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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 11, 14-18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
claim 3 recites “a water intake of (161) flow regulators (162)” which should be amended to “a water intake flow regulators (162).”
Claim 11 recites “according to claim 10 characterized” which should be amended to “according to claim 10, characterized.”
Claims 14-18 recite “METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE according to claim 11,” which should be amended to “METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE according to claim .”
Claim 1 recites “JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM” which should be amended to “.”
Claims 2-12 recites “JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM” which should be amended to “.”
Claim 13 recites “METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE” which should be amended to “ A method for sanitizing a juice extraction machine.”
Claims 14-18 recite “METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE” which should be amended to “
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In [0144-0157] of applicant’s specification, both a selection key and a branch share the reference character 177.
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 1-19 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "waste outlet holes" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if “waste outlet holes” refers to the “waste outlet holes (42) associated with practicable doors” as previously recited in the claim. For purposes of examination, they are taken to be the same.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the second sub-circuit comprises … sprinklers (141)”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the second sub-circuit comprises further sprinklers than that claimed in claim 1. For purposes of examination the sprinklers are taken to be the same.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the vanes of the smaller section" and “the vanes of the larger section. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as “a smaller section” and “a larger section” are not previously recited.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the front wall" and “the vanes of the larger section. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as “a front wall” is not previously recited. For purposes of examination, “the front wall” is taken to be the same as “a front part” previously recited in claim 1.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the third stage of general recirculation.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. “A third stage” is not previously recited. Additionally claim 13 recites “this third step comprises..” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as a third step is not previously recited. For purposes of examination the third stage and the third step are taken to be the same.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “during stages 2 or 3.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. “A stage 2” or “a stage 3” is not previously recited, however the limitation is understood to be “during the second step or the third step or during both.”
Claim 13 recites the limitation “squeezing. At this stage.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Firstly, applicant’s claim should be amended as “squeezing at this stage…” Additionally it is unclear which “stage’ applicant is referring. For purposes of examination it is understood to be any of the first, second, and third steps.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the squeezing unit.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the recirculation tube.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the housing.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the first conduit.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the vane of the smaller section.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the nozzles of the first conduit.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the pressure of the water.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the rotation of the sprinklers and the rinsing of the walls.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the second conduit.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the nozzles of the second conduit (17) of the sprinklers.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the stops and the starts.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. “A stop” or “a start” is not previously recited, however for purposes of examination, it is taken that “the stop and the start” refer to “stops and starts” in claim 16.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “the stops and the starts.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. “A stop” or “a start” is not previously recited, however for purposes of examination, it is taken that “the stop and the start” refer to “stops and starts” in claim 16.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “the doors.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the doors are the “practicable doors” of claim 1. For purposes of examination they are taken to be the same.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN108968087A) in view of Saito (CN102616711A) and further in view of Kim (KR20200001479) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 1, Deng teaches JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISATION SYSTEM,
the machine being of the type that generates solid waste after the squeezing process and comprising
a casing (60) with a squeezing unit (30) housed therein characterized in that the casing (60) is watertight ([0048] leakproof rib 4012) and in that it comprises
waste outlet holes (801, 802), a practicable fruit inlet window (6011) associated with a lid (1021),
sprinklers (701) associated with a first sub-circuit ([0052] spray water pump and the pure water tank) arranged above the squeezing unit (30) wherein the casing (60) comprises:
a rear wall (901) with housings (Fig. 2 301 situated in wall 901) for the drive shafts (301) of the squeezing system (30);
an upper lid (601) with holes for the channelling of cleaning liquids (701);
side walls (6022);
a front part (front of 401), with a liquid outlet hole (4021);
a bottom closure ([0048] juice receiving plate 401 is connected to close to bottom position) with a hole (4013) suitable for drainage (juice opening); and
waste outlet holes (801, 802),
wherein the bottom of the casing (401) forms a reservoir ([0048] juice receiving plate), and
wherein the machine further comprises a sanitising circuit (70) where the sprinklers (701) comprise a first conduit (702) connected to the first water introduction sub-circuit ([0052] It is connected simultaneously with feeding spraying pump and pure water cylinder).
Deng is silent on waste outlet holes associated with practicable doors, sprinklers associated with a first sub-circuit and a second sub-circuit and a conduit connected to the second sub-circuit for general recirculation and heating of cleaning liquids, the first and second conduits being coaxial and independent of each other.
Saito teaches sprinklers (14a) associated with a first sub-circuit (13) and a second sub-circuit (12), and a conduit (17) connected to the second sub-circuit (12) for general recirculation and heating of cleaning liquids, .
the first (16) and second conduits (17) being coaxial and independent of each other (Fig. 3).
Deng and Saito are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of cleaning devices. 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 Deng to incorporate the teachings of Saito to have sprinklers associated with a first and second subcircuit and a conduit for recirculation of liquids so that the device can perform production using one liquid filling path while cleaning another liquid filling path, without the need for liquid change cleaning time, thereby achieving efficient production (Saito [0010]).
Deng and Saito are silent on waste outlet holes associated with practicable doors.
Kim teaches waste outlet holes (12) associated with practicable doors (1202).
Deng, Saito, and Kim are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of cleaning device. 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 Deng and Saito to incorporate the teachings of Kim to have the outlet holes have door in order to selectively open and close the waste port ([0088]).
Regarding claim 7, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, and Deng teaches characterised in that the sprinklers (701) comprise vanes mounted on an idle shaft (Fig. 11)
and nozzles at the ends of the vanes orientated diagonally with respect to the plane of the vanes (Fig. 11, where the nozzles have a portion that are aimed diagonally to the vanes).
Regarding claim 8, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, and Deng teaches characterised in that the first conduit (702) conducts the cleaning liquids to the vanes of the smaller section (Fig. 11) but is silent on and the second conduit to the vanes of the larger section.
Saito teaches and the second conduit to the vanes of the larger section (146).
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 Deng and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Saito to have the second subcircuit have vanes so that the device can perform production using one liquid filling path while cleaning another liquid filling path, without the need for liquid change cleaning time, thereby achieving efficient production (Saito [0010]).
Regarding claim 12, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, and Deng teaches characterised in that the waste outlet holes (801, 802) are located in the side walls (6022).
Regarding claim 19, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, and Deng teaches characterised in that during the squeezing operations the window (6011) and the doors (Fig. 12 outlets remain open) remain open, but is silent on and during the sanitising operations remain closed.
Kim teaches during the sanitising operations remain closed ([0095] the user rotates the door lever 1200 clockwise for cleaning).
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 Deng and Saito to incorporate the teachings of Kim to have the outlet holes have door in order to selectively open and close the waste port (Kim [0088]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN108968087A), Saito (CN102616711A), and Kim (KR20200001479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Copeland (US5505915A).
Regarding claim 2, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, but Deng and Kim are silent on characterised in that the front part further comprises a recirculation hole and in that the sanitising circuit further comprises a third circuit for recirculating the cleaning liquids from a basin comprising a stepper motor, an outlet tube and a recirculation tube.
Saito teaches characterised in that the front part (1) further comprises a recirculation hole (37) and in that the sanitising circuit further comprises a third circuit (29, 31, 33) for recirculating the cleaning liquids from a basin (29) comprising an outlet tube (33) and a recirculation tube (31).
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 Deng and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Saito to have a third circuit so that the device can perform production using one liquid filling path while cleaning another liquid filling path, without the need for liquid change cleaning time, thereby achieving efficient production (Saito [0010]).
Deng, Saito, and Kim are silent on a stepper motor.
Copeland teaches a stepper motor (69 Col. 7 lines 10-20).
Deng, Saito, Kim, and Copeland are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of cleaning devices. 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 Deng, Saito, and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Copeland to have a stepper motor as stepper motors allow adjustments to components in discrete increments (Copeland Col. 7 lines 10-20).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN108968087A), Saito (CN102616711A), and Kim (KR20200001479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Publ (US 20080210280).
Regarding claim 3, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, and Deng teaches characterised in that the first sub-circuit comprises ([0052] feeding spraying pump and pure water cylinder) sprinklers (701) through which the water enters the casing (60), but is silent on a water intake of flow regulators associated with a level detector.
Publ teaches a water intake of flow regulators (51, 52) associated with a level detector (77).
Deng, Saito, Kim, and Publ are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of cleaning devices. 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 Deng, Saito, and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Publ to have a water intake of flow regulators and a level detector to maintain the flow at appropriate speeds and pressures for parts (Publ [0046]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN108968087A), Saito (CN102616711A), and Kim (KR20200001479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fujikawa (US 20090014039).
Regarding claim 4, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, but Deng and Kim are silent on the second sub-circuit comprises a drain, a recirculation pump, a heater, an element for controlling the temperature of the cleaning liquid and sprinklers for reintroducing the water inside the casing with desired pressure and direction and optionally a filter.
Saito teaches characterised in that the second sub-circuit (12) comprises a drain (17a), and sprinklers (14a) for reintroducing the water inside the casing (11) with desired pressure and direction and optionally a filter.
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 Deng and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Saito to have the second subcircuit have sprinklers so that the device can perform production using one liquid filling path while cleaning another liquid filling path, without the need for liquid change cleaning time, thereby achieving efficient production (Saito [0010]).
Deng, Saito, and Kim are silent on a recirculation pump, a heater, an element for controlling the temperature of the cleaning liquid.
Fujiawa teaches a recirculation pump (12), a heater (16), an element for controlling the temperature (16) of the cleaning liquid ([0023] cleaning liquid).
Deng, Saito, Kim, and Fujikawa are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of cleaning devices. 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 Deng, Saito, and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Fujikawa to have a pump, heat, temperature controlling element to be able to circulate water at a desired temperature to the affected object being cleaned (Fujikawa [0007-0008]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN108968087A), Saito (CN102616711A), and Kim (KR20200001479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zuo (CN106859272A) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 4, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, and Deng teaches characterised in that the front wall (401) is fixed up to the height of an expansion zone (602), but is silent on and has a door at its upper part.
Zuo teaches a door (62) at its upper part (Fig. 3).
Deng, Saito, Kim, and Zuo are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of cleaning devices. 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 Deng, Saito, and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Zuo to have doors at an upper part so that components may be placed or removed by users (Zuo [0035]).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN108968087A), Saito (CN102616711A), and Kim (KR20200001479) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ran (CN211441290U) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 10, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, and Deng teaches characterised in that the squeezing unit (30) comprises drums (301) and extractor wedges (302), but is silent on and as auxiliary elements a juice filter placed downstream of the squeezing unit, said juice filter having a drive system.
Ran teaches as auxiliary elements a juice filter (13, 14) placed downstream of the squeezing unit (7), said juice filter having a drive system (19).
Deng, Saito, Kim, and Ran are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of cleaning devices. 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 Deng, Saito, and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Ran to have juice filters downstream a squeezing unit in order to further squeeze and juice the chopped fruit, resulting in a good fruit squeezing effect (Ran [0032]).
Regarding claim 10, Deng, Saito, and Kim teach JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE WITH SANITISING SYSTEM according to claim 1, but are silent on characterized in that the juice filter is in the form of a double channel with a spindle housed in each of the channels, the spindles being mobile by the action of a shaft associated with a motor and of opposite movement by the action of a gear.
Ran teaches characterized in that the juice filter is in the form of a double channel with a spindle (12, 13) housed in each of the channels (Fig. 4)
the spindles being mobile by the action of a shaft (Fig. 4) associated with a motor (19) and of opposite movement by the action of a gear (17, 18).
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 Deng, Saito, and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Ran to have juice filters downstream a squeezing unit as a form of a double channel with a spindle in order to further squeeze and juice the chopped fruit, resulting in a good fruit squeezing effect (Ran [0032]).
Claims 13 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN108968087A) in view of Zuo (CN106859272A) and further in view of Fujikawa (US 20090014039), Wong (US20070283508A1), and Saito (CN102616711A) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 13, Deng teaches METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE characterised in that it comprises:
a zero solid waste removal step during which the squeezing unit and its auxiliary elements move in a vacuum;
a first step of closing the covers (601),
a second step of introducing water into the housing by the first conduit (702) and by the vane of the smaller section (Fig. 11) so as, together with the nozzles (Fig. 11) of the first conduit (702) to raise the pressure of the water and that upon its exit by the nozzles orientated diagonally causes the rotation of the sprinklers and the rinsing of the walls of the housing (Fig. 11, where the nozzles have a portion that are aimed diagonally to the vanes);
during stages 2 or 3 or during both the squeezing unit and its auxiliary devices move all the elements that move during the squeezing, At this stage the different parts of the squeezing unit or their auxiliary devices are exposed to the effect of the sprinklers with variations in their angle of attack and pressure ([0052] cleaning water may be adjust, understood to be able to stop or start movement to be cleaned in for a certain time).
Deng is silent on closing doors and positioning the recirculation tube in the closed position and verifying said operations; the third stage of general recirculation in which the water or cleaning liquids leave the housing through the drain and pass through a filter, a selection key, a pump and a heater to re-enter the housing, hot and under pressure through the second conduit and the nozzles of the second conduit of the sprinklers this third step comprises a first phase in which the water without detergent is recirculated until it reaches a predetermined temperature, once the predetermined temperature is reached, the detergent is incorporated.
Zuo teaches closing doors (62).
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 Deng to incorporate the teachings of Zuo to have doors at an upper part so that components may be placed or removed by users (Zuo [0035]).
Deng and Zuo are silent on positioning the recirculation tube in the closed position and verifying said operations; the third stage of general recirculation in which the water or cleaning liquids leave the housing through the drain and pass through a filter, a selection key, a pump and a heater to re-enter the housing, hot and under pressure through the second conduit and the nozzles of the second conduit of the sprinklers this third step comprises a first phase in which the water without detergent is recirculated until it reaches a predetermined temperature, once the predetermined temperature is reached, the detergent is incorporated.
Fujikawa teaches pass through a filter (5), a selection key (11), a pump (12) and a heater (16) to re-enter the housing.
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 Deng and Zuo to incorporate the teachings of Fujikawa to have a pump, heater, filter, and selection key to be able to circulate water at a desired temperature to the affected object being cleaned (Fujikawa [0007-0008]).
Deng, Zuo, and Fujikawa are silent on the third stage of general recirculation in which the water or cleaning liquids leave the housing through the drain, hot and under pressure through the second conduit and the nozzles of the second conduit of the sprinklers this third step comprises a first phase in which the water without detergent is recirculated until it reaches a predetermined temperature, once the predetermined temperature is reached, the detergent is incorporated.
Wong teaches this third step comprises a first phase in which the water without detergent is recirculated until it reaches a predetermined temperature (104' [0121]), once the predetermined temperature is reached, the detergent is incorporated ([0123] Fig. 13).
Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, and Wong are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of cleaning devices. 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 Deng, Zuo, and Fujikawa to incorporate the teachings of Wong to have a tube that can be closed and recirculation of water or cleaning liquids with sprinklers so that the device can perform production using one liquid filling path while cleaning another liquid filling path, without the need for liquid change cleaning time, thereby achieving efficient production (Wong [0010]).
Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, and Wong are silent on the third stage of general recirculation in which the water or cleaning liquids leave the housing through the drain, hot and under pressure through the second conduit and the nozzles of the second conduit of the sprinklers.
Saito teaches the third stage of general recirculation in which the water or cleaning liquids leave the housing (11) through the drain (17a), hot and under pressure through the second conduit (17) and the nozzles of the second conduit (17) of the sprinklers (14a).
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 Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, and Wong to incorporate the teachings of Saito to recirculate cleaning liquids through nozzles so that the device can perform production using one liquid filling path while cleaning another liquid filling path, without the need for liquid change cleaning time, thereby achieving efficient production (Saito [0010]).
Regarding claim 15, Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, Wong, and Saito teach METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE according to claim 13, and Deng teaches characterised in that the movement of the elements of the squeezing unit is continuous ([0058] complete process of juicing).
Regarding claim 16, Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, Wong, and Saito teach METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE according to claim 13, and Deng teaches characterised in that the movement of the elements of the squeezing unit has stops and starts in such a way that a specific part is exposed for more time to the action of the cleaning liquids ([0052] cleaning water may be adjust, understood to be able to stop or start movement to be cleaned in for a certain time).
Regarding claim 17, Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, Wong, and Saito teach METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE according to claim 13, and Deng teaches characterised in that the stops and starts are predetermined ([0058] juicing starts or stops in accordance to counting sensor 1022, which is understood to be predetermined as to how the stops and starts occur).
Regarding claim 18, Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, Wong, and Saito teach METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE according to claim 13, and Deng teaches characterised in that the stops and starts are random ([0058] juicing starts or stops in accordance to counting sensor 1022, which is understood to be random if oranges are fed randomly).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (CN108968087A) in view of Zuo (CN106859272A) and further in view of Fujikawa (US 20090014039), Wong (US20070283508A1), Saito (CN102616711A), and Copeland (US5505915A).
Regarding claim 14, Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, Wong, and Saito teach METHOD FOR SANITISING A JUICE EXTRACTION MACHINE according to claim 13, but Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, and Wong are silent on characterised in that the third stage further comprises a partial recirculation sub-stage where the liquid contained in the bowl, is pumped by a stepper motor, exits through the outlet pipe and re-enters the casing through the recirculation pipe which is in the closed position.
Saito teaches characterised in that the third stage further comprises a partial recirculation sub-stage where the liquid contained in the bowl (29), is pumped; exits through the outlet pipe (33) and re-enters the casing through the recirculation pipe (31) which is in the closed position.
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 Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, and Wong to incorporate the teachings of Saito to have a bowl, outlet and a pipe so that the device can perform production using one liquid filling path while cleaning another liquid filling path, without the need for liquid change cleaning time, thereby achieving efficient production (Saito [0010]).
Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, Wong, and Saito are silent on a stepper motor.
Copeland teaches a stepper motor (69).
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 Deng, Zuo, Fujikawa, Wong, and Saito to incorporate the teachings of Copeland to have a stepper motor as stepper motors allow adjustments to components in discrete increments (Copeland Col. 7 lines 10-20).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABIGAIL RHUE whose telephone number is (571)272-4615. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10-6.
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.
/ABIGAIL H RHUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 6/27/2026
/WOODY A LEE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights