DETAILED ACTION
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
The amendment filed on 12/15/2025 has been entered and accepted.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. A new rejection has been made in view of Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) in view of Cai (US 20020178932 A1), Sus (US 20110256287 A1), AZUKI (JP H0787915 A), and DI (EP 0273323 A2). A full rejection can be found below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification, as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “control means” in dependent claim 12.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. A review of the specification and drawing found the corresponding structure of brackets (per para. 0037 and fig. 9).
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means,” and thus are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “control means” in dependent claim 12.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. A review of the specification and drawing found the corresponding structure of a relief valve (per page 13 Lines 1-5).
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) 1, 3, 8-10, and 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) in view of Cai (US 20020178932 A1), Sus (US 20110256287 A1), AZUKI (JP H0787915 A), and DI (EP 0273323 A2).
Regarding claim 1, Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) teaches a system for cooking pasta (Figure 12B Paragraph 100, cooking pasta); the system comprising:
a container (vessel 9-13), which is configured to contain a given quantity of pasta (Paragraph 16, vessel is used to cook comestibles; Paragraph 92, comestibles include pasta; Paragraph 102, pulsing of the steam continues as more comestibles are added to the liquid); the container comprising a base wall and one single opening opposite the base wall (Figure 2A, vessel containing a base and a wall as a well as a single opening opposite the base wall); and
a pasta cooking machine (Figure 12B) comprising:
a first dosing device (Figure 12B Paragraph 134, steam wand 2-1a) to feed a given quantity of liquid water into the container (Paragraph 15, steam wand applies hot water to the liquid to prepare a meal); the first dosing device being configured to feed the given quantity of liquid water to the container and comprising a first duct (Paragraph 112, pressure control unit 7-6 regulates the flow of water to the steam wand), a first nozzle arranged at an end of the first duct to release the liquid water into the container, and a feeding assembly to convey the liquid water along the first duct to the first nozzle (Paragraph 112, one-way valve is inserted to convey the water along the path; Figure 12B Paragraph 135, hot water flows from the coupling 12-13 to the flexible tube 12-14 such as to reach the steam wand 2-1a); and
a second dosing device (Figure 12B Paragraph 134, steam wand 2-1b) to feed a given quantity of water vapour into the container (Paragraph 15, steam wand applies steam to the liquid to prepare a meal); the second dosing device comprising a second duct, a second nozzle arranged at an end of the second duct to emit the water vapour (Paragraph 112, one-way valve is inserted to convey the steam along the path; Figure 12B Paragraph 135, steam flows from the coupling 12-13 to the flexible tube 12-14 such as to reach the steam wand 2-1a), and a boiler to feed the water vapour along the second duct to the second nozzle (Paragraph 112, heating element transfers its energy to the water such as to be transformed into steam), wherein the container is separable from the pasta cooking machine (Paragraph 90, vessel is removable from the grill; Paragraph 135, steam wands are detachable and the lid in which the steam wands are connected is detachable from the vessel) and the first and the second nozzle are two different nozzles and at least partially extend inside the container through the opening (Figure 12B Paragraph 135, steam wands 2-1a and 2-1b are different nozzles which extends inside the vessel through the opening covered by the lid), wherein the feeding assembly comprises a flow adjuster to adjust the quantity of water flowing along the first duct and the water vapour emitted by the second nozzle (Paragraph 112, pressure control unit 7-6 regulates the flow of water or steam to the steam wand)
wherein, in use, the given quantity of pasta rests on the base wall in a lower region of the container (Paragraph 118, user fills his vessel with liquid and comestibles; Paragraph 100, comestibles include pasta, noodles, and ravioli; Figure 3A, liquid within the vessel is supported by the lower region of the container by gravity and thus the comestibles would likewise be supported by the lower region of the container by gravity; base wall of the vessel is in a lower region of the vessel)
Gabara fails to teach:
the first dosing device being configured to feed the given quantity of liquid water at a temperature of at least 50°C to the container
wherein the feeding assembly comprises a first flow adjuster to adjust the quantity of water flowing along the first duct, and wherein the second dosing device comprises a second flow adjuster to adjust the water vapour emitted by the second nozzle,
and wherein the pasta cooking machine is configured to operate the first dosing device and the second dosing device such that the release of the liquid water from the first nozzle overlaps in time with the emission of the water vapour from the second nozzle;
the first and the second nozzle terminate in an upper region of the container above the given quantity of pasta so as to direct the liquid water and the water vapour toward the given quantity of pasta
Cai (US 20020178932 A1) teaches a device and method for cooking comestibles with hot gaseous fluid, wherein:
in use, the given quantity of pasta rests on the base wall in a lower region of the container (Figures 1a and 2a Paragraphs 33 and 43, comestibles to be prepared can be pasta wherein said comestibles are placed in a dish on a base wall in a lower region of said dish) and the first and the second nozzle terminate in an upper region of the container above the given quantity of pasta (Figure 2a Paragraphs 26, steam distributor 59 near the center of the applicator body terminates in an upper region of the container above said pasta; Figure 2a Paragraphs 36-37, water outlet 42 is formed at the bottom of the chamber 48 and is connected to a valve 83 via a liquid passageway such as to deliver hot water through the applicator to the vessel) so as to direct the liquid water and the water vapour toward the given quantity of pasta (Figure 2a Paragraph 26, steam jets are dotted arrows from the orifices are uniformly distributed onto the comestibles in a downward direction)
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with Cai and have the wands terminate in an upper region of the container above the given quantity of pasta such as to direct steam and hot water down onto the food. This would have been done as directing steam from above from a steam wand onto pasta is known in the art to maximize the agitation and mixing of the pasta inside the container as evidenced by Paragraph 39 of Sus (US 20110256287 A1).
The Office further notes that since the applicator and nozzle of Cai is capable of delivering both hot water and steam, and is positioned above the pasta, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious when modifying Gabara with Cai to position both wands in an upper region of the container such as to direct liquid water and water vapor toward the pasta.
Gabara modified with Cai fails to teach:
the first dosing device being configured to feed the given quantity of liquid water at a temperature of at least 50°C to the container
wherein the feeding assembly comprises a first flow adjuster to adjust the quantity of water flowing along the first duct, and wherein the second dosing device comprises a second flow adjuster to adjust the water vapour emitted by the second nozzle,
and wherein the pasta cooking machine is configured to operate the first dosing device and the second dosing device such that the release of the liquid water from the first nozzle overlaps in time with the emission of the water vapour from the second nozzle;
AZUKI (JP H0787915 A) teaches a noddle boiling apparatus, wherein:
wherein the feeding assembly comprises a first flow adjuster to adjust the quantity of water flowing along the first duct (Paragraphs 5 and 9, water flow control valve is used to control hot water entering the pot), and wherein the second dosing device comprises a second flow adjuster to adjust the water vapour emitted by the second nozzle (Paragraph 7, steam control valve is used to control the steam entering the pot).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with AZUKI and have the two nozzles have their own controllable control valve connected to their own source of hot water and steam. This would have been done to allow for independent control the quantity of hot water and steam entering the container such as to better control the cooking process, and to facilitate the cooking of noodles and other pasta requiring delivery of both hot water and steam (AZUKI Paragraph 5).
Gabara modified with AZUKI fails to teach:
the first dosing device being configured to feed the given quantity of liquid water at a temperature of at least 50°C to the container
and wherein the pasta cooking machine is configured to operate the first dosing device and the second dosing device such that the release of the liquid water from the first nozzle overlaps in time with the emission of the water vapour from the second nozzle;
DI (EP 0273323 A2) teaches an apparatus for cooking pasta, wherein:
the first device being configured to feed a given quantity of liquid water at a temperature of at least 50°C to the container (Column 2 Line 51 – Column 3 Line 3, controller 34 operates the valve assembly 30 to fill the pot with hot water which is very close to the boiling temperature)
and wherein the pasta cooking machine is configured to operate the first dosing device and the second dosing device such that the release of the liquid water from the first nozzle overlaps in time with the emission of the water vapour from the second nozzle (Column 2 Line 51 – Column 3 Line 3, steam is injected into the pot at the same time that the pot is being filled with hot water).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with DI such that Gabara uses the method taught by Di including providing hot water as medium to the packaging and using steam as medium to maintain the hot water at boiling point such as to cook the pasta. This would have been done to provide rapid cooking of individual quantities of food (DI Column 1 Lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 3, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein
the opening is configured to allow part of the water vapour to flow out of the container (Figure 12B Paragraph 135, steam exists the volume via an opening 12-37).
Regarding claim 8, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1.
AZUKI further teaches:
the first flow adjuster is a valve (Paragraphs 5 and 9, hot water control valve).
