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 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 1-3, 7-12, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carpenter (US1956853A).
PNG
media_image1.png
348
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Carpenter
PNG
media_image2.png
704
1008
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of Carpenter
Regarding claim 1, Carpenter teaches a machine for cooking a food item (38) having at least a first portion and a second portion (Fig. 1 Col. 2 lines 25-45 doughnuts 38 having a top and bottom portion), comprising:
a vessel (4) sized and shaped to receive a frying medium (hot liquid grease), the vessel having (4) an entrance region (Col. 1 lines 65-75 doughnut former 5) and an exit region (Col. 1 lines 65-75 suitable discharge portion);
a frame that coupleably receives the vessel (Fig. 1); and
a submerger (12, 13, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37) that cooks at least the first and the second portions of the food item (38, Col. 2 lines 1-45 tray 33 submerged and unsubmerged, cooking top and bottom of doughnut 38),
the submerger (12, 13, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37) fixedly positioned in a vertical direction (Fig. 1, where at least in the position shown in Fig. 1, the submerger is fixedly positioned in a vertical direction, where “fixedly positioned” is not understood to mean that the submerger cannot move in a vertical direction, rather is understood to mean the submerger is fixed in a vertical position, at least at some point).
Regarding claim 2, Carpenter teaches the machine of claim 1
wherein the submerger (12, 13, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37) includes a cascade-providing apparatus (33, 34, 35, 36, 37) which provides the frying medium to cook the first portion (Col. 2 lines 1-10 when the tray 33 is raised the hot liquid grease is allowed to run out in the form of a large number of small streams and thus descend in the form of a spray onto the doughnuts beneath it; taken to cook the top portion) while the frying medium in the vessel (4) cooks the second portion (bottom of doughnut) which is opposite the first portion (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Carpenter teaches the machine of claim 2
wherein the cascade-providing apparatus (33, 34, 35, 36, 37) includes a trough (33) having a pair of arcuate end flanges (36, 37) which direct the frying medium to the food item to cook the first portion (Col. 2 lines 1-10).
Regarding claim 7, Carpenter teaches the machine of claim 1, comprising:
a conveyor apparatus (Col. 1 lines 60-70 a conveyor including a pair of side chains 7 and 8) that facilitates movement of the food item from the entrance region to the exit region (Col. 1 lines 60-76 the doughnuts are carried from the position of the doughnut former 5 to a suitable discharge point); and
a roller apparatus (Col. 1 lines 80-105 shaft 9, links 22, 23) which is coupled to the conveyor apparatus (chains 7 and 8), movement of the conveyor apparatus causing rotatable movement of the roller apparatus (Col. 1 lines 80-105 thus raising and lowering the bars 12 and 13 in timed relationship with respect to the advancements of the conveyor chains 7 and 8).
Regarding claim 8, Carpenter teaches the machine of claim 7 wherein the roller apparatus (9, 22, 23, 29, 30, 31, 32) includes a roller (9) which, when moved, submerges the food item (38) in the frying medium in the vessel (4, Col. 1 line 90- Col. 2 line 25 raising and lowering the bars 12 and 13, lowers tray 33, which lowers doughnuts beneath it).
Regarding claim 9, Carpenter teaches the machine of claim 7 wherein the roller apparatus (9, 22, 23, 29, 30, 31, 32) includes a driver (29, 30, 31, 32) that is coupled to the conveyor apparatus (Col. 1 lines 60-70 a conveyor including a pair of side chains 7 and 8), the driver rotatably moves a roller when the conveyor apparatus moves (Col. 2 lines 40-50).
Regarding claim 10, Carpenter teaches the machine of claim 1 wherein the submerger (12, 13, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37) includes one or more submerger plates (tray 33, Fig. 1 a plurality of trays 33, show by flanges 35), the one or more submerger plates (33) positioned proximate to the vessel (4, Fig. 1) and arranged to submerge the food item (38) in the frying medium in the vessel (4).
Regarding claim 11, Carpenter teaches a submerger (12, 13, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37) that is configured to cook a food item (38), the submerger (12, 13, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37) fixedly positioned in a vertical direction (Fig. 1, where at least in the position shown in Fig. 1, the submerger is fixedly positioned in a vertical direction, where “fixedly positioned” is not understood to mean that the submerger cannot move in a vertical direction, rather is understood to mean the submerger is fixed in a vertical position, at least at some point) and comprising:
a cascade-providing apparatus (33, 34, 35, 36, 37) which provides a first volume of shortening (Col. 2 lines 1-10 hot liquid grease is allowed to run out in the form of a large number of small streams and thus descend in the form of a spray onto the doughnuts beneath it) to cook an exposed portion of the