DETAILED ACTION
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/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 2, Fig. 6 (with claims 1-2, 4-14, and 16-20 readable thereon) in the reply filed on 18 November 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the species overlap in scope and are not mutually exclusive. This is not found persuasive because, as can be readily evidenced by Figs. 5 and 6, each of the Species require features and configurations that are not required by the other, i.e., they are mutually exclusive. Thus, the search for features and configurations not required for the other species presents a serious search burden.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 3 and 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the aforementioned reply.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-7, 11-14, 16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2022/0298713 to Arankalle et al. (“Arankalle”).
Regarding claim 1, Arankalle (in Figs. 1-5 and associated text) discloses a washing machine appliance (100) comprising:
a cabinet comprising a front panel (104) defining a chamber opening (see Fig. 2);
a wash tub (109) positioned within the cabinet and defining a wash chamber;
a door (106) rotatably mounted to the front panel and moveable between an open position for providing access to the wash chamber and a closed position for prohibiting access to the wash chamber (see opening and closing operations in ¶ [0019]); and
an automatic door opening assembly for selectively rotating the door from the closed position to the open position, the automatic door opening assembly comprising:
a linear actuator (piston 130) comprising a rod (142) moveable between a retracted position and an extended position in which the rod moves the door from the closed position (see Fig. 3 and associated text);
a sensor (206) for detecting a contactless user input to move the door from the closed position to the open position (see Fig. 5); and
a controller (202) operatively coupled to the sensor and the linear actuator, the controller configured to control an operation of the linear actuator to move the rod from the retracted position to the extended position upon detection of the contactless user input by the sensor (see controller opening door based on gesture sensor 206 detection of hand movement in ¶ [0032]).
Regarding claim 2, Arankalle further discloses the automatic door opening assembly further comprising: a door hinge (112a/112b) coupled to the door and the front panel for facilitating rotation of the door between the open position and the closed position; and a hinge actuator coupled to the door hinge for moving the door to the open position after the linear actuator moves the door from the closed position (see ¶ [0019] - “[t]he hinge assembly may be capable of disengaging the door from the latch in order to open the door”; see also ¶ [0023] where the controller controls the hinge to open and closed the door based on a command).
Regarding claim 4, Arankalle further discloses wherein the hinge actuator is configured as a motor operable to move the door to the open position after the linear actuator moves the door from the closed position (hydraulic pump 122 reads on a hydraulic “motor” that converts hydraulic pressure into movement).
Regarding claim 5, Arankalle further discloses wherein the controller is operatively coupled to the motor, the controller further configured to: after controlling the operation of the linear actuator to move the rod from the retracted position to the extended position, control an operation of the motor to move the door to the open position (note the hydraulic pump (motor) in Arankalle moves the rod from retracted position to an extended position, and subsequently to an open position).
Regarding claims 6-7, Arankalle further discloses wherein the sensor is configured as a proximity sensor for detecting the contactless user input (note gesture sensor 206 reads on a proximity sensor); wherein: the proximity sensor is configured to detect motion corresponding to the contactless user input; and the controller is further configured to control the operation of the linear actuator to move the rod from the retracted position to the extended position when the motion is detected by the proximity sensor (see Fig. 5 and associated text).
Regarding claims 11-12, Arankalle further discloses wherein: the sensor is configured as a microphone for receiving a voice command; and the controller is further configured to: determine when the voice command is a command to open the door; and control the operation of the linear actuator to move the rod from the retracted position to the extended position when determined that the voice command is a command to open the door (see ¶ [0022] and [0029]-[0030] wherein a microphone is used to give audible commands for the door to open or close); wherein the controller is further configured to: determine when the voice command is a command to open the door from a specific user; and control the operation of the linear actuator move the rod from the retracted position to the extended position when determined that the voice command is a command to open the door from the specific user (see ¶ [0031] wherein the received user commands may include user authentication).
Regarding claim 13, see claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 14, see claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 16, see claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 18, see claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 19, see claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 20, Arankalle further discloses a switch for activating by the user, wherein, the controller is operatively coupled to the switch, the controller further configured to: control the operation of the linear actuator to move the rod from the retracted position to the extended position when the switch is activated by the user (see ¶ [0022] wherein the user interface may include touch displays, which read on a “switch”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arankalle.
Arankalle, supra, discloses the claimed invention including a proximity sensor positioned on the front panel of the washing machine. Arankalle discloses the sensor positioned above the door rather than below the door as recited in claim 8. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to rearrange the sensor location as desired to achieve the same and predictable results of proximity sensing a user to control automatic door opening, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04 (VI)(C) regarding Obviousness and Rearrangement of Parts.
Claim(s) 9-10 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arankalle in view of US 2020/0087846 to Park et al. (“Park”).
Regarding claims 9-10 Arankalle, supra, discloses the claimed invention including a sensor configured to detect a user. Arankalle does not expressly disclose a temperature sensor for such operation. However, Park teaches that it is known in the laundry treating art to provide either a motion detection sensor or temperature sensor in order to identify a human (see Park at ¶ [0018]).
Because both Arankalle and Park teach laundry treating appliances using sensors for detecting humans, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one sensor (i.e. a motion detecting sensor) for the other (i.e. a temperature sensor) to achieve the same and predictable result of identifying the presence of a human.
Regarding claim 17, see claim 9 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH L PERRIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1305. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00.
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, Michael E. Barr can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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.
Joseph L. Perrin, Ph.D.
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/Joseph L. Perrin/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711