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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1, 3-4, 7, and 11-13 are amended. Claims 2, 5-6, 8-10, 14-18 are as previously presented. Claims 19-20 are newly added. Therefore, claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on April 22, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-13, filed on 04/22/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-18 under U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of applicant’s amendment regarding the hood moving between a closed and open position via a handle, where the brace structure extends within the hood main wall and moves with the hood between the closed and open positions to support the hood, and newly found prior art regarding these features.
Applicant argues that the Brummer reference is not analogous art as it fails the both prongs of the analogous art test. Applicant argues that Brummer is not from the same field of endeavor and is not reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor even if it is not in the same field of endeavor.
The Examiner agrees with the Applicant that Brummer does not fall within the same field of endeavor of a cooking station. The Examiner also agrees, in view of applicant’s new amendment, that Brummer does not include a cover with cross bracing that is moveable between an open and closed position through the use of a handle. Since Applicant’s amendment has now elaborated upon how the bracing interacts with the cooking station hood, the Examiner believes that now Brummer cannot be analogous art as least by itself. It is for these reasons that the Examiner has found additional prior art pertinent to bracing for covers that move between open and closed positions through the use of a handle.
However, it is the Examiner’s position that Brummer is still applicable to the problem of high temperatures warping covers which is disclosed in Applicant’s claim 4. Regarding the warping feature, Brummer still is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor even though it is not in the same field of endeavor as the Brummer discloses cross bracing within high temperature environments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7-9, 11, and 13-16 and is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dahle et al. (US 20200093330 A1, hereinafter Dahle) in view of Brummer (US 5753059 A1) and Norris et al. (US 20150013662 A1, hereinafter Norris) and Uffner et al. (CA 2570581 A1, hereinafter Uffner).
Regarding claim 1, Dahle discloses a cooking station (Abstract, “An outdoor cooking station”), comprising:
a main body extending to define a front side, a rear side, a left side and a right side each extending between a lower end and an upper portion (Modified Fig. 4, where the main body is shown with the front side, rear side, left side, and a right side that extend between a lower end and an upper portion),
the main body extending to support one or more heating elements (Para. 0024, “The cooking station 10 may include a main body 12 with an upper portion 14 and a lower portion 16, the upper portion 14 including heating elements 18 for heating a cooking surface 20”);
a griddle configured to be supported by the upper portion of the main body (Para. 0026, “The upper edge 48 or structure adjacent the upper edge 48 may be sized and configured to support the cooking surface 20, such as a griddle member 52”), the griddle extending to define an upper side with a cooking surface (Para. 0026, “The upper edge 48 or structure adjacent the upper edge 48 may be sized and configured to support the cooking surface 20”, where the griddle 52 includes a cooking surface 20) and a splash guard (Modified Fig. 2, where the splash guard is shown), the splash guard extending upward from the cooking surface of the griddle (Modified Fig. 2, where the splash guard is shown to extend upwards from the cooking surface 20 of the griddle); and
a hood sized and configured to be operably coupled to the main body (Para. 0026, “the cooking station 10 may include a lid 54 that is attached to the rear side 38 of the main body 12 so as to pivot between an open position and closed position.”), the hood configured to be moveable between a closed position and an open position relative to the griddle (Para. 0026, “the cooking station 10 may include a lid 54 that is attached to the rear side 38 of the main body 12 so as to pivot between an open position and closed position.”, and where the lid covers the griddle, Para. 0026, “The lid 54 may be an unattached component, relative to the main body 12, and may be sized and configured to cover the griddle member 52”), the hood extending with a main wall (Modified Fig. 2, where the reference numeral 54 is pointing to the main wall) and one or more sidewalls positioned around a perimeter of the main wall, wherein the main wall and the one or more sidewalls define a plurality of corners on an interior side of the hood (Modified Fig. 2, where reference numeral 54 includes a main wall that handles are attached to, where there are four sidewalls that extend downwards around the perimeter of the main wall, where the main wall and sidewalls create four corners).
PNG
media_image1.png
556
848
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 4, Dahle
PNG
media_image2.png
412
770
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 2, Dahle
Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the hood comprises: a handle coupled to an exterior surface on a front sidewall of the hood, the handle to move the hood between the closed position and the open position; and
where the hood includes a brace structure extending on the main wall of the hood, wherein the brace structure comprises:
a first bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a first corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a second corner of the plurality of corners; and
a second bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a third corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a fourth corner of the plurality of corners to substantially support the hood as the hood is moved between the open position and the closed position via the handle.
However, Brummer discloses, in the similar field of covers (Abstract, “The bottom of the cover”), where the cover includes a brace structure positioned to extend over the main wall of the cover to substantially support the cover (Section 3, lines 36-38, “The bottom 1 of the cover has stiffening ribs 3 which are arranged in a cross bracing 4.”, and where the cross bracing provides support for the hood, Section 3, lines 49-53, “The boundaries 9. 10 have an L-shape, whereby the surface of the stiffening ribs is relatively enlarged in this region. The relatively enlarged surface results in a stable connection of the stiffening ribs with each other.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the hood in Dahle to include cross bracing for a cover as taught by Brummer.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to provide a stiff connection for the hood cover, as stated by Brummer, Section 3, lines 49-53, “The boundaries 9. 10 have an L-shape, whereby the surface of the stiffening ribs is relatively enlarged in this region. The relatively enlarged surface results in a stable connection of the stiffening ribs with each other.”.
Norris discloses, in the similar field of cooking stations (Abstract, “Outdoor Barbeque Grill), where the hood includes a handle coupled to an exterior surface on a front sidewall of the hood (Para. 0017, “The outdoor grill includes a pivoted cover 17, temperature gauge 48 and a handle 47 attached to cover 17.”), where the handle moves the hood between a closed and open position (Claim 15, “each cover being separately pivotably attached to the housing above a respective cooking surface, thereby isolating the space above the cooking surface from the atmosphere when the cover is in a closed position.”, where Fig. 1 shows that the cover 17 can be in an open position, and where the cover 17 is placed in a closed position through the use of the handle 47). 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 handle location in modified Dahle to be attached on the front sidewall as taught by Norris.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use a handle to move a cover, as stated by Norris, Para. 0017, “The outdoor grill includes a pivoted cover 17, temperature gauge 48 and a handle 47 attached to cover 17.”.
Regarding the positioning of the handle, it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Dahle already includes a cover with a handle as shown in modified Fig. 2 and Norris also includes a cover with a handle as shown in Fig. 1, where the main difference is in the positioning of the handle went attached to the cover. It is the Examiner’s position that both handles in Dahle and Norris are able to achieve the same end result of opening and closing the cover. As a result, the location of the handle would be a mere matter of rearrangement of parts and the specific placement of the handle would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Further, Uffner discloses, in the similar field of systems used in the cooking area (Abstract, “preparation station for use in outdoor food service.”), where a cover includes a brace structure extending on the main wall of the cover (Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”), where the brace structure includes a first bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a first corner of the plurality of corner to proximate a second corner of the plurality of corners (Modified Fig. 4.1, where the bracing structure shows the first bracing axis between the first and second corners), where a second bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a third corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a fourth corner of the plurality of corners (Modified Fig. 4.1, where the bracing structure shows the second bracing axis between the third and fourth corners) in order to substantially support the cover as it is moved between the open and close positions via a handle (Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”, and Page 16, “A handle 538 is provided on the upper door and a handle 540 is provided on the lower door to assist in opening and closing the doors.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the cover that can be opened and closed via a handle in modified Dahle to include a cross bracing structure that moves with the cover between open and closed positions as taught by Uffner.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of using cross bracing in order to strength the cover or door, as stated by Uffner, Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”.
PNG
media_image3.png
547
655
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 4.1, Uffner
Regarding claim 2, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein the brace structure extends with an x- configuration (Teaching from Brummer, Section 3, lines 36-38, “The bottom 1 of the cover has stiffening ribs 3 which are arranged in a cross bracing 4.”, where the cross bracing shape is in a “x”).
Regarding claim 5, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above, discloses wherein, upon the hood being moved to the open position, the hood is removable from the griddle (Dahle, Para. 0026, “The lid 54 may be an unattached component, relative to the main body 12, and may be sized and configured to cover the griddle member 52 or grill for protection of the cooking surface 20 during non-use of the cooking station 10.”, where the hood or lid 54 can be unattached and removable from the griddle in the open position).
Regarding claim 7, Dahle discloses a cooking station (Abstract, “An outdoor cooking station”), comprising:
a main body extending to define a front side, a rear side, a left side and a right side each extending between a lower end and an upper portion (Modified Fig. 4, where the main body is shown with the front side, rear side, left side, and a right side that extend between a lower end and an upper portion),
the main body extending to support one or more heating elements (Para. 0024, “The cooking station 10 may include a main body 12 with an upper portion 14 and a lower portion 16, the upper portion 14 including heating elements 18 for heating a cooking surface 20”), the main body configured to support a cooking surface positioned above the one or more heating elements (Para. 0026, “The upper edge 48 or structure adjacent the upper edge 48 may be sized and configured to support the cooking surface 20”, where the main body supports the griddle 52 which includes a cooking surface 20, where the heating elements 18 heat the cooking surface 20 from Para. 0024); and
a hood configured to pivot between a closed position and an open position relative to the cooking surface (Para. 0026, “the cooking station 10 may include a lid 54 that is attached to the rear side 38 of the main body 12 so as to pivot between an open position and closed position.”, and where the lid covers the griddle, Para. 0026, “The lid 54 may be an unattached component, relative to the main body 12, and may be sized and configured to cover the griddle member 52”), the hood operably coupled to the main body (Para. 0026, “the cooking station 10 may include a lid 54 that is attached to the rear side 38 of the main body 12 so as to pivot between an open position and closed position.”),
the hood extending with a main wall (Modified Fig. 2, where the reference numeral 54 is pointing to the main wall) and one or more sidewalls positioned around a perimeter of the main wall, wherein the main wall and the one or more sidewalls define a plurality of corners on an interior side of the hood (Modified Fig. 2, where reference numeral 54 includes a main wall that handles are attached to, where there are four sidewalls that extend downwards around the perimeter of the main wall, where the main wall and sidewalls create four corners).
Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the hood comprises: a handle coupled to an exterior surface on a front sidewall of the hood, the handle to move the hood between the closed position and the open position; and
where the hood includes a brace structure extending on the main wall of the hood so as to substantially support the hood, wherein the brace structure comprises:
a first bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a first corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a second corner of the plurality of corners; and
a second bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a third corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a fourth corner of the plurality of corners to substantially support the hood as the hood is moved between the open position and the closed position via the handle.
However, Brummer discloses, in the similar field of covers (Abstract, “The bottom of the cover”), where the cover includes a brace structure positioned to extend over the main wall of the cover to substantially support the cover (Section 3, lines 36-38, “The bottom 1 of the cover has stiffening ribs 3 which are arranged in a cross bracing 4.”, and where the cross bracing provides support for the hood, Section 3, lines 49-53, “The boundaries 9. 10 have an L-shape, whereby the surface of the stiffening ribs is relatively enlarged in this region. The relatively enlarged surface results in a stable connection of the stiffening ribs with each other.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the hood in Dahle to include cross bracing for a cover as taught by Brummer.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to provide a stiff connection for the hood cover, as stated by Brummer, Section 3, lines 49-53, “The boundaries 9. 10 have an L-shape, whereby the surface of the stiffening ribs is relatively enlarged in this region. The relatively enlarged surface results in a stable connection of the stiffening ribs with each other.”.
Norris discloses, in the similar field of cooking stations (Abstract, “Outdoor Barbeque Grill), where the hood includes a handle coupled to an exterior surface on a front sidewall of the hood (Para. 0017, “The outdoor grill includes a pivoted cover 17, temperature gauge 48 and a handle 47 attached to cover 17.”), where the handle moves the hood between a closed and open position (Claim 15, “each cover being separately pivotably attached to the housing above a respective cooking surface, thereby isolating the space above the cooking surface from the atmosphere when the cover is in a closed position.”, where Fig. 1 shows that the cover 17 can be in an open position, and where the cover 17 is placed in a closed position through the use of the handle 47). 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 handle location in modified Dahle to be attached on the front sidewall as taught by Norris.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use a handle to move a cover, as stated by Norris, Para. 0017, “The outdoor grill includes a pivoted cover 17, temperature gauge 48 and a handle 47 attached to cover 17.”.
Regarding the positioning of the handle, it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Dahle already includes a cover with a handle as shown in modified Fig. 2 and Norris also includes a cover with a handle as shown in Fig. 1, where the main difference is in the positioning of the handle went attached to the cover. It is the Examiner’s position that both handles in Dahle and Norris are able to achieve the same end result of opening and closing the cover. As a result, the location of the handle would be a mere matter of rearrangement of parts and the specific placement of the handle would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Further, Uffner discloses, in the similar field of systems used in the cooking area (Abstract, “preparation station for use in outdoor food service.”), where a cover includes a brace structure extending on the main wall of the cover (Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”), where the brace structure includes a first bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a first corner of the plurality of corner to proximate a second corner of the plurality of corners (Modified Fig. 4.1, where the bracing structure shows the first bracing axis between the first and second corners), where a second bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a third corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a fourth corner of the plurality of corners (Modified Fig. 4.1, where the bracing structure shows the second bracing axis between the third and fourth corners) in order to substantially support the cover as it is moved between the open and close positions via a handle (Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”, and Page 16, “A handle 538 is provided on the upper door and a handle 540 is provided on the lower door to assist in opening and closing the doors.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the cover that can be opened and closed via a handle in modified Dahle to include a cross bracing structure that moves with the cover between open and closed positions as taught by Uffner.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of using cross bracing in order to strength the cover or door, as stated by Uffner, Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”.
Regarding claim 8, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 7, as set forth above, discloses wherein the brace structure extends with an x- configuration (Teaching from Brummer, Section 3, lines 36-38, “The bottom 1 of the cover has stiffening ribs 3 which are arranged in a cross bracing 4.”, where the cross bracing shape is in a “x”).
Regarding claim 9, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 7, as set forth above, discloses wherein the brace structure extends with multiple elongated pieces, the elongated pieces extending along the main wall of the hood to define an x- configuration (Teaching from Brummer, Section 3, lines 36-38, “The bottom 1 of the cover has stiffening ribs 3 which are arranged in a cross bracing 4.”, where the cross bracing includes stiffening ribs that include multiple elongated pieces and where the pieces form the shape in a “x”).
Regarding claim 11, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 7, as set forth above, discloses wherein, upon the hood being moved to the open position, the hood is removable from the main body (Dahle, Para. 0026, “The lid 54 may be an unattached component, relative to the main body 12, and may be sized and configured to cover the griddle member 52 or grill for protection of the cooking surface 20 during non-use of the cooking station 10.”, where the hood or lid 54 can be unattached and removable from the griddle in the open position).
Regarding claim 13, Dahle discloses a method for supporting a hood (Para. 0026, “the cooking station 10 may include a lid 54”, where the lid includes a method of being placed onto the main body through covering the griddle), comprising:
providing a main body that extends to define a front side, a rear side, a left side and a right side each extending between a lower end and an upper portion (Modified Fig. 4, where the main body is shown with the front side, rear side, left side, and a right side that extend between a lower end and an upper portion),),
the main body extending to support one or more heating elements (Para. 0024, “The cooking station 10 may include a main body 12 with an upper portion 14 and a lower portion 16, the upper portion 14 including heating elements 18 for heating a cooking surface 20”), the main body configured to support a cooking surface positioned above the one or more heating elements (Para. 0026, “The upper edge 48 or structure adjacent the upper edge 48 may be sized and configured to support the cooking surface 20”, where the main body supports the griddle 52 which includes a cooking surface 20, where the heating elements 18 heat the cooking surface 20 from Para. 0024);
operably coupling a hood to the main body, the hood extending with a main wall and one or more sidewalls positioned around a perimeter of the main wall, wherein the main wall and the one or more sidewalls define a plurality of corners on an interior side of the hood (Para. 0026, “the cooking station 10 may include a lid 54 that is attached to the rear side 38 of the main body 12 so as to pivot between an open position and closed position.”; Modified Fig. 2, where reference numeral 54 includes a main wall that handles are attached to, where there are four sidewalls that extend downwards around the perimeter of the main wall, where the main wall and sidewalls create four corners),
pivoting the hood relative to the main body via a handle between a closed position and an open position relative to the cooking surface (Para. 0026, “the cooking station 10 may include a lid 54 that is attached to the rear side 38 of the main body 12 so as to pivot between an open position and closed position.”, and where the lid covers the griddle, Para. 0026, “The lid 54 may be an unattached component, relative to the main body 12, and may be sized and configured to cover the griddle member 52”, and Modified Fig. 2 shows the handle connected to the lid 54 that is used to pivot the hood between a closed and open position).
Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the hood comprises: a handle coupled to an exterior surface on a front sidewall of the hood, the handle to move the hood between the closed position and the open position; and
where the hood includes a brace structure extending on the main wall of the hood, wherein the brace structure comprises:
a first bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a first corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a second corner of the plurality of corners; and
a second bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a third corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a fourth corner of the plurality of corners to substantially support the hood as the hood is moved between the open position and the closed position via the handle.
However, Brummer discloses, in the similar field of covers (Abstract, “The bottom of the cover”), where the cover includes a brace structure positioned to extend over the main wall of the cover to substantially support the cover (Section 3, lines 36-38, “The bottom 1 of the cover has stiffening ribs 3 which are arranged in a cross bracing 4.”, and where the cross bracing provides support for the hood, Section 3, lines 49-53, “The boundaries 9. 10 have an L-shape, whereby the surface of the stiffening ribs is relatively enlarged in this region. The relatively enlarged surface results in a stable connection of the stiffening ribs with each other.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the hood in Dahle to include cross bracing for a cover as taught by Brummer.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to provide a stiff connection for the hood cover, as stated by Brummer, Section 3, lines 49-53, “The boundaries 9. 10 have an L-shape, whereby the surface of the stiffening ribs is relatively enlarged in this region. The relatively enlarged surface results in a stable connection of the stiffening ribs with each other.”.
Norris discloses, in the similar field of cooking stations (Abstract, “Outdoor Barbeque Grill), where the hood includes a handle coupled to an exterior surface on a front sidewall of the hood (Para. 0017, “The outdoor grill includes a pivoted cover 17, temperature gauge 48 and a handle 47 attached to cover 17.”), where the handle moves the hood between a closed and open position (Claim 15, “each cover being separately pivotably attached to the housing above a respective cooking surface, thereby isolating the space above the cooking surface from the atmosphere when the cover is in a closed position.”, where Fig. 1 shows that the cover 17 can be in an open position, and where the cover 17 is placed in a closed position through the use of the handle 47). 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 handle location in modified Dahle to be attached on the front sidewall as taught by Norris.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to use a handle to move a cover, as stated by Norris, Para. 0017, “The outdoor grill includes a pivoted cover 17, temperature gauge 48 and a handle 47 attached to cover 17.”.
Regarding the positioning of the handle, it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). Dahle already includes a cover with a handle as shown in modified Fig. 2 and Norris also includes a cover with a handle as shown in Fig. 1, where the main difference is in the positioning of the handle went attached to the cover. It is the Examiner’s position that both handles in Dahle and Norris are able to achieve the same end result of opening and closing the cover. As a result, the location of the handle would be a mere matter of rearrangement of parts and the specific placement of the handle would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Further, Uffner discloses, in the similar field of systems used in the cooking area (Abstract, “preparation station for use in outdoor food service.”), where a cover includes a brace structure extending on the main wall of the cover (Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”), where the brace structure includes a first bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a first corner of the plurality of corner to proximate a second corner of the plurality of corners (Modified Fig. 4.1, where the bracing structure shows the first bracing axis between the first and second corners), where a second bracing axis extending diagonally from proximate a third corner of the plurality of corners to proximate a fourth corner of the plurality of corners (Modified Fig. 4.1, where the bracing structure shows the second bracing axis between the third and fourth corners) in order to substantially support the cover as it is moved between the open and close positions via a handle (Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”, and Page 16, “A handle 538 is provided on the upper door and a handle 540 is provided on the lower door to assist in opening and closing the doors.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the cover that can be opened and closed via a handle in modified Dahle to include a cross bracing structure that moves with the cover between open and closed positions as taught by Uffner.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of using cross bracing in order to strength the cover or door, as stated by Uffner, Page 16, “The inside of the doors are constructed with a plurality of strengthening ribs 202 and gussets 530 to add further strength to the doors.”.
Regarding claim 14, modified Dahle teaches the method according to claim 13, as set forth above, discloses wherein the providing comprises providing the cooking surface extending with a griddle structure (Dahle, Para. 0026, “support the cooking surface 20, such as a griddle member 52 and/or a grill/grate (not shown).”, where the cooking surface 20 is part of the griddle member 52).
Regarding claim 15, modified Dahle teaches the method according to claim 13, as set forth above, discloses wherein the pivoting comprises supporting the main wall of the hood with the brace structure extending with an x-configuration (Teaching from Brummer, Section 3, lines 36-38, “The bottom 1 of the cover has stiffening ribs 3 which are arranged in a cross bracing 4.”, where the cross bracing shape is in a “x”).
Regarding claim 16, modified Dahle teaches the method according to claim 13, as set forth above, discloses wherein the pivoting comprises supporting the main wall of the hood with the brace structure extending with multiple elongated pieces extending along the main wall of the hood (Teaching from Brummer, Section 3, lines 36-38, “The bottom 1 of the cover has stiffening ribs 3 which are arranged in a cross bracing 4.”, where the cross bracing includes stiffening ribs that include multiple elongated pieces and where the pieces form the shape in a “x”).
Claims 3 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dahle et al. (US 20200093330 A1, hereinafter Dahle) in view of Brummer (US 5753059 A1) and Norris et al. (US 20150013662 A1, hereinafter Norris) and Uffner et al. (CA 2570581 A1, hereinafter Uffner) in further view of Dysinger et al. (US 20090134301 A1, hereinafter Dysinger).
Regarding claim 3, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the brace structure comprises: a first brace member extending along the first bracing axis, the first brace member including a U-shape; and
a second brace member extending along the second bracing axis, the second brace member at least partially overlapping the first brace member.
However, Dysinger discloses, in the similar field of cooking devices (Para. 0013, “For example, the appliance base 10 provides a structurally sound and rigid foundation on which an appliance, in the form of a cooking range R”), where there is a brace structure that includes a first member extending along the first bracing axis that includes a U-shape and a second brace member extending along the second bracing axis, where the second brace member overlaps the first brace member (Modified Fig. 6, where the first and second bracing member’s features are shown). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the bracing structure in modified Dahle to include the features as taught by Dysinger.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of the middle circular structure allowing for easier manufacturing due to allowing for stacking to occur, as stated by Dysinger, Para. 0017, “each index ring 28, 42, respectively, has an extent higher than the other portions of the appliance base 10 such that these top portions 43, 45 projects above a plane defined by the appliance base 10 for facilitating "nesting" storage of a number of appliance bases 10-i.e., each stored compactly and stably arranged in a stacked one on top of another arrangement with other appliance bases 10 having the same dimensions-such as, for example, during cooking range manufacturing.”.
PNG
media_image4.png
586
691
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Modified Figure 6, Dysinger
Regarding claim 19, modified Dahle teaches the method according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the brace structure comprises a first brace member having a cross-sectional U-shape, wherein the first brace member comprising one or more flat portions coupled to the main wall of the hood.
However, Dysinger discloses where there is a brace structure that includes a first member extending along the first bracing axis that includes a U-shape and includes flat portions coupled to the main wall (Modified Fig. 6, where the first bracing member’s features are shown, where the part on the diagonal is flat and contains parts that are coupled to the wall). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the bracing structure in modified Dahle to include the features as taught by Dysinger.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of the middle circular structure allowing for easier manufacturing due to allowing for stacking to occur, as stated by Dysinger, Para. 0017, “each index ring 28, 42, respectively, has an extent higher than the other portions of the appliance base 10 such that these top portions 43, 45 projects above a plane defined by the appliance base 10 for facilitating "nesting" storage of a number of appliance bases 10-i.e., each stored compactly and stably arranged in a stacked one on top of another arrangement with other appliance bases 10 having the same dimensions-such as, for example, during cooking range manufacturing.”.
Regarding claim 20, modified Dahle teaches the method according to claim 7, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the brace structure comprises a first brace member having a cross-sectional U-shape, wherein the first brace member comprising one or more flat portions coupled to the main wall of the hood.
However, Dysinger discloses where there is a brace structure that includes a first member extending along the first bracing axis that includes a U-shape and includes flat portions coupled to the main wall (Modified Fig. 6, where the first bracing member’s features are shown, where the part on the diagonal is flat and contains parts that are coupled to the wall). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the bracing structure in modified Dahle to include the features as taught by Dysinger.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of the middle circular structure allowing for easier manufacturing due to allowing for stacking to occur, as stated by Dysinger, Para. 0017, “each index ring 28, 42, respectively, has an extent higher than the other portions of the appliance base 10 such that these top portions 43, 45 projects above a plane defined by the appliance base 10 for facilitating "nesting" storage of a number of appliance bases 10-i.e., each stored compactly and stably arranged in a stacked one on top of another arrangement with other appliance bases 10 having the same dimensions-such as, for example, during cooking range manufacturing.”.
Claims 4, 10, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dahle et al. (US 20200093330 A1, hereinafter Dahle) in view of Brummer (US 5753059 A1) and Norris et al. (US 20150013662 A1, hereinafter Norris) and Uffner et al. (CA 2570581 A1, hereinafter Uffner) in further view of Neff (CA 2193762 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the brace structure comprises a cap structure having an x-configuration, wherein the brace structure strengthens the hood when positioned above the griddle, such that the brace structure reduces deformation of the hood when increasing in temperature from heat flowing from the one or more heating elements and the cooking surface of the griddle.
However, Neff discloses, in the similar field of cross bracing (Page 1, lines 11-13, “cross braces to suspend those members from the ceiling and to support the main runner members and cross braces at intersection points in the grid.”), where the cross bracing includes a cap structure that has an x-configuration (Page 20, lines 11-14, “The cover members 122 have the shape of a plus sign and include four pairs of inwardly-turned, flat, horizontally-projecting flanges 124 with one pair of flanges 124 for each arm 126 of the cover members 122.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the bracing in modified Dahle to include the x-configuration cap as taught by Neff.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to connect cross bracing members in a continuous manner, where gaps can be avoided, as stated by Neff, Page 20, lines 20-24, “The cover members 122 are adapted to fit over the flanges 108 and 116 to cover the slight gaps formed where these structural members are joined together in the framework 84 so that an individual viewing the drop ceiling will see a continuous wood grain grid.”.
Further, Brummer discloses where a similar bracing structure as taught by Uffner is subjected to high temperatures and the bracing structure reduces deformation due to those high temperatures (Section 2, lines 14-17, “Subsequent straightening of the cover during mounting, as is necessary in the prior art, can therefore be avoided. This is particularly advantageous when the inside of the cover is acted on by heat and/or liquid media.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the cross bracing within the cooking station’s hood that is subjected to high temperatures from the griddle in modified Dahle to allow for resistance to deformation at high temperatures as taught by Brummer.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of using the cross bracing to prevent deformation, which allows a user to not need to straighten out the cover later, as stated by Brummer, Section 2, lines 14-17, “Subsequent straightening of the cover during mounting, as is necessary in the prior art, can therefore be avoided. This is particularly advantageous when the inside of the cover is acted on by heat and/or liquid media.”.
Regarding claim 10, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 7, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the brace structure extends with a cap structure having an x-configuration.
However, Neff discloses, in the similar field of cross bracing (Page 1, lines 11-13, “cross braces to suspend those members from the ceiling and to support the main runner members and cross braces at intersection points in the grid.”), where the cross bracing includes a cap structure that has an x-configuration (Page 20, lines 11-14, “The cover members 122 have the shape of a plus sign and include four pairs of inwardly-turned, flat, horizontally-projecting flanges 124 with one pair of flanges 124 for each arm 126 of the cover members 122.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the bracing in modified Dahle to include the x-configuration cap as taught by Neff.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to connect cross bracing members in a continuous manner, where gaps can be avoided, as stated by Neff, Page 20, liens 20-24, “The cover members 122 are adapted to fit over the flanges 108 and 116 to cover the slight gaps formed where these structural members are joined together in the framework 84 so that an individual viewing the drop ceiling will see a continuous wood grain grid.”.
Regarding claim 17, modified Dahle teaches the method according to claim 16, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the pivoting comprises positioning a cap structure over the multiple elongated pieces such that the cap structure extends with an x-structure.
However, Neff discloses, in the similar field of cross bracing (Page 1, lines 11-13, “cross braces to suspend those members from the ceiling and to support the main runner members and cross braces at intersection points in the grid.”), where the cross bracing includes a cap structure that has an x-configuration (Page 20, lines 11-14, “The cover members 122 have the shape of a plus sign and include four pairs of inwardly-turned, flat, horizontally-projecting flanges 124 with one pair of flanges 124 for each arm 126 of the cover members 122.”). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the bracing in modified Dahle to include the x-configuration cap as taught by Neff.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to connect cross bracing members in a continuous manner, where gaps can be avoided, as stated by Neff, Page 20, liens 20-24, “The cover members 122 are adapted to fit over the flanges 108 and 116 to cover the slight gaps formed where these structural members are joined together in the framework 84 so that an individual viewing the drop ceiling will see a continuous wood grain grid.”.
Claims 6, 12, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dahle et al. (US 20200093330 A1, hereinafter Dahle) in view of Brummer (US 5753059 A1) and Norris et al. (US 20150013662 A1, hereinafter Norris) and Uffner et al. (CA 2570581 A1, hereinafter Uffner) in further view of Orban et al. (US 10159378 B1, hereinafter Orban) and Fertil (US 20070075204 A1).
Regarding claim 6, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the hood includes a first tab and a second tab extending along a front hood portion, the first and second tabs sized and configured to facilitate suspending the hood along the rear side of the main body upon the hood being removed from the griddle.
However, Orban discloses, in the similar field of hood or covers for a cooking device (Abstract, “lid is closing the cookware/bakeware”), where the hood includes a tab extending along a center of the hood portion and sized to facilitate suspending of the hood along a rear side of the main body upon the hood being removed (Section 4, lines 40-43, “(b) used to hang the closure or lid 2000 on to the bakeware/cookware 3000 in a handle-out orientation via laying the hook 1200 of the apparatus over a lip or edge 3100 of the cookware or bakeware 3000.”, and Fig. 8, where the hook 1200 is shown to be located in the center of the hood). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the hood and main body with a rear side in modified Dahle to include the hood with a hook with the ability to be hung from a main body wall as taught by Orban.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to save space, reduce damage from heat from the hood, and avoid messes through the hook hanging structure, as stated by Orban, Section 2, lines 6-10, “an object of this specification is to disclose a space saving, heat-damage reducing, mess-avoiding hanging apparatus for cookware or bakeware closures and related methods”.
Regarding the position of the hook within the hood, it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). It is the Examiner’s position that moving the hook from a central to a frontal position in the hood would still achieve the same end results of allowing the hood to hang from the rear portion of a main body. As a result, the position of the hook would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Further, Fertil discloses, in the similar field of hanging devices (Abstract, “The holder can be removably mounted to wall”), where the hook includes a first and second tab (Para. 0041, “Portable holder 200 includes first support member 220a and second support member 220b.”). 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 hook in modified Dahle to include multiple hooks as taught by Fertil.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to have multiple points of contact, as stated by Fertil, Para. 0041, “The width between first and second support members, 220a and 220b, respectively, in this embodiment is fixed”, and Fig. 8A shows that the hooks have more points of contact with the wall.
Regarding the use of multiple hooks, it has been held that mere duplication of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). It is the Examiner’s position that having multiple hooks would still achieve the same end result of allowing the hood to hang from the main body. As a result, the amount of hooks would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Regarding claim 12, modified Dahle teaches the apparatus according to claim 11, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the hood includes a first tab and a second tab extending along a front hood portion, the first and second tabs sized and configured to facilitate suspending the hood along the rear side of the main body upon the hood being removed from the main body.
However, Orban discloses, in the similar field of hood or covers for a cooking device (Abstract, “lid is closing the cookware/bakeware”), where the hood includes a tab extending along a center of the hood portion and sized to facilitate suspending of the hood along a rear side of the main body upon the hood being removed (Section 4, lines 40-43, “(b) used to hang the closure or lid 2000 on to the bakeware/cookware 3000 in a handle-out orientation via laying the hook 1200 of the apparatus over a lip or edge 3100 of the cookware or bakeware 3000.”, and Fig. 8, where the hook 1200 is shown to be located in the center of the hood). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the hood and main body with a rear side in modified Dahle to include the hood with a hook with the ability to be hung from a main body wall as taught by Orban.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to save space, reduce damage from heat from the hood, and avoid messes through the hook hanging structure, as stated by Orban, Section 2, lines 6-10, “an object of this specification is to disclose a space saving, heat-damage reducing, mess-avoiding hanging apparatus for cookware or bakeware closures and related methods”.
Regarding the position of the hook within the hood, it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). It is the Examiner’s position that moving the hook from a central to a frontal position in the hood would still achieve the same end results of allowing the hood to hang from the rear portion of a main body. As a result, the position of the hook would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Further, Fertil discloses, in the similar field of hanging devices (Abstract, “The holder can be removably mounted to wall”), where the hook includes a first and second tab (Para. 0041, “Portable holder 200 includes first support member 220a and second support member 220b.”). 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 hook in modified Dahle to include multiple hooks as taught by Fertil.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to have multiple points of contact, as stated by Fertil, Para. 0041, “The width between first and second support members, 220a and 220b, respectively, in this embodiment is fixed”, and Fig. 8A shows that the hooks have more points of contact with the wall.
Regarding the use of multiple hooks, it has been held that mere duplication of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). It is the Examiner’s position that having multiple hooks would still achieve the same end result of allowing the hood to hang from the main body. As a result, the amount of hooks would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Regarding claim 18, modified Dahle teaches the method according to claim 13, as set forth above.
Modified Dahle does not disclose:
wherein the pivoting comprises removing the hood from the main body upon the hood pivoting to the open position such that the hood is positionable along a rear side of the main body with tabs extending from the hood.
However, Orban discloses, in the similar field of hood or covers for a cooking device (Abstract, “lid is closing the cookware/bakeware”), where the hood includes a tab extending along a center of the hood portion and sized to facilitate suspending of the hood along a rear side of the main body upon the hood being removed (Section 4, lines 40-43, “(b) used to hang the closure or lid 2000 on to the bakeware/cookware 3000 in a handle-out orientation via laying the hook 1200 of the apparatus over a lip or edge 3100 of the cookware or bakeware 3000.”, and Fig. 8, where the hook 1200 is shown to be located in the center of the hood). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the hood and main body with a rear side in modified Dahle to include the hood with a hook with the ability to be hung from a main body wall as taught by Orban.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to save space, reduce damage from heat from the hood, and avoid messes through the hook hanging structure, as stated by Orban, Section 2, lines 6-10, “an object of this specification is to disclose a space saving, heat-damage reducing, mess-avoiding hanging apparatus for cookware or bakeware closures and related methods”.
Regarding the position of the hook within the hood, it has been held that mere rearrangement of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). It is the Examiner’s position that moving the hook from a central to a frontal position in the hood would still achieve the same end results of allowing the hood to hang from the rear portion of a main body. As a result, the position of the hook would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Further, Fertil discloses, in the similar field of hanging devices (Abstract, “The holder can be removably mounted to wall”), where the hook includes a first and second tab (Para. 0041, “Portable holder 200 includes first support member 220a and second support member 220b.”). 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 hook in modified Dahle to include multiple hooks as taught by Fertil.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to gain the advantage of being able to have multiple points of contact, as stated by Fertil, Para. 0041, “The width between first and second support members, 220a and 220b, respectively, in this embodiment is fixed”, and Fig. 8A shows that the hooks have more points of contact with the wall.
Regarding the use of multiple hooks, it has been held that mere duplication of parts is an obvious modification to make. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). It is the Examiner’s position that having multiple hooks would still achieve the same end result of allowing the hood to hang from the main body. As a result, the amount of hooks would be a mere matter of user design choice.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN GUANHUA WEN whose telephone number is (571)272-9940 and whose email is kevin.wen@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on 571-270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KEVIN GUANHUA WEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
06/29/2026
Prosecution Insights