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 Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Grammatical error in line 3: “..the poor being in..”. The suggested change is: “..the port being in..”.
Grammatical error in line 5: “..a water supply pump and fluid communication with the water supply line..”. The suggested change is: “..a water supply pump in fluid communication with the water supply line”.
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 10-11 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 10 recites the limitation "the water return line" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Disch et al. (US20180213999).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Disch et al. teaches a dish cleaning system (see abstract) comprising: a cabinet (see housing of 1, as shown in figure 1) defining an interior volume therein, the interior volume including a loading space 10, a washing space 11-14, a drying space 15, and a storage space 17 (see figure 1, paragraphs [0045]-[0046]); a dish rack 7 capable of being positioned in the cabinet and capable of holding a plurality of dishes (see abstract, figure 1, paragraphs [0062]-[0063]); a drive system 20 mounted in the cabinet and capable of moving the dish rack 7 between the loading space 10, the washing space 11-14, the drying space 15, and the storage space 17 (see abstract, figure 1, paragraphs [0063], [0065], [0072]-[0073]); and a washing assembly 2-5 configured to wash contents of the washing space of the interior volume of the cabinet (see figure 1, paragraphs [0047]-[0049], [0053]-[0058]) (reads on claim 1); a fan mounted in the cabinet adjacent to the drying space 15, the fan being positioned and configured to circulate air in the drying space when activated (reads on claim 15) (see paragraph [0052]).
Claims 1 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (CN112826405A).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Chen et al. teaches a dish cleaning system (see abstract) comprising: a cabinet 100 defining an interior volume therein, the interior volume including a loading space (see inlet side), a washing space (see space 310 of 300, as shown in figure 1), a drying space (see space 310 of 400, as shown in figure 1), and a storage space (see outlet side) (see figure 1, pages 3-4 of the translation); a dish rack (see dish/bowl basket) capable of being positioned in the cabinet 100 and configured to hold a plurality of dishes (see abstract, pages 3-4 of the translation); a drive system 200 mounted in the cabinet 100 and configured to move the dish rack between the loading space, the washing space, the drying space, and the storage space (see pages 4-5 of the translation, figure 1); and a washing assembly 410 configured to wash contents of the washing space of the interior volume of the cabinet 100 (see figure 1, page 5 of the translation) (reads on claim 1); a fan 600 mounted in the cabinet 100 adjacent to the drying space, the fan 600 being positioned and configured to circulate air in the drying space when activated (see pages 5-6 of the translation, figure 1) (reads on claim 15).
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.
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.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Disch et al. (US20180213999) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Kral et al. (US6582654B1).
Regarding claim 10, Disch et al. teaches the limitations of claim 1. Disch et al. also teaches that the washing assembly comprises: a water supply line (see e.g. common line in paragraph [0048]) extending into the cabinet (see paragraphs [0007], [0048]); a port 2/3/4/5 in an interior space of the cabinet, the port 2/3/4/5 being in fluid communication with the water supply line and the washing space (see figure 1, paragraphs [0047]-[0049], [0053]-[0058]); a water supply pump and fluid communication with the water supply line, the water supply pump being configured to urge fluid from the water supply line and into the washing space through the port 2/3/4/5 (see paragraphs [0048], [0053]); and a water return line extending into the cabinet, the cabinet defining a drain therein at a bottom of the interior volume, the drain being in fluid communication with the water return line and the interior volume. Disch et al. does not teach the cabinet defining a port on an interior surface of the cabinet, the port being in fluid communication with the water supply line and the washing space and a water return line extending into the cabinet, the cabinet defining a drain therein at a bottom of the interior volume. Kral et al. teaches a spray cleaning apparatus (see abstract) and the cabinet 13 defining a port 102/104/106/107/108/110 on an interior surface of the cabinet 13, the port 102/104/106/107/108/110 being in fluid communication with the water supply line 42 and the washing space, the water supply pump being configured to urge fluid from the water supply line 42 and into the washing space through the port 102/104/106/107/108/110 (see column 5, line 63-column 6, line 14, figures 1-2), a water return line (see line on which valve 240 is disposed, as shown in figure 1) extending into the cabinet 13, the cabinet 13 defining a drain therein at a bottom of the interior volume, the drain being in fluid communication with the water return line and the interior volume (see figure 1, column 10, lines 38-40, column 10, line 61-column 11, line 5); thereby allowing for complete spray coverage of items within the washing space and removal of waste water from the system. Since both Disch et al. and Kral et al. both teach spray washing apparatuses it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that a port may be disposed on an interior space of the cabinet so as to allow complete spray coverage and a water return line may be included so as to allow for the removal of waste water, as shown to be known and conventional by Kral et al.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Disch et al. (US20180213999) as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Lee et al. (KR20200115013A).
Regarding claim 16, Disch et al. teaches the limitations of claim 1. Disch et al. also teaches a loading opening which extends into the cabinet to the loading space 10, the cabinet defining a storage opening which extends into the cabinet to the storage space 17 (see figure 1, paragraphs [0045]-[0046]). Disch et al. does not explicitly teach the cabinet including a loading door which is movable to alternately open and close with respect to the loading opening, the cabinet including a storage door which is movable to alternately open and close with respect to the storage opening. Lee et al. teaches a spray washing apparatus (see abstract, page 2 of the translation) and that a door 150 may be provided to alternately open and close with respect to the cabinet 110 thereby allowing for the loading and unloading of the items to be washed into and from the washing space 121, and providing a watertight seal of the washing space (see pages 7-8 of the translation). Since both Disch et al. and Lee et al. teach spray washing apparatuses it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that a loading door and storage door may be included in the system by Disch et al. so as to alternately open and close the loading and storage openings and provide a watertight seal of the washing space, as shown to be known and conventional by Lee et al.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Disch et al. (US20180213999) in view of Kral et al. (US6582654B1) as applied to claim 10 and further in view of Lee et al. (KR20200115013A).
Regarding claim 11, Disch et al. and Kral et al. together teach the limitations of claim 10. Disch et al. does not teach a water return pump. Lee et al. teaches a spray washing apparatus (see abstract, page 2 of the translation) and a water return pump (see drain pump) and fluid communication with the water return line 132d, the water return pump being configured to urge fluid from the interior volume into the water return line 132d through the drain, thereby allowing for the guided discharge of waste water from the system (see pages 4, 8 of the translation, figure 5). Since both Disch et al. and Lee et al. teach spray washing apparatuses it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that a water return pump may be included in the system by Disch et al. so as to allow for the guided discharge of waste water from the system, as shown to be known and conventional by Lee et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9, 12-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 17 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record is Chen et al. (CN112826405A). Chen et al. fails to teach/disclose all of the limitations of claims 2, 12 and 17, including the following limitations of independent claim 17: “..a storage lift configured to move the dish rack between the drying space and the storage space.. the horizontal partition being movable between a first position and a second position, the first position of the horizontal partition being between the loading space and the washing space, the second position of the horizontal partition being between the storage space and the drying space; a pair of horizontal rails mounted in the cabinet, the horizontal rails being positioned opposite each other across the interior volume, the horizontal partition being movably mounted on the pair of horizontal rails; a horizontal partition drive configured to move the horizontal partition on the horizontal rails between the first and second positions of the horizontal partition; a vertical partition movably mounted in the cabinet, the vertical partition being movable between a first position and a second position, the first position of the vertical partition being between the loading space and the storage space, the second position of the vertical partition being between the washing space and the drying space; a pair of vertical rails mounted in the cabinet, the vertical rails being positioned opposite each other across the interior volume, the vertical partition being movably mounted on the pair of vertical rails; a vertical partition drive configured to move the vertical partition on the vertical rails between the first and second positions of the vertical partition..”. Furthermore, no other prior art was located that fairly suggested the claimed invention in whole or in part along with the requisite motivation for combination to anticipate or render the claimed invention obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TINSAE B AYALEW whose telephone number is (571)270-0256. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-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, MICHAEL BARR can be reached at 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 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.
/TINSAE B AYALEW/EXAMINER, Art Unit 1711