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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “spring-type vibration sensor" (see Claim 3), the “multiple vibration sensors” (see Claim 4), and the “second sensor” (see Claim 6), must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, and 8-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites, between the preamble and the body of the claim, “a vacuum cleaner that works by triggering a vibration sensor, comprising a housing, the housing is provided with…”. Specifically, the grammatical clarity of this sentence can be improved for a more direct interpretation of the claims, where the Examiner suggests this be edited to instead disclose, “a vacuum cleaner that works by triggering a vibration sensor, the vacuum cleaner comprising: a housing, the housing is provided with…”. This edit helps to differentiate between the preamble and body of the claim with greater clarity, and also to ensure that the claim does not inadvertently describe a housing of the vibration sensor instead of a housing of the vacuum cleaner. However, please amend the claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention.
Claim 1 recites a vacuum cleaner that works by triggering a vibration sensor in the preamble, but later recites the first sensor is a vibration sensor. This is likely a typographical error, as “a vibration sensor” has already been introduced appropriately in the preamble. The Examiner suggests, as an edit, that the latter recitation of “a vibration sensor” is modified to instead disclose “…the vibration sensor is a first sensor, the first sensor is provided with the housing…”. However, please amend the Claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention.
Claim 3 recites “the direction of the spring's expansion and contraction for detecting sensitivity”, and “the movement direction of the cleaning tool”. This is likely a typographical error, as “the direction” and “the movement direction” have not been appropriately introduced. The Examiner suggests this instead be edited as “a direction…”and “a movement direction”.
Claim 3 recites the spring's expansion and contraction. The Examiner advises the Applicant remain consistent with claim language, and that this be edited to instead describe “of the spring-type vibration sensor’s expansion and contraction”, or instead, introduce the spring as a new element. However, please amend the claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention.
Claim 8 recites the control system twice without antecedent basis, and is likely a typographical error for both instances. Claim 8, which depends upon Claim 6, does not appropriately introduce “a control system”. However, Claim 7 does appropriately introduce “a control system”, but is not depended upon by Claim 8. The Examiner suggests the first iteration of “the control system” be edited to “a control system”, which would fix the antecedent basis issues with the recitation of “the control system” disclosed later in the Claim. Please amend the claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention. Additionally, Claim 9 is objected to for the same antecedent basis typographical errors disclosed for Claim 8 pertaining to the recitation of “the control system”, but would be rectified if Claim 8, of which Claim 9 depends upon, is appropriately edited to address the typographical errors.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2-5, and 8, 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.
The term “near” in claims 2 and 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “near” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding Claim 2, it is indefinite how “near” to the inlet the first sensor must be when arranged on the housing. For the purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting “near” to refer to anywhere on the bottom of the housing. The Examiner suggests, as an example of an edit, that this instead disclose “the first sensor is arranged on the bottom of the housing”. However, please amend the claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention.
Regarding Claim 5, it is indefinite as to which end of the hose is “near” the inlet, as any reference as to how “near” the inlet the end of the hose must be is not given. For the purposes of examination, the Examiner is interpreting “near” to refer to “contacting”. However, please amend the claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention.
The term “spring-type” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “spring-type” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the inclusion of "type" renders the claim indefinite, see MPEP 2173.05(b)-III-E. For the purposes of examination, the term “spring-type” will refer to any vibration sensor having a spring, and can also be edited such that the claim instead discloses, per the Examiner’s suggestion, “…wherein the vibration sensor comprises a spring; the direction of the spring’s expansion…”. However, please amend the Claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention.
Regarding Claim 4, the recitation of “multiple vibration sensors are connected in parallel” is unclear. Specifically, this can be interpreted as “horizontally parallel with each other in their arrangement on the housing”, but also can be interpreted as “connected, electrically, in parallel” (i.e. connected in parallel). When seeking to ascertain the intended structure of the claimed invention, the Examiner reflected upon the intended claim scope in light of the Specification, but the Specification reiterated the description of Claim 4 with no greater clarity (see Specification, Page 2, lines 6-7, and Page 8, lines 2-3). Please amend the claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention. An example edit can include “multiple vibration sensors physically located on the housing in a linear arrangement parallel with a floor surface”. For the purposes of Examination, this is being interpreted to describe a physical arrangement of multiple vibration sensors in a parallel line on the housing. However, please amend the Claim to reflect the Applicant’s intentions.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the suction mode" in the body of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. When seeking to ascertain the intended structure of the claimed invention, the Examiner reflected upon the intended claim scope in light of the specification. The instant Specification, Page 3, recites, inter alia, “the suction mode is configured by the control system to the accessory mode”, and, “the suction mode is configured by the control system to the floor mode”. However, it is also recited from this same paragraph that, “vacuuming methods of the vacuum cleaner comprise a floor mode and an accessory mode”. Based on this description, and for the purposes of Examination, “vacuuming methods” is being interpreted as “a suction mode”. As an example edit, the Examiner suggests the claim disclosed read as “wherein a suction mode of the vacuum cleaner comprises a floor mode and an accessory mode”. However, please amend the claim to reflect the Applicant’s intention.
Any claim listed as rejected above but not specifically addressed above has inherited the rejection of a claim specifically addressed above due to dependency therefrom.
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.
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) 1-4, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US 20090183333 A1), herein after referred to as "Tsai", in view of Eda (JP H06169872 A), herein after referred to as "Eda".
Regarding Claim 1, Tsai discloses a vacuum cleaner that works by triggering a sensor (Tsai, Paragraph (Para.) [0025], vacuum dust collector (1) and sensor (132)), comprising a housing (Para. [0023], housing (11)), the housing is provided with an inlet and an outlet (Para. [0025], dust inlet (131), and Para. [0030], outlet port (1111)), the inlet is arranged at a bottom of the housing (Para. [0025] in view of FIG. 4, dust inlet (131) at bottom cover (13) at bottom of housing), a motor and a dust bin are arranged in the housing (Paras. [0024], motor (121), and [0026], dust container (14); see FIG. 2), the motor comprises a suction port and an exhaust port (Para. [0024], suction generator (12) comprises motor (121), wherein "a suction side and an exhausted side in the suction generator (12)" are disclosed), the inlet is connected to the dust bin (Para. [0030], air drawn into dust container (14) through dust inlet (131)), the dust bin is connected to the motor (Para. [0030], air in dust bin (14) is expelled by suction generator (12)), the exhaust port is connected to the outlet (Para. [0024], exhausted side of suction generator (12) “is connected to the outlet port 1111 of housing 11”); the housing is also provided with a first sensor (Para. [0025], housing (11) includes sensor (132)), and the sensor is configured to detect whether a broom or other cleaning tools have swept dust and debris proximal to the housing (Para. [0038], debris is swept to bottom of vacuum dust collector).
Tsai does not disclose a vibration sensor, the first sensor is a vibration sensor, and the vibration sensor is configured to detect when something has collided with the housing.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Eda discloses a vibration sensor (Eda, English Translation (Eng.), Page 1, line 7, vibration detecting means (13)), the first sensor is a vibration sensor (Eng., Page 1, line 7, vibration detecting means), and the vibration sensor is configured to detect when something has collided with the housing (Eng., Page 7, lines 22-27, and Page 8, lines 3-6, vibration detection means can detect “minute” changes caused by the collision between a vibration actuator (19) and a cleaning surface).
The apparatus disclosed by Tsai is analogous to the apparatus disclosed by Eda, wherein Tsai discloses a vacuum dust collector having at least one sensor, a dust container, and a suction generator (Tsai, Abstract). Similarly, Eda discloses a vacuum cleaner having a floor brush (7) “fitted with a vibration detecting means 13 to detect a vibration due to friction with the irregularities of the surface of a cleaning object or the surface of the body”, wherein the vibration detecting means consists of a piezoelectric element (18), a vibration actuator (19) and a vibration spring (20) facing towards the bottom surface (7a) of the floor intake port (7) (i.e. facing towards the source of vibration-inducing external anomalies such as impacts) (Eda, Eng., Page 1, lines 6-11, and Page 7, lines 22-27 in view of FIG. 5).
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 combined Tsai in view of Eda such that the sensor disclosed by Tsai is modified into a vibration detecting means, as taught by Eda. Sucha modification would allow the system to automatically turn on and off without the need of the user pressing a button (Eda Paragraph 12 discusses the motor control means).
Regarding Claim 2, Tsai in view of Eda discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Tsai further discloses the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of claim 1, wherein the first sensor is arranged on the housing near the inlet (Tsai, Para. [0125], sensor (132) near dust inlet (131)).
Regarding Claim 3, Tsai in view of Eda disclose the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Tsai further discloses the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of Claim 2, wherein the first sensor is a spring-type vibration sensor (Eda, Eng., Page 7, lines 22-27, vibration detection means); the direction of the spring’s expansion and contraction for detecting sensitivity is aligned with the movement direction of the cleaning tool (Eda, Eng., Page 7, lines 22-27 in view of FIG. 5, wherein the direction of the vibration spring’s (20) expansion and contraction is aligned with the bottom surface (7a) of the floor intake port (7) (i.e. aligned with the movement direction of the impact-delivering source, presented as unevenness on a cleaning surface)).
Regarding Claim 4, Tsai in view of Eda disclose the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Tsai further discloses the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of claim 2, wherein multiple vibration sensors are arranged at intervals on the housing, and the multiple vibration sensors are connected in parallel (Tsai, see FIG. 4, two sensors (132) are shown, and are arranged in parallel on the bottom cover 13).
Regarding Claim 7, Tsai in view of Eda disclose the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Tsai further discloses the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of claim 1, further comprising a control system (Tsai, Para. [0031], control knob (112)), the control system comprises a control module (Tsai, Para. [0031], “a three-stage control mechanism”), the control system is provided with a manual mode and an automatic mode (Tsai, Para. [0031], control knob 112 having a three-stage control mechanism of auto, manual, and off modes), both the manual mode and the automatic mode are connected to the motor through a motor control module on the control module (Tsai, Paras. [0023-0024], “The motor 121 and the fan are electrically connected to the control knob 112”, wherein the control knob (112) is used to “switch the operation mode of the vacuum dust collector 1”), and the automatic mode is also connected to the first sensor (Tsai, Para. [0032], “dust and debris is sensed by the sensor 132 and then automatically drawn into the dust container 14, when the control knob 112 is turned to the auto mode”).
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US 20090183333 A1), in view of Eda (JP H06169872 A), and in further view of Schwille and Herberger (US 20230040686 A1), herein after referred to as "Schwille".
Regarding Claim 5, Tsai in view of Eda disclose the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of claim 1, wherein the inlet is connected to the dust bin through a pipeline (Tsai, Para. [0025], inlet pipe 135).
Tsai in view of Eda does not disclose at least a portion of the pipeline is placed outside the housing, the portion of the pipeline outside the housing is at least partially a hose, a detachable structure is located at one end of the hose near the inlet, one end of the hose near the detachable structure is a hose suction nozzle.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Schwille discloses at least a portion of the pipeline is placed outside the housing (Schwille, Para. [0047], suction hose (36) outside of suction device housing (12)), the portion of the pipeline outside the housing is at least partially a hose (Schwille, Para. [0047], suction hose (36)), a detachable structure is located at one end of the hose near the inlet (Schwille, Paras. [0012], [0050], and [0052], suction hose (36) is connected to the suction device housing (12) at a mechanical interface (140) “in a detachable manner”, and the mechanical interface (140) is an inlet for picking up dirt particles for collection in a dust collection apparatus (14)), one end of the hose near the detachable structure is a hose suction nozzle (Schwille, Paras. [0012] and [0050], suction opening (35) of the suction hose (36)).
The apparatus disclosed by Schwille is analogous to the apparatus disclosed by Tsai and the apparatus disclosed by Eda, wherein Schwille discloses a suction device (10), having a suction device housing (12), a sensor module (70), a motor (80) for producing suction, and a dust collection apparatus (14) (Schwille, Paras. [0047-0048]). Of noteworthy mention, Schwille discloses the sensor module (70) is located at an end region (75) of the suction hose (36) to detect vibrations, wherein upon detection of vibration, an “autostart function” begins which sends a “start signal” to the electric motor (80) to begin suctioning (Schwille, Paras. [0007], [0050], [0053], and [0057]). Additionally, while the mechanical interface (140) is embodied as a detachable structure, it is recited by Schwille that “the suction hose has at least one suction opening and is preferably able to be attached to the suction device housing in a reversibly detachable manner”, and that “the suction hose is connectable, preferably connectable in a reversibly detachable manner, to a machine tool, in particular a handheld machine tool” (Schwille, Paras. [0012] and [0052]).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined Tsai in view of Eda, and in further view of Schwille, such that the vacuum dust collector, disclosed by Tsai, is modified to have a vibration detection means, disclosed by Eda, and wherein the inlet pipe disclosed by Tsai is modified as a suction hose that is reversibly detachable from the housing of the vacuum dust collector, and has a sensor affixed to the hose, for the purposes of detecting vibrations (i.e. connection or disconnection from the vacuum dust collector; see Schwille, Para. [0013]), wherein the vibrations may enable an automatic start function for the suction device (Schwille, Para. [0007]). One would be motivated to do this for improved user experience, wherein Tsai remarks that their “auto mode and manual mode” provide “convenience for users when cleaning” (Tsai, Para. [0039]), and wherein Schwille similarly remarks that their invention “increases user convenience by providing an autostart function for suction devices” (Schwille, Para. [0007]). Someone who has ordinary skill in the art seeking to improve user convenience while producing a more efficient design would find it obvious to have combined these two inventions, as the user convenience of the automated and manual suctioning modes for the vacuum dust collector, and the user convenience of the automatic start functionality upon removal of the hose and sensor module from the suction device (Schwille, Para. [0013]), are known.
Regarding Claim 6, Tsai in view of Eda, and in further view of Schwille, disclose the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Tsai further discloses the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of claim 5, wherein a second sensor is arranged on the detachable structure (Schwille, Para. [0050], sensor module 70 “attached and therefore mechanically connected” to an end region (75) of the suction hose (36); see also Schwille, Para. [0014], the sensor is “preferably arranged close to the suction opening” at an end region of the suction hose “that faces away from the suction device”), and the second sensor is configured to detect whether the hose has been detached from the detachable structure (Schwille, Para. [0047], the sensor module (70) detects “vibrations 110 of a machine tool 100” and of the suction device (10), wherein the sensor module (70) is further specified as an acceleration sensor (71) that “detects the vibrations 110 in up to three spatial directions and converts the vibrations 110 into vibration data 120”; see also Schwille, Para. [0013], wherein the vibrations produced by the “connection of the suction hose to the machine tool” are transferred to the sensor module, and contribute to the collected vibration data).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US 20090183333 A1), in view of Eda (JP H06169872 A), in view of Schwille (US 2023040686 A1), and in further view of Conrad and Innes (US 20230148814 A1), herein after referred to as "Conrad".
Regarding Claim 8, Tsai in view of Eda in view of Schwille disclose the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Tsai further discloses the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of claim 6, the second sensor detects that the hose suction nozzle has been removed from the detachable structure, and the second sensor detects that the hose suction nozzle has not been removed from the detachable structure (Schwille, Paras. [0007] and [0013], sensor module detects the connection and disconnection between the suction hose and the machine tool, and automatically starts the suction device).
Tsai in view of Eda in view of Schwille does not disclose vacuuming methods of the vacuum cleaner comprising a floor mode and an accessory mode, the suction mode is configured by the control system to the accessory mode, and the suction mode is configured by the control system to the floor mode.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Conrad discloses vacuuming methods of the vacuum cleaner comprising a floor mode and an accessory mode (Conrad, Paras. [0131] and [0137], surface cleaning apparatus 100 operable in different modes, including “floor cleaner mode” and “above floor cleaning mode”, wherein the above floor cleaning mode may utilize an accessory attachment), the suction mode is configured by the control system to the accessory mode (Conrad, Paras. [0130-0131], the surface cleaning apparatus (100) detects when the floor cleaning head (150) is detachably removed, and prompts the apparatus to operate in an “above floor cleaning mode”), and the suction mode is configured by the control system to the floor mode (Conrad, Paras. [0130-0131], the surface cleaning apparatus (100) detects when the floor cleaning head (150) is attached, and prompts the apparatus to operate in a ”floor cleaner mode”).
The apparatus disclosed by Conrad is analogous to the apparatuses disclosed by Tsai, Eda, and Schwille, wherein Conrad discloses a surface cleaning apparatus, comprising a main body (120), and the main body further comprising a suction motor, an air treatment assembly, (Conrad, Paras. [0120-0123]), a dirty air inlet (162), and a clean air outlet (164) (Conrad, Para. [0133]).
It would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined Tsai in view of Eda, in view of Schwille, and in further view of Conrad, such that the vacuum dust collector, disclosed by Tsai, included with the vibration detection means, disclosed by Eda, modified by Schwille to include a hose and sensor for detecting the attachment and detachment of a hose from a mounting structure, and further modified by Conrad to include suction modes based on the operative state of the hose. One would be motivated to do this as to produce a more adaptable design, wherein the alternating between a “floor cleaner mode” and an “above floor cleaning mode” may produce different efficiency and power consumption results, dependent upon the air intake dimensions of the vacuum dust collector (i.e. changes in airflow) (Conrad, Paras. [0131] and [0274-0275]).
Regarding Claim 9, Tsai in view of Eda in view of Schwille in view of Conrad disclose the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Modified Tsai discloses the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of Claim 8, wherein the floor mode is initially configured by the control system to high-power suction (Conrad, Paras. [0176], [0180], and [0274], upright cleaning mode (i.e. floor cleaning mode) may be a “low-power mode”, but is operatively configured by a user interface (360) to toggle a different operation state (i.e. high-power mode), wherein the user interface (360) coupled to the control system (370); see also Tsai, Para. [0031], control knob (112) is the control system of the vacuum dust collector), and the accessory mode is initially configured by the control system to low-power suction (Conrad, Paras. [0180] and [0274], above floor cleaning mode may be a “high-power mode” and is operatively configured by the user interface (360) to use a low-power mode; see also Tsai, Para. [0031], control knob (112) is the control system of the vacuum dust collector); when the vacuum cleaner is in the accessory mode, pressing a mode switching button will switch the low-power suction of the accessory mode to high-power suction (Conrad, Para. [0180], a user interface (360) includes a button to toggle between operational states of the surface cleaning apparatus (100), specifically between the “floor cleaning mode” and the “above floor cleaning mode”).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai (US 20090183333 A1), in view of Eda (JP H06169872 A), and in further view of Oh-Hyun and Hyoung-Deuk (US 20070039293 A1), herein after referred to as "Baek".
Regarding Claim 10, Tsai in view of Eda disclosed the vacuum cleaner that works by triggering the vibration sensor of claim 1, wherein the dust bin is detachably arranged on the housing (Tsai, Para. [0011], the dust container (14) is removable).
Tsai in view of Eda does not disclose a mistake-proofing sensor is arranged on the housing, the mistake-proofing sensor is configured to detect whether the dust bin is opened or removed.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor, Baek discloses a mistake-proofing sensor is arranged on the housing, the mistake-proofing sensor is configured to detect whether the dust bin is opened or removed (Baek, Para. [0046-0048], magnetic sensor (30) for detecting the removal of the dust tank (3)).
The apparatus disclosed by Baek is analogous to the apparatus disclosed by Tsai and the apparatus disclosed by Eda, wherein Baek discloses a robot cleaner, comprising a suction motor (2) mounted in the body (1), having an inlet (11) coupled to a dust tank (3), and an outlet (12).
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 combined Tsai in view of Eda, and in further view of Baek, such that a sensor is included in the modified design for detecting when a dust tank is removed. One would be motivated to do this for the purposes of maintaining cleaning operation efficiency, wherein Baek discloses that the magnetic sensor (30) has rubber characteristics, creating a sealing function, thus increasing suction force of the suction motor and improving cleaning efficiency, wherein the breaking of this seal from circumstances such as a collision prompts the magnetic sensor (30) to stop, or prevent the startup, of the suction motor (2) (Baek, Paras. [0048] and [0054-0056]). Similarly, Tsai discloses a latch 146 which prevents the vacuum dust collector (1) from being used without the filter (143), thus protecting the suction generator from dust and dirt. For this reason, someone having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to include the magnetic sensor on the dust bin to ensure the vacuum dust collector is not used without the dust container being secured in the housing as an additional safety feature.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JON M HEGEMIER whose telephone number is (571)467-6405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00 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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/JON M HEGEMIER/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/TOM RODGERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
