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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN202221889916.3, filed on 07/20/2022.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 states, “end portion of the network rack”, and in claim 1, the term “net rack” is used. From the specification filed on 09/01/2022, it appears that there is no other “net rack” object that could be used for the “network rack”, however there could be a potential lack of antecedent basis issue due the different abbreviations of network being used.
Examiner suggests changing the word “network rack” to “net rack” in claim 2 for purposes of clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20220084917 A) in view of Lin et al. (EP 3373783 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a food cooking device (Abstract, “multi-purpose grilling plate”), comprising
a grill body (Page 2, Para. 3 from end, “grill 120 and the guide wall 140 on the grill 100, the bottom plate 102 is formed in a square shape, and the wall 104 is formed along the square edge to form a heat source.”),
a food cooking cavity being disposed in the grill body (Page 2, Para. 2 from end, “In addition, the roasting space 100a and the auxiliary cooking space 100b can be partitioned by the support piece 106, and the wall 104 and the support piece 106 are configured as a guide wall 140”, where the roasting and cooking spaces are the food cooking cavities), and
the net rack comprises a plurality of bar-shaped pieces disposed spaced from each other (Page 3, Para. 3, “Additions are arranged at equal intervals in the longitudinal direction and welded across the lower end of a state in which a plurality of grills 220 are arranged in parallel using the mounting portion 240”),
the bar-shaped pieces are respectively connected to each other by a connecting piece (Page 2, Para. 4, “the holder 240 is configured with a U-shaped holder 240 to form a holder groove 242”, where the holder grooves 242 are the connecting pieces that connect all the bar-shaped pieces 220),
one side of each of the bar-shaped pieces facing the food being cooked is formed with an oil guiding groove extending along a length direction thereof (Page 3, Para. 5, “The mounted roasting object can be cooked, and even if oil comes out of the roasting object, the oil can be efficiently discharged through the flow path 222 and harmful substances can be prevented from being generated.”),
the net rack is obliquely mounted in the food cooking cavity so that the oil guiding groove on each of the bar-shaped pieces is in an inclined state (Page 3, Para. 6, “At this time, the grill 100 allows the first grilling plate 200 to be mounted inclinedly from the grilling space 100a side to the auxiliary cooking space 100b side, so that the flow path 222 of the grilled meat 220 is connected to the auxiliary cooking space ( It is possible to induce oil discharge by forming a gradient toward 100b)”), and two ends of the oil guiding groove form a height difference (Page 3, Para. 6, “for this purpose, the guide walls 140 on both sides of the crater 120 may be formed to have a height difference between the upper and lower sides.”).
Kim does not disclose:
a rack body, the rack body being disposed in the food cooking cavity and located below food being cooked, wherein the rack body comprises at least one net rack.
However, Lin discloses, in the similar field of food cooking devices with grills (Para. 0001, “cooking grill apparatus”), where a rack body is located in a food cooking cavity below the food being cooked (Para. 0054, “DIBS grill 7 is fabricated so one or more dividers 19-20 (see FIG. 1A) may be placed under and between one or more grids 11 in firebox 10.”, where the firebox is below the food cooking cavity), where the rack body includes at least one net rack (Para. 0054, “Dividers 19-20 section DIBS grill 7 into multiple cooking surface zones, and are secured between two or more separate grids 11”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the cooking device in Kim to include the dividers or rack body as taught by Lin.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage being able to locate where grills should be positioned if the cooking device accepts more than one grill, where the dividers or rack bodies can let a user know the specific positions meant for each grill, as stated by Lin, Para. 0054, “With dividers 19-20, consumers can isolate selected zones of the DIBS grill 7 and restrict mixing of grilling liquids, food seasonings, foods grilled with different cooking methods, and the like, in a multiple grid-and heat-plate grill arrangement.”.
Claims 2-5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20220084917 A) in view of Lin et al. (EP 3373783 B1) in further view of Antrag (DE 19716972 B4).
Regarding claim 2, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein an end portion of the network rack located at a position of one end of each of the bar-shaped pieces is erected on a first step surface on the food cooking cavity by at least one first cushion (Kim, Page 3, Para. 4 from end, “In addition, the corresponding wall 104a has a recessed part 105 having a shape that is inserted into the lower side corresponding to the length of the mounting part 240 in order to prevent left and right flow in the state in which the first grilling plate 200 is mounted.”, where Fig. 4 shows that the left end side of the net rack includes a first step surface 104a by the back wall, where the back wall is construed as a first cushion).
Modified Kim does not disclose:
where the first cushion is a block.
However, Antrag discloses, in the similar field of cooking devices (Abstract, “a grill grate”), where the first cushion can be a partial block shape (Page 4, Para. 1, “At him are the supports 2 fixed on which the grill grate 1 outsourced. The length of the columns 2 is different, reducing the inclination of the grill grate 1 is realized.”, and Fig. 2 shows that the support columns are in a block-like shape with three sides). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the back support wall in modified Kim to be a block-like structure support as taught by Antrag.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of allowing for a similar slanted inclination of a grill to be provided, as stated by Antrag, Page 4, Para. 1, “The length of the columns 2 is different, reducing the inclination of the grill grate 1 is realized.”.
It has also been held that mere changes in shape are obvious modifications to make. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). It is the Examiner’s position that the supports shown in Kim and Antrag both are able to hold the grill and allow for an inclination to form, where the different shape still allows for the same end function with minor differences in surface area contact. As a result, altering the shape of the support to a block would be a mere matter of a user selecting what type of shape desired for their design.
Regarding claim 3, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 2, as set forth above, discloses wherein a location near an end portion of the net rack located at a position of the other end of each of the bar-shaped pieces is erected on a second step surface on the food cooking cavity by at least one second cushion (Kim, Page 3, Para. 4 from end, “In addition, the corresponding wall 104a has a recessed part 105 having a shape that is inserted into the lower side corresponding to the length of the mounting part 240 in order to prevent left and right flow in the state in which the first grilling plate 200 is mounted.”, where Fig. 4 shows that near the right end side of the net rack includes a second step surface 104a by the middle wall, where the middle wall is construed as a second cushion), and
the first cushion and the second cushion have a height difference so that the net rack is in an inclined state after being mounted in the food cooking cavity (Kim, Page 3, Para. 4 from end, “In addition, the corresponding wall 104a has a recessed part 105 having a shape that is inserted into the lower side corresponding to the length of the mounting part 240 in order to prevent left and right flow in the state in which the first grilling plate 200 is mounted.”, where Fig. 4 shows that the left and right ends include a height difference to allow for an inclined state, Page 3, Para. 3 from end, “the first grilling plate 200 is mounted with a gradient”).
Modified Kim does not disclose:
the end portion of the net rack located at a position of the other end of each of the bar-shaped pieces includes a second step;
there being a second cushion block.
However, Antrag discloses where the end portion of the net rack includes the second step (Page 5, last Para., “the frames ( 12a . 12b ) with supports ( 2 ) are connected for support above a heat source”) and where the second cushion can be a partial block shape (Page 4, Para. 1, “At him are the supports 2 fixed on which the grill grate 1 outsourced. The length of the columns 2 is different, reducing the inclination of the grill grate 1 is realized.”, and Fig. 2 shows that the support columns are in a block-like shape with three sides, where the second cushion is positioned near the front of the grill). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the front support wall in modified Kim to be a block-like structure support as taught by Antrag.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of allowing for a similar slanted inclination of a grill to be provided, as stated by Antrag, Page 4, Para. 1, “The length of the columns 2 is different, reducing the inclination of the grill grate 1 is realized.”.
It has also been held that mere changes in shape are obvious modifications to make. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). It is the Examiner’s position that the supports shown in Kim and Antrag both are able to hold the grill and allow for an inclination to form, where the different shape still allows for the same end function with minor differences in surface area contact. As a result, altering the shape of the support to a block would be a mere matter of a user selecting what type of shape desired for their design.
Regarding claim 4, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 3, as set forth above, discloses wherein the connecting piece further comprises a first support bar (Kim, Page 3, Para. 5 from end, “mounting groove 242 is formed to be relatively larger than the thickness of the guide wall 140 so as to have a clearance, so that the guide wall 140 is accommodated in the mounting groove 242 while being inclinedly mounted.”, and Page 3, Para. 3, “And a cradle 240 is provided at the lower end of the first grilling plate 200 to be vertically inserted into
the guide wall 140 to be seated.”, where the first support bar is the mounting part 240 located at the back wall or higher portion of the grill), the first support bar is formed on the end portion of the net rack located at the position of one end of each of the bar-shaped pieces (Kim, Fig. 4, where the mounting part 240 located at the higher portion of the grill is shown to be located at the end portion of the net rack), and the at least one first block is formed on the first support bar (Kim, Fig. 4, where the first cushion is shown to be the back wall that couples to the first support bar or the mounting part 240; teaching from Antrag, where a cushion block or any other shape support is shown to be known).
Regarding claim 5, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 4, as set forth above, discloses wherein the connecting piece further comprises a second support bar (Kim, Page 3, Para. 5 from end, “mounting groove 242 is formed to be relatively larger than the thickness of the guide wall 140 so as to have a clearance, so that the guide wall 140 is accommodated in the mounting groove 242 while being inclinedly mounted.”, and Page 3, Para. 3, “And a cradle 240 is provided at the lower end of the first grilling plate 200 to be vertically inserted into the guide wall 140 to be seated.”, where the second support bar is the groove 242 located near the front wall or lower portion of the grill), and the at least one second cushion block is formed on the second support bar (Kim, Fig. 4, where the second cushion is shown to be the middle wall that couples to the second support bar or the mounting part 240; teaching from Antrag, where a cushion block or any other shape support is shown to be known).
Modified Kim does not disclose:
the second support bar is formed on the end portion of the net rack located at the position of the other end of each of the bar-shaped pieces.
However, Antrag discloses where the end portion of the net rack includes a support bar connected to the second step (Page 5, last Para., “the frames ( 12a . 12b ) with supports ( 2 ) are connected for support above a heat source”, where the frame is construed to be that support bar). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the front support bar in modified Kim to be at the end portion of the net rack as taught by Antrag.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of allowing for a similar slanted inclination of a grill to be provided through the framework, as stated by Antrag, Page 5, last Para., “the frames ( 12a . 12b ) with supports ( 2 ) are connected for support above a heat source”, where the position of the framework still allows for a connection to the supports.
Regarding claim 8, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above, discloses wherein the grill body comprises an oil collecting rack for mounting the net rack (Kim, Page 3, Para. 7 from end, “It is possible to induce oil discharge by forming a gradient toward 100b), and for this purpose, the guide walls 140 on both sides of the crater 120 may be formed to have a height difference between the upper and lower sides.”), the second step surface is formed on the oil collecting rack (Kim, modified Fig. 5, where the second step surface is shown forming on the oil collecting rack), a height of the first cushion block is higher than a height of the second cushion block (Kim, modified Fig. 5, where the heights of the first and second cushions are shown; teaching from Antrag, where a cushion block is disclosed), and bottom of the oil collecting rack is provided with an oil collecting groove disposed obliquely towards the net rack. (Kim, modified Fig. 5, where the obliquely disposed feature is shown for oil collecting groove of the oil collecting rack for the net rack; Page 4, Para. 3 from end, “In addition, it is desirable to form an oil outlet 180 in the auxiliary cooking space 100b so that excess oil can be drained when excess oil remains, and a separate stopper may be provided at the oil outlet.”).
PNG
media_image1.png
368
877
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 5, Kim
Claims 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20220084917 A) in view of Lin et al. (EP 3373783 B1) in further view of Nather (EP 2639515 A1).
Regarding claim 6, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Kim does not disclose:
wherein the connecting piece comprises a first connecting block, and the first connecting block is fixedly connected with two adjacent bar-shaped pieces.
However, Nather discloses, in the similar field of food cooking devices (Abstract, “primary support module (2) that is provided for receiving food to be cooked and/or cooking vessel.”), where a connecting piece can be a block shape that fixedly connects two adjacent pieces (Page 6, Para. 5 from end, “The hinge-like pivotal connections 18 and 19 comprise in the embodiment in the direction of the axis A displaceable sliding sleeves 20 and 21. These are above In addition, in particular biased by a spring. As a result, a blocking displacement position of the displacement sleeves 20 and 21 are kept biased again.”, where Fig. 5 and 6 show that the sleeve is in a block-like shape or rectangular shape). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the connecting piece and bar pieces in modified Kim to include an upper section to hold two adjacent bar pieces together as taught by Nather.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage being able to further secure the bar pieces so that undesirable pivoting or folding could not occur, as stated by Nather, Page 6, Para. 5 from end, “As a result, a blocking displacement position of the displacement sleeves 20 and 21 are kept biased again. An undesirable pivoting or even folding of the support modules 2 and 3, as in the position according to Fig. 5 are shown can be prevented.”.
Regarding claim 7, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 6, as set forth above, discloses wherein an outer wall of the bar-shaped piece located at the outermost side is formed with a connecting piece (Kim, Fig. 3, where the bar pieces 220 are always on the connecting piece 242, even the outermost piece is in contact with the connecting piece).
Modified Kim does not disclose:
wherein an outer wall of the bar-shaped piece located at the outermost side is formed with a second connecting block, and a position of the second connecting block corresponds to a position of the first connecting block.
However, Nather discloses where the connecting piece in a block shape can be used multiple times, where their positions can be aligned along specific axes (Page 6, Para. 5 from end, “The hinge-like pivotal connections 18 and 19 comprise in the embodiment in the direction of the axis A displaceable sliding sleeves 20 and 21.”, where multiple connecting blocks 20 and 21 are used, where Fig 5 shows that they are aligned). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the connecting piece with the connection to the outer wall of the bar-shaped piece on the outermost side and then the next two bar pieces going towards the other end of the connecting piece in modified Kim to include multiple connection blocks as taught by Nather; where the connecting piece in Kim is already aligned, meaning that the multiple connection blocks would also be corresponding in position with each other.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage being able to further secure the bar pieces so that undesirable pivoting or folding could not occur, as stated by Nather, Page 6, Para. 5 from end, “As a result, a blocking displacement position of the displacement sleeves 20 and 21 are kept biased again. An undesirable pivoting or even folding of the support modules 2 and 3, as in the position according to Fig. 5 are shown can be prevented.”.
It has also been held that mere duplication of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). It is the Examiner’s position that by extending the block connections in Nather along the connection piece in Kim so that every two adjacent bars are secured to each other would still allow the user to gain the benefit of securing the bar pieces from rotating. As a result, duplicating the block connections along the entire length of the connecting piece would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Claims 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20220084917 A) in view of Lin et al. (EP 3373783 B1) in further view of Antrag (DE 19716972 B4) and Wang et al. (CN 110887331 A, hereinafter Wang).
Regarding claim 9, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 8, as set forth above, discloses wherein a baffle is formed on a top surface of the oil collecting rack (Kim, modified Fig. 5, where the baffle on the top surface of the oil collecting rack is shown).
Modified Kim does not disclose:
a side wall of the second support bar is provided with a spacer block abutting against the baffle.
However, Wang discloses, in the similar field of food holding devices (Page 1, Para. 2 from end, “refrigerating device storing perishable food”), where the food holder has a protrusion or spacer block to abut against a far wall or baffle (Page 14, Para. 6, “the cover 3 may include a convex portion 316, the drawer 2 is pushed into the storage chamber 10, the cover 3 of the protrusion 316collides with the back plate 100 of the storage chamber 10.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the second support bar in modified Kim to include a protrusion as taught by Wang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage allowing the food holder, which could be the rack or drawer, to have more precise contact with the baffle and allow a user to know that the rack is located at the correct position, as stated by Wang, Page 14, Para. 6, “ the cover 3 of the protrusion 316collides with the back plate 100 of the storage chamber 10. Therefore, the way it can through point contact improves and contact precision of the back plate 100.”.
Regarding the specific location where the protrusion contacts the second support bar, it has been held that mere rearrangement of part is an obvious modification to make. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). It is the Examiner’s position that putting the protrusion on the side wall or on a front wall of the second support bar would still be able to achieve the same end function of allowing the rack to hold its position correctly. As a result, rearranging the protrusion to be at different locations would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Claims 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (KR 20220084917 A) in view of Lin et al. (EP 3373783 B1) in further view of Antrag (DE 19716972 B4) and Wang et al. (CN 110887331 A, hereinafter Wang) and Kwak (KR 102059184 B1).
Regarding claim 10, modified Kim teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, as set forth above.
Modified Kim does not disclose:
wherein both sides of the oil collecting rack are provided with mounting plates abutting against end portions of the second support bar.
However, Kwak discloses, in the similar field of food holding devices (Abstract, “grilling grill for grilling”), where the oil collecting rack has mounting plates that abut against the end portions of a support bar for the rack (Modified Fig. 3, where the oil collecting rack mounting plates are shown to abut against the ends of the support bar for the rack). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the support bar and oil collecting rack in modified Kim to include the abutting feature as taught by Kwak.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage securing the oil collecting rack section to be isolated so oil does not escape into the cooking area, where Kwak would improve upon Kim as Kim shows that a second step surface is a wall but does not specify that the support bar also secures the oil collecting area, as stated by Kwak, Page 3, Para. 8 from end, “As the front closure plate 31 is installed, the frying pan 30 is closed together with the frame 10 so that food in the frying pan 30 does not escape into the open space between the grill meat 20.”.
PNG
media_image2.png
325
524
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 3, Kwak
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Auf (DE 2435801 A1) discloses a similar slanted oil guiding groove for a grilling rack, however a grill body is not disclosed. Ducate et al. (US 20140352551 A1) discloses a similar slanted grill surface with bar pieces. Zhang (WO 2012025338 A1) discloses a similar slanted grill, with support pieces being columns instead of bars.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN GUANHUA WEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9940. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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 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.
/KEVIN GUANHUA WEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
08/08/2025