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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/16/2024 and 2/24/2025 were filed prior to the mailing date of this action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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 11 is 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.
Regarding claim 11, the language recites “wherein at least one of the one or more steam openings extends along the longitudinal ridge positioned a radial first distance from the longitudinal axis”. However, the term “a radial first distance” lacks proper antecedent basis because this term was previously introduced in claim 7 and it is not precisely clear if this is the same “radial first distance” or a different “radial first distance”. Additionally, it is not precisely clear what the phrase “positioned a radial first distance from the longitudinal axis” is with respect to. That is, it is not clear if this phrase is with respect to the steam openings or with respect to the longitudinal ridge. For purposes of examination, the language will be interpreted as requiring the longitudinal ridge to be a radial distance from the longitudinal axis that is not the same as the previously recited radial first distance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 1-2, 6-11, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Siegel et al. (DE 102019109298), hereinafter Siegel.
Regarding claim 1, Siegel teaches a cleaning apparatus (fig. 1, cleaning machine station 88) for a floor cleaner (cleaning machine 10), the floor cleaner having a base movable along a surface to be cleaned (fig. 4, cleaning head 12), a brushroll motor (electric motor 18, third paragraph on page 16 of the attached translation), and a brushroll (cleaner roller 14) rotatable about a brushroll axis relative to the base by the brushroll motor (third paragraph on page 16 of the attached translation), the cleaning apparatus comprising:
a tray (fig. 5, tray which includes receiving chamber 92) configured to removably receive the floor cleaner in a mounted position (figs. 5 and 2), the tray including a brushroll-receiving portion configured to receive the brushroll of the floor cleaner (receiving chamber 92 is configured to receive the brushroll of the floor cleaner);
a reservoir configured to store liquid (tank 134 of the disinfection device 130, fig. 1);
a boiler (last paragraph on page 24 of the attached translation, heater for dispensing disinfectant through nozzles 148 in a gaseous state and/or as steam to the cleaning roller unit 14) in fluid communication with the reservoir (last paragraph on page 24 of the attached translation), the boiler configured to convert the liquid into steam (last paragraph on page 24 through first paragraph on page 25 of the attached translation); and
PNG
media_image1.png
678
679
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a steam distributor (nozzles 148, fig. 5) in fluid communication with the boiler (last paragraph on page 24 through first paragraph on page 25 of the attached translation), the steam distributor having one or more steam openings configured to dispense the steam onto the brushroll (see annotated fig. 5 above. last paragraph on page 24 through first paragraph on page 25 of the attached translation, Siegel teaches disinfectant can be dispensed using nozzles 148 as steam to the cleaning roller unit 14).
Regarding claim 2, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein the reservoir is removable from the tray (second to last paragraph on page 23 of the attached translation).
Regarding claim 6, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches the one or more steam openings being a plurality of steam openings configured to dispense the steam onto the brushroll (fig. 5, nozzles 148 in fig. 5).
Regarding claim 7, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 6. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein the brushroll-receiving portion defines a longitudinal axis (figs. 3 and 5, wherein the brushroll-receiving portion defines a longitudinal axis that is parallel to a longitudinal axis of the brushroll being received), and wherein the steam distributor includes a plurality of segments along the longitudinal axis (fig. 5, nozzles 148 along the longitudinal axis of the receiving portion), at least one of the plurality of segments including at least one of the plurality of steam openings positioned a radial first distance from the longitudinal axis (fig. 5, nozzles 148 include a steam opening positioned a radial first distance (with respect to the longitudinal axis) from the longitudinal axis).
Regarding claim 8, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 7. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein each of the plurality of segments includes at least one of the plurality of steam openings positioned the radial first distance from the longitudinal axis (fig. 5, nozzles 148 positioned the radial first distance from the longitudinal axis).
Regarding claim 9, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 7. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein each of the plurality of segments is separated from an adjacent segment by a divot (see annotated fig. 6 below),
PNG
media_image2.png
710
746
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a rear wall bounding the divot positioned a radial second distance from the longitudinal axis, the second distance being greater than the first distance (see annotated fig. 6 above, wherein the divot is bounded by a rear wall positioned a second radial distance from the longitudinal axis, the second distance being greater than the first distance).
Regarding claim 10, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 7. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein the plurality of segments forms a comb shape (fig. 6, Under Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI), the plurality of nozzles 148 form a comb shape).
Regarding claim 11, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 7. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein the steam distributor includes a longitudinal ridge extending along at least a portion of the brushroll-receiving portion (see annotated fig. 6 below, wherein the portion of the nozzle extending in the longitudinal direction is interpreted as the longitudinal ridge, wherein the longitudinal ridge extends along a portion of the brushroll-receiving portion),
PNG
media_image3.png
710
689
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein at least one of the one or more steam openings extends along the longitudinal ridge positioned a radial first distance from the longitudinal axis (the steam opening of the nozzle 148 extends along the longitudinal ridge, wherein the longitudinal ridge is positioned a radial distance from the longitudinal axis. As best understood by the examiner, in view of the above 35 USC 112(b) rejection, the prior art teaches the claim language).
Regarding claim 13, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein the brushroll has a brushroll radius defined from the brushroll axis to an outer perimeter of the brushroll (fig. 4), and wherein the cleaning apparatus is configured to engage the brushroll (the cleaning apparatus is configured to operationally engage the brushroll) and expose an internal portion of the brushroll to the one or more steam openings (The internal portion of the brushroll is fluidically exposed to the steam openings of the nozzles 148. That is, the internal portion of the brushroll is capable of receiving steam from the steam openings, thereby being fluidically exposed), wherein the internal portion of the brushroll includes portions of the brushroll disposed at a dimension less than the brushroll radius from the brushroll axis (internal portions of the brushroll disposed at a dimension less than the brushroll radius from the brushroll axis are capable of being exposed to the steam from the steam openings).
Regarding claim 14, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein the cleaning apparatus includes a controller (control device) operable to control an operation of either the boiler (Siegel teaches the disinfectant is heated/evaporated by the heater to be dispensed in a gaseous state/steam (last paragraph on page 24 of the attached translation). Additionally, Siegel teaches the control device is connected to the disinfectant module so that supply of the disinfectant can be carried out in a controlled manner by means of the control device. As a result, the disinfection and/or cleaning of the cleaning machine and/or the cleaning machine station can be carried out in a controlled and/or automated manner (fifth paragraph on page 7 of the attached translation)) or a pump configured to deliver the liquid to the boiler, or both of the boiler and the pump (the prior art is not required to teach this claim language because the language recites the term “or”).
Regarding claim 15, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein the tray includes an actuator (control device 110 is interpreted as the actuator) configured to activate the brushroll when the floor cleaner is in the mounted position in the tray (second to last paragraph on page 39 of the attached translation and last 5 paragraphs on page 29 of the attached translation).
Regarding claim 16, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches further comprising a plenum configured to deliver steam to the one or more steam openings (fig. 5, structure attached to the nozzle head in fig. 5 (that is, structure indicated by leader line 148) which conveys the steam to the steam opening of the nozzle 148 is interpreted as the plenum).
Regarding claim 17, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein a cover portion is configured to shield at least a portion of the one or more steam openings to inhibit an ingress of water and/or debris into the one or more steam openings (fig. 6, truncated cone structure of the nozzle head 148 is interpreted as the cover portion which is configured to shield at least a portion of the one or more steam openings to inhibit an ingress of water and/or debris into the one or more steam openings).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siegel et al. (DE 102019109298), hereinafter Siegel, in view of Fordahl et al. (US PGPUB 20230210333), hereinafter Fordahl.
Regarding claim 3, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches a pump for the disinfectant (fig. 1, pump 140).
Siegel does not explicitly teach wherein the cleaning apparatus includes a pump operably positioned between the reservoir and the boiler, the pump configured to transfer the liquid from the reservoir to the boiler.
However, Fordahl teaches a cleaning apparatus with a steam delivery, wherein the cleaning apparatus includes a pump (steam supply pump 54, fig. 2) operably positioned between the reservoir (fig. 2, supply tank 18) and the boiler (heater 26), the pump configured to transfer the liquid from the reservoir to the boiler (fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Siegel to incorporate the teachings of Fordahl to provide wherein the cleaning apparatus includes a pump operably positioned between the reservoir and the boiler, the pump configured to transfer the liquid from the reservoir to the boiler. Specifically, it would have been obvious to incorporate the pump, reservoir, boiler, steam distributor configuration into the device of Siegel. Doing so would have been a simple substitution (MPEP 2143) of one known steam system configuration for another known steam system configuration to obtain the predictable results of producing steam for cleaning. Additionally, doing so would continue to allow the device to function as intended with explicit component layouts.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siegel et al. (DE 102019109298), hereinafter Siegel, in view of Tang et al. (CN 113243823), hereinafter Tang.
Regarding claim 4, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Siegel does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more steam openings extend along at least 50% of a length of the brushroll-receiving portion.
However, Tang teaches a base station and surface cleaning system, wherein the base station includes outlets 1011 for processing the rolling brush (fifth paragraph on page 16 of the attached translation). Overall, Tang teaches wherein the one or more openings extend along at least 50% of a length of the brushroll-receiving portion (fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Siegel to incorporate the teachings of Tang to provide wherein the one or more steam openings extend along at least 50% of a length of the brushroll-receiving portion. Specifically, it would have been obvious to modify the steam openings of Siegel such that they extend along at least 50% of the length of the brushroll receiving portion. Doing so would promote increased cleanliness and disinfecting of the brushroll of Siegel over the entire length of the brushroll.
Regarding claim 5, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Siegel does not explicitly teach wherein the steam distributor extends along at least 50% of a length of the brushroll- receiving portion.
However, Tang teaches a base station and surface cleaning system, wherein the base station includes outlets 1011 for processing the rolling brush (fifth paragraph on page 16 of the attached translation). Overall, Tang teaches wherein the distributor extends along at least 50% of a length of the brushroll- receiving portion (fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Siegel to incorporate the teachings of Tang to provide wherein the steam distributor extends along at least 50% of a length of the brushroll- receiving portion. Specifically, it would have been obvious to modify the steam openings of Siegel such that they extend along at least 50% of the length of the brushroll receiving portion. Doing so would promote increased cleanliness and disinfecting of the brushroll of Siegel over the entire length of the brushroll.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siegel et al. (DE 102019109298), hereinafter Siegel, in view of Krebs et al. (US PGPUB 20180344112).
Regarding claim 12, Siegel teaches the claimed invention as rejected above in claim 1. Additionally, Siegel teaches wherein the brushroll has a brushroll radius defined from the brushroll axis to an outer perimeter of the brushroll (fig. 4), wherein the one or more steam openings are positioned a radial first distance from the brushroll axis (fig. 8).
However, Siegel does not explicitly teach wherein the radial first distance is less than the brushroll radius.
However, Krebs teaches a cleaning system including spray nozzles 152 (fig. 8), wherein the spray nozzles 152 extend upwards from a base surface of the tray (fig. 8).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Siegel to incorporate the teachings of Krebs to provide wherein the nozzles of Siegel extend upwards from the base surface of the tray. Doing so would have been a simple substitution (MPEP 2143) of one known nozzle configuration for another known nozzle configuration to obtain the predictable results of providing nozzles for cleaning. Additionally, doing so would continue to allow the device to function as intended and clean the rollers.
In summary, Siegel, as modified, teaches wherein the brushroll has a brushroll radius defined from the brushroll axis to an outer perimeter of the brushroll (The independent claim is directed towards a cleaning apparatus for a floor cleaner. Therefore, the cleaning apparatus need only be capable of operating on a floor cleaner. The floor cleaner is capable of including a brush roll which has a brushroll radius defined from the brushroll axis to an outer perimeter of the brushroll), wherein the one or more steam openings are positioned a radial first distance from the brushroll axis (as modified, the upwardly extending nozzles position the steam openings, wherein the position is capable of being positioned a radial first distance from the brushroll axis), wherein the radial first distance is less than the brushroll radius (As modified, the upwardly extending nozzles provide the capability of wherein the radial first distance is less than the brushroll radius. Overall, because the claim is directed towards the cleaning apparatus and not a system, the prior art is required to provide a steam opening which capable of being positioned a radial first distance from the brushroll axis, wherein the radial first distance is less than the brushroll radius. Siegel, as modified, provides this capability).
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Davila et al. (US Patent 11432644) teaches a floor cleaner and tray which includes an actuator 48 similar to the disclosed and claimed invention (fig. 5)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A GUMP whose telephone number is (571)272-2172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, David Posigian can be reached at (313) 446-6546. 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.
/MICHAEL A GUMP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights