DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the application filed 1/9/2025.
Claims 1-20 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 § 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 1-5, 8-9 and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson et al. (US 2021/0207730 A1).
Re claim 1, Olson discloses a washing machine appliance (abstract, ¶ [0002]) comprising:
a wash tub (ref. 12) positioned within a cabinet and defining a wash chamber;
a wash basket (see fig. 1 unlabeled inner basket/drum; to any extent the basket is not inherent, it is conventionally known to those of ordinary skill in the art to provide a rotating basket/drum for agitation) rotatably mounted within the wash tub for receiving a load of clothes;
a dispensing assembly (ref. 22, 24, 26) mounted within the cabinet for selectively adding wash fluid into the wash tub, the dispensing assembly defining a plurality of dispenser inlets (see fig. 1); and
a diverter assembly (ref. 20) for selectively directing the wash fluid through one or more of the plurality of dispenser inlets, the diverter assembly comprising:
a diverter inlet (ref. 52);
a diverter disk (ref. 38) mounted adjacent the diverter inlet and defining a plurality of flow tubes (ref. 30), the diverter disk being rotatable to aligning one of the plurality of flow tubes with the diverter; and
a drive motor (ref. 44) mechanically coupled to the diverter disk for selectively rotating the diverter disk.
Re claim 14, Independent claim 14 reads as a subcombination of claim 1 rejected above. As such, the claim is satisfied by Olson, as applied above.
Re claims 2-4 and 15-16, wherein at least one of the plurality of flow tubes is straight (see fig. 1); Re claim 3, Regarding “wherein at least one of the plurality of flow tubes extends along a direction that is not parallel to an axis of rotation of the drive motor”, the mere change in angle/dimensions of the flow tubes is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art depending on simply the angle of pipe runs to the desired downstream destination. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) Rearrangement of Parts. Re claim 4, Similarly, regarding “wherein at least one of the plurality of flow tubes is curved or non-linear”, the mere change in shape of the flow tube is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art depending on the desired direction of pipe run to the downstream destination.
Re claims 5 and 17, wherein the plurality of flow tubes is four flow tubes and the drive motor is configured to rotate between four positions (see fig. 2 four flow tubes 30, ¶ [0053]).
Re claims 8-9, Regarding “wherein the diverter disk is injection molded”, the use of a known manufacturing process such as injection molding for producing washing machine components is known in the art. Regarding “wherein the drive motor is a synchronous motor”, the use of a known synchronous controllable motor is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, it being simply a selection of known materials suitable for its intended purpose.
Re claims 12-13, wherein a hot supply, a cold supply, or a mixed supply is fluidly coupled to the diverter inlet (¶ [0048] source of hot and cold water 16, mixer valve 18). wherein the washing machine appliance is a horizontal axis washing machine or a front load washing machine (see fig. 1).
Claims 6-7 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson et al. (US 2021/0207730 A1) in view Favaro et al. (US 2017/0016165 A1).
Re claims 6-7 and 18-19, Olson discloses as shown above, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the dispensing assembly comprises a dispenser housing, an aperture is defined in a rear wall of the dispenser housing, and the diverter disk is positioned through the aperture. However, Favaro discloses it is known in the washing machine art (abstract) to provide the dispensing assembly (ref. 106) comprises a dispenser housing (ref. 2, 116), an aperture is defined in a rear wall of the dispenser housing (see figs. 3 and 6-7, rear wall has space for mounting ref. 3), and the diverter disk (ref. 3, 26) is positioned through the aperture (see fig. 3). Regarding “wherein the diverter assembly further comprises: a seal positioned around the diverter disk between a diverter housing and the dispenser housing”, the use of seals for a variety of waterproof connections is taught by Favaro (¶ [0003], watertight sealing; ¶ [0110] annular sealing gasket; ¶ [0113] sealing gasket), as such the use of a seal to prevent leaks and firmly mount the diverter assembly to the dispenser housing is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, in order to maintain a secure and leakless mounting.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the dispensing assembly to further include a dispenser housing and an aperture for positioning the diverter disk, as suggested by Favaro, in order to provide a compact and ease of access dispensing assembly.
Claims 10-11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson et al. (US 2021/0207730 A1) in view JP 2024545166 A (“JP’166”) (machine translation attached).
Re claims 10-11 and 20¸Olson discloses as shown above but does not disclose a limit switch for detecting a position of the diverter disk. However, JP’166 teaches it is known in the washing machine art (abstract) to provide detecting a position (S22) of the diverter disk based on the valve core being in a neutral position, with positioning protrusion (ref. 21) abutting against a position restriction rib (ref. 14). Here, the use of a limit switches are conventionally known in the art and would have been readily available sensor for measuring the physical abutment of the diverter disk in the neutral position would have been prima facie obvious to one o ordinary skill in the art. wherein the diverter assembly comprises: a cam that rotates with the diverter disk, wherein the cam defines a protrusion (ref. 21, see fig. 4 ref. 21 on ref. 2) or a recess configured to engage a limiting rib at a home position (ref. 14, neutral position).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the washing machine of Olson to further include detecting a position of the diverter disk, as suggested by JP’166, in order to accurately control switching; and to further use a limit switch as conventionally known for determining a neutral/start position.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
DE 102018109806 A1 note synchronous motor and diverter start position and timing of motor rotation.
DE 102007056921 A1 note angle and partly curved outlets in diverter Fig. 5.
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