Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/735,431

LAUNDRY TREATING APPARATUS AND SYSTEM HAVING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jun 06, 2024
Examiner
LEE, KEVIN G
Art Unit
1711
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
369 granted / 581 resolved
-1.5% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+26.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
613
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
§112
27.0%
-13.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 581 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/14/2026 has been entered. Acknowledgements This office action is in response to the communication filed 1/14/2026. Claims 1-8 are pending and have been examined. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Previous rejections under 35 USC 112 are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments. 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 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son et al. (US 2018/0202091 A1) in view of Kwon et al. (US 2018/0305851 A1) and Lee et al. (AU 2016384539 B2). Re claim 1, Son discloses a laundry treating apparatus (abstract, title) comprising: a first laundry treating apparatus (ref. 110, see fig. 2) comprising: a cabinet (ref. 111), a drum (¶ [0126] a first drum) disposed in the cabinet and configured to receive laundry, a driver (ref. 114) configured to rotate the drum, a manipulation portion (see fig. 2 portion occupied by ref. 200) configured to receive a selection command for selecting a course or an operation triggering an operation of the driver, a display portion (ref. 210, 220 ¶ [0166]-[0167] display unit) configured to display state information including at least one of a name, a selected state, or an executed state of the course or the option that triggered the operation of the driver (fig. 10a-c), and a second laundry treating apparatus (ref. 120) configured to be separated from the first laundry treating apparatus and to receive laundry, wherein the first laundry treating apparatus further comprises: a communication module (ref. 300, ¶ [0151]) configured to communicate with the second laundry treating apparatus, and a switching portion (¶ [0147]-[0148] switch provided in the cabinet…connected to an external power supply source…a second power supply source for supplying power to the second treating unit) disposed at the cabinet and configured to receive a connection command that causes the communication module to communication with the second laundry treating apparatus (¶ [0173], [0219]-[0220]), and wherein the second laundry treating apparatus is configured to, based on the connection command being input to the switching portion, receive power, and wherein the display portion is configured to: display information regarding the second laundry treating apparatus based on connection command being input to the switching portion (¶ [0036]-[0038], [0095], [0186] displays based on sensing whether one or both treating units are activated; [0044]-[0045] “course display step may be repeated, when the operation command performable in the selected treating unit is not input in the course input sense step”). Son does not explicitly disclose a setting portion disposed at an outside of the manipulation portion and the display portion and configured to receive a change command to change the operation of the driver, and display information regarding the first laundry treating apparatus based on a control command being received at the second laundry treating apparatus after the connection command is input to the switching portion. Regarding the setting portion, Kwon discloses it is well-known in the laundry treating apparatus interface art (abstract) to provide a setting portion (see fig. 3, ref. 170 operate/pause, ref. 160d add laundry) disposed at an outside of the manipulation portion (refs. 140) and the display portion (ref. 130) and configured to receive a change command to change the operation of the driver (e.g. pause and add laundry will stop the driver). Lee disclose it is known in the laundry treating apparatus art (abstract) to provide display information regarding the first laundry treating apparatus based on a control command being received at the second laundry treating apparatus after the connection command is input to the switching portion (p. 30 lines 13-17, p. 33 lines 6-11, claims 2-3, second clothes treating apparatus may be released…based on a user input…such that second graphic objects disappear and the icons included in the first group appear; see also claim 9-10 guidance information of second treating apparatus after executing function of the first treating apparatus [and the reverse being prima facie obvious, i.e. finish executing second treating apparatus, results in guidance for the first treating apparatus]). Regarding display information regarding the first laundry treating apparatus based on a control command being received at the second laundry treating apparatus, At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further include a setting portion disposed at an outside of the manipulation portion and the display portion, as suggested by Kwon, in order to pause or interrupt a washing process for changes; and to further include refreshing the display based on a command and/or power off the second laundry treating apparatus, as suggested by Lee, in order to avoid user confusion when the second laundry treating apparatus is unavailable. Re claim 3, regarding “a third laundry treating apparatus configured to be separated from the second laundry treating apparatus and to receive laundry, wherein the communication module is configured to communicate the third laundry treating apparatus, and wherein the third laundry treating apparatus is configured to, based on the connection command being input to the switching portion, receive power”, the mere duplication of laundry apparatuses and connection the communication module is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the known art to have multiple washing and drying apparatuses (see e.g. fig. 1 showing ref. 10 and ref. 21, or fig. 2 ref. 120 appearing to have a top and side load treating unit). See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B) Duplication of Parts. Claims 2 and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son et al. (US 2018/0202091 A1) in view of Kwon et al. (US 2018/0305851 A1) and Lee et al. (AU 2016384539 B2), and further in view of Ha (US 2014/0156082 A1) (previously cited). Re claim 2, Son discloses as shown above, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the second laundry treating apparatus is controlled to power off when the connection command is input to the switching portion and a predetermined reference time has passed. However, Ha discloses it is very old and well-known in the home appliance control art to automatically power off a washing machine (i.e. laundry treating apparatus) when operations are completed. Regarding “a predetermined reference time”, the use of a timeout or inactive wait period is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, i.e. power-saving mode, for purposes of saving energy. (Alternatively, the operation of a timed cycle is also a “predetermined reference time”). At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the laundry treating apparatus of Son/Kwon/Lee to further include an automatic power off feature, as suggested by Ha, in order to enable remote power off and power-savings upon completion or inactivity. Re claim 4-8, Dependent claim 4-8 are drawn to similar features of the first/second/third treating apparatus is controlled to power off when the connection command is input to the switching portion and a predetermined reference time has passed and/or after completion of a course and/or an option being executed. Here, as discussed in the rejection to claim 2 above, the mere use of a known automatic shut off after completion of a course/predetermined timeout or inactive wait period is prima facie obvious, and it being obvious to control any and/or all of the connected laundry treating apparatus. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 1/14/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive in part. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Specifically, Son discloses display first information, second information and/or both information, based on a sense step that occurs on power on of the display to determine if the second treating unit is connected/powered on, but does not explicitly disclose a continuous sense step or modification of the display based on a change in command/power off of the second treating unit. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of AU 2016384539 B2. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20180291550A1 note disabling second treatment unit icons on display on detecting power off/completion of second treatment unit operation. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7299. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am to 6:30pm. 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, Michael Barr can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. KEVIN G. LEE Examiner Art Unit 1711 /KEVIN G LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 06, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 24, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jul 03, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 15, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 14, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588798
DISHWASHER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588796
A DOOR OPENER FOR A DOMESTIC APPLIANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584258
LAUNDRY PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584637
HOUSEHOLD APPLIANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12532961
PAINT BRUSH AND ROLLER WASHER
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+26.3%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 581 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month