Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/793,339

LAUNDRY TREATING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 02, 2024
Examiner
BELL, SPENCER E
Art Unit
1711
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
76%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
413 granted / 648 resolved
-1.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
50 currently pending
Career history
698
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
51.5%
+11.5% vs TC avg
§102
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
§112
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 648 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Korea on 8/3/23. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Korean application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. 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. Claims 1-8, 10-12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 20180202091 by Son et al. As to claim 1, Son discloses a laundry treating apparatus comprising a first treating apparatus 110 (fig. 2) having a first receiving part (e.g. drum) to receive laundry, the first apparatus configured to operate in a plurality of operation modes to provide treatment courses; a second treating apparatus 120 having a second receiving part (e.g. drum); an output part 200 at the first or second apparatus, the output part configured to output a screen (see figs. 7-13), the output part configured to selectably display a mode selection item configured to display the first plurality of operation modes of the first treating apparatus (fig. 10a), and a selector corresponding to the second treating apparatus (fig. 10a); and an input part at the first or second apparatus configured to receive a user command for selection of an object displayed on the screen (para. 92, fig. 10). As to claim 2, Son discloses that the first plurality of operation modes includes a washing mode to provide a washing course; and a drying mode to provide a drying course (paras. 53, 202). As to claim 3, Son discloses that the screen includes a course selection screen that displays the treatment courses provided by the first apparatus and the selector (fig. 10a), a course progress screen to display information about the course being executed by the first apparatus and information about the course being executed by the second apparatus (fig. 12), and wherein the mode selection item is displayed on the course selection screen (fig. 10a). As to claim 4, Son discloses that the first plurality of modes includes a washing/drying mode to sequentially execute the washing and drying courses (para. 211). As to claim 5, Son discloses that the output part is configured to, when the selector is selected, output a course selection screen to display treatment courses or output a course progress screen (fig. 8, 10, 12; paras. 183, 186, 192). As to claim 6, Son discloses that the output part is configured to, when the mode selection item is selected, output a mode selection screen to display the first plurality of operation modes and the selector such that at least a portion of the first plurality of modes and the selector are selectable (fig. 10a). As to claim 7, Son discloses that an alignment direction of the first plurality of modes of the first apparatus and the selector on the mode selection screen is identical to an arrangement direction of the first and second apparatuses (paras. 183-185). As to claim 8, Son discloses that the output part is configured to, when the mode selection idem is selected, display a distinguishment market (e.g. a line) on the screen separating the first plurality of modes and the selector (fig. 10). As to claim 10, Son discloses that each of the first plurality of modes and the selector are individually displayed in a selectable state (fig. 10). As to claim 11, Son discloses that each of the first plurality of modes and the selector are individually displayed in a course progress state indicating progress of the treatment courses (fig. 12). As to claim 12, Son discloses an in-operation marker (e.g. time display, pause indicator, “rinsing” text, or circulator progress indicator, each of which indicates that a course is in operation) is disposed at an object corresponding to the course progress state (e.g. circular progress indicator) among the plurality of modes and the selector on the mode selection screen (fig. 12). As to claim 20, Son discloses that the output part and the input part are provided at one of the first and second treatment apparatus and the output part and the input part overlap each other (fig. 2, para. 92). 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. Claims 9, 14-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 20180202091 by Son et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20140067131 by Park et al. As to claim 9, Son does not explicitly teach a previous selection marker at an object corresponding to an immediately previous screen output before the mode selection screen. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to have a previous selection marker. It was known to provide an indication of a current setting when a settings option screen is presented (see Park, fig. 31). Based on its established and known use in the art, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to have a previous selection marker that indicates an operation mode that was previously selected before a mode selection screen is output. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established use of a previous selection marker, namely to provide user indication of the selected mode. Therefore, the claimed invention would have been obvious at its effective filing date. As to claim 14, Son teaches that its second apparatus operates in one of a second plurality of operation modes and that its output part is configured to output a double-view screen to display progress information about courses being executed (fig. 12). Son does not explicitly teach that a mode selection item is displayed on the double-view screen. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to display a mode selection item while a treatment course is being executed in order to allow a user to change a mode. Park teaches a display that allows a user to change a mode during execution of a course (see figs. 27, 29; para. 378-379). Son suggests that a user has the ability to perform settings modifications based on a selection item on its double-view screen (see fig. 12, note right arrow selection item). Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to display a mode selection item in order to allow for user control and modification of a course based on the teachings and suggestions of Park and Son. As to claim 15, Son teaches that its double-view screen includes a first area to display information about the first treating apparatus and a second area to display information about the second treating apparatus, the second area separated from the first area (fig. 12). Upon the obvious modification discussed above, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to have a mode selection item on the double-view screen and when it is selected a mode selection screen is displayed to display operation modes and a selector that are selectable. As to claim 16, Son teaches a mode selection screen output in an entire area comprising the first and second areas (fig. 11), and also teaches that a mode selection screen may be output in an entire area even when both treating units are selected in order for a user to input commands without errors (fig. 10d, para. 199). Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to display a mode selection screen in an entire area, in particular to allow for input without errors as taught by Son. As to claim 17, Son teaches that the mode selection screen may be output to overlay the first and second areas (fig. 10d). As to claim 19, Son teaches that the mode selection item is displayed in each of the fist and second areas (fig. 10). Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 20180202091 by Son et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20150345068 by Coffman et al. As to claim 13, Son does not explicitly teach that if the mode selection idem is selected when the first apparatus is executing a course and prior to the second apparatus executing a course, the first plurality of modes are displayed in a course progress or non-selectable state, and the selector is displayed in a selectable state. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to display modes or options in selectable or non-selectable states as appropriate. Coffman teaches that menu items may be displayed according to their state, in particular having visual indications of whether the option is selectable based on the current settings and operation of the appliance (para. 77). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the apparatus taught by Son to indicate items as selectable or non-selectable on its menu in order to indicate to a user whether a particular item is not recommended or available for use, as taught by Coffman. Therefore, the claimed invention would have been obvious at its effective filing date. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 20180202091 by Son et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20220319219 by Tsibulevskiy et al. As to claim 18, Son does not teach that at least a portion of a mode selection screen is transparent. However, it was known to make a screen transparent or translucent so that a user can still at least partially see underlying content (see Tsibulevskiy, para. 150). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to have a mode selection screen transparent in order to allow a user to see the underlying content on the display, as taught by Tsibulevskiy. Therefore, the claimed invention would have been obvious at its effective filing date. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Spencer Bell whose telephone number is (571)272-9888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 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 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. /SPENCER E. BELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 02, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601096
LAUNDRY WASHING MACHINE COLOR COMPOSITION ANALYSIS DURING LOADING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595608
WASHING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593955
DISHWASHER DRYING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595616
WASHING MACHINE APPLIANCE AND STEAM-GENERATING FEATURES FOR THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589718
DEVICE AND METHOD FOR APPLYING A CLEANING LIQUID TO A VEHICLE PART
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
76%
With Interview (+11.9%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 648 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