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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the actuator as set forth in claims 6, 7, 8, 9, 15 and 19; the first conductor as set forth in claim 5; the second conductor as set forth in claim 5 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
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: “an electrical component” in claim 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 14, 15, 18 and 19; “a first wireless communication device” in claim 5; and “a second wireless communication device” in claim 5.
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.
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 § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kovacic et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2009/0084274).
Regarding Claim 1, Kovacic et al. discloses A food processing apparatus (figure 1, reference #1), comprising:
a body (figure 1, reference #2);
a first connection interface disposed on the body and configured to selectively receive a mixing tool (figure 1, reference #15 and 17);
a drive unit disposed in the body and configured to rotate the mixing tool via the first connection interface (figure 1, reference #3; [0028]);
a second connection interface disposed on the body (figure 1, reference #15, 27 and 30) and configured to selectively receive an attachment having an electrical component (figure 2, reference #18, 31 and 32; [0028]; [0029]; [0032]) (it is noted that the limitation uses the term “configured” which only requires the second connection interface be capable of receiving an attachment, and therefore does not require the structural limitation of the attachment and its subparts (an electrical component) as part of the limitations of the claim), wherein the second connection interface includes an electrical interface (figures 2 and 3, reference #21, 22, 25; [0028]); and
a power circuit configured to supply electrical power to the electrical component via the electrical interface (figure 1, reference #4).
Regarding claim 2, Kovacic et al. discloses control circuity in communication with the drive unit (reference #4 and 5; [0028]); and a communication circuit providing communication between the control circuitry and the electrical component when the attachment couples with the body (figure 1, reference #28; [0028]; [0029]).
Regarding claim 3, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the communication circuit includes at least one conductor at the electrical interface (figure 1, reference #25; figure 2, reference #21 and 22; [0028]), wherein the control circuitry is configured to electrically communicate data with the electrical component via the at least one conductor (figure 1, reference #4, 5, 25 and 28; figure 2, reference #21 and 22; [0028]).
Regarding claim 4, Kovacic et al. discloses a wireless communication network ([0028]-[0029]) having a first wireless communication device disposed in the body (figure 2, reference #22) and a second wireless communication device disposed in the attachment (figure 2, reference #32).
Regarding claim 5, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the at least one conductor includes a first conductor configured to supply the electrical power to the electrical component (figure 1, reference #25; figure 2, reference #21 and 22; [0028]) and a second conductor configured to supply the data between the control circuitry and the electrical component (figure 2, reference #31 and 32; [0028]-[0029]).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 1, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 6 which further limit the electrical component are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the electrical component includes an actuator that actuates in response to the electrical power being supplied to the electrical component from the power circuit ([0017]-[0018]; [0022]; [0028]-[0029]; [0032]).
Regarding claim 7, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the drive unit is configured to drive a food processing operation of the attachment and the actuator is configured to selectively interrupt driving of the food processing operation based on the supply of the electrical power to the actuator ([0017]-[0018]; [0022]; [0028]-[0029]; [0032]).
Regarding claim 8, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the control circuitry electrically interposes the electrical interface and the actuator to control the electrical power to the actuator (figure 1, reference #3, 4, 5, 28; figure 2, reference #21, 222, 31, 32; ([0017]-[0018]; [0022]; [0028]-[0029]; [0032]).
Regarding claim 9, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to control motion of the drive unit and motion of the actuator, wherein the motion control of the drive unit is at least partially independent of the motion control of the actuator (figure 1, reference #3, 4, 5, 28; [0022]; [0028]-[0029]; [0032]).
Regarding claim 11, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the electrical interface includes at least one conductive pad disposed on a front face of the second connection interface for electrical interaction with the attachment (figure 1, reference #25; figure 2, reference #21 and 22; [0028]).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 1, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 12 which further limit the attachment are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the attachment includes an electrical contact point engaging the at least one conductive pad to establish the electrical interaction (figure 1, reference #35; figure 2, reference #31 and 32; [0028]; [0032]).
Regarding claim 13, Kovacic et al. discloses a mixing head (figure 1, reference #2 where numeral 2 is pointing), wherein the first connection interface is disposed on an underside of the mixing head (figure 1, reference #16) and the second connection interface is disposed on a front of the mixing head (figure 1, reference #30).
Regarding Claim 14, Kovacic et al. discloses A food processing apparatus (figure 1, reference #1), comprising:
a body (figure 1, reference #2);
a first connection interface disposed on the body and configured to selectively receive a mixing tool (figure 1, reference #15 and 17);
a drive unit disposed in the body and configured to rotate the mixing tool via the first connection interface (figure 1, reference #3; [0028]);
a second connection interface disposed on the body (figure 1, reference #15, 27 and 30) and configured to selectively receive an attachment having an electrical component (figure 2, reference #18, 31 and 32; [0028]; [0029]; [0032]) (it is noted that the limitation uses the term “configured” which only requires the second connection interface be capable of receiving an attachment, and therefore does not require the structural limitation of the attachment and its subparts (an electrical component) as part of the limitations of the claim), wherein the second connection interface includes an electrical interface (figures 2 and 3, reference #21, 22, 25; [0028]); and
operational circuitry configured to supply electrical power and data to the electrical component via the electrical interface (figure 1, reference #4).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 14, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 14 which further limit the electrical component are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the electrical component includes an actuator ([0006]-[0007] (known kitchen tools have actuators that permit the tools to operate); [0017]-[0018]; [0022]; [0028]-[0029]; [0032]); and the operational circuitry includes control circuitry configured to control motion of the drive unit and motion of the actuator, wherein the motion control of the drive unit is at least partially independent of the motion control of the actuator (figure 1, reference #28; [0022]; [0028]-[0029]; [0032]).
Regarding claim 16, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the electrical interface includes at least one conductive pad disposed on a front face of the second connection interface for electrical interaction with the attachment (figure 1, reference #25; figure 2, reference #21 and 22; [0028]).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 14, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 17 which further limit the attachment are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the attachment includes an electrical contact point engaging the at least one conductive pad to establish the electrical interaction (figure 1, reference #35; figure 2, reference #31 and 32; [0028]; [0032]).
Regarding Claim 28, Kovacic et al. discloses A food processing apparatus (figure 1, reference #1), comprising:
a mixing head (figure 1, reference #2 where numeral 2 is pointing) including:
a connection interface configured to selectively receive a mixing tool (figure 1, reference #15 and 17);
a hub configured to selectively receive an attachment (figure 1, reference #27 and 30; [0016]; [0028]);
a drive unit disposed in the mixing head and configured to rotate the mixing tool via the connection interface (figure 1, reference #3; [0028]), wherein the attachment includes an electrical component (figure 2, reference #35) (it is noted that the limitation uses the term “configured” which only requires the hub be capable of receiving an attachment, and therefore does not require the structural limitation of the attachment and its subparts (an electrical component) as part of the limitations of the claim);
operational circuitry communicatively coupled with the drive unit (figure 1, reference #4); and
an electrical interface disposed on the hub providing electrical communication between the electrical component and the operational circuitry (figure 1, reference #25; [0028]).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 18, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 19 which further limit the electrical component are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the electrical component includes an actuator ([0006]-[0007] (known kitchen tools have actuators that permit the tools to operate); [0017]-[0018]; [0022]; [0028]; [0032]); and the operational circuitry includes control circuitry configured to control motion of the drive unit and motion of the actuator, wherein the motion control of the drive unit is at least partially independent of the motion control of the actuator (figure 1, reference #28; [0022]; [0028]-[0029]; [0032]).
Regarding claim 20, Kovacic et al. discloses wherein the connection interface is disposed on an underside of the mixing head (figure 1, reference #16) and the second connection interface is disposed on a front of the mixing head (figure 1, reference #30).
Claim(s) 1-12 and 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Benelli et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2006/0044935).
Regarding claim 1, Benelli et al. discloses A food processing apparatus (title; abstract; figure 1, reference #100; figure 4, reference #400), comprising:
a body (figures 4 and 5, reference #405 and 430);
a first connection interface disposed on the body and configured to selectively receive a mixing tool (figure 4, reference #435);
a drive unit disposed in the body and configured to rotate the mixing tool via the first connection interface (figure 4, reference #425);
a second connection interface disposed on the body (figure 5, reference #515; [0038]) and configured to selectively receive an attachment having an electrical component (reference #500; [0043]), wherein the second connection interface includes an electrical interface (figure 5, reference #520 and 565); and
a power circuit configured to supply electrical power to the electrical component via the electrical interface (figure 5, reference #515, 520, 565; [0022]; [0043]).
Regarding claim 2, Benelli et al. discloses control circuitry in communication with the drive unit (figure 5, reference #500 and 515; [0043]-[0046]; [0057]); and
a communication circuit providing communication between the control circuitry and the electrical component when the attachment couples with the body (figure 5, reference #520; [[0043]-[0046]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 3, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the communication circuit includes at least one conductor at the electrical interface, wherein the control circuitry is configured to electrically communicate data with the electrical component via the at least one conductor (figure 5, reference #515 and 520).
Regarding claim 4, Benelli et al. discloses a wireless communication network having a first wireless communication device disposed in the body and a second wireless communication device disposed in the attachment ([0075]).
Regarding claim 5, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the at least one conductor includes a first conductor configured to supply the electrical power to the electrical component (figure 5, reference #560 and 565) and a second conductor configured to supply the data between the control circuitry and the electrical component (figure 5, reference #515 and 520).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 1, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 6 which further limit the electrical component are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the electrical component includes an actuator that actuates in response to the electrical power being supplied to the electrical component from the power circuit (figure 5, reference #500, 525, 530, 540, 545 and 550).
Regarding claim 7, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the drive unit is configured to drive a food processing operation of the attachment and the actuator is configured to selectively interrupt driving of the food processing operation based on the supply of the electrical power to the actuator ([0044]; [0046]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 8, Benelli al. discloses wherein the control circuitry electrically interposes the electrical interface and the actuator to control the electrical power to the actuator (figure 5, reference #500, 515, 520, 525, 530, 545, 550, 560 and 565; [0044]; [0046]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 9, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the control circuitry is configured to control motion of the drive unit and motion of the actuator, wherein the motion control of the drive unit is at least partially independent of the motion control of the actuator (figure 4, reference #405, 425; figure 5, reference #500, 515, 520, 525, 530, 545, 550, 560 and 565; [0044]; [0046]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 10, Benelli et al. discloses a sensor configured to detect a thermal condition of a mixing bowl of the food processing apparatus (figure 5, reference #510; [0036]; [0047]), wherein the drive unit includes a motor (figure 5, reference #425) and the control circuitry is configured to control the motor based on the thermal condition ([0046]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 11, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the electrical interface includes at least one conductive pad disposed on a front face of the second connection interface for electrical interaction with the attachment (figure 5, reference #515 and 565).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 1, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 12 which further limit the attachment are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the attachment includes an electrical contact point engaging the at least one conductive pad to establish the electrical interaction (figure 5, reference #520 and 560).
Regarding claim 14, Benelli et al. discloses A food processing apparatus (title; abstract; figure 1, reference #100; figure 4, reference #400), comprising:
a body (figures 4 and 5, reference #405 and 430);
a first connection interface disposed on the body and configured to selectively receive a mixing tool (figure 4, reference #435);
a drive unit disposed in the body and configured to rotate the mixing tool via the first connection interface (figure 4, reference #425);
a second connection interface disposed on the body (figure 5, reference #515; [0038]) and configured to selectively receive an attachment having an electrical component (reference #500; [0043]), wherein the second connection interface includes an electrical interface (figure 5, reference #520 and 565); and
operational circuitry configured to supply electrical power to the electrical component via the electrical interface (figure 5, reference #515, 520, 565; [0022]; [0043]).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 14, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 14 which further limit the electrical component are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the electrical component includes an actuator figure 5, reference #500, 525, 530, 540, 545 and 550); and the operational circuitry includes control circuitry configured to control motion of the drive unit and motion of the actuator, wherein the motion control of the drive unit is at least partially independent of the motion control of the actuator (figure 5, reference #500, 515, 520 and 565; [0044]; [0046]; [0057]).
Regarding claim 16, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the electrical interface includes at least one conductive pad disposed on a front face of the second connection interface for electrical interaction with the attachment (figure 5, reference #515 and 565).
As stated above in the rejection to claim 14, the attachment and its subparts (the electrical component) are not positively recited structures of the claims, and therefore the limitations as recited in claim 17 which further limit the attachment are not positive structural limitations that are part of the claim. However, in order to further prosecution, Benelli et al. discloses wherein the attachment includes an electrical contact point engaging the at least one conductive pad to establish the electrical interaction (figure 5, reference #520 and 560).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Harnden, Jr. et al. (U.S. Patent No. 3,761,668) discloses a food processing apparatus (title) comprising body (figure 3, reference #16), first connection interface to receive a mixing tool (reference #22), drive unit (figure 1, reference #15), second connection interface to receive an attachment having an electrical interface (reference #26 and 50); and a power/operational circuit (reference #11). Borger et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,979,806) discloses a food processing apparatus (title) comprising body (reference #1), first connection interface to receive a mixing tool (reference #2, 4 and 6 on left top side), drive unit (reference #29), second connection interface to receive an attachment having an electrical interface (reference #3, 5 and 6 on right top side, reference #14); and a power/operational circuit (figure 2). Short et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2006/0198240) discloses the food processing apparatus with body (figure 5), first connection interface (reference #20), drive unit (reference #26 and 100), second connection interface configured to receive an attachment with electrical interface (figure 5, reference #40, 80, 98, 104 and 108); and power/operational circuit (figure 5, reference #100, 102, 104, 106; [0022]). Baker (U.S. Patent No. 9,782,041) discloses the limitations of the independent claim 1, 14 and 18 along with many dependent claims (see figure 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH INSLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/ELIZABETH INSLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774