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 .
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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/29/2024 and 02/11/2026 were filed before the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wee (CN 101273860 A) as cited by Applicant in view of Haijun (CN 211582928 U) as cited by Applicant.
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Wee teaches a cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) comprising: a body (main body, 10) having a front end (Fig. 1); a movement mechanism (Paragraph [0060]) comprising at least one driving wheel (drive wheels, 16), and configured to support and drive the cleaning robot (1) to move on a to-be-cleaned ground (Fig. 2); a cleaning mechanism (Fig. 2) comprising a roller brush (rotating brush, 14), and configured to perform cleaning work on the to-be-cleaned ground (Fig. 2); a dust suction mechanism (Paragraph [0007]) comprising a fan (fan, 32), and configured to suck garbage cleaned off by the cleaning mechanism into the body (10; Paragraph [0063]) a dust collection mechanism (Fig. 2) comprising a dust box (dust collector, 20), and configured to collect the garbage sucked into the body (10; Paragraph [0065]); and a controller (controller, 19) configured to control the cleaning robot (1) to move on the to-be-cleaned ground (Paragraph [0061]), to implement autonomous cleaning of the to-be-cleaned ground (Paragraph [0062]), wherein: the roller brush (14) comprises at least a first cleaning roller brush (Fig. 2), the first cleaning roller brush (14) disposed at a bottom of the body, and are at least partially exposed from the body (10; Fig. 2; Paragraph [0058]); the first cleaning roller brush (14) configured to clean off garbage on the to-be-cleaned ground during rotation (Paragraph [0059]), to facilitate a suction by the dust suction mechanism (Paragraph [0059]); and the fan (32) is disposed inside the body (10; Fig. 2), and a power of the fan (32) is greater than or equal to 65 W (Paragraph [0010]).
Wee does not explicitly teach the roller brush comprises a second cleaning roller brush; the second cleaning roller brush disposed at a bottom of the body; the second cleaning roller brush are configured to clean off garbage on the to-be-cleaned ground during rotation, to facilitate a suction by the dust suction mechanism.
Haijun, however, teaches the roller brush (Fig. 4) comprises a first (front brush, 2) and second (rear brush, 3) cleaning roller brush (Fig. 4); the first (2) and second (3) cleaning roller brush disposed at a bottom of the body (Fig. 2); the first (2) and second (3) cleaning roller brush are configured to clean off garbage on the to-be-cleaned ground during rotation (Paragraph [0040]), to facilitate a suction by the dust suction mechanism (Paragraph [0044]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a second cleaning roller brush, as taught by Haijun, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 2, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) wherein with the fan has a rated input power of 80 W (Paragraph [0010]).
Wee does not explicitly teach at the rated input power, a degree of vacuum of the fan ranges from 7.6 Kpa to 8.2 Kpa; and a test value of a flow rate at an inlet when the fan is fully open approximately ranges 64 from 0.72 m3/min to 0.75 m3/min.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a second cleaning roller brush, as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 3, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) according to claim 1, as discussed above.
Wee does not explicitly teach the fan accounts for 0.5% to 1% of a total volume of the cleaning robot.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a second cleaning roller brush, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/volume of a component. A change in size/volume is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 4, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) wherein the body (10) comprises a chassis (10), and a chassis height (Fig. 2).
Wee does not explicitly teach a chassis height at a position of the fan is smaller than a chassis height at another position at which the fan is not disposed of the body, wherein a value range of the chassis height at the position of the fan is 8 mm to 12 mm; and a value range of the chassis height at another position at which the fan is not disposed of the body is 12 mm to 18 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a chassis height at a position of the fan is smaller than a chassis height at another position at which the fan is not disposed of the body, wherein a value range of the chassis height at the position of the fan is 8 mm to 12 mm; and a value range of the chassis height at another position at which the fan is not disposed of the body is 12 mm to 18 mm, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/shape of a component. A change in size/shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 5, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1)
according to claim 1, as discussed above.
Wee does not explicitly teach rotational speeds of the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush are both greater than or equal to 1500 r/min, or wherein the cleaning mechanism comprises a roller brush motor configured to drive the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush to rotate, and a value range of a power of the roller brush motor is 30 W to 35 W.
Haijun, however, teaches high speed rotation of both the first and second brushes (Paragraph [0053]), put fails to explicitly teach the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush are both greater than or equal to 1500 r/min, or wherein the cleaning mechanism comprises a roller brush motor configured to drive the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush to rotate, and a value range of a power of the roller brush motor is 30 W to 35 W.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee in view Haijun to further include first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush are both greater than or equal to 1500 r/min, or wherein the cleaning mechanism comprises a roller brush motor configured to drive the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush to rotate, and a value range of a power of the roller brush motor is 30 W to 35 W, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/number of rotations of a component. A change in size/number of rotation is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 6, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) wherein the first cleaning roller brush (14) is disposed in a traveling direction of the body (10; Fig. 2).
Wee does not explicitly teach a second cleaning roller brush disposed in a traveling direction of the body, a rotation axis of the first cleaning roller brush and a rotation axis of the second cleaning roller brush are parallel to each other, and the rotation axis of the first cleaning roller brush and the rotation axis of the second cleaning roller brush are both perpendicular to a traveling direction of the cleaning robot, wherein a value range of a length of at least one of the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush in a direction of the rotation axis is 190 mm to 195 mm.
Haijun, however, teaches the first (2) and second (3) cleaning roller brush disposed in a traveling direction of the body (1; Fig. 4), a rotation axis (Fig. 6) of the first cleaning roller brush (2) and a rotation axis (Fig. 6) of the second cleaning roller brush (3) are parallel to each other (Fig. 6), and the rotation axis (Fig. 6) of the first cleaning roller brush (3) and the rotation axis (Fig. 6) of the second cleaning roller brush (2) are both perpendicular to a traveling direction of the cleaning robot (1; Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a second cleaning roller brush, as taught by Haijun, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Haijun does not explicitly teach a value range of a length of at least one of the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush in a direction of the rotation axis is 190 mm to 195 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a value range of a length of at least one of the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush in a direction of the rotation axis is 190 mm to 195 mm, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 7, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1)
according to claim 1, as discussed above.
Wee, as modified, by Haijun does not explicitly teach the first cleaning roller brush is a hard roller brush, and the second cleaning roller brush is a bristle roller brush, wherein the hard roller brush is a rubber roller brush, and the bristle roller brush comprises at least bristles, and wherein in a traveling direction of the body, the first cleaning roller brush is located in front of the second cleaning roller brush.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include the first cleaning roller brush is a hard roller brush, and the second cleaning roller brush is a bristle roller brush, wherein the hard roller brush is a rubber roller brush, and the bristle roller brush comprises at least bristles, and wherein in a traveling direction of the body, the first cleaning roller brush is located in front of the second cleaning roller brush, as claimed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (MPEP 2144.07).
Regarding Claim 8, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1)
according to claim 7, as discussed above.
Wee does not teach a value range of a degree of interference of the first cleaning roller brush is 1.5 mm to 2.5 mm; a value range of a degree of interference of the second cleaning roller brush is 3 mm to 5 mm; and the degree of interference is a depth by which a cleaning portion of the roller brush extends into an upper surface of the to-be-cleaned ground.
Haijun further teaches a degree of interference (Paragraph [0044]) but fails to explicitly teach a value range of a degree of interference of the first cleaning roller brush is 1.5 mm to 2.5 mm; a value range of a degree of interference of the second cleaning roller brush is 3 mm to 5 mm; and the degree of interference is a depth by which a cleaning portion of the roller brush extends into an upper surface of the to-be-cleaned ground.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a value range of a degree of interference of the first cleaning roller brush is 1.5 mm to 2.5 mm; a value range of a degree of interference of the second cleaning roller brush is 3 mm to 5 mm; and the degree of interference is a depth by which a cleaning portion of the roller brush extends into an upper surface of the to-be-cleaned ground, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 9, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1), wherein the cleaning robot (1) further comprises a power supply mechanism (Fig. 2) comprising a rechargeable battery (rechargeable battery, 17), configured to provide energy to the cleaning robot (1; Paragraph [0061]).
Wee does not explicitly teach wherein a capacity of the rechargeable battery ranges from 140 Wh to 200 Wh; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a capacity of the rechargeable battery ranges from 140 Wh to 200 Wh, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 10, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1), wherein the cleaning robot (1) further comprises a power supply mechanism (Fig. 2) comprising a rechargeable battery (rechargeable battery, 17), configured to provide energy to the cleaning robot (1; Paragraph [0061]).
Wee does not explicitly teach wherein a ratio of a capacity of the rechargeable battery to a power of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 2500 J/W,or a ratio of a capacity of the rechargeable battery to a height of the cleaning robot ranges from 1.2 Wh/mm to 2.1 Wh/mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a ratio of a capacity of the rechargeable battery to a power of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 2500 J/W,or a ratio of a capacity of the rechargeable battery to a height of the cleaning robot ranges from 1.2 Wh/mm to 2.1 Wh/mm, since it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 11, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1), wherein the cleaning robot (1) further comprises a power supply mechanism (Fig. 2) comprising a rechargeable battery (rechargeable battery, 17), configured to provide energy to the cleaning robot (1; Paragraph [0061]).
Wee does not explicitly teach wherein a battery cycle count of the rechargeable battery for a cleaning robot with a rated input power PE being greater than or equal to 100 W ranges from 640 to 960.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a battery cycle count of the rechargeable battery for a cleaning robot with a rated input power PE being greater than or equal to 100 W ranges from 640 to 960, since it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 12, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1), wherein the rechargeable battery (17) has a cylindrical shape (Fig. 6); the rechargeable battery (17) is disposed on the body (10) in an assembly direction during installation (Fig. 6), wherein the assembly direction is a direction that makes an axis of the battery (17) perpendicular to a horizontal plane (Fig. 6).
Wee does not explicitly teach a proportion of a volume of the rechargeable battery relative to a volume of the cleaning robot is at least 1/25; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a proportion of a volume of the rechargeable battery relative to a volume of the cleaning robot is at least 1/25, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 13, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1)
according to claim 9, as discussed above.
Wee does not explicitly teach a percentage of the rechargeable battery in a total weight of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 10%; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a percentage of the rechargeable battery in a total weight of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 10%, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/weight of a component. A change in size/weight is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 14, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1), wherein: the cleaning robot (1) further comprises a driving motor (Paragraph [0060]) configured to drive the movement mechanism (16) to move (Paragraph [0060]); and the movement mechanism (16) is configured to drive the cleaning robot to move at a preset movement speed (Paragraph [0062])
Wee does not teach a value range of a power of the driving motor is 4 W to 6 W, or a proportion of a sum of the power of the fan and a power of a roller brush motor configured to drive the roller brush to rotate relative to a power of the driving motor is at least 15; wherein a value range of the preset movement speed is 0.1 m/s to 0.2 m/s, or a ratio of a power of the cleaning robot to the preset movement speed is at least 50 J/m.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a value range of a power of the driving motor is 4 W to 6 W, or a proportion of a sum of the power of the fan and a power of a roller brush motor configured to drive the roller brush to rotate relative to a power of the driving motor is at least 15; wherein a value range of the preset movement speed is 0.1 m/s to 0.2 m/s, or a ratio of a power of the cleaning robot to the preset movement speed is at least 50 J/m, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/power of a component. A change in size/power is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 15, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1),
according to claim 1, as discussed above.
Wee does not explicitly teach an energy input per unit area of the cleaning robot is at least 4000 J/m2, or wherein a ratio of an energy input per unit area of the cleaning robot to a height of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 11.7 Wh/m3; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include an energy input per unit area of the cleaning robot is at least 4000 J/m2, or wherein a ratio of an energy input per unit area of the cleaning robot to a height of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 11.7 Wh/m3 since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 16, Wee, as modified, teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1),
wherein for a standard test carpet, a cleaning efficiency of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 80% (Paragraph [0085]), or a ratio of a cleaning efficiency of the cleaning robot to a height of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 7/m; or a ratio of a cleaning efficiency of the cleaning robot to a power of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal 67 to 0.004/W.
Claims 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wee (CN 101273860 A) as cited by Applicant.
Regarding Independent Claim 17, Wee teaches a cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) comprising: a body (main body, 10) having a front end (Fig. 1); a movement mechanism (Paragraph [0060]) comprising at least one driving wheel (drive wheels, 16), and configured to support and drive the cleaning robot (1) to move on a to-be-cleaned ground (Fig. 2); a beating mechanism (rotating brush, 14) configured to perform beating work on the to-be-cleaned ground (Fig. 2); a dust suction mechanism (Paragraph [0007]; fan, 32), and configured to suck garbage agitated by the beating mechanism into the body (10; Paragraph [0063]); and a power supply mechanism (fan motor, 31) configured to provide energy to the cleaning robot (1; Paragraph [0063]), wherein: the cleaning robot (1) has a first cleaning effect (rotation of brush beating floor; Fig. 6), the first cleaning effect (Fig. 6) is used for representing a cleaning effect produced by cleaning the to-be-cleaned ground once by the cleaning robot by using the beating mechanism (14) and the dust suction mechanism (Paragraph [0007]) and driven by the movement mechanism (16); and the first cleaning effect is represented by a single-time cleaning efficiency (Paragraph [0085]).
Wee does not explicitly teach a standard test carpet, a ratio of the single-time cleaning efficiency of the cleaning robot to a height of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 7/m.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a ratio of the single-time cleaning efficiency of the cleaning robot to a height of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 7/m, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size/power of a component. A change in size/power is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 18, Wee teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) wherein the cleaning robot is configured to make the ratio of the single-time cleaning efficiency to the height of the cleaning robot by operations comprising at least one of:
A: a beating frequency of the beating mechanism is increased;
B: the beating mechanism beats a same strand of pile of the standard test carpet in at least two directions;
C: a length by which the beating mechanism contacts the standard test carpet in a single time of beating ranges from 190 mm to 195 mm;
D: the beating mechanism comprises a cleaning portion contacting a surface of the to-be- cleaned ground, and a degree of interference between the cleaning portion and the standard test carpet is 2 mm to 5 mm, wherein the degree of interference is used for representing a depth value by which the cleaning portion extends into the standard test carpet;
E: the dust suction mechanism comprises a fan disposed in the body, and a power of the fan is greater than or equal to 65 W; (Paragraph [0085]) and
F: a movement speed of the cleaning robot is 0.1 m/s to 0.2 m/s, wherein the cleaning robot is configured to make the ratio of the single-time cleaning efficiency to the height of the cleaning robot greater than or equal to 7/m in a combination of operations comprising:
A: the beating frequency of the beating mechanism is greater than or equal to 3000/min;
B: the beating mechanism beats each strand of pile of the standard test carpet in at least two directions; and
E: the dust suction mechanism comprises the fan disposed in the body, and the power of the fan is greater than or equal to 65 W, wherein: the beating frequency of the beating mechanism is increased in at least one of the operations in A; the beating mechanism comprises a cleaning roller brush, the cleaning roller brush comprises at least a first cleaning roller brush and a second cleaning roller brush, and the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush clean off the garbage on the to-be- cleaned ground during rotation, to facilitate a suction by the dust suction mechanism; and the beating mechanism comprises the cleaning roller brush, and a rotational speed of the cleaning roller brush is at least 1500 r/min.
Wee does not explicitly teach the height of the cleaning robot greater than or equal to 7/m; however, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include the height of the cleaning robot greater than or equal to 7/m, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Independent Claim 19, Wee teaches a cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) comprising: a body (10) having a front end (Fig. 1); a movement mechanism (16) configured to support and drive the cleaning robot to move on a to-be-cleaned ground (Paragraph [0060]); a beating mechanism (brush, 14) configured to perform beating work on the to-be-cleaned ground (Paragraph [0057]); a dust suction mechanism (fan motor, 31) configured to suck garbage agitated by the beating mechanism into the body (10; Paragraph [0063]); a dust collection mechanism (20) configured to collect the garbage (Paragraph [0065]); and a power supply mechanism (17) configured to provide energy to the cleaning robot (Paragraph [0061]).
Wee further teaches wherein the cleaning robot provides a blower with very low power (approximately 100W) and achieves a cleaning efficiency of 95% but does not explicitly teach a ratio of an energy input per unit area produced by cleaning the to-be-cleaned ground once by the cleaning robot by using the beating mechanism and the dust suction mechanism and driven by the movement mechanism to a height of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 11.7 Wh/m3.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the robot of Wee to further include a ratio of an energy input per unit area produced by cleaning the to-be-cleaned ground once by the cleaning robot by using the beating mechanism and the dust suction mechanism and driven by the movement mechanism to a height of the cleaning robot is greater than or equal to 11.7 Wh/m3 since it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Regarding Claim 20, Wee teaches the cleaning robot (robotic vacuum cleaner, 1) wherein the cleaning robot is configured to make the ratio of the energy input per unit area to the height of the cleaning robot greater than or equal to 11.7 Wh/m3 by operations comprising at least one of:
A: a beating frequency of the beating mechanism is increased;
B: the beating mechanism beats a same strand of pile of a standard test carpet in at least two directions;
C: a length by which the beating mechanism contacts the standard test carpet in a single time of beating ranges from 190 mm to 195 mm;
D: the beating mechanism comprises a cleaning portion contacting a surface of the to-be- cleaned ground, and a degree of interference between the cleaning portion and the standard test carpet is 2 mm to 5 mm, wherein the degree of interference is used for representing a depth value by which the cleaning portion extends into a non-standard test carpet or the standard test carpet;
E: the dust suction mechanism comprises a fan disposed in the body, and a power of the fan is greater than or equal to 65 W; (Paragraph [0085]) and
F: a movement speed of the cleaning robot is 0.1 m/s to 0.2 m/s, wherein 70 the cleaning robot is configured to make the ratio of the energy input per unit area to the height of the cleaning robot greater than or equal to 11.7 Wh/m3 in a combination of operations comprising:
A: the beating frequency of the beating mechanism is greater than or equal to 3000/min;
B: the beating mechanism beats each strand of pile of the standard test carpet in at least two directions; and
E: the dust suction mechanism comprises the fan disposed in the body, and the power of the fan is greater than or equal to 65 W, wherein: the beating frequency of the beating mechanism is increased in at least one of the operations in
A; the beating mechanism comprises a cleaning roller brush, the cleaning roller brush comprises at least a first cleaning roller brush and a second cleaning roller brush, and the first cleaning roller brush and the second cleaning roller brush clean off the garbage on the to-be- cleaned ground during rotation, to facilitate the suction by the dust suction mechanism; and the beating mechanism comprises the cleaning roller brush, and a rotational speed of the cleaning roller brush is at least 1500 r/min.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am 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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723