Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A-1, B-1 (claims 1-4, 8-10, 13, 15-25) in the reply filed on 4/03/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that:
Applicant considers that searching all species would not be a serious burden because each of the designated inventions is related.
Respectfully, the argument is not found persuasive because a serious burden exists for the specific reasons set forth in the original restriction requirement which identifies that the species encompass distinct configurations with mutually exclusive characteristics.
The election/restriction requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim(s) 5-7, 11-12, 14, 26-27 is/are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
“a first end” identified in claim 1 (line 4). It is unclear exactly what location this references.
“a second end” identified in claim 1 (line 4).
“a first direction” identified in claim 1 (line 5). It is unclear exactly which direction this references.
“a first end” identified in claim 1 (line 6).
“a second end” identified in claim 1 (line 7).
“a second direction” identified in claim 1 (line 8). It is unclear exactly which direction this references.
“an upper space” identified in claim 19 (line 3).
“the first flow path (217) has a circular cross-sectional shape when viewed in plan.” identified in claim 4.
“the guide flow path is disposed so as not to overlap the first flow path in the first direction” identified in claim 15. See Annotated Applicant’s Fig 11 wherein the guide flow path 227, which comprises 227a combined with 227b, appears to overlap the first flow path 217 in the first direction. If Applicant is going to respond that Fig 11 does show that the first flow path 217 does not overlap the guide flow path 227, this may result in subsequent objections related to the drawings not exactly/clearly identifying various structures, such as flow path structures, which introduces confusion regarding the design of the device.
Note that 35 U.S.C. 113 identifies the requirement for drawings to be generally provided (“The applicant shall furnish a drawing where necessary for the understanding of the subject matter sought to be patented.”) and 37 CFR 1.83(a) identifies requirements for what those drawings must show (“The drawing in a nonprovisional application must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. However, conventional features disclosed in the description and claims, where their detailed illustration is not essential for a proper understanding of the invention, should be illustrated in the drawing in the form of a graphical drawing symbol or a labeled representation (e.g., a labeled rectangular box)”).
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
Reference character 227a is used, in Figure 11 at least, to designate the “first guide flow path 227a” (e.g. para 0016) and the “second guide flow path 227a” (e.g. para 0017) and the “arm 227a” (e.g. para 0124).
Reference character 25 is used in Fig 11 at least to designate both “a scattering prevention rib 25” (e.g. para 0075) and “a lower cover 25” (e.g. para 0113).
Reference character 226 is used in Fig 12 at least to designate both “the upper space 226” (e.g. para 0127) and “a lower space 226” (e.g. para 0108).
Reference character 14 is used in Fig 3 at least to designate both “a fan module housing 14” (e.g. para 0039) and “a dust collector 14” (e.g. para 0040).
The drawings are objected to because:
Reference character 229 is meant to designate “a fastening part (or fastener) 229” (para 0125) but in Fig 12 does not point to a fastening part.
Reference character 228 is meant to designate “a lower support 228” (para 0126) (Fig 12) but in Fig 11 does not point to a lower support as shown in Fig 12, rather appears to point to a space or cavity or hole.
For each of the drawing objections above, corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as "amended." If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet" or "New Sheet" pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 23 (line 1) recites the limitation “an closed curve” which is grammatically incorrect and should be rewritten as -- a closed curve --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner’s note: For the purposes of examining this application, the term “flow path”, which is used within terms such as “guide flow path”, “first flow path”, etc., is interpreted to reference a structure for guiding air and not interpreted to mean a path of fluid flow. This interpretation is supported by for example paras 0114, 0141, and also for example Fig 11 wherein reference characters identifying flow paths point to channels/spaces of the structure rather than the dashed lines of the fluid flow.
If the term “flow path” is instead meant to identify a path of fluid flow, then this would result in various objections/rejections regarding clarity regarding identification of the paths of fluid flow. An example of such an objection would be:
Reference character 227 references a “guide flow path”, however, in the Figures (e.g. Fig 11), this reference character does not appear to identify a path, it instead appears to identify an area or region. It is suggested that, in the figures, the leader line of this reference character point instead to one of the dashed arrows which appear to identify a path. The following reference characters (all in at least, for example, Fig 11) suffer from a similar deficiency thus are similarly objected to: 217 (a “first flow path”), 218 (a “second flow path”), 215 (a “third flow path”).
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) 1-4, 8-10, 13, 15-25 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 1 (line 6) recites the limitation “a first end” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this references the same first end previously identified in claim 1 or a different first end.
Claim 1 (line 7) recites the limitation “a second end” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this references the same second end previously identified in claim 1 or a different second end.
Claims 17 (line 4), 18, 20, 21, each recite the limitation “the lower lateral wall” which lacks proper antecedent basis and thus renders the claim indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation “a lower lateral surface wall” in claim 17 line 3 be rewritten as -- a lower lateral wall --.
Claim 23 recites the limitation “a plurality of the separation walls, wherein the plurality of separation walls” wherein the underlined terms lack proper antecedent basis and thus renders the claim indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation be rewritten as -- a plurality of the at least one separation wall, wherein the plurality of the at least one separation wall --.
Claim 1 (line 4 and line 10) recites the limitation “the guide flow path” which lacks proper antecedent basis and thus renders the claim indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation be rewritten as -- the at least one guide flow path --. Note that claim 2 recites “the at least one guide flow path”.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the guide flow path” which lacks proper antecedent basis and thus renders the claim indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation be rewritten as -- the at least one guide flow path --. Note that claim 2 recites “the at least one guide flow path”.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “the guide flow path” which lacks proper antecedent basis and thus renders the claim indefinite. It is suggested that the limitation be rewritten as -- the at least one guide flow path --. Note that claim 2 recites “the at least one guide flow path”.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “the upper top surface” which lacks proper antecedent basis and thus renders the claim indefinite.
Claim(s) 2-4, 8-10, 13, 15-25 is/are also rejected by virtue of dependency.
In view of the 112(b) rejections set forth above, the claims are rejected below as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) XXX is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR 100725515 B1 (hereinafter Lee).
Examiner's note: The examiner's submitted English translation of Lee, submitted with this office action, is referenced hereinafter.
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses:
A noise reduction device for use in a cleaner comprising:
at least one guide flow path (first guide flow path combined with second guide flow path in Annotated Fig 1a) that receives air discharged through an air outlet of the cleaner (Annotated Fig 1a);
a first flow path (Annotated Fig 1a) having a first end that communicates with the guide flow path and a second end that is open (Fig 1 shows all this),
the first flow path extending in a first direction (Annotated Fig 1a);
and a second flow path (Annotated Fig 1a) having a first end that is fluidly connected to the first flow path between the first end and the second end of the first flow path (Annotated Fig 1a shows all this),
and a second end that is closed (Annotated Fig 1a; closed by the walls shown at the arrow head of “second end”),
the second flow path extending in a second direction intersecting the first direction (Annotated Fig 1a),
wherein the guide flow path overlaps the second flow path in the first direction (Annotated Fig 1a shows this for the “second guide flow path” and the “second flow path”).
PNG
media_image1.png
629
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 1a
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses:
the at least one guide flow path comprises:
a first guide flow path that communicates with the air outlet, and has a ring shape around a central axis that extends parallel to the first direction (Annotated Fig 1a indicates all this);
and a second guide flow path having a first end that communicates with the first guide flow path and a second end that communicates with the first flow path, the second guide flow path extending in the second direction (Annotated Fig 1a shows all this).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses:
a center of the first flow path overlaps the central axis in the first direction (Annotated Fig 1a indicates this, wherein Annotated Fig 1a labels only one side/portion of the “first flow path” for clarity, but the first flow path also exists at the region near the arrow head of “second end” in Annotated Fig 1a).
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses:
the first flow path has a circular cross-sectional shape when viewed in plan (Annotated Fig 1a indicates this, if the first flow path in Fig 1 were viewed in the first direction, looking from right to left in Fig 1).
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses:
the first direction and the second direction are perpendicular to each other (Annotated Fig 1a shows this).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses:
the first end and the second end of the first flow path have respective different cross-sectional areas (the first end and the second end are essentially regions/portions which can be defined/chosen somewhat arbitrarily, thus their resulting respective cross sections may be defined to be different or corresponding).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses:
the first end and the second end of the first flow path have corresponding cross-sectional areas (the first end and the second end are essentially regions/portions which can be defined/chosen somewhat arbitrarily, thus their resulting respective cross sections may be defined to be different or corresponding).
Regarding claim 13, Lee discloses:
a thickness of the second guide flow path in the first direction is greater than a thickness of the second flow path in the first direction (Annotated Fig 1b shows this).
PNG
media_image2.png
448
448
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 1b
Regarding claim 15, Lee discloses:
the guide flow path is disposed so as not to overlap the first flow path in the first direction (at the second end of the first flow path in Annotated Fig 1a).
Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses:
a lower body (shown generally in Annotated Fig 1c) coupled to the cleaner,
a portion of the first flow path being defined between the guide flow path and the lower body (at the second guide flow path of the guide flow path in Annotated Fig 1a);
and an upper body (shown generally in Annotated Fig 1c) that is coupled to the lower body,
the upper body defining another portion of the first flow path, and the second flow path being defined between the lower body and the upper body (Annotated Fig 1a combined with Annotated Fig 1c indicate all this).
PNG
media_image3.png
629
798
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 1c
Regarding claim 17, Lee discloses:
the lower body comprises: a lower lateral wall that defines a lower space; a lower top wall that is connected to one end of the lower lateral wall and is positioned over the lower space; a lower hole that is provided in the lower top wall; and a lower cover that is positioned to overlap the lower hole in the first direction, and is disposed in the lower space (Annotated Fig 1c indicates all this).
Regarding claim 19, Lee discloses:
the upper body comprises: an upper lateral wall defining an upper space; an upper top wall connected to one end of the upper lateral wall and positioned over the upper space; and an upper hole provided in the upper top surface (Annotated Fig 1c indicates all this).
Regarding claim 22, Lee discloses:
the upper body further comprises an upper cover that is positioned to cover the upper top wall and the upper hole, and at least one separation wall that is positioned to separate the upper cover and the upper top wall (Annotated Fig 1c indicates all this).
Regarding claim 24, Lee discloses:
a center of the upper hole and a center of the lower hole overlap each other in the first direction (Annotated Fig 1c indicates this).
Regarding claim 25, Lee discloses:
a diameter of the upper hole corresponds to a diameter of the lower hole (in that they are parallel or comparable or similar or analogous or equivalent in function at least).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim(s) 18, 20, 21, 22, 23 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.
Regarding claim 18, Lee, as modified above, discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose:
a fastener that is configured to be fastened to the cleaner is provided on the lower lateral wall.
Regarding claim 20, Lee, as modified above, discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose:
a portion of the lower lateral wall is inserted into the upper space defined by the upper lateral wall.
Claim 21 depends from claim 20 and is therefore allowable over the prior art for at least that reason.
Regarding claim 22, Lee, as modified above, discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose:
the upper body includes a plurality of the separation walls,
wherein the plurality of separation walls are arranged on a closed curve enclosing the upper hole in the first direction.
Claim 23 depends from claim 22 and is therefore allowable over the prior art for at least that reason.
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 Lee’s structure such that it would read on Applicant’s claim, without improper hindsight from Applicant’s disclosure. The claim is therefore deemed to be allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
The following prior art, made of record and not relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 20180020891 A1 - cited for teaching a vacuum cleaner that can reduce noise.
US 20200329932 A1 - cited for teaching a vacuum cleaner with various flow path channels and an upper body and a lower body.
US 20200008636 A1- cited for teaching a vacuum cleaner with various flow path channels and an upper body and a lower body.
US 5560075 A - cited for teaching a vacuum cleaner with various flow path channels overlapping in various directions.
US 6804857 B1 - cited for teaching a vacuum cleaner with noise damping.
CN 108158490 A - cited for teaching a noise reduction mechanism for dust collector.
US 4418443 A - cited for teaching a muffler in Fig 2 having chambers in orthogonal directions.
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 9:00-5:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Courtney Heinle can be reached at 571-270-3508. 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
/COURTNEY D HEINLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights