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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 14 to 16 of the summary, “surface in a direction perpendicular to it, but also ensures” is suggested to be changed to “surface in a direction perpendicular to it but also ensures”.
In line 31 of the summary, “where the floor cleaning machine is to be used and the amount of dirt” is suggested to be changed to “where the floor cleaning machine is to be used, and the amount of dirt”.
In line 17 of the detailed description, “a fresh water tank” is suggested to be changed to “a freshwater tank”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burgoon (US 4041567 A) in light of Dojan (US 4037289 A).
Regarding claim 1, Burgoon teaches a floor cleaning machine with a frame (figure 1, element 22), with at least one cleaning device which is configured to engage with the floor surface to be cleaned in order to loosen and/or remove dirt from the floor surface to be cleaned (figure 8, element 44), wherein the floor cleaning machine has a front end (figure 4, element 26 is the front wheels), wherein the floor cleaning machine is configured to be moved in a forward direction over the floor surface to be cleaned in a cleaning operation (figure 4, element 26 is designated as the front wheels specifically so it is designed to be moved in a forward direction over the floor when cleaning), wherein during a movement in the forward direction the front end points in the forward direction, with a clearing blade arrangement which is mounted in front of the cleaning device when viewed in the forward direction (figure 1, element 36 would act like a clearing blade), wherein the clearing blade arrangement comprises a clearing blade which is configured to be guided over the floor surface to be cleaned (figure 1, element 36 would act like a clearing blade), wherein a guiding wheel is connected to the clearing blade (figure 1, element 38, the drum can be interpreted as a guide wheel under BRI), wherein the guiding wheel is configured to roll over the floor surface to be cleaned and wherein the position of the clearing blade relative to the floor surface to be cleaned is predetermined by the guiding wheel in a direction perpendicular to the floor surface to be cleaned (figure 1, element 38, the drum can be interpreted as a guide wheel under BRI), wherein the clearing blade arrangement is mounted on the frame so as to be vertically adjustable in a direction perpendicular to the floor surface to be cleaned (figures 1 and 4). Burgoon does not teach with a running gear which has at least one wheel driven by a running gear drive, wherein the running gear is configured such that the floor cleaning machine can be moved over a floor surface to be cleaned, but does state “Various modifications of the above-described embodiment of the invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art and it is to be understood that such modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention, if they are within the spirit and the tenor of the accompanying claims”. Lines 27 to 29 of the instant invention also reveals “The floor cleaning machine can have a frame, a running gear which has at least one wheel, possibly driven by a running gear drive, wherein the running gear is configured in such a way that the floor cleaning machine can be moved over a floor surface to be cleaned, and at least one cleaning device which is configured to engage with the floor surface to be cleaned in order to loosen and/or remove dirt from the floor surface to be cleaned”. Under BRI, this can be interpreted as any method to drive the machine. Dojan teaches “electric motor 11 is mounted on the frame 12 and connected by a suitable drive connection 19 to the surface engaging propulsion wheels” (col. 3, lines 60 to 63).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add an electric motor and suitable to drive connection to move the floor cleaning machine of Burgoon. In addition, there is an absence of criticality to the specific drive system used and absence of unexpected results.
Regarding claim 2, Burgoon, as modified by Dojan, teaches wherein the cleaning device comprises a scrubbing deck attached to the frame (figure 1, element 48), wherein the scrubbing deck has a driven cleaning element which is configured to engage the floor surface to be cleaned (figure 1, element 48), and wherein the scrubbing deck is configured to apply cleaning fluid in the region of the scrubbing deck to the floor surface to be cleaned (col. 4, lines 1 to 2).
Regarding claim 3, Burgoon teaches, as modified by Dojan, with a suction foot which is attached to the frame (col. 2, lines 49 to 52), wherein the floor cleaning machine has a vacuum source connected to the suction foot (col. 2, lines 49 to 52), wherein the suction foot is configured to absorb liquid from the floor surface to be cleaned (col. 2, lines 49 to 52), and wherein the suction foot is arranged behind the cleaning device when viewed in the forward direction (col. 2, lines 49 to 52, figure 1, elements 52, 54, 56).
Regarding claim 4, Burgoon, as modified by Dojan, teaches wherein the position of the clearing blade is adjustable in a direction perpendicular to the floor surface to be cleaned relative to the guiding wheel (figures 1 and 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
220
248
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Burgoon, as modified by Dojan, teaches wherein the clearing blade extends perpendicular to the floor surface to be cleaned (see annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 10, Burgoon teaches wherein the clearing blade has a frame and a flexible strip extending therefrom towards the floor surface to be cleaned (Figure 8, element 102). Burgoon does not teach wherein the ends of the flexible strip extend laterally beyond the frame of the clearing blade. However, it is well known in the art that flexible materials transfer less load to the structures they are attached to than an equivalent more rigid material would because the energy goes into deforming the flexible material elastically instead of transferring shock to the rest of the system. As a result, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend the flexible strip beyond the cross section of the housing to stop impacts with the floor and wall from causing damage to the frame and rest of the floor cleaning machine. Instead of transferring the impact load, the extended flexible strip would deform elastically and absorb most of the load on its own.
PNG
media_image2.png
404
1053
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Burgoon, as modified by Dojan, teaches wherein the floor cleaning machine has a housing and wherein the frame of the clearing blade is arranged within the cross-section of the housing when viewed in a direction perpendicular to the floor surface to be cleaned (see annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 12, Burgoon does not teach wherein the ends of the flexible strip extend laterally beyond the cross-section of the housing when viewed in a direction perpendicular to the floor surface to be cleaned. However, it is well known in the art that flexible materials transfer less load to the structures they are attached to than an equivalent more rigid material would because the energy goes into deforming the flexible material elastically instead of transferring shock to the rest of the system. As a result, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to extend the flexible strip beyond the cross section of the housing to stop impacts with the floor and wall from causing damage to the frame and rest of the floor cleaning machine. Instead of transferring the impact load, the extended flexible strip would deform elastically and absorb most of the load on its own.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burgoon (US 4041567 A) in light of Dojan (US 4037289 A) and Wulff (US 4158901 A).
PNG
media_image3.png
469
613
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Burgoon does not teach wherein the guiding wheel can be pivoted about an axis running perpendicular to the floor surface to be cleaned opposite the clearing blade. Wulff teaches “It is an object of the invention to provide an elongated horizontally disposed squeegee movably mounted at each side of the machine with means, responsive to the steering apparatus for lowering one side squeegee into contact with a surface on which the machine is positioned as the machine is turned in one direction, and as the machine is turned in the other direction, the first mentioned side squeegee is raised and the other squeegee is lowered to contact the surface whereby the area missed by the rear squeegee on a turn of the machine is covered by a side squeegee” (col 1, lines 14 to 24). While this squeegee mechanism is on the back of Wulff’s machine, one of ordinary skill in the art could have attached a mirrored version of this squeegee mechanism to the front of Burgoon’s machine by known methods (see annotated figure above). Burgoon’s machine and Wulff’s squeegee arrangement would perform the same function they do separately which would lead to predictable results.
PNG
media_image4.png
403
751
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Burgoon does not teach wherein the clearing blade arrangement is connected to the frame via a first and a second parallelogram arrangement, wherein each of the parallelogram arrangements comprises a first and a second arm extending from a first to a second end and spaced apart from one another in a direction perpendicular to the floor surface to be cleaned, wherein the first end is pivotably mounted on the frame about a first pivot axis extending parallel to the floor surface to be cleaned, and wherein the second end is pivotably mounted on the clearing blade about a second pivot axis extending parallel to the floor surface to be cleaned, and wherein the pivot axes of the parallelogram arrangements run parallel. However, Wulff teaches all elements of claim 6 in figures 6 and 7 (see annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 7, Wulff does not teach an explicit stop element for the arrangement in claim 6. However, stop elements are well known in the art, and it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add one to the parallelogram arrangement to prevent the clearing blade arrangement from being damaged by being lifted into the machine.
Regarding claim 8, Wulff’s clearing blade arrangement when added to the front of Burgoon’s machine (see the paragraph for claim 5), does result in the clearing blade is convexly curved when viewed against the forward direction (see first annotated figure).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA MOY whose telephone number is (571)272-0439. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday, 8 a.m. 5 p.m. ET..
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.
/JOSHUA MOY/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/MONICA S CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights