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 § 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.
In claim 10, applicant states “the outer open portion having a first diameter” it is unclear as to how an open operation has a diameter. For examination purposes the limitation will be understood as an opening width rather than diameter.
The remaining claims are rejected for being dependent upon a previously rejected 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 & 5-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Campos (US20230160133A1).
As to claim 1, Campos discloses a laundry treatment apparatus (abstract) comprising: a cabinet (ref 22); a tub (ref 20) arranged inside the cabinet to accommodate water; a drum (ref 12) rotatably disposed inside the tub to accommodate clothing, the drum having a drum opening (see Fig.2) formed in one surface thereof to allow the clothing to be introduced therethrough; a column part (ref 16 including ref 118) protruding from a surface of the drum opposite to the one surface toward the drum opening, the column part having a space formed therein (e.g. see Fig.5); and a filter (ref 32) disposed inside the column part to filter out foreign matter from water flowing into the column part, wherein the filter comprises: a filter body (see ref 112) extending in parallel with the column part, the filter body comprising a filter surface facing an inner circumferential surface of the column part (see Figs.2-3); and a filter fixing part (refs 114/116, ref 96, or catch like projections seen at top portion of ref 32 in Fig.4) coupled to the inner circumferential surface of the column part to fix the filter body inside the column part.
As to claim 2, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 1, wherein the inner circumferential surface of the column part is provided with a filter coupling portion (Fig.4 ref 118, see also [0037] or corresponding portion that receives ref 96 ), the filter fixing part being coupled to the filter coupling portion.
As to claim 3, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 2, wherein the column part comprises: a column body having a space formed therein, the column body comprising an opening surface facing the drum opening (best seen by Fig.6); and a column cap (ref 90) coupled to the column body to shield the open surface, wherein the filter coupling portion is spaced apart from the column cap along a longitudinal direction of the column body (e.g., see Fig.7).
As to claim 5, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 1, wherein the column part comprises: a blade (ref 170) protruding from an outer circumferential surface of the column part to form a water current inside the drum; and a water flow hole (ref 58) extending from the outer circumferential surface of the column part to the inner circumferential surface of the column part in a penetrating manner to allow water to flow therethrough.
As to claim 6, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 5, wherein the blade extends from one end of the column part toward an opposite end of the column part, wherein the water flow hole comprises a plurality of water flow holes arranged along a direction of extension of the blade (see Fig.6).
As to claim 7, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 6, wherein the plurality of water flow holes are disposed on opposite sides of the blade with respect to a circumferential direction of the column part, respectively (see Fig.6).
As to claim 8, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 6, wherein the filter body comprises: a plurality of water inflow portions (e.g. space between refs 58 and 110) arranged inside the column part to face the water flow holes, wherein the filter surface is disposed between the water inflow portions.
As to claim 9, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 8, wherein the blade extends at an inclination with respect to a longitudinal direction of the column part (see Figs.1 & 6), wherein at least some of the water flow holes are arranged in parallel with the direction of extension of the blade (see Fig.3 which appears to showcases at least some extent of the water flow hole has at least some portion which is parallel to the extension direction of the blade), wherein the water inflow portions extend in parallel with a direction of arrangement of the water flow holes inside the column part to face the water flow holes (see Figs.3-8 & [0037]).
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(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campos (US20230160133A1) in view of Piekarski (US20180313024A1).
As to claim 10, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 9, wherein each of the water inflow portions comprises: an outer open portion open toward an outside of the filter body, the outer open portion having a first width (see Figs.4-5); and an inner open portion connected to the outer open portion and open toward an inside of the filter body (see Figs.4-5 exit portion of the water inflow portions). Campos does not disclose the inner open portion having a second width smaller than the first width; however, such a feature is known in the art as seen by Piekarski.
Piekarski discloses an art related filter for a washing machine (abstract), wherein water inflow openings can have different sizes (see Figs.8a-8e) including variations where an outer open portion has a width larger than an inner open portion (see Fig.8e) in order to guide liquid to optimize filtration efficiency and increase the amount of fluid passing through the filtration element [0064].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify to modify Campos to provide inner open portions with a smaller width in order to (Piekarski guide liquid to optimize filtration efficiency and increase the amount of fluid passing through the filtration element [0064]).
As to claim 11, Modified Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 10, wherein one end of the blade disposed at the one end of the column part is spaced apart from an opposite end of the blade disposed at the opposite end of the column part in a first direction along a circumference of the column part (see Figs.1, 3, & 6), wherein the outer open portion is spaced apart from the inner open portion in the first direction (see Piekarski Fig.8e in conjunction with Campos Figs.1, 3, & 6).
Claim(s) 12-13 & 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campos (US20230160133A1) in view of Jung (US20220243384A1) and Zupan (US20200179846A1).
As to claim 12, Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 1, wherein the filter body comprises: a filter case comprising the filter surface and having a space formed therein, the filter case defining an appearance of the filter body (see Figs.5-6); wherein an inner filter (see ref 98) disposed at least somewhat in the filter case (see Fig.7). However, assuming arguendo that the filtering portion of Campos is not located in the filter case, the use of a multiple nested filters is a well-known feature in the art, as seen by Jung and Zupan.
Jung discloses an art related washing machine (abstract), wherein it is known to utilize a first and second filters (refs 61 & 62) located one behind another in order to further filter the fluid [0075].
Zupan discloses an art related filter for washing machines (abstract), which allows for removal of particles from fluid. The filter assembly utilizes a filter case (ref 5) in which an inner filter (ref 4) is located in order to remove particles from the fluid.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify to modify Campos to include an inner filter within the filter case in order to further filter the fluid, as suggested by Jung and Zupan. A skilled artisan recognizes that any number of further filters can be incorporated with the reasonable and expected benefit of improving filtration performance through the use of the multiple filters. It is also in the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize one known filter configuration in place of another with a reasonable expectation of success.
As to claim 13, Modified Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 12, wherein the inner filter comprises: a plurality of inner filter surfaces spaced apart from each other along a longitudinal direction of the filter body to filter out foreign matter when water passes therethrough. Specifically, the limitation of having surfaces spaced apart from each other along a longitudinal direction is broad enough that an upper third portion having the filtering holes and a lower third portion having the filtering holes which are spaced apart by the middle third portion can read on the claim (e.g., see Campos Figs.6-7).
As to claim 15, Modified Campos teaches the laundry treatment apparatus of claim 13, wherein the filter surface is provided with holes allowing water to pass therethrough, the holes being larger than holes formed in the inner filter surfaces to allow water to pass therethrough (see Campos Figs.5-7).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 14, & 16-20 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record is that recited in the rejection above. However, the prior art of record does not fairly teach or suggest the invention of claims 4, 14, & 16. Thus, claims along with their dependents are considered to contain allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAIR CHAUDHRI whose telephone number is (571)272-4773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00am to 5:00pm EST.
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.
/OMAIR CHAUDHRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights