DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/11/26 have been fully considered but they are moot as they do not apply to the current grounds of rejection made in view of amendments to the claims.
Response to Amendments
The rejections of claims 1-12 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) and claims 13-15 under 35 USC 103 set forth in the prior Office action are withdrawn in order to present new rejections in view of amendments to the claims.
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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 20220098785 by Kim et al. in view of KR20110025566A by Lim et al.
As to claim 1, Kim teaches a laundry treating apparatus comprising a cabinet 110 having a front opening (fig. 1); a door connected to the cabinet; a tub 120 including an inlet in communication with the opening (fig. 2); a drum 130 in the tub; a driver 121 coupled to a rear of the tub (fig. 3); a gasket 190 connecting the opening with the inlet; a water supply portion including a water supply valve 143 coupled to the cabinet and connected to an external water supply source and a water supply pipe 146 supplying water from the valve to the tub (fig. 2); and a sprayer 200 coupled to an upper portion of the gasket to receive water from the water supply pipe and spray water into the drum (fig. 3, para. 50), wherein the sprayer includes an inflow pipe 221 coupled to a distal end of the water supply pipe (fig. 6); an installation plate 210 extending from an outer surface of the inflow pipe and seated on the gasket (fig. 6, para. 93); and a spray nozzle 220 extending downward from the installation plate, the nozzle including a guide body 220a protruding inwards from an inner circumferential surface of the gasket and having a hollow in communication with the inflow pipe (fig. 6); and a main spray hole 222 penetrating through a rear portion to discharge water into the drum (fig. 6, para. 101).
Kim does not teach an additional spray hole penetrating through a front portion of the guide body to discharge water to the door. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to have an additional spray hole. Lim teaches a laundry treating apparatus having a spray hole to discharge water to a door (para. 39) which allows for removing contaminants from the door without having to manually do so (paras. 7-10). One of ordinary skill in the art would have thus been motivated to modify the sprayer of Kim so that it has an additional spray hole through a front of its guide body in order to discharge water to the door and remove contaminants, as suggested by Lim.
As to claim 2, Kim teaches that the sprayer is configured to spray water to at least one of both sides of an inner surface of the gasket (paras. 50, 101).
As to claim 3, Lim teaches that the sprayer sprays water to a rear surface of the door disposed behind the sprayer (para. 39).
As to claim 4, Kim teaches that the sprayer includes cleaning holes 223, 224 penetrating through the guide body spaced apart from the main spray hole and spraying water toward the inner circumferential surface of the gasket (fig. 6, para. 101).
As to claim 5, Kim teaches a first cleaning hole 223 on a first side of the main hole and a second cleaning hole 224 on a second side of the main hole (fig. 6, para. 101).
As to claim 6, Kim teaches that the guide body includes a cleaning slit recessed on at least one of body sides of the spray hole to disperse water sprayed from the cleaning holes 223, 224 in a front and rear direction (see figs. 9 and 10).
As to claim 7, Kim teaches that the slit is spaced apart from the main spray hole 222 (fig. 7).
As to claim 8, Kim teaches a blocking rib on the installation plate in both lateral directions of the guide body, wherein the cleaning slit is formed to be recessed to the blocking rib on both sides of the mail spray hole (fig. 6).
As to claim 9, Kim teaches that the cleaning slit has a width that increases in a direction from the cleaning hole to the rear portion of the guide body (fig. 9).
As to claim 10, Kim teaches that a bottom surface of the cleaning slit has a downward inclination from the cleaning hole to the rear of the guide body (fig. 9).
As to claim 11, Kim teaches that the cleaning hole includes first and second cleaning holes 223, 224, and wherein the cleaning slit includes a first slit extending from the first cleaning hole 223 to the rear portion of the guide body (fig. 9); and a second slit extending from the second cleaning hole 224 to the rear of the guide body (fig. 10).
As to claim 12, Kim teaches that the first and second cleaning slits are formed asymmetrically to each other with respect to the main spray hole 222 (fig. 7).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 20220098785 by Kim et al. in view of KR20110025566A by Lim et al. as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20090249838 by Kim et al. (hereinafter “Kim ‘838”).
As to claim 13, Kim does not teach an auxiliary spray hole to spray water longer toward a rear of the drum than the main hole. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to modify the nozzle of Kim to have an auxiliary spray hole. Kim ‘838 teaches a spray nozzle having a plurality of holes to spray water onto different positions along the length of a drum, which includes holes spraying water longer toward a rear of the drum, in order to supply washing water uniformly to laundry (paras. 55-57). One of ordinary skill in the art would thus have been motivated to modify the spray nozzle of Kim to have an auxiliary spray hole to spray longer toward a rear of the drum in order to more uniformly supply washing water to laundry, as suggested by Kim ‘838. Therefore, the claimed invention would have been obvious at its effective filing date.
As to claim 14, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious or arrange an auxiliary spray hole upward of a main spray hole based on the teachings of Kim ‘838 that evidence such configuration, demonstrating a reasonable expectation of success (see fig. 9).
As to claim 15, Kim ‘838 teaches a partition rib 130 inside a spray hole to branch sprayed water in a left and right direction (fig. 6, para. 88); one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to have such rib to induce uniform dispersion of washing water, as taught by Kim ‘838 (para. 88).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Spencer Bell whose telephone number is (571)272-9888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 6:30pm.
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, 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.
/SPENCER E. BELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights