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 .
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 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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 – 13 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/30/2024 was filed before the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers 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 – 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ohashi (JPH 07322 A) as cited by Applicant – Please see Machine Translation attached.
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Ohashi teaches a cleaner (Fig. 1) comprising: a cleaning module (A; Fig. 1) including an agitator (rotor, 13) configured to suction external air and sweep a cleaning area (Paragraph [0020]); and a main body (nozzle) configured to provide a suction force to the cleaning module (Paragraph [0019]), wherein the agitator (13) includes: an agitator bar (Annotated Fig. 4) configured to rotate about a rotational axis (Annotated Fig. 4); a plurality of bristles (brushes, 14) disposed on an outer circumferential surface of the agitator bar (Annotated Fig. 4) and extending outward in a radial direction (Fig. 4); and a blade (blades, 23) disposed on the outer circumferential surface of the agitator bar (Annotated Fig. 4) and disposed in a circumferential direction of the agitator (13) from the bristle (14), and the blade (23) includes: an extension part (base, 25) extending outward from the agitator bar (Annotated Fig. 4) in the radial direction of the agitator (13); and a blocking part (tip, 29; Fig. 4 or tips, 43; Fig. 8) extending from one side of the extension part (25) toward the bristle (14).
PNG
media_image1.png
491
793
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blade (23) is spaced apart from a housing (case, 2) of the cleaning module when the agitator (13) does not rotate, and is in close contact with the housing (2) of the cleaning module when the agitator (13) rotates (Ohashi teaches the agitator installed in the housing, thus when the vacuum is off and the agitator is not rotating, the blades can be placed apart from the housing and further is in close contact with the housing (2) of the cleaning module when the agitator (13) rotates (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the bristle (14) and the blade (23) are alternately disposed in the circumferential direction of the agitator (13; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 4, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blocking part (29) extends in the circumferential direction of the agitator (13; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 5, Ohashi teaches a cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blocking part (43) extends in a direction opposite to a rotational direction of the agitator (13; Fig. 8).
Regarding Claim 6, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blade (23) is connected by curving a connection part (bent portion, 26; Paragraph [0027]; Fig. 4) between the extension part (25) and the blocking part (29).
Regarding Claim 7, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blade (23) is connected by bending a connection part (bent portion, 26; Paragraph [0027]; Fig. 4) between the extension part (25) and the blocking part (29).
Regarding Claim 8, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blocking part (29) extends from an end portion of the extension part (25).
Regarding Claim 9, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blocking part (29) extends from an inside more than an end portion of the extension part (25; Fig. 4).
Regarding Independent Claim 10, Ohashi teaches a cleaner (Fig. 1) comprising: a cleaning module (A; Fig. 1) including an agitator (rotor, 13) configured to suction external air and sweep a cleaning area (Paragraph [0020]); and a main body (nozzle) configured to provide a suction force to the cleaning module (Paragraph [0019]), wherein the agitator (13) includes: an agitator bar (Annotated Fig. 4) configured to rotate about a rotational axis (Annotated Fig. 4); a plurality of bristles (brushes, 14) disposed on an outer circumferential surface of the agitator bar (Annotated Fig. 4) and disposed in a circumferential direction of the agitator (13); and a blocking member (blade, 23) disposed on the outer circumferential surface of the agitator (13) and isolating one bristle (14) from the other bristle (14; the blade, 23 separates on set of bristles from the next row of bristles).
Regarding Claim 12, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blocking member (23) includes: a first extension part (25) extending outward from the agitator bar (Annotated Fig. 4) in the radial direction of the agitator (13); a second extension part (29) extending outward from the agitator bar in the radial direction of the agitator and extending from a location spaced apart from the first extension part (25); and a blocking part (26) configured to connect the first extension part (25) with the second extension part (29) and extending in the circumferential direction of the agitator (13; Fig. 4).
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.
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.
Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi (JPH 07322 A) as cited by Applicant – Please see Machine Translation attached.
Regarding Claim 11, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) of claim 10, as discussed above.
Ohashi does not explicitly teach wherein the blocking member has a hollow formed therein.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the blocking member of Ohashi to further include the blocking member has a hollow formed therein, as claimed, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding Claim 13, Ohashi teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) of claim 12, as discussed above.
Ohashi further teaches the cleaner (Fig. 1) wherein the blocking part (29) is spaced apart from a housing (case, 2) of the cleaning module when the agitator (13) does not rotate, (Ohashi teaches the agitator installed in the housing, thus when the vacuum is off and the agitator is not rotating, the blocking part can be placed apart from the housing (Fig. 1).
Ohashi does not explicitly when the agitator rotates, is deformed convexly in the radial direction of the agitator to be in close contact with a housing of the cleaning module.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the blocking member of Ohashi to further include the agitator rotates, is deformed convexly in the radial direction of the agitator to be in close contact with a housing of the cleaning module, as claimed, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
Art made of record, however, not relied upon for the current rejection is as follows: U. S. Patent No. 10,898,046 B2 to Shim et al. teaches an agitator and a robot cleaner including an agitator. The agitator includes a body configured to be rotated, a plurality of couplers formed at the body and arranged to be spaced apart from each other by a predetermined distance, and a first member and a second member coupled to any one of the couplers and configured to contact a surface to be cleaned during rotation of the body. The first member and the second member extend different lengths from the body in a radial direction.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATINA N HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-8024. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday; 5:30am to 3:30pm.
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, Monica Carter can be reached at 571-272-4475. 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.
/KATINA N. HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights