DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 11/20/25. As directed by the amendment: claims 21-23, 25-29, 31, 35-38, and 40-42 have been amended; claims 1-11, 13-20, 24, 30, 32-34, and 39 have been cancelled; and no claims have been added. Thus, claims 12, 21-23, 25-29, 31, 35-38, and 40-42 are presently pending in this application.
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 § 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 21-23, 25-29, 31, 35-38 and 40-42 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 21, 35, and 40 recites “calculating … a plurality of up to forty characteristic values by
different mathematical operations”, it is unclear what these forty characteristic values and different mathematical operations actually are. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 21 recites “the first and second measured values”; however, the claim does not recite “first and second measured values”, and it is unclear whether these measured values relate to the measured values of the earlier recited “at least two sensors”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 21, 35, and 40 recite “monitoring a condition of at least one of the food processor or a food in the food preparation vessel”; however, it is unclear what “condition” is being referenced, and additionally, the claimed “a condition” is not referenced later in the claim so it is unclear whether another limitation later in the claim is intended to be referenced regarding said claimed “a condition”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 21, 35, and 40 recite “a different characterization feature of the condition”; however, it is unclear what the claimed “a different characterization feature” relates to. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 21, 35, and 40 recite “a mathematical operation of the different mathematical operations”, it is unclear what is the “a mathematical operation”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 21, 35, and 40 recite “different mathematical operations”, it is unclear what the claimed “different mathematical operations” relate to. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 21, 35, and 40 recite “determining via the monitoring device a monitoring result indicative of a comparison between the plurality of up to forty characteristic values and the desired profile”, it is unclear what/how the “comparison” is being performed. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 21 recites “initiating via the monitoring device an action for adjusting operation of the food processor based on the monitoring result”, it is unclear what “an action” is being referenced. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 28 recites “the monitoring result is a similarity value which describes the similarity of the measured condition to the desired profile as a numerical value representative of a percentage between 0 and 100”, it is unclear how a “similarity” may be referenced as the percentage value encompasses all values (“between 0 and 100”). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 41 recites the resultant numerical value is calculated by a unique mathematical operation of the different mathematical operations that is different for each characteristic value and describes the different characterization feature of the condition, it is unclear what “unique mathematical operation” is being referenced within the aforementioned claim recitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 42 recites “wherein the different mathematical operations include standard deviation”; however, claim 21 from which claim 42 depends recites “at least one of standard deviation” and is therefore duplicative of the earlier cited claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
The above rejections are presented herein in response to the newly presented claim amendments.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH W ISKRA whose telephone number is (313) 446-4866. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 09:00-17:00 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, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached on 571-270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSEPH W ISKRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights