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 of Device Species A (Figs. 1-3 and 13) in the reply filed on 7/10/2026 in response to the requirement for restriction mailed 4/10/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out any errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 4-13, 20, and 25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “15” (See Fig. 3) and “22” (See Fig. 5). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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
Claims 1-3, 18-19, 21-24, and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claims 1, 19, and 22-24, each instance of “the connection element” should be revised to “the at least one connection element” to ensure using terminology consistent with what is used elsewhere throughout the claims.
In Claims 1-2, 19, 21, 23, and 26, each instance of “the channel” should be revised to “the at least one channel” to ensure using terminology consistent with what is used elsewhere throughout the claims.
In Claim 1 Line 7, “the at least one cover element” should be revised to “the cover element” to ensure using terminology consistent with what is used elsewhere throughout the claims.
In Claim 1 Line 15, “the radial direction” should be revised to “a radial direction” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 1 Line 16, “in the region” should be revised to “in a region” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 3 Lines 2-3, “base element are be connected” should be revised to “base element are connected” to ensure proper grammar.
In Claim 18 Line 3, “the group” should be revised to “a group” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 23 Line 2, “the axis of the connection element” should be revised to “an axis of the connection element” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 23 Line 5, “the center radius of the channel” should be revised to “a center radius of the channel” to ensure clarity in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 15, 21, 23, and 26 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 15 is indefinite because Lines 2-4 state “wherein the cover element and the base element each have a chamfer relative to one another on an outer casing of the device, in which chamfer a seal is arranged” and it is not clear if “in which chamfer a seal is arranged” means that a seal is arranged in the chamfer of the cover element, a seal is arranged in the chamfer of the base element, or a seal is arranged in both the chamfer of the cover element and the chamfer of the base element. For the purpose of examination, Claim 15 Lines 2-4 will be interpreted to state “wherein the cover element and the base element each have a chamfer relative to one another on an outer casing of the device, and wherein a seal is arrange between the chamfer of the cover element and the chamfer of the base element”.
Claim 21 is indefinite because Lines 2-4 state “wherein the channel has a first boundary wall in a normal plane to the axis of rotation and the channel forms a circular ring” and there is improper antecedent basis for “the axis of rotation” in the claim. It is not clear if “the axis of rotation” means an axis of rotation of the device, an axis of rotation of the channel, or something else. For the purpose of examination, Claim 21 Lines 2-4 will be interpreted to state “wherein the at least one channel has a first boundary wall in a normal plane to an axis of rotation of the device and the at least one channel forms a circular ring”.
Claim 23 is indefinite because Lines 2-5 state “wherein the axis of the connection element is arranged parallel and eccentrically to the axis of rotation, wherein the connection element is arranged on a radius which corresponds to the center radius of the channel” and there is improper antecedent basis for “the axis of rotation” in the claim. It is not clear if “the axis of rotation” means an axis of rotation of the device, an axis of rotation of the connection element, or something else. For the purpose of examination, Claim 23 Lines 2-5 will be interpreted to state “wherein an axis of the at least one connection element is arranged parallel and eccentrically to an axis of rotation of the device, wherein the at least one connection element is arranged on a radius which corresponds to a center radius of the at least one channel”.
Claim 26 is indefinite because Lines 2-5 state “wherein at least three nozzles are provided, which are arranged offset by 120° on the circumference, wherein the nozzles are arranged on a radius which corresponds to a center radius of the channel” and there is improper antecedent basis for “the circumference” in the claim. It is not clear if “the circumference” means a circumference of the device or something else. Furthermore, it is not clear how the nozzles are “arranged on a radius which corresponds to a center radius of the channel” when it appears in Fig. 4 that three nozzles are arranged in a circle with 120° offset rather than being arranged on a common radius. Additionally, it is not clear how more than three nozzles can be arranged offset by 120°. For the purpose of examination, Claim 26 Lines 2-5 will be interpreted to state “wherein three nozzles are provided, which are arranged offset by 120°, wherein the nozzles are arranged on a circle”.
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.
Claims 1-3, 14, 17-19, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 3,516,611 to Piggott (“Piggott”).
As to Claim 1, Piggott discloses a device for spraying and distributing liquid (See Fig. 1), comprising:
at least one connection element (#34) for connection to a liquid connection (#20, See Col. 1 Lines 65-70);
at least one dispensing opening for dispensing liquid (#43, See Col. 3 Lines 24-27),
a base element (#26) and a cover element (#24), which can be connected to one another in a force-fit or form-fit manner (See Fig. 1 and Col. 2 Lines 10-15, #26 is connected to #24 via threads), wherein:
the connection element is arranged in the base element (See Fig. 1, the connection element is partially arranged inside #26), and
the cover element and the base element enclose at least one channel (#31) which fluidically connects the connection element and the at least one dispensing opening to one another (See Fig. 1),
at least one seal is provided between the cover element and the base element, which seal forms a boundary of the channel in the radial direction over an entire height of the channel (See S in Annotated Fig. 1, the structure surrounding #31 is equivalent to a seal that forms a boundary of #31 in a radial direction over an entire height of #31), and
the at least one dispensing opening is arranged in the region of the at least one cover element (See Fig. 1, #43 is within #24).
As to Claim 2, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein two seals (#40 and #30) are provided as two mutually opposite boundaries of the channel (See Fig. 1, the seals #30 and #40 can be considered to create axial boundary planes for the channel), and wherein the seals have annular sealing surfaces and are designed as O-rings (See Fig. 1 and Col. 2 Lines 25-30).
As to Claim 3, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein the cover element and base element are be connected to one another via an internal thread and an external thread arranged on the cover element and base element or via screws (See Fig. 1 and Col. 2 Lines 10-20, #24 and #26 connect via internal threads on #26 and external threads on #24.).
As to Claim 14, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein a seal is arranged on an outer casing of the device, between the cover element and base element (See Annotated Fig. 1, a single thread T on #24 is equivalent to a seal that is arranged on an outer casing of the device between #24 and #28).
As to Claim 17, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein the cover element and the base element are designed as bodies of rotation about an axis of rotation (See Annotated Fig. 1, the cover element #24 and base element #28 rotate about axis A1 when they are screwed together).
As to Claim 18, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein a receptacle (#20) is provided into which a component selected from the group consisting of a foam bubbler, a headlamp, and a nozzle can be inserted (See Fig. 1, at least some nozzle can be inserted into #20), wherein the receptacle is arranged coaxially to an axis of rotation of the device (See Annotated Fig. 1, the receptacle is coaxial to axis A2 that the device is capable of rotating about).
As to Claim 19, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein the connection element extends at least as far as the channel, and the connection element terminates flush with a boundary wall of the channel (See Annotated Fig. 1, the connection element #34 extends all of the way to an inlet of the channel and is longer than the channel. An end of #34 ends flush with a boundary wall W at #41).
As to Claim 21, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein the channel has a first boundary wall in a normal plane to the axis of rotation and the channel forms a circular ring (See Annotated Fig. 1. The channel #31 is circular and the first boundary wall lies on a plane P1 that is normal to axis A1).
As to Claim 22, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein a ratio of a flow cross-section of the connection element to a channel cross-section is between 0.8 and 1.2 (See Fig. 1, #37 and #31 have a same cross section, thus a ratio of flow cross-sections is 1.0).
As to Claim 23, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein the axis of the connection element (See axis A2 in Annotated Fig. 1) is arranged parallel and eccentrically to the axis of rotation (See axis A1 in Annotated Fig. 1), wherein the connection element is arranged on a radius which corresponds to the center radius of the channel (See Annotated Fig. 1. The connection element has a central channel #37 that aligns with a center of #31).
As to Claim 24, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein the at least one dispensing opening on the cover element is arranged on a side of the device opposite to and facing away from the connection element (See Fig. 1. The cover element is on a right side of the device with an outlet facing right and the connection element is on a left side of the device with an inlet facing left).
PNG
media_image1.png
839
835
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piggott in view of US PGPUB 2003/0234301 A1 to Swan (“Swan”).
Regarding Claim 16, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one dispensing opening has an inclination to a vertical axis or axis of rotation of the device, which is inclined radially outwards by between 15° and 25° (See Annotated Fig. 1, #43 is aligned with axis A2 and parallel to axis A1).
However Swan discloses, in the same field of endeavor of fluid spraying, a device (See Fig. 3) comprising a dispensing opening (#10) that has an inclination to an axis of rotation of the device (See a central axis of #1 in Fig. 3), which is inclined radially outwards by an angle that is between 15° and 25° (See #12 in Fig. 3 and See Paragraph 0019 disclosing an angle of 10 degrees to 20 degrees, preferably 15 degrees).
Therefore, 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 device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above such that the at least one dispensing opening has an inclination to a vertical axis or axis of rotation of the device, which is inclined radially outwards by between 15° and 25°, as taught by Swan, since doing so would yield the predictable result of modifying the discharge pattern and imparting a different spray angle (See Swan Paragraph 0026) in order to spray fluid in a desired direction toward a desired target.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piggott in view of US Patent 6,460,783 to Cristopher (“Christopher”).
As to Claim 26, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott further discloses wherein at least three nozzles are provided (See four nozzles #29 in Fig. 2) wherein the nozzles are arranged on a radius which corresponds to a center radius of the channel (See Fig. 2, the nozzles are arranged in a circle around #25, which is centered between each channel #31).
Regarding Claim 26, Piggott does not specifically disclose wherein three nozzles are arranged offset by 120° on the circumference (See Fig. 2, four nozzles are arranged offset by 90 degrees in a circle).
However Cristopher discloses, in the same field of endeavor of fluid spraying, a device (See Fig. 1) comprising three nozzles (#160, #168, and #176) that are arranged offset by 120° (See Fig. 8), wherein the nozzles are arranged on a circle (See Fig. 8).
Therefore, 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 device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above such that the device comprises three nozzles arranged offset by 120° in a circle instead of four nozzles arranged offset by 90°, as doing so would yield the predictable result of simplifying the design of the device by reducing the number of components, thus lowering the cost of manufacturing while still allowing for multiple spray modes.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art fails to teach, disclose, or suggest, in combination with other limitations recited in dependent Claim 15 when interpreted as best understood by the examiner: “wherein the cover element and the base element each have a chamfer relative to one another on an outer casing of the device, in which chamfer a seal is arranged”.
Regarding Claim 15, in reference to the device of Piggott as applied to Claim 1 above, Piggott does not disclose wherein the cover element and the base element each have a chamfer relative to one another on an outer casing of the device, in which chamfer a seal is arranged (See Fig. 1, the cover #24 and base element #28 are joined together by threads and do not have chamfers relative to one another. There are no seals on an outer casing of the device). One having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would not be motivated to reconfigure the device of Piggott such that the cover element and the base element each have a chamfer relative to one another on an outer casing of the device, in which chamfer a seal is arranged as required by Claim 15 when best interpreted by the examiner, as there is no apparent benefit to making such a modification and making such a modification would change the overall configuration of the device of Piggott, which already has #24 and #28 joined by threads. Furthermore, there is no prior teaching in Piggott or other prior art that indicates that making such a modification would be an obvious design choice without utilizing improper hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Notice of References Cited Form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN E SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1770. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00AM - 5:00PM MST.
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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571)-270-1814. 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.
/KEVIN EDWARD SCHWARTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 July 14, 2026
Prosecution Insights