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 .
Election/Restrictions
1. The arguments directed towards the restriction have been found persuasive. Therefore, the restriction is withdrawn.
Accordingly, claims 1-10 have been examined herein.
Priority
2. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in CN on 3/28/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN 2023103488035 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/11/2024 and 10/31/2025 were filed prior to the mailing date of this 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.
Claim Objections
4. Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9, “a plurality of sliders” should read “a plurality of the sliders” to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Claim 9, “a rotary member being provided” should read “[[a]] the rotary member being provided” to avoid the antecedent basis issue.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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 1-10 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 1, lines 8-9, the language recites “the outer cylinder is provided with abutting sections each fitted with the slider”. However, it is not clear how a plurality of sections can each be fitted with a singular slider. Overall, the claim appears to be mixing a plural feature format with a singular feature format. For purposes of examination, as best understood by the examiner, the language will be interpreted as requiring a singular abutting section fitted with a singular slider.
Claims 2-10 are rejected for depending upon a rejected base claim.
Regarding claim 1, line 9, the language recites “the outer cylinder rotates forwardly”. However, it is not precisely clear what is required by the term “forwardly”. As best understood by the examiner, the outer cylinder does not move axially when it rotates. Therefore, it is not precisely clear what is required by the term “forwardly”. For purposes of examination, as best understood by the examiner, the language will be interpreted as “the outer cylinder rotates [[forwardly]]”.
Claims 2-10 are rejected for depending upon a rejected base claim.
Regarding claim 5, the language recites “sliding grooves extending radially and each fitting with the slider”. However, it is not clear how a plurality of grooves can each be fitted with a singular slider. Overall, the claim appears to be mixing a plural feature format with a singular feature format. For purposes of examination, as best understood by the examiner, the language will be interpreted as requiring a singular groove fitted with a singular slider.
Regarding claim 6, the language recites “the elastic members”. However, the term “the elastic members” lacks proper antecedent basis because only a singular elastic member was previously introduced. For purposes of examination, as best understood by the examiner, the language will be interpreted as requiring a plurality of the elastic members.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fei et al. (US PGPUB 20230193609), hereinafter Fei.
Regarding claim 1, Fei teaches a drain cleaning machine (fig. 3), comprising a machine body (see annotated fig. 3 below) in which a drive assembly is provided (motor device C),
PNG
media_image1.png
452
800
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a rotary drum (drum device D) driven by the drive assembly [0071] and having a flexible shaft (flexible shaft E) wound therein (fig. 21), and a lead frame (fig. 3, flexible shaft advancing and retreating device A is interpreted as the lead frame) disposed in a front portion of the rotary drum (fig. 3) and configurable to guide the flexible shaft to advance and retract (advancing and retreating device A), wherein the lead frame comprises an inner base (see annotated fig. 7 below),
PNG
media_image2.png
728
778
media_image2.png
Greyscale
an outer cylinder (fig. 7, structures indicated by elements A1, A66 and A56 are together interpreted as the outer cylinder, wherein structure A1 has an outer cylindrical profile) rotatably sleeved outside the inner base [0067], and locking structures operable to lock or release the flexible shaft (fig. 6, [0067]); the flexible shaft passes through the inner base to project forwardly (fig. 3); the locking structure comprises a slider disposed on the inner base (fig. 6, feed rocker arm A51 is interpreted as the slider which is disposed on the inner base), a rotary member rotatably disposed on the slider (feed bearing A53), and an elastic member acting against the slider (fig. 6, feed torsion spring A54); the outer cylinder is provided with abutting sections each fitted with the slider (fig. 12, [0056]); when the outer cylinder rotates forwardly about a central axis [0067], the abutting section drives, via the slider, the rotary member to move towards the flexible shaft [0067] (fig. 12), and when the outer cylinder rotates reversely about the central axis, the abutting section releases the slider (via the reset function of the feed torsion spring [0067]); the elastic member is configurable to be deformed when the slider drives the rotary member to move towards the flexible shaft (fig. 6, [0056] and [0067]), and configurable to drive, via the slider, the rotary member to move opposite the flexible shaft when the abutting section releases the slider (via the reset function of the feed torsion spring [0067]).
Regarding claim 2, Fei teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Fei teaches wherein the abutting section is an arc-shaped abutting surface provided on an inner wall of the outer cylinder (fig. 12, arc shaped surface of feed housing A56) and disposed eccentrically with respect to the central axis of the outer cylinder (fig. 12, the arc is disposed eccentrically with respect to the central axis of the outer cylinder), distances between the arc-shaped abutting surface and the central axis of the outer cylinder increasing from one end to an opposite end (fig. 12, distances between the arc-shaped abutting surface and the central axis of the outer cylinder increase from one end to an opposite end of the arc-shaped abutting surface).
Regarding claim 3, Fei teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 2. Additionally, Fei teaches wherein an end of the arc-shaped abutting surface distant from the central axis of the outer cylinder smoothly engages an inner peripheral wall of the outer cylinder (fig. 12, the arc-shaped abutting surface smoothly engages and transitions into the inner peripheral wall of the outer cylinder); and/or an end of the arc-shaped abutting surface proximal to the central axis of the outer cylinder is provided with a stop rib for limiting the slider (fig. 12, the arc-shaped abutting surface includes a lip at the end, which is interpreted as the end of the arc-shaped abutting surface proximal to the central axis of the outer cylinder is provided with a stop rib for limiting the slider).
Regarding claim 9, Fei teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Fei teaches wherein a plurality of sliders are provided at even intervals along a circumferential direction of the inner base, a rotary member being provided on each slider (the prior art is not required to teach this limitation because the language recites the term “and/or”); and/or, the rotary member is a bearing (feed bearing A53).
Regarding claim 10, Fei teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Fei teaches wherein the slider is provided with a mounting surface disposed inclinedly relative to an axial direction of the lead frame for mounting the rotary member (The language does not specifically recite what is required by the axial direction. Specifically, the language does not recite the axial direction is a longitudinal axial direction. Therefore, the axial direction can be interpreted under BRI (Broadest Reasonable Interpretation) as a direction which extends along an axis. In fig. 12, the slider is provided with a mounting surface disposed inclinedly relative to a broad axial direction of the lead frame for mounting the rotary member A53), the rotary member being rotatably mounted on the mounting surface (fig. 12, feed bearing A53), an axial direction of the rotary member being vertical to the mounting surface (Similar to above, the language does not specify what is required by the axial direction of the rotary member. Under BRI, an axial direction of the rotary member is vertical to the mounting surface).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fei et al. (US PGPUB 20230193609), hereinafter Fei, in view of Wu (US PGPUB 20220203414).
Regarding claim 4, Fei teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Fei teaches the elastic member comprises a feed torsion spring A54 (fig. 6) having one end abutting against the inner base (feed pin shaft A55) and an opposite and abutting against the slider (fig. 6, [0056]).
Fei does not explicitly teach wherein the elastic member comprises a compression spring having one end abutting against the inner base and an opposite end abutting against the slider.
However, Wu teaches an auto-feed pipe cleaner including a spring wire flexible shaft 25, wherein the locking device includes a slider (movable fixing shaft 531, fig. 6), wherein a compression spring 533 has one end abutting against the inner base and an opposite end abutting against the slider (fig. 10-11), the compression spring having an end abutting against a groove wall of the sliding groove and an opposite end abutting against the slider (fig. 10).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fei to incorporate the teachings of Wu to provide wherein the elastic member comprises a compression spring having one end abutting against the inner base and an opposite end abutting against the slider, the compression spring having an end abutting against a groove wall of the sliding groove and an opposite end abutting against the slider. Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the compression spring configuration of Wu into the device of Fei to provide additional bias return force, which promote proper returning of the slider member. Doing so would promote longevity by providing two elastic bias members. Additionally, doing so would promote longevity in case of failure of one of the elastic bias members.
Regarding claim 5, Fei, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 4. Additionally, Fei, as modified, teaches wherein the inner base is provided with sliding grooves extending radially and each fitting with the slider (fig. 6 of Fei, wherein the groove in which the slider A51 slides is interpreted as the sliding groove), the slider being at least partially inserted in the corresponding sliding groove (fig. 6 of Fei), the compression spring having an end abutting against a groove wall of the sliding groove and an opposite end abutting against the slider (see above rejection of claim 4, wherein the compression spring configuration of Wu was incorporated).
Regarding claim 6, Fei, as modified, teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 4. Additionally, Fei, as modified, teaches wherein the elastic members comprise an arc-shaped spring (fig. 6, torsion spring A54 of Fei), and the slider is provided with an arc-shaped slot (fig. 6 of Fei), the arc-shaped spring being partially located in the arc-shaped slot (fig. 6 of Fei).
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 7-8 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7, Fei et al. (US PGPUB 20230193609), hereinafter Fei, is the closest prior art to the claimed invention but fails to teach or make obvious in combination with the additionally cited prior art the feature of a microswitch secured on the frame head, a movable sleeve movably connected to the frame head and operable to activate the microswitch, and a head spring disposed between the frame head and the movable sleeve; the head spring is configurable to be deformed when the thickened section abuts against the movable sleeve to drive the movable sleeve to approach and activate the microswitch during retraction of the flexible shaft as particularly claimed in combination with all other elements of claims 1 and 7.
Claim 8 is indicated as allowable for depending from claim 7.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Silverman (US Patent 6470525) teaches a drain cleaning apparatus similar to the claimed invention.
Rutkowski et al. (US Patent 5901401) teaches a feed control device for a snake device similar to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A GUMP whose telephone number is (571)272-2172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/MICHAEL A GUMP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights