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. KR10-2022-0041639, filed on 04/04/2022.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“heat transfer part” in Claim 13
The generic placeholder is “heat transfer part” and the functional language attributed the “heat transfer part” includes: “configured to transfer heat generated by a heat source”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Reference is made to the Specification filed on 05/23/2023.
Regarding the heat transfer part, Para. 0032, “The heat transfer part 104 may be provided in a form of a drawer.”, and Para. 0035, “heat source receiving part 114 may be configured to receive charcoal.”, where the heat transfer part is assumed to be a container that is capable of receiving material like charcoal
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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, 3, and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (JP H08206013 A, hereinafter Kobayashi) in view of Xu (CN 202567850 U).
Regarding claim 1, Kobayashi discloses an apparatus (Para. 0001, “a griddle (pottery) used for cooking hamburgers, yakisoba, okonomiyaki, etc. in restaurants, hamburger shops”) comprising: a griddle receiving part (Modified Fig. 1, where the receiving part is shown as the opening in the main body that holds the griddle), an upper side of which is opened (Modified Fig. 1, where the main body of the apparatus is shown to include an interior that has an upper side that is open to the air);
a griddle part accommodated in an interior of the griddle receiving part and in which a food is grilled (Para. 0009, “That is, the griddle 1 in FIG. 3 has a gas burner 9 as a heating means under the iron plate 3.”, and Para. 0001, “a griddle (pottery) used for cooking hamburgers, yakisoba, okonomiyaki, etc. in restaurants, hamburger shops”); and
a water passage pipe provided in a widthwise direction of the griddle receiving part on one side of the griddle receiving part (Para. 0009, “The cleaning nozzles 21a and 21b face the central direction of the iron plate 3 and spray water. Cleaning nozzles 21a, 21b Water is sent from the water supply pipe 27 through the water solenoid valve 25 and the water pipe 23.”, where modified Fig. 1 shows that the water pipe 23 extends along a width and lengthwise direction on three sides of the griddle receiving part, where the water pipe does extend widthwise along the sides of the griddle receiving part), provided on an upper side of the griddle part (Para. 0009, “The cleaning nozzles 21a and 21b face the central direction of the iron plate 3 and spray water.”, and modified Fig. 1, where the nozzles 21a and 21b are shown to be on a upper side of the griddle as they are located above the griddle top surface), and
configured to discharge water that flows in an interior thereof toward the griddle part (Para. 0009, “The cleaning nozzles 21a and 21b face the central direction of the iron plate 3 and spray water.”), wherein the water discharged from the water passage pipe flows down along the griddle part to remove foreign substances that are present on a surface of the griddle part (Para. 0007, “a griddle with a cleaning nozzle of the present invention is a griddle provided with an iron plate for baking a pottery, provided with a cleaning nozzle for spraying water toward the upper surface of the iron plate. It is characterized in that it is tilted downwards and a saucer is provided along the front edge of the iron plate.”, where water from the water passage pipe flows down along the griddle to clean the griddle).
PNG
media_image1.png
584
846
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 1, Kobayashi
Kobayashi does not disclose:
a grill apparatus with a grill part;
a water passage pipe provided only in a widthwise direction on one side of a grill receiving part.
However, Xu discloses, in the similar field of water passage pipes for grilling apparatuses (Abstract, “fire-leading plate main body is provided with spray pipe; the water spraying pipe is connected with the guide tube and water-adding device”), where the grill apparatus can use a grill with separated grilling plates (Para. 0020, “new fire-leading plate for oven, comprising a fire-guiding plate body 5”), where a water passage pipe is provided only in a widthwise direction on one side of the grill receiving part (Modified Fig. 2, where the water passage pipe is shown to be extending widthwise in only one side of the grill receiving part). 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 griddle and water passage in Kobayashi to include grill grates and a water passage located in the position as taught by Xu.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use grill grates to allow for an additional benefit in storing water so absorb oil smoke generated, where this can protect the environment, and where the water passage configuration is placed on one side widthwise in order to allow the water to enter into the troughs of the grates, as stated by Xu, Para. 0020, “water spraying hole 12 the troughs 10 in storage… can make it generates water vapour in the barbecue process, the absorbing moisture of the food, so as to achieve the best baking effect, and there is a function that the baking process will yield the oil smoke and water vapour capacity can absorb the oil smoke, so as to reach the effect of environmental protection”.
It is the Examiner’s position that the grates of Xu would still be angled downwards to allow for water to flow as disclosed in Kobayashi with the griddle, however the wavy feature of the cooking surface from Xu’s grates can still allow for water to pool at specific locations in order to protect against oil smoke.
PNG
media_image2.png
566
744
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 2, Xu
Regarding claim 3, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
wherein the water passage pipe includes: a plurality of water discharge holes provided at a lower end of the water passage pipe to be spaced apart from each other along a lengthwise direction of the water passage pipe, and wherein the water supplied from an outside flows along an interior of the water passage pipe and is discharged to a lower side through the water discharge holes.
However, Xu discloses where the water passage pipe includes a plurality of water discharge holes at the lower end of the pipe that are spaced apart in a lengthwise direction (Para. 0020, “the spraying pipe 4 with the fire-leading plate body 5 of corrugations 10 corresponding to position is provided with water spraying hole 12 the troughs 10 in storage”), where the water supplied from an outside flows along the interior of the water passage pipe and is discharged to a lower side through the water discharge holes (Claim 3, “a spray pipe (4) is connected with each other by guide tube with the water funnel (1).”, and Fig. 3, where the water spraying holes 12 are shown to be located at the lower side of the water passage pipe, where water that flows into the pipe 4 would exit at the lower side). 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 water passage pipe in modified Kobayashi to include the features as taught by Xu.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to align the water discharge holes with the troughs of the grilling grate, which provides the user with the ability to control where water is discharged, as stated by Xu, Para. 0020, “the spraying pipe 4 with the fire-leading plate body 5 of corrugations 10 corresponding to position is provided with water spraying hole 12 the troughs 10 in storage”.
Regarding claim 6, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 3, as set forth above, discloses wherein the grill part is provided to be inclined downwards from one side to an opposite side of the grill receiving part (Kobayashi, Para. 0008, “Since the iron plate is inclined downwards, the water used for cleaning flows down to the saucer in the foreground, so it is well drained.”) and is configured such that the water discharged through the water discharge holes flows down to the opposite side of the grill receiving part along a surface of the grill part (Kobayashi, Fig. 1, where the water discharge holes 21a and 21b and water pipeline 23 would be replaced with the water pipeline from the teaching of Xu, which would keep the water pipeline at the top elevated end of Kobayashi; thus, in modified Kobayashi, the water discharge holes would still be located at the elevated end and water would flow from the water discharge holes to the opposite side of the grill receiving part along the grill).
Regarding claim 7, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 6, as set forth above, discloses further comprising: a discharge hole provided on an opposite side of the grill receiving part and through which the water that flows down along the surface of the grill part is discharged (Kobayashi, Para. 0009, “The saucer 5 is shaped like a deep groove that is one step lower than the iron plate 3… By grading the iron plate surface, food scraps and washing water can be naturally collected in the saucer.”, and Para. 0008, “Since the iron plate is inclined downwards, the water used for cleaning flows down to the saucer in the foreground, so it is well drained.”).
Claims 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (JP H08206013 A, hereinafter Kobayashi) in view of Xu (CN 202567850 U) in further view of Azzam (US 20150208861 A1).
Regarding claim 2, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
wherein the grill receiving part includes: a mounting recess provided on upper ends of opposite side plates on one side of the grill receiving part, and wherein the water passage pipe is inserted into and mounted in the mounting recess.
However, Azzam discloses, in the similar field of cooking apparatuses with food (Para. 0066, “cooking apparatus 20 is that the heating means 46 is oriented in a vertical orientation with the food to be cooked arranged in a generally vertical orientation adjacent the heating means 46.”), where a grill receiving part includes a mounting recess on an upper ends of opposite side plates on one side of the grill receiving part (Para. 0060, “Vertically spaced slots 78 are formed in the side walls 26, the slots 78 extending from a front edge thereof and directed generally towards the rear wall 28 at a slight downward angle. The slots 78 terminate about halfway along the side walls 26.”), and where a cylindrical pipe is inserted into and mounted in the mounting recess (Para. 0065, “respective end portions of the skewers 110 are placed in the slots 78.”). 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 grill receiving part and water pipe in modified Kobayashi to include a recess located on opposite side plates on the upper ends for a pipe shape as taught by Azzam.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use recesses so that the pipe can be removed from the apparatus, as stated by Azzam, Para. 0060, “As shown in FIG. 6, the slots 78 in each pair are dimensioned to receive respective end portions of a skewer 110.”.
Regarding the specific attachment of an upper recess, it is the Examiner's position that one of ordinary skill in the art would have also found it obvious to try as Xu already shows that a water pipe can be attached to a grill receiving part. Azzam then shows that a recess configuration can hold a pipe structure as well. As a result, the specific attachment for the water pipe has its own advantages and disadvantages, such as Azzam’s recess allowing for detachability, and choosing one such attachment would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Claims 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (JP H08206013 A, hereinafter Kobayashi) in view of Xu (CN 202567850 U) in further view of Zhang et al. (CN 104747270 A, hereinafter Zhang).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 3, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
wherein the water passage pipe further includes: a plurality of screw-coupling holes provided at a lower end of the water passage pipe, spaced apart from each other along the lengthwise direction of the water passage pipe, to which screws are coupled respectively.
However, Zhang discloses, in the similar field of water discharge holes (Abstract, “chamber is provided with a water discharging opening”), where the opening includes a screw coupling to which a screw is coupled to (Page 3, Para. 6 from end, “hole is provided with a screw thread… the drain element 4 is screwed with the water outlet”). 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 plurality of holes located at the lower end of water passage pipe that are spaced apart lengthwise in modified Kobayashi to include screw couplings and screws for each of the holes as taught by Zhang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to attach a drain valve to the water discharge holes, where the water flow can then be controlled in a convenient and fast manner, as stated by Zhang, Page 3, Para .1, “without changing the cooling liquid, the sealing ring has good sealing effect, when it needs to change liquid, the drain valve exposed position from the first hole to the U-shaped groove, the cooling liquid can be flowed by the U type groove of the water discharging valve, the operation is convenient and fast.”
Regarding claim 5, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 4, as set forth above, discloses wherein the screw-coupling holes are provided at locations corresponding to the water discharge holes (Teaching from Zhang, Page 3, Para. 6 from end, “hole is provided with a screw thread… the drain element 4 is screwed with the water outlet”, where the drain element is the screw and it corresponds with a hole with a screw thread that is water discharge hole; where in modified Kobayashi, all the water discharge holes would have screw threads to hold a drain element).
Claims 8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (JP H08206013 A, hereinafter Kobayashi) in view of Xu (CN 202567850 U) in further view of Kang (US 20080087269 A1).
Regarding claim 8, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 6, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
wherein the grill part includes: a plurality of first grill parts arranged in parallel along the widthwise direction of the grill receiving part; and
a plurality of second grill parts provided on a lower side of the first grill parts, and arranged along the widthwise direction of the grill receiving part.
However, Kang discloses, in the similar field of grilling apparatuses (Abstract, “A grill for roasting a meat”), where the grill part includes a plurality of first grill parts parallel along a widthwise direction of a grill receiving part, and a plurality of second grill parts provided on a lower side of the first grill parts that are also along a widthwise direction of a grill receiving part (Para. 0050, “Referring to the cross-section taken along line "E-E'" of FIG. 7, the plurality of first support frames 15 of the upper plate 12 are parallel to and spaced apart from one another by the first space 38 and the plurality of second support frames 18 of the lower plate 13 are parallel to and spaced apart from one another by the second space 39.”, where Fig. 7 shows that the second space 39 includes the second grill parts that are on a lower side of the first space 38 that includes the first grill parts, where the bottom image of Fig. 7 shows that the grill parts extend parallel and along a widthwise direction). 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 grill apparatus in modified Kobayashi to include the plurality of first and second grill parts as taught by Kang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to have separation in grilling parts so that contact between the grill and food can be minimized, where the second grill parts provide the benefit in preventing grease from contacting a heat source in a separated first grill part configuration, as stated by Kang, Para. 0053, “Since the meat contacts a top surface of the two first side parts 22 of each first support frame 15, the contact area of the meat and the upper plate 12 is minimized.”, and Para. 0050, “Accordingly, the plurality of first support frames 15 overlap the plurality of second support frames 18 at their side portions so that drop of the remnants on the plurality of first support frames 15 onto the heat source can be prevented.”.
Regarding claim 11, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 8, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
wherein the second grill part is provided in a form corresponding to the concave inclined-part, and is provided at a location corresponding to the concave inclined-part.
However, Kang discloses where a second grill part can be provided in a form corresponding to a concave inclined part at a location corresponding to the concave inclined part as well (Para. 0057, “The upper plate 112 includes a first peripheral frame 114 having a tetragonal shape, a plurality of first support frames 115 parallel to and spaced apart from one another inside the first peripheral frame 114 and a first fence 116 surrounding the first peripheral frame 114. The middle plate 160 includes a second peripheral frame 161 having a tetragonal shape, a plurality of second support frames 162 parallel to and spaced apart from one another inside the second peripheral frame 161 and a second fence surrounding the second peripheral frame 161. Further, the lower plate 113 includes a third peripheral frame 117 having a tetragonal shape, a plurality of third support frames 118 parallel to and spaced apart from one another inside the third peripheral frame 117 and a third fence 119 surrounding the third peripheral frame 117.”, where the second and third support frames correspond in form and location). 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 first and second grill parts in modified Kobayashi to be corresponding in form and location as taught by Kang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being a doubled grill part that allows for scorch to be prevented as the second grill part that corresponds in form and location acts as a buffer, as stated by Kang, Para. 0062, “Further, the plurality of third support frames 118 of the lower plate 113 corresponding to the plurality of second support frames 162 of the middle plate 160 function as a buffer that prevents direct heating of the plurality of second support frames 162 of the middle plate 160 by the heat source and prevents scorch of the remnants in the plurality of second support frames 162. The scorch of the remnants causes smoke and smell to hinder pleasure of meal.”.
Claims 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (JP H08206013 A, hereinafter Kobayashi) in view of Xu (CN 202567850 U) in further view of Kang (US 20080087269 A1) and Schwoed (DE 4201519 C2).
Regarding claim 9, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 8, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
wherein each of the first grill parts includes: a concave inclined-part, opposite sides of which are inclined downwards toward a center thereof; and an extension part extending upwards from one end of the concave inclined-part.
However, Kang discloses where the grill parts includes a concave inclined part, opposite sides of which are inclined downwards to a center thereof (Modified Fig. 7, where the concave inclined part and opposite sides that are inclined downwards are shown). 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 grill part in modified Kobayashi to include the features as taught by Kang.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of adopting a grill part shape that minimizes the contact with the food which can prevent scorching of the food, as stated by Kang, Para. 0053, “Since the meat contacts a top surface of the two first side parts 22 of each first support frame 15, the contact area of the meat and the upper plate 12 is minimized… As a result, the scorch of the meat is prevented due to the minimization of the contact area.”.
PNG
media_image3.png
383
944
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 7, Kang
Further, Schwoed discloses, in the similar field of grilling parts (Page 1, Para. 1, “a grill with several partially overlapping Z- or S-shaped grill grate bars that hold the food to be grilled define an upper grill level.”), where a grill part can include an extension part that extends upwards from one of the concave inclined part (Page 3, Para. 6, “according to FIG. 2, an angle α of 90 ° is formed between a left outer leg 11 and a center piece 12 , while between the middle part 12 and a right outside leg 13 a bending angle β of 100 ° exists.”, and Fig. 2, where the labelled area 13 extends upwards from a concave inclined part labelled 12). 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 grilling part in modified Kobayashi to include the extension part as taught by Schwoed.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use the extension part to reduce dripping from fat and where the extension still allows for accessibility in cleaning, as stated by Schwoed, Page 2, Para. 3, “With this seemingly simple measure, achieve that the rods are relatively close together which are arranged so that dripping from Fat is largely avoided, however the gap between adjacent bars by pulling the two grill grids apart parts can be enlarged so that the individual Bars of both groups are easily accessible and can be cleaned easily.”.
Regarding claim 10, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
wherein the extension part includes: a first extension part extending from one end of the concave inclined-part at the same inclination angle as that of the concave inclined-part; and a second extension part extending from an end of the first extension part at an inclination angle that is different from that of the first extension part.
However, Schwoed discloses where a first extension part extends from one end of the concave inclined part at the same inclination angle as that of the concave inclined part and where a second extension part extends from the end of the first extension part at a different inclination angle from the first extension part (Modified Fig. 2.1, where the first extension and second extension parts are shown, where the second extension part has a different extension angle compared to the first extension part). 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 grill part in modified Kobayashi to include the features as taught by Schwoed.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use the extension part to reduce dripping from fat and where the extension still allows for accessibility in cleaning, as stated by Schwoed, Page 2, Para. 3, “With this seemingly simple measure, achieve that the rods are relatively close together which are arranged so that dripping from Fat is largely avoided, however the gap between adjacent bars by pulling the two grill grids apart parts can be enlarged so that the individual Bars of both groups are easily accessible and can be cleaned easily.”.
PNG
media_image4.png
439
1034
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 2.1, Schwoed
Claims 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (JP H08206013 A, hereinafter Kobayashi) in view of Xu (CN 202567850 U) in further view of Kang (US 20080087269 A1) and Jeong (KR 1438473 B1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 8, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
further comprising: a red clay layer formed on a surface of the second grill part.
However, Jeong discloses, in the similar field of grill apparatuses (Novelty, “The grill has a drawer-shaped body portion”), where a red clay layer can be formed on a surface of a grill (Advantage, “The grill body is coated with red clay so as to enhance flavor of meat by a far infrared ray. The grill ensures usage safety.”). 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 grill part in modified Kobayashi to be coated in red clay as taught by Jeong.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to enhance the flavor of meat being grilled through the red clay, as stated by Jeong, Advantage, “The grill body is coated with red clay so as to enhance flavor of meat by a far infrared ray.”.
Claims 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi et al. (JP H08206013 A, hereinafter Kobayashi) in view of Xu (CN 202567850 U) in further view of Jo (KR 102142963 B1).
Regarding claim 13, modified Kobayashi teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Kobayashi does not disclose:
further comprising: a grill support part, in which the grill receiving part is seated at an upper end thereof; and a heat transfer part provided on a lower side of the grill receiving part on an inside of the grill support part and configured to transfer heat generated by a heat source to the grill receiving part.
However, Jo discloses, in the similar field of grilling apparatuses (Abstract, “allowing the user to grill meat such as barbecue outdoors”), where a grill support part has an upper end that can seat a grill receiving part (Modified Fig. 8, where the grill support part is shown to have an upper end that seats the grill receiving part), and where a heat transfer part is provided on a lower side of the grill receiving part inside of the grill support part and transfers heat generated by a heat source to the grill receiving part (Modified Fig. 8, where the heat transfer part is shown to be within the grill support and on a lower side of the grill receiving part). 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 grill in modified Kobayashi to include the features as taught by Jo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage the configuration in Jo allowing for control over the heat transfer, where the charcoal plate can be moved to prevent burning, and where using a heat transfer plate allows for a user to choose between using a gas burner or coals, as stated by Jo, Abstract, “Since the charcoal plate of the portable roaster is vertically transferred by an operation of a user, the portable roaster controls a height of the charcoal plate in order to prevent burning of the meat.”.
PNG
media_image5.png
434
772
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 8, Jo
Conclusion
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 and whose email is kevin.wen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 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
02/13/2026