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 .
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(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ickes (US PG Pub No. 20170164805) in view of Pedlar (US Pub No. 20050132527).
In regards to claim 1, Ickes discloses
a floor treatment and cleaning device (surface maintenance machine 100, fig. 1-23) comprising:
at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11);
a chassis member (mobile body 102, fig. 1-2, 5, 19-22) operable to support the at least one cleaning device component, the chassis comprising
a first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) that is equidistant from lateral sides of the device (see fig. 2);
a drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) operable to provide locomotive functions to the device, the drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) being laterally offset (see fig. 2) from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2);
[0043] Referring now to FIG. 2, the machine 100 can include a motive source 152 for providing motive force to the steerable front wheel 140 to drive the machine 100 on a surface 120.
PNG
media_image1.png
605
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a rear-access platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7) open at least towards a rear of the device and operable to receive a standing user, and wherein the platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7) comprises
a second centerline (see fig. 2 - ann. 1) and wherein the second centerline is laterally offset from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) to position the platform and an associated user closer to one lateral side of the device; and
PNG
media_image2.png
741
648
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a pivotable squeegee member (squeegee assembly 500, fig. 2, 8-11; [0062-0068]) provided proximal to the at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11), wherein the pivotable squeegee member (squeegee assembly 500, fig. 2, 8-11; [0062-0068]) is rotatable about a pivot point and is operable to pivot based on a turning of the device ([0068]).
[0068] As seen in FIGS. 10 and 11, the articulating mechanism 520 permits controlled articulation of the squeegee assembly 500. As used herein, the term articulation may include both pivotal motion (along arrows 524) of the squeegee assembly 500 relative to the maintenance head assembly 400 about a pivot axis 526, as well as swivel motion (along arrows 528) of the squeegee assembly 500 about the swivel axis 530.
Ickes fails to disclose “a pair of trailing wheels provided proximal to a rearward portion of the device.” Ickes discloses a single unitary wheel (150) which trails the drive wheel (140). However, Ickes points out that this isn’t the only possible configuration:
[0040]:…In some cases, rear wheel 150 comprises a unitary wheel (e.g., one-piece design). For example, in some cases, there may be no other wheels to the rear of the transverse centerline 146 except for a single rear wheel 150.
Pedlar, which also discloses an apparatus for floor cleaning, teaches an apparatus with two rear wheels (see fig. 1-12).
Pedlar and Ickes are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor, floor cleaners with squeegees, floor cleaning members, and platforms for users to stand upon.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ickes in view of Pedlar, and provide Ickes with a pair of wheels, as opposed to a single unitary one, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B) St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
In regards to claim 2, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 1, wherein the chassis (mobile body 102, fig. 1-2, 5, 19-22) comprises a lip (see fig. 20 – ann. 1) provided on at least one side of a user area, the lip being operable to contain a user.
PNG
media_image3.png
510
889
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 3, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 1, wherein the trailing wheels (as modified by Pedlar) comprise non-steerable wheels ([0043]: The rear wheel 150 in such cases can be neither steered nor propelled) operable to support a weight of the device and an associated user.
In regards to claim 4, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 1, the at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11) comprises a center that is at least laterally offset (see fig. 2 – ann. 2) from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
656
1052
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 5, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 1, wherein the drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) is rotatable about a vertical axis and operable to steer the device.
In regards to claim 6, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 4, wherein the center of the at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11) is laterally offset from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) by substantially the same amount as the drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]).
Pursuant of MPEP 2144.IV.A, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. As such, to change offset between the centerline and the drive wheel and cleaning component to be the same amount would be found as an obvious design choice within the skill of an ordinary artisan in the art.
In regards to claim 7, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 1, but fails to disclose the at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11), the drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]), and the second centerline (see fig. 2 - ann. 1) are offset from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) toward the same lateral side of the device. The cleaning component (400) is on an opposite lateral side.
Pursuant MPEP 2144.04-VI-A the mere reversal of parts is held to be an obvious modification.
Thus, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to provide the rear-access at least one cleaning component (400) toward the same lateral side as the drive wheel and second centerline, given the expectable results of providing an operational cleaning apparatus.
In regards to claim 8, Ickes as modified discloses
a floor treatment and cleaning device (surface maintenance machine 100, fig. 1-23) comprising:
at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11);
a chassis member (mobile body 102, fig. 1-2, 5, 19-22) operable to support the at least one cleaning device component, the chassis comprising
a first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) that is equidistant from lateral sides of the device;
a steerable drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) operable to provide steering functions to the device, the steerable drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) being laterally offset from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) toward a first lateral side of the device;
a rear-access platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7) open at least towards a rear of the device and operable to receive a standing user, and
wherein the platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7) is laterally offset from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) to position the platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7) and an associated user closer to the first lateral side of the device; and
a trailing pivotable squeegee member (squeegee assembly 500, fig. 2, 8-11; [0062-0068]) provided rearward (see fig. 2) and proximal to the at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11), wherein the trailing pivotable squeegee member (squeegee assembly 500, fig. 2, 8-11; [0062-0068]) is rotatable about a pivot point.
Ickes fails to disclose “a pair of non-steerable of trailing wheels provided proximal to a rearward portion of the device.” Ickes discloses a single unitary wheel (150) which trails the drive wheel (140). However, Ickes points out that this isn’t the only possible configuration:
[0040]:…In some cases, rear wheel 150 comprises a unitary wheel (e.g., one-piece design). For example, in some cases, there may be no other wheels to the rear of the transverse centerline 146 except for a single rear wheel 150.
Pedlar, which also discloses an apparatus for floor cleaning, teaches an apparatus with two rear wheels (see fig. 1-12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ickes in view of Pedlar, and provide Ickes with a pair of wheels, as opposed to a single unitary one, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B) St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
In regards to claim 9, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 8, wherein the pivot point (of the squeegee assembly 500) is the same position as a center point (see fig. 8-11) of the at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11).
In regards to claim 10, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 8, wherein the trailing wheels (as modified by Pedlar) comprise non-powered wheels ([0043] of Ickes) operable to support a weight of the device and an associated user.
In regards to claim 11, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 8, wherein the steerable drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) further comprises a powered wheel to provide locomotive functions to the device.
In regards to claim 12, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 8, wherein the drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) is rotatable about a vertical axis and operable to steer the device.
In regards to claim 13, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 8, wherein the center point (see fig. 2- ann. 2) of the at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11) is offset (see fig. 2 – ann. 2) from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2).
In regards to claim 14, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 13, wherein the center point of the at least one cleaning component (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11) is offset toward the first lateral side of the device (see fig. 2- ann. 3).
PNG
media_image5.png
656
1052
media_image5.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 15, Ickes discloses
a floor treatment and cleaning device (surface maintenance machine 100, fig. 1-23) comprising:
a chassis member (mobile body 102, fig. 1-2, 5, 19-22) comprising
a first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) that is equidistant from lateral sides of the device;
a rotatable cleaning pad (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11) extending from and rotatable relative to the chassis;
a plurality of wheels (wheels 140, 142, and 150, fig. 1-2, 19) extending from a lower portion of the chassis (mobile body 102, fig. 1-2, 5, 19-22), the plurality of wheels consisting of
a forward drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) operable to provide locomotive functions to the device and
the forward drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) being offset from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2);
a rear-access platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7) open towards a rear of the device and operable to receive a standing user, and
wherein the platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7) is laterally offset (see fig. 2) from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2) to position the platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7) and an associated user closer to one lateral side of the device; and
a pivotable trailing member (squeegee assembly 500, fig. 2, 8-11; [0062-0068]) provided rearward and proximal to the rotatable cleaning pad (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11), wherein the trailing pivotable member (squeegee assembly 500, fig. 2, 8-11; [0062-0068]) is rotatable about a pivot point.
Ickes fails to disclose “first and second trailing wheels.” Ickes discloses a single unitary wheel (150) which trails the drive wheel (140). However, Ickes points out that this isn’t the only possible configuration:
[0040]:…In some cases, rear wheel 150 comprises a unitary wheel (e.g., one-piece design). For example, in some cases, there may be no other wheels to the rear of the transverse centerline 146 except for a single rear wheel 150.
Pedlar, which also discloses an apparatus for floor cleaning, teaches an apparatus with two rear wheels (see fig. 1-12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ickes in view of Pedlar, and provide Ickes with a pair of wheels, as opposed to a single unitary one, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B) St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
In regards to claim 16, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 15, wherein the pivot point (of the squeegee assembly 500) is the same position as a center point (see fig. 8-11) of the rotatable cleaning pad (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11).
In regards to claim 17, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 15, wherein the trailing wheels (as modified by Pedlar) comprise non-powered wheels (Ickes [0043]) operable to support a weight of the device and an associated user.
In regards to claim 18, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 15, wherein the forward drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]) is offset from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2), but fails to disclose it being “the same lateral side of the device” as the rear-access platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7).
Pursuant MPEP 2144.04-VI-A the mere reversal of parts is held to be an obvious modification.
Thus, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to provide the rear-access platform to be towards the side same as the forward drive wheel (140), given expectable results of providing stable footing for an operator.
In regards to claim 19, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 15, wherein the center point (see fig. 2- ann. 2) of the rotatable cleaning pad (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11) is offset (see fig. 2- ann. 2) from the first centerline (longitudinal centerline 154, fig. 2).
In regards to claim 20, Ickes as modified discloses
the floor treatment and cleaning device of claim 19, wherein the forward drive wheel (steerable front wheel 140, fig. 1-2, 19; [0040-0043]), the center point of the rotatable cleaning pad (maintenance head assembly 400, fig. 1-2, 8-11) are all offset toward the same lateral side of the device.
Ickes fails to disclose “the rear-access platform (operator platform 190, fig. 1-2, 5-7)” also being on this side.
Pursuant MPEP 2144.04-VI-A the mere reversal of parts is held to be an obvious modification.
Thus, it would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art to provide the rear-access platform on the side same as the forward drive wheel (140) and center point of the cleaning pad (see fig. 2 – ann. 2), given expectable results of providing stable footing for an operator.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON KHALIL HAWKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-5446. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 8-5PM.
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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/JASON KHALIL HAWKINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
