DETAILED ACTION
Claim Objections
Claims 11 and 36 are objected to because of the following informalities: the indentations for each claim confuses the scope of the claim. For instance, lines 5 and 6 of claim 11 being the same indent as lines 3 and 4 appears to claim the collection container and pre-separator unit as parts of the power head. Amendments to claim 11 are suggested below, with similar amendments being need for claim 36. Appropriate correction is required.
11. (Original) A vacuum assembly comprising:
a power head, wherein the power head includes:
a first housing at least partially defining a power head volume,
a blower assembly at least partially positioned within the power head volume;
a collection container at least partially defining a collection volume; and
a pre-separator unit, wherein the pre-separator includes:
a second housing at least partially defining a pre-separator volume,
a cyclonic separator at least partially positioned within the pre-separator volume, and
a first flow path extending between the cyclonic separator and the blower assembly, and wherein the first flow path is always positioned within at least one of the power head volume and the pre-separator volume.
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 (connection interface, connection region 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) is/are: “connection implements” in claims 8 and 9 (assumed to correspond to the “connection elements” (270a/b) of the specification.
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.
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 § 102
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 –
Claims 36-41 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 5077494 (to be referred to hereinafter as 494).
Regarding claim 36, 494 discloses A vacuum assembly comprising: a power head (12) comprising: a first housing (14) at least partially defining a power head volume, wherein the first housing defines a first connection interface (20/22) including a first internal connection region (void within passages 20/22), and a blower assembly (10) at least partially positioned within the power head volume, an inlet passage (19); and an accessory (23-25) comprising: a second housing (defined by external walls of 23-25) at least partially defining a second volume, wherein the second housing defines a second connection interface (35/57) including a second connection region (internal openings 39/58), and a first flow path in fluid communication with the blower assembly, and wherein the first flow path passes through both the first internal connection region and the second internal connection region; and a second flow path in fluid communication with the inlet passage, and wherein the second flow path passes through both the first internal connection region and the second internal connection region.
Regarding claim 37, 494 further discloses that the accessory includes a cyclonic separator (within 25) at least partially positioned within the second volume, and wherein the first flow path extends between the cyclonic separator and the blower assembly.
Regarding claim 38, 494 further discloses that the accessory includes a cyclonic separator (within 25) at least partially positioned within the second volume, and wherein the second flow path extends between the cyclonic separator and the inlet passage.
Regarding claim 39, 494 further discloses that the first flow path extends between the cyclonic separator and the blower assembly.
Regarding claim 40, 494 further discloses that the second housing defines a third connection interface (plate 37) including a third internal connection region, the vacuum assembly further comprising: a collection container (26) comprising: a third housing at least partially defining a collection volume, wherein the third housing defines a fourth connection interface (open upper end of container) including a fourth internal connection region; and a third flow path in fluid communication with the collection volume, and wherein the third flow path passes through both the third connection region and the fourth connection region.
Regarding claim 41, 494 further discloses that the accessory includes a cyclonic separator (within 25) at least partially positioned within the second volume, and wherein the third flow path extends between the cyclonic separator and the collection volume.
Regarding claim 43, 494 further discloses that the first flow path includes a filter (51 having a plurality of fine holes effectively functions as a filter) positioned therein.
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 1-20 and 36-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Witter et al. (2009/0307866; to be referred to hereinafter as WI) in view of Ohlendorf (11,627,851; to be referred to hereinafter as OH) and Marshall et al. (2005/0055794; to be referred to hereinafter as MA).
Regarding claim 1, WI discloses a vacuum pre-separation device for use with a vacuum assembly having a power head (50) and a collection container (12), the pre-separation device comprising: a housing (20) defining a housing volume, wherein the housing includes a first connection interface (open upper end) configured to attach to the power head and a second connection interface (plate 22 and rim 23) configured to attach to the collection container; a cyclonic separator (24), wherein the cyclonic separator includes a discharge port (68) open to the second connection interface; and a feed passage (26) configured to direct air into the cyclonic separator. However, Wi fails to disclose that the cyclonic separator is at least partially positioned within the housing volume or that the first end of the feed passage is open to the first connection interface.
OH discloses a similar pre-separation device, also configured for use with a vacuum assembly having a power head (3) and a collection container (4), the pre-separation device comprising: a housing (2) defining a housing volume, wherein the housing includes a first connection interface (open upper end) configured to attach to the power head and a second connection interface (open lower end) configured to attach to the collection container and a cyclonic separator positioned within the housing volume. OH teaches that the pre-separation device is configured to be positioned between the power head and collection container that are sized and shaped to be engage one another when the pre-separation device is not installed, effectively designing the pre-separation device as a supplemental separator to provide additional separation means to an existing “shop-vac” style vacuum cleaner. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to configure the pre-separation device of WI to have a similar form, with all components, including the cyclonic separator, positioned within an external wall forming a housing, as taught by OH, to configure the pre-separation device to be provided to existing vacuum cleaners by positioning the pre-separation device between an existing power head and collection container that are sized and shaped to be engage one another.
Regarding the feed passage being open to the first connection interface, MA discloses another known vacuum cleaner having a power head (14) and collection container (12) that are sized and shaped to be engage one another, wherein the power head includes an inlet port (90), open to the exterior of the first housing, configured to connect to a suction hose, end having an internal outlet end that opens into the collection container. Therefore, when configuring the pre-separation device of WI to be a supplemental separator to the cleaner of MA, in the manner taught by OH, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to configure the intake of the cyclonic separator (24) of WI to engage with the outlet end of the inlet port of MA, such that the hose connected thereto will initially provide airflow to the cyclonic separator, prior to the power head of MA. Thus, the feed passage will effectively be formed at the first connection interface, between the intake of the cyclonic separator of WI and the outlet end of the inlet port (90) of MA, which will position the feed passage to be open to the first connection interface.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides the
the first connection interface, which encloses a first connection region, wherein the first end of the feed passage is positioned within the first connection region (to meet the outlet end of the inlet passage port 90 of MA).
Regarding claim 3, the configuration taught by OH teaches that the first connection interface and the second connection interface are positioned on opposite sides of the housing to fit between the power head and collection container of an existing vacuum cleaner.
Regarding claim 4, both WI and OH disclose the cyclonic separator with an exit aperture (34 of WI, inlet end of 21b/22b of OH), and wherein the exit aperture is in fluid communication with the first connection interface (for the air flow to enter the power head).
Regarding claim 5, both WI and OH disclose a filter casing (internal space of 40 of WI and within the pre-separation housing of OH, as seen in Fig. 18 w/ the filter of the power head shown cross-hatched) sized to receive at least a portion of an air filter therein, and wherein the pre-separation device further includes an intermediate passage (hose 36 of WI, 21b/22b of OH) extending between the exit aperture and the filter casing.
Regarding claim 6, the filter casing of both WI and OH is open to the first connection interface.
Regarding claim 7, both WI and OH that the first connection interface encloses a first connection region, wherein the filter casing includes an open end, and wherein the open end is positioned within the first connection region.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, the configuration taught by OH teaches a first set of connection implements (latches 7/8) configured to selectively couple the housing to the collection container and a second set of connection implements (for engaging latches 5/6) configured to selectively couple the housing to the power head.
Regarding claim 10, the configuration taught by OH teaches that the housing includes a perimeter wall at least partially encompassing the housing volume, wherein the perimeter wall includes a first end and a second end opposite the first end, wherein the first end defines the first mounting interface, and wherein the second end defines the second mounting interface.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides a vacuum assembly comprising: a power head (14 of MA), wherein the power head includes: a first housing at least partially defining a power head volume, a blower assembly (82/84) at least partially positioned within the power head volume; a collection container (12 of MA) at least partially defining a collection volume; and a pre-separator unit (components of WI configured in a housing of OH), wherein the pre-separator includes: a second housing (taught by OH) at least partially defining a pre-separator volume, a cyclonic separator (taught by WI and OH) at least partially positioned within the pre-separator volume, and a first flow path extending between the cyclonic separator and the blower assembly, and wherein the first flow path is always positioned within at least one of the power head volume and the pre-separator volume (first flow path will be defined from cyclonic separator, positioned in the second housing, to the power head positioned within the first housing).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides the power head having an inlet port (90 of MA, as discussed supra) open to the exterior of the first housing, the vacuum assembly further comprising a second flow path extending between the inlet port and the cyclonic separator, wherein the second flow path is always positioned within at least one of the first power head volume and the pre-separator volume (at least partially within pre-separator volume to connect to cyclonic separator).
Regarding claim 13, WI and OH both disclose that the cyclonic separator includes a discharge port (68 of WI, 21c/22c of OH), and wherein the discharge port is in fluid communication with the collection volume.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
a debris flow path extending between the discharge port and the collection volume, and wherein the debris flow path is always positioned within at least one of the pre-separator volume and the collection volume (primarily shown within the collection volume by WI and OH).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides that the first flow path passes through a filter (48 of WI, shown but not numbered for OH, as discussed above for claim 5, and 104 of MA).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides a
vacuum assembly comprising: a power head (of MA) comprising: a first housing (14 of MA) at least partially defining a power head volume, wherein the first housing defines a first connection interface including a first internal connection region (formed within lower lip 80 of MA), and a blower assembly (82/84) at least partially positioned within the power head volume; and a pre-separator unit (components of WI configured in a housing of OH) comprising: a second housing (taught by OH) at least partially defining a pre-separator volume, wherein the second housing defines a second connection interface (open upper end) including a second connection region, and a cyclonic separator at least partially positioned within the pre-separator volume; and a first flow path extending between the cyclonic separator and the blower assembly, and wherein the first flow path passes through both the first internal connection region and the second internal connection region (which engage with one another to connect the power head to the pre-separator unit).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides the power head with an inlet port (90 of MA) that is open to the outside of the first housing, the vacuum assembly further comprising a second flow path extending between the inlet port and the cyclonic separator, and wherein the second flow path passes through both the first internal connection region and the second internal connection region.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
the pre-separator unit with a filter casing (internal space of 40 of WI and within the pre-separation housing of OH, as seen in Fig. 18 w/ the filter of the power head shown cross-hatched) configured to contain a filter therein, and wherein the filter is attached to the power head.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
the first flow path passes through a filter (104 of MA).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
the first connection interface that interacts with the second connection interface to relatively align the power head with the pre- separator unit (as taught by OH).
Regarding claim 36, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides (all components referenced above will not be repeated for claim 36) a vacuum assembly comprising: a power head comprising: a first housing at least partially defining a power head volume, wherein the first housing defines a first connection interface including a first internal connection region, and a blower assembly at least partially positioned within the power head volume, an inlet passage; and an accessory (pre-separation unit as discussed above) comprising: a second housing at least partially defining a second volume, wherein the second housing defines a second connection interface including a second connection region, and a first flow path in fluid communication with the blower assembly, and wherein the first flow path passes through both the first internal connection region and the second internal connection region; and a second flow path in fluid communication with the inlet passage, and wherein the second flow path passes through both the first internal connection region and the second internal connection region.
Regarding claim 37, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
a cyclonic separator (taught by WI and OH), at least partially positioned within the second volume, and wherein the first flow path extends between the cyclonic separator and the blower assembly.
Regarding claim 38, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides the cyclonic separator at least partially positioned within the second volume, and wherein the second flow path extends between the cyclonic separator and the inlet passage.
Regarding claim 39, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides the first flow path that extends between the cyclonic separator and the blower assembly.
Regarding claim 40, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
the second housing that defines a third connection interface (bottom end, taught by WI and OH) including a third internal connection region, the vacuum assembly further comprising: a collection container (12 of MA) comprising: a third housing at least partially defining a collection volume, wherein the third housing defines a fourth connection interface (open top end) including a fourth internal connection region; and a third flow path in fluid communication with the collection volume, and wherein the third flow path passes through both the third connection region and the fourth connection region.
Regarding claim 41, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
a cyclonic separator at least partially positioned within the second volume, and wherein the third flow path extends between the cyclonic separator and the collection volume.
Regarding claim 42, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
air flowing passing successively through the first flow path and the second flow path that experience two successive stages of air treatment (first via cyclone taught by WI and OH, then by filter 104 of MA).
Regarding claim 43, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides
the first flow path that includes a filter (104 of MA) positioned therein.
Regarding claim 36, the combination of WI, OH and MA, as discussed supra, provides the filter fixedly coupled to the first housing (taught by WI and MA).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of Hashimoto (JP 2005-211350 A), Knight et al. (11,910,989) and Witter (8,393,050) disclose devices having similar structure and function as the applicant’s claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN R MULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4489. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, 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.
/BRYAN R MULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 26 August 2026
Prosecution Insights