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 1-2, 12, 14 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, in line 1 after “food” delete “as it is reheated” and insert “during reheating” in order to place the claim in better form.
In line 5 after “covers” delete “a user’s” and insert “the” since “food” was already recited in line 1 and to place the claim in better form.
In line 5 before “microwave” delete “a” and insert “the” since “a microwave” was already recited in line 2.
Regarding claim 2, in line 2 delete “microwave cooking cavity during cooking” and insert “cooking cavity of the microwave during reheating” for consistency with the preamble and to place the claim in better form.
Regarding claim 12, in line 2 after “grasp” delete “it” and inset “said handle” to place the claim in better form.
Regarding claim 14, in line 1 after “food” delete “as it is reheated” and insert “during reheating” in order to place the claim in better form.
In line 6 after “within a” delete “microwave cooking cavity during cooking” and insert “cooking cavity of the microwave during reheating” for consistency with the preamble and to place the claim in better form.
In line 11, before “food” insert “the” since “food” was previously recited in line 1.
Regarding claim 17, in line 2 after “grasp” delete “it” and inset “said handle” to place the claim in better form.
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 7 and 15 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.
Regarding claims 7 and 15, the limitation “which allows the handle to remain substantially cool to a user’s touch during use” renders the claim indefinite since the limitation is directed to a subjective feature. Specifically, temperature value(s) encompassed by “cool to a user’s touch” can vary between individuals, where one individual may consider a certain temperature of the handle (e.g., no more than 80oF) to be “cool to the touch”, whereas another individual may consider a different temperature (e.g., no more than 70oF) to be “cool to the touch”. The specification does not provide sufficient detail for one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the feature(s) encompassed by the limitation “substantially cool to a user’s touch”. It is noted that the rejection can be overcome by amending the claim to remove the subjective feature. For example, the claim can be amended to remove “which allows the handle to remain substantially cool to a user’s touch during use”.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tai (US 2017/0273149 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tai teaches a device for retaining a moisture level of a food heated/reheated in a microwave oven (abstract; paragraphs 4-6) comprising a body component (splatter cover) 202 having a plurality of vent holes 208 and a water cup component 210, wherein the body component covers a user’s food in a microwave, and wherein the water cup component is filled with a liquid during use to create moisture (figures 4B; paragraphs 24-29).
Regarding claim 2, the body component 202 is disposed over container 217 (microwavable plate) to prevent splatter within the microwave during cooking (figure 4B; paragraph 5).
Regarding claim 10, the plurality of vent holes 208 are positioned around a top of the body component (figures 4A-B).
Regarding claim 11, the water cup component is removably secured to the body component (Figure 4A; paragraphs 26-27).
Regarding claim 12, the water cup component 210 comprises an external handle 204 that allows a user to grasp when filling the water cup component with liquid (figure 4A; paragraphs 26-29).
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.
Claim 3-6, 9, 13-14, 16-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tai as applied to claims 1-2 and 10-12 above.
Regarding claims 3-4, the embodiment relied on for claim 1 does not specify the body component having a sidewall and a top cover portion, the sidewall being 2-5 inches.
Tai teaches an embodiment where the body component 100 comprises a side wall 110 and a top portion 108, the side wall being 2-5 inches (figure 1A; paragraphs 16-18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the body component to comprise a 2-5 inch side wall and top cover portion since Tai states modifications can be made to the embodiments (paragraphs 39-40), since the shape does not produce unexpected results, see also MPEP 2144.04 IV.B., since such a structure is known for microwave splatter covers, and to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, see also MPEP 2143 I.(A).
Regarding claim 5, the body component 202 is circular in shape (figure 4A; paragraphs 25 and 29).
Regarding claim 6, the body component comprises a handle 204 secured to a top of the body component 202 for transportation (paragraphs 26-27). Further, raised barrier 206/219 could also be used as the claimed handle (figure 4B).
Regarding claim 9, the body component as modified for claims 3-4 comprises a side wall and a dome-shaped housing (figures 1A, C, and E-F). The same modification is applied to claim 9 and would have been obvious for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 13, the embodiment relied on for claim 1 does not specify the water cup component comprises an amount meter for measuring an amount of liquid added.
Tai teaches an embodiment where the liquid storage area 106 comprises an amount meter 105 for measuring an amount of liquid added (figure 1A; paragraph 17). Further embodiments show a meter 212 can be placed within liquid holding chambers (figure 5B; paragraph 31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the water cup component to comprise an amount meter for the same reasons stated for claims 3-4, and in order to similarly allow water level to be measured/confirmed in the cup 210 of embodiment 4A.
Regarding claim 14, the embodiment of Tai applied to claims 1, 2, 6 and 10 teaches a microwavable food cover device as recited for said claim. The device is used to cover food within plate 217 and “keep the food moisturized” during microwaving as stated for said claims. It is noted the water cup is necessarily secured to “a side of the body component” since the cup 210 is secured to the body component 202 at the upper side thereof via handle 204 (figure 4A).
The embodiment does not teach the body component comprising a side wall and a top cover portion. However, the modification applied to claim 3 teaches said features. The same modification is applied to claim 14 and would have been obvious for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 16, the embodiment relied on for claim 14 does not specify a plurality of indicia. However, the modification applied to claim 13 teaches a plurality of indicia such as dashes for meter 105 (figure 1A). The same modification is applied to claim 16 and would have been obvious for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 17, the water cup component 210 comprises an external handle 204 that allows a user to grasp when filling the water cup component with liquid (figure 4A; paragraphs 26-29).
Regarding claim 18, the modification applied to claim 13 teaches an amount meter as claimed. The same modification is applied to claim 18 and would have been obvious for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 20, Tai teaches a method of preventing food splatters while microwaving food comprising providing a microwavable food cover device comprising a body component with a plurality of through-holes, a water cup, and a handle, filling up the cup with water, and microwaving the food without worry of splattering and while infusing moisture into the food as stated for claims 1-2 and 6 above.
However, the embodiment of Tai relied on for the claims does not teach placing the cover device over a plate of food in the microwave via the handle.
Tai further teaches an embodiment where the body component is placed over a plate with food to be warmed in a microwave oven (paragraph 21). The same embodiment is relied on for claims 3-4. The same modification, with respect to method limitations, is applied to claim 20 and would have been obvious for the same reasons.
Therefore, the above feature would have been obvious based on the type of covering and the type of food being microwaved.
Claims 7-8, 15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tai as applied to claims 1-6, and 14 above, and in view of Mouler (US 2023/0145139 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Tai does not teach the handle comprises a covering which allows the handle to remain substantially cool to a user’s touch during use.
Mouler teaches a microwave cooking device for preventing splattering of food during microwaving (paragraph 6), the device comprising opposing side handles 9A-B to facilitate maneuvering the device (figures 1-2; paragraph 29). The handles are made from silicone to prevent the handles from getting hot and protecting the user’s hands from burning (paragraph 12).
While the reference does not explicitly recite a covering for the handles, such structures are well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the handle of Tai to include a covering as claimed since the prior art recognizes materials used for handles that prevent over heating during microwaving, since there is no evidence of criticality or unexpected results associated with the feature, and in order to cover the handle with a similar material to prevent burning of the user’s hands.
Regarding claims 8 and 19, Tai does not teach the body component comprises at least two grip handles on opposing sides.
Mouler further teaches the device comprising opposing side handles 9A-B to facilitate maneuvering the device (figures 1-2; paragraph 29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the body portion of Tai to include opposing side handles since the structure is known in the art, to provide an auxiliary means for handling the device, and to provide balanced handling structures for enhanced stability.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-0338. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6.
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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at (571)-270-3475. 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.
/BRYAN KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 1792