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 .
Specification
The attempt to incorporate subject matter into this application by reference to French Application No. 22/02669 is ineffective because the incorporation by reference was filed after the PCT date of 03/15/2023, which considered the filing date of the US application. As such, the incorporation by reference statement must be removed, as it introduces new matter by being filed after the filing date of the application.
See MPEP §608.01(p) I B: “For the incorporation by reference to be effective as a proper safeguard, the incorporation by reference statement must be filed at the time of filing of the later-filed application. An incorporation by reference statement added after an application’s filing date is not effective because no new matter can be added to an application after its filing date”;
MPEP 1893.03(b): “An international application designating the U.S. has two stages (international and national) with the filing date being the same in both stages. Often the date of entry into the national stage is confused with the filing date. It should be borne in mind that the filing date of the international stage application is also the filing date for the national stage application. Specifically, 35 U.S.C. 363 provides that An international application designating the United States shall have the effect, from its international filing date under Article 11 of the treaty, of a national application for patent regularly filed in the Patent and Trademark Office”, and
MPEP 714.01(e): “A preliminary amendment filed with a submission to enter the national stage of an international application under 35 U.S.C. 371 is not part of the original disclosure under 37 CFR 1.115(a) because it was not present on the international filing date accorded to the application under PCT Article 11.” as well as:
PCT Article 11(3) - “...an international filing date shall have the effect of a regular national application in each designated State as of the international filing date, which date shall be considered to be the actual filing date in each designated State.”
The specification amendment filed 09/25/2024 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the incorporation by reference to French Application No. 22/02669.
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
In claim 1, consider -- wherein the support base includes a first adjustment means configured to adjust a positioning of the base body with respect to the first fastening point according to a first adjustment direction--.
In claim 2, consider -- are configured to be arranged one above [[the]] another--.
In claim 8, consider -- comprising a second adjustment means distinct from the first adjustment means--.
In claim 13, consider --wherein each retaining member of the two retaining members includes a free end portion[[s]], the free end portion of one retaining member spaced apart from free end portion of another of the two retaining member While the claim is not indefinite in view of the disclosure, this would provide further clarity as the specification provides for one free end portion for each of the retaining member.
In claim 16, consider -- A suction assembly including [[a]] the support base according to claim l, and [[a]] the handheld vacuum cleaner configured to be supported by the support base in [[a]] the storage position--.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“support device” in claim 1, including two retaining members configured to extend on either side of a gripping handle of the handheld vacuum cleaner;
“first adjustment means” in claim 1 and claim 6, including include an adjustment member slidably mounted relative to the base body according to the second adjustment direction, the adjustment member including the first fastening hole, and wherein the first fastening hole is oblong;
“second adjustment means” in claim 8, including an oblong second fastening hole
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
The limitations “first adjustment means” in claim 7 is not interpreted under 35 USC 112(f) as it includes sufficient structure to perform the entire claimed functionality (in claim 6 it remains interpreted under 35 USC 112(f) as the adjustment member is not, by itself, sufficient structure to allow adjustment in the first adjustment direction). Furthermore, the limitations “second adjustment means” is recited with sufficient structure in claim 10 not to invoke a 35 USC 112(f) interpretation as the claim recites sufficient structure, and the limitations “support device” is recited with sufficient structure in claim 11 not to invoke a 35 USC 112(f) interpretation as the claim recites sufficient structure. The term “adjustment member”, in claim 6, while reciting the nonce term “member” is not interpreted under 35 USC 112(f), as the claim defines structure in terms of the “first fastening hole” and how it is slidably mounted. The term “retaining member”, in claim 11 (and 12-13), while reciting the nonce term “member” is not interpreted under 35 USC 112(f), as the claim defines structure with respect to how it extends and retains.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11, 13, 15, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (CN 109589041 A) in view of Wu (CN 215344677 U).
With respect to claim 1, Lu discloses A support base for a handheld vacuum cleaner, comprising:
a base body (base body 2, fig .2; [0045]) configured to be fastened to a first fastening point provided on a wall (first fastening point at the location of the screw at 151, fig. 2; [0048], screw shown as 150, fig. 3, first fastening point is at lower, center portion of the base body 2 relative to fig. 2 ) and to be fastened to a second fastening point provided on the wall (second fastening point at 151, fig. 2, left upper portion of base body 2, fig. 2; [0048], screw shown as 150, fig. 3)
a first fastening hole provided on the base body and configured to be crossed by a first fastening screw, so as to fasten the base body to the first fastening point (as explained with respect to the first fastening point, the first fastening point is an elongated hole, at 151, fig. 2, lower center of base body 2, fig. 2, with screw 150, fig. 3 passing though)
a second fastening hole provided on the base body and configured to be crossed by a second fastening screw, so as to fasten the base body to the second fastening point (as explained with respect to the second fastening point, the second fastening point is an elongated hole, at 151, fig. 2, upper left of base body 2, fig. 2, with screw 150, fig. 3 passing though), and
a support device configured to support the handheld vacuum cleaner in a storage position (support device 26, fig. 2; [0059], holds portion of vacuum cleaner 200, fig. 1, [0042]),
wherein the support base includes first adjustment means configured to adjust a positioning of the base body with respect to the first fastening point according to a first adjustment direction (the first adjustment means, interpreted under 112(f), is partially disclosed as elongated hole, at 151, fig. 2; [0048], specifically at the lower, center portion of the base body 2 relative to fig. 2, there is also a corresponding elongated hole 152, fig. 3 on the lower center portion of 1, fig. 3, this allows up/down movement - relative to the wall and also portion 1, fig. 3) and
however, does not explicitly disclose that the first adjustment means is configured to adjust a positioning of the base body with respect to second adjustment direction which are different from each other.
Wu, reasonably pertinent to the problem being solved of providing adjustability to a wall mounted device, teaches of a wall mounted device ([0004]), where an elongated hole (24, fig. 3, [0025] for a screw 25) is provided with a sliding adjustment member (moving plate 23, on guide rails 22, fig .3 [0025], to move left and right, while moving up/down). Wu teaches that this allows matching to an original hole on the wall without drilling new holes, which makes installation safer, more efficient and convenient ([0027]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the holes Lu (holes 151, and corresponding holes 152, which allow a screw to pass through to a wall), with the adjustment member of Wu, for the purpose of matching to an original hole on the wall without drilling new holes, which makes installation safer, more efficient and convenient. The complete assembly of an elongated hole (or two elongated holes with the first fastening hole 151, and corresponding holes 152, in Lu) with a sliding adjustment member would be 112(f) equivalent to the claimed first adjustment means, and have allowed relative movement of the base body in two different directions.
With respect to claim 2, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein the first and second fastening holes are configured to be arranged one above the other when the base body is properly fastened to the wall (Lu, the first fastening hole is at lower center of base body 2 in fig. 2 and the second fastening hole is above the first fastening hole in a vertical direction in fig .2 at the upper left of the base body 2, claim does not require alignment in a vertical line of the two holes, only one is above the other).
With respect to claim 3, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein the first and second adjustment directions are substantially perpendicular to each other (Lu, the enlarged vertical hole allows vertical adjustment, while the sliding adjustment member of Wu allows horizontal adjustment, as described in rejection of claim 1 substantially interpreted as an approximation consistent with MPEP 2173.05(b)).
With respect to claim 4, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein the first adjustment direction extends substantially vertically when the base body is fastened to the wall (Lu the enlarged vertical hole allows vertical adjustment of the base body 2 relative to a wall, see orientation as shown in fig. 4; as described in rejection of claim 1, substantially interpreted as an approximation consistent with MPEP 2173.05(b)).
With respect to claim 5, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein the second adjustment direction extends substantially horizontally when the base body is fastened to the wall (Wu, the sliding adjustment member/moving plate 23, on guide rails 22, fig .3 [0025], to move left and right; substantially interpreted as an approximation consistent with MPEP 2173.05(b)).
With respect to claim 6, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein the first adjustment means includes an adjustment member slidably mounted relative to the base body according to the second adjustment direction, the adjustment member including the first fastening hole (Wu, moving plate 23, on guide rails 22, fig .3 [0025], to move left and right, while moving up/down, includes analogous first fastening hole 24, fig. 3, [0025] for a screw 25, allows movement in the second adjustment direction left/right).
With respect to claim 7, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 6 above, and further teaches wherein the first fastening hole is oblong and extends according to the first adjustment direction (Lu, elongated hole, at 151, fig. 2, lower center of base body 2, fig. 2, with screw 150, fig. 3 passing though), the first fastening hole partially forming the first adjustment means (explained in rejection of claim 1, this allows up/down movement in first adjustment direction).
With respect to claim 8, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches a second adjustment means distinct from the first adjustment means and configured to adjust a positioning of the base body relative to the second fastening point according to at least a third adjustment direction (Lu, second adjustment means is elongated hole, at 151, fig. 2, upper left of base body 2, fig. 2, with screw 150, fig. 3 passing though, allows adjustment of base body 2 relative to wall and 1, fig. 3 in up/down direction, and consistent with instant invention, the first and third adjustment directions are parallel and up/down).
With respect to claim 9, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 8 above, and further teaches wherein the first and third adjustment directions are substantially parallel to each other (Lu, second adjustment means is elongated hole, at 151, fig. 2, upper left of base body 2, fig. 2, with screw 150, fig. 3 passing though, allows adjustment of base body 2 relative to wall and 1, fig. 3 in up/down direction, and the first adjustment direction addressed in rejection, claim 1 is also up/down and consistent with instant invention, the first and third adjustment directions are parallel and up/down; substantially interpreted as an approximation consistent with MPEP 2173.05(b)).
With respect to claim 10, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 8 above, and further teaches wherein the second fastening hole is oblong and extends according to the third adjustment direction, the second fastening hole partially forming the second adjustment means (Lu, second adjustment means is elongated hole, at 151, fig. 2, upper left of base body 2, fig. 2, with screw 150, fig. 3 passing though, allows adjustment of base body 2 relative to wall and 1, fig. 3 in up/down direction, and consistent with instant invention, the first and third adjustment directions are parallel and up/down)
With respect to claim 11, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein the support device includes two retaining members configured to extend on either side of a gripping handle of the handheld vacuum cleaner (Lu, two retaining members 26, fig. 2, although only the right side retaining member is labeled with a reference character, a mirrored shape is present on the left side in fig .2, [0059], the vacuum cleaner is not explicitly claimed, but rather an external device that the support base is configured to interact with, and this retaining member interacts with a cylinder part 201, fig .1 of the vacuum cleaner [which may be deemed a handle that can be gripped similar to the instant cylindrical handle 6], and similarly can extend around a cylindrical handle on opposite sides).
With respect to claim 13, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 11 above, and further teaches wherein the two retaining members include free end portions that are spaced apart from each other (Lu the two retaining members 26 have a free end, or free tip, as shown in fig. 2 spaced apart from each other on the left and right sides of the base 2).
With respect to claim 15, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches wherein each of the first and second fastening holes is accessible from a front face of the base body (Lu, see fig. 2 which shows a front face exposed, and the two fastening holes, addressed in rejection of claim 1, also exposed)
With respect to claim 16, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, and further teaches a support base according to claim 1 (addressed in rejection of claim 1 above), and a handheld vacuum cleaner configured to be supported by the support base in a storage position (Lu, support device 26, fig. 2; [0059], holds portion of vacuum cleaner 200, fig. 1, [0042]).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (CN 109589041 A) in view of Wu (CN 215344677 U), and further in view of Xu (CN 112336246 A) and as evidenced by Wikipedia article on "Thermoplastic elastomer", past revision dated 2 October 2020.
With respect to claim 12, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 11 above, however does not explicitly teach wherein at least one amongst the two retaining members is flexible.
Xu, in the same field of endeavor, related to vacuum cleaner accessories, teaches of making portions of retaining members (the retaining members forming a clamping groove 2, fig. 6, [0034] includes a soft material 6, fig. 6, with an example made of TPE (thermoplastic elastomer)). Xu teaches this prevents scratching an outer wall of part the vacuum cleaner ([0034], see 7, fig .7).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Lu to have soft material at the retaining members, as taught by Xu, for preventing scratches. The soft material would be flexible, as evidenced by Wikipedia article on "Thermoplastic elastomer", as “Thermoplastic elastomers show advantages typical of both rubbery materials and plastic materials” (page 1 of article), evidencing deformability.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu (CN 109589041 A) in view of Wu (CN 215344677 U), and further in view of Bian (CN 208837795 U).
With respect to claim 14, Lu, as modified, teaches the limitations of claim 1 above, however does not explicitly teach wherein the support base is a charging base and comprises a male electrical connector which is configured to cooperate with a female electrical connector provided on the handheld vacuum cleaner when the handheld vacuum cleaner is in the storage position.
Bian, in the same field of endeavor, related to vacuum cleaners accessories, teaches of a wall hung support base (wall hung base 200, fig. 6, [0038]) is a charging base ([0038] providing for a charging storage rack 200) and comprises a male electrical connector (male connector 204, fig. 6, [0037]) which is configured to cooperate with a female electrical connector ([0037] provides that it charges a female connector 15 of vacuum cleaner 100, fig .1) provided on the handheld vacuum cleaner when the handheld vacuum cleaner is in the storage position (when supported as in [0038]). Bian teaches that this arrangement enriches the use for the user and makes it more convenient ([0021]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Lu to have the charging arrangement of Bian, for enriches the use for the user and convenience.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steven Huang whose telephone number is (571)272-6750. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 6:30 am to 2:30 pm, Friday 6:30 am to 11:00 am (Eastern Time).
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.
/Steven Huang/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights