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 .
Response to Amendment
The response filed on September 9th, 2026 is acknowledged. Eight pages of amended claims were received on 9/9/2026. Claims 1 and 25 have been amended, Claims 2, 53, and 61 have been cancelled, and Claims 113-115 are newly presented.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the fluid sprayer of Invention Group I in the reply filed on 9/9/2026 in response to the requirement for restriction mailed 8/13/2026 acknowledged.
Claims 25-28 and Claim 115, which do not depend from any claims in elected Invention Group I, are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 9-13, 18, and 113 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, each instance of “the sensor” should be revised to “the at least one sensor” to ensure using terminology consistent with what is used elsewhere throughout the claims.
In Claim 1 Lines 18-19, “the first threshold different than the second threshold” should be revised to “the first threshold is different from the second threshold” to ensure proper grammar.
In Claim 1 Lines 24-25, “the third threshold different than the fourth threshold” should be revised to “the third threshold is different from the fourth threshold” to ensure proper grammar.
In Claim 9, “a reciprocation path within the pump chamber” should be revised to “a reciprocation path of each stroke of a plurality of strokes within the pump chamber” to ensure clarity in the claims.
In Claims 10-13 and 18, each instance of “the fluid displacement member” should be revised to “the fluid displacer” to ensure using terminology consistent with what is used elsewhere throughout the claims.
In Claim 10 Lines 1-2, “the speed” should be revised to “a speed” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 10 Line 4, “in the middle of a pump stroke” should be revised to “in a middle of a pump stroke” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 11 Line 2, “the speed” should be revised to “a speed” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 11 Line 3, “reversed direction” should be revised to “reverses direction” to ensure proper grammar.
In Claim 11 Lines 4-5, “the reciprocation path of each stroke” should be revised to “the reciprocation path of each stroke of the plurality of strokes” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 12 Line 2, “the reciprocation path for each stroke of a plurality of strokes” should be revised to “the reciprocation path of each stroke of the plurality of strokes” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 12 Line 7, “the speed” should be revised to “a speed” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 18 Line 2, “the speed” should be revised to “a speed” to ensure clarity in the claim.
In Claim 113 Lines 10-11, “and the each increment adjusts” should be revised to “and each increment adjusts” to ensure proper grammar.
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.
Claims 3-5, 8, and 21-22 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.
Claims 3-5, 8, and 21 are each indefinite because they state in Line 1, “The fluid sprayer of Claim 2”, however Claim 2 is cancelled, therefore there is improper antecedent basis for “The fluid sprayer of Claim 2” in each of Claims 3-5, 8, and 21. It is not clear if Claims 3-5, 8, and 21 are intended to depend from a different Claim or not. For the purpose of examination, each instance of “The fluid sprayer of Claim 2” in Claims 3-5, 8, and 21 will be interpreted as “The fluid sprayer of Claim 1”.
Claim 22 depends from Claim 21, therefore Claim 22 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for being indefinite since Claim 21 is indefinite.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 3-5, 8, and 21 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claims 3-5, 8, and 21 each state in Line 1 “The fluid sprayer of claim 2”, however Claim 2 is cancelled. Therefore Claims 3-5, 8, and 21 do not contain a reference to a claim previously set forth.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 8, 21-22, and 113-114 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO-2020068685-A1 to Mansheim et al. (“Mansheim”) in view of US PGPUB 2016/0221015 A1 to Gohring et al. (“Gohring”).
As to Claim 1, Mansheim discloses a fluid sprayer (See #1 in Fig. 1) comprising:
an electric motor (#4) that outputs rotational motion (See Paragraph 0037);
a drive (#7) that converts the rotational motion output from the electric motor into linear reciprocating motion (See Paragraph 0037);
a pump (#9) driven by the drive (See Paragraph 0037);
a hose (#2A) that receives an output of a fluid from the pump (See Paragraph 0038);
a spray gun (#3) that receives the fluid from the hose (See Paragraph 0038);
at least one sensor (#27 and #28, See Paragraphs 0051 and 0053); and
a controller (#25) configured to receive an output from the at least one sensor and control operation of the electric motor based on the output from the at least one sensor (See Paragraphs 0082 and 0100), wherein the controller is configured to operate in either a first mode or a second mode based on a user input (See Paragraphs 0260-0263 disclosing a user changing threshold pressures, therefore multiple modes exist. Furthermore Paragraph 0079 discloses a cleaning mode and a spraying mode), wherein:
in the first mode the controller is configured to cease output from the pump by stopping rotation of the electric motor when a fluid parameter that is monitored by the sensor crosses a first threshold (See Paragraph 0263 disclosing stopping power when pressure exceeds a value for an amount of time. Therefore crossing a first threshold can be considered crossing to a value greater than P1), and resume output from the pump by restarting rotation of the electric motor when the fluid parameter that is monitored by the sensor crosses a second threshold (See Paragraph 0263 disclosing that when pressure sensed by #28 drops below a value, power is resumed or increased. Therefore crossing a second threshold can be considered crossing to a value less than P1); and
in the second mode the controller is configured to cease output from the pump by stopping rotation of the electric motor when the fluid parameter that is monitored by the sensor crosses a third threshold, and resume output from the pump by restarting rotation of the electric motor when the fluid parameter that is monitored by the sensor crosses a fourth threshold (See Paragraphs 0260-0262 disclosing changing the threshold pressure, therefore crossing a third threshold can be considered crossing to a value above P2 and crossing to a fourth threshold can be considered crossing to a value less than P2).
Regarding Claim 1, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim does not specifically disclose wherein the first threshold is different from the second threshold, the third threshold different than the fourth threshold, and a first difference between the first threshold and the second threshold is less than a second difference between the third threshold and the fourth threshold (Paragraphs 0260-0263 disclose changing pressure threshold values and changing pump output based on going above or below a threshold, but differences between threshold values are not disclosed. Paragraph 0251 discloses utilizing a lower pressure threshold or an upper pressure threshold, but utilizing both at the same time is not disclosed).
However, Gohring discloses, in the same field of endeavor of fluid handling (See Paragraph 0003), a fluid sprayer (See #1 in Fig. 1) comprising a controller (#R) that is configured to operate in either a first mode or a second mode based on a user input (See Paragraphs 0035 and 0042-0044 disclosing preselecting device 213c that can change a pressure threshold, thus multiple modes can be selected based on a preselected pressure), wherein:
in the first mode the controller is configured to cease output from a pump by stopping rotation of a motor when a fluid parameter that is monitored by a sensor crosses a first threshold, and resume output from the pump by restarting rotation of the motor when the fluid parameter that is monitored by the sensor crosses a second threshold, the first threshold different than the second threshold (See Paragraph 0007 disclosing detecting fluid pressure and stopping rotation of motor when pressure is too high and starting rotation of a motor when pressure it too low, therefore a maximum pressure P1 and different minimum pressure P2 can be selected);
in the second mode the controller is configured to cease output from the pump by stopping rotation of the motor when the fluid parameter that is monitored by the sensor crosses a third threshold, and resume output from the pump by restarting rotation of the motor when the fluid parameter that is monitored by the sensor crosses a fourth threshold, the third threshold different than the fourth threshold (See Paragraph 0007 disclosing detecting fluid pressure and stopping rotation of motor when pressure is too high and starting rotation of a motor when pressure it too low, with minimum and maximum pressures being selected, therefore a maximum pressure P3 and different minimum pressure P4 can be selected).
Furthermore, Mansheim discloses operating the fluid sprayer in different modes having minimum pressures and maximum pressures that span different amounts (See Paragraphs 0081-0082 disclosing a cleaning mode being at pressures of 100 psi to 400 psi and a spraying mode being at pressures of 1000 psi to 4000 psi with different options for spray thresholds including above 50 psi, above 100 psi, 5 psi -500 psi, 300 psi -400 psi, and other values).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fluid sprayer of Mansheim as applied to Claim 1 above such that the first threshold is different from the second threshold, the third threshold different than the fourth threshold, and a first difference between the first threshold and the second threshold is less than a second difference between the third threshold and the fourth threshold, since doing so would utilize a known technique taught by Gohring to yield the predictable result of being able to adjust the fluid sprayer to operate within a desired pressure range depending on a desired spraying mode (See Gohring Paragraph 0007 disclosing infinite adjustability with fine adjustment within each adjusting range being possible and Mansheim Paragraphs 0081-0082 disclosing a variety of operating pressure ranges which correlate to different spraying modes. As an example, one of ordinary skill in the art could modify one range to be 100 psi to 400 psi for a cleaning mode and another range 1000 psi to 4000 psi for a spraying mode, along with various other possible ranges for different cleaning applications and spraying applications. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art could also modify one range to be 500-1000 psi for one spraying mode in a first spraying application and another range to be 900 psi to 2000 psi for another spraying mode in a second spraying application, along with various other possible ranges for different spraying applications).
As to Claim 3, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim as modified by Gohring further discloses wherein the fluid parameter is pressure and each of the first threshold, the second threshold, the third threshold, and the fourth threshold respectively represent different pressure values (See Gohring Paragraph 0007 disclosing different pressure intervals and See Mansheim Paragraphs 0081-0082 disclosing a variety of operating pressure ranges which correlate to different spraying modes, therefor the fluid sprayer of Gohring is modified to operate with four different pressure threshold values).
As to Claim 4, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim as modified by Gohring further discloses wherein the first threshold is greater than the second threshold, and the third threshold is greater than the fourth threshold, and each of the third threshold and the fourth threshold are greater than each of the first threshold and the second threshold (See Gohring Paragraph 0007 and Mansheim Paragraphs 0081-0082. One of ordinary skill in the art could set one range to be 100 psi to 400 psi for a cleaning mode and another range to be 1000 psi to 4000 psi for a spraying mode).
As to Claim 5, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim as modified by Gohring further discloses wherein the controller is configured to operate in the first mode when the user input selects a first pressure setting in a first pressure range and operate in the second mode when the user input selects a second pressure setting in a second pressure range, the second pressure range representing higher pressure than the first pressure range (See Gohring Paragraph 0007 and Mansheim Paragraphs 0081-0082. One of ordinary skill in the art could set the first mode to correspond to a first range of 100 psi to 400 psi for cleaning and the second mode to correspond to a second range of 1000 psi to 4000 psi for spraying mode).
As to Claim 8, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim as modified by Gohring further discloses wherein:
the first mode is associated with a first pressure range extending between a first lower pressure value and a first upper pressure value (See Gohring Paragraph 0007 disclosing infinite adjustability with fine adjustment within each adjusting range being possible and Mansheim Paragraphs 0081-0082 disclosing a variety of operating pressure ranges which correlate to different spraying modes. One of ordinary skill in the art could have one range be 500-1000 psi for one spraying mode in a first spraying application).;
the second mode is associated with a second pressure range extending between a second lower pressure value and a second upper pressure value (See Gohring Paragraph 0007 disclosing infinite adjustability with fine adjustment within each adjusting range being possible and Mansheim Paragraphs 0081-0082 disclosing a variety of operating pressure ranges which correlate to different spraying modes. One of ordinary skill in the art could have another range be 900 psi to 2000 psi for another spraying mode in a second spraying application, along with various other possible ranges for different spraying applications); and
the first upper pressure value is intermediate the second lower pressure value and the second upper pressure value (See Gohring Paragraph 0007 disclosing infinite adjustability with fine adjustment within each adjusting range being possible and Mansheim Paragraphs 0081-0082. The first upper pressure value can be 1000 psi, which is in between 900 psi and 2000 psi).
As to Claim 21 in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim as modified by Gohring further discloses the fluid sprayer comprising a user interface configured to receive a parameter output setting from a user (See Mansheim Paragraph 0249 disclosing computer #14), the controller configured to control operation of the electric motor based on the parameter output setting (See Mansheim Paragraph 0249 disclosing changing threshold pressures, which control the electric motor);
wherein the first threshold is based on the parameter output setting (See Mansheim Paragraph 0249 disclosing a user changing threshold pressures throughout a day, therefore the first threshold is chosen by a user); and
wherein the third threshold is based on the parameter output setting (See Mansheim Paragraph 0249 disclosing a user changing threshold pressures throughout a day, therefore the third threshold is chosen by a user).
As to Claim 22, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 21 above, Mansheim as modified by Gohring further discloses wherein the parameter output setting is set within a range between a minimum output setting and a maximum output setting (See Paragraph Mansheim 0249 disclosing the threshold pressure being a pressure that is less than a maximum achievable pressure of the pump. The threshold pressure must also have some minimum pressure that is 0 psi or more. Mansheim Paragraph 0102 for example discloses pressure threshold values of 50 psi to 700 psi).
As to Claim 113, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim as modified by Gohring further discloses the system comprising:
an input interface configured to provide pressure setting information regarding a target pressure to the controller (See Mansheim Paragraph 0062 disclosing a computer with interfaces #20);
wherein the controller is configured to:
set the target pressure based on the pressure setting information (See Mansheim Paragraph 0052 disclosing generating a pressure of 500 psi to 8000 psi);
control operation of the electric motor based on pressure information from the at least one sensor and based on the target pressure (See Mansheim Paragraphs 0250-0253); and
remap the input interface based on an operating mode of the controller such that each increment of the input interface adjusts the target pressure by a first pressure value with the controller in the first mode and the each increment adjusts the target pressure by a second pressure value with the controller in the second mode, the first pressure value differing from the second pressure value (See Paragraphs 0052, 0082, and 0263 disclosing a dial to change pressure values. See Paragraph 0110 disclosing user selecting operation mode on interfaces #20. When the fluid sprayer is in the first mode and the second mode, different pressure ranges can be applied. A user can operate the dial to increase the target pressure by different amounts in different modes. Thus, the controller is configured to change the input interface between modes having different minimum and maximum values so different operations of the dial can adjust the target pressure by different amounts in different modes).
As to Claim 114, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim as modified by Gohring further discloses wherein the controller is configured to receive information regarding a sensed position of a fluid displacer of the pump from the at least one sensor and control operation of the electric motor based on the sensed position of the fluid displacer (See Paragraphs 0053-0058 disclosing cycle sensor #27 that senses a position of a piston and See Paragraphs 0100-0112 disclosing pressures driven by the motor based on calculations using data from #27).
Claims 9-13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mansheim in view of Gohring and US Patent 6,074,170 to Bert (“Bert”).
As to Claim 9, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring as applied to Claim 1 above, Mansheim further discloses wherein the pump comprises:
a pump chamber (#12); and
a fluid displacer (#13) that reciprocates along a reciprocation path within the pump chamber to alternately increase and decrease space within the pump chamber for the fluid (See Paragraph 0037).
Regarding Claim 9, Mansheim does not specifically disclose wherein the pump comprises a first check valve upstream of the pump chamber, the first check valve configured to prevent retrograde flow of the fluid; and a second check valve configured to prevent retrograde flow of the fluid (See Paragraph 0230 disclosing pump valves, but a first check valve and a second check valve are not disclosed).
However, Bert discloses, in the same field of endeavor of fluid handling (See Col. 1 Lines 10-20), a fluid sprayer (See Col. 1 Lines 20-25 disclosing a coating station) comprising a pump (See Fig. 1) with a pump chamber and a fluid displacer (See Col. 4 Lines 15-20 disclosing #30 having a piston and cylinder) comprising a first check valve upstream of a pump chamber, the first check valve configured to prevent retrograde flow of fluid (See Col. 4 Lines 20-27 disclosing a check valve in the inlet #32); and a second check valve configured to prevent retrograde flow of the fluid (See Col. 4 Lines 20-27 disclosing a check valve in outlet #36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring to utilize the pump or Bert such that the pump comprises a first check valve upstream of the pump chamber, the first check valve configured to prevent retrograde flow of the fluid; and a second check valve configured to prevent retrograde flow of the fluid, as taught by Bert, since doing so would yield the predictable result of having a pumping stroke executed with each reciprocation of the fluid displacer (See Bert Col. 4 Lines 20-27 ) while reducing pressure drops and spikes of pumped liquid (See Bert Col. 8 Lines 1-5).
As to Claim 10, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring and Bert as applied to Claim 9 above, Bert further discloses wherein the controller is configured to control the speed of the electric motor such that the electric motor is spinning faster during changeover when the fluid displacement member is reversing direction than when the fluid displacement member is in the middle of a pump stroke (See Col. 7 Lines 35-65. During changeover the controller acts to make the motor #94 operate at a speed that is multiplied by a factor up to 1.5 compared to a normal speed during a middle of pump stroke).
As to Claim 11, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring and Bert as applied to Claim 9 above, Bert further discloses wherein the controller is configured to control the speed of the electric motor such that the electric motor is spinning faster coming out of changeover just after the fluid displacement member reversed direction and then the electric motor slows down for a middle portion of stroking, the middle portion comprising at least half of the reciprocation path of each stroke (See Col. 7 Lines 35-65. Right before, during, and just after changeover the controller acts to make the motor #94 operate at a speed that is multiplied by a factor up to 1.5 compared to a normal speed during a middle portion of stroking. The middle portion can be considered everything in the stroke that is normal speed and zero speed).
As to Claim 12, in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring and Bert as applied to Claim 9 above, Bert further discloses wherein:
the reciprocation path for each stroke of a plurality of strokes comprises a first end portion, a middle portion, and a second end portion (See Col. 7 Lines 35-65. A first end portion is right before, during, and just after changeover. A middle portion is during normal speed and at zero speed. A second end portion is right before, during and just after a subsequent changeover on the opposite side);
for each stroke of the plurality of strokes, the fluid displacement member is first moved through the first end portion, then the middle portion, and then the second end portion (See Col. 7 Lines 35-65. The displacement member moves from the first end portion, to a middle portion during normal speed and then zero speed, to a second end portion); and
the controller is configured to control the speed of the electric motor such that the electric motor is spinning faster in the first end portion than in the middle portion such that the fluid displacement member moves faster in at least a portion of the first end portion than in the middle portion (See Col. 7 Lines 35-65. During the first end portion that includes changeover the speed can be up to 1.5 times the normal speed. During the middle portion the speed is a normal speed and then becomes zero).
As to Claim 13 in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring and Bert as applied to Claim 12 above, Bert further discloses wherein the controller is configured to control the speed of the electric motor such that the electric motor is spinning faster in the second end portion than in the middle portion such that the fluid displacement member moves faster in at least a portion of the second end portion than in the middle portion (See Col. 7 Lines 35-65. During the second end portion that includes a subsequent changeover the speed can be up to 1.5 times the normal speed. During the middle portion the speed is a normal speed and then becomes zero).
As to Claim 18 in reference to the fluid sprayer of Mansheim in view of Gohring and Bert as applied to Claim 9 above, Bert further discloses wherein the controller is configured to control the speed of the electric motor such that the electric motor accelerates to spin faster as the fluid displacement member approaches a changeover and decelerates to spin slower after the fluid displacement member completes the changeover (See Col. 7 Lines 35-65. During the first end portion that includes just before and after changeover the speed can be up to 1.5 times the normal speed thus the electric motor accelerates from 0 to a speed that is higher than normal speed as changeover is approached. Then after changeover is completed the speed reduces to a normal speed, therefore a deceleration occurs).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Notice of References Cited Form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN E SCHWARTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1770. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00AM - 5:00PM MST.
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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571)-270-1814. 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.
/KEVIN EDWARD SCHWARTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 October 8, 2026
Prosecution Insights