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 .
Response to amendments
The amendments filed 10/14/2025 have been entered, The drawing objection has been overcome by amendment. Accordingly claims 1-6 and 9-12 remain pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/14/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant firstly argues (page 7):
“With respect to dependent claim 8, the Examiner asserts "it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of Papaleo and Wulf...to modify the safety interlock system of Papaleo to include the implement sensing control system of Wulf, because detection of interchangeable implements enable varied motor control specific to said implements while also being able to perform interlock function without mechanical implements." While Wulf discloses the use of sensor switches 66, 67 to detect a type of container and a microcontroller that using the container information to provide functions for the blender base 32, Wulf fails to disclose "wherein the motorized base housing is configured to adjust a speed of the drive coupler based on the accessory attachment detected" as recited in independent claim 1. See col. 13, lines 28-48 of Wulf. As shown in Fig. 38 of Wulf, the device of Wulf detects the type of container and enables or disables pre-set routines and sets a manual speed range for the device. An operator or user of the device of Wulf selects the routine or manually selects the speed. Accordingly, Wulf fails to disclose "the motorized base housing is configured to adjust a speed of the drive coupler based on the accessory attachment detected" as recited in independent claim 1.”.
However Examiner respectfully disagrees because Wulf provides different ranges of speed based on accessory detected in accordance with the prior/amended claims merely requiring an adjustment of speed (not a single set speed) based on accessory attached, Wulf provides selection of speeds limited to attachment as disclosed by Applicant above and provided in past/present rejection, because Wulf anticipates different functions associated to different attachments to include speed “the blender base 32 may be used with any number of different blending or processing units that may serve different or overlapping functions.” (column 6, lines 18-30) these different / non-overlapping functions change a speed by availability there between, emphasis added “If the container is not a blender container, step 352 branches to step 360, where a determination is made if the container is a food processor container. If so, step 360 branches to step 362, where food processor routines are enabled. Likewise, some routines, e.g., blender routines, may be disabled (step 364). The manual speed of the blender base 32 is set to the food processor range in step 366.
If the container is neither a blender container or a food processor container, then step 360 branches to step 368, where the microcontroller handles accordingly. For example, a separate type of container may be utilized with the blender base 32, and routines and/or a particular speed range may be available for that type of container.” (column 20, lines 3-9) the ranges of set speeds according to type of processing/processor, emphasis added “Blenders are household devices often used to blend or mix drinks or liquids. On the other hand, food processors are household devices commonly used to chop, cut, slice, and/or mix various solid foods such as vegetables, fruits, or meats. Different blade designs and rotation speeds are used in a blender or a food processor in order to accomplish the mixing or cutting actions desired.” (column 1, lines 11-17).
Therefore the rejection is maintained.
Applicant secondly argues (page 7-8):
Applicant also respectfully submits that the Examiner failed to provide the required articulated reasoning and rationale as to why one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified Papaleo in view of Wulf. See MPEP §2142. The Examiner merely asserts that modifying Papaleo in view of Wulf would have been obvious to one skilled in the art "because detection of interchangeable implements enable varied motor control specific to said implements while also being able to perform interlock function without mechanical implements". The bare assertion that it would be obvious to modify a device to include functionality from a device of a secondary reference is insufficient to establish a primafacie case of obvious.
Therefore, for at least the foregoing reasons, independent claim 1 is patentable over Papaleo and Wulf. Independent claim 12 was amended to include the subject matter of dependent claims 7 and 8 and is patentable over the cited references for at least the same reasons discussed above in connection with independent claim 1. Reconsideration and withdrawal of these rejections are respectfully requested.
However Examiner respectfully disagrees because as disclosed by Applicant above, the rational is given that “detection of interchangeable implements enable varied motor control specific to said implements”, therefore it is more than implied that specific implements performing a correlated specific range of processing’s would be enhanced by automatically/detectingly being tied to a correlating range of motor controls (speed for one) associated there to implement/processing’s.
Therefore the rejection is maintained.
Applicant thirdly argues (page 8):
Independent claim 9 was amended to recite "a motorized base housing comprising a drive coupler configured to rotate about a first axis and at least one tab protruding outward from a distal end of the motorized base housing...and a base attachment housing comprising a first port configured to receive the drive coupler and a second port configured to receive the central rotating member, the first port comprising an attachment area configured to retain the at least one tab of the motorized base housing...." Applicant respectfully submits that Papaleo and Wulf fail to disclose at least one tab and an attachment area as recited in amended independent claim 9. Reconsideration and withdrawal of this rejection are respectfully requested.
Examiner agrees, see newly cited reference Ryan.
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 1-6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Papaleo (US 5,129,589) in view of Wulf (US 6,609,821).
Regarding claim 1, Papaleo discloses a food processing attachment for a food processing device comprising:
a base attachment housing (generally 12) including:
a first port (where motorized base housing (stick blender 11) connects to 16, see figure 1) configured to receive a drive coupler (15) of a detachably connectable motorized base housing (housing of 11);
a second port (where 18 interchangeably fits to housing 12 “the container 18 can be differently shaped, in particular in order to adapt to specific uses. For example, in the case of a citrus-fruit squeezer, the container 18 shown in the figures can be replaced by the classical container comprising an upper ribbed element which is generically cone-shaped and rotating in order to remove the pulp from the halved citrus fruit. Likewise, for the preparation of milk shakes, the container 18 can be replaced by a vertically taller container with rotating blades disposed on the bottom. All these variations to the container 18 are in any case technically known and easily imaginable by any expert technician.” (column 3, lines 4-22)) configured to receive a central rotating member (where driven shaft 17 exists in 18 and provides drive connection to food processing accessory 19, see figure 1)) of a detachably connectable accessory attachment (drive shaft 17 running multitude of food processing accessories 19 “The coupling 15 is connected, by means of a drive system 16, for example of the toothed belt type, to a pivot 17 protruding vertically from the base of the device so as to fit into a container 18 and operate interchangeable rotating elements for whipping, cutting, chopping etc., as, for example, indicated schematically by reference 19.” (column 1-2, lines 62-5)): and
a drive transfer assembly (16) configured to couple the first port to the second port (connection of first port drive coupler 15 to second port central rotating member disclose above see (column 3, lines 4-22), additionally see figure 1 showing drive system 16):
wherein the drive transfer assembly is configured to transfer rotational motion of the drive coupler to drive rotational motion of the central rotating member of the accessory attachment when the motorized base housing and the accessory attachment are connected to the first port and second port respectively (drive transfer from stick blender 11 to food processor implement 19 “a rotating element (19) for processing the foodstuffs placed therein, a drive mechanism (16) for transmitting movement to the element (19) includes an element (15) which engages with the end of the rotating shaft (22) of an immersion type blender (11) disposed in a housing (12),” (abstract)).
wherein the second port includes one or more interlocks (safety mechanism 24) to detect the accessory attachment coupled to the base attachment housing (food processor 18 must be in place to housing 12, to include proper orientation of lid 23, or the drive motor will not be operational “The mechanism 21 comprises a forked-shaped element 25, pivoted on 26 and having a recess 27 for the shank 13 of the blender. When the lid is removed or positioned incorrectly, a spring 28 pushes the element 25 into the position shown in FIG. 3 so that the recess 27 is no longer aligned with the coupling 15.” (column 2, lines 23-28)),
Papaleo is silent regarding and wherein the motorized base housing is configured to adjust a speed of the drive coupler based on the accessory attachment detected.
However Wulf teaches wherein the motorized base housing is configured to adjust a speed of the drive coupler based on the accessory attachment detected (detection of type of implement on food processor base “One or more sensors may be present on the blender base to detect the presence of and type of container in which the mixing or processing will take place.” (column 2-3, lines 63-2), functions specific to implement, emphasis added “the microcontroller 224 may use the container information to provide particular functions for the blender base 32, or even to provide relative information on the display 236.” (column 13, lines 28-48) programs of function provide speed control, emphasis added “the preprogrammed commands (e.g., the commands described above) are executed by microcontroller 224 to control the speed, pause time, and/or direction of the motor 234.” (column 15, lines 46-60)).
The advantage of wherein the motorized base housing is configured to adjust a speed of the drive coupler based on the accessory attachment detected, is to enable varied motor control to include speed is set specific to said implements while also being able to perform interlock function without mechanical implements, emphasis added ” For example, the sensor switches 66, 67 may normally be in an opened position. In such an embodiment, the microcontroller 224 may be programmed such that, if none of the switches are closed, then the blender base 32 will not operate. If, however, one or both of the sensor switches 66, 67 is closed (e.g., by the switch actuators 80), the specific switch or switches that are closed indicate to the microcontroller exactly what container or type of container is on the blender base 32. As an example, when the collared jar 34 is placed on the blender base 32, the sensor actuators 80 depress the second sensor switch 67. Similarly, sensor actuators on the actuator collar 190 depress the second sensor switch 67 when the actuator collar is placed on the blender base. In contrast, when the food processor 40 is placed on the blender base 32, the first sensor switch 66 is depressed. Yet another container might engage and depress both the sensor switches 66, 67. As subsequently described, the microcontroller 224 may use the container information to provide particular functions for the blender base 32, or even to provide relative information on the display 236.” (column 13, lines 28-48), functions of the blender to include speed of the drive, emphasis added “The function switches 286 represent various programs for functions or end results that have been preprogrammed into the read only memory 228, as described above. For example, pressing or touching a function switch 290 labeled "salsa" will cause microcontroller 224 to access memory section 260 of read only memory 228 for the program containing preprogrammed motor commands used to make salsa, and the preprogrammed commands (e.g., the commands described above) are executed by microcontroller 224 to control the speed, pause time, and/or direction of the motor 234. To alert the user which function or program is running, a LED 292 can light up on the particular function switch 286 that was pressed.” (column 15, lines 46-60).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Papaleo and Wulf bfore him or her, to modify the safety interlock system of Papaleo to include the implement sensing control system of Wulf, because detection of interchangeable implements enable varied motor control specific to said implements while also being able to perform interlock function without mechanical implements.
Regarding claim 2, Papaleo as modified teaches the food processing attachment of claim 1, Papaleo as already modified further teaches wherein the accessory attachment further comprises a vessel (18) and the central rotating member (17) is positioned to rotate within the vessel (“The coupling 15 is connected, by means of a drive system 16, for example of the toothed belt type, to a pivot 17 protruding vertically from the base of the device so as to fit into a container 18 and operate interchangeable rotating elements for whipping, cutting, chopping etc., as, for example, indicated schematically by reference 19.” (column 1-2, lines 62-5)).
Regarding claim 3, Papaleo as modified teaches the food processing attachment of claim 1, Papaleo as already modified further teaches wherein the drive transfer assembly includes at least one of a belt drive and a gear train to drive rotational motion of the central rotating member (belt shown Figure 1, gear anticipated “The drive system 16 can obviously also be made with toothed gearing rather than with belts.” (column 1-2, lines 62-5)).
Regarding claim 4, Papaleo as modified teaches the food processing attachment of claim 1, Papaleo as already modified further teaches wherein the accessory attachment is selected from the group consisting of: a blender (bottom blades configuration disclosed below), a chopper (food processor with top blade and food shoot 20 as shown in figure 1), a mixer, a frother, a vacuum sealer, a grinder. a food processor (as shown in figure 1). juicer, spiralizer, and a direct prepper (kitchen appliances variations anticipated to driven component “For example, in the case of a citrus-fruit squeezer, the container 18 shown in the figures can be replaced by the classical container comprising an upper ribbed element which is generically cone-shaped and rotating in order to remove the pulp from the halved citrus fruit. Likewise, for the preparation of milk shakes, the container 18 can be replaced by a vertically taller container with rotating blades disposed on the bottom. All these variations to the container 18 are in any case technically known and easily imaginable by any expert technician.” (column 3, lines 4-22)).
Regarding claim 5, Papaleo as modified teaches the food processing attachment of claim 1, Papaleo as already modified further teaches wherein the drive coupler rotates about a first axis (axis of 15) and the central rotating member rotates about a second axis (axis of 17), and the first axis is parallel to the second axis (see figure 1, parallel/vertical axis of both 15/17).
Regarding claim 6, Papaleo as modified teaches the food processing attachment of claim 5, Papaleo as already modified further teaches wherein the first axis is offset from the second axis (see separation distance between 15/17 (axis thereof), figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Papaleo as modified teaches the food processing attachment of claim 1, Papaleo as already modified further teaches wherein the second port includes one or more interlocks (safety mechanism 24) to detect the accessory attachment coupled to the base attachment housing (food processor 18 must be in place to housing 12, to include proper orientation of lid 23, or the drive motor will not be operational “The mechanism 21 comprises a forked-shaped element 25, pivoted on 26 and having a recess 27 for the shank 13 of the blender. When the lid is removed or positioned incorrectly, a spring 28 pushes the element 25 into the position shown in FIG. 3 so that the recess 27 is no longer aligned with the coupling 15.” (column 2, lines 23-28)).
Regarding claim 12, Papaleo discloses a method of using a food processing device comprising:
connecting a drive coupler (15) of a motorized base housing (housing of 11) to a first port (where stick blender 11 fits to housing 12 to connect to drive coupler 15, see figure 1) of a base attachment housing (12);
connecting a central rotating member (17) of an accessory attachment (where 17 attached to food processing implement 19, see figure 1) to a second port (where food processor body attaches to 12, see figure 1) of the base attachment housing;
providing a drive transfer assembly (16) within the base attachment housing (within housing 12, see figure 1) arranged to transfer a motion of the drive coupler to a motion of the central rotating member drive transfer from stick blender 11 to food processor implement 19 “a rotating element (19) for processing the foodstuffs placed therein, a drive mechanism (16) for transmitting movement to the element (19) includes an element (15) which engages with the end of the rotating shaft (22) of an immersion type blender (11) disposed in a housing (12),” (abstract)); and
activating the motorized base housing to drive rotational movement of the central rotating member via the drive transfer assembly (“it is possible to insert the blender 11 which, when operated, sets the elements 19 in the container 18 rotating,” (column 2, lines 41-46)).
wherein the second port includes one or more interlocks (safety mechanism 24) to detect the accessory attachment coupled to the base attachment housing (food processor 18 must be in place to housing 12, to include proper orientation of lid 23, or the drive motor will not be operational “The mechanism 21 comprises a forked-shaped element 25, pivoted on 26 and having a recess 27 for the shank 13 of the blender. When the lid is removed or positioned incorrectly, a spring 28 pushes the element 25 into the position shown in FIG. 3 so that the recess 27 is no longer aligned with the coupling 15.” (column 2, lines 23-28)),
Papaleo is silent regarding and wherein the motorized base housing is configured to adjust a speed of the drive coupler based on the accessory attachment detected.
However Wulf teaches wherein the motorized base housing is configured to adjust a speed of the drive coupler based on the accessory attachment detected (detection of type of implement on food processor base “One or more sensors may be present on the blender base to detect the presence of and type of container in which the mixing or processing will take place.” (column 2-3, lines 63-2), functions specific to implement, emphasis added “the microcontroller 224 may use the container information to provide particular functions for the blender base 32, or even to provide relative information on the display 236.” (column 13, lines 28-48) programs of function provide speed control, emphasis added “the preprogrammed commands (e.g., the commands described above) are executed by microcontroller 224 to control the speed, pause time, and/or direction of the motor 234.” (column 15, lines 46-60)).
The advantage of wherein the motorized base housing is configured to adjust a speed of the drive coupler based on the accessory attachment detected, is to enable varied motor control to include speed is set specific to said implements while also being able to perform interlock function without mechanical implements, emphasis added ” For example, the sensor switches 66, 67 may normally be in an opened position. In such an embodiment, the microcontroller 224 may be programmed such that, if none of the switches are closed, then the blender base 32 will not operate. If, however, one or both of the sensor switches 66, 67 is closed (e.g., by the switch actuators 80), the specific switch or switches that are closed indicate to the microcontroller exactly what container or type of container is on the blender base 32. As an example, when the collared jar 34 is placed on the blender base 32, the sensor actuators 80 depress the second sensor switch 67. Similarly, sensor actuators on the actuator collar 190 depress the second sensor switch 67 when the actuator collar is placed on the blender base. In contrast, when the food processor 40 is placed on the blender base 32, the first sensor switch 66 is depressed. Yet another container might engage and depress both the sensor switches 66, 67. As subsequently described, the microcontroller 224 may use the container information to provide particular functions for the blender base 32, or even to provide relative information on the display 236.” (column 13, lines 28-48), functions of the blender to include speed of the drive, emphasis added “The function switches 286 represent various programs for functions or end results that have been preprogrammed into the read only memory 228, as described above. For example, pressing or touching a function switch 290 labeled "salsa" will cause microcontroller 224 to access memory section 260 of read only memory 228 for the program containing preprogrammed motor commands used to make salsa, and the preprogrammed commands (e.g., the commands described above) are executed by microcontroller 224 to control the speed, pause time, and/or direction of the motor 234. To alert the user which function or program is running, a LED 292 can light up on the particular function switch 286 that was pressed.” (column 15, lines 46-60).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Papaleo and Wulf bfore him or her, to modify the safety interlock system of Papaleo to include the implement sensing control system of Wulf, because detection of interchangeable implements enable varied motor control specific to said implements while also being able to perform interlock function without mechanical implements.
Claims 9, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Papaleo in view of Ryan (US 2015/0164279).
Regarding claim 9, Papaleo discloses a food processing device comprising:
a motorized base housing (housing 12, motor 11) comprising a drive coupler (15) configured to rotate about a first axis (axis of motor 11 and drive coupler 15, see figure 1);
an accessory attachment (food processor 18) comprising a central rotating member (17) configured to rotate about a second axis (axis of 17, driven via drive 16 in connection to 15, see figure 1): and
a base attachment housing (12) comprising a first port (where stick blender 11 inserts through housing 12 to connect to drive coupler 15, see figure 1) configured to receive the drive coupler (see 15 within housing 12 in connection to stick blender 11, figure 1) and a second port (where 18 interchangeably fits to housing 12 “the container 18 can be differently shaped, in particular in order to adapt to specific uses. For example, in the case of a citrus-fruit squeezer, the container 18 shown in the figures can be replaced by the classical container comprising an upper ribbed element which is generically cone-shaped and rotating in order to remove the pulp from the halved citrus fruit. Likewise, for the preparation of milk shakes, the container 18 can be replaced by a vertically taller container with rotating blades disposed on the bottom. All these variations to the container 18 are in any case technically known and easily imaginable by any expert technician.” (column 3, lines 4-22)) configured to receive the central rotating member (where driven shaft 17 exists in 18 and provides drive connection to food processing accessory 19, see figure 1);
wherein the base attachment housing further comprises a drive transfer assembly (16) arranged to transfer rotational motion of the drive coupler to drive rotational motion of the central rotating member (drive transfer from stick blender 11 to food processor implement 19 “a rotating element (19) for processing the foodstuffs placed therein, a drive mechanism (16) for transmitting movement to the element (19) includes an element (15) which engages with the end of the rotating shaft (22) of an immersion type blender (11) disposed in a housing (12),” (abstract)).
Papaleo is silent regarding and at least one tab protruding outward from a distal end of the motorized base housing, the first port comprising an attachment area configured to retain the at least one tab of the motorized base housing.
However Ryan teaches (Fig-1-2-5-6) and at least one tab (43/44 “Ears 43, 44 that descend from the lower rim of the handle portion 14 accommodate (as is known in the art) mechanical buttons 45, that when depressed simultaneously (disengage the handle portion 14 from an accessory that is attached to it” [0044]) protruding outward from a distal end of the motorized base housing (stick blender fits into base 46 of gear drive via above disclosed ears/tabs [0045], see figure 5) the first port (46) comprising an attachment area (46 having recesses as shown in figure 10 “The collar 46 in tins example has a pair of recesses and ears that cooperate with the ears 43, 44 of the handle of the stick mixer.” [0045]) configured to retain the at least one tab of the motorized base housing (retention via “recesses” disclosed above [0045]).
The Advantage of and at least one tab protruding outward from a distal end of the motorized base housing the first port comprising an attachment area configured to retain the at least one tab of the motorized base housing, is to provide a stick blender that works for power a base station processor with additional hand held processing options (“the base 11 can support the stick mixer's removable stem and blade assembly 15 and/or the stick mixer's whisk accessory 16.” [0038]) and or to enhance a connection between a stick blender and a base station processor “Ears 43, 44 that descend from the lower rim of the handle portion 14 accommodate (as is known in the art) mechanical buttons 45, that when depressed simultaneously (disengage the handle portion 14 from an accessory that is attached to it).” [0044].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Papaleo and Ryan before him or her, to modify the undisclosed attachment of stick blend of Papaleo to include the tab and recess stick blender to base connection of Ryan, because tabs at a distal end of a stick blender along with receiving recesses to attaching component, enhance retention of the stick blender thereto while and or also making it possible to change handheld components of the stickblender.
Regarding claim 10, Papaleo as modified teaches the food processing device of claim 9, Papaleo as already modified further teaches wherein the First axis is parallel to and offset from the second axis (see figure 1, parallel/vertical axis of both 15/17).
Regarding claim 11, Papaleo as modified teaches the food processing device of claim 9, Papaleo as already modified further teaches wherein the drive transfer assembly includes a belt drive or a gear train (belt shown Figure 1, gear anticipated “The drive system 16 can obviously also be made with toothed gearing rather than with belts.” (column 1-2, lines 62-5)).
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 Spencer H Kirkwood whose telephone number is (469)295-9113. The examiner can normally be reached 12:00 am - 9:00 pm Eastern.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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.
/Spencer H. Kirkwood/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/STEVEN W CRABB/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761