DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the communication filed 11/12/2024.
Claims 1-15 are pending and have been examined.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 11-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bethlehem et al. (EP 2487289 A1) (machine translation attached).
Re claim 1, Bethlehem discloses a filter module (ref. 14, see fig. 3) comprising:
a filter case (housing of ref. 14) having a case opening (see fig. 3) and an inlet (ref. 9a) to allow water to enter the filter case;
a filter (ref. 16) mountable in the filter case through the case opening; and
a sealing member (ref. 20) that is deformable and is configured so that, with the filter mounted in the filter case, at least a portion of the sealing member is outside a perimeter of the case opening (see fig. 6 ref. 20b is outside the perimeter region of ref. 22 of the housing ref. 14), and with the filter mounted in the filter case and the water entering the filter case through the inlet and thereby causing a hydraulic pressure in the filter case, the sealing member is deformed by the hydraulic pressure so as to seal a gap formed between the filter case and the filter (RE “deformed by the hydraulic pressure”, here, as seen in fig. 6 ref. 20b is exposed to receiving space 15 and thus any hydraulic pressure therein and is expected to deform leftward and radially outward if receiving pressure in the leftward/compressive direction by nature of the flange-style seal; see also claim 1 “designed to provide a radial force against wall section 15a”).
Re claim 2, wherein, with the sealing member deformed by the hydraulic pressure, at least a portion of the sealing member is in close contact with the filter case (claim 1 “radial force against wall section 15a”).
Re claim 3, wherein the filter includes a filter cover (ref. 19) configured to cover the case opening when the filter is mounted in the filter case, and the sealing member is mounted on the filter cover (see figs. 3 and 6).
Re claim 4, further comprising a handle (see fig. 2 unlabeled handle on front side of filter cover 19) on a side of the filter cover that is opposite to a side of the filter cover that faces the filter.
Re claims 11-12, Independent claim 11 defines over claim 1 only the recitation of a filter apparatus including a housing inlet and a housing outlet. Bethlehem further discloses a filter apparatus including a housing inlet and a housing outlet (see fig. 3, abstract, inlet 9a and outlet 10a). Re claim 12, claim 12 recites limitation rejected above.
Re claim 15, Independent claim 15 defines over claims 1 and 11 only in the recitation of a clothes treating apparatus comprising a housing, a tub, and a drainage device. Bethlehem further discloses a clothes treating apparatus (abstract, washing machine ref. 1) comprising a housing (ref. 2), a tub and a drainage device (ref. 9, 14, 10).
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 5-10 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bethlehem, as applied above, in view of Liu (CN-107237090-A) (machine translation attached).
Re claims 5 and 13, Bethlehem discloses as shown above including the sealing member includes: a sealing body (see fig. 6 lower portion of ref. 20) along a perimeter of the filter cover and an extension portion (ref. 20a) extending from the sealing body in an outward direction of the filter cover. Bethlehem does not explicitly disclose a sealing rib extending from the extension portion in a direction that is different from the outward direction of the filter cover. However, Liu teaches it is known in the washing machine filter art (abstract) to provide a sealing body (see fig. 9 ref. 3 inner perimeter) with an extension portion (see figs. 9-10 vertical portion) extending from the sealing body in an outward direction, and a sealing rib (ref. 32 ring of protruding structures) extending from the extension portion in a direction that is different from the outward direction.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the seal of Bethlehem to further include a sealing rib, as suggested by Liu, in order to provide an extension for deformation to provide greater surface contact with the surface to be sealed.
Re claim 6, Liu further discloses wherein, with the filter mounted in the filter case, the sealing rib is outside the perimeter of the case opening (see figs. 6-7 ref. 32 includes portion outside perimeter of ref. 1, 21).
Re claims 7 and 14, Regarding “wherein, with the sealing member deformed by the hydraulic pressure, the sealing rib is in close contact with the filter case”, as discussed above, it is expected as a function of a deformable sealing member that any leftward-compressive force will yield a radial deformation/sealing.
Re claim 8, Regarding “wherein the sealing body, the extension portion, and the sealing rib are configured to form a sealing groove, and with the filter mounted in the filter case and the water entering the filter case through the inlet, the sealing groove is pressed by the water”, the combination of Bethlehem and Liu forms a sealing groove, i.e. a right protrusion (Bethlehem) and a left protrusion (Liu), and would be expected to be pressed/deformed by the water.
Re claim 9, Liu further discloses wherein the sealing member further includes a sealing protrusion (ref. 33) protruding from the sealing rib.
Re claim 10, Bethlehem further discloses wherein the sealing body includes a deformation groove (see fig. 6, groove between ref. 20b and 20a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20240356049A1 note groove-type seal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7299. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am to 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 on 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.
KEVIN G. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/KEVIN G LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights