Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 01, 2026
Application No. 18/819,775

TANK DISPENSER FOR CLEAN TOILET

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 29, 2024
Priority
Sep 13, 2023 — provisional 63/538,178
Examiner
DEERY, ERIN LEAH
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Kohler Co.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allowance Rate
465 granted / 797 resolved
-11.7% vs TC avg
Strong +49% interview lift
Without
With
+49.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
822
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
45.4%
+5.4% vs TC avg
§102
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
§112
36.9%
-3.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 797 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1, species A and Group 2, Species A in the reply filed on 7/8/26 is acknowledged. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the at least one opening which both conducts fluid into and out of the reservoir (cl. 4) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claim 3, 4, 12, 13, and 15, 16, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claims 3, 4, 12, 13, and 15, 16, and 18, applicant is advised to recite --the flow-- of fluid into the housing or reservoir instead of “a”. In claims 3, 4, 12, 13, and 15, 16, and 18, applicant is advised to recite --the flow of cleaning solution-- instead of “a flow” of cleaning solution or fluid. 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 12 and 13 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. Regarding claim 12, “a first side” is a double inclusion of the first side set forth in parent claim 8. Regarding claim 13, “a second side” is a double inclusion of the second side set forth in parent claim 8. 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. Claim(s) 1 - 5, 8 - 10, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hautmann (CH 623096). Regarding claim 1, Hautmann discloses a cleaning device (fig. 1) for a toilet, the cleaning device comprising: a housing (1); a reservoir (interior of 1) disposed in the housing, the reservoir configured to store a cleaning compound (15); a lid (7) rotatably coupled to housing and configured to selectively provide access to the reservoir (see machine translation, p. 3, para. 7); and at least one opening (10) disposed in the reservoir, the opening configured to conduct a flow of water into the reservoir or conduct a flow of cleaning solution from the reservoir (machine translation, p. 4, para. 3). Regarding claim 2, Hautmann shows that a depth of the reservoir is longer than a width and length thereof. See figure 1 showing that a vertical height of the reservoir (1) is longer than width and length of the base (4). Regarding claim 3, Hautmann shows that the at least one opening includes a first opening (10) configured to conduct a flow of fluid to the reservoir and a second opening (11) configured to conduct a flow of fluid from the reservoir (p. 4, para. 3, note that either opening is capable of performing either claimed function.) Regarding claim 4, Hautmann shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further shows that the at least one opening is configured to conduct a flow of water into the reservoir and conduct a flow of cleaning solution from the reservoir (p. 4, para. 3, note that 10 is capable of performing the claimed function.) Regarding claim 5, Hautmann shows that the reservoir is configured to store two or more tables of a cleaning component (15) in a vertically stacked arrangement. Fig. 1. Note that the reservoir is fully capable of receiving stacked tablets in a vertical configuration. Regarding claim 8, Hautmann shows that the housing has a first side (5) with a first length and a second side (3) with a second length, wherein the second length is longer than the first length. See fig. 1, lateral measurement of 3 is unambiguously longer than lateral measurement of 5. Regarding claims 9-10, Hautmann further shows a hanger (14) which is coupled to the second side of the housing (fig. 2) and which is configured to couple the cleaning device to a side of a toilet (fig. 3). Regarding claim 17, Hautmann discloses a toilet comprising a tank (fig. 3), a bowl in fluid communication with the tank (machine translation, p.1 , para. 1); and a cleaning device (fig. 1) including a housing (1) and a reservoir disposed in the housing (interior of the housing), the reservoir configured to store two or more tablets of a cleaning compound (15) in a vertically stacked arrangement (note that the reservoir is fully capable of receiving stacked tablets in a vertical configuration); and at least one opening (10) configured to conducting a flow of water int the reservoir and conduct a flow of cleaning solution from the reservoir (p. 4, para. 3, note that 10 is capable of performing the claimed function). Regarding claim 20, Hautmann shows that the housing is disposed in the tank (fig. 3). 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. Claim(s) 6 and 14 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hautmann, as applied to claim 1, in view of KR 200374142 (hereinafter KR ‘142). Regarding claim 6, Hautmann shows all of the instant invention as discussed above but does not show the particulars of the lid. Attention is turned to KR ‘142 which teaches a container having a hinged (5) lid (2) with a button (10) configured to engage therewith; and a biasing member (7) configured to impinge on the lid , wherein the button is configured to disengage the lid when pressed and the biasing member is configured to push the lid open (see. fig. 7)(machine translation, abstract). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided a button and spring, like that taught by KR ‘142 in the hinged lid of Hautmann for simple, one touch opening of the reservoir. Regarding claim 14, Hautmann discloses a cleaning device for a toilet (fig. 1), the cleaning device comprising: a housing (1); a reservoir (interior of 1) disposed in the housing configured to store a cleaning compound (15); at least one opening (10) disposed in the reservoir, the opening configured to conduct a flow of water into the reservoir or conduct a flow of cleaning solution from the reservoir (p. 4, para. 3, note that 10 is capable of performing the claimed function); and a lid (7) rotatably coupled to the housing and configured to selectively provide access to the reservoir (see machine translation, p. 3, para. 7); Hautmann does not show the particulars of the lid. Attention is turned to KR ‘142, which teaches a container having a hinged (5) lid (2), a button (10) configured to engage the lid; and a biasing member (7) configured to impinge on the lid, wherein the button is configured to disengage the lid when pressed and the biasing member is configured to push the lid open when the button disengages the lid (see. fig. 7)(machine translation, abstract). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided a button and spring, like that taught by KR ‘142 in the hinged lid of Hautmann for simple, one touch opening of the reservoir. Regarding claim 15, Hautmann as modified shows that the at least one opening includes a first opening (10) configured to conduct a flow of fluid to the reservoir and a second opening (11) configured to conduct a flow of fluid from the reservoir (p. 4, para. 3, note that either opening is capable of performing either claimed function.) Regarding claim 16, Hautmann as modified shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, and further shows that the at least one opening is configured to conduct a flow of water into the reservoir and conduct a flow of cleaning solution from the reservoir (p. 4, para. 3, note that 10 is capable of performing the claimed function.) Claim(s) 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hautmann, as applied to claims 5 and 9, in view of FR 26645889 (hereinafter FR ‘889). Regarding claim 7, Hautmann shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, but does not specify that the lid is transparent. Attention is turned to FR ‘889 which teaches a similar cleaning device having a lid (8) which is transparent (machine translation, cl. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have made the lid of Hautmann from a transparent material so that the user can quickly assess the status of the disinfectant in the reservoir. Regarding claim 11, Hautman shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, but does not show that the housing is disposed outside of the toilet. Attention is turned to FR ‘889 which teaches a similar toilet cleaning device having a water inlet (1), a dissolvable cleaning compound (9)(fig. 4) and a cleaning solution outlet (5) which is mounted outside of the tank (machine translation, p. 2, ln. 17). It would have been obvious to connect the device of Hautmann outside of the tank in the manner contemplated by FR ‘889 so that the user can quickly determine the quantity of cleaning product/solution quickly, without having to disassemble the tank. Claim(s) 12, 13, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hautmann, as applied to claim 1 and 17, in view of Lubrano (US 6,151,722). Regarding claims 12 and 13, Hautmann shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, but does not show the inlet and outlet connectors as claimed. Attention is turned to Lubrano which teaches a similar toilet cleaning device having a housing with an inlet connector (44) configured to conduct a flow of fluid into the housing (col. 4, ln. 5-8) and an outlet connector (50) configured to conduct a flow of fluid out of the housing (col. 4, ln. 8-10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided an inlet connector and outlet connector as claimed in the apparatus of Hautman, so that the cleaning solution can be directly dispensed into the overflow tube and into the toilet bowl responsive to a toilet being flushed (see figure 1). As to the limitation that the outlet and inlet connectors be located on either of the first or second sides, there is nothing in the record which establishes that the claimed arrangement presents a novel or unexpected result (MPEP 2144.05(III)). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the dispenser of Hautmann as modified to perform equally well as applicant's. It would have been obvious to have modified the device to have the connectors positioned as claimed since such a modification is a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish. Furthermore, the proposed modification is a rearrangement of parts. It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C). Regarding claims 18 and 19, Hautmann shows all of the instant invention as discussed above, but does not show the connectors and arrangement of the valves as claimed. Attention is turned to Lubrano which teaches a similar toilet cleaner (10) having a housing with an inlet connector (44) conduct a flow of fluid into the housing (col. 4, ln. 5-8) and an outlet connector (50) configured to conduct a flow of cleaning solution out of the housing (col. 4, ln. 8-10), where the inlet connector is in communication with an inlet valve (18 via 16 and 14) configured to selectively provide a flow of water into the toilet tank, and an outlet valve (22 via 20) configured to selectively provide a flow of water to the toilet bowl. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to have provided an inlet connector and outlet connector as claimed in the apparatus of Hautman, so that the cleaning solution can be directly dispensed into the overflow tube and into the toilet bowl responsive to a toilet being flushed (see figure 1). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Scoggins (US 5,603,126) shows a toilet disinfectant/cleaning dispenser of interest to the instant invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN L DEERY whose telephone number is (571)270-1928. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur, 7:30am - 4:30pm; Fri 8:00am-12:00pm. 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 Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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. /ERIN DEERY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 29, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12742319
BATHTUB DRAIN CONNECTOR
2y 2m to grant Granted Sep 22, 2026
Patent 12735880
SYSTEM FOR TREATING AND PREVENTING BLOCKAGE AND/OR AIRLOCKS IN SANITATION FIXTURES
2y 1m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729526
Magnetic Suspension Drain
3y 4m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12729517
System and Method for Evaporative Loss Compensation and Water Storage System for Swimming Pools
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12729523
HEATER AND CONTROL SYSTEM FOR A HEATING SYSTEM
3y 1m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+49.1%)
2y 7m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 797 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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