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 Interpretation
Claim 22 recites “the locking tabs” in line 8 which is understood to mean “one or more locking tabs” as recited in line 6.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: paragraph [0011] recites “a locking tabs” and it appears this should be “[[a]] locking tabs” and paragraph [0102] recites “and supported to rotated within the auger chamber” and it appears this should be “and supported to rotate[[d]] within the auger chamber”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 10 recites “rotatable receivable” in line 3 and it appears this should be “rotatably receivable”. 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 17-22 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 17 recites the limitation "the material dispenser" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This could be changed to “the material dispenser base”.
Claims 18-21 are rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 17.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the material dispenser" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This could be changed to “the material dispenser base”.
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.
Claims 1-4, 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hanson (US 4493442).
Regarding claim 1, Hanson discloses a material dispenser base (for powdered or granular food, Abstract) for mixing and dispensing a material as shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
851
1259
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hanson discloses the material dispenser base comprises: a base unit (lower section 22) including a base internal cavity defined therein, the material is receivable in the base internal cavity (received via upper portion 18/hopper 10, Fig. 1); an auger (auger 14) rotatably located in the base internal cavity (Fig. 2); and a mixer (agitator 52) rotatably located in the base internal cavity (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 2, Hanson discloses wherein the base unit defines an auger chamber (portion of lower section 22 containing the auger, Fig. 2, shown above) in communication with the base internal cavity (Fig. 2) and a mixer chamber (portion containing agitator 52) in communication with the base internal cavity, the auger chamber is configured to rotatably receive at least a part of the auger (auger 14, Fig. 2), the mixer chamber is configured to rotatably receive at least a part of the mixer (Fig. 2, shown above for claim 1).
Regarding claim 3, Hanson discloses wherein the base unit includes a discharge end extending out therefrom (such as extending from flange 44, Fig. 2, shown above for claim 1), the discharge end defines a hollow interior therethrough that is in communication with the auger chamber (shown above for claim 1).
Regarding claim 4, Hanson discloses wherein the discharge end is configured to receive an auger discharge end of the auger (shown above for claim 1), and the auger is configured to dispense the material from the auger chamber through the hollow interior of the discharge end (material is discharged through end 34, openings 32 and slots 38 of the discharge end, col. 3, lines 24-26 and 33-35, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Hanson discloses a hopper (hopper 10) including a hopper internal cavity defined therein (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2), the hopper internal cavity being in communication with the base internal cavity (hopper 10/upper portion 18 shown in communication with base internal cavity/lower section 22 as the hopper is shown inserted into the base unit at flange 27, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, Hanson discloses wherein the material is a foodstuff (granular food product, Abstract).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanson (US 4493442) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Villarreal (US 8814006).
Regarding claim 5, Hanson discloses wherein the mixer includes a mixer support end configured to support the mixer in a mixer bore defined through the base unit (Fig. 2) as shown below:
PNG
media_image2.png
505
580
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Insomuch as Hanson does not explicitly disclose the auger includes an auger support end configured to support the auger in an auger bore defined through the base unit; Villarreal discloses a similar device (seasoning feeder 15, Fig. 2) having an auger (auger 35) and a mixer (mixer with paddles 40) and Villarreal teaches wherein the auger includes an auger support end configured to support the auger in an auger bore defined through the base unit, and wherein the mixer includes a mixer support end configured to support the mixer in a mixer bore defined through the base unit as shown below:
PNG
media_image3.png
656
1020
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein the auger includes an auger support end configured to support the auger in an auger bore defined through the base unit.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use an auger support end to provide additional support in the base unit for the auger.
Regarding claim 7, Hanson discloses wherein the mixer includes a shaft, one or more paddles extending out from the shaft, and a locking end (end secured to a wall of the base unit) as shown below:
PNG
media_image4.png
410
555
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Assuming, arguendo, that Hanson does not disclose paddles; Villarreal discloses a similar device (seasoning feeder 15, Fig. 2) having an auger (auger 35) and a mixer (mixer with paddles 40) and Villarreal teaches one or more paddles extending out from the shaft as shown below:
PNG
media_image5.png
637
762
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein one or more paddles extend out from the shaft.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use paddles in order to break up clumps (Villarreal, col. 3, line 40).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanson (US 4493442) in view of Villarreal (US 8814006) as applied to claim 7 above and in further view of Zhou (attached translation of CN 111387822A).
Regarding claim 8, Hanson does not disclose wherein the locking end includes one or more locking tabs extending out from the locking end, wherein the locking tabs are engageable with a sidewall of the base unit or a surface of the base unit that defines a bore.
However, Zhou discloses a material dispenser for mixing and dispensing (powder box, Abstract) having an auger (screw powder rod 2) and Zhou teaches securing a rotating member (the auger) to a sidewall using a locking end wherein the locking end includes one or more locking tabs extending out from the locking end, wherein the locking tabs are engageable with a sidewall of the base unit or a surface of the base unit that defines a bore (comprising mounting ring 4-2 and sleeve 5) as shown below:
PNG
media_image6.png
419
1207
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson by using a known locking mechanism for attaching and supporting a rotating member such as a mixer shaft wherein the locking end includes one or more locking tabs extending out from the locking end, wherein the locking tabs are engageable with a sidewall of the base unit or a surface of the base unit that defines a mixer bore when the locking tabs are received through the mixer bore.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use locking tabs to provide a rotatable coupling of the mixer shaft to a wall of the base unit which allows for easy disassembly such as for cleaning and maintenance.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanson (US 4493442) in view of Villarreal (US 8814006) as applied to claim 7 above and in further view of Zhou (attached translation of CN 111387822A) and Kim (attached translation of KR 20110011210A).
Regarding claim 9, Hanson does not disclose wherein the auger and the mixer each includes a cog or a cog socket that is operatively engageable with one or more motors or a gearbox.
However, Zhou discloses a material dispenser for mixing and dispensing (powder box, Abstract) having an auger (screw powder rod 2) and Zhou teaches wherein the auger includes a cog or a cog socket that is operatively engageable with one or more motors (powder discharge motor, para. [0017]) or a gearbox as shown below:
PNG
media_image7.png
289
847
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein the auger includes a cog or a cog socket that is operatively engageable with one or more motors or a gearbox.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a coupling having cogs in order to facilitate easy installation and removal of the auger (slidably installed and removed).
The above-cited references do not expressly disclose the mixer includes a cog socket that is operatively engageable with one or more motors or a gearbox.
However, Kim teaches a device having an auger (screw 34) and a mixer (kneading wing 102) wherein the mixer includes a cog socket (locking groove 106) that is operatively engageable with a gearbox as shown below:
PNG
media_image8.png
515
981
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein the mixer
includes a cog or a cog socket that is operatively engageable with one or more motors or a gearbox.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a coupling having cogs in order to facilitate easy installation and removal of the mixer (slidably installed and removed).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanson (US 4493442) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Edelman et al. (US 20170274331).
Regarding claim 10, Hanson does not disclose wherein the mixer is at least two mixers.
However, Edelman et al. discloses a material dispenser for mixing and dispensing a material (material dispenser for powder having a mixing portion with rotating beaters, Abstract) and Edelman et al. further teaches wherein the mixer is at least two mixers (first and second beaters, para. [0004]), at least a part of each of the at least two mixers being rotatable receivable in a mixer chamber (Fig. 13 and Fig. 14) defined in the base unit, the at least two mixers being located in a spaced apart relationship with each other in the base unit (Fig. 14) to create an opening therebetween (Fig. 14) configured to allow the material to pass therebetween toward the auger (Fig. 14) as shown below:
PNG
media_image9.png
1001
1146
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein the mixer is at least two mixers, at least a part of each of the at least two mixers being rotatable receivable in a mixer chamber defined in the base unit, the at least two mixers being located in a spaced apart relationship with each other in the base unit to create an opening therebetween configured to allow the material to pass therebetween toward the auger.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use two mixers in order to improve agitation.
Regarding claim 11, Hanson does not disclose wherein the mixer is at least two mixers.
However, Edelman et al. who is relied upon to teach two mixers as discussed for claim 10 above, further discloses wherein the at least two mixers are operatively driven in counter rotating directions by a motor (motor 15) or by a gearbox (comprising sprockets 19, 54, and belt 13, as shown below and as indicated in Fig. 15, the belt would cause the mixers to counter-rotate where one mixer rotates clockwise and the other mixer rotates counter-clockwise):
PNG
media_image10.png
675
787
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein the at least two mixers are operatively driven in counter rotating directions by a motor or a gearbox.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use counter-rotating mixers to equally direct material from both sides of the base unit to the auger.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanson (US 4493442) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Neely (US 4207995).
Regarding claim 13, Hanson does not expressly disclose integral construction.
However, Neely discloses a material dispenser for mixing and dispensing a material (canister with screw and agitator for dispensing material, Abstract) and Neely further teaches an upper hopper portion (wall 18) is integrally formed with a lower base portion (having bottom wall 20, col. 1, lines 48-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein the hopper is integrally formed with the base unit.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use integral construction in order to simplify manufacturing. See In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Claims 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanson (US 4493442) as applied to claim 1 or claim 15 above and in further view of Fritz-Jung et al. (US 9974314).
Regarding clam 14, Hanson does not disclose a fastener.
However, Fritz-Jung et al. discloses a dispensing device (cheese station 1400) with a hopper (hopper 1402) and a base unit (base structure 1460) and Fritz-Jung et al. further discloses a fastener, wherein, when the hopper is mounted to the base unit, the hopper internal cavity is in communication with the base internal cavity, and the hopper and the base unit are secured together by the fastener in a locked position (Fig. 42), and wherein, when the hopper is removed from the base unit, the fastener is in an unlocked position (Fig. 38) as shown below:
PNG
media_image11.png
645
936
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein when the hopper is mounted to the base unit, the hopper internal cavity is in communication with the base internal cavity, and the hopper and the base unit are secured together by the fastener in a locked position, and wherein, when the hopper is removed from the base unit, the fastener is in an unlocked position.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use fasteners in order to better secure the hopper.
Regarding claim 16, Hanson does not expressly disclose cheese. However, “it is well-settled that the material worked upon by an apparatus does not limit apparatus claims. See MPEP 2115. Nonetheless, the device of Hanson would be fully capable of dispensing a cheese food product.
Further, Fritz-Jung et al. discloses a dispensing device (cheese station 1400) with a hopper (hopper 1402) and a base unit (base structure 1460) and Fritz-Jung et al. further discloses using the device to dispense cheese (col. 9, lines 39-44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein the foodstuff is cheese.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the device to dispense cheese in order to use the device to make pizzas (Fritz-Jung et al., Abstract).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanson (US 4493442) in view of Villarreal (US 8814006) and Zhou (attached translation of CN 111387822A).
Regarding claim 22, Hanson discloses a material dispenser base (for powdered or granular food, Abstract) for mixing and dispensing a material as shown above for claim 1. Hanson discloses the material dispenser base comprises: a base unit (lower section 22) including a base internal cavity defined therein; an auger (auger 14) rotatably located in the base internal cavity (Fig. 2); and a mixer (agitator 52) rotatably located in the base internal cavity (Fig. 2).
Hanson discloses the mixer includes one or more paddles (annotated above for claim 7) or otherwise Villarreal discloses a similar device (seasoning feeder 15, Fig. 2) having an auger (auger 35) and a mixer (mixer with paddles 40) and Villarreal teaches one or more paddles (paddles 40) as shown above for claim 7.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson wherein the mixer includes one or more paddles.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use paddles in order to break up clumps (Villarreal, col. 3, line 40).
Hanson does not disclose a locking end with one or more locking tabs.
However, Zhou discloses a material dispenser for mixing and dispensing (powder box, Abstract) having an auger (screw powder rod 2) and Zhou teaches securing a rotating member (the auger) to a sidewall using a locking end wherein the locking end includes one or more locking tabs extending out from the locking end, wherein the locking tabs are engageable with a sidewall of the base unit that defines a bore (comprising mounting ring 4-2 and sleeve 5) as shown above for claim 8.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Hanson by using a known locking mechanism for attaching and supporting a rotating member such as a mixer shaft wherein the mixer includes a locking end with one or more locking tabs extending out from the locking end, wherein the locking tabs are engageable with a sidewall of the base unit that defines a mixer bore when the locking tabs are received through the mixer bore.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use locking tabs to provide a rotatable coupling of the mixer shaft to a wall of the base unit which allows for easy disassembly such as for cleaning and maintenance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), but would be allowable upon the resolution of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) discussed above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record discloses devices for dispensing and mixing having a base unit with an auger and a mixer disposed therein including devices having multiple mixers which undergo counter-rotation and which have an auger support end and a mixer support end.
However, the prior art of record did not reasonably disclose, teach or otherwise suggest a material dispenser base for dispensing and mixing having a base unit with an auger and a mixer disposed therein and which has an auger support end and a mixer support end and wherein the mixer support end features a mixer support ledge and the auger support end features an auger support ledge wherein the mixer support ledge is configured to overlap the auger support ledge to prevent the auger from being withdrawn from an auger bore or wherein the mixer support ledge is configured to overlap the auger support ledge to prevent the auger from being withdrawn from the base unit when the mixer and the auger are operatively assembled with the base unit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Miller (US 3271061) discloses a hopper with a fastener.
Verhoest et al. (US 20220097978) discloses a dispenser/feeder with an overlapping end member.
Zhang et al. (attached translation of CN 201436954U) discloses a dispensing device with a mixer and an auger.
Hu (attached translation of CN 108355518A) discloses a dispensing device with mixers and an auger.
Bouziad et al. (US 20200391165) discloses a food processor having mixers and an auger.
Wassink et al. (US 20200037809) discloses a material dispenser.
Leclercq (US 3907259) discloses extruder screws having pinion gears with overlapping ledges.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK M MCCARTY whose telephone number is (571)272-4398. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, Claire 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.
/P.M.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1774
/CLAIRE X WANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1774