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 Objections
Claims 1-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, elements a, b and c should start with “a” instead of “A”.
In claims 2-15, line 1, the word “Claim” should read “claim”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term "substantially flat" in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "substantially flat" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear to what degree is the surface of the magnetized base “substantially flat”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said center" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The term "substantially comprises" in claim 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term "substantially comprises" is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear to what degree does the vacuous top portion “substantially comprises” a clear, see-through material.
Claims 2-4 and 6-15 are rejected due to their inherited deficiency (dependency from claim 1).
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.
Claims 1-5 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BECKER (EP 3117747) in view of SUN (CN 114631739), and further in view of REINHARD (EP 3287700).
Regarding claim 1, Becker teaches a vapor containing infusion device for the infusion of consumables (abstract; para. 0001), comprising: a base (lower portion of cooking device 1) having a substantially flat surface upon which a consumable item (2) is placeable (as shown in Fig. 3); a vacuous top portion (11, 15, 22 and any other sidewall of the cooking chamber 3) having a bottom edge connectable to said base (as shown in Fig. 3), and having a continuous walled portion (15, 22 and any other sidewall of the cooking chamber 3) connected to said bottom edge (as shown in Fig. 3), a vapor entry portal (6, 7, 17) fitted through a portion of said vacuous top portion (as shown in Fig. 3); and a top portion (11) connected to said continuous walled portion (as shown in Fig. ), said top portion being positioned oppositely to said bottom edge (as shown in Fig. 3), said vacuous top portion having a volume (3); and a handle (handle of 22, example shown in Figs. 1 and 2) fixed to said vacuous top portion.
BECKER fails to disclose wherein the base is magnetized, and wherein the handle is fixed about a center of said top portion of said vacuous top portion.
SUN teaches a cooking device (Fig. 1-4) comprising a magnetized base (1; para. 0035-0036).
Therefore, it would have it would have been prima facie obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the base of BECKER, with SUN, to provide a magnetized base to secure the vacuous top portion to the base, and for easier maintenance. POSITA would have known that providing a magnetized base would have a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results, such as properly securing the vacuous top portion and easier maintenance.
BECKER and SUN combined fail to disclose a handle fixed about a center of said top portion of said vacuous top portion.
REINHARD teaches a cooking and vapor infusion device (Fig. 4) comprising a handle (56) fixed about a center of said top portion (54) of said vacuous top portion (combination of 52 and 54).
Therefore, it would have it would have been prima facie obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vacuous top portion of BECKER and SUN, with REINHARD, by providing a handle fixed about a center of said top portion of said vacuous top portion, for easier handling of the vacuous top portion. POSITA would have known that providing a handle fixed about a center of said top portion of said vacuous top portion would have a reasonable expectation of success such as easier handling of the vacuous top portion.
Regarding claim 2, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 1, wherein a vapor blowing device (BECKER; 4 and vapor generator connected to steam inlet nozzle 7) is connectable to said vacuous top portion (BECKER: as shown in Fig. 3; para. 0033-0035) whereby said vapor blowing device blows vapor into said vacuous top portion through said vapor entry portal (BECKER; as shown in Fig. 3; para. 0033-0035).
Regarding claim 3, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 1, wherein said bottom edge of said vacuous top portion is ferrous (SUN; magnetic; para. 0035-0036).
Regarding claim 4, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 1, wherein said vacuous top portion is transparent (SUN; portion 10 is transparent; para. 0010-0011; 0034).
Regarding claim 5, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 4, wherein said vacuous top portion substantially comprises a clear, see-through material (SUN; portion 10 is transparent; para. 0010-0011; 0034).
Regarding claim 7, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 1, wherein said consumables are altered by said vapor (BECKER; para. 0038; 0040).
Regarding claim 8, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing device of claim 7, wherein said altered consumables by said vapor are altered for taste (BECKER; para. 0038; 0040).
Regarding claim 9, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 7, wherein said altered consumables of said vapor are altered for composition (BECKER; flavor is part of the composition of the consumable; para. 0038-0040).
Regarding claim 10, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 7, wherein said altered consumables of said vapor are altered for texture (BECKER; vapor also changes the texture of the consumable; para. 0038; 0040).
Regarding claim 11, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 7, wherein said altered consumables of said vapor are altered for smell (BECKER: alters the aroma thru flavorings; para. 0038; 0040).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BECKER, SUN and REINHARD as set forth above, and further in view of KR 200344133.
Regarding claim 6, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach all the elements of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for, wherein said clear, see- through material is transparent acrylic.
KR200344133 teaches a vacuous top portion (60) comprises a transparent acrylic material (para. 0020).
Therefore, it would have it would have been prima facie obvious to one of
ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vacuous top portion of BECKER, SUN and REINHARD, with KR200344133, by providing a transparent acrylic as the clear, see-through material of the vacuous top portion, for the advantages of visual monitoring of the consumable/interior of the cooking and vapor containing infusion device, durability and easy cleaning. POSITA would have known that providing a transparent acrylic as the clear, see-through material of the vacuous top portion would have a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results such as visual monitoring of the consumable/interior of the cooking and vapor containing infusion device, durability and easy cleaning.
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BECKER, SUN and REINHARD as set forth above, and further in view of LIU (CN 110575083).
Regarding claim 12, BECKER, SUN and REINHARD combined teach all the elements of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for, wherein said vapor provides a visual signal.
LIU teaches a cooking device (Fig. 1-3) wherein said vapor provides a visual signal (para. 0024; 0029; 0035; 0038; 0073; 0079; 0085; 0087; 0096; 0106).
Therefore, it would have it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the vapor containing infusion device of BECKER, SUN and REINHARD, with LIU, by providing a vapor visual signal, for safety reasons, and to assure proper vapor temperature is reached. POSITA would have known that providing a vapor visual signal would have a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results such as safety and assuring proper vapor temperature is reached.
Regarding claim 13, BECKER, SUN, REINHARD and LIU combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 12, wherein said vapor exhibits at least one color (LIU; para. 0024; 0029; 0035; 0038; 0073; 0079; 0085; 0087; 0096; 0106).
Regarding claim 14, BECKER, SUN, REINHARD and LIU combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 13, wherein said vapor exhibits two or more colors (LIU; para. 0024; 0029; 0035; 0038; 0073; 0079; 0085; 0087; 0096; 0106).
Regarding claim 15, BECKER, SUN, REINHARD and LIU combined teach the vapor containing infusion device of claim 14, wherein said color in said vapor changes over time (LIU; at different temperatures of the steam; para. 0024; 0029; 0035; 0038; 0073; 0079; 0085; 0087; 0096; 0106).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 2017/0112155, EP 3118526 and DE 202012100102.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBA T ROSARIO-APONTE whose telephone number is (571)272-9325. The examiner can normally be reached M to F; 8am-5pm.
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.
/ALBA T ROSARIO-APONTE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 11/25/2025
/STEVEN W CRABB/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761