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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/17/2024 is acknowledged. The submission is in compliance with the provision of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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: “a rotating mechanism” in claim 5.
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.
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.
Claim 1 recites “a blower dryer casing detachably attached to a rim surrounding the bottom surface of the detachable handle unit” in lines 10-11. It is unclear if a blower dryer casing detachably attached to the rim of the detachable handle unit when an ultrasonic stain removing head/a fabric shaving head is attached to the bottom surface of the detachable handle unit or not. It is suggested that the limitation should be changed to “a blower dryer casing is configured to be detachably attached to a rim surrounding the bottom surface of the detachable handle unit”.
Claim 1 recites “the detachable pair of hanger attachments gets connected to the pair of attachment holders of the blower dryer casing” in lines 17-18. It is unclear the detachable pair of hanger attachments gets connected to the pair of the attachment holders of the blower dryer casing in all situations or not. It is suggested that the limitation should be changed to “the detachable pair of hanger attachments is configured to get connected to the pair of attachment holders of the blower dryer casing”.
Claim 1 recites “an ultrasonic stain removing head located on the bottom surface on one side of the detachable handle unit, wherein the ultrasonic stain removing head is positioned within a hollow section on the bottom surface of the detachable handle unit” in lines 19-21. It is unclear an ultrasonic stain removing head is located on the bottom surface even when the blower drying casing is used or not. It is suggested that the limitation should be changed to “an ultrasonic stain removing head configured to be located on the bottom surface on one side of the detachable handle unit, wherein the ultrasonic stain removing head is configured to be positioned within a hollow section on the bottom surface of the detachable handle unit”.
Claim 1 recites “the fabric shaving head is located opposite to the ultrasonic stain removing head on the bottom surface on another side of the detachable handle unit” in lines 24-26. It is unclear the fabric shaving head is attached to the detachable handle unit in all situations or not. It is suggested that the limitation should be changed to “the fabric shaving head is configured to be located opposite to the ultrasonic stain removing head on the bottom surface on another side of the detachable handle unit”.
Claim 2 recites “the detachable handle unit draws out from the cavity of the main unit…”. It is unclear how the detachable handle unit “draws out from the cavity of the main unit”. It is suggested that the limitation should be changed to “the detachable handle unit is configured to be drawn out from the cavity of the main unit…”.
Any remaining claims are rejected as depending from a rejected base claim.
Claim limitation “ a rotating mechanism” in claim 5 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure for “a rotating mechanism” that performs the function in the claim. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
None of the cited prior art of record, alone or in combination, and in conjunction with other cited limitations, discloses a multipurpose garment cared device comprising a main unit, a detachable handle unit, a blower dryer casing, a detachable pair of hanger attachments, an ultrasonic stain removing head, a fabric shaving head and a collector compartment affixed to the fabric shaving head; wherein the main unit comprises a steam iron comprising a sole plate, a water compartment, and a set of buttons for operating the steam iron; wherein the detachable handle unit comprises a first set of blower vents located on a bottom surface and a second set of blower vents located on opposite sides of the detachable handle unit; wherein the blower dryer casing is configured to be detachably attached to a rim surrounding the bottom surface of the detachable handle unit, wherein the blower dryer casing comprises a third set of blower vents and a pair of attachment holders, and wherein the first set of blower vents gets aligned with the third set of blower vents to create an air column, upon attaching the blower dryer casing with the rim; wherein the detachable pair of hanger attachments comprise a fourth set of blower vents, the detachable pair of hanger attachments is configured to be connected to the pair of attachment holders of the blower dryer casing; wherein the ultrasonic stain removing head located on the bottom surface on one side of the detachable handle unit, wherein the ultrasonic stain removing head is positioned within a hollower section on the bottom surface of the detachable handle unit; and wherein the fabric shaving head is located opposite to the ultrasonic stain removing head on the bottoms surface on another side of the detachable handle unit.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tobias (US 2005/0028408) teaches a hand-held convertible pressing iron/steamer device includes a steaming module including a compartment for holding water, and a heater for producing steam from the water. The device further includes an ironing module including a heatable flat pressing bottom surface, the ironing module being selectively attachable to the steaming module so as to direct steam through the flat pressing bottom surface. There is also a handle attachable to the steaming module and the ironing module. Tobias does not teach a blower dryer casing, a detachable pair of hanger attachments, an ultrasonic stain removing head, a fabric shaving head and a collector compartment as in the claim.
Zai (US 4583260) teaches a combined vacuum cleaner and steam iron comprising a housing having a substantially flat bottom. The housing is further provided on the bottom with a recess which can receive a brush for cleaning clothes during ironing. Zai does not teach a blower dryer casing, a detachable pair of hanger attachments, an ultrasonic stain removing head, a fabric shaving head and a collector compartment as in the claim.
Li (US 2020/0266646) teaches a handheld device comprises a device structure and a handle, wherein the device structure is detachably connected to the handle; the device structure is an electric iron, a lint ball trimmer or a hairbrush which is connected or detached from the handle by a quick rotation, insertion or disconnection for switching functions. Li does not teach a blower dryer casing, a detachable pair of hanger attachments, an ultrasonic stain removing head as in the claim.
Chang (US 2020/0141047) teaches a portable blowing device includes at least one support rod and a plurality of blades. Chang does not teach a steam iron, an ultrasonic stain removing head, a fabric shaving head and a collector compartment as in the claim.
Otsuka (US 2012/0211383) teaches an iron case which includes a table where an iron is placed; a receiving case that surrounds the iron and has a lower opening that is closed by the table; and a locking mechanism that detachably combines the table with the receiving case.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UYEN THI THAO NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 AM-4:30 PM 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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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.
/UYEN T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3732