DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Restriction
Applicant’s election of Group II (which is currently recited by claims 8-16) in the reply filed on August 25, 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out any supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 8-16 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 8 recites that “the first washing liquid temperature is between about 140° and about 200°”. However, it is not clear if these temperature degree values are on the Celsius scale or the Fahrenheit scale. The scope of claim 8 is thus not clear.
Claim 12 recites that “the first washing liquid temperature is between about 170° and about 190°”. However, it is not clear if these temperature degree values are on the Celsius scale or the Fahrenheit scale. The scope of claim 12 is thus not clear.
Claim 16 recites that “the first washing liquid temperature is between about 170° and about 190°”. However, it is not clear if these temperature degree values are on the Celsius scale or the Fahrenheit scale. The scope of claim 16 is thus not clear.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the conduit member". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, it was presumed that applicant intended to have claim 15 depend from claim 9 because claim 9 does recite “a conduit member”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN219880704 by Miao in view of CN111482422 by Li in view of CN108655103 by Dong.
With regard to claim 8, Miao teaches a method of cleaning a flame arrestor 120 using a flame arrestor washing apparatus that comprises a cover 130 and a nozzle assembly (comprising washing pipe 210 and nozzles 40), wherein the nozzle assembly is rotated such that the nozzles 40 rotate as they spray washing liquid downward toward the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor 120, and wherein the nozzle assembly receives its washing liquid from a pump 10 that pumps washing liquid from a source of washing liquid (pages 5-8 of translation).
Miao does not teach that the washing apparatus comprises a lid. Note that Miao teaches cover 130 (see Figure 1), but Miao does not explicitly discuss this “cover” in any detail. This “cover” may be a washing chamber of some kind, but Miao is simply not clear on this point.
Li teaches that when using a washing apparatus to wash an item with sprayed washing liquid, that washing can successfully occur inside a walled chamber, wherein a top portion of the chamber comprises a lid with a rotatable nozzle assembly thereon (pages 10-11 and claim 12 of translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao such that the cover 130 is substituted by a walled chamber comprising a vessel interior defined by a floor, a lid to which Miao’s nozzle assembly is attached, opposing first and second side walls, a front wall, and a rear wall. As discussed, Miao is silent about what precisely cover 130 is. Motivation for performing the modification was provided by Li, who teaches that when using a washing apparatus to wash an item with sprayed washing liquid, that washing can successfully occur inside a walled chamber, wherein a top portion of the chamber comprises a lid with a rotatable nozzle assembly thereon. Such a walled enclosure could advantageously limit the spread of sprayed washing fluid and protect the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor from the surrounding environment during its washing.
The combination of Miao in view of Li does not teach that the washing apparatus comprises a drawer that receives the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor.
Dong teaches that when attempting to insert a to-be-washed item into a washing chamber that can be opened and closed via a door, such insertion can successfully be achieved using a mesh drawer, wherein the mesh drawer is mounted to a sliding rail such that the drawer can move in an out of an opening of the washing chamber (pages 4-5 of translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li such that the walled chamber comprises a front opening and a corresponding door, wherein the door can selectively open the wash chamber such that a mesh drawer mounted to a sliding rail can be temporarily withdrawn from the vessel interior such that the to-be-washed flame arrestor can be loaded into a lower surface of the mesh drawer and the mesh drawer then reinserted into the wash chamber. Dong teaches that when attempting to insert a to-be-washed item into a washing chamber that can be opened and closed via a door, such insertion can successfully be achieved using a mesh drawer, wherein the mesh drawer is mounted to a sliding rail such that the drawer can move in an out of an opening of the washing chamber. Motivation for performing the modification would be provide a technique for successfully inserting a to-be-washed item into the washing chamber, in light of Dong’s teachings.
The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong does not specify that the pressure of the washing liquid is between about 1500 PSI and about 2000 PSI. However, the pressure of the washing liquid flowing to the nozzle assembly is considered to be a result-effective variable because Miao teaches that the pressure of the sprayed cleaning liquid affects the washing effectiveness of the sprayed cleaning liquid (pages 4-7 of translation). In accordance with MPEP 2144.05, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong by optimizing the pressure of the washing liquid flowing towards the nozzle assembly, as that pressure is a result-effective variable.
The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong is silent about the temperature of the washing liquid. However, in the art of cleaning, it is well known that the temperature of a washing liquid is a result-effective variable because increased temperature can increase molecular agitation such that cleaning is improved but added heat also costs an energy input, and therefore, in accordance with MPEP 2144.05, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong by optimizing the temperature of the washing liquid that flows towards the nozzle assembly, as that temperature is a result-effective variable, with added heat further agitating the liquid molecules to aid cleaning but also costing energy.
Claims 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN219880704 by Miao in view of CN111482422 by Li in view of CN108655103 by Dong as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of U.S. 2009/0145468 by Chericoni.
With regard to claim 9, in the combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong, the nozzle assembly is rotated such that the nozzles 40 rotate as they spray washing liquid downward toward the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor 120 (pages 5-8 of Miao translation).
The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong does not teach that the rotating nozzle assembly comprises first and second arms.
Chericoni teaches that when attempting to performing washing inside a chamber with a rotating nozzle assembly, such washing can be successfully performed with a rotating nozzle assembly that comprises a conduit member comprising first and second arms that each comprise a plurality of nozzles and that each extend horizontally from a vertically-oriented nozzle axis (axis “A” in Figures 1-4), wherein Chericoni’s nozzles are illustrated as each spraying a divergent pattern of liquid (Figures 1-4 and Par. 0022-0037).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong such that Miano’s rotating nozzle assembly is substituted with a nozzle assembly of the type taught by Chericoni, wherein the nozzle assembly comprises a conduit member comprising first and second arms that each comprise a plurality of nozzles and that each extend horizontally from a vertically-oriented nozzle axis, and wherein each nozzle sprays a divergent pattern of liquid. Motivation for performing the modification was provided by Chericoni, who teaches that when attempting to performing washing inside a chamber with a rotating nozzle assembly, such washing can be successfully performed with a rotating nozzle assembly that comprises a conduit member comprising first and second arms that each comprise a plurality of nozzles and that each extend horizontally from a vertically-oriented nozzle axis (axis “A” in Figures 1-4), wherein Chericoni’s nozzles are illustrated as each spraying a divergent pattern of liquid. In this combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, a nozzle on the first arm corresponds to applicant’s first nozzle member, and a nozzle on the second arm corresponds to applicant’s second nozzle member.
With regard to claim 10, in the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, an imaginary vertical plane bifurcates the first and second arms (by passing through the center of the arms along a length formed by the two arms), wherein the vertical plane includes first and second opposing sides, wherein the first nozzle member sprays washing liquid from the first side, and wherein the second nozzle member sprays washing liquid from the second side.
With regard to claim 11, the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni does not specify that a first exit axis (defined by a conduit of the first nozzle member) of the first nozzle member and a second exit axis (defined by a conduit of the second nozzle member) of the second nozzle member are each angled between about 25° and about 35° with respect to the imaginary vertical plane. However, Chericoni teaches that the angle of a nozzle with respect to a vertical plane that bifurcates arms is a result-effective variable because it affects whether thrust from nozzle can contribute to the rotating of the nozzle assembly and affects whether the ejected divergent washing spray can effectively contribute to cleaning of to-be-washed surfaces (Par. Par. 0022-0037). With regard to MPEP 2144.05, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni such that the angle (with respect to the imaginary vertical plane) of each nozzle is optimized, as Chericoni teaches that each nozzle’s angle affects that nozzle’s contribution (or lack thereof) to thrust (for rotating the arms) and that nozzle’s contribution to ejected washing liquid being able to successfully clean surfaces in need of cleaning. In this combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, the angular orientation (with respect to the imaginary vertical plane) of each nozzle is optimized such that rotation of the arms occurs and the divergent sprays from all the nozzles combined is able to successfully clean the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor 120.
With regard to claim 12, in the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, the pressure and temperature of the washing liquid supplied toward the nozzle assembly are each optimized, as discussed above in the rejection of claim 8.
With regard to claim 13, in the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, each nozzle sprays a divergent pattern of washing liquid. The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni does not recite that a nozzle’s divergent spray diverges at an angle that is between about 40° and about 60°. However, the divergent sprays (from the nozzles) function to impact and clean the to-be-cleaned surfaces of the flame arrestor. The angle of the divergence of each spray is thus a result-effective variable, as that angle affects the size of the surface area (of the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor) that can be directly impinged by the ejected washing liquid. In other words, a tight, concentrated divergence pattern (from a single nozzle) would clearly be limited to directly impinging a correspondingly small area of the flame arrestor, whereas a more-widely-diverging spray pattern (from a single nozzle) would clearly be able to directly imping a correspondingly larger area than the tight, concentrated divergence pattern. In accordance with MPEP 2144.05, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni to optimize the divergence angle of each nozzle’s spray in order to optimize the cleaning of the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor, as the divergence angles of all the nozzles’ sprays will affect which surfaces get directly impinged by sprayed washing liquid.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN219880704 by Miao in view of CN111482422 by Li in view of CN108655103 by Dong as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of U.S. 4,842,001 to O’Leary.
With regard to claim 14, the combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong does not recite that the lid is connected to a wall of the washing chamber in a pivotable manner.
O’Leary teaches that a lid can be successfully connected to a rear wall of a washing chamber in a pivotable manner such that the lid can selectively be moved from a closed position to an open position to allow for interior access of the washing chamber (Col. 5, lines 5-22 and claims 13-14 of O’Leary).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong such that the lid is pivotally connected to the rear wall of the washing chamber, wherein the pivotable connection allows the lid to be selectively moved from a closed position to an open position. Motivation for performing the modification was provided by O’Leary, who teaches that a lid can be successfully connected to a rear wall of a washing chamber in a pivotable manner such that the lid can selectively be moved from a closed position to an open position to allow for interior access of the washing chamber.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN219880704 by Miao in view of CN111482422 by Li in view of CN108655103 by Dong in view of U.S. 2009/0145468 by Chericoni as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of U.S. 5,398,708 to Sheldon.
With regard to claim 15, as discussed above in the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) section, it was presumed (for purposes of examination) that applicant intended to have claim 15 depend from claim 9.
The combination of Miano in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni does not teach that the lid comprises an opening, wherein a washing liquid path is defined from the source of washing liquid through said opening to the conduit member of the nozzle assembly.
Sheldon teaches that when attempting to deliver washing liquid to a spraying mechanism inside a washing chamber, an opening (item 82 in Sheldon’s Figure 3) through the ceiling of the chamber can function to define a washing liquid path through which washing liquid can successfully travel from a source to the spraying mechanism (Col. 7, line 60 to Col. 8, line 36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miano in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni such that the lid comprises an opening, wherein a washing liquid path is defined from the source of washing liquid through said opening and into the conduit member of the nozzle assembly. Motivation for performing the modification was provided by Sheldon, who teaches that when attempting to deliver washing liquid to a spraying mechanism inside a washing chamber, an opening through the ceiling of the chamber can function to define a washing liquid path through which washing liquid can successfully travel from a source to the spraying mechanism.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN219880704 by Miao in view of CN111482422 by Li in view of CN108655103 by Dong in view of U.S. 2009/0145468 by Chericoni in view of U.S. 4,842,001 to O’Leary in view of U.S. 5,398,708 to Sheldon.
With regard to claim 16, Miao teaches a method of cleaning a flame arrestor 120 using a flame arrestor washing apparatus that comprises a cover 130 and a nozzle assembly (comprising washing pipe 210 and nozzles 40), wherein the nozzle assembly is rotated such that the nozzles 40 rotate as they spray washing liquid downward toward the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor 120, and wherein the nozzle assembly receives its washing liquid from a pump 10 that pumps washing liquid from a source of washing liquid (pages 5-8 of translation).
Miao does not teach that the washing apparatus comprises a lid. Note that Miao teaches cover 130 (see Figure 1), but Miao does not explicitly discuss this “cover” in any detail. This “cover” may be a washing chamber of some kind, but Miao is simply not clear on this point.
Li teaches that when using a washing apparatus to wash an item with sprayed washing liquid, that washing can successfully occur inside a walled chamber, wherein a top portion of the chamber comprises a lid with a rotatable nozzle assembly thereon (pages 10-11 and claim 12 of translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao such that the cover 130 is substituted by a walled chamber comprising a vessel interior defined by a floor, a lid to which Miao’s nozzle assembly is attached, opposing first and second side walls, a front wall, and a rear wall. As discussed, Miao is silent about what precisely cover 130 is. Motivation for performing the modification was provided by Li, who teaches that when using a washing apparatus to wash an item with sprayed washing liquid, that washing can successfully occur inside a walled chamber, wherein a top portion of the chamber comprises a lid with a rotatable nozzle assembly thereon. Such a walled enclosure could advantageously limit the spread of sprayed washing fluid and protect the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor from the surrounding environment during its washing.
The combination of Miao in view of Li does not teach that the washing apparatus comprises a drawer that receives the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor.
Dong teaches that when attempting to insert a to-be-washed item into a washing chamber that can be opened and closed via a door, such insertion can successfully be achieved using a mesh drawer, wherein the mesh drawer is mounted to a sliding rail such that the drawer can move in an out of an opening of the washing chamber (pages 4-5 of translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li such that the walled chamber comprises a front opening and a corresponding door, wherein the door can selectively open the wash chamber such that a mesh drawer mounted to a sliding rail can be temporarily withdrawn from the vessel interior such that the to-be-washed flame arrestor can be loaded into a lower surface of the mesh drawer and the mesh drawer then reinserted into the wash chamber. Dong teaches that when attempting to insert a to-be-washed item into a washing chamber that can be opened and closed via a door, such insertion can successfully be achieved using a mesh drawer, wherein the mesh drawer is mounted to a sliding rail such that the drawer can move in an out of an opening of the washing chamber. Motivation for performing the modification would be provide a technique for successfully inserting a to-be-washed item into the washing chamber, in light of Dong’s teachings.
The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong does not specify that the pressure of the washing liquid is between about 1700 PSI and about 1800 PSI. However, the pressure of the washing liquid flowing to the nozzle assembly is considered to be a result-effective variable because Miao teaches that the pressure of the sprayed cleaning liquid affects the washing effectiveness of the sprayed cleaning liquid (pages 4-7 of translation). In accordance with MPEP 2144.05, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong by optimizing the pressure of the washing liquid flowing towards the nozzle assembly, as that pressure is a result-effective variable.
The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong is silent about the temperature of the washing liquid. However, in the art of cleaning, it is well known that the temperature of a washing liquid is a result-effective variable because increased temperature can increase molecular agitation such that cleaning is improved but added heat also costs an energy input, and therefore, in accordance with MPEP 2144.05, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong by optimizing the temperature of the washing liquid that flows towards the nozzle assembly, as that temperature is a result-effective variable, with added heat further agitating the liquid molecules to aid cleaning but also costing energy.
In the combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong, the nozzle assembly is rotated such that the nozzles 40 rotate as they spray washing liquid downward toward the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor 120 (pages 5-8 of Miao translation).
The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong does not teach that the rotating nozzle assembly comprises first and second arms.
Chericoni teaches that when attempting to performing washing inside a chamber with a rotating nozzle assembly, such washing can be successfully performed with a rotating nozzle assembly that comprises a conduit member comprising first and second arms that each comprise a plurality of nozzles and that each extend horizontally from a vertically-oriented nozzle axis (axis “A” in Figures 1-4), wherein Chericoni’s nozzles are illustrated as each spraying a divergent pattern of liquid (Figures 1-4 and Par. 0022-0037).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong such that Miano’s rotating nozzle assembly is substituted with a nozzle assembly of the type taught by Chericoni, wherein the nozzle assembly comprises a conduit member comprising first and second arms that each comprise a plurality of nozzles and that each extend horizontally from a vertically-oriented nozzle axis, and wherein each nozzle sprays a divergent pattern of liquid. Motivation for performing the modification was provided by Chericoni, who teaches that when attempting to performing washing inside a chamber with a rotating nozzle assembly, such washing can be successfully performed with a rotating nozzle assembly that comprises a conduit member comprising first and second arms that each comprise a plurality of nozzles and that each extend horizontally from a vertically-oriented nozzle axis (axis “A” in Figures 1-4), wherein Chericoni’s nozzles are illustrated as each spraying a divergent pattern of liquid. In this combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, a nozzle on the first arm corresponds to applicant’s first nozzle member, and a nozzle on the second arm corresponds to applicant’s second nozzle member.
In the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, an imaginary vertical plane bifurcates the first and second arms (by passing through the center of the arms along a length formed by the two arms), wherein the vertical plane includes first and second opposing sides, wherein the first nozzle member sprays washing liquid from the first side, and wherein the second nozzle member sprays washing liquid from the second side.
The method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni does not specify that a first exit axis (defined by a conduit of the first nozzle member) of the first nozzle member and a second exit axis (defined by a conduit of the second nozzle member) of the second nozzle member are each angled between about 25° and about 35° with respect to the imaginary vertical plane. However, Chericoni teaches that the angle of a nozzle with respect to a vertical plane that bifurcates arms is a result-effective variable because it affects whether thrust from nozzle can contribute to the rotating of the nozzle assembly and affects whether the ejected divergent washing spray can effectively contribute to cleaning of to-be-washed surfaces (Par. Par. 0022-0037). With regard to MPEP 2144.05, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni such that the angle (with respect to the imaginary vertical plane) of each nozzle is optimized, as Chericoni teaches that each nozzle’s angle affects that nozzle’s contribution (or lack thereof) to thrust (for rotating the arms) and that nozzle’s contribution to ejected washing liquid being able to successfully clean surfaces in need of cleaning. In this combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, the angular orientation (with respect to the imaginary vertical plane) of each nozzle is optimized such that rotation of the arms occurs and the divergent sprays from all the nozzles combined is able to successfully clean the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor 120.
In the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni, each nozzle sprays a divergent pattern of washing liquid. The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni does not recite that a nozzle’s divergent spray diverges at an angle that is between about 40° and about 60°. However, the divergent sprays (from the nozzles) function to impact and clean the to-be-cleaned surfaces of the flame arrestor. The angle of the divergence of each spray is thus a result-effective variable, as that angle affects the size of the surface area (of the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor) that can be directly impinged by the ejected washing liquid. In other words, a tight, concentrated divergence pattern (from a single nozzle) would clearly be limited to directly impinging a correspondingly small area of the flame arrestor, whereas a more-widely-diverging spray pattern (from a single nozzle) would clearly be able to directly imping a correspondingly larger area than the tight, concentrated divergence pattern. In accordance with MPEP 2144.05, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni to optimize the divergence angle of each nozzle’s spray in order to optimize the cleaning of the to-be-cleaned flame arrestor, as the divergence angles of all the nozzles’ sprays will affect which surfaces get directly impinged by sprayed washing liquid.
The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni does not recite that the lid is connected to a wall of the washing chamber in a pivotable manner.
O’Leary teaches that a lid can be successfully connected to a rear wall of a washing chamber in a pivotable manner such that the lid can selectively be moved from a closed position to an open position to allow for interior access of the washing chamber (Col. 5, lines 5-22 and claims 13-14 of O’Leary).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni such that the lid is pivotally connected to the rear wall of the washing chamber, wherein the pivotable connection allows the lid to be selectively moved from a closed position to an open position. Motivation for performing the modification was provided by O’Leary, who teaches that a lid can be successfully connected to a rear wall of a washing chamber in a pivotable manner such that the lid can selectively be moved from a closed position to an open position to allow for interior access of the washing chamber.
The combination of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni in view of O’Leary does not teach that the lid comprises an opening, wherein a washing liquid path is defined from the source of washing liquid through said opening to the conduit member of the nozzle assembly.
Sheldon teaches that when attempting to deliver washing liquid to a spraying mechanism inside a washing chamber, an opening (item 82 in Sheldon’s Figure 3) through the ceiling of the chamber can function to define a washing liquid path through which washing liquid can successfully travel from a source to the spraying mechanism (Col. 7, line 60 to Col. 8, line 36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Miao in view of Li in view of Dong in view of Chericoni in view of O’Leary such that the lid comprises an opening, wherein a washing liquid path is defined from the source of washing liquid through said opening and into the conduit member of the nozzle assembly. Motivation for performing the modification was provided by Sheldon, who teaches that when attempting to deliver washing liquid to a spraying mechanism inside a washing chamber, an opening through the ceiling of the chamber can function to define a washing liquid path through which washing liquid can successfully travel from a source to the spraying mechanism.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN L COLEMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7376. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 Monday-Friday.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at (571)272-1344. 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.
/RLC/
Ryan L. Coleman
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1714
/KAJ K OLSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1714