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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
Reference characters 33L (e.g. para 0041) and 32L (e.g. para 0041) are both used to designate the “lower wall”, illustrated in at least Fig 1 and Fig 2. The same part of an invention appearing in more than one view of the drawing must always be designated by the same reference character.
Reference character 49 is used, in Figure 6 at least, to designate both of the following underlined terms in the following excerpt from para 0034: “the tubular structure 49 can include a distal opening 49”.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because:
Reference character 33 appears in the specification (e.g. para 0041, 0056) but does not appear in the drawings.
Reference character “G” of Fig 6 does not appear in the specification.
For each of the drawing objections above, 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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 0032 (second sentence), “a vehicle station 101” should be -- a vacuum station 101 --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 (last line & 4th to last line) recites the limitation “the holster” which should be rewritten as -- the vacuum holster -- to provide formal antecedent basis, as the claims typically otherwise reference “the vacuum holster”.
Claim 11 (last line) recites the limitation “the holster” which should be rewritten as -- the vacuum holster -- to provide formal antecedent basis, as the claims typically otherwise reference “the vacuum holster”.
Claim 17 (last line) recites the limitation “the holster” which should be rewritten as -- the vacuum holster -- to provide formal antecedent basis, as the claims typically otherwise reference “the vacuum holster”.
Claims 8 and 9 (line 3 in each) recites the limitation “the holster” which should be rewritten as -- the vacuum holster -- to provide formal antecedent basis, as the claims typically otherwise reference “the vacuum holster”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
Regarding the IDS document which Applicant filed on 6/04/2024, Examiner has lined through items "Mr. Nozzle Hangers” and “Sonny's Vacuum Express Nozzle with Holster” and “Tommy's Existing Nozzle Holster” because Applicant has not provided on 6/04/2024 any documents with any such identifiers. Examiner acknowledges that Applicant submitted on 6/04/2024 three documents each containing images, but Examiner has no way of knowing whether any of these images/documents correspond to either "Mr. Nozzle Hangers” or “Sonny's Vacuum Express Nozzle with Holster” or “Tommy's Existing Nozzle Holster”. The references of "Mr. Nozzle Hangers”, “Sonny's Vacuum Express Nozzle with Holster”, “Tommy's Existing Nozzle Holster”, as identified on the IDS document are therefore unable to be considered.
Applicant is requested to provide the sources (e.g. URL addresses) where the images/references exist (i.e. were “downloaded” from) for full consideration, to include the date of each NPL reference, as each image/reference is identified on the IDS as being “downloaded” from a certain site.
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) 1-20 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 and Claim 11 and Claim 17 each recite in line 1 the limitation “a vacuum nozzle” and then subsequently “a vacuum nozzle” again which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the second recitation references the same vacuum nozzle previously identified or a different vacuum nozzle. If the former, then it is suggested that the second recitation be rewritten as -- the vacuum nozzle --.
Claim(s) 2-10, 12-16, 18-20 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) 1-3, 11, 17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by non-patent literature “Car Wash AND VACUUM! The Auto Spa Express, I-270 location” (hereinafter KingCarWash).
Regarding claim 1, KingCarWash discloses:
A vacuum holster adapted to retain a vacuum nozzle at a vacuum station of a vehicle wash facility, the vacuum holster comprising:
a mounting flange configured to be fixedly attached to a structure to thereby support the vacuum holster relative to the structure (ScreenCapture01 shows all this);
a first upper sidewall extending rearward from the mounting flange and an opposing second upper sidewall extending rearward from the mounting flange (Annotated ScreenCapture03
shows all this),
the first upper sidewall and the second upper sidewall joined with an upper wall (Annotated ScreenCapture03) extending rearward from the mounting flange,
the first upper sidewall, the second upper sidewall and the upper wall bounding an insertion opening (Annotated ScreenCapture03) extending rearward from the mounting flange,
the insertion opening bounded by the mounting flange (Annotated ScreenCapture03
shows this),
the first upper sidewall and the second upper sidewall separated by a first lateral width (Annotated ScreenCapture03) configured to allow passage of a widest dimension of a vacuum nozzle into the insertion opening (e.g. ScreenCapture01 shows this);
a first lower sidewall (Annotated ScreenCapture03) extending rearward from the mounting flange and an opposing second lower sidewall (Annotated ScreenCapture03) extending rearward from the mounting flange,
the first lower sidewall and the second lower sidewall joined with a lower wall (Annotated ScreenCapture03) extending rearward from the mounting flange,
the first lower sidewall, the second lower sidewall and the lower wall bounding a nesting recess (Annotated ScreenCapture03) in communication with and below the insertion opening,
the nesting recess extending rearward from the mounting flange (Annotated ScreenCapture03
shows this),
the nesting recess bounded by the mounting flange (Annotated ScreenCapture03
shows this),
the first lower sidewall and the second lower sidewall separated by a second lateral width (Annotated ScreenCapture03) adjacent the mounting flange,
the second lateral width being less than the first lateral width (Annotated ScreenCapture03 shows this),
the first lower sidewall and the second lower sidewall forming a retention contour (Annotated ScreenCapture03) beyond which the widest dimension of the vacuum nozzle cannot pass when the vacuum nozzle is pulled downward against the retention contour under the force of gravity (e.g. ScreenCapture01, ScreenCapture02 show this);
whereby when the vacuum nozzle is disposed in the holster the vacuum nozzle is trapped in the nesting recess via the vacuum nozzle interacting with the retention contour (e.g. ScreenCapture01 shows this), but removeable via the vacuum nozzle being tilted upward and out of contact with the retention contour during withdrawal of the vacuum nozzle from the holster by a user (e.g. ScreenCapture02 shows there is clearly enough room around the nozzle to tilt the nozzle upward as such).
PNG
media_image1.png
489
801
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated ScreenCapture03
Regarding claim 2, KingCarWash discloses:
wherein the first lower sidewall transitions at a first shoulder to the first upper sidewall, wherein the second lower sidewall transitions at a second shoulder to the second upper sidewall, wherein the first shoulder and the second shoulder form at least a portion of the retention contour (e.g. ScreenCapture03 shows this).
Regarding claim 3, KingCarWash discloses:
wherein the first lower sidewall and the second lower sidewall are separated by a third lateral width distal from the mounting flange, the third lateral width being less than the first lateral width and greater than the second lateral width (with regard to Annotated ScreenCapture03: the third lateral width may exist between the first lateral width and the second lateral width, and may be located away from the plane of the opening of the nesting recess, such that it meets this claim).
Regarding claim 11, KingCarWash discloses:
A vacuum holster adapted to retain a vacuum nozzle at a vacuum station of a vehicle wash facility, the vacuum holster comprising:
a mounting flange configured to be fixedly attached to a structure to thereby support the vacuum holster relative to the structure (ScreenCapture01 shows all this),
the mounting flange (20) surrounding a proximal opening (ScreenCapture03 shows this) defining an insertion opening (Annotated ScreenCapture03) and a nesting recess (Annotated ScreenCapture03) below the insertion opening; and
a plurality of walls extending from the proximal opening toward a distal opening (ScreenCapture03 shows this),
the plurality of walls defining a first lateral width (Annotated ScreenCapture03) configured to allow passage of a widest dimension of a vacuum nozzle through the insertion opening (e.g. ScreenCapture01, ScreenCapture02 show this) and a second lateral width (Annotated ScreenCapture03) adjacent the mounting flange,
the second lateral width being less than the first lateral width (ScreenCapture03 shows this),
the plurality of walls forming a retention contour (Annotated ScreenCapture03) beyond which the widest dimension of the vacuum nozzle cannot pass when the vacuum nozzle is pulled outward against the retention contour (e.g. ScreenCapture01, ScreenCapture02 show this; the widest dimension of the nozzle cannot pass beyond the retention contour in a downward direction);
whereby when the vacuum nozzle is disposed in the vacuum holster the vacuum nozzle is trapped in the nesting recess via the vacuum nozzle interacting with the retention contour (e.g. ScreenCapture01 shows this), but removeable via the vacuum nozzle being tilted upward and out of contact with the retention contour during withdrawal of the vacuum nozzle from the holster by a user (e.g. ScreenCapture02 shows there is clearly enough room around the nozzle to tilt the nozzle upward as such).
Regarding claim 17, KingCarWash discloses:
A vacuum holster adapted to retain a vacuum nozzle at a vacuum station of a vehicle wash facility, the vacuum holster comprising:
a plurality of walls (Annotated ScreenCapture03 shows this) extending from a proximal opening (opening at the flange in ScreenCapture03) toward a distal opening (opening within an interior of the holster),
the plurality of sidewalls defining a tubular structure extending from the proximal opening to the distal opening and having a first lateral width (ScreenCapture03) configured to allow passage of a widest dimension of a vacuum nozzle (e.g. ScreenCapture01, ScreenCapture02 show this) through the proximal opening and into the vacuum holster; and
a retention contour (Annotated ScreenCapture03), disposed below the first lateral width, beyond which the widest dimension of the vacuum nozzle cannot pass when urged toward the proximal opening with the vacuum nozzle (e.g. ScreenCapture01, ScreenCapture02 show this);
whereby when the vacuum nozzle is disposed in the vacuum holster the vacuum nozzle is trapped via the vacuum nozzle interacting with the retention contour (e.g. ScreenCapture01 shows this), but removeable via the vacuum nozzle being tilted upward and out of contact with the retention contour during withdrawal of the vacuum nozzle from the holster by a user (e.g. ScreenCapture02 shows there is clearly enough room around the nozzle to tilt the nozzle upward as such).
Regarding claim 19, KingCarWash discloses:
wherein the retention contour is formed below the first lateral width and includes a second lateral width less than the first lateral width (e.g. ScreenCapture03 shows this);
wherein the vacuum nozzle includes a second nozzle width distal from the widest dimension of the vacuum nozzle which is located near a nozzle opening configured to draw debris into the vacuum nozzle (e.g. ScreenCapture04 shows this);
wherein the second nozzle width nests adjacent the second lateral width (e.g. ScreenCapture01, ScreenCapture02 show this);
wherein the widest dimension of the vacuum nozzle is greater than the second lateral width (e.g. ScreenCapture01, ScreenCapture02, ScreenCapture03 show this);
wherein the plurality of walls includes a lower wall forming a lower boundary of a nesting recess (Annotated ScreenCapture03);
wherein the lower wall is engaged by a lower vacuum nozzle wall while the vacuum nozzle is at least partially nested in the nesting recess (e.g. ScreenCapture02 shows this);
wherein the plurality of walls includes a shoulder (Annotated ScreenCapture03);
wherein the shoulder is located above the lower wall (Annotated ScreenCapture03 shows this);
wherein the vacuum nozzle is located above and below the shoulder when the vacuum nozzle is in the nesting recess (e.g. ScreenCapture01 shows this);
wherein the nozzle opening is disposed above the shoulder when the vacuum nozzle is in the nesting recess (ScreenCapture01 shows that there is room for the nozzle opening to be moved upwards such that this limitation is met, such that the nozzle is also still occupying the nesting recess).
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(s) 7-10, 12-14, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KingCarWash in view of JP H0639620 Y2 (hereinafter JP620).
Examiner's note: The examiner's submitted English translation of JP620, submitted with this office action, is referenced hereinafter.
Regarding claim 7, KingCarWash discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: a plurality of fastener bosses joined with at least one of the upper wall, the first upper sidewall, the second upper sidewall, the first lower sidewall and the second lower sidewall and the lower wall, a backer plate disposed distal from the mounting flange; and a plurality of fasteners extending through the backer plate and into respective ones of the plurality of fastener bosses.
However, JP620, in the same field of endeavor, vacuums, teaches:
A vacuum nozzle holder (11; Fig 4) having a stop plate (24) attached to interior walls of the holder via a fastener (shown in Fig 4 where the stop pate interfaces with wall 22 near reference character 24) in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KingCarWash to include JP620’s teachings as described above, having a stop plate attached to interior walls of the holder, in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5).
While JP may not explicitly identify a plurality of the fasteners, it is noted that, courts have established that “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced”, and is not inventive, rather a difference which would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI).
Regarding claim 8, KingCarWash, as modified above, discloses: wherein the insertion opening and the nesting recess cooperatively form a void inside the holster; wherein the backer plate closes off the void distal from the mounting flange (JP620’s stop plate closes off a void formed by the insertion opening and the nesting recess).
Regarding claim 9, KingCarWash discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: a flexible flap disposed adjacent the upper wall and lower wall, wherein the insertion opening and the nesting recess cooperatively form a void inside the holster, wherein the flexible flap faces toward the void distal from the mounting flange, whereby a vacuum drawn through the vacuum nozzle engages a distal end of the vacuum nozzle against the flexible flap to close off a mouth of the vacuum nozzle.
However, JP620, in the same field of endeavor, vacuums, teaches:
A vacuum nozzle holder (11; Fig 4) having a stop plate (24) attached to interior walls of the holder via a fastener (shown in Fig 4 where the stop pate interfaces with wall 22 near reference character 24), wherein the stop plate may comprise “a rubber sheet” capable of sealing against the nozzle’s suction (page 3 para 3) in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5).
A broadest reasonable interpretation of a “flap” may be “a flat piece of material that is attached to something on one side and that can be easily moved” per https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/flap; note that this does not require the material to be attached on only one side.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KingCarWash to include JP620’s teachings as described above, having a flexible rubber flap at the distal end of the nozzle holder, in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5). This modification results in disclosing the limitations above.
Regarding claim 10, KingCarWash discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: a flexible flap; wherein the upper wall, the first upper sidewall, the second upper sidewall, the first lower sidewall and the second lower sidewall and the lower wall form a tubular structure having a distal opening located a distance from a proximal opening comprising the insertion opening and the nesting recess; wherein the flexible flap extends over the distal opening; wherein the proximal opening is open and surrounded by the mounting flange; whereby a vacuum drawn through the vacuum nozzle engages a distal end of the vacuum nozzle against the flexible flap.
However, JP620, in the same field of endeavor, vacuums, teaches:
A vacuum nozzle holder (11; Fig 4) having a stop plate (24) attached to interior walls of the holder via a fastener (shown in Fig 4 where the stop pate interfaces with wall 22 near reference character 24), wherein the stop plate may comprise “a rubber sheet” capable of sealing against the nozzle’s suction (page 3 para 3) in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5).
A broadest reasonable interpretation of a “flap” may be “a flat piece of material that is attached to something on one side and that can be easily moved” per https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/flap; note that this does not require the material to be attached on only one side.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KingCarWash to include JP620’s teachings as described above, having a flexible rubber flap at the distal end of the nozzle holder, in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5). This modification results in disclosing the limitations above.
Regarding claim 12, KingCarWash discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: a backer plate adjacent the plurality of walls and disposed over the distal opening; and a plurality of fasteners joining the backer plate with the plurality of walls.
However, JP620, in the same field of endeavor, vacuums, teaches:
A vacuum nozzle holder (11; Fig 4) having a stop plate (24) attached to interior walls of the holder via a fastener (shown in Fig 4 where the stop pate interfaces with wall 22 near reference character 24) in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KingCarWash to include JP620’s teachings as described above, having a stop plate attached to interior walls of the holder, in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5).
While JP may not explicitly identify a plurality of the fasteners, it is noted that, courts have established that “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced”, and is not inventive, rather a difference which would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI).
Regarding claim 13, KingCarWash, as modified above, discloses: a flexible flap disposed between the backer plate and the plurality of walls; whereby a vacuum drawn through the vacuum nozzle engages a distal end of the vacuum nozzle against the flexible flap (wherein the stop plate may comprise “a rubber sheet” capable of sealing against the nozzle’s suction (page 3 para 3)).
A broadest reasonable interpretation of a “flap” may be “a flat piece of material that is attached to something on one side and that can be easily moved” per https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/flap; note that this does not require the material to be attached on only one side.
Regarding claim 14, KingCarWash discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: a flexible flap; wherein the plurality of walls form a closed tubular structure between the proximal opening and the distal opening; wherein the flexible flap extends over the distal opening; wherein the proximal opening is open and surrounded by the mounting flange; whereby a vacuum drawn through the vacuum nozzle engages a distal end of the vacuum nozzle against the flexible flap.
However, JP620, in the same field of endeavor, vacuums, teaches:
A vacuum nozzle holder (11; Fig 4) having a stop plate (24) attached to interior walls of the holder via a fastener (shown in Fig 4 where the stop pate interfaces with wall 22 near reference character 24), wherein the stop plate may comprise “a rubber sheet” capable of sealing against the nozzle’s suction (page 3 para 3) in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5).
A broadest reasonable interpretation of a “flap” may be “a flat piece of material that is attached to something on one side and that can be easily moved” per https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/flap; note that this does not require the material to be attached on only one side.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KingCarWash to include JP620’s teachings as described above, having a flexible rubber flap at the distal end of the nozzle holder, in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5). This modification results in disclosing the limitations above.
Regarding claim 20, KingCarWash discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: a backer plate adjacent the plurality of walls and disposed over the distal opening; a plurality of fasteners joining the backer plate with the plurality of walls; a flexible flap disposed between the backer plate and the plurality of walls; whereby a vacuum drawn through the vacuum nozzle engages a distal end of the vacuum nozzle against the flexible flap; wherein the proximal opening is open and surrounded by a mounting flange; wherein the mounting flange defines a plurality of fastener holes.
However, JP620, in the same field of endeavor, vacuums, teaches:
A vacuum nozzle holder (11; Fig 4) having a stop plate (24) attached to interior walls of the holder via a fastener (shown in Fig 4 where the stop pate interfaces with wall 22 near reference character 24), wherein the stop plate may comprise “a rubber sheet” capable of sealing against the nozzle’s suction (page 3 para 3) in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5).
A broadest reasonable interpretation of a “flap” may be “a flat piece of material that is attached to something on one side and that can be easily moved” per https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/flap; note that this does not require the material to be attached on only one side.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify KingCarWash to include JP620’s teachings as described above, having a flexible rubber flap at the distal end of the nozzle holder, in order to close off nozzle suctioning when the nozzle is placed into the holder (e.g. page 3 para 5). This modification results in disclosing the limitations above.
While JP may not explicitly identify a plurality of the fasteners, it is noted that, courts have established that “mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced”, and is not inventive, rather a difference which would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.04(VI).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim(s) 4-6, 15-16, 18 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 4, KingCarWash, as modified above, discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: wherein the nesting recess flares wider as the nesting recess extends farther from the mounting flange; wherein the insertion opening remains substantially the same first lateral width as the insertion opening extends farther from the mounting flange.
Claims 5-6 each depend from claim 4 and are therefore allowable over the prior art for at least that reason.
Regarding claim 15, KingCarWash, as modified above, discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: a longitudinal axis separating a left side and a right side; wherein the first lateral width and second lateral width each span from the left side to the right side; wherein the plurality of walls surround the longitudinal axis entirely from the proximal opening to the distal opening; wherein the retention contour flares wider as the retention contour extends toward the distal opening.
Regarding claim 16, KingCarWash, as modified above, discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: wherein the plurality of walls include a lower wall; wherein the lower wall engages the vacuum nozzle simultaneously while the retention contour engages the vacuum nozzle when the vacuum nozzle is stored in the vacuum holster; wherein the retention contour bounds the nesting recess and widens from the proximal opening to the distal opening.
Regarding claim 18, KingCarWash, as modified above, discloses all claim limitations (see above) except may not explicitly disclose: a longitudinal axis separating a left side and a right side; wherein the first lateral width spans horizontally from the left side to the right side; wherein the plurality of walls surround the longitudinal axis entirely from the proximal opening to the distal opening; wherein the retention contour widens as the retention contour extends away from the proximal opening.
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. 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 7945990 B2 - cited for teaching in Fig 4 a vacuum nozzle in a holster.
US 20170325644 A1 - cited for teaching in Fig 3 a vacuum nozzle in a holster.
US 11882983 B2 - cited for teaching a nozzle and a holster.
KR 20210138957 A - cited for teaching a nozzle and a holster.
JP H05261046 A - cited for teaching a nozzle and a holster.
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 8:30-5:00.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745