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1.
AZUKI further teaches:
the second flow adjuster is a valve (Paragraph 7, steam control valve is used to control the steam entering the pot).
It would have been obvious for the same motivation as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 10, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein
the machine comprises a lid, which is configured to at least partially cover the opening (Figure 12B Paragraph 135, removable lid 12-10 is configured to create a closed volume within the volume).
Regarding claim 12, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 10, wherein
the lid completely covers said opening and is provided with control means (Figure 12B Paragraph 135, removable lid 12-10 is configured to create a closed volume within the volume)
Cai further teaches:
which are configured to let out gas from the inside of the container when the pressure inside the container exceeds a reference value (Paragraph 46, releasing excess steam in the dish when the steam pressure reaches above a certain pressure)
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with Cai and release the gas from the inside of the container when the pressure exceeds a reference value. This would have been done to create small pressure pulses which improves the quality of the resulting comestibles (Cai Paragraph 43).
Regarding claim 13, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 10, wherein
the first and the second device, in particular the first and the second nozzle, extend through the lid (Figure 12B Paragraph 135, steam wands 2-1a and 2-1b extend through the lid 12-10).
Regarding claim 14, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 10.
Cai further teaches:
a moving device to move at least one between the container and the lid relative to the other one, so as to move them close to and away from one another (Figures 1-2 Paragraph 7, extendable member is used to allow the user to move the body between a rest position and an operating position).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with Cai and had an extendable member. This would have been done to allow a user to move the body between a rest position and an operating position (Cai Paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 15, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 14.
Cai further teaches:
the moving device is configured to move the container towards the lid or away from the lid (Figures 1-2 Paragraph 7, extendable member is used to allow the user to move the body between a rest position and an operating position).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with Cai and had an extendable member configured to move the container towards and away from the lid. This would have been done to allow a user to move the body between a rest position and an operating position (Cai Paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 16, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 14.
Cai further teaches:
the moving device is configured to exert a given force upon the lid and/or upon the container so as to keep the lid in contact with an upper edge of the container, even when the second device is operated (Paragraph 46, the steam pressure generated from boiler pushes the piston 85 downwards towards the dish and releases excess steam into the dish when the steam pressure reaches above a certain pressure; Paragraph 50, valve can be used to control the steam flow to the applicator).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with Cai and release only release the gas from the inside of the container when the pressure exceeds a reference value. This would have been done to create small pressure pulses which improves the quality of the resulting comestibles (Cai Paragraph 43).
Regarding claim 17, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein:
at least one control unit, which is configured to control the first and the second dosing devices (Paragraph 112, pressure control unit 7-6 regulates the flow of hot water or steam to the steam wands)
the given quantity of liquid water is at least partially emitted before the given quantity of water vapour (Paragraph 100, steam is also used to boil water within the vessel which indicates that water is delivered before the steam is)
AZUKI- further teaches:
the given quantity of liquid water is at least partially emitted before the given quantity of water vapour (Paragraph 8, supplying water into a pot and then injecting steam generated by the boiler into the water inside the pot).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with AZUKI- and have the quantity of water be partially emitted before the quantity of steam. This would have been done as the purpose of the steam is to maintain the temperature of the water at boiling temperature (Di Column 1 Lines 15-18) and thus the introduction of the steam would reasonably be controlled based on the temperature of the emitted water in the pot as SIEGRIST teaches that the controller generates the proper food adapted climate profile in the package (SIEGRIST Paragraph 44).
DI further teaches:
at least one control unit (controller 34), which is configured to control the first and the second dosing devices so as to feed the given quantity of liquid water and the given quantity of water vapour (Column 2 Lines 51 – Column 3 Lines 1-3, controller 34 operates the valve assembly 30 to fill the pot with hot water and injects steam into the pot);
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with DI and have the dosing devices be controlled by a control unit. This would have been done so that the controller can take over the control of the cooking (DI Column 2 Lines 46-54).
The Office further notes that the MPEP teaches that broadly providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. MPEP §2144.04.VI.B. In this case, using a control unit to control the first and second dosing devices is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) in view of Cai (US 20020178932 A1), Sus (US 20110256287 A1), AZUKI (JP H0787915 A), and DI (EP 0273323 A2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of YU (CN 106388562 A).
Regarding claim 7, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein
the feeding assembly comprises a pump (Paragraph 112, pump is used to deliver water to the heating chamber; Paragraph 112, pressure control unit regulates the flow of water).
Gabara as modified fails to explicitly teach:
a flow meter to measure the quantity of water flowing along the first duct.
YU (CN 106388562 A) teaches an electric steaming device, wherein:
the feeding assembly comprises a pump and a flow meter to measure the quantity of water flowing along the first duct (Paragraphs 18-19, water adding device includes a pump and a liquid flow meter
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with YU and have the feeding assembly comprise a pump and flow meter. This would have been done to better control the water flow.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) in view of Cai (US 20020178932 A1), Sus (US 20110256287 A1), AZUKI (JP H0787915 A), and DI (EP 0273323 A2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Toole (US 6307193 B1).
Regarding claim 11, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein
wherein the lid completely covers said opening and has an outlet passage, which establishes a communication between the inside of the container and the outside (Figure 12B Paragraph 135, removable lid 12-10 is configured to create a closed volume within the volume wherein an opening 12-37 exists in the center of the lid which allow steam to exit the volume)
Gabara as modified fails to explicitly teach:
said opening has an area from 0.09 cm2 to 0.95 cm2.
Toole (US 6307193 B1) teaches a cooking vessel for cooking, wherein:
the lid has an outlet passage (one of ventilation hole 19), which establishes a communication between the inside of the container and the outside and has an area from 0.09 cm2 to 0.95 cm2 (Column 4 Lines 55-59, the ventilation holes regulate and control the amount of steam that escapes from the cooking vessel 10; Column 6 Lines 6-17, lid 12 has ventilation holes 19 which have a diameter of a quarter of an inch each; a diameter of 0.25 inches results in a total area of 0.3167 cm).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with Toole and have the outlet passage have a diameter of 0.25 inches. This would have been done to control the amount of steam that escapes from the cooking vessel.
The Office further notes that it is known in the art to choose the size of steam release holes which are sufficient to release steam but still capable of impeding fluid from splashing out as evidenced by Paragraph 58 of Kallos (US 20160302606 A1). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have had the outlet passages have an area from 0.09 cm squared to 0.95 cm squared as discovering an optimal value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art as stated by MPEP 2144.05(II).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) in view of Cai (US 20020178932 A1), Sus (US 20110256287 A1), AZUKI (JP H0787915 A), and DI (EP 0273323 A2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of LI (CN 102654904 A) and Fukuyama (US 6136355 A).
Regarding claim 19, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein:
control unit selects a target mass of the given quantity of liquid water fed into the container (Paragraph 112, pressure control unit 7-6 regulates the flow of water to the steam wand)
Gabara fails to explicitly teach:
a reader and a control unit, wherein the reader is configured to detect a machine-readable identifier, and the control unit controls the cooking parameters based on the machine-readable identifier, wherein the target mass is selected according to a ratio of a target water mass to a mass of the pasta in the container, and the ratio is between 0.30 and 0.95.
LI (CN 102654904 A) teaches an application of radio frequency identification, comprising:
a reader and a control unit, wherein the reader is configured to detect a machine-readable identifier, and the control unit controls the cooking parameters based on the machine-readable identifier (Paragraph 6, an RDIF-enable home cooking appliance utilizes a barcode or chip on the food packaging that indicates the cooking conditions for cooking wherein the cooking process is set based on the parameters and the process is completed with a single press of a button)
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with LI and have the container contain an RDIF barcode which is scannable by the appliance such that the cooking process can automatically be set by scanning. This would be done to make it more convenient for users by automatically setting cooking mode settings (LI Paragraph 4).
Gabara modified with LI fails to teach:
wherein the target mass is selected according to a ratio of a target water mass to a mass of the pasta in the container, and the ratio is between 0.30 and 0.95.
Fukuyama (US 6136355 A) teaches a process for cooking pastas, wherein:
wherein the target mass is selected according to a ratio of a target water mass to a mass of the pasta in the container, and the ratio is between 0.30 and 0.95 (Column 3 Line 57 - Column 4 Lines 1-13, 65-120mL of water is inserted per 100g of dry pasta; it should be noted that 1g equals 1mL when measuring water).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with Fukuyama and injected the pasta with 65-120mL of water per 100g of dry pasta. This would be done to properly cook pasta or noodles to a desirable “al dente” level (Fukuyama Column 4 Lines 46-50).
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) in view of Cai (US 20020178932 A1), Sus (US 20110256287 A1), AZUKI (JP H0787915 A), and DI (EP 0273323 A2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fraccon (US 20060251785 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1.
While Gabara as modified does not explicitly teach that “a ratio between a weight of the given quantity of water vapour and the given quantity of pasta ranges between .04 and 0.25”, Paragraph 35 Fraccon (US 20060251785 A1) teaches a method of cooking food using steam wherein the steam generation time depends on the cooking time and wherein the cooking time depends on the amount or size of food being cooked. It would thus be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Gabara so that “a ratio between a weight of the given quantity of water vapour and the given quantity of pasta ranges between .04 and 0.25”, as discovering an optimal value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art as stated by MPEP 2144.05(II).
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to adjust the amount of water vapour and water delivered such as to ensure that a safe amount of liquid remains in the vessel which Paragraphs 11-13 of Gabara teaches is a concern and uses sensors to monitor. This is because condensing steam add to the amount of water within the vessel which could result in the amount of water within said vessel reaching unsafe amounts.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) in view of Cai (US 20020178932 A1), Sus (US 20110256287 A1), AZUKI (JP H0787915 A), and DI (EP 0273323 A2) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pratolongo (US 4869160 A).
Regarding claim 21, Gabara as modified teaches the system according to claim 1.
While Gabara as modified does not explicitly teach that “the emitted water vapour has a vapour quality of less than 0.9”, Pratolongo (US 4869160 A) teaches an apparatus for the fast cooking of pasta which teaches the use of saturated wet vapor (Column 6 Lines 54-65) and against the formation and use of overheated vapour (Column 7 Lines 2-5). Pratolongo teaches that the presence of overheated vapour alters the molecular structure of gluten present and hinders the absorption of the water such as to even endanger the cooking process of pasta (Pratolongo Column 1 Lines 32-40). Given that overheated or superheated vapor has a quality of 1 and saturated vapor has a quality of 0, Pratolongo effective teaches of a vapor quality range of less than 1, which overlaps with the applicant’s claimed quality range.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) in view of Cai (US 20020178932 A1), Sus (US 20110256287 A1), and DI (EP 0273323 A2).
Regarding claim 22, Gabara (US 20150257573 A1) teaches a system for cooking pasta (Figure 12B Paragraph 100, cooking pasta); the system comprising:
a container (vessel 9-13), which is configured to contain a given quantity of pasta (Paragraph 16, vessel is used to cook comestibles; Paragraph 92, comestibles include pasta; Paragraph 102, pulsing of the steam continues as more comestibles are added to the liquid); the container comprising a base wall and one single opening opposite the base wall (Figure 2A, vessel containing a base and a wall as a well as a single opening opposite the base wall); and
a pasta cooking machine (Figure 12B) comprising:
a first dosing device (Figure 12B Paragraph 134, steam wand 2-1a) to feed a given quantity of liquid water into the container (Paragraph 15, steam wand applies hot water to the liquid to prepare a meal); the first dosing device being configured to feed the given quantity of liquid water to the container and comprising a first duct (Paragraph 112, pressure control unit 7-6 regulates the flow of water to the steam wand), a first nozzle arranged at an end of the first duct to release the liquid water into the container, and a feeding assembly to convey the liquid water along the first duct to the first nozzle (Paragraph 112, one-way valve is inserted to convey the water along the path; Figure 12B Paragraph 135, hot water flows from the coupling 12-13 to the flexible tube 12-14 such as to reach the steam wand 2-1a); and
a second dosing device (Figure 12B Paragraph 134, steam wand 2-1b) to feed a given quantity of water vapour into the container (Paragraph 15, steam wand applies steam to the liquid to prepare a meal); the second dosing device comprising a second duct, a second nozzle arranged at an end of the second duct to emit the water vapour (Paragraph 112, one-way valve is inserted to convey the steam along the path; Figure 12B Paragraph 135, steam flows from the coupling 12-13 to the flexible tube 12-14 such as to reach the steam wand 2-1a), and a boiler to feed the water vapour along the second duct to the second nozzle (Paragraph 112, heating element transfers its energy to the water such as to be transformed into steam), wherein the container is separable from the pasta cooking machine (Paragraph 90, vessel is removable from the grill; Paragraph 135, steam wands are detachable and the lid in which the steam wands are connected is detachable from the vessel) and the first and the second nozzle are two different nozzles and at least partially extend inside the container through the opening (Figure 12B Paragraph 135, steam wands 2-1a and 2-1b are different nozzles which extends inside the vessel through the opening covered by the lid);
wherein, in use, the given quantity of pasta rests on the base wall in a lower region of the container (Paragraph 118, user fills his vessel with liquid and comestibles; Paragraph 100, comestibles include pasta, noodles, and ravioli; Figure 3A, liquid within the vessel is supported by the lower region of the container by gravity and thus the comestibles would likewise be supported by the lower region of the container by gravity; base wall of the vessel is in a lower region of the vessel)
Gabara fails to teach:
the first dosing device being configured to feed the given quantity of liquid water at a temperature of at least 50°C to the container
wherein the pasta cooking machine is configured to operate the first dosing device and the second dosing device such that the release of the liquid water from the first nozzle overlaps in time with the emission of the water vapour from the second nozzle;
the first and the second nozzle terminate in an upper region of the container above the given quantity of pasta so as to direct the liquid water and the water vapour toward the given quantity of pasta
Cai (US 20020178932 A1) teaches a device and method for cooking comestibles with hot gaseous fluid, wherein:
in use, the given quantity of pasta rests on the base wall in a lower region of the container (Figures 1a and 2a Paragraphs 33 and 43, comestibles to be prepared can be pasta wherein said comestibles are placed in a dish on a base wall in a lower region of said dish) and the first and the second nozzle terminate in an upper region of the container above the given quantity of pasta (Figure 2a Paragraphs 26, steam distributor 59 near the center of the applicator body terminates in an upper region of the container above said pasta; Figure 2a Paragraphs 36-37, water outlet 42 is formed at the bottom of the chamber 48 and is connected to a valve 83 via a liquid passageway such as to deliver hot water through the applicator to the vessel) so as to direct the liquid water and the water vapour toward the given quantity of pasta (Figure 2a Paragraph 26, steam jets are dotted arrows from the orifices are uniformly distributed onto the comestibles in a downward direction)
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with Cai and have the wands terminate in an upper region of the container above the given quantity of pasta such as to direct steam and hot water down onto the food. This would have been done as directing steam from above from a steam wand onto pasta is known in the art to maximize the agitation and mixing of the pasta inside the container as evidenced by Paragraph 39 of Sus (US 20110256287 A1).
The Office further notes that since the applicator and nozzle of Cai is capable of delivering both hot water and steam, and is positioned above the pasta, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious when modifying Gabara with Cai and positioned both wands above in an upper region of the container such as to direct liquid water and water vapor toward the pasta.
Gabara modified with Cai fails to teach:
the first dosing device being configured to feed the given quantity of liquid water at a temperature of at least 50°C to the container
wherein the pasta cooking machine is configured to operate the first dosing device and the second dosing device such that the release of the liquid water from the first nozzle overlaps in time with the emission of the water vapour from the second nozzle.
DI (EP 0273323 A2) teaches an apparatus for cooking pasta, wherein:
the first device being configured to feed a given quantity of liquid water at a temperature of at least 50°C to the container (Column 2 Line 51 – Column 3 Line 3, controller 34 operates the valve assembly 30 to fill the pot with hot water which is very close to the boiling temperature) and a feeding assembly to convey the water along the first duct to the first nozzle (Column 2 Line 51 – Column 3 Line 3, controller 34 operates the valve assembly 30 fill the pot with hot water);
and wherein the pasta cooking machine is configured to operate the first dosing device and the second dosing device such that the release of the liquid water from the first nozzle overlaps in time with the emission of the water vapour from the second nozzle (Column 2 Line 51 – Column 3 Line 3, steam is injected into the pot at the same time that the pot is being filled with hot water).
It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gabara with DI such that Gabara uses the method taught by Di including providing hot water as medium to the packaging and using steam as medium to maintain the hot water at boiling point such as to cook the pasta. This would have been done to provide rapid cooking of individual quantities of food (DI Column 1 Lines 1-5).
The Office further notes that the delivery of the water and steam each being delivered through their own pipes is known in the art as evidenced by AZUKI (JP H0787915 A) and is beneficial in allowing the apparatus to individually control of the quantity of hot water and steam entering the container such as to better control the cooking process, and to facilitate the cooking of noodles and other pasta requiring delivery of both hot water and steam (AZUKI Paragraph 5).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 FRANKLIN JEFFERSON WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM (E.S.T).
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 at (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 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.
/F.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761