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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 6/23/2026 is acknowledged. Claim 15 was withdrawn.
Specification
The specification is objected to since the written description only implicitly or inherently discloses the structure, material, or acts for performing the function recited in a claim limitation invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Sixth Paragraph.
Specifically, Claims 1 and 5 contain element "means for providing electrical power" and Claims 7 and 11 contains element “means for supplying power”. These elements are limitations that invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Rather than clearly linking a specific scope of structural features related to the claim limitations, the written description only implicitly or inherently sets forth the corresponding structure, material, or acts that perform the claimed function. Therefore, the Specification does not provide a clear boundary for the interpretation of the operation means and therefore the specification does not allow the scope of the claims to be bounded. Regarding the "means for providing electrical power" and “means for supplying power”, the Specification is silent as to corresponding structure, material, or acts that perform the claimed function and therefore the specification does not allow the scope of the claims to be bounded.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181, applicant should:
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(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; or
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts that perform 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
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(c) State on the record what corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function.
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.
Claim 7 and 11 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 7 and 11 recite the limitation "the means for supplying power". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims since “a means for supplying power" has not been previously claimed.
Claims 1, 5, 7, and 11, and therefore dependent Claims 2-4, 6, 8-10, and 12-14 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim elements “means for providing electrical power" and “means for supplying power” are limitations that invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to clearly link or associate the disclosed structure, material, or acts to the claimed function such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function. The written description only implicitly or inherently sets forth the corresponding structure, material, or acts that perform the claimed function, however, the claim elements are not specifically and distinctly identified and tied to the specific structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function. Therefore, the specification does not provide a clear boundary for the interpretation of the “means for providing electrical power" and “means for supplying power” and therefore the specification does not allow the scope of the claims to be bounded. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite since it is not specifically bounded.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant may:
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(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; or
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links or associates the corresponding structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a) ); or
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(c) State on the record where the corresponding structure, material, or acts are set forth in the written description of the specification and linked or associated to the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.175(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181 .
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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 following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
As previously presented, the claim elements presented in Claims 1, 5, 7, and 11 cannot be properly interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the specification does not provide a clear boundary regarding the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. For the purpose of examination of Claims 1, 5, 7, and 11, the Examiner will attempt, as best understood, to match the claim elements to structure in the prior art that is similar to the Applicant's device with similar/equivalent operation.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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.
Claims 1-5, 8-10, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Orhan et al. TR 201612509 A (hereafter Orhan et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Orhan et al. anticipates:
1. (Original) A cleaning arrangement (ultrasonic cleaning machine 1) for cleaning the interior of a tank (sanitary structures 2) containing fluid, the cleaning arrangement comprising: a plurality of ultrasonic transducers (transducers 61 and 62) mounted to a support body (assembly comprising fixing device 30, upper pipe 40, and lower pipe 50) to be mounted to the tank, in use, and means for providing electrical power (electrical cable, Claim 5) to the transducers, wherein the transducers are mounted to the support body such that, when the support body is mounted to the tank, in use, and when power is supplied to the transducers, the transducers generate ultrasonic waves throughout the interior of the tank (shown in Figures 1-3)(“In order to achieve a more efficient cleaning of the toilet, by means of a motor, by rotating the pipes at constant speed, it is provided that the ultrasonic waves penetrate to the places which are difficult to reach by brush and to every point of the toilet hole. This increases the efficiency of the cleaning process and minimizes machine life. The invention also provides comfort to the user by eliminating the use of manpower. One of the transducers is positioned at a 90 ° angle, while the other transducer is positioned at a 45 ° angle so that the two transducers used in the machine of the invention can be effective in a shorter time and efficiently. In this connection, the 45 ° converter is located on the side surfaces of the toilet seat. The transducer has the ability to send over-sound waves to the lower surfaces of the toilet seat. Thanks to this method, the efficiency of cleaning the toilet bowl has been increased. The use of two piezoelectric transducers in the design of the machine within the invention increases the efficiency of cleaning. As a result of the researches, when the ultrasonic transducer is energized, the transducer starts to produce a sound wave at a frequency of 40 kHz. It is more effective for cavitation below 40 kHz. However, noise occurs at these frequencies. The frequency at which no noise is generated and cavitation occurs optimally is 40 kHz. As a result of these researches, a converter with a power of 60 W at 40 kHz frequency was chosen. In this way, both efficient cleaning and comfort are provided to the user.“).
Regarding Claim 2, Orhan et al. anticipates:
2. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 1, wherein the support body (assembly comprising fixing device 30, upper pipe 40, and lower pipe 50) is configured to mount the transducers (transducers 61 and 62) to an exterior of the tank (sanitary structures 2)(shown in Figures 1 and 2).
Regarding Claim 3, Orhan et al. anticipates:
3. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 2, wherein the support body (assembly comprising fixing device 30, upper pipe 40, and lower pipe 50) comprises a plate (assembly comprising cable tray 20, stabilizers 31, intermediate stabilizer 32, and side stabilizer 33 as shown in Figure 3) to which the transducers (transducers 61 and 62) are mounted, the plate configured to be mounted to an exterior wall (external sides of sanitary structure through connection to stabilizers 31, intermediate stabilizer 32, and side stabilizer 33 as shown in Figures 1-3) of the tank (sanitary structures 2) such as to bring the transducers into contact with the exterior wall (best shown in Figures 1 and 2).
Regarding Claim 4, Orhan et al. anticipates:
4. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 3, wherein the plate (assembly comprising cable tray 20, stabilizers 31, intermediate stabilizer 32, and side stabilizer 33 as shown in Figure 3) comprises a plurality of separate plate sections (three stabilizers 31, intermediate stabilizer 32, and side stabilizer 33 are shown in Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 5, Orhan et al. anticipates:
5. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 3, wherein the means for providing electrical power comprises a conductor (electrical cable, Claim 5) located on (configured to stow electrical cable) or within the plate (assembly comprising cable tray 20, stabilizers 31, intermediate stabilizer 32, and side stabilizer 33 as shown in Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 8, Orhan et al. anticipates:
8. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 1, wherein the support body (assembly comprising fixing device 30, upper pipe 40, and lower pipe 50) is configured to mount the transducers (transducers 61 and 62) inside the interior of the tank (sanitary structures 2)(shown in Figures 1-3).
Regarding Claim 9, Orhan et al. anticipates:
9. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 8, wherein the transducers (transducers 61 and 62) are mounted around the support body (assembly comprising fixing device 30, upper pipe 40, and lower pipe 50) that extends through the tank (sanitary structures 2) to locate the transducers in the interior of the tank (shown in Figures 1 and 2).
Regarding Claim 10, Orhan et al. anticipates:
10. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 8, wherein the support body (assembly comprising fixing device 30, upper pipe 40, and lower pipe 50) is a cylindrical or tubular body (shown in Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 12, Orhan et al. anticipates:
12. (Original) A tank (sanitary structures 2) defining an interior volume to be cleaned (interior shown in Figures 1 and 2), the tank comprising the cleaning arrangement (ultrasonic cleaning machine 1) as claimed in claim 2 mounted to the exterior of the tank (shown in Figures 1 and 2).
Regarding Claim 14, Orhan et al. anticipates:
14. (Original) A tank (sanitary structures 2) defining an interior volume to be cleaned (interior shown in Figures 1 and 2), the tank comprising the cleaning arrangement (ultrasonic cleaning machine 1) as claimed in claim 8 extending into the interior of the tank (shown in Figures 1-3).
Claims 1, 2, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bran US 5534076 A (hereafter Bran).
Regarding Claim 1, Bran anticipates:
1. (Original) A cleaning arrangement (megasonic cleaning apparatus 10) for cleaning the interior of a tank (tank 12) containing fluid, the cleaning arrangement comprising: a plurality of ultrasonic transducers (one or more arcuate piezoelectric transducers 26) mounted to a support body (support frame 38 and cover 42) to be mounted to the tank, in use, and means for providing electrical power (cable 30 and wires 28) to the transducers, wherein the transducers are mounted to the support body such that, when the support body is mounted to the tank, in use, and when power is supplied to the transducers, the transducers generate ultrasonic waves throughout the interior of the tank (shown in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 2, Bran anticipates:
2. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 1, wherein the support body (support frame 38 and cover 42) is configured to mount the transducers (one or more arcuate piezoelectric transducers 26) to an exterior of the tank (tank 12)(shown in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 12, Bran anticipates:
12. (Original) A tank (tank 12) defining an interior volume to be cleaned (interior shown in Figure 1), the tank comprising the cleaning arrangement (megasonic cleaning apparatus 10) as claimed in claim 2 mounted to the exterior of the tank (shown in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 13, Bran anticipates:
13. (Original) The tank of claim 12, wherein the tank (tank 12) has an exterior insulative cladding (carrier 20 and interface 32 – fabric or fiberglass cloth) and wherein the cleaning arrangement (megasonic cleaning apparatus 10) is mounted to the cladding such that the transducers (one or more arcuate piezoelectric transducers 26) contact the tank exterior through (shown in in Figure 1).
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 of this title, 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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 6, 7, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orhan et al. TR 201612509 A (hereafter Orhan et al.) in view of design choice.
Regarding Claim 6, Orhan et al. teaches:
6. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 5, wherein the conductor (electrical cable, Claim 5) is located in a recess of the plate (assembly comprising cable tray 20, stabilizers 31, intermediate stabilizer 32, and side stabilizer 33 as shown in Figure 3).
Orhan et al. discloses a device that is powered by an electrical cable that powers at least the motor 11 and transducers 61 and 62 by connection to the electrical grid. Orhan discloses a cable tray 20, however, he does not disclose that the cable enters the cable tray 20 through a recess. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route the cable into the internal structure of the ultrasonic cleaning machine 1 through a recess in the cable tray with the motivation to locate a necessary passage at a location that is not immersed in the fluid. As shown in Figures 1 and 2, the cable tray would be an obvious location by design choice.
Regarding Claim 7, Orhan et al. teaches:
7. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 2, wherein the means for supplying power (through connection of electrical cable, Claim 5, to a grid) has two ends to each of which power can be supplied (“In the operation of the ultrasonic cleaning machine (1), two methods can be followed to drive the motor (11) with electrical energy. These can be summarized as follows; 1. Driven directly from the grid without using batteries.“).
Orhan et al. discloses a device that is powered by an electrical cable that powers at least the motor 11 and transducers 61 and 62 by connection to the electrical grid. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route the electrical cable into the internal structure of the ultrasonic cleaning machine 1 that power can be supplied to both the cable end inside the device and the cable end connected to the grid with the motivation to provide power between the grid and the ultrasonic cleaning machine to allow the device to operate as disclosed.
Regarding Claim 11, Orhan et al. teaches:
11. (Original) The cleaning arrangement of claim 8, wherein the means for supplying power (through connection of electrical cable, Claim 5, to the grid) comprises a conductor extending through the support body (assembly comprising fixing device 30, upper pipe 40, and lower pipe 50) to the transducers (transducers 61 and 62)(electrical connection to transducers is provided by side insulator side insulator 611 and lower insulator 621).
Orhan et al. discloses a device that is powered by an electrical cable that powers at least the motor 11 and transducers 61 and 62 by connection to the electrical grid. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to route the electrical cable into the internal structure of the ultrasonic cleaning machine 1 that power can be supplied to both the cable end inside the device and the cable end connected to the grid with the motivation to provide power between the grid and the ultrasonic cleaning machine to allow the device to operate as disclosed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in form PTO-892 Notice of References Cited. Specifically, the prior art references include pertinent disclosures of ultrasonic cleaning devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30am-3:30pm.
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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached on (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.
/MARC CARLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights