DETAILED ACTION
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 1-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xia et al. (10,092,155) in view of Salem et al. (2002/0042965) and Nakanishi et al. (5,959,423).
Regarding claim 1, Xia discloses a surface cleaning device, comprising: a base (500) adapted for contacting a surface of a surrounding environment to be cleaned; a suction source (205); a suction nozzle assembly (580) provided on the base and defining a suction nozzle in fluid communication with the suction source; a fluid supply tank (300) adapted to hold a supply of fluid; a fluid dispenser (554) in fluid communication with the fluid supply tank; a recovery container (400) in fluid communication with the suction nozzle assembly; a frame (200) including a main support section supporting at least the recovery container, the frame pivotally mounted to the base (via joint assembly 570) for movement about at least one axis. However, Xia fails to disclose a fluid level sensing assembly. Salem discloses a similar cleaning device, also having a recovery container (26) and teaching a fluid level sensing assembly comprising a first sensor and a second sensor located at the recovery container; a controller (microprocessor 162 and circuit board 386) communicatively coupled to the first sensor and second sensor and configured to detect a level of fluid in the recovery container; and a first electrical connector (382) and a second electrical connector (383), wherein the first and second electrical connectors are operably coupled to the controller; wherein the first sensor comprises a terminal end (376) configured to be received in the first electrical connector and the second sensor comprises a terminal end (377) configured to be received in the second electrical connector; and wherein the recovery container is removably mounted on the main support section and the main support section comprises the first electrical connector and the second electrical connector (as shown in Fig. 9) to provide an alert (red LED 388) to the user when the recovery tank is nearing full, so that a user can empty before overflowing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the fluid level sensing assembly of Salem to the cleaner of Xia to detect the fill level of the recovery tank and prevent overflow. Further, although Salem discloses that the first and second sensors are connected to a bottom of the tank, Salem also discloses an alternative location for the sensors within a supply tank that positions the sensor at the exterior sidewalls of the container, to detect liquid levels therein. Additionally, Nakanishi discloses a similar liquid level sensing system, also having first and second sensors located on a liquid holding tank, and teaching that the sensors are positioned within the exterior sidewall of the tank, which will be understood to anyone of ordinary skill in the art to prevent contact of the sensors with the fluid (particularly advantageous for dirty liquid of a recovery tank). Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made that the location taught for sensors in the recovery tank of Salem may alternatively be provided at the exterior sidewalls, as taught by Salem as an alternative tank location, and taught by Nakanishi as being a known alternative in the art, that will prevent contact of the sensors with the dirty liquid in the recovery tank of Xia.
Regarding claim 2, Nakanishi further discloses another alternative tank level sensor system (Figs. 10A-C), having the sensors on opposite sides of the tank, which will also allow the sensors to detect levels of dry debris within the tank. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to optionally or additionally provide first and second sensors on opposite sidewalls of the collection tank of Xia, as taught by Nakanishi, to enable the sensors to detect dry debris levels in addition to the liquid levels within the tank of Xia.
Regarding claim 3, as discussed supra, Nakanishi discloses that the sensors may be positioned within the sidewall of the tank, which will prevent the sensors from contacting the liquid, such that it would have been obvious to provide similar location for the sensors in the tank of Xia, wherein the sidewalls must include some form of recess to enable the sensors to be positioned therein.
Regarding claim 4, Salem further discloses that the first sensor and the second sensor include a set of pins (portion of connectors 378/379 that pass through the wall of the tank to contacts 376/377 may be considered to be equivalent to “pins” as claimed, forming metallic linear electrical contacts and/or the contacts 376/377 themselves may read on “pins” as extending from the bottom of the tank in a similar manner to the applicant’s disclosed pins) having the terminal end thereof at a bottom wall of the recovery container. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide similar pins to the tank of Xia, to pass through the wall and provide the contacts for connection to the controller. When the sensors are provided on/in the sidewalls, as discussed supra, the leads may still extend to the bottom of the tank for connection to the first and second electrical connectors having a similar location as taught by Salem in Figs. 9-10.
Regarding claim 5, while Salem fails to disclose how the pins are formed or joined to the tank, the term “insert-molded” is considered to be a product-by-process limitation, wherein the structure of the “pins” taught by Salem, forming a conductive pad (376/377) is considered to define equivalent structure to the claimed pins and conductive pad, regardless of the manner in which it is manufactured.
Regarding claim 6, Salem further discloses that the sets of pins are in a vertical configuration when the terminal ends are received in the corresponding first and second electrical connectors.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, when the fluid level sensing assembly is provided to the tank of Xia, and optionally provided with the sensors on opposite external walls, as discussed supra, it further would have been obvious for the first and second electrical connectors to be spaced about the conduit (422) located in the base of Xia, due to the location on opposite sides of the tank, which will be positioned on opposite sides of the conduit due to the central location of the conduit in Xia.
Regarding claim 9, both Salem and Nakanishi disclose that the first and second sensors may be light emitting and light receiving sensors (respectively), such that the first (light emitting) sensor will be considered to emit a liquid sensing signal at a first frequency (any form of light will inherently be emitted at some frequency) and the second (light receiving) sensor is configured to detect a liquid response signal.
Regarding claim 10, when provided as light, the liquid sensing signal will be a sine wave due to the general definition of light waves being known as sinusoidal (sine) waves.
Regarding claims 11 and 17, as discussed supra, Salem discloses that the controller will activate a red LED when the liquid level reaches a preset threshold, indicating full condition (paragraph 85), which is a visual status indication via a user interface based on the liquid response signal.
Regarding claim 12, as discussed supra, Salem discloses that when the liquid level sensor indicates to the controller that the level is nearing full, the controller will activate an alert (red LED) to indicate to a user that the tank needs to be emptied, which is equivalent to the controller being configured to determine an operational status (full vs. not full) of the surface cleaning device based on the detected level of fluid.
Regarding claim 13, Xia further discloses that the surface cleaning device is an upright cleaner which may be considered either of an upright multi-surface floor cleaner (inherently capable of cleaning multiple surfaces) and upright deep cleaner (deep cleaning dependent on how long the cleaner is applied to the floor surface).
Regarding claim 14, as discussed supra for claim 11, the controller is operationally connected to a user interface (LED lights to indicate status).
Regarding claim 15, as previously discussed for claim 9, both Salem and Nakanishi disclose that the first and second sensors may be light emitting and light receiving sensors (respectively), such that the first (light emitting) sensor will be considered to emit a liquid sensing signal at a first frequency (any form of light will inherently be emitted at some frequency) and the second (light receiving) sensor is configured to detect a liquid response signal.
Claims 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xia et al. (10,092,155) in view of Salem et al. (2002/0042965) and Nakanishi et al. (5,959,423) as applied to claims 1 and 13, and further in view of Orubor (8,925,142).
Regarding claims 16 and 19, the previous combination fails to disclose that the controller is further configured to deenergize the at least one of the suction source, the pump, the agitator, or the user interface based on the liquid response signal detected at the second sensor. Orubor discloses another cleaning device, also having a recovery container (vacuum receptacle 20) with a liquid level sensor, and teaches that the controller is configured to automatically shut down the operation of the apparatus when the fluid within the recovery container reaches a predetermined level (Col. 6, lines 12-15), which will be understood to anyone of ordinary skill in the art to prevent overflow of the recovery container that could enter the suction motor and/or spill from the cleaner. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to configure the controller of Xia to similarly shut down operation, including the suction source, pump, agitator and/or user interface, upon detection of a full recovery tank, as taught by Orubor, to prevent damage to the motor or spilling of the collected fluid.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xia et al. (10,092,155) in view of Salem et al. (2002/0042965), Nakanishi et al. (5,959,423) as applied to claim 17, and further in view of Krebs et al. (2018/0344112).
The previous combination of references fails to disclose that the controller is further configured to detect a presence of the recovery container on the main support section or an absence of the recovery container on the main support section via input from at least one portion of the fluid level sensing assembly. Krebs discloses another cleaning device, also having a recovery container (34) and teaches that sensors are provided to detect the presence of the container and the controller may prevent operation of the device until the containers are properly installed (paragraph 91), which will be understood to anyone of ordinary skill in the art to prevent improper operations, such as suction of liquid or debris without the container to receive it. Therefore, it further would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to configure the controller of Xia to similarly detect a presence or absence of the recovery container, for instance via connection or lack of connection of the sensors to the electrical connectors, and to prevent operation of the cleaner unless the container is properly positioned, as taught by Krebs.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Each of Zhou et al. (2022/0338695), Li (2019/0246860) and Smith et al. (2017/0224185) disclose devices having similar structure and/or function as the applicant’s claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN R MULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4489. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Brian Keller can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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.
/BRYAN R MULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 24 September 2026
