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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/4/2024 is being considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the shelf and all the walls of claim 1 and 11 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 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 1 and 11 recite the limitations “a first wall extending from the second sidewall, wherein the first wall is parallel to the first sidewall; and a second wall extending from the fourth sidewall, wherein the second wall is aligned with the first wall; wherein the first wall and the second wall are separated so as to form a fluid pathway therebetween.” From the Examiner’s best understanding, the first sidewall is the front, the second sidewall is the rear where the wringer is located, the third and fourth sidewalls are sidewalls there between. Thus it is unclear how: if the first wall extends from the rear, a second wall extends from a side, the second wall and first wall are aligned, and have a fluid pathway therebetween. From the Examiners understanding they would form a corner, which would make them aligned but there is not really a fluid pathway there between. They definitely are not separated, thus the claim is determined to be indefinite. Please check the verbiage of the claim and the specification, and adjust accordingly. For Examination purposes, if they meet in a corner they are determined to have met the limitations of the claim since the structure is equivalent to applicant’s.
Claims 2-10 and 12-20 are rejected due to dependency.
Claim 2 and 13 recite the limitation “the second sidewall and the fourth sidewall comprise symmetrical configurations.” When looking to at least paragraph 40 and figure 5a, Items 23 and 24 are not of the traditional understanding of symmetrical. As such the claim is determined to be indefinite. Items 25 and 24 are symmetrical. For examination purposes, the claim is to be interpreted as “ the third sidewall and the fourth sidewall comprise symmetrical configurations.”
Claims 5 and 15 recite the limitation “wherein the third wall is laterally centered between the second sidewall and the fourth sidewall”. The second and fourth walls (23 and 25 respectively) form a corner. The examiner is confused how something can be centered on a corner given the current arrangement. As such the claim is determined to be indefinite. For Examination purposes, the Examiner is not applying art since its unclear what sidewall is being claimed and what the wall is.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “wherein the first sidewall is a rear sidewall and the first sidewall is a front sidewall.” It is unclear how the first sidewall can be the front and the rear sidewall. As such the claim is determined to be indefinite. For Examination purposes, the claim will be interpreted as “wherein the second sidewall is a rear sidewall and the first sidewall is a front sidewall.”
Any dependent claim from those listed above is also rejected due to dependency.
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 1-4, 6-7, 10-14, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by Alt (US 2002/0120997).
Regarding claim 1, Alt discloses a mop bucket system comprising:
a mop bucket comprising:
a first sidewall (Item 86);
a second sidewall (Item 84);
a third sidewall (Item 80);
a fourth sidewall (Item 82), wherein the first sidewall, the second sidewall, the third sidewall, and the fourth sidewall together define a first rim along a top of the mop bucket (Item 96);
a shelf that extends at least partially along a middle portion of the first sidewall, at least partially along a middle portion of the second sidewall, and at least partially along a middle portion of the fourth sidewall, wherein a first capacity of the mop bucket below the shelf is less than a second capacity of the mop bucket above the shelf (as shown in Figure 2, all of the sidewalls have stepped portions to help show how much fluid is in the bucket. The stepped potions are considered the walls that extend from the sidewalls);
a first wall extending from the second sidewall, wherein the first wall is parallel to the first sidewall; and
a second wall extending from the fourth sidewall, wherein the second wall is aligned with the first wall;
wherein the first wall and the second wall are separated so as to form a fluid pathway therebetween.
Please note the limitations pertaining to the different sidewalls allows for broad interpretations. Even though cited above is Items 80, 82, 84, and 86, the first sidewall could be interpreted as the third to meet the limitations of the dependent claims.
Regarding claim 2 (as best understood), Alt discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the third sidewall and the fourth sidewall comprise symmetrical configurations (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 3, Alt discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the first sidewall and the third sidewall comprise asymmetrical configurations (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 4 and 14, Alt discloses the system of claim 1, wherein a length of a gap between the first wall and the second wall is equal to or greater than a length of the first wall. (Annotated Figure 11)
PNG
media_image1.png
640
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Alt discloses the system of claim 1, wherein a top of the first wall (lower step) is positioned relatively lower than the shelf (higher step, Figure 11).
Regarding claim 7 and 17, Alt discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the first wall and the second wall are disposed at a center of the mop bucket (the step of Item 90 is on both the front and back wall and centered from 80 and 82).
Regarding claim 10 and 20 (as best understood)system of claim 1, wherein the second sidewall is a rear sidewall and the first sidewall is a front sidewall (Figure 2).
Regarding claim 11, Alt discloses a system comprising:
a wringer (Item 108 Figure 13); and
a mop bucket (Item 10)comprising:
a first sidewall (Item 86);
a second sidewall (Item 84);
a third sidewall (Item 80);
a fourth sidewall (Item 82),
a shelf that extends at least partially along a middle portion of the first sidewall, at least partially along a middle portion of the second sidewall, and at least partially along a middle portion of the fourth sidewall, wherein a first capacity of the mop bucket below the shelf is less than a second capacity of the mop bucket above the shelf (as shown in Figure 2, all of the sidewalls have stepped portions to help show how much fluid is in the bucket. The stepped potions are considered the walls that extend from the sidewalls);
a first wall extending from the second sidewall, wherein the first wall is parallel to the first sidewall, and wherein a top of the first wall is positioned relatively lower than the shelf; and
a second wall extending from the fourth sidewall, wherein the second wall is aligned with the first wall;
wherein the first wall and the second wall are separated so as to form a fluid pathway therebetween.
Regarding claim 12, Alt discloses the system of claim 11, wherein the first sidewall, the second sidewall, the third sidewall, and the fourth sidewall together define a first rim along a top of the mop bucket (Item 96).
Regarding claim 13, Alt discloses the system of claim 11, wherein the third sidewall and the fourth sidewall comprise symmetrical configurations, and wherein the first sidewall and the third sidewall comprise asymmetrical configurations (Figure 2).
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 8, 9, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Alt (US 2002/0120997) in view of Burns (US 2005/0204503).
Regarding claim 8 and 18, Alt discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising:
a wringer comprising:
a first wringing plate (Item 112);
a second wringing plate (Item 110), which is moveable toward the first wringing plate to wring liquid from a mop;
a wringer arm (Item 138)configured to be actuated to cause movement of the second wringing plate toward the first wringing plate, such that the wringer is actuated between a mop-receiving position and a mop-wringing position;
linkage coupling (Item 140) the wringer arm to the second wringing plate.
Alt fails to explicitly disclose a spiral torsion spring engaging the linkage or the wringer arm, such that the wringer is urged into the mop-receiving position, absent an actuating force being applied, wherein the spiral torsion spring comprises radially wound spring material configured to expand and contract in a radial direction.
Burns teaches a spiral torsion spring (Item 32) engaging the linkage or the wringer arm, such that the wringer is urged into the mop-receiving position, absent an actuating force being applied, wherein the spiral torsion spring comprises radially wound spring material configured to expand and contract in a radial direction (Burns in paragraphs [0028-29] discusses how the spring is coiled around the connecting rod but does not discuss how much force is applied in the open position and in the closed position. Burns also discusses how different spring configurations can be used. It is known that coiled springs expand/contract inherently when they are biased). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to simply substitute elastic means of Alt for the coiled spring of Burns. Such a modification would lead to the predictable result of the wring plate being brought back into its original position.
Regarding claim 9 and 19, Alt in view of Burns disclose the system of claim 8, wherein the first and second wringing plates each extend between a first wringer sidewall and a second wringer sidewall (Alt Items 114 and 116).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOM R RODGERS whose telephone number is (313)446-4849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8AM-5PM EST.
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.
/TOM RODGERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights