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 .
Priority
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
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, 2, 5-8, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Schreiner (EP 2026632) in view of Austen (US 2013/0128919) and Cheng (US 2019/0053332). An English machine translation of Schreiner (EP 2026632) is included with the Notice of Refences Cited (PTO-892).
With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Schreiner teaches a method for preparing a food (title, abstract), the method comprising: inserting a food thermometer (Fig 7, temperature sensor spit 3, 0061) including two temperature sensors (temperature sensors 6a, 6b, 6c, 0061) into a food (food 1, 0061) to be cooked, in such a way that one temperature sensor is located outside (0061, while one of the temperature sensors 6a is placed outside the food 1, 0061) the food and the other temperature sensor is located in (0061, two of the temperature sensor 6b, 6c are located inside the food 1) the food; supplying heat to the food, by means of a heating device (heater 51, 0062), or cooling down the product to be cooked; transmitting, by the food thermometer, actual temperatures measured with the one or more temperature sensors to a control device (0062, the arithmetic unit 30 includes a timer and is able to process the data of all sensors 6a, 6b, 6c, 24, 39, 45, 48, including their temporal developments, 0073); at least one of controlling, by the control device, the heating device depending on transmitted actual temperatures by comparison with desired temperatures stored in a memory unit (0062, raw data and the values obtained by calculations can be compared with stored values from the memory 33…on the basis of the information obtained in the evaluation, the arithmetic unit 30 can control both a heater 51); or transmitting, by the control device, at least one instruction for action based on a comparison of at least one transmitted actual temperature with at least one desired temperature stored in a memory unit (0062, 0073); or storing, by the control device, at least one transmitted actual temperature in a memory unit as a desired temperature depending on a product to be cooked (0070, typical boundary conditions and the time profile of the core temperature can be stored in the memory 33 for a specific cooking process, this data can be recalled using the same or a similar cooking process to set appropriate constraints or find solutions to the heat equation for the problem).
Schreiner discloses the claimed invention except for the food is a dough; and communicating as an instruction for action a cooling-down period to the user.
However, Austen discloses that the food is a dough (0020, the unit of food 12 is a loaf of bread and the probe 10 is inserted into the loaf prior to baking; where the bread is dough before baking) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method of preparing a food silent to the food is a dough with the dough of Austen for the purpose of preparing a known food item that is suitable for temperature probe process monitoring (0020, the probe 10 can be used with any type of food that is at least partially solid such that it can support a probe inserted into it), thereby improving the overall versatility of the food preparation method.
Additionally, Cheng discloses communicating as an instruction for action a cooling-down period to the user (0145, which include an instruction to remove the edible substance at a certain time to rest; 0146, 0184) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method of preparing a dough of Schreiner in view of Austen silent to a cooling-down period indication with the communicating as an instruction for action a cooling-down period to the user of Cheng for the purpose of providing an alert to the user to remove the food item from the cooking appliance to enable a resting or cooling period, thereby ensuring that the food item is at an optimum temperature for consumption.
With respect to the limitations of claims 2 and 8, Schreiner teaches at least one of a first desired temperature profile for the one temperature sensor or a second desired temperature profile for the other temperature sensor is stored in the memory unit depending on the product to be cooked (0036, 0062, 0070);
before supplying heat to the product to be cooked, a dimension of the product to be cooked is determined and stored desired temperatures are selected depending on the determined dimension of the product to be cooked (Figs 2-5, shows predetermined temperature profiles related to food thickness).
With respect to the limitations of claims 5, 17 and 18, Schreiner in view of Austen and Cheng discloses the product to be cooked is a bread dough (Austen, 0020, the unit of food 12 is a loaf of bread and the probe 10 is inserted into the loaf prior to baking; where the bread is dough before baking); the cool-down period is communicated to the user as an instruction for action after the temperature rise (Cheng, 0145, 0146, 0184).
With respect to the limitations of claims 6 and 7, Cheng discloses further comprising transmitting to the user as an instruction for action that the user (0145, 0146, 0184); further comprising transmitting to the user as an instruction for action that the user shall set or change a heating temperature of the heating device (0199; provide the user with an interface to make further adjustments in response thereto).
Schreiner in view of Austen and Cheng discloses the claimed invention except for it is transmitted to the user as an instruction for action that the user shall set or change a distance between the product to be cooked and the heating device. However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to have is transmitted to the user as an instruction for action that the user shall set or change a distance between the product to be cooked and the heating device, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable user instruction parameters involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
Claims 9, 10, 12, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Schreiner (EP 2026632) in view of Cheng (US 2019/0053332).
With respect to the limitations of claim 9, Schreiner teaches a system for preparing a food or a beverage (title, abstract), the system comprising: a food thermometer (Fig 7, temperature sensor spit 3, 0061) having two temperature sensors (temperature sensors 6a, 6b, 6c, 0061); a heating device (heater 51, 0062); a control device to which actual temperatures measured by the food thermometer with the at least two temperature sensors can be transmitted (0062, the arithmetic unit 30 includes a timer and is able to process the data of all sensors 6a, 6b, 6c, 24, 39, 45, 48, including their temporal developments, 0073), the control device is configured to at least one of: control the heating device depending on transmitted actual temperatures by comparison with desired temperatures stored in a memory unit (0062, raw data and the values obtained by calculations can be compared with stored values from the memory 33…on the basis of the information obtained in the evaluation, the arithmetic unit 30 can control both a heater 51), or transmit instructions for action to a user based on a comparison of transmitted actual temperatures with desired temperatures stored in a memory unit (0062, 0073), or store transmitted actual temperatures in a memory unit as desired temperatures depending on a product to be cooked (0070, typical boundary conditions and the time profile of the core temperature can be stored in the memory 33 for a specific cooking process, this data can be recalled using the same or a similar cooking process to set appropriate constraints or find solutions to the heat equation for the problem),
Schreiner discloses the claimed invention except for the control device is configured to communicate a cooling-down period as an instruction for action to the user.
However, Cheng discloses the control device (Fig 2, controller 220, 0034) is configured to communicate a cooling-down period as an instruction for action to the user (0145, which include an instruction to remove the edible substance at a certain time to rest; 0146, 0184) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the food preparation system of Schreiner to a cooling-down period indication with the control device is configured to communicate a cooling-down period as an instruction for action to the user of Cheng for the purpose of providing an alert to the user to remove the food item from the cooking appliance to enable a resting or cooling period, thereby ensuring that the food item is at an optimum temperature for consumption.
With respect to the limitations of claim 10, Schreiner teaches at least one of a first desired temperature profile for the one temperature sensor or a second desired temperature profile for the other temperature sensor is stored in the memory unit depending on the product to be cooked (0036, 0062, 0070).
With respect to the limitations of claims 12 and 16, Schreiner discloses the claimed invention except for further comprising at least one of a display or a loudspeaker, the control device is configured to output an instruction for action to the user at least one of graphically via the display or acoustically via the loudspeaker; the control device is configured transmit the cooling-down period as an instruction for action after an end of a heat supply.
However, Cheng discloses a cooling-down period is transmitted as an instruction for action after the temperature rise (0146, 0184); further comprising a display and/or a loudspeaker, the control device is configured to output an instruction for action to the user graphically via the display and/or acoustically via the loudspeaker (0146, 0184); the control device is configured in such a way that after the end of a heat supply, a cooling time is transmitted as an instruction for action (0146, 0184) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method and system of preparing a food of Schreiner silent to a cooling-down period indication with a cooling-down period is transmitted as an instruction for action after the temperature rise; further comprising a display and/or a loudspeaker, the control device is configured to output an instruction for action to the user graphically via the display and/or acoustically via the loudspeaker; the control device is configured in such a way that after the end of a heat supply, a cooling time is transmitted as an instruction for action of Cheng for the purpose of providing an alert to the user that a resting or cooling period has started, thereby ensuring that the food item is at an appropriate temperature for consumption.
With respect to the limitations of claim 13, Cheng discloses the at least one of the display is a display of a kitchen appliance (Fig 2, touch display, 0043) or a mobile phone or the loudspeaker is a loudspeaker of a kitchen appliance or a mobile phone (speaker, 0043).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Austen (US 2013/0128919) in view of Schreiner (EP 2026632) and Cheng (US 2019/0053332).
With respect to the limitations of claim 19, Austen teaches a method for preparing a bread (0003, baking bread), the method comprising: inserting a food thermometer (Figs 1-3, probe 10, 0022) including at least one temperature sensor into a bread dough (0020, the unit of food 12 is a loaf of bread and the probe 10 is inserted into the loaf prior to baking; where the bread is dough before baking) in such a way that the at least one temperature sensor is located outside (ambient temperature sensor 52, 0024) the bread dough or in the bread dough (temperature sensors 50A-50E, 0024); supplying heat to the bread dough, by means of a heating device (Fig 1, oven 14, 0023), transmitting, by the food thermometer, actual temperatures measured with the one or more temperature sensors to a control device (0022, wirelessly transmit the data to a location outside of the oven 14, such as to a computer configured to monitor baking temperatures).
Austin discloses the claimed invention except for explicitly showing at least one of: controlling, by the control device, the heating device depending on transmitted actual temperatures by comparison with desired temperatures stored in a memory unit; or transmitting, by the control device, at least one instruction for action based on a comparison of at least one transmitted actual temperature with at least one desired temperature stored in a memory unit; or storing, by the control device, at least one transmitted actual temperature in a memory unit as a desired temperature depending on a bread dough; and communicating a cooling-down period as an instruction for action after an end of the heat supply.
However, Schreiner discloses controlling, by the control device, the heating device depending on transmitted actual temperatures by comparison with desired temperatures stored in a memory unit (0062, raw data and the values obtained by calculations can be compared with stored values from the memory 33…on the basis of the information obtained in the evaluation, the arithmetic unit 30 can control both a heater 51); or transmitting, by the control device, at least one instruction for action based on a comparison of at least one transmitted actual temperature with at least one desired temperature stored in a memory unit (0062, 0073); or storing, by the control device, at least one transmitted actual temperature in a memory unit as a desired temperature depending on a bread dough (0070, typical boundary conditions and the time profile of the core temperature can be stored in the memory 33 for a specific cooking process, this data can be recalled using the same or a similar cooking process to set appropriate constraints or find solutions to the heat equation for the problem) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method of preparing bread of Austen having a control device in connection with the food thermometer and heating device silent to the recited controlling, transmitting or storing with the controlling, by the control device, the heating device depending on transmitted actual temperatures by comparison with desired temperatures stored in a memory unit; or transmitting, by the control device, at least one instruction for action based on a comparison of at least one transmitted actual temperature with at least one desired temperature stored in a memory unit; or storing, by the control device, at least one transmitted actual temperature in a memory unit as a desired temperature depending on a bread dough of Schreiner for the purpose of providing a known control configuration that controls the heating device based on actual temperature readings from the thermometer (0062) to regulate a cooking process (0072).
Additionally, Cheng discloses communicating a cooling-down period as an instruction for action (0145, which include an instruction to remove the edible substance at a certain time to rest; 0146, 0184) after an end of the heat supply. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method of preparing a dough of Austen in view of Schreiner silent to a cooling-down period indication with the communicating a cooling-down period as an instruction for action after an end of the heat supply of Cheng for the purpose of providing an alert to the user to remove the food item from the cooking appliance to enable a resting or cooling period, thereby ensuring that the food item is at an optimum temperature for consumption.
Claims 3, 4, 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Schreiner (EP 2026632) in view of Austen (US 2013/0128919) or Schreiner (EP 2026632) in view of Cheng (US 2019/0053332) or Austen (US 2013/0128919) in view of Schreiner (EP 2026632) and Cheng (US 2019/0053332) as applied to claims 1, 9 and 19, further in view of John (WO2004080126).
With respect to the limitations of claims 3, 11 and 20, Schreiner teaches storing the temperature profile stored in the memory unit. Schreiner in view of Austen or Schreiner in view of Cheng or Austen in view of Schreiner and Cheng discloses the claimed invention except for the temperature profile comprises a temperature rise towards an end of the cooking time. However, John discloses the temperature profile comprises a temperature rise towards an end of the cooking time (Fig 12, Pg 18, Lines 768-788, baking time course of a loaf of bread, where temperature continues to rise until the end of baking cycle) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method and system of preparing a food of Schreiner in view of Austen or Schreiner in view of Cheng or Austen in view of Schreiner and Cheng silent to a temperature rise towards an end of cooking with the temperature profile comprises a temperature rise towards the end of the cooking time of John for the purpose of providing a known temperature profile suitable for the baking of bread quickly and efficiently.
With respect to the limitations of claim 4, Schreiner in view of Austen and John discloses heat is supplied to a dough according to the temperature profile stored in the memory unit, which comprises a temperature rise towards the end of the cooking time (John, Fig 12, Pg 18, Lines 768-788).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Schreiner (EP 2026632) in view of Cheng (US 2019/0053332) as applied to claim 9, further in view of Buttner (US 2020/0170447).
With respect to the limitations of claim 14, Schreiner in view of Cheng discloses the claimed invention except for further comprising a food processor, the food processor includes the control device. However, Buttner discloses further comprising a food processor (Fig 2, cook-mixer 102, 0104), the food processor includes the control device (control unit 106, 0104, 0105) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the system for preparing a food or beverage of Schreiner in view of Cheng having a control device silent to a food processor with the further comprising a food processor, the food processor includes the control device of Buttner for the purpose of providing a known cooking system configuration that allows multiple kitchen components to compare the at least one piece of detected information about the state of the foodstuff with a preparation instruction and in that the control unit is configured to control the further kitchen appliance as a function of the result of the comparison (abstract, 0008), so that their interaction can be automated and optimized for the execution of a cooking recipe (0011).
With respect to the limitations of claim 15, Schreiner discloses the recipe development device is configured to suggest, to a user, desired temperatures for the creation of a recipe (0017, 0070, 0074). Schreiner in view of Cheng and Buttner discloses the claimed invention except the food processor includes a recipe development device. However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to have the food processor includes a recipe development device, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable recipe development device location involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Austen (US 2013/0128919) in view of Schreiner (EP 2026632) and Cheng (US 2019/0053332) as applied to claim 19, further in view of John (WO2004080126).
With respect to the limitations of claim 20, Schreiner discloses a temperature profile stored in the memory unit. Austen in view of Schreiner and Cheng discloses the claimed invention except for the temperature profile comprises a temperature rise towards the end of the cooking time. However, John discloses the temperature profile comprises a temperature rise towards the end of the cooking time (Fig 12, Pg 18, Lines 768-788, baking time course of a loaf of bread, where temperature continues to rise until the end of baking cycle) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the method of preparing bread of Austen in view of Schreiner and Cheng silent to a temperature rise towards the end of cooking with the temperature profile comprises a temperature rise towards the end of the cooking time of John for the purpose of providing a known temperature profile suitable for the baking of bread quickly and efficiently.
Response to Amendments
Claims 2-17, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25-33 and 35 have been amended.
Claims 1-35 are pending.
Response to Arguments
The 112b rejection of claims 1-20 has been withdrawn in view of the claim amendments.
Applicant's arguments filed 6/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant has argued on pages 7-13 that Schreiner (EP 2026632) or Cheng (US 2019/0053332) or Austen (US 2013/0128919) fails to disclose the amended limitations of claims 1, 9 and 19 directed to “communicating a cooling-down period as an instruction for action after an end of the heat supply”, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Cheng as set for in the rejection above discloses in paragraph 0145, which include an instruction to remove the edible substance at a certain time to rest, and therefore fully discloses the recited claim limitations.
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 comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should clearly be labeled “Comments on Statement for Reasons for Allowance.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN S TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7745. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday [8:00-5:00].
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.
/THIEN S TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 7/23/2025
Prosecution Insights