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 Species I, Figs. 1-9, Shaft Portion Species I, Fig. 5 in the reply filed on January 29, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 9-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on January 29, 2026. The Applicant argues that claims 1-15 read on the elected Species. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim 9 recites “the prevention portions have a substantially polygonal shape.” Paragraphs [0090]- [0091] discloses “FIG. 9 is a view of a cleaner nozzle 1B according to a second modification…shaft portion 22B and a hole 13B that constitute prevention portions have a substantially polygonal shape. The “substantially polygonal shape” is basically a polygonal shape…” Clearly, Fig. 9 is not an elected Species in the Applicant’s election. Independent claim 10 recites “a protruding portion protruding in a radial direction of the cylinder.” Paragraphs [0094]- [0115] discloses “the protruding portion 126” of a non-elected Species in Figs. 11-15. Clearly, Figs. 11-15 are not an elected Species in the Applicant’s election. Claims 9-15 are therefore withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “prevention portions” in claim 1, where the “portion” is the placeholder and “prevention” is the functional language.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ringler et al. (DE102018220582. Ringler hereinafter).
With respect to claim 1, Ringler discloses a cleaner nozzle (Figs. 1-12) comprising:
a cylinder (2, 9) extending in an axial direction (A); and
a piston (3) having an ejection port (5) and being displaceable in the axial direction in the cylinder, wherein
the piston and the cylinder are provided with respective prevention portions (7-7’’’, 8-8’’’ and 25) that prevent relative displacement of the cylinder and the piston about an axis by coming into contact with each other.
With respect to claim 2, Ringler discloses the cleaner nozzle according to claim 1, wherein the prevention portions include a piston side flat surface portion in the piston (7-7’’’’. Figs. 6-9c) and a cylinder side flat surface portion in the cylinder (8-8’’’. Figs. 10-12) that faces the piston side flat surface portion.
With respect to claim 3, Ringler discloses the cleaner nozzle according to claim 1, wherein the cylinder includes a cover portion (18) covering at least a part of an opening (occupied by 3), the cover portion is provided with a hole (at 25) through which the piston is inserted, and a portion (hole at 25) of the cover portion that constitutes the hole and a portion (25) of the piston that is in contact with the hole constitute the prevention portions.
With respect to claim 4, Ringler discloses the cleaner nozzle according to claim 2, wherein the cylinder includes a cylindrical portion (body of 2) and a cover portion (9) that is separate from the cylindrical portion and covers at least a part of an opening of the cylindrical portion (at 28), the cover portion is provided with a guide (cylindrical) portion extending to a side opposite to the ejection port, and the guide portion has a flat surface facing the piston side flat surface portion (Fig. 5).
With respect to claim 5, Ringler discloses the cleaner nozzle according to claim 2, wherein at least two cylinder side flat surface portions (left and right sides of 9 or flat surfaces of 8-8’’’) and at least two piston side flat surface portions (flat surfaces of 7-7’’’) are provided.
With respect to claim 6, Ringler discloses the cleaner nozzle according to claim 5, wherein at least two cylinder side flat surface portions (flat surfaces portions of 8-8’’’) are provided and have the axis sandwiched (by surrounding axis A) in between when viewed from the axial direction (Same as the Applicant’s configuration).
With respect to claim 7, Ringler discloses the cleaner nozzle according to claim 3, wherein the piston includes a seal portion (17) in water-tight contact with an inner wall of the cylinder (Fig. 5) and an internal flow path (24, 13, 4), the cylinder is divided into a spring accommodating chamber (encasing 19) defined between the cover portion and the seal portion and a hydraulic pressure chamber (24) that is provided on a (upstream) side opposite to the cover portion relative to the seal portion and communicates with the internal flow path, and the spring accommodating chamber is provided with a coil spring (19) therein that moves the piston away from the cover portion.
With respect to claim 8, Ringler discloses the cleaner nozzle according to claim 1, wherein the prevention portions have a flat shape (of 7-7’’’, 8-8’’’ and 25) when viewed from the axial direction of the cylinder.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following patents are cited to show the art with respect to a cleaner nozzle: Witty et al., Orth, Bristwo, Camier, Epple et al., Orth et al., Lind et al., Hartick et al., Dinant, Suhring et al. and Nuber et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHEE-CHONG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am -5pm.
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.
/CHEE-CHONG LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 February 17, 2026