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 .
Drawings
The corrected drawings filed 6/19/2026 are accepted and the objections removed.
Specification
The objections to the specification have been addressed by the amended specification and are removed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The rejections under 112b in claim 7 and in claim 17 have been addressed by the amendments and are removed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 11, filed 6/19/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under §102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 2026/0169483 (Han et al.) combined together with previous prior art US 9,677,294 (Renaud et al).
(A similar argument is made for claim 11.)
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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) 1-3, 5, 7-8, 10-13, 15, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,677, 294 (Renaud et al., hence Renaud) in light of US 2026/0169483 (Han et al., hence Han.).
As for claim 1, Renaud teaches a method for extricating a pool cleaning robot from a stuck state (Renaud: covered in columns 23-25), comprising:
controlling the pool cleaning robot to travel in a pool to perform a cleaning operation (Renaud: Col 1 lines 53-64; Col. 8 lines 20-41; travel control mentioned (Col 12 lines 48-53));
acquiring an operating parameter of the pool cleaning robot during the traveling, and determining whether the pool cleaning robot is in a stuck state due to being stuck on an obstacle according to the operating parameter (Renaud: "After power-up and after the cleaner is operating in the water, the load on the impeller motor 360 is constantly monitored to determine whether the cleaner remains in or has traveled out of the water, an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360." (Col. 23 lines 49-54); note that under BRI if the robot is beached it's still in a stuck state and can be considered “stuck on an obstacle”);
wherein the extrication action comprises at least one of adjusting a magnitude of a driving force of the pool cleaning robot or adjusting a direction of the driving force. ("At about the same time that the impeller is shut OFF, the drive motor gear assembly 367 is stopped and then started in the opposite direction to cause the cleaner 100, 300, 400 to 45 travel in a direction opposite to the direction in which it was traveling when it experienced the out-of-water condition." (Col. 24, lines 42-46))
Renaud also teaches wherein the driving force comprises a buoyancy of the pool cleaning robot (Renaud: see Figs. 36-37 showing different paths depending on the level of buoyancy and weight distribution) Renaud however does not specifically teach performing the extrication action comprises adjusting the buoyancy of the pool cleaning robot so that the pool cleaning robot moves upwards to get out of the stuck state. However, this is taught by Han: (Han: "The pool cleaning robot has a buoyancy adjustment unit. The buoyancy adjustment unit can store water to increase the weight of the pool cleaning robot, such that the pool cleaning robot dives down. The buoyancy adjustment unit also can drain the water to reduce the weight of the pool cleaning robot, such that the pool cleaning robot floats up. In this way, the pool cleaning robot can automatically float up or dive down." [0101]; "When the operation of the pool cleaning robot goes wrong, for example, the pool cleaning robot gets stuck or needs to change its operating mode, the operational parameter transmitted to the control unit exceeds the threshold range of the operational parameter. In this case, it is determined that the pool cleaning robot needs to float up or dive down."(underlining added) [0223])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application to add the extrication method as outlined in Han to the pool-cleaning behavior of the robot in Renaud. The motivation would be, as Han mentions, to provide a solution in the case where the robot is “hung up” on something.
As for claim 2, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches wherein the operating parameter includes at least one of: a time period of a straight travel of the pool cleaning robot, a distance of the straight travel, a current of a driving motor of a traveling mechanism of the pool cleaning robot, or a wheel speed of the traveling mechanism (Renaud: "After power-up and after the cleaner is operating in the water, the load on the impeller motor 360 is constantly monitored to determine whether the cleaner remains in or has traveled out of the water, an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360." (Col. 23 lines 49-54));
wherein it is determined that the pool cleaning robot is in the stuck state due to being stuck on an obstacle if a preset condition is satisfied regarding at least one of the time period of the straight travel, the distance of the straight travel, the current of the driving motor, or the wheel speed of the traveling mechanism. (Renaud: "After power-up and after the cleaner is operating in the water, the load on the impeller motor 360 is constantly monitored to determine whether the cleaner remains in or has traveled out of the water, an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360." (Col. 23 lines 49-54));
As for claim 3, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches wherein the preset condition being satisfied regarding at least one of the time period of the straight travel, the distance of the straight travel, the current of the driving motor, or the wheel speed of the traveling mechanism comprises at least one of: the time period of the straight travel being longer than a preset first time period (Renaud: "On sensing an out-of-water condition after the cleaner 100, 300, 400 has been operating in the water, an algorithm in accordance with the present disclosure may, upon first receiving an out-of-water indication, continue operating in the then-current mode of operation for a predetermined short period....if the foregoing delay period does not remedy the out-of-water-condition...the controller triggers an out-of-water recovery routine..." Col. 23 line 54-Col 24 line 16 (further steps in the recovery process in Col 24-25)):
the distance of the straight travel being greater than a preset distance threshold; the current of the driving motor being less than a preset current threshold (Renaud: "...an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360." (Col. 23 lines 52-54)); or the wheel speed of the traveling mechanism being greater than a preset wheel speed threshold.
As for claim 5, Renaud, as modified by Ran, teaches wherein the driving force comprises at least one of water thrust from a water jet mechanism of the pool cleaning robot, thrust from a traveling mechanism of the pool cleaning robot, or buoyancy of the pool cleaning robot. (Renaud: See Fig. 11; and "The duct 162B, vent channel 152, and vent aperture 122 may cooperate to define the filtration vent shaft which, in some embodiments, extends up along the ventilation axis Av and out through the lid 121. The impeller unit 162 acts as a pump for the cleaner 100, drawing water through the filter assembly 150 and pushing filtered water out through the filtration vent shaft. An exemplary filtration flow path for the cleaner 100 is designated by directional arrows depicted in FIG. 11." Col. 10 lines 3-11. That the impeller contributes to the motive force on the robot: "...the recovery routine continues, eventually turning the impeller ON for a period, to push the cleaner towards a pool surface (wall or floor-depending upon the cleaner position at that time)." Col 25. lines 10-14. The driving force of the robot is also provided by the wheels: "The cleaner 100 is typically supported/propelled about a pool by the wheel assemblies 130 located relative to the bottom of the cleaner 100. The wheel assemblies 130 are usually powered by the motor drive assembly 160 in conjunction with the drive transfer system, as discussed herein." Col 8, lines 20-24.)
As for claim 7, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches wherein performing the extrication action comprises performing a first extrication action, wherein the first extrication action comprises at least one of adjusting a magnitude of the water thrust from the water jet mechanism or adjusting a magnitude of the thrust from the traveling mechanism. (Renaud: "At about the same time that the impeller is shut OFF, the drive motor gear assembly 367 is stopped and then started in the opposite direction to cause the cleaner 100, 300, 400 to 45 travel in a direction opposite to the direction in which it was traveling when it experienced the out-of-water condition." (Col 24, lines 42-46). Note that this can be considered as “adjusting a magnitude of the thrust from the traveling mechanism” since now the robot is traveling in the opposite direction.)
As for claim 8, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches further comprising: if the first extrication action fails to extricate the pool cleaning robot from the stuck state, performing a second extrication action. (Renaud: This can be the same action, just repeated. "After traveling in the opposite direction as stated in the preceding step, the cleaner has either re-entered the water or not. In either case, the recovery routine continues, eventually turning the impeller ON for a period, to push the cleaner towards a pool surface (wall or floor-depending upon the cleaner position at that time). The impeller is then turned OFF and the cleaner executes one or more reversals in drive direction. This ON and OFF cycling of the impeller motor 360 in conjunction with ON and OFF cycling and reversing of the drive motor gear assembly 367 may be conducted a number of times." (Col. 25, lines 8-19))
As for claim 10, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches wherein the second extrication action comprises at least one of: adjusting a direction of the water thrust from the water jet mechanism; adjusting a direction of the thrust from the traveling mechanism; adjusting a magnitude and direction of the water thrust; or adjusting a magnitude and direction of the thrust from the traveling mechanism. (Renaud: Since the effect of having the impeller on is for the cleaner to get sucked towards a wall/floor (see flow of liquid in Fig. 11) the combination of multiple periods of time turning the impeller ON/OFF together with the front/back motive power provided by the wheels, together with the effects of gravity (which will have a different effect on the cleaner depending on its tilt) will be the equivalent of changing the magnitude and direction of the water jets as well as the magnitude and direction of thrust from the wheels. '"After traveling in the opposite direction as stated in the preceding step, the cleaner has either re-entered the water or not. In either case, the recovery routine continues, eventually turning the impeller ON for a period, to push the cleaner towards a pool surface (wall or floor-depending upon the cleaner position at that time). The impeller is then turned OFF and the cleaner executes one or more reversals in drive direction. This ON and OFF cycling of the impeller motor 360 in conjunction with ON and OFF cycling and reversing of the drive motor gear assembly 367 may be conducted a number of times." (Col 25, lines 8-19))
As for claim 11, Renaud teaches A pool cleaning robot comprising: a traveling mechanism configured to drive the pool cleaning robot to travel on a bottom or sidewall of the pool (Renaud: Fig. 1); a water jet mechanism configured to provide water thrust to the pool cleaning robot (Renaud: See Fig. 11; and "The duct 162B, vent channel 152, and vent aperture 122 may cooperate to define the filtration vent shaft which, in some embodiments, extends up along the ventilation axis Av and out through the lid 121. The impeller unit 162 acts as a pump for the cleaner 100, drawing water through the filter assembly 150 and pushing filtered water out through the filtration vent shaft. An exemplary filtration flow path for the cleaner 100 is designated by directional arrows depicted in FIG. 11." Col. 10 lines 3-11; that the impeller contributes to the motive force on the robot: "...the recovery routine continues, eventually turning the impeller ON for a period, to push the cleaner towards a pool surface (wall or floor-depending upon the cleaner position at that time)." Col 25. lines 10-14.);
and a control mechanism configured to acquire an operating parameter of the pool cleaning robot during the traveling, (Renaud: “After power-up and after the cleaner is operating in the water, the load on the impeller motor 360 is constantly monitored to determine whether the cleaner remains in or has traveled out of the water, an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360.” (Col. 23 lines 49-54))
determine whether the pool cleaning robot is in a stuck state due to being stuck on an obstacle according to the operating parameter (Renaud: "After power-up and after the cleaner is operating in the water, the load on the impeller motor 360 is constantly monitored to determine whether the cleaner remains in or has traveled out of the water, an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360." (Col. 23 lines 49-54));
and control the pool cleaning robot to perform an extrication action in response to determining that the pool cleaning robot is in the stuck state due to being stuck on an obstacle (Renaud: mention of and explanation of a recovery routine Col 24 lines 15-18, 42-46, Col 25 lines 8-19 and lines 24-34)),
wherein the extrication action comprises at least one of adjusting a magnitude of a driving force of the pool cleaning robot or adjusting a direction of the driving force. (Renaud: "At about the same time that the impeller is shut OFF, the drive motor gear assembly 367 is stopped and then started in the opposite direction to cause the cleaner 100, 300, 400 to 45 travel in a direction opposite to the direction in which it was traveling when it experienced the out-of-water condition." (Col. 24, lines 42-46))
Renaud also teaches wherein the driving force comprises a buoyancy of the pool cleaning robot (Renaud: see Figs. 36-37 showing different paths depending on the level of buoyancy and weight distribution.) Renaud however does not specifically teach the pool cleaning robot further comprises a buoyancy adjusting mechanism configured to adjust the buoyancy of the pool cleaning robot in the extrication action so that the pool cleaning robot moves upwards to get out of the stuck state. However, this is taught by Han: (Han: "The pool cleaning robot has a buoyancy adjustment unit. The buoyancy adjustment unit can store water to increase the weight of the pool cleaning robot, such that the pool cleaning robot dives down. The buoyancy adjustment unit also can drain the water to reduce the weight of the pool cleaning robot, such that the pool cleaning robot floats up. In this way, the pool cleaning robot can automatically float up or dive down." [0101]; "When the operation of the pool cleaning robot goes wrong, for example, the pool cleaning robot gets stuck or needs to change its operating mode, the operational parameter transmitted to the control unit exceeds the threshold range of the operational parameter. In this case, it is determined that the pool cleaning robot needs to float up or dive down."(underlining added) [0223])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application to add the extrication method as outlined in Han to the pool-cleaning behavior of the robot in Renaud. The motivation would be, as Han mentions, to provide a solution in the case where the robot is “hung up” on something.
As for claim 12, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches wherein the operation parameter comprises at least one of: a time period of a straight travel of the pool cleaning robot, a distance of the straight travel, a current of a driving motor of the traveling mechanism, or a wheel speed of the traveling mechanism (Renaud: "After power-up and after the cleaner is operating in the water, the load on the impeller motor 360 is constantly monitored to determine whether the cleaner remains in or has traveled out of the water, an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360." (Col. 23 lines 49-54));
wherein the control mechanism is further configured to determine the pool cleaning robot is in the stuck state due to being stuck on an obstacle based on a preset condition being satisfied regarding at least one of the time period of the straight travel, the distance of the straight travel, the current of the driving motor, or the wheel speed of the traveling mechanism. (Renaud: "After power-up and after the cleaner is operating in the water, the load on the impeller motor 360 is constantly monitored to determine whether the cleaner remains in or has traveled out of the water, an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360." (Col. 23 lines 49-54));
As for claim 13, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches wherein the preset condition being satisfied regarding at least one of the time period of the straight travel, the distance of the straight travel, the current of the driving motor, or the wheel speed of the traveling mechanism comprises at least one of: the time period of the straight travel being longer than a preset first time period (Renaud: "On sensing an out-of-water condition after the cleaner 100, 300, 400 has been operating in the water, an algorithm in accordance with the present disclosure may, upon first receiving an out-of-water indication, continue operating in the then-current mode of operation for a predetermined short period....if the foregoing delay period does not remedy the out-of-water-condition...the controller triggers an out-of-water recovery routine..." Col. 23 line 54-Col 24 line 16 (further steps in the recovery process in Col 24-25).);
the distance of the straight travel being greater than a preset distance threshold; the current of the driving motor being less than a preset current threshold (Renaud: "...an out-of-water condition being indicated by a reduction in current/load from the impeller motor 360." (Col. 23 lines 52-54));
or the wheel speed of the traveling mechanism being greater than a preset wheel speed threshold.
As for claim 15, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches wherein the driving force comprises at least one of water thrust from the water jet mechanism, thrust from the traveling mechanism, or buoyancy of the pool cleaning robot. (Renaud: "thrust from the traveling mechanism" can be from the wheels; "The drive transfer system is typically used to transfer power from the motor drive assembly 160 to the wheel assemblies 130 and the roller assemblies 140."(Col 6 lines 45-47); "The cleaner 100 is typically supported/propelled about a pool by the wheel assemblies 130 located relative to the bottom of the cleaner 100. The wheel assemblies 130 are usually powered by the motor drive assembly 160 in conjunction with the drive transfer system, as discussed herein." (Col. 8 lines 20-24)).
As for claim 17, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches wherein the performing the extrication action comprises performing a first extrication action, wherein the first extrication action comprises at least one of adjusting a magnitude of the water thrust from the water jet mechanism or adjusting a magnitude of the thrust from the traveling mechanism. (Renaud: "At about the same time that the impeller is shut OFF, the drive motor gear assembly 367 is stopped and then started in the opposite direction to cause the cleaner 100, 300, 400 to 45 travel in a direction opposite to the direction in which it was traveling when it experienced the out-of-water condition." (Col 24, lines 42-46) Note that this can be considered as “adjusting a magnitude of the thrust from the traveling mechanism” since now the robot is traveling in the opposite direction.)
As for claim 18, Renaud, as modified by Han, teaches further comprising: if the first extrication action fails to extricate the pool cleaning robot from the stuck state, performing a second extrication action. (Renaud: This can be the same action, just repeated. "After traveling in the opposite direction as stated in the preceding step, the cleaner has either re-entered the water or not. In either case, the recovery routine continues, eventually turning the impeller ON for a period, to push the cleaner towards a pool surface (wall or floor-depending upon the cleaner position at that time). The impeller is then turned OFF and the cleaner executes one or more reversals in drive direction. This ON and OFF cycling of the impeller motor 360 in conjunction with ON and OFF cycling and reversing of the drive motor gear assembly 367 may be conducted a number of times." (Col. 25, lines 8-19))
As for claim 20, Renaud, modified by Han, teaches wherein the second extrication action comprises at least one of: adjusting a direction of the water thrust from the water spraying mechanism; adjusting a direction of the thrust from the traveling mechanism; adjusting a magnitude and direction of the water thrust; or adjusting a magnitude and direction of the thrust from the traveling mechanism. (Renaud: Since the effect of having the impeller on is for the cleaner to get sucked towards a wall/floor (see flow of liquid in Fig. 11) the combination of multiple periods of time turning the impeller ON/OFF together with the front/back motive power provided by the wheels, together with the effects of gravity (which will have a different effect on the cleaner depending on its tilt) will be the equivalent of changing the magnitude and direction of the water jets as well as the magnitude and direction of thrust from the wheels. '"After traveling in the opposite direction as stated in the preceding step, the cleaner has either re-entered the water or not. In either case, the recovery routine continues, eventually turning the impeller ON for a period, to push the cleaner towards a pool surface (wall or floor-depending upon the cleaner position at that time). The impeller is then turned OFF and the cleaner executes one or more reversals in drive direction. This ON and OFF cycling of the impeller motor 360 in conjunction with ON and OFF cycling and reversing of the drive motor gear assembly 367 may be conducted a number of times." (Col 25, lines 8-19))
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 14 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANYA CHRISTINE SIENKO whose telephone number is (571)272-5816. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Kito Robinson can be reached at 571-270-3912. 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.
/TANYA C SIENKO/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/KITO R ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights