DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1, 2, 5-13, 16 and 17 are pending.
3. This office action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed 07/30/2026 in response to PTO Office Action mailed 04/30/2026. The Applicant’s remarks and amendments to the claims and/or the specification were considered with the results that follow.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended independent claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection in which the Examiner has cited newly presented prior art, Geng et al. (US Pub. No. 2018/0301900 A1 hereinafter “Geng”), as necessitated by the amended independent claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 1, 5-12, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolar et al. (EP 3285627 B1 hereinafter “Kolar” – IDS Submission) in view of Geng et al. (US Pub. No. 2018/0301900 A1 hereinafter “Geng”).
Referring to claim 1, Kolar discloses a kitchen appliance (Kolar – Figs. 1-5, blending system 100, 200, 300, 400, 500.), wherein the kitchen appliance comprises a base unit having a housing, an electric motor (Kolar – Par. [0027] discloses a base 110 may house a motor; Fig. 3, motor 312.), a detector (Kolar – Fig. 3, NFC component 314.), a controller (Kolar – Fig. 3, processor 304.) and a communication interface (Kolar – Fig. 3, NFC component 314.), and at least one accessory having an identifier (Kolar – Figs. 1-5, container 120, 230, 330, 430, 530; Par. [0047] discloses the container 330 having a unique identifier.), the at least one accessory comprising a first accessory and a further accessory, the first accessory and the further accessory comprising a type of at least one of the following: a cutting unit, stirring unit, weighing unit, steaming unit, covering unit, or any combination thereof (Kolar – Fig. 1 & par. [0028] disclose the container 120 to allow blade assembly 122 to chop, mix, blend, or otherwise interact with the foodstuff. Par. [0067] discloses the blender system 500 may utilize pressure sensors (e.g., weight sensors), or the like to determine when a user adds foodstuff to the container 560.),
wherein the detector is configured to detect the identifier of the at least one accessory and to forward it to the controller (Kolar – Par. [0047-0052] disclose the NFC component 314 receiving an identifier of the container 330 so the base 310 (e.g., via processor 304) may receive the parameters and/or query the NFC component 334 to determine whether the container 330 is compatible with the base 310.),
wherein the controller is configured to compare the detected identifier with identifiers from a database, wherein the controller is configured to, in the event of a match between the detected identifier and an unmarked identifier from the database, mark the matching identifier from the database as known, and provide cooking information associated with the matching identifier from the database via the communication interface, and wherein the controller is configured to make available at least one item of cooking information from the database, which is assigned to the identifier marked as known, via the communication interface if the detected identifier matches an identifier already marked as known (Kolar – Par. [0047-0052, 0055] disclose the NFC component 314 receiving an identifier of the container 330 so the base 310 (e.g., via processor 304) may receive the parameters and/or query the NFC component 334 to determine whether the container 330 is compatible with the base 310. The base 310 may identify container 330. Identifying container 330 may include identifying a make, model, a particular container (e.g., via a unique identifier), blade assembly utilized in the container, or the like. In an example, identifying the container may include determining a match between received data and data stored in memory 302. For example, a set of identifiers may be stored in a table or other data structure in memory 302. The NFC component 314 may receive an identifier from NFC component 334 and/or decode data received therefrom to determine an identifier. The identifier may then be compared to stored identifiers. See par. [0055] disclosing a user accessing a recipe that allows the user to identify a specific container 330 for the utilization for nuts.),
wherein a position detector is provided and is configured to detect the position of the first accessory with respect to the base unit and with respect to the further accessory (Kolar – Figs. 1A-1B show a first accessory, blade assembly 122, of the container 120 with respect to the base unit 110 and with respect to a further accessory, lid 130 of the container 102.) and to forward it to the controller (Kolar – See par. [0026-0034, 0043-0047].), wherein the controller is configured to provide cooking information from the database in dependence on the detected position of the at least one accessory via the communication interface (Kolar – See par. [0026-0034, 0043-0047].), and
wherein the controller is configured to provide cooking information from the database as a function of a plurality of detected identifiers and/or detected positions (Kolar – See par. [0039, 0043-47].).
Kolar fails to explicitly disclose the first accessory comprising a cooking unit; each of the first accessory and the further accessory comprising an interface configured to be directly assembled to or disassembled from an interface of the base unit; and the type of the further accessory being different from a type of the first accessory.
Geng discloses the first accessory comprising a cooking unit (Geng – Fig. 1B & Par. [0045] disclose a heat distribution plate 138 of the vessel for heating ingredients.), the further accessory comprising a type of at least one of the following: a cutting unit, stirring unit, weighing unit, steaming unit, covering unit, or any combination thereof (Geng – Fig. 1B & Par. [0044] disclose cutting blades 136 located within the vessel.), each of the first accessory and the further accessory comprising an interface configured to be directly assembled to or disassembled from an interface of the base unit (Geng – Par. [0042] discloses the base supports a removable cooking vessel 130.). Fig. 1B & Par. [0045] disclose the heating element 160 is in thermal communication with a heat distribution plate 138 of the vessel. Par. [0044] discloses the motor load element 150 is coupled to cutting blades 136 located within the vessel.); and the type of the further accessory being different from a type of the first accessory (Geng – Fig. 1B & Par. [0044-0045] disclose the cutting blades 136 being different from the heat distribution plate 138.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include Geng’s teachings with Kolar’s teachings for the benefit of implementing the use of a heated blender (having a heater load element and a motor load element) (Geng – par. [0002]).
Referring to claim 5, Kolar and Geng disclose the kitchen appliance according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to block at least one preparation function in the event the detected identifier does not match an identifier from the database, and/or wherein the controller is configured to block at least one preparation function in the event of detecting the position of an accessory corresponding to an assembly of the accessory with the base unit and in the event of an aborted detection of an identifier (Kolar – See par. [0049].).
Referring to claim 6, Kolar and Geng disclose the kitchen appliance according to claim 1, wherein the identifier is a coded data carrier with machine-readable information, and wherein the detector is configured to detect machine-readable information (Kolar – See par. [0022, 0023, 0026].).
Referring to claim 7, Kolar and Geng disclose the kitchen appliance according to claim 6, wherein the identifier is stored on an electronic data carrier and the detector is a reader for the electronic data carrier, the data carrier and the reader being connected bidirectionally by cable, or wherein the identifier is stored on an electronic data carrier and the detector is a reader for the electronic data carrier, the reader being configured to detect the content of the electronic data carrier by means of a radio standard (Kolar – See par. [0019-0023, 0026].).
Referring to claim 8, Kolar and Geng disclose the kitchen appliance according to claim 7, wherein the data carrier and the reader are connected bidirectionally via a bus connection (Kolar – See par. [0062] disclosing the NFC component 434 may be coupled to NFC component 474, such as via bus 454, to provide power and/or otherwise communicate therewith.).
Referring to claim 9, Kolar and Geng disclose the kitchen appliance according to claim 7, wherein the reader is configured to detect the content of the electronic data carrier by means of radio frequency identification (RFID), Bluetooth (BT), Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), WLAN or ultra-wide band (UWB) (Kolar – See par. [0019-0023, 0026]; RFID devices, transponders, or tags.).
Referring to claim 10, Kolar and Geng disclose the at least one accessory for the kitchen appliance according to claim 1, wherein the accessory has a base body, wherein a data carrier with an identifier is provided, the identifier being at least one machine-readable information concerning the type and/or an identification number of the accessory, and wherein the data carrier is integrated in the base body (Kolar – Claim 11 discloses the container comprises: a body having an open end, a closed end, and a wall extending from the open end to the closed end; and wherein the second a near field communication component is disposed within the body. Par. [0047-0052, 0055] disclose the NFC component 314 receiving an identifier of the container 330 so the base 310 (e.g., via processor 304) may receive the parameters and/or query the NFC component 334 to determine whether the container 330 is compatible with the base 310. the base 310 may identify container 330. Identifying container 330 may include identifying a make, model, a particular container (e.g., via a unique identifier), blade assembly utilized in the container, or the like. In an example, identifying the container may include determining a match between received data and data stored in memory 302. For example, a set of identifiers may be stored in a table or other data structure in memory 302. The NFC component 314 may receive an identifier from NFC component 334 and/or decode data received therefrom to determine an identifier.).
Referring to claim 11, Kolar and Geng disclose a system, wherein the system comprises the kitchen appliance according to claim 1 (Kolar – Fig. 3, blender system 300.), and a database, wherein the database has identifiers and cooking information associated therewith, and wherein the controller is configured for connection to the database via a communication network (Kolar – See par. [0047, 0048, 0051] disclosing that blender base 314 may communicate with user device 320 to access a communication network (e.g., a cloud) and/or components of the user device 320. For instance, the user device 320 may store container IDs. It is implied that the user device 320 has some type of storage component for storing the container IDS.).
Referring to claim 12, Note the rejections of claim 1 above. The Instant Claim recites substantially same limitations as the above-rejected and is therefore rejected under same prior-art teachings.
Referring to claim 16, Note the rejections of claim 5 above. The Instant Claim recites substantially same limitations as the above-rejected and is therefore rejected under same prior-art teachings.
Referring to claim 17, Kolar and Geng disclose a computer program comprising instructions, the execution of which on at least one processor of a controller of a kitchen appliance causes the performance of a method according to claim 12 (Kolar – Par. [0043, 0045] disclose processor 304 may facilitate execution of the computer executable instructions. The processor 304 may receive the blending program from memory 302 and may generate instructions for the motor 312 and/or other components (e.g., a display - not shown) based on the blending program.).
7. Claims 2 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolar in view of Geng, and further in view of Palmer et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0204757 A1 hereinafter “Palmer” – IDS Submission).
Referring to claim 2, Kolar and Geng disclose the kitchen appliance according to claim 1, however, fail to explicitly disclose wherein the communication interface is configured to detect a user input and to forward it to the controller, and in that the controller is configured to mark at least one cooking information selected by the user input among the cooking information provided as preferred cooking information, and in the event of a subsequent, renewed match of the same identifier, make the at least one item of cooking information marked as preferred cooking information available separately via the communication interface.
Palmer discloses wherein the communication interface is configured to detect a user input and to forward it to the controller, and in that the controller is configured to mark at least one cooking information selected by the user input among the cooking information provided as preferred cooking information, and in the event of a subsequent, renewed match of the same identifier, make the at least one item of cooking information marked as preferred cooking information available separately via the communication interface (Palmer – See par. [0235].).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include Palmer’s teachings with Kolar and Geng’s teachings for the benefit of implementing a food processor capable of integrating intelligently with multiple attachments, cloud-based services, wireless-communicating household appliances, smart meters, and household robots, to efficiently and safely complete a recipe made to conform to user preferences and characteristics (Palmer – par. [0005]).
Referring to claim 13, Note the rejections of claim 2 above. The Instant Claim recites substantially same limitations as the above-rejected and is therefore rejected under same prior-art teachings.
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 extension fee 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 DAYTON LEWIS-TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571) 270-7754. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday, 8AM TO 4PM, EASTERN TIME.
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, Idriss Alrobaye, can be reached on (571) 270-1023. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Dayton Lewis-Taylor/
Examiner, Art Unit 2181
/IDRISS N ALROBAYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2181
Prosecution Insights