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 without traverse of Group I (claims 1-14), Species A (claim 8) in the reply filed on August 28, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 9 and 15-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species and Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on August 28, 2025.
Claims 1-8 and 10-14 will be examined on the merits.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation “the suction motor is controlled by turned on or off” should be amended to “the suction motor is controlled by turned being on or off”. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2018/0078107 to Gagnon et al. in view of DE102012109938A1 to Plachetka (see machine translation).
As to claim 1, Gagnon discloses a cleaner system comprising: a cleaner comprising a dust bin configured to collect dust (see Gagnon Fig. 2, disclosing autonomous vacuum cleaner 20 with dust bin 26; paragraph [0026]); and a cleaner station to which the cleaner is coupled (see Gagnon Fig. 2, ref.#52, 56, 54, 36; paragraphs [0032]-[0033] disclosing central vacuum system to which the cleaner can be coupled), wherein the cleaner comprises an onboard vacuum to generate suction airflow so that air containing dust can be introduced into the dust bin (see Gagnon Fig. 2, ref.#24; paragraphs [0025]-[0026]); wherein the cleaner station comprises: a housing having a coupling part to which the cleaner can be coupled, the housing having an internal space configured to accommodate a flow path part through which the dust in the dust bin flows (see Gagnon Fig. 2 disclosing housing 52 that couples to the cleaner and the housing has an internal space with a flow path part) and that the central vacuum system can provide a suction force to the dust bin through the flow path part (see Gagnon Figs. 2 and 3 disclosing flow due to suction force from the dust bin through the flow path part and out exterior vent 56).
Gagnon does not explicitly disclose that the dust collecting motor is disposed at a downstream side of the flow part path. Plachetka discloses a similar cleaner system wherein the blower is located at a downstream side of the flow path (see, e.g., Plachetka Fig. 3, ref.#21). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to locate the dust collecting motor at a downstream side of the flow path part as disclosed by Plachetka as is known in the art (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) where rearrangement of parts is prima facie obvious) or in order to collect the removed dust into a dirt container, like a dust filter bag for disposal (see Plachetka machine translation paragraph [0041]). Furthermore, to the extent that it could be argued that Gagnon does not disclose a suction motor or a dust collecting motor, use of motors to operate a vacuum system is well known in the art and does not provide patentable significance (see, e.g., Plachetka Fig. 3, ref.#7 and 21; paragraphs [0037], [0041] disclosing the use of motors to generate the vacuum in a vacuum system).
Regarding the recitation “wherein the suction motor operates at least one or more times after the dust collecting motor begins to operate,” said recitation is directed to an intended use. The cleaner system disclosed by the combination of Gagnon and Plachetka is fully capable of having the suction motor operate at least one or more times after the dust collecting motor begins to operate (see, e.g., Gagnon Fig. 3 and paragraph [0037]).
As to claim 2, the recitation “wherein a flow direction of the dust in the flow path part changes reversely at least one or more times,” is directed to an intended use of the system. The combination of Gagnon and Plachetka discloses that the system is fully capable of having a flow direction of the dust in the flow path part change reversely at least one or more times (see Gagnon Figs. 3 and 4 where the flow direction is fully capable of being reversed).
As to claim 3, at least one of the suction motor and the dust collecting motor is fully capable of being controlled by being turned on or off (where it is well known in the art that motors can be turned on or off; see also Gagnon paragraph [0033] and Plachetka paragraph [0005]).
As to claim 5, the combination of Gagnon and Plachetka discloses that the direction of suction forces provided to the dust bin by the suction motor and the dust collecting motor can be in different, opposite directions (see Gagnon Fig. 4 where the suction force from 24 is in a different, opposite direction than the suction force from 52 ; see also MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) where rearrangement of parts is prima facie obvious).
As to claims 6 and 7, the combination of Gagnon and Plachetka discloses that the cleaner station can comprise a door configured to open or close a dust passage hole formed in the coupling part, to which the cleaner is coupled, the dust passage hole being disposed between the dust bin and the flow path part (see Gagnon paragraphs [0034]-[0035] disclosing a bin output valve (read as a door)). Regarding the recitation “wherein the door operates before at least any one of the suction motor and the dust collecting motor operates” and “wherein the door operates to completely open the dust passage hole before the dust collecting motor operates and wherein the door operates to open only a part of the dust passage hole before the suction motor operates after the dust passage hole is completely opened,” said recitations are directed to the intended use of the system and the combination of Gagnon and Plachetka is fully capable of performing said recitations.
As to claim 8, the recitation “wherein the dust collecting motor operates consistently and the suction motor is controlled by turned on or off” is directed to the intended use of the cleaning system, and the combination of Gagnon and Plachetka is fully capable of performing said recitation.
Claim(s) 4 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2018/0078107 to Gagnon et al. in view of DE102012109938A1 to Plachetka (see machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2021/0068603 to Cho et al.
Gagnon and Plachetka are relied upon as discussed above with respect to the rejection of claim 1.
As to claim 4, the recitation “wherein a suction force of the dust collecting motor changes at least one or more times after the dust collecting motor begins to operate” is directed to the intended use of the cleaning system, and the combination of Gagnon and Plachetka is fully capable of performing said recitation. Furthermore, it is noted that Cho discloses that it is known in the art to change the suction force of the of the motors (see Cho paragraphs [0021]-[0026] and Figs. 6-15). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Gagnon/Plachetka to include having the suction force of the dust collecting motor change at least one or more times after the dust collecting motor begins to operate in order to efficiently remove the dust (see Cho paragraphs [0143] and [0448]).
As to claims 10-14, Cho discloses a similar cleaning system wherein the rotational speed of the suction motor can include a first suction speed and a second suction speed lower than the first suction speed, and wherein the first suction speed and the second suction speed are fully capable of being alternately implemented and the suction motor is fully capable of being turned off for a predetermined time before the rotational speed is changed and the dust collecting motor is fully capable of operating while the suction motor is turned off. The first suction speed and the second suction speed of the suction motor can be alternately implemented and the rotational speed is capable of being continuously changed for a predetermined time when the rotational speed is changed as well as having a rotational speed of the dust collecting motor be lower than the first suction speed (see Cho paragraphs [0021]-[0026], [0134] and Figs. 6-15). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Gagnon/Plachetka to include having said capabilities in order to efficiently remove the dust (see Cho paragraphs [0143] and [0448]). It is noted that recitations directed to the intended use of a system does not provide patentable significance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-3296. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30pm.
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.
/DOUGLAS LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714