DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed July 28, 2026, have been entered. Applicant’s amendments have overcome every objection, and rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed May 8, 2026. Applicant’s amendments cause claims 1 and 15 to avoid interpretation under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 28, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Essentially the Office maintains its previous positions.
As to currently amended claim 1, Applicant submits that Fujita teaches a disadvantage compared to currently amended claim 1, “it would be very difficult to install or replace the conductive plate 45 without disconnecting and removing the thermoprotector 43” because Fig. 4 of Fujita shows the heat transfer plate (“conductive plate 45”): “disposed radially closer to the rotation axis of” the drive motor of (“electric motor 26”) than the themostat (“thermoprotector 43”), and “disposed lateral to the portion of the electric motor 26 that the Examiner analogizes to Applicant's claimed drive motor (even though the structure that the Examiner asserts is a "commutator" is actually part of the electric motor 26).” (page 10 of Remarks).
Applicant submits that it would not have been obvious to modify Fujita to read on currently amended claim 1: If the heat transfer structure of Fujita (“conductive plate 45”) was relocated to above the thermostat of Fujita (“thermoprotector 43”), then the transfer structure of Fujita (“conductive plate 45”) “would have essentially no contact with the electric motor 26 and would be ineffective at transferring heat generated by the electric motor 26 to the thermoprotector 43.” (page 11 of Remarks).
“Applicant submits that Broadbent fails to cure the above noted deficiencies of Fujita.” (page 11 of Remarks).
In response, the Office submits that the rejection to claim 1 in the Detailed Action mailed May 8, 2026, rejects currently amended claim 1. (page 6–13 of Detailed Action). That rejection is summarized in this paragraph. Except before summarizing that rejection, it may be helpful to clarify annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita (page 8 of Detailed Action).
PNG
media_image1.png
471
696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita.
Reference character “46” showing “cover body” comprises the thin hatched rectangle immediately below annotation “X,” immediately below that thin hatched rectangle is another thin hatched rectangle (and attached perpendicular to it is also includes a relatively short hatched rectangular projection on the right-hand side of the figure) and it is indicated by reference character “26” showing “electric motor,” and the “electric motor” includes structure below and touching, the parallelogram (unhatched/solid) and indicated by reference character “43” showing the “thermoprotector”; and this interpretation is supported by Fujita:
The thermoprotector 43 is housed in a recessed storage groove 44 provided on the electric motor 26, so as to be contained within the outer wall of the electric motor 26. A conductive plate 45 is provided in the storage groove 44 so that the heat generated by the electric motor 26 is transmitted to the thermoprotector 43.
(paragraph 30 of the machine-generated translation into English of Fujita). Fig. 4 of Fujita implicitly taught spacing the thermostat apart from a stator in a direction of the rotation axis because Fujita recognized a benefit of the thermostat (“thermoprotector 43”) location shown in Fig. 4 of Fujita, “the size of the electric motor can be reduced” (at paragraph 16 of the machine-generated translation of into English of Fujita); and a stator is typically present in a drive motor and is the structure that typically constrains a drive motor’s diameter. (page 10–11 of Detailed Action). Thus, arranging a thermostat apart from a drive motor (and not merely the drive motor’s stator) in the direction of the rotation axis would have been an obvious rearrangement of parts (MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C)) that maintains the benefit. (page 11 of Detailed Action). In other words, moving the thermostat (“thermoprotector 43”) to the left, even farther away from the stator than shown in Fig. 4 of Fujita would have been an obvious rearrangement of parts. (page 11 of Detailed Action). Further modifying Fujita, the heat transfer structure disposed at a greater distance in a radial direction than the thermostat and the drive motor would have been obvious to try (MPEP 2143 (I)(E)) because Fujita recognized the benefit of the heat transfer structure (“conductive plate 45”), that is, a strip of material transferring heat from drive motor to thermostat by contacting both (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16, 36; Fig. 4 of Fujita); and one out of a finite number of general arrangements of the heat transfer structure to maintain the aforementioned benefit would read on the claimed disposition of the heat transfer structure. (page 11–12 of Detailed Action).
The verbatim rejection, to claim 1 in the Detailed Action, follows. Claims 1–2, 4–6, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita et al. (JP 2002315700 A) (its machine-generated translation into English), in view of Broadbent (US 4602314 A) and further as evidenced by Grzywacz et al. (US 20050082926 A1) and De Sisto et al. (EP 0068729 A1).
As to claim 1, Fujita teaches a cleaner head (paragraph 2: “Conventional suction attachments . . . shown in Figure 5”) comprising:
a brush drum (“rotating brush 2”) rotatable about a rotation axis;
a brush case (“device body 1”) rotatably supporting the brush drum; and
a drive assembly arranged inside the brush drum and configured to provide a rotational force to the brush drum, wherein the drive assembly comprises:
a drive motor (“electric motor 5”),
a drive housing (paragraph 5: “other end [of fixed shaft 13] is formed in a cylindrical shape and disposed inside the rotating brush 2, supporting the outer circumference of the electric motor 5”; annotated Fig. 5 of Fujita) that accommodates the drive motor,
is arranged between an inner circumferential surface of the brush drum and an outer circumferential surface of the drive motor, and
is supported by an end of the brush case (paragraph 5: “one end [of fixed shaft 13] protruding to the side of rotating brush 2, and rotatably supporting the rotating brush 2 via a bearing 11”; annotated Fig. 5 of Fujita).
To be clear, “fixed shaft 13” is a single component that is “fixedly held to the suction device body 1.” (paragraph 6). Each dotted-line box in annotated Fig. 5 of Fujita encloses an end of the “fixed shaft 13”: the dotted-line box on our lefthand side encloses the end of the “fixed shaft 13” that reads on the drive housing, while the dotted-line box on our righthand side encloses the end of the “fixed shaft 13” that reads on the end of the brush case that supports the drive housing.
PNG
media_image2.png
441
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 5 of Fujita
However, the “Conventional suction attachments . . . shown in Figure 5” of Fujita teach neither a thermostat nor a heat transfer structure.
We turn to Fujita’s invention (Fig. 1–4) that teaches:
a thermostat (“thermoprotector 43”) that is configured to cut off power supplied to the drive motor (“electric motor 26”) according to a temperature, and
is arranged to be spaced apart from a stator (annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita) of the drive motor (“electric motor 26”) in a direction of the rotation axis, and
a “conductive plate 45” configured to transfer heat from the drive motor to the thermostat (paragraph 30). The “conductive plate 45 is provided in the storage groove 44 so that the heat generated by the electric motor 26 is transmitted to the thermoprotector 43.” (paragraph 30; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita).
PNG
media_image1.png
471
696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) by employing a thermostat (“thermoprotector 43” in Fujita’s invention; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita) for the benefit, as taught by Fujita, of preventing an electric motor from generating enough heat that it cause “thermal damage” to gears (that are part of the drivetrain transmitting a rotational force to a brush drum). (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 17, 36).
Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) as modified does not explicitly teach that a thermostat is arranged to be spaced apart from a drive motor in a direction of the rotation axis. Fujita’s invention (Fig. 1–4) does, however, implicitly teach this thermostat arrangement in light of the level of skill in the art that is evidenced by Grzywacz and De Sisto, and in light of an obvious rearrangement of parts.
Annotated Fig. 4 of Grzywacz shows a "rotor 18" and "stator 16" in a drawing of an electric motor.
PNG
media_image3.png
537
722
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 of Grzywacz.
Thus, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita implicitly taught a rotor installed in a stator because reference character “26” indicating an “electric motor” would have drawn one’s attention to structure relating to an electric motor, such as a rotor and stator, and also one would have recognized those structures’ representation in Fujita by their similarity to rotor and stator representations common to other electric motor drawings, such as in annotated Fig. 4 of Grzywacz.
Also, a person of ordinary skill would have recognized that annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita taught commutators located below the “thermoprotector 43” because reference character “26” indicating an “electric motor” would have drawn one’s attention to structure relating to an electric motor, such as commutators; and also one would have recognized those structures’ representation in Fujita by their similarity to commutator representations common to other electric motor drawings, such as in annotated Fig. 8A of De Sisto showing "commutator segments 325.”
PNG
media_image4.png
209
442
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 8A of De Sisto.
And one of ordinary skill would have appreciated, as shown in annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita and annotated Fig. 8A of De Sisto, that an electric motor’s commutators usually have a smaller diameter than the same motor’s stator.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) by spacing the thermostat (“thermoprotector 43” in Fujita’s invention; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita) apart from Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” drive motor (“electric motor 5”) as implicitly taught by annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita, and the machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16 and 36, and in light of an obvious rearrangement of parts. One of ordinary skill would have recognized that annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita implicitly taught arranging a thermostat apart from a stator along the axis of rotation of the stator and that it would have had the benefit of enabling a smaller diameter drive housing than if the thermostat were located above the stator, which is where reference character “X” is marked above the stator on annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita. (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16, 36; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita). And since the stator is typically present in a drive motor, and is the structure that typically constrains a drive motor’s diameter, then one of ordinary skill would have realized that arranging a thermostat apart from a drive motor, and not merely the drive motor’s stator, would have been an obvious rearrangement of parts. MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C).
Given that Fig. 4 of Fujita teaches a “conductive plate 45 . . . made of a copper plate or the like, which has a good thermal conductivity,” connecting the drive housing to the thermostat because the “conductive plate 45” is sandwiched between those two structures (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 30); and given that it would have been obvious to arrange the thermostat apart from the drive motor in the direction of the rotation axis; then it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) by using the claimed heat transfer structure (described in the specification and equivalents thereof) as implicitly taught by the invention in Fujita annotated Fig. 4, for the benefit of transferring heat from the drive motor to the thermostat (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16, 36; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita). This further modification would have been obvious for reasons in the following paragraph.
One heat transfer structure described by the present specification comprises a “heat transfer plate 160 extending in the direction of the rotation axis, and assembled to the drive housing.” (paragraph 91). And Fig. 9–10 of the present drawings show that the heat transfer structure comprises a strip of material that is between the, drive housing and both drive motor and thermostat; also, the strip of material bridges the gap between drive motor and thermostat. An equivalent to the heat transfer structure includes a strip of material that touches: a side of the thermostat and also an area on the outside diameter of the drive motor. The heat transfer structure is therefore obvious to try because there is a finite number of general arrangements for a strip of material, like Fujita’s “conductive plate 45,” to bridge a gap between drive motor and thermostat so as to read on the heat transfer structure and its equivalents, described by the present application: for the art-recognized benefit that the strip transfer heat from drive motor to thermostat. (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16, 36; MPEP 2143 (I)(E)).
Even if Fujita does not teach the heat transfer structure, then still the heat transfer structure would have been obvious because Broadbent implicitly teaches it.
Broadbent teaches a “heat conduction mechanism 20” that transfers heat (“arrows 16”) from a row of "semiconductor device[s] (hereinafter . . . ‘chip[s]’) 10” to a “heat sink 40.” (column 2, line 25–44; Fig. 1–2). The “heat conduction mechanism 20” has a flexible foam core (“central core 26” or “central body portion 26”) and a “thermally conductive and deformable metallic outer surface 30” that surrounds the flexible foam core. (column 2, line 25–35; Fig. 1–2). To transfer heat, the “heat conduction mechanism 20” is “sandwiched” between the “heat sink 40” and a row of “chips 10.” (column 1, line 62–68; column 2, line 1–3; column 3, line 1–22; Fig. 1–2). Broadbent thus implies that the “heat conduction mechanism 20” is compressed by “chips 10” and “heat sink 40” to bring into “physical contact” one side of the “heat conduction mechanism 20” with “surface 32 of the chip 10,” and another of its sides with the “heat sink 40.” (column 2, line 36–45; Fig. 1–2). Finally, Broadbent teaches that “the thermally conductive outer surface 30 may comprise a thin layer aluminum or copper, . . . ." (column 2, line 47–52). One of ordinary creativity would have realized that by disposing a thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes those portions contacting “chips 10,” and by replacing one “chip 10,” in a row of only two “chip[s] 10,” with a heat sink, then the “thermally conductive outer surface 30” would have transferred heat from the remaining “chip 10” to the heat sink. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) which spaces a thermostat apart from the drive motor in a direction of the rotation of axis, by employing the heat transfer structure implicitly taught by Broadbent (thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes portions contacting “chips10”), for the benefit of “maximum surface contact” (Broadbent column 3, line 23–32) between the conductive material, and each of the thermostat and drive motor.
As to instant claims 2–14, they are “are patentable for at least the reasons that claim 1 is patentable, as well as for the additional features recited therein,” according to Applicant. (page 12 of Remarks).
In response, the Office submits that the rejections to claims 1–14 in the Detailed Action mailed May 8, 2026, reject the instant claims 2–14. The verbatim rejections, to claims 2–14 in the Detailed Action, follow. As to claim 2, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) as already modified in the rejection to claim 1, above, employed the heat transfer structure implicitly taught by Broadbent. And as implicitly taught by Broadbent, the heat transfer structure comprised a heat transfer plate (thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes portions contacting “chips 10”). It inherently would have extended in the direction of the rotation axis, once installed to bridge the gap between the drive motor and thermostat. Moreover, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) by assembling the heat transfer plate of Broadbent to the drive housing of Fujita: because it would have been a matter of engineering choice; or, for the benefit of one less structure to disassemble when accessing the thermostat, and subsequently one less structure to reinstall during reassembly of the drive housing.
As to claim 4, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) as already modified in the rejection to claim 2, above, employed the heat transfer plate implicitly taught by Broadbent (thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes portions contacting “chips 10”). And as implicitly taught by Broadbent, the heat transfer plate would have comprised a continuous strip of conductive material bridging a gap between drive motor and thermostat, and thus would have comprised a first area overlapping the drive motor; a second area overlapping the thermostat; and a connection area connecting the first area to the second area.
As to claim 5, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) as already modified in the rejection to claim 2, above, included the heat transfer plate implicitly taught by Broadbent (thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes portions contacting “chips 10”) that inherently comprised a connection pad that transfers heat from the drive motor to the heat transfer plate (and a connection pad that transfers heat from the heat transfer plate to the thermostat) because: Broadbent’s heat transfer plate comprised a continuous strip of thermally conductive material bridging the gap between drive motor and thermostat, and contacting an area of the drive motor and of the thermostat.
As to claim 6, Fujita does not teach that the connection pad is elastically deformable.
However, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) as already modified to reject claim 5, above, included the heat transfer plate of Broadbent (thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes portions contacting “chips 10”). Additionally, Broadbent teaches that the “heat conduction mechanism 20” has a flexible foam core (“central core 26” or “central body portion 26”) and a “thermally conductive and deformable metallic outer surface 30” that surrounds the flexible foam core. (column 2, line 25–35; Fig. 1–2). To transfer heat, the “heat conduction mechanism 20” is “sandwiched” between the “heat sink 40” and a row of “chips 10.” (column 1, line 62–68; column 2, line 1–3; column 3, line 1–22; Fig. 1–2). Broadbent thus implies that the “heat conduction mechanism 20” is compressed by “chips 10” and the “heat sink 40” to bring into “physical contact” one side of the “heat conduction mechanism 20” with “surface 32 of the chip 10,” and bring into “physical contact” another of its sides with the “heat sink 40.” (column 2, line 36–45; Fig. 1–2).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) (that was already modified to reject claim 5) by employing a connection pad that is elastically deformable as taught by Broadbent (“central core 26” or “central body portion 26” that is flexible foam, or a “deformable metallic outer surface 30”), and as implicitly taught by Broadbent, a first adhesion area adhered to the drive motor and a second adhesion area adhered to the thermostat (because Broadbent teaches that compressing “heat conduction mechanism 20” causes one of its sides to make “physical contact” with “surface 32 of the chip 10” and multiple “chip[s] 10” are in a row); for the benefit of “maximum surface contact” (Broadbent column 3, line 23–32) between the heat transfer plate, and each of the thermostat and drive motor.
As to claim 13, it is assumed that the thickness (T) of the thermostat is measured along a radial direction of the brush drum rotation axis. Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) as already modified to reject claim 1, above, taught that a difference between an inner diameter of the drive housing and an outer diameter of the drive motor is less than a thickness (T) of the thermostat. This teaching was inherent in the teaching of Fujita discussed to reject claim 1, above: Arranging a thermostat apart from a stator along the axis of rotation of the stator would have enabled a smaller diameter drive housing than if the thermostat were located above the stator. And this benefit (a smaller diameter drive housing) is the result of a difference between an inner diameter of the drive housing and an outer diameter of the drive motor that is less than a thickness (T) of the thermostat. Also, the relative dimensions described by claim 13 are taught by annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Fujita (its machine-generated translation into English) and Broadbent, and further as evidenced by Grzywacz and De Sisto, as applied above to reject claim 2, and further in view of Atkinson et al. (US 20080182156 A1).
As to claim 3, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) already modified in the rejection to claim 2, above, comprised a heat transfer structure implicitly taught by Broadbent (thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes portions contacting “chips 10”). And Broadbent’s heat transfer structure, modified to reject claim 2, already comprised a heat transfer plate (thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes portions contacting “chips 10”).
Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) already modified did not teach that the heat transfer plate comprises a material with thermal conductivity higher than a material of the drive housing. Atkinson does.
Atkinson teaches “compressible contacts 500” (or “thermal transfer contacts 400”) that transfer heat from a “battery cell 204” to a “portable computer system 100.” (abstract; paragraph 12, 23, 25; Fig. 5–6). The “compressible contacts 500” (or “thermal transfer contacts 400”) extend through a “housing 202.” (abstract; paragraph 12, 23, 25; Fig. 5–6). Atkinson teaches a lower thermal conductivity of the “housing 202” compared to the “compressible contacts 500” (or “thermal transfer contacts 400”) because the target structure of heat from the “battery cell 204” is the “portable computer system 100,” rather than the “housing 202.” (paragraph 12).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that were already modified to reject claim 2) by choosing a material with a higher thermal conductivity for the heat transfer plate, compared to a material of the drive housing, as implicitly taught by Atkinson, for the benefit of maximizing the heat transfer from the drive motor to the thermostat, rather than to the drive housing.
Claims 7–9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita (its machine-generated translation into English) and Broadbent, and further as evidenced by Grzywacz and De Sisto, s applied above to reject claim 2, and further in view of Murphy (US 4383007 A).
As to claim 7, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) already modified to reject claim 2, above, does not teach a cutout.
However, Murphy teaches a cutout (cutout remaining after removing “cover 11,” or “associated cover 11”) in a housing (“radio cabinet 10”) that exposes a portion inside the housing (“battery compartment 14”), and a cover (“cover 11”) is arranged to be inserted into the cutout. (Fig. 1). One of ordinary skill would have recognized that with Murphy’s “cover 11” installed into the cutout, an external surface of “cover 11” would have laid flush with respect to an external surface of a side of Murphy’s “radio cabinet 10,” and thus Murphy’s “radio cabinet” would essentially have maintained the surface continuity of the rest of the “radio cabinet.” A person of ordinary skill would have known how to apply this teaching to housings having different forms such as cylinders.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that was already modified to reject claim 2) by designing a cutout, as taught by Murphy, into the drive housing of Fujita for the benefit of inspection of the structure underlying the drive housing without disassembly of the entire drive housing. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that was already modified to reject claim 2) by arranging the heat transfer plate into the cutout, as taught by Murphy, for the benefit of disposing the thermostat underneath the heat transfer plate, and thereby permitting access to the thermostat without disassembly of the entire drive housing.
As to claim 8, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) already modified to reject claim 7, above, teaches neither that the heat transfer plate comprises a step area, nor that the heat transfer plate comprises a coupling area.
However, Murphy teaches a step area (“extensions 12”) on one end of “cover 11” that is to be inserted between the “radio cabinet 10” and the “battery compartment 14.” Murphy also teaches a coupling area (“latch 13”) arranged at a other end of “cover 11” that is to be coupled to the “radio cabinet 10.” (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that was already modified to reject claim 7) by employing a step area of Murphy (“extensions 12”) on one end of the heat transfer plate to be inserted between the drive housing and the drive motor, and by employing a coupling area of Murphy (“latch 13”) arranged at a other end of the heat transfer plate to be coupled to the drive housing; for the benefit of securing the heat transfer plate to the drive housing.
As to claim 9, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) already modified to reject claim 8, above, do not teach a second coupling area.
However, Murphy implicitly teaches a second coupling area (area of the “radio cabinet 10” that is “engageable” with the “flexible latch 13” of “cover 11”) assembled to the coupling area (“flexible latch 13” of “cover 11”). (paragraph 2; Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that was already modified to reject claim 8) by designing a second coupling area assembled to the coupling area to prevent separation of the heat transfer plate, as taught by Murphy, for the benefit of securing, or further securing, the heat transfer plate to the drive housing.
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita (its machine-generated translation into English), Broadbent, and Murphy, and further as evidenced by Grzywacz and De Sisto, as applied above to reject claim 9, and further in view of Choi (KR 200444987 Y1) (its machine-generated translation into English).
As to claim 10, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) modified to reject claim 9, above, do not teach a first separation prevention part and a second separation prevention part.
However, Choi teaches a first or second separation prevention part (“protrusions (114)” or “locking grooves (116)”) that prevents separation of the heat transfer plate in a direction. (machine-generated translation into English of Choi page 6–7; Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that was already modified to reject claim 9) by including in the second coupling area: a separation part that prevents separation of the heat transfer plate in a length direction as taught by Choi, for the benefit of further securing the heat transfer plate to the drive housing. Further modifying Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that were already modified to reject claim 9) by installing a first separation prevention part that prevents separation of the heat transfer plate in a length direction, and then installing second separation prevention parts that do the same but in a width direction, would have been an obvious duplication of parts that produced the known and expected result of further securing the heat transfer plate to the drive housing. MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(B). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that were already modified to include a separation prevention part as taught by Choi) by including in the second coupling area: a first separation part that prevents separation of the heat transfer plate in a length direction as taught by Choi, and also second separation prevention parts that prevent separation of the heat transfer plate in a width direction as taught by Choi for the benefit of further still securing the heat transfer plate to the drive housing.
As to claim 12, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) already modified to reject claim 10, above, taught that the second coupling area comprised coupling protrusions (Choi’s “protrusions (114)”) that are insertable into coupling grooves. Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) as already modified, however, did not expressly include a coupling area that comprised coupling grooves.
Choi teaches coupling grooves (“locking grooves (116)”), into which coupling protrusions (“protrusions (114)”) are insertable. (machine-generated translation into English of Choi page 6–7; Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that was already modified to reject claim 10) by including in the coupling area, coupling grooves provided at both ends of the heat transfer plate in the width direction, as taught by Choi, and by including in the second coupling area, a sufficient number of coupling protrusions (at least some of which were already taught by Fujita as modified) insertable into the coupling grooves, as taught by Choi, for the benefit of selecting known engagement structures to further secure the heat transfer plate to the drive housing.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita (its machine-generated translation into English), Broadbent, Murphy, and Choi (its machine-generated translation into English), and further as evidenced by Grzywacz and De Sisto, as applied above to reject claim 10, and further in view of Holka (US 3165163 A).
As to claim 11, it is assumed that a thickness direction is along the radial direction of the brush drum rotation axis. Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) already modified to reject claim 10, above, did not teach that the second coupling area has a hook shape. Holka does.
Holka teaches a coupling area that has a hook shape (“inwardly turned lips 18” or “lips 18”). (column 2, line 53–65).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that were already modified to reject claim 10) by employing a second coupling area with a hook shape to prevent separation of the heat transfer plate in a thickness direction, as taught by Holka, for the benefit of further securing the heat transfer plate to the drive housing.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita (its machine-generated translation into English), and Broadbent, and further as evidenced by Grzywacz and De Sisto, as applied above to reject claim 1, and further in view of Cunningham et al. (US 20050166351 A1).
As to claim 14, Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) already modified to reject claim 1, above, did not teach a direct current motor.
However, Cunningham teaches a direct current electric motor (“DC brushless motor 15”) for use in a vacuum cleaner (“suction device 1”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” in Fig. 5 (that were already modified to reject claim 1) by employing a direct current electric motor as the drive motor, as taught by Cunningham, for the benefit of a quieter or more efficient motor compared to an alternating current motor. (page 3, paragraph 73).
As to currently amended claim 15, Applicant submits that it “should be allowable for reasons similar to those described . . . with respect to” currently amended claim 1.
In response, the Office submits that the rejection to claim 15 in the Detailed Action mailed May 8, 2026, rejects currently amended claim 15 (page 15–21 of Detailed Action), for reasons similar to those in the above rejection to currently amended claim 1. The verbatim rejection, to claim 15 in the Detailed Action, follows. As to claim 15 Fujita taught a cleaner head (paragraph 2: “Conventional suction attachments . . . shown in Figure 5”),
wherein the cleaner head comprises:
a brush drum (“rotating brush 2”) rotatable about a rotation axis;
a brush case (“device body 1”) rotatably supporting the brush drum; and
a drive assembly arranged inside the brush drum and configured to provide a rotational force to the brush drum, wherein the drive assembly comprises:
a drive motor (“electric motor 5”),
a drive housing (paragraph 5: “other end [of fixed shaft 13] is formed in a cylindrical shape and disposed inside the rotating brush 2, supporting the outer circumference of the electric motor 5”; annotated Fig. 5 of Fujita) that accommodates the drive motor,
is arranged between an inner circumferential surface of the brush drum and an outer circumferential surface of the drive motor, and
is supported by an end of the brush case (paragraph 5: “one end [of fixed shaft 13] protruding to the side of rotating brush 2, and rotatably supporting the rotating brush 2 via a bearing 11”; annotated Fig. 5 of Fujita).
To be clear, “fixed shaft 13” is a single component that is “fixedly held to the suction device body 1.” (paragraph 6). And each dotted-line box in annotated Fig. 5 of Fujita encloses one end of “fixed shaft 13”: the dotted-line box on our lefthand side encloses the “fixed shaft 13” end that reads on the drive housing, while the dotted-line box on our righthand side encloses the “fixed shaft 13” end that reads on the end of the brush case that supports the drive housing.
However, the “Conventional suction attachments . . . shown in Figure 5” of Fujita teach neither a thermostat nor a heat transfer structure. They also don’t teach a cleaner comprising a cleaner main body.
We turn to Fujita’s invention in Fig. 1–4 that teaches:
a cleaner (paragraph 22: “Figures 1 to 3 show an electric vacuum cleaner”) comprising: a cleaner main body (assembly of “cleaner body 21,” “hose 22,” “extension pipe 23,” and “connecting pipe 24”);
a cleaner head (“suction device body 18”) connected to the cleaner main body,
a thermostat (“thermoprotector 43”) that is configured to cut off power supplied to the drive motor (“electric motor 26”) according to a temperature, and
is arranged to be spaced apart from a stator (annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita) of the drive motor (“electric motor 26”) in a direction of the rotation axis, and
a “conductive plate 45” configured to transfer heat from the drive motor to the thermostat (paragraph 30). The “conductive plate 45 is provided in the storage groove 44 so that the heat generated by the electric motor 26 is transmitted to the thermoprotector 43.” (paragraph 30; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) by employing a cleaner comprising a cleaner main body to which the cleaner head attaches as taught by Fujita’s invention in Fig. 1–4 for the benefit of an apparatus that could be used to clean a surface.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) by employing a thermostat (“thermoprotector 43” in Fujita’s invention; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita) for the benefit, as taught by Fujita, of preventing an electric motor from generating enough heat that it cause “thermal damage” to gears (that are part of the drivetrain transmitting a rotational force to a brush drum). (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 17, 36).
Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) as modified do not explicitly teach that a thermostat is arranged to be spaced apart from a drive motor in a direction of the rotation axis. Fujita’s invention (Fig. 1–4) does, however, implicitly teach this thermostat arrangement in light of the level of skill in the art that is evidenced by Grzywacz et al. and De Sisto, and in light of an obvious rearrangement of parts.
Annotated Fig. 4 of Grzywacz, above, shows a "rotor 18" and "stator 16" in a drawing of an electric motor. Thus, one of ordinary skill would have recognized that annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita implicitly taught a rotor installed in a stator because reference character “26” indicating an “electric motor” would have drawn one’s attention to structure relating to an electric motor, such as a rotor and stator, and also one would have recognized those structures’ representation in Fujita by their similarity to rotor and stator representations common to other electric motor drawings, such as in annotated Fig. 4 of Grzywacz.
Also, a person of ordinary skill would have recognized that annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita taught commutators located below the “thermoprotector 43” because reference character “26” indicating an “electric motor” would have drawn one’s attention to structure relating to an electric motor, such as commutators; and also one would have recognized those structures’ representation in Fujita by their similarity to commutator representations common to other electric motor drawings, such as in annotated Fig. 8A of De Sisto, above, showing "commutator segments 325.” And one of ordinary skill would have appreciated, as shown in annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita and annotated Fig. 8A of De Sisto, that an electric motor’s commutators usually have a smaller diameter than the same motor’s stator.
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) by spacing the thermostat (“thermoprotector 43” in Fujita’s invention; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita) apart from Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” drive motor (“electric motor 5”) as implicitly taught by annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita, and the machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16 and 36, and in light of an obvious rearrangement of parts. One of ordinary skill would have recognized that annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita implicitly taught arranging a thermostat apart from a stator along the axis of rotation of the stator and that it would have had the benefit of enabling a smaller diameter drive housing than if the thermostat were located above the stator, which is where reference character “X” is marked above the stator on annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita. (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16, 36; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita). And since the stator is typically present in a drive motor, and is the structure that typically constrains a drive motor’s diameter, then one of ordinary skill would have realized that arranging a thermostat apart from a drive motor, and not merely the drive motor’s stator, would have been an obvious rearrangement of parts. MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(C).
Given that Fig. 4 of Fujita teaches a “conductive plate 45 . . . made of a copper plate or the like, which has a good thermal conductivity,” connecting the drive housing to the thermostat because the “conductive plate 45” is sandwiched between those two structures (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 30); and given that it would have been obvious to arrange the thermostat apart from the drive motor in the direction of the rotation axis; then it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) by using the claimed heat transfer structure (described in the specification and equivalents thereof) as implicitly taught by the invention in Fujita annotated Fig. 4, for the benefit of transferring heat from the drive motor to the thermostat (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16; annotated Fig. 4 of Fujita). This further modification would have been obvious for reasons in the following paragraph.
One heat transfer structure described by the present specification comprises a “heat transfer plate 160 extending in the direction of the rotation axis, and assembled to the drive housing.” (paragraph 91). And Fig. 9–10 of the present drawings show that the heat transfer structure comprises a strip of material that is between the, drive housing and both drive motor and thermostat; also, the strip of material bridges the gap between drive motor and thermostat. An equivalent to the heat transfer structure includes a strip of material that touches: a side of the thermostat and also an area on the outside diameter of the drive motor. The heat transfer structure is therefore obvious to try because there is a finite number of general arrangements for a strip of material, like Fujita’s “conductive plate 45,” to bridge a gap between drive motor and thermostat so as to read on the heat transfer structure and its equivalents, described by the present application: for the art-recognized benefit that the strip transfer heat from drive motor to thermostat. (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16; MPEP 2143 (I)(E)).
Even if Fujita does not teach the heat transfer structure, then still the heat transfer structure would have been obvious because Broadbent implicitly teaches it.
Broadbent teaches a “heat conduction mechanism 20” that transfers heat (“arrows 16”) from a row of "semiconductor device[s] (hereinafter . . . ‘chip[s]’) 10” to a “heat sink 40.” (column 2, line 25–44; Fig. 1–2). The “heat conduction mechanism 20” has a flexible foam core (“central core 26” or “central body portion 26”) and a “thermally conductive and deformable metallic outer surface 30” that surrounds the flexible foam core. (column 2, line 25–35; Fig. 1–2). To transfer heat, the “heat conduction mechanism 20” is “sandwiched” between the “heat sink 40” and a row of “chips 10.” (column 1, line 62–68; column 2, line 1–3; column 3, line 1–22; Fig. 1–2). Broadbent thus implies that the “heat conduction mechanism 20” is compressed by “chips 10” and “heat sink 40” to bring into “physical contact” one side of the “heat conduction mechanism 20” with “surface 32 of the chip 10,” and another of its sides with the “heat sink 40.” (column 2, line 36–45; Fig. 1–2). Finally, Broadbent teaches that “the thermally conductive outer surface 30 may comprise a thin layer aluminum or copper, . . . ." (column 2, line 47–52). One of ordinary creativity would have realized that by disposing a thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes those portions contacting “chips 10,” and by replacing one “chip 10,” in a row of only two “chip[s] 10,” with a heat sink, then the “thermally conductive outer surface 30” would have transferred heat from the remaining “chip 10” to the heat sink. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Fujita’s “Conventional suction attachments” (Fig. 5) which spaces a thermostat apart from the drive motor in a direction of the rotation of axis, by employing the heat transfer structure implicitly taught by Broadbent (thermally conductive material only on the side of “thermally conductive outer surface 30” that includes portions contacting “chips10”), for the benefit of “maximum surface contact” (Broadbent column 3, line 23–32) between the conductive material, and each of the thermostat and drive motor.
As to new claims 16 and 17, they “are patentable for at least the reasons that claims 1 and 15 are patentable” according to Applicant. (page 12 of Remarks).
Applicant also submits that in Fig. 4 of Fujita, the heat transfer plate (“conductive plate 45”) is positioned
lateral to the portion of the electric motor 26 that the Examiner analogizes to Applicant's claimed drive motor (the Examiner does not analogize the region of the electric motor 26 that he refers to as the "commutator" to Applicant's claimed drive motor in order to show a "spaced apart from the drive motor" relationship that is required by Applicant's claim 1) and does not overlap the drive motor.
(page 12 of Remarks).
In response, the Office submits that the rejections to claims 1 and 15, in the Detailed Action mailed May 8, 2026, reject, respectively, new claims 16 and 17. (page 6–13, 15–21 of Detailed Action). The heat transfer structure (comprising the heat transfer plate) that overlaps both the thermostat and the drive motor, is an arrangement inherent in the arrangement of the heat transfer structure recited by currently amended claims 1 and 15. Alternatively, the arrangement recited by new claims 16 and 17 would have been obvious to try (MPEP 2143 (I)(E)) because Fujita recognized the benefit of the heat transfer structure (“conductive plate 45”), that is, a strip of material transferring heat from drive motor to thermostat by contacting both (machine-generated translation into English of Fujita paragraph 16, 36; Fig. 4 of Fujita); and one out of a finite number of general arrangements of the heat transfer structure to maintain the benefit would read on the claimed arrangement of the heat transfer structure. (page 11–12, 19–20 of Detailed Action).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ENRICO MIOTTO whose telephone number is (571) 272-2650. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 - 5:30 p.m..
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, NICHOLAS WEISS can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/ENRICO MIOTTO/Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/NICHOLAS J. WEISS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights