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 .
Response to Election
1. Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on August 10, 2026 is acknowledged.
Rejections 35 U.S.C. § 103
2. 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.
Claims 1-3, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication (2023/035699) to So et al. in view of U.S. Patent Publication (2020/253445) to So et al.
Regarding independent claim 1, a main body (600) (See FIG. 6 of So et al. (‘699));
Except, So et al. (‘699) is silent regarding a driving wheel disposed on a bottom of the main body and configured to move the main body. However, So et al. (‘445)
But, So et al. (‘699) teaches a mopping device (631) disposed on the bottom of the main body (see semi-circular body in FIG. 6); and a rotation device comprising: a bridge (637) connected to the mopping device (631), and a first motor (See paragraph [0106]) configured to rotate the bridge (637) for the mopping device (631) such that the mopping device (637) is moved to one from among a first position (See FIG. 6) and a second position (out from under the cleaning apparatus (600) in FIG. 6) with the mopping device (631) is disposed on the bottom of the main body (see semi-circular body in FIG. 6 of So et al. ‘699) based on the mopping device being in the first position (under the cleaning apparatus (600) in FIG. 6), and the mopping device (631) protrudes outward from the main body (see semi-circular body in FIG. 6) based on the mopping device being in the second position (outside of the main body; See paragraph [0136] of So et al. ‘699).
As mentioned above, So et al. (‘699) is silent regarding a driving wheel disposed on a bottom of the main body and configured to move the main body. However, So et al. (‘445) teaches a robot cleaner (100) having a main body (101) with a bumper (102) (See paragraph [0053]). So et al. (‘445) teaches that the cleaner (100) includes a drive wheel (150) located on the bottom of the robot cleaner (100) (See paragraph [0060]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify So et al. (‘699) with So et al. (‘445) to include a driving wheel (150) on the bottom of the cleaning apparatus (600) of So et al. (‘699) in order to provide linear movement for the cleaning apparatus in motorized fashion.
Regarding claim 2, So et al. (‘699) as modified with So et al. (‘445) teaches claim 2. So et al. (‘699) teaches that the mopping device (631): a mopping pad (See paragraph [0135]) of So et al. (‘699)); a second motor (linear motor; See paragraph [0137] of So et al. (‘699)) configured to rotate the mopping pad (631); and at least one sensor (lidar sensor; See paragraph [0067), and wherein the robot cleaner (600) further includes one or more processors (19); and memory storing instructions (17), that when executed by the one or more processors (19), cause the robot cleaner (600) to control the first motor ((See paragraph [0106]) to move the mopping device (631) to one from among the first position (under the cleaning apparatus (600)) and the second position (See FIG. 6 of So et al. (‘699)) based on a sensing value of the at least one sensor (833).
Regarding claim 3, So et al. (‘699) as modified with So et al. (‘445) teaches that the main body has a circular shape (see semi-circular body in FIG. 6 of So et al. ‘699), with the mopping pad (631) is disposed inside an outer diameter of the main body (see semi-circular body in FIG. 6 of So et al. ‘699) based on the mopping device (631) being in the first position (See FIG. 6), and wherein the mopping pad (631) protrudes from the outer diameter of the main body (see semi-circular body in FIG. 6 of So et al. ‘699) to the outside of the main body (see semi-circular body in FIG. 6 of So et al. ‘699) within a predetermined range based on the mopping device (600) being in the second position (outside of the main body; See paragraph [0136] of So et al. ‘699).
Regarding claim 6, So et al. (‘699) as modified with So et al. (‘445) teaches that the at least one sensor (lidar sensor; See paragraph [0067] of So et al. (‘669)) comprises a distance detection sensor configured to recognize a surrounding object (See paragraph [0067]).
Regarding claim 7, So et al. (‘699) wherein the one or more processors (19) are configured to execute the instructions to cause the robot cleaner (600) to activate the distance detection sensor (lidar sensor) based on the mopping device (631) being moved to the second position (outward position).
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Claims 4, 5 and 8-12 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
3. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D. JENNINGS whose telephone number is (571)270-1536. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30pm. 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, Monica S. Carter can be reached at (571) 272-4475. 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.
MICHAEL DEANGILO. JENNINGS
Examiner
Art Unit 3723
/MICHAEL D JENNINGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights