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 (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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “driving member” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-10 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.
A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, 639 F.3d 1303, 1318, 97 USPQ2d 1737, 1748-49 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Independent claim 1 and claims 2-10 depending therefrom are directed to an apparatus (specifically a handheld vacuum cleaner for pets). Claim 1 recites the limitation “the cleaning accessory is inserted into the dust suction port and brings the driving member into contact with the trigger, and the trigger performs a pressing operation, and drives the driving member to perform hair removal on the cleaning accessory”. Claim 7 recites the limitation “wherein...the handle is inserted into a charging base”. Claim 10 recites the limitations “wherein...the handle is inserted into the handle socket and charges the battery, and the cleaning accessory is inserted into each of the accessory sockets”. Each of these limitations appears to recite at least one method step for using the apparatus rather than the apparatus itself (i.e. “wherein...the handle is inserted into a charging base” instead of “wherein...the handle is configured to be inserted into a charging base”). Claims 1, 7, and 10 are therefore indefinite.
Additionally, claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein...the dust suction chamber is brought into communication with the dust canister through an outlet of the rear part” while claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein...the dust canister...brings the side hole into hermetic communication with the outlet of a rear part of the dust suction chamber”. It is unclear whether these claims recite structural relationships between the recited elements or if they recite intended uses of the invention.
Furthermore, claims 7-10 refer to a “charging base”, but the claims are directed to a “handheld cleaner for pets” rather than “a cleaning system comprising the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets of claim 1 and a charging base, wherein the handle is configured to be inserted into the base” or similar structure. Because the reference to a charging base in claim 7 appears to recite an intended use and the preamble is directed solely to the handheld cleaner, it is unclear whether the charging base is affirmatively claimed as part of the handheld vacuum cleaner or whether the handheld vacuum cleaner simply needs to have a handle that may be insertable into a charging base.
For purposes of examination, the broader interpretations, which treat all ambiguous limitations as reciting intended uses rather than explicit method steps or functionally claimed structures will be adopted.
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, 6-7, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (US PGPub 2025/0331497, "Zhu") in view of Xie et al. (CN 219895569, "Xie").
1. Zhu teaches a handheld vacuum cleaner for pets (1), comprising
a body (housing of 1, see Zhu fig. 2),
a vacuum motor (115, Zhu [0034]) inside the body (Zhu fig. 3),
a dust canister (118) removably mounted to the body (118 is detachable, Zhu figs. 3 and 5, and [0036]),
a dust suction port (127) in communication with the dust canister (dust passes from 127 to 118, Zhu fig. 3 and [0036]), and
a cleaning accessory (3, see Zhu figs. 2 and 9),
wherein the cleaning accessory (3) has a driving member (combination of 36 and post 124) to drive hair removal (see Zhu fig. 12 and [0041]), an adsorption port (361, Zhu fig. 9) in communication with the dust suction port is arranged on the cleaning accessory (361 is in communication with 127, Zhu fig. 13 and [0041]), a trigger (116) is arranged on the body on a side of the dust suction port (Zhu fig. 13), the driving member is arranged in the cleaning accessory (361 is in 3, see Zhu fig. 9), the cleaning accessory is connected to the dust suction port and brings the driving member into contact with the trigger (via post 124, see Zhu fig. 12 and [0041]), and the trigger performs a pressing operation, and drives the driving member to perform hair removal on the cleaning accessory (Zhu fig. 12 and [0041]).
Although Zhu teaches that the cleaning accessory (3) is attached to the suction port (127, Zhu figs. 2 and 13), it does not teach that the cleaning accessory is removably inserted into the dust suction port.
However, Xie teaches a cleaning collector accessory (3) configured to be removably inserted into a suction port (2), thereby connecting a driving member (32) to an actuator (6-61) capable of driving a part of the accessory to perform hair removal (see Xie figs. 1-9).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the cleaner of Zhu to use the attachment mechanism taught by Xie such that the cleaning accessory was removably inserted into the dust suction port, as doing so represents the simple substitution of one sort of accessory connection mechanism for another, the results of such a substitution being predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
6. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 1, wherein the trigger is arranged on a front side of a top of the handle, and is located below the dust suction port (trigger 116 is on an upper front side of handle 11 and is located below dust suction port 127, see Zhu figs. 3 and 13).
7. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 1, wherein a battery (power supply 14 is associated with a charging interface 18 and configured to operate with no external wiring, which one of ordinary skill would understand to mean that power supply 14 is a battery, see Zhu [0034]) is arranged in the handle (power supply 14 is in handle 11, Zhu fig. 8 and [0039]). Zhu teaches the presence of a charging interface (18), but does not teach that the handle is insertable into a charging base. However, because the handle of Zhu as modified would inherently be capable of being inserted into a base with associated charging infrastructure, it teaches the claimed invention.
9. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 7, wherein the charging base has a flat bottom surface, an arc-shaped top surface, and two semicircular side surfaces (as noted above, the charging base is not affirmatively claimed and the cleaner of Zhu as modified would be usable with a charging base having a flat bottom surface, an arc-shaped top surface, and two semicircular side surfaces).
Furthermore, even if the charging base were affirmatively claimed, However, it has been held that matters relating to ornamentation that have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947). It has similarly been held that a particular shape or configuration for an invention is an obvious matter of design choice unless there is persuasive evidence that a particular configuration is significant. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Applicant offers no evidence of any mechanical function provided by the claimed shapes for the top surface and side surfaces, or any indication that the particular configuration has any significance beyond that of ornamentation. The disclosure simply recites the particular shapes. Further, although one of ordinary skill would understand that a flat bottom surface plays a mechanical role in ensuring that the charging base sits on a floor (or other flat surface), they would not expect the particular shape of an upper surface to provide any functionality.
10. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 9, wherein the cleaner is capable of use with a charging base having a handle socket and a plurality of accessory sockets arranged on the top surface of the charging base, the handle is inserted into the handle socket and charges the battery, and the cleaning accessory is inserted into each of the accessory sockets (as noted above, the charging base is not affirmatively claimed and the cleaner of Zhu as modified would be usable with a charging base including the claimed features, as Zhu includes accessories 2 and 3 which would be capable of being stored separately, see Zhu figs. 1-2).
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Xie as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ren et al. (CN 210354537, "Ren").
2. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 1, wherein the body is composed of a head (upper portion of housing distant from handle 11, see Zhu fig. 3), a dust suction chamber (combination of air guiding openings 127, 121, 119, and 1181, see Zhu figs. 3, 5, and 13), and a handle at a bottom of the dust suction chamber (handle 11 extends downward from portion with air guiding openings, see Zhu fig. 3).
Zhu does not teach that the dust suction chamber is at a bottom of the head, the vacuum motor is arranged in the head, the dust canister is removably mounted to a rear part of the head, the dust suction port is externally provided on a front part of the dust suction chamber, or that the dust suction chamber is brought into communication with the dust canister through an outlet of the rear part.
However, Ren teaches a configuration for a handheld vacuum cleaner (Ren figs. 1-3) comprising a body (housing, see Ren fig. 3), wherein the body includes a head (40), a dust suction chamber (21) at a bottom of the head (Ren fig. 3), a vacuum motor (41) arranged in the head (41 is inside 40, see Ren figs. 2-4), a dust canister (30) removably mounted to a rear part of the head (see Ren figs. 3-6), the dust suction port is externally provided on a front part of the dust suction chamber (21 is on a lower outside front portion of 30, see Ren figs. 1-3), and the dust suction chamber (21) is brought into communication with the dust canister (30) through an outlet (22) of the rear part ( 22 interacts with hole 31 in dust canister 30, see Ren figs. 3-6).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the cleaner of Zhu as modified according to the teachings of Ren regarding a configuration for functional elements of a cleaner such that the dust suction chamber was at a bottom of the head, the vacuum motor is arranged in the head, the dust canister was removably mounted to a rear part of the head, the dust suction port was externally provided on a front part of the dust suction chamber, and the dust suction chamber was brought into communication with the dust canister through an outlet of the rear part, as doing so would improve a user experience by ensuring that air was exhausted in a direction facing away from the user (see Ren Translation, Abstract).
3. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 2, wherein a side hole (31, see Ren fig. 6) is provided on a bottom of the dust canister (31 is on a lower side of canister 30 to interface with hole 22, see Ren figs. 5-6), and the dust canister (30) is mounted to the rear part of the head (30 is on a rear end, see Ren fig. 3), and brings the side hole into hermetic communication with the outlet of a rear part of the dust suction chamber (31 and 22 are connected to ensure proper airflow between points, see Ren fig. 3 and the rejection of claim 2 under 35 U.S.C. 103 above).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Xie and Ren as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Dai (CN 114305205).
5. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 2, wherein an accessory release button (Xie teaches accessory release buttons 51 located on either side of an airflow pathway, see Xie figs. 2, 6, and 7) is arranged on each of two side surfaces of the front part of the dust suction chamber (the modification of the accessory connection structure of Zhu to integrate the teachings of Xie as described in the rejection of claim 1 would include provision of such buttons). Zhu further teaches that the dust canister is detachable (Zhu [0041]) but does not teach a mechanism for detaching. Consequently, Zhu as modified does not teach that a dust canister release button is arranged on a side surface of the rear part of the dust suction chamber.
However, Dai teaches a mechanism for securing a dust canister (01) to a cleaner (Dai fig. 1) comprising a dust canister release button (019) arranged on a side surface of a dust suction chamber (see Dai figs. 1-7).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the cleaner of Zhu as modified according to the teachings of Dai regarding a dust canister securement mechanism such that it included a dust canister release button is arranged on a side surface of the rear part of the dust suction chamber, as doing so represents the use of a known technique (specifically a mechanism for releasably attaching a dust canister) to improve a similar device (specifically handheld vacuum cleaners) in the same way (both cleaners include detachable dust canisters, and the specific mechanism taught by Dai represents an improvement over the undisclosed technique of Zhu), the results of such an improvement being predictable to one of ordinary skill.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Xie as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Conrad (US 9591952, "Conrad '952 ").
4. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 1, wherein a canister opening and a detachable canister lid hermetically covering the canister opening are provided on a rear part of the dust canister (canister 118 includes an opening covered by lid 1182 extending across an entire bottom of the canister, including a rear part, which may be opened to empty hair, see Zhu fig. 5 and [0041]). However, because the canister lid of Zhu allows airflow through an embedded filter cartridge (1183, see Zhu fig. 13 and [0041]), it does not teach that the detachable canister lid hermetically covers the canister opening.
However, Conrad '952 teaches a handheld vacuum cleaner (100, Conrad '952 fig. 1), comprising a dirt collection chamber (124) including a canister opening and a detachable canister lid (158) hermetically covering the canister opening (see Conrad '952 figs. 4 and 5 and 8:56-9:23).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the cleaner of Zhu according to the teachings of a configuration for a dust canister from Conrad '952 such that it included a detachable canister lid hermetically covering the canister opening, as doing so would allow for the canister to be emptied without removing the canister from the vacuum cleaner (Conrad '952 8:56-9:23).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Xie as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Conrad (US 12678001, "Conrad '001").
8. Zhu as modified teaches the handheld vacuum cleaner for pets according to claim 7, but does not teach the presence of a charging indicator light and a switch speed regulation toggle are arranged on an outer surface of the handle.
However, Conrad '001 teaches a surface vacuum cleaning apparatus (100, see, e.g. Conrad '001 fig. 4) including lights to indicate a variety of information to a user including battery charge level or status (Conrad '001 25:30-61) and a switch capable of controlling a suction power level (see Conrad '001 25:62-26:55; suction power level is correlated with fan speed, as the suction is created by a fan and a higher or lower suction power would correlate with higher and lower fan speeds, see Conrad '001 21:1-7).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the cleaner of Zhu according to the teachings of from Conrad '001 regarding user interfaces such that it included a charging indicator light and a switch speed regulation toggle arranged on an outer surface of the handle, as doing so represents the combination of known prior art elements according to known methods, the results of such a combination being predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN R ZAWORSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-7804. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00-5:00, Fridays 9:00-1:00.
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.
/JONATHAN R ZAWORSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights