
Powal does not disclose the hose hole attached to one or more interchangeable nozzles, wherein each of the one or more interchangeable nozzles comprises an atomizer and an adjustable threaded cap.
Clarke discloses in Figs. 3 and 4A, a hose 90 carrying an insecticide to a hose hole (at the outlet end of the hose) and teaches the hose hole attached to one or more nozzles (at 22, nozzles 94 as shown in Fig. 3) at an exhaust end 38 of a blower wherein each of the one or more interchangeable nozzles comprises an atomizer 102 (see Fig. 4A) and an adjustable threaded cap 94 (cap adjustable in that it can be screwed in or out from element 102 as evidenced by the threads and hex nuts shown in the figures; the nozzles are interchangeable in that they can be removed and replaced by the other nozzles, i.e. anything can be removed and replaced with enough effort).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Powal by including the one or more interchangeable nozzles, wherein each of the one or more interchangeable nozzles comprises an atomizer and an adjustable threaded cap as taught by Clarke in order to increase the distance that the dispensed droplets travel from the blower (Clarke para. 0050).
Regarding Claim 4, Powal in view of Clarke teaches the claimed invention as discussed above. Clarke teaches the one or more nozzles 102+94 of the combination including wherein the one or more nozzles is embodied as a multi-nozzle system comprising two or more nozzles attached to a central channel (within 98, Figs. 3 and 4A), which central channel attaches to the hose 90 hole (as shown in the figures), each nozzle comprising an atomizer 102 and an adjustable threaded cap 94.
Regarding Claim 5, Powal in view of Clarke teaches the claimed invention as discussed above. Clarke teaches the one or more nozzles 102+94 of the combination including wherein the two or more nozzles are arranged to face in different directions (see Figs. 3 and 4A) to achieve a varying spray coverage (apparent result obtained by having the nozzles arranged as claimed; see also varying coverage from Fig. 3 to Fig. 4A).
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Powal (US 2020/0154691) in view of Clarke (US 2018/0325798) as applied to claim 4 above and further in view of Brandt (US 3,995,667).
Regarding Claim 7, Powal in view of Clarke teaches the claimed invention as discussed above. Powal does not disclose a tank connector and a push connector comprising a turn valve attached between the tank and hose, respectively, such push connector comprising a turn valve allowing for fast tank changes and simple pressure control over the amount of liquid being sprayed.
Brandt discloses in Fig. 4, a pressurized insecticide tank 1 containing a fluid to be delivered through a hose 36, much like that disclosed by Powal. Brandt teaches a hose assembly including a tank connector 20 a push connector comprising turn valve 34 attached between the tank 1 and hose 36, respectively, such push connector comprising a turn valve 34 allowing for tank changes (tank changes are allowed, i.e. not prevented, by the turn valve) and simple pressure control over the amount of liquid being sprayed (a fluid valve controls the flow therethrough).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified Powal further to include hose assembly including the tank connector and push connector/turn valve taught by Brandt in order to allow for replacement of tanks and to control the flow of fluid from the tank.
Regarding Claim 8, Powal in view of Clarke and Brandt teaches the claimed invention as described above. Brandt teaches the hose assembly of the combination (see Fig. 4) including wherein the tank connector 20 comprises a thread pattern (read col. 4, ll. 14-15) for connection to a specific tank(s) and can be removed from the push connector/turn valve 34 (via connector 32) and replaced with another tank connector such that multiple types of tank can be utilized (tank connector 20 can be replaced).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach interchangeable nozzles as required by the amended claims because the nozzles taught in the prior art are fixed in nature. This is not persuasive because even fixed components can be interchanged. Even if the nozzles are welded onto a base, they can be cut out, moved to another location, and rewelded. Interchangeable does not convey an amount of work required to interchange the nozzles. It is additionally noted that the nozzles disclosed by Hong can be removed simply by unscrewing the cap and pulling out the atomizer as detailed above and interchanged with other nozzles. The Applicant also seems to assert that “interchangeable spray nozzle” conveys that one can change spray patterns during a spraying job, however there is no discussion of the changes being made “during a spraying job” and interchangeable is given the broadest reasonable interpretation of “capable of being interchanged”.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rene Ford whose telephone number is (571) 272-8140. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 7am to 3:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached on (571) 270-5426. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/R.D.F/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/PHUTTHIWAT WONGWIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights