DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is in response to the claims filed 11/20/2025.
Claims 21-35 are presented for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/14/2024, 5/15/2025, 4/20/2026, 5/11/2026, and 6/24/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 21, 24-26, and 30-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. in CN216628452 (hereinafter “Li”; a machine translation of this document has been attached to this action which will be referenced by the examiner).
Regarding claim 21, Li discloses a robot cleaner (paragraph [0001]) comprising: a motor 21 (Fig. 2); a shaft 12 coupled to the motor (Fig. 2); a first member 13 having the shaft 12 (Fig. 2; paragraph [0047]) and movable between a first position and a second position lower than the first position (paragraph [0057]); a second member (sleeve 3) threadedly coupled to the first member (paragraph [0049]); and a cleaning cloth module (“mopping brush” 11) coupled to the first member and rotating at a same speed as the first member, wherein when the first member rotates in a first direction to move from the first position to the second position, the second member rotates slower than the first member such that the first member moves downward relative to the second member (paragraph [0057]), and when the first member rotates in the first direction at the second position, the second member is rotatable at the same speed together with the first member (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 24, Li discloses the robot cleaner of claim 21, wherein the shaft 12 is configured to move together with the first member 13 when the first member moves between the first position and the second position lower than the first position (paragraph [0064]).
Regarding claim 25, Li discloses the robot cleaner of claim 21, further comprising: a gear assembly (drive assembly and housing 5; Fig. 2) configured to transmit power from the motor 21 to the shaft 12, wherein the gear assembly includes a shaft coupling opening 251 formed to penetrate in an axial direction at a center portion and configured to allow the shaft 12 to be coupled thereto (Fig. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 26, Li discloses the robot cleaner of claim 21, further comprising: a pressing device 4 configured to press the second member 3.
Regarding claim 30, Li discloses the robot cleaner of claim 21, wherein the first member 13 includes at least one guide protrusion protruding outward, and the second member 3 includes at least one guide groove recessed inward to slidably accommodate the at least one guide protrusion (they’re threaded together).
Regarding claim 31, Li discloses the robot cleaner of claim 30, wherein the second member 3 includes a stopper disposed at an end of the at least one guide groove to contact the at least one guide protrusion (the end of the threading inside element 3 may be called “a stopper”), and when the first member 13 rotates in the first direction at the second position, the at least one guide protrusion contacts the stopper and the first member is fixed in a vertical direction relative to the second member (simply, the two are fully threaded together).
Regarding claim 32, Li discloses the robot cleaner of claim 31, wherein the second member rotates together with the first member in a state where the at least one guide protrusion contacts the stopper (when the two bodies are fully threaded together).
Regarding claim 33, Li discloses the robot cleaner of claim 30, wherein the at least one guide protrusion is disposed on an upper outer side of the first member 13 (see the threading on 13 in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 34, Li discloses the robot cleaner of claim 30, wherein the at least one guide groove is formed to extend along a circumferential direction of the second member with an inclined surface having a predetermined angle (the threads inside element 3 that mate with the exterior threading on element 13; Fig. 2 and 4).
Claim(s) 21, 27, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. in WO2023197854 (hereinafter “Wang”; a machine translation of this document has been attached to this action which will be referenced by the examiner).
Regarding claim 21, Wang discloses a robot cleaner comprising: a motor 20 (Fig. 1); a shaft coupled to the motor (Fig. 1); a first member 5 having the shaft and movable between a first position and a second position lower than the first position (mop head engaged or disengaged); a second member threadedly coupled to the first member (see the threads at detail “M” in Fig. 2 and 3); and a cleaning cloth module 4 (Fig. 11-13; or mop head 102 in Fig. 2 and 3) coupled to the first member and rotating at a same speed as the first member (when the mop is driven; paragraph [0083]), wherein when the first member 5 rotates in a first direction to move from the first position to the second position (the threaded relationship produces translational movement), the second member rotates slower than the first member such that the first member moves downward relative to the second member, and when the first member rotates in the first direction at the second position, the second member is rotatable at the same speed together with the first member (as they are threadedly engaged).
Regarding claim 27, Wang discloses the robot cleaner of claim 21, wherein the cleaning cloth module 4/102 is partially inserted into a lower opening of the first member to be coupled with the first member (see the mop head 102 in a recess in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 28, Wang discloses the robot cleaner of claim 21, wherein the cleaning cloth module comprises: a magnetic body 81 (Fig. 11) for magnetic coupling with the first member, and a shielding member 4 disposed below the magnetic body and configured to shield downward magnetic force by the magnetic body (structure 4 creates distance between the magnetic coupling and “shields downward magnetic force”).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li alone.
Regarding claim 22, Li does not explicitly disclose the robot cleaner of claim 21, wherein the first member is integrally formed with the shaft and rotates together with the shaft. However, the Court has held that “"that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.” See MPEP 2144.04. Here, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Li by forming the shaft 12 and first member 13 as a single, integral or unitary piece as an obvious matter of engineering choice, and the result would have been predictable (simply – a one piece component instead of two piece).
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang alone.
Regarding claim 29, Wang does not explicitly disclose the robot cleaner of claim 28, wherein the shaft is partially composed of a magnetic material for magnetic coupling with the magnetic body of the cleaning cloth module. However, the Court has held that “"that the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice.” See MPEP 2144.04. Here, making the second magnet of the magnetic coupling integral to the shaft of Wang would have been an obvious matter of engineering choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and the result would have been predictable. Further, the Court has held that “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination”. Instantly, simple selection of a common shaft material such as carbon steel for the shaft of Wang would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and the resulting structure would have all of the limitations of claim 29.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23 and 35 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 23, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, is silent to the robot cleaner of claim 21, wherein the second member is configured to rotate slower than the first member by frictional force. Li and Wang, applied above and considered the closest art of record, are silent to any equivalent frictional interface yielding differing rotational speeds.
Regarding claim 35, the prior art of record, either alone or in combination, is silent to the robot cleaner of claim 21, wherein the second member includes a threshold extending inward and configured to partially support the first member. Li and Wang, applied above and considered the closest art of record, are silent to any equivalent thresholds on analogous inwardly extending thresholds on second members that support the equivalent first members.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELDON T BROCKMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3263. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-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, Court Heinle can be reached at (571) 270-3508. 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.
/ELDON T BROCKMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights