DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the communication filed 9/4/2025.
Claims 2-3, 6, 9-10, 12 and 18 are pending and have been examined.
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 .
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 2-3, 6, 9-10, 12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noren (US 4,872,466 A) in view of Bigott (US 2006/0254619 A1), Bigott (KR 2008/0020998 A) (“Bigott’998”) (machine translation attached), Classen et al. (US 8,662,246 B2), Herbst (EP 2380479 A1) (machine translation attached) and Wood et al. (US 6,598,701 B1).
Re claim 2, Noren discloses a method of washing dishes in a dishmachine (abstract, col. 8 lines 5-59) comprising:
(a) spraying wash water (col. 8 line 14-19) through at least one wash arm (“wash arms”);
(b) collecting the wash water (col. 8 lines 18-19) in a wash tank (“sump”);
(c) spraying rinse water (col. 8 lines 42-59) having a temperature of 165-180°F (col. 3 lines 45-46 180 F) through at least one rinse arm (rinse arm 32);
(d) collecting the rinse water (col. 8 lines 58-59 sump) in the wash tank, wherein spraying the wash water, collecting the wash water, spraying the rinse water, and collecting the rinse water collectively form a single wash cycle (col. 8 lines 5-59);
(e) draining a portion of the wash tank every wash cycle (col. 8 lines 20-42, 0.8 gallon of retained wash water…plus whatever drains from the wash water plumbing; see also abstract “portion of wash water is drained”); and
(g) refilling the wash tank with water (col. 8 42-57 fresh water fill valve 55 opens….[t]he fill valve is then closed…amount of fresh rinse water added during this period…),
wherein the dishmachine does not include a heater (col. 7 lines 50-53 “heater can be omitted…if a source of 180 F water”; see also MPEP 2144.04(II)(A) Omission of an Element, here omission of all heaters is obvious if no heating is require and/or desirable, e.g. 180 F high temperature source sufficient to sanitize);
and wherein the dishmachine comprises a controller (see figs. 4A-4B, col. 8 to col. 11 “The Control System”);
wherein the dishmachine is made of material configured to maintain wash water temperature between 150-165 F during the wash cycle (claim 7 “maintaining wash water at a temperature of at least 160 F during recirculation”).
Noren does not explicitly disclose (f) draining the entire wash tank after completing a predetermined number of wash cycles; and the dishmachine does not include a heater; and wherein the dishmachine comprises an insulated paneling on the exterior of the dishmachine, the insulated paneling comprising a high thermal conductivity material adjacent to a controller and a low thermal conductivity material adjacent to the wash tank, the low thermal conductivity material comprising an internal chamber filled with air, and the low thermal conductivity material selected from the group consisting of foam, fiberglass, air, porcelain, nylon polymer, PTFE, PVC, HDPE, polystyrene, and combinations thereof; and wherein the high thermal conductivity material and low thermal conductivity material are configured to maintain wash water temperature between 150-165 F during the wash cycle without a heater.
Regarding the “draining” step, Bigott discloses it is very well-known in the dishmachine art (abstract) to provide the step of (f) draining the entire wash tank after completing a predetermined number of wash cycles (¶ [0245]-[0248] counter that tracks the number of wash cycles….the tank water is replaced once the number of wash cycles equal the preset value; see also ¶ [0260] automatic drain).
Bigott further discloses operation of the pumps can increase the temperature of the fluid within the tank from about 65 degrees to about 118 degrees Farenheit in about ninety minutes without using a heater (¶ [0112]). And further teaches heating the fluid in the range of about 160 to about 170 degrees Farenheit for a first type of washing cycle (¶ [0208]).
Regarding the capability of the pumps to maintain a temperature in the range of about 160 degrees F, Bigott’998 discloses teaching the use of pumps to heat fluid without the use of heater that “may increase the temperature of the fluid in the tank from about 65 degrees to about 180 degrees Farenheit in about 90 minutes, without the use of a heater” (¶ [085] p. 8). Bigott’998 further teaches “other wash cycles include heating the fluid in the tank to a range of from about 160 to about 170 degrees F for the first type of cleaning cycle (¶ [085] p. 10). As such, it is obvious that the combination is capable of utilizing only the pumps, without the use of heaters, to increase and control the temperature of the fluid in the tank (Bigott/Bigott’998), in a range of 160 F to 170 F (Bigott/Bigott’998/Noren). Examiner also noting that the combination contemplates Noren having an inlet temperature of 180 F, thus requiring even less heating from the pumps of Bigott/Bigott’998 to maintain a desired wash cycle temperature of 160 F.
Further, the selection of ranges between the known operating temperatures, i.e. between 65 to above 180 F to 150 F to 165 F, is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, depending on the desired sanitization, cleanliness, temperature of water source and/or desired energy savings. See MPEP 2144.05 Obviousness of Similar and Overlapping Ranges.
Regarding “insulated paneling”, Classen teaches it is old and well-known in the dishmachine art (abstract) to include insulated paneling (refs. 6, 7, 8, 9; col. 12 lines 43-61) on the exterior of the dishmachine (see fig. 1) comprising low thermal conductivity material (abstract, bituminous mixture. Here, “low” bituminous is a relative term to that of “high” steel) surrounding the wash tank on at least two sides (refs. 42, 46, 47, 49, see figs. 1-2), the low thermal conductivity material possibly selected from air (see fig. 2 appearing to have air gaps between refs. 10 and 11 “does not have a constant thickness but, instead, a plurality of non-contiguous regions 10, 11 of differing thickness”).
Regarding “high thermal conductivity material surrounding a controller”, Herbst discloses it is well-known in the dishmachine art (¶ [0001]) to provide insulated paneling (ref. 4 housing cap) comprising a high thermal conductivity material (¶ [0024] thin stainless steel sheet) surrounding a controller (ref. 11, 7) on at least two sides (see Annotated Figs. 1, 3-5 below in dash and arrows). (Examiner further notes the controller of Herbst is located on the front of the door, which would be simultaneously adjacent and exterior to the insulated paneling of Classen 411b and the high grade steel sheeting door of Classen 48, thus in the combination the controller being adjacent to two high thermal conductivity material).
PNG
media_image1.png
402
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
474
224
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
462
366
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding “the low thermal conductivity material” (to the extent Classen is not clear as to an “air gap”), Wood discloses it is known in the sound absorbing material art (abstract) to provide a material with low thermal conductivity comprising an internal chamber filled with air (see fig. 2 cavity or volume 114), and the lower thermal conductivity materials selected from the group consisting of foam, fiberglass, air, porcelain, nylon polymer, PTFE, PVC, HDPE, polystyrene and combination thereof (fiberglass strands, open-cell polymeric foams, polyurethanes, acoustic tiles col. 1 lines 17-20 and/or nylons col. 8 line 13, polyvinylchlorides col. 8 line 14) (Examiner notes the open-cell polymeric foam in the Background would also satisfy the internal chamber, as claimed).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Noren to further including draining the entire wash tank after completing a predetermined number of wash cycles, as suggested by Bigott, in order to avoid stagnate and dirty water and insufficient cleaning (Bigott ¶ [00244]); and to further include heating by pump without heaters up to 180 F and desirably 160 to 170 F during a wash cycle, as suggested by Bigott’998 in order to reduce operation cost without a heater and sufficient temperature for cleaning; and to further include an insulated panel comprising low thermal conductivity material, as suggested by Classen, in order to reduce noise transmission and reduce heat loss (Classen abstract); and to further position the controller at the front of the door with a high thermal conductivity material paneling, as suggested by Herbst, in order to provide durability and insensitivity to cleaning and ease of disinfecting (Herbst ¶ [0009]); and to further modify the sound insulating material of Classen to include an internal chamber filled with air selected from fiberglass, foam, polyurethanes, nylons or polyvinylchloride, as suggested by Wood, for the purpose of known, readily-available, effective and inexpensive sound absorbers (Woods col. 2 lines 37-42, col. 1 lines 13-14).
Re claims 3 and 6, Noren discloses a commercial dishmachine (abstract); a door-(col. 6 lines 35 door 15) or hood-style dishmachine.
Re claim 9, Classen/Herbst further discloses wherein the insulated panel is solid (Classen see fig. 1; Herbst see figs. 4-5).
Re claim 10, Noren/Bigott/Bigott’998/Classen/Herbst discloses as shown above but does not explicitly disclose wherein the insulated paneling is perforated. However, Wood discloses it is known in the sound absorbing art (abstract) including dishwashers (col. 10 line 55) to include insulated paneling that is perforated (abstract, col. 2 lines 44-51).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the insulated panel of Noren/Bigott/Classen/Herbst to further include perforations, as suggested by Wood, in order to influence the sound absorption spectrum (Wood abstract).
Re claims 12, Herbst/Classen further discloses further discloses wherein the material with high thermal conductivity comprises stainless steel, carbon steel, iron, nickel, brass, silver, copper, or combinations thereof (Herbst ¶ [0024] stainless steel; Classen col. 13 lines 42-45 high grade steel, see also col. 7 lines 1-2 stainless high grade steel. Here, “high” is a relative term to the other material bituminous mixture that is comparatively “low”).
Re claim 18, Wood further discloses wherein the low thermal conductivity material comprises an open or closed cellular structure embedded with air or other gases (col. 1 lines 17-20 open-cell polymeric foams). Here, the inclusion of known sound absorbing material in substitution or in addition to other known sound absorbing material is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, depending on the frequency of sound desired to be reduced and it being simply a matter of cost-to-efficacy balance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/4/2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
At issue is the language “comprising an internal chamber filled with air”. Here, the broadest reasonable interpretation of an internal chamber is “a…[internal] artificial enclosed space or cavity” (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chamber). As seen in Fig. 2, Wood clearly defines a “cavity or volume” 114 (col. 4 lines 40-50). The “plugs” of air refer to the soundwaves travelling through the microperforations 112 as they vibrate (“As the air vibrates, sound energy is dissipated via frictional interaction of the moving air with the walls of the microperforations 112”). That is, the cavity or volume 114 is an internal chamber filled with air connected to microperforations 112 (see also abstract, “the film is then formed to produce the desired three-dimensional shape….without the need for additional support or frame”). The film is made of suitable plastics including but not limited to, polyolefins, polyesters, nylons, polyurethanes, polycarbonates, polysulfones, polypropylenes and polyvinylchlorides for many applications. Copolymers and blends may also be used.
Further, regarding Wood’s background section, Wood teaches that other sound absorbing insulation are known to include: one or more layers of fibrous materials, for example, fiberglass strands, open-cell polymeric foams, fibrous spray-on materials such as polyurethanes, and acoustic tiles (agglomerated fibrous and/or particulate matter) (emphasis added). Examiner respectfully maintains that the background section teaches that it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include any or in combination materials in the background section, despite “inherent disadvantages”. The disadvantages of particulate matter, costly treatment and complexity do not rise to the level of teaching away, as it simply a balance of cost-to-efficacy and availability of readily accessible material. One would not be discouraged from the combination with sufficient funds. As such, it would also have been prima facie obvious to include an open-cell polymeric foams, satisfying “an internal chamber filled with air” (“a material in a lightweight cellular form resulting from introduction of gas bubbles during manufacture” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foam).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20110232701 A1 note acoustic membrane having air gaps including closed and/or open cell foam.
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 KEVIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7299. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30am to 6:30pm.
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, Michael Barr can be reached on 571-272-1414. 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.
KEVIN G. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/KEVIN G LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1711
/MICHAEL E BARR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1711