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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraphs 0012, 0016-0021 are objected to because they each refer to “line 6-6” or “line 9-9” or “line 11-11” of Fig 1 but Fig 1 does not have a “line 6-6” or “line 9-9” or “line 11-11”.
Reference characters 122 (e.g. para 0035) and 202 (e.g. para 0047) are both used to designate “the spring”. It is suggested that the first use of “a spring 122” be changed to “a latch member spring 122” and that the first use of “a spring 202” be changed to “a torsion spring 202”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 29 (last paragraph) recites the limitation “and the wand having a second configuration wherein the telescoping member in the retracted state” which is grammatically incorrect and should be rewritten as -- and the wand having a second configuration wherein the telescoping member is in the retracted state --.
Claim 26 recites the limitation “the actuator includes a rack and pinion” which should be rewritten as -- the actuator includes a rack and a pinion -- to provide formal antecedent basis for separate structures, especially as certain claims are subsequently directed towards only “the pinion” and not the rack.
Claim 30 recites the limitation “the actuator includes a rack and pinion” which should be rewritten as -- the actuator includes a rack and a pinion -- to provide formal antecedent basis for separate structures, especially as certain claims are subsequently directed towards only “the pinion” and not the rack.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim(s) 17, 27 is/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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the spring is a torsion spring operable to rotate the pinion when the telescoping member is in the retracted state” wherein the underlined terms each lack proper antecedent basis and thus render the claim indefinite.
Note: claim 13 introduces and discusses a pinion; claim 14 introduces and discusses a telescoping member; claim 16 introduces and discusses the spring.
Claim 27 recites the limitation “the spring is a torsion spring operable to rotate the pinion when the telescoping member is in the retracted state” wherein the underlined terms each lack proper antecedent basis and thus render the claim indefinite.
Note: claim 25 introduces and discusses a spring; claim 26 introduces and discusses a pinion.
In view of the 112(b) rejections set forth above, the claims are rejected below as best understood.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim(s) 1-16, 18 are allowable over prior art.
Claim(s) 19-26, 28 are allowable over prior art (but 26 is subject to the claim objections identified above).
Claim(s) 29-33 are allowable over prior art (but 29, 30 are subject to the claim objections identified above).
Claim(s) 17, 27 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
Independent claims 1, and 19, and 29, are each directed toward a surface cleaner (10) which has automatic actuation of a valve (162) to switch between suction at the base (18), and suction at the handle (26) or the wand (22). The wand has an internal linkage (slider 86, rod 90, telescoping member 70) which gets extended only when the handle is connected to the wand.
Figs 11-14 show the vacuum housing.
Fig 11 shows the wand removed.
Fig 12 shows the wand being inserted (handle not connected).
Fig 13 shows the wand inserted (handle not connected).
Fig 14 shows the wand inserted, and the handle connected to the wand - the wand's linkage extends to engage an actuator (rack 178 and pinion 182) which rotates valve 162 against spring 202 to produce suction at the base 18.
CN 201256921 Y (Ni) is considered to be the closest known prior art.
Examiner's note: The examiner's submitted English translation of Ni, submitted with this office action, is referenced hereinafter.
Ni is directed towards a vacuum which has automatic actuation of a valve (3; Fig 1) to switch between suction at the base (19; Fig 1), and suction at the wand (tube 12, which is connected to handle 11 and hose 4). When the tube 12 is inserted into pipe 13, tube 12 contacts component 6/61/60, wherein component 6/61/60 is forced downward inside pipe 13 to overcome the force of spring 5, wherein component 6/61/60 actuates a rack and pinion (9 combined with 7) which rotates valve core 3 to produce suction at the ground brush (e.g. page 4 para 2-7).
While it may be obvious to modify Ni’s tube 12 and handle 11 to be separable, in order to produce suction at a short handle or a long wand for convenient/efficient cleaning, one would not be motivated to further modify Ni’s tube and handle to have a configuration “wherein the valve moves from the first position to the second position in response to the handle air inlet being uncoupled from the second end of the wand, and wherein the valve moves from the first position to the second position in response to the first end of the wand being removed from the wand housing” (as required by claim 1), or to have a configuration “wherein the actuator moves from the first actuator position to the second actuator position in response to the telescoping member moving from the retracted state to the extended state when the handle is coupled to the wand while the wand is coupled to the housing” (as required by claim 19), or to have a configuration of “the wand having a first configuration wherein the telescoping member [is] in the extended state and holds the valve actuator in the second actuator position against the force of the spring, and the wand having a second configuration wherein the telescoping member [is] in the retracted state and allows the spring to move the valve actuator to move to the first actuator position, the spring force sufficient to move the valve actuator from the second actuator position to the first actuator position” (as required by claim 29).
GB 2462124 A (Bassett) (Examiner's note: The examiner's submitted English translation of Bassett, submitted with this office action, is referenced hereinafter.) is similar prior art and is directed towards a vacuum which has automatic actuation of a valve (30; Fig 3, Fig 4) to switch between suction at the base (13; Fig 1), and suction at a handle (12, which is connected to hose 20). When the handle 12 is inserted into socket 18, handle 12 contacts arm 21, wherein arm 21 is forced to overcome the force of spring 23, wherein arm 21 actuates a rack and pinion (31 combined with 32; Figs 3 and 4) which rotates valve 30 to produce suction at the base (e.g. bottom of page 4 and top of page 5; abstract).
While it may be obvious to modify Bassett’s handle to have a separable wand, in order to produce suction at a short handle or a long wand for convenient/efficient cleaning, one would not be motivated to further modify Bassett’s handle and wand to have a configuration as required by claims 1, 19, 29 (configurations discussed above with respect to Ni).
US 20110219568 A1 (Conrad) is similar prior art and is directed towards a vacuum which has automatic actuation of a valve (300; Fig 8) to switch between suction at the base (106; Fig 6), and suction at a handle (at 116 in Fig 6, which is connected to hose 118). When the handle is inserted onto mount 316 (Fig 9), rod 306 extends against spring 314 to actuate valve 300 to produce suction at the base (e.g. Figs 7-10).
While it may be obvious to modify Conrad’s handle to have a separable wand, in order to produce suction at a short handle or a long wand for convenient/efficient cleaning, one would not be motivated to further modify Conrad’s handle and wand to have a configuration as required by claims 1, 19, 29 (configurations discussed above with respect to Ni).
At this time, the prior art of record does not fairly disclose, teach, or suggest the missing limitation(s) as described above such that a modification would be possible in order to arrive at the claimed invention. One would not be motivated to modify the prior art’s structure such that it would read on Applicant’s claims 1, 19, 29 without improper hindsight from Applicant’s disclosure. The claims 1, 19, 29 are therefore deemed to be allowable over the prior art.
Claims 2-18 each depend from claim 1 and would therefore be allowable over the prior art for at least that reason.
Claims 20-28 each depend from claim 19 and would therefore be allowable over the prior art for at least that reason.
Claims 30-33 each depend from claim 29 and would therefore be allowable over the prior art for at least that reason.
Conclusion
The following prior art, made of record and not relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
WO 2005094654 A1- cited for teaching a vacuum which has suction at the base, and at distal end of a handle 19 which is connected to hose 26. When the handle is removed from the housing, linkage 33 activates a valve 32 to rotate into a position for automatic switching of suction from base to the hose.
US 20090049641 - cited for teaching a flow control valve 50.
US 20150223650 - cited for teaching a diverter assembly 48 for selectively diverting the working air flow between the vacuum hose 16 and the floor suction nozzle 42.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Art Golik whose telephone number is (571)272-6211. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:00.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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.
/Art Golik/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745