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 .
Status of the Claims
1-6 and 8-18 are pending in the current office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 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. Further, the current office action is made non-final to address missing art in the previous set of rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6 and 8-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 18 include the limitation, “wherein said free end of each of said hooks extends above said open top of said basket.” This limitation is not supported by the original disclosure. The specification states that the hooks support the heat reflector above the basket. The specification and drawings do no provide support for the free end of each hooks extending above on an open top of said basket.
Claim 15 has been amended to include the limitation, “wherein said bottom portion of said pan is configured to be received in said internal compartment of said heat reflector”. The specification states that the pan is positioned above the heat reflector. The specification also states that a gap is made between the heat reflector and pan to provide insulation. However, the specification and drawings do not appear to provide support for the pan configured being received in said internal compartment of said heat reflector. Figure 3 seems to more clearly show that the pan is positioned over the top of the heat reflector.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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.
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, 3-6, 8-13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muse (US Pat 4300444) in view of Virado (PGPUB# US2004/0123857 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Muse teaches a smoker apparatus (abstract, figure 1-2) comprising: a container 14 having an open end; a removable lid 11 for covering said open end of said container; a basket 13 positionable inside said container for holding a combustible smoking material, wherein said basket comprises an open top (figure 1); a heat reflector 22 positionable above said basket inside said container; and a grate 20. Muse further teaches the use of hooks 23/37 for supporting the heat reflector.
Muse does not explicitly teach a pan positionable above said heat reflector inside said container; wherein said basket comprises hooks spaced around a perimeter of said basket, wherein each of said hooks comprises an attached end and a free end, wherein said free end of each of said hooks extends above said open top of said basket and is configured to support said heat reflector above said open top of said basket.
However, Virado teaches a similar cooking system. (abstract and figure 1) Viraldo teaches that a pan 50 can be place over a heat reflector/pan 32. (par. 24-27 and figure 2) Virado teaches that the pan above the hear reflector is used in order to prevent grease from coming into contact with the burning charcoal. (par. 28) Virado further teaches the heat reflector 32 is supported on top of a fuel basket 36 by v shaped supports 47. Virado further teaches supporting elements of a grill using a bottom support structure 62 with hooks 65 to support an element above burning charcoal. (par. 36 and figure 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the pan above heat reflector of Virado, to the system of Muse, in order to prevent grease from coming into contact with the burning charcoal as taught by Virado. It would have further been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the bottom-up support structure of Virado for the top-down support structure of Muse, as both are simple substitutions of know support structures in a smoker apparatus. The resulting combination would result in the hooks of Muse having the free end attached to the heat reflector and the bottom of support being attached to the fuel basket as shown in Virado.
Regarding claim 3, Muse does not explicitly teach wherein said grate rests on a top of said pan inside said container.
However, Muse and Virado teach that the gratings can be positioned inside or on top of the container or pan. (figures 1 of Muse and 10 of Virado)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have rearranged the position of the grate anywhere a user desires based on the amount heat/temp required. Rearrangement of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is provided. See MPEP 2144.04 VI
Regarding claim 4, Muse teaches wherein said grate is positioned on top of said container. (figure 1)
Regarding claim 5, Muse does not explicitly teach wherein said basket is perforated.
However, Virado teach that the basket can be made of a grating so the ashes can be shaken off. (par. 25)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the grating of Virado, to the basket of Muse, in order to remove ashes from the basket as taught by Virado.
Regarding claim 6, Muse teaches wherein said container comprises a plurality of legs 12. Muse does not explicitly teach the basket having legs.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the legs of Muse, to the basket of Muse, in order support and elevate the basket.
Regarding claim 8, Muse does not explicitly teach wherein said container comprises vent holes.
However, Virado teach that each of the chambers can include an adjustable air vent. (claim 8)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the adjustable air vents of Virado, to the system of Muse, in order to control the air flow through the smoker.
Regarding claim 9, Muse teaches wherein said basket comprises a plurality of legs 12.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Muse and Virado does not explicitly teach wherein said container, said removable lid, said basket, said heat reflector, said pan, and said grate are each made of a heat-resistant material.
However, examiner takes official notice that it was known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to use heat resistant materials to make lids, baskets, heat reflectors, pans, and grates.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied heat-resistant materials to the system of Muse in view of Virado, in order to select a material that would be durable when operating in a high temperature environment.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Muse and Virado teaches wherein each of said container (12), said removable lid (handle on lid), said basket (flange on basket), said heat reflector (flange on heat reflector), said pan (54 of Virado), and said grate (each grate has handle figure 1 of Muse).
Regarding claim 12, Muse does not explicitly teach a thermometer.
However, Virado teach that it is known to attach a thermometer to a smoker to assist with controlling temperature. (par.2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the thermometer of Virado, to the system of Muse, in order to assist with controlling temperature as taught by Virado.
Regarding claim 13, Muse does not explicitly teach wherein said lid comprises a vent and an adjustable cover for covering said vent.
However, Virado teach that each of the chambers can include an adjustable air vent. (Claim 8: Adjustable air vent would include a cover to change amount of air flow.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the adjustable air vents of Virado, to the system of Muse, in order to control the air flow through the smoker. It would further have been obvious to include the adjustable vent in the lid and anywhere else on the smoker in need of air flow control.
Regarding claim 18, Muse teaches a smoker apparatus (abstract, figure 1-2) comprising: a container 14 having an open end; a removable lid 11 for covering said open end of said container; a basket 13 positionable inside said container for holding a combustible smoking material, wherein said basket comprises an open top (figure 1); a heat reflector 22 positionable above said basket inside said container; and a grate 20. Muse further teaches the use of hooks 23/37 for supporting the heat reflector.
Muse does not explicitly teach a pan positionable inside an internal compartment of said heat reflector inside said container; wherein said basket comprises hooks spaced around a perimeter of said basket, wherein each of said hooks comprises an attached end and a free end, wherein said free end of each of said hooks extends above said open top of said basket and is configured to support said heat reflector above said open top of said basket.
However, Virado teaches a similar cooking system. (abstract and figure 1) Viraldo teaches that a pan 50 can be place over a heat reflector/pan 32. (par. 24-27 and figure 2) Virado teaches that the pan above the hear reflector is used in order to prevent grease from coming into contact with the burning charcoal. (par. 28) Virado further teaches the heat reflector 32 is supported on top of a fuel basket 36 by v shaped supports 47. Virado further teaches supporting elements of a grill using a bottom support structure 62 with hooks 65 to support an element above burning charcoal. (par. 36 and figure 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the pan above/inside the heat reflector of Virado, to the system of Muse, in order to prevent grease from coming into contact with the burning charcoal as taught by Virado. It would have further been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have substituted the bottom-up support structure of Virado for the top-down support structure of Muse, as both are simple substitutions of know support structures in a smoker apparatus. The resulting combination would result in the hooks of Muse having the free end attached to the heat reflector and the bottom of support being attached to the fuel basket as shown in Virado.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muse (US Pat 4300444) and Virado (PGPUB# US2004/0123857 A1) in view of Brennan (PGPUB# US2018/0180286 A1)
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Muse and Virado does not explicitly teach a ring inside said container for supporting said basket.
However, Brennan teaches a similar smoking/grill system. (abstract and figures 1-6) Brennan teaches a basket 12 supported by a base ring 11. (par. 34-36 and figures 1-6)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the support ring of Brennan, to the bottom of the basket of Muse, in order to provide support to the basket and allow spend ash to exit the firebox as taught by Brennan (par. 34).
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muse (US Pat 4300444) and Virado (PGPUB# US2004/0123857 A1) in view of Henderson et al. (US Pat# 2,894,448)
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Muse and Virado does not explicitly a smoke stack pipe attached to said removable lid.
However, Henderson teaches a similar smoking/grill system. (abstract and figures 1-6) Brennan teaches a lid with a smoke stack 20 and adjustable vent 22. (col. 4, lines 20-40 and figures 1-6)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the stack and adjustable vent of Henderson, to the system of Muse in view of Virado, in order to provide an appropriate vent flow through the smoker.
Regarding claim 15, Muse teaches a smoker apparatus (abstract, figure 1-2) comprising: a container 14 having an open end; a removable lid 11 for covering said open end of said container; a basket 13 positionable inside said container for holding a combustible smoking material, wherein said basket comprises an open top (figure 1); a heat reflector 22 comprising an internal compartment, wherein said heat reflector positionable is above said basket inside said container; and a grate 20. Muse further teaches the use of hooks 23/37 for supporting the heat reflector.
Muse does not explicitly teach a pan positionable above said heat reflector inside said container, wherein said pan comprises a top portion and a bottom portion, wherein said bottom portion of said pan is configured to be received in said internal compartment of said heat reflector; and a smoke stack pipe extending upwards from a top surface of said removable lid.
However, Virado teaches a similar cooking system. (abstract and figure 1) Viraldo teaches that a pan 50 can be place over/inside a heat reflector/pan 32. (par. 24-27 and figure 2) Virado teaches that the pan above the hear reflector is used in order to prevent grease from coming into contact with the burning charcoal. (par. 28) Virado further teaches the heat reflector 32 is supported on top of a fuel basket 36 by v shaped supports 47. Virado further teaches supporting elements of a grill using a bottom support structure 62 with hooks 65 to support an element above burning charcoal. (par. 36 and figure 2)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the pan above/inside heat reflector of Virado, to the system of Muse, in order to prevent grease from coming into contact with the burning charcoal as taught by Virado.
The combination of Muse and Virado does not explicitly a smoke stack pipe attached to said removable lid.
However, Henderson teaches a similar smoking/grill system. (abstract and figures 1-6) Henderson teaches a lid with a smoke stack 20 and adjustable vent 22. (col. 4, lines 20-40 and figures 1-6)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the stack and adjustable vent of Henderson, to the system of Muse in view of Virado, in order to provide an appropriate vent flow through the smoker.
Regarding claim 16, Muse does not explicitly teach wherein said smoke stack pipe comprises an adjustable cover.
However, Virado teach that each of the chambers can include an adjustable air vent. (claim 8) and Henderson teaches a similar smoking/grill system. (abstract and figures 1-6) Henderson teaches a lid with a smoke stack 20 and adjustable vent 22. (col. 4, lines 20-40 and figures 1-6)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the adjustable air vents of Virado and Henderson, to the system of Muse, in order to control the air flow through the smoker.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Muse and Virado does not explicitly teach wherein said container, said removable lid, said basket, said heat reflector, said pan, and said grate are each made of a heat-resistant material.
However, examiner takes official notice that it was known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to use heat resistant materials to make lids, baskets, heat reflectors, pans, and grates.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the expected filing date of the claimed invention to have applied heat-resistant materials to the system of Muse in view of Virado, in order to select a material that would be durable when operating in a high temperature environment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5569. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Marivelisse Santiago-Cordero can be reached at 571-272-7839. 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.
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761