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 .
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, 2, 3, 6, 8, 11, 16, 18 and 25-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schalla et al. (EP2386811) in view of Moran et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20050193760) and Dahms et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20110090064).
Regarding Claim 1, Schalla et al. discloses a tray 80 (figure 2) for releasably engaging a trolley 12 (figure 1), the tray comprising a body having a first major surface and a second major surface (figure 2) describing a sealed volume (figure 2), the sealed volume having a phase change material received therein 190 (figure 23; paragraph 13), the tray comprising a first part of an engager for releasably engaging a second part of an engager located on a trolley 48/50 (figure 2; paragraph 52). Schalla et al. does not disclose a thermal conductivity of the first major surface is less than a thermal conductivity of the second major surface and wherein the tray further comprises a communication means, wherein the communication means comprises a RFID tag, arranged to contain operational information and/or tracking/location information associated with the tray. However, Moran et al. teaches a thermal conductivity of the first major surface is less than a thermal conductivity of the second major surface (figure 4, paragraph 20) and Dahms et al. teaches a communication means (figure 3, paragraph 33), wherein the communication means comprises a RFID tag (paragraph 33), arranged to contain operational information and/or tracking/location information associated with the tray (paragraph 33). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schalla et al. to include the above, as taught by Moran et al. and Dahms et al., in order to allow for better cooling abilities and identify the tray.
Regarding Claim 2, Schalla et al. discloses the phase change material has a phase change temperature of from 75 to -75 degrees Celsius (paragraph 76; phase change approximately -20 degrees Celsius).
Regarding Claim 3, Schalla et al. discloses an insulative foam is located within the sealed volume (paragraph 71).
Regarding Claim 6, Schalla et al. discloses the insulative foam is an open celled foam or a phenolic foam (paragraph 71).
Regarding Claim 8, Schalla et al. discloses the insulative foam has a first thermal conductivity and comprises a thermally conductive member having a second thermal conductivity, the first thermal conductivity being less than the second thermal conductivity (paragraph 71).
Regarding Claim 11, Schalla et al. discloses the body comprises a polymeric material (paragraph 69, polyethylene pouch).
Regarding Claim 16, Schalla et al. discloses the body comprises a hydrophobic coating (paragraph 69, polyethylene pouch).
Regarding Claim 18, Schalla et al. discloses the first part of the engager comprises one or more tabs or clips for engaging the second part of the engager located on a trolley, wherein the first part of the engager and the second part of the engager allow the tray to be secured to and removed from the trolley in which is locatable (figure 2; paragraph 52).
Regarding Claim 25, Schalla et al. discloses a galley trolley for an aircraft comprising the tray 12 (figure 1).
Regarding Claim 26, Schalla et al. discloses a food storage compartment (figure 2) and a tray storage compartment (figure 2) in which the tray is releasably located or locatable by engaging the first part of the engager on the tray with the second part of the engager on the trolley (figure 2).
Regarding Claim 27, Schalla et al. discloses wherein, in use, the second major surface faces the food storage compartment (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 28, Schalla et al. and Dahms et al. teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the first major surface is thicker than the second major surface and/or wherein the first major surface is fabricated from a first material and the second major surface is fabricated from a second material and wherein the first material has a lower thermal conductivity than the second material. However, Moran et al. teaches the first major surface is thicker than the second major surface (paragraph 20, figure 4) and/or wherein the first major surface is fabricated from a first material and the second major surface is fabricated from a second material and wherein the first material has a lower thermal conductivity than the second material (Figure 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schalla et al. and Dahms et al. to include the above, as taught by Moran et al., in order to allow for better cooling abilities.
Regarding Claim 29, Schalla et al. and Dahms et al. teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for thermal conductivity promoter located on or towards the second major surface. However, Moran et al. teaches thermal conductivity promoter located on or towards the second major surface 102 (figure 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schalla et al. and Dahms et al. to include the above, as taught by Moran et al., in order to allow for better cooling abilities.
Regarding Claim 30, Schalla et al. and Dahms et al. teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for indicia to identify the first major surface and/or the second major surface. However, Moran et al. teaches indicia to identify the first major surface and/or the second major surface (figure 5A). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schalla et al. and Dahms et al. to include the above, as taught by Moran et al., in order to easily identify the tray.
Claim(s) 9, 13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schalla et al. (EP2386811) in view of Moran et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20050193760), Dahms et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20110090064) and Aurekoski (EP3441699).
Regarding Claim 9, Schalla et al., Moran et al. and Dahms et al. teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the insulative foam comprises a thermally conductive member, wherein the thermally conductive member comprises one or more of metal, graphite, carbon nanotubes and/or graphene. However, Aurekoski teaches the insulative foam comprises a thermally conductive member, wherein the thermally conductive member comprises one or more of metal, graphite, carbon nanotubes and/or graphene (paragraph 37). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schalla et al., Dahms et al. and Moran et al.to include the above, as taught by Aurekoski, in order to better transfer cooling.
Regarding Claim 13, Schalla et al., Dahms et al. and Moran et al. teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the body comprises one or more of metal, carbon nanotubes and/or graphene. However, Aurekoski teaches the body comprises one or more of metal, carbon nanotubes and/or graphene (paragraph 37). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schalla et al., Dahms et al. and Moran et al.to include the above, as taught by Aurekoski, in order to better transfer cooling.
Regarding Claim 15, Schalla et al., Dahms et al. and Moran et al. teach all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the body comprises a metallic structure having a coating of a polymeric material. However, Aurekoski teaches the body comprises a metallic structure having a coating of a polymeric material (paragraph 36-38). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schalla et al., Dahms et al. and Moran et al.to include the above, as taught by Aurekoski, in order to better transfer cooling.
Claim(s) 10 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schalla et al. (EP2386811) in view of Moran et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20050193760), Dahms et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20110090064), Aurekoski (EP3441699) and Ceremony et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20140327349).
Regarding Claims 10 and 14, Schalla et al., Moran et al., Dahms et al. and Aurekoski teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the insulative foam comprises from1 to 2% carbon nanotubes and/or graphene by weight. However, Ceremony et al. teaches carbon nanotubes and graphene (paragraph 17). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Schalla et al., Moran et al., Dahms et al. and Aurekoski to include the above, as taught by Ceremony et al., in order to provide a conductive material.
Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 II(A), MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 6, 8-11, 13-16, 18, 25-30 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J VOLZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm 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, NATHAN JENNESS can be reached at (571)270-5055. 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.
/ELIZABETH J VOLZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3733