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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/28/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it should avoid using phases which can be implied, such as, “This disclosure concerns”, “The disclosure defined by this invention”, “This disclosure describes”, “is disclosed”, “are disclosed”, “the invention relates to” etc. Correction is required. See MPEP 608.01 (b).
In this case, the present Abstract, filed on 01/12/204, contains the term “Disclosed are” that should avoid.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every features of the invention specified in the claims.
In claim 5, the limitation "…the rack has a storage state and a support state, in the storage state, the free end is attached to the limit plate, in the support state, the free end is away from the limit plate…", and
In claim 10, the limitation “…an oil pan…”.
The limitations above, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by D’Amato et al. (US 20110113974 A1).
Regarding claim 1, D’Amato discloses
A rack (grill rack 10, fig.1), comprising:
a limit plate (flat surface 12, fig.1); and
a support (legs 11a, 11b, fig.1) connected with the limit plate (flat surface 12);
wherein the limit plate (flat surface 12) is provided with a plurality of limit notch grooves (slots 14, central slot 17, aperture 18, fig.1), and the plurality of limit notch grooves (slots 14, central slot 17, aperture 18) are arranged along a length direction of the limit plate (flat surface 12); the limit notch grooves (slots 14, central slot 17, aperture 18) are configured to pass through the limit plate (flat surface 12), and configured to limit and stabilize food.
Regarding claim 2, D’Amato discloses
a groove width of any of the limit notch grooves (central slot 17, aperture 18, fig.1) is configured to increase uniformly toward a notch (aperture 18) of the limit notch grooves (central slot 17, aperture 18) along a width direction of the limit plate (flat surface 12, fig.1).
Regarding claim 3, D’Amato discloses
the limit plate (flat surface 12, fig.1) is provided with a limit clamping tooth [series of slot 14, fig.1, in each side of flat surface, is considered as clamping tooth, see fig.1], and the limit clamping tooth (series of slot 14) is spaced on a side wall of the limit notch grooves (slot 14, fig.1).
PNG
media_image1.png
589
525
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, D’Amato discloses
the limit plate (flat surface 12, fig.1) is further provided with a plurality of limit holes, each of the limit holes (apertures 13, fig.1) is configured to correspond to one limit notch groove (slot 14, fig.1) and is arranged on one side of the limit notch groove (slots 14) away from the limit notch groove (slot 14), and the limit hole (apertures 13) is communicated with the limit notch groove (slot 14) [aperture 13 correspond to slot 14, aperture 13 is located on a side of slot 14 and away from slot 14, and aperture 13 is communicated with slot 14 via flat surface 12. See fig.1].
Regarding claim 5, D’Amato discloses
the rack (grill rack 10, fig.1) is provided with a rotating component (aperture 21a-b, fig.1) arranged at both ends of the limit plate (flat surface 12, fig.1) along the length direction of the limit plate (flat surface 12), and the rotating component (aperture 21a-b, fig.1) is provided with rotating holes (aperture 21a-b); an end of the support (legs 11a, 11b, fig.1) is provided with rotating rods (23a,-b, fig.1), and each rotating rod (23a-b) is inserted into each rotating hole (aperture 21a-b); an end of the support (bottom part of legs 11a, 11b) away from the limiting plate (flat surface 12) is configured to form a free end; and the rack (grill rack 10) has a storage state (disconnect position) and a support state (connect position); in the storage state (disconnect position), the free end is attached to the limit plate (flat surface 12) [in disconnect position, the bottom portion of legs 11a, 11b, can be attached to the limit plate]; in the support state (connect position), the free end is away from the limit plate (flat surface 12).
Regarding claim 6, D’Amato discloses
the limit plate (flat surface 12, fig.1) is provided with a limit component (flanges 22a-b, fig.1), the limit component (flanges 22a-b) is connected with the rotating component (aperture 21a-b, fig.1) and is provided with a limit space to accommodate at least part of the support (legs 11a, 11b, fig.1); and in the support state (connect position), the support (legs 11a, 11b) is abutted against the limit component (flanges 22a-b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D’Amato et al. (US 20110113974 A1) in view of McDonald et al. (US 5331942).
Regarding claim 7, D’Amato discloses substantially all the features as set forth above, does not explicitly disclose a rim frame, a bent rib rod, a connecting rod, two sets of bending components….
McDonald discloses a rib frame (basket 40, figs.1-2) independently arranged on the rack (grill rack 10, figs.1-2); wherein the rib frame (40) is provided with a bent rib rod (BRR, annotated figure below) and a connecting rod (CR, connecting rod), and the bent rib rod (BRR) is provided with two sets of bending components; one set of the bending components comprises a first bending component (FBC, annotated figure below) and a second bending component (SBC, annotated figure below); the first bending component (FBC) and the second bending component (SBC) are arranged at intervals at a non-end segment of the bend rib rod (BRR), and the two sets of bending components are symmetrically arranged on the bend rib rod (BRR); the bend rib rod (BRR) is configured to form a first limit component (FLC, annotated figure below), a second limit component (CLC, annotated figure below), and a connecting component (CC, annotated figure below), and the first limit component (FLC) is parallel to the second limit component (SLC); and a plurality of bent rib rods (BRR) are arranged at intervals on the connecting rod (CC), and a clamping space (gap between BRR) is formed between any two adjacent bent rib rods (BRR).
Regarding claim 8, McDonald discloses
the bend rib rod (BRR) further comprises a third bending component (TBC, annotated figure above) close to an end of the bend rib rod (BRR), and the third bending component (TBC) is configured to bend the end of the bend rib rod ((BRR)) towards the first limit component (FLC).
PNG
media_image2.png
517
631
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the rack of D’Amato, with a rib frame, as taught by McDonald, in order to support the cooking food.
Regarding claim 9, D’Amato discloses substantially all the features as set forth above, such as the rack, but does not explicitly disclose a barbecue comprising: a thermal insulation inner cavity formed by an enclosure of a housing; wherein the rack is arranged in the thermal insulation inner cavity, and the housing has a first state and a second state; in the first state, the housing is configured to cover the thermal insulation inner cavity; in the second state, the housing is configured to reveal the thermal insulation inner cavity.
McDonald discloses a barbecue (barbecue 11, fig.1) comprising: a thermal insulation inner cavity (chamber of bottom bowl 13, fig.1) formed by an enclosure of a housing (bottom bowl 13, fig.1); wherein the rack (grill rack 10, figs.1-2) is arranged in the thermal insulation inner cavity (chamber of bottom bowl 13), and the housing (bottom bowl 13) has a first state (closing position) and a second state (opening position); in the first state (closing position), the housing (bottom bowl 13) is configured to cover the thermal insulation inner cavity (chamber of bottom bowl 13); in the second state (opening position), the housing (bottom bowl 13) is configured to reveal the thermal insulation inner cavity (chamber of bottom bowl 13).
Regarding claim 10, McDonald discloses
an oil pan (bottom part of bottom bowl 13, fig.1), wherein the oil pan is arranged in the thermal insulation inner cavity (chamber of bottom bowl 13, fig.1), and the rack (grill rack 10, figs.1-2) is located above an orthograph of the oil pan (bottom part of bottom bowl 13).
Regarding claim 11, McDonald discloses
a thermal insulation net (trough walls 31, fig.4), wherein the thermal insulation net (trough walls 31) is arranged in the thermal insulation inner cavity (chamber of bottom bowl 13, fig.1), and the thermal insulation net (trough walls 31) is located above the orthograph of the oil pan (bottom part of bottom bowl 13, fig.1).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the rack of D’Amato, by including a barbecue and an oil pan, as taught by McDonald, in order to support the cooking food.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cloutier et al. (US 8627764 B1) is considered as the relevant prior art in field of a cooking rack, as shown in fig.1, with a rack and a support… but does not disclose a plurality of notch grooves...
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1834. The examiner can normally be reached 9.00am-5.00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Crabb can be reached on 571-270-5095. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PHUONG T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
09/07/2026
Prosecution Insights