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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment and corresponding arguments, filed 5/2/2026, have been reviewed and considered. Claims 1, 5-6, 10, 13, 15-16, and 19 have been amended and claims 4, 7-9, 12 and 18 have been canceled. Therefore, claims 1-3, 5-6, 10-11, 13-17 and 19-20 are currently pending. Regarding the amendments to the drawings and specification, please note the drawing objection below. Applicant’s amendment to independent claim 1 is considered sufficient in overcoming the prior art rejections of the previous Office Action. Applicant’s amendment to independent claim 16 is NOT persuasive in overcoming the prior art rejections of the previous Office Action. Note that the added limitations of claim 16 recite that the housing is defined with the first, second and third compartments. Within previous allowable claim 18, the applicant had recited that the air duct cavity comprised the first, second and third compartments (there was a 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection applied). Accordingly, claim 16 does not overcome the prior art rejections of the previous Office Action because all of the added limitations have been previously addressed and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 by DENG et al. (CN 113389029 A) in view of SIBEAUD et al. (US 2022/0120028 A1) previously. This Office Action is a Final Rejection.
Drawings
The drawings, filed 5/2/2026, are objected to because the figures are not sufficient for reproduction. Note that the lines of the drawings appear to have been lightened as compared to the originally filed drawings, dated 6/26/2025. The MPEP states that, “All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black, sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction.” (37 C.F.R. 1.84(l)) (MPEP 608.02; note section “V” entitled “Drawing Standards”).
Additionally, note that the line, as indicated by the applicant as the “filter layer” (reference character 170), appears to just be a boundary of the filter plate (160). Regardless, if the line (170) is representative of the filter layer as indicated, please refrain from thickening the line on the drawings. Note that the thickening of the line or the addition of a non-shown “filter layer” is considered “new matter” because the applicant is providing at least a “thickness” that was not portrayed in the originally filed disclosure (objection under 35 U.S.C. 132(a)). The examiner suggests re-submitting the originally filed drawings (that have proper reproduction characteristics) and including the identification of the referenced “line” (without thickening) using reference character, “170”. Note that if the “filter layer” is not shown in the original filed disclosure/drawings, the examiner suggests deleting the “filter layer” from the claims.
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, 5-6, 10, 13-14 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Within line 21 of claim 1, lines 1-2 of claim 10, line 3 of claim 13, lines 3-4 of claim 14, and line 5 of claim 19, please replace “the filter aperture” with “the at least one filter aperture” to keep the terminology consistent and thus avoid confusion.
Within line 21 of claim 1, line 2 of claim 5, line 2 of claim 10, and line 3 of claim 13, please replace “the suction inlet” with “the at least one suction inlet” to keep the terminology consistent and thus avoid confusion.
Within lines 1-2 of claim 6, please replace “at least one suction” with “at least one suction inlet”.
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 16-17 and 19-20 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.
Claim 16 recites the limitations "the air suction zone" and “the suction member” in lines 13-16 of the claim (two occurrences of each). There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Note that previous claim 18 (now cancelled) was dependent from claim 17 which introduced “a suction member”. If the first occurrence of “the suction member” within claim 16 is amended to recite “a suction member”, please amend “a suction member” of claim 17 to recite “the suction member” or “said suction member”.
All remaining claims are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being dependent from a rejected base claim.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DENG et al. (CN 113389029 A) in view of SIBEAUD et al. (US 2022/0120028 A1).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, DENG discloses an ironing machine comprising: a housing (12, 1231, 23) having an air outlet (24); a steam generator (13) arranged in the housing; a reservoir (18) coupled to the housing, and configured for supplying aqueous media (i.e., water) to the steam generator (13); and a working part (11 and front extension of 13 which contains 131) coupled to the housing, the working part having at least one steam outlet (131) and at least one suction inlet (1131); the ironing machine comprises an air duct cavity (14, 211) arrange inside the housing (12, 1231, 23), the at least one suction inlet (1131) and the air outlet (24) are in fluid communication with the air duct cavity (14, 211) to establish a primary airflow channel of the ironing machine (Figures 2-4); and wherein the working part further comprises a heat equalization member (extension from 13 which contains outlets 131) coupled to the steam generator (13) and a suction member (11; specifically, 113) arranged on the periphery of the heat equalization member (extension from 13 that contains 131) (Figures 1-3). DENG discloses wherein the housing (12, 1231, 23) is defined with a first compartment (front portion of 12), a second compartment (1231) and a third compartment (rear portion of 12), the steam generator (13) is disposed in the first compartment (front portion of 12); an air suction zone (outer surface of 11; specifically 113) is arranged at one side of the suction member (11; specifically 113) away from the steam generator (13), the at least one suction inlet (1131) is arranged on the air suction zone and penetrated through the suction member (11; specifically 113), the air outlet (24) is in communication with the second compartment (1231); the ironing machine further comprises a pump (16) disposed in the third compartment (rear portion of 12) (Figures 2-3).
However, DENG fails to disclose the steam generator and the heat equalization member together defining a steam reheat chamber. Note that the internal structure and connection of these two elements is not discussed within DENG. SIBEAUD discloses an ironing machine comprising a steam generator (6) and a heat equalization member (34) wherein the steam generator (6) and the heat equalization member (34) together defining a steam reheat chamber (35; Fig. 4) (note that the front end of 6 extends into the protrusion 34 to heat the surface 31 and defines a boundary of the chamber 35 thus “reheating” the steam) in order to evenly distribute steam to steam outlets (33) (Figures 1-5). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have provided the ironing machine of DENG with a steam reheat chamber defined by the steam generator and the heat equalization member together, in light of the teachings of SIBEAUD, in order to evenly distribute steam to steam outlets. For future reference, please note LAI (US 2021/0277591 A1) which discloses a steam reheat chamber (cavity of third layer 84) between a steam generator (62) and heat equalization member (46) in order to both reheat steam and to evenly distribute steam to steam ports (48) (Figures 11 and 28-29).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 10-11 and 13-15 are allowable. However, note that claims 1, 5-6, 10 and 13-14 have been objected to for minor informalities as discussed above. Accordingly, all of claims 1-3, 5-6, 10-11 and 13-15 will be marked as objected to because each is either objected to or dependent from a base claim that is object to.
Claims 19 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN E DURHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-8642. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Alissa J Tompkins can be reached at 571-272-3425. 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.
NED
/NATHAN E DURHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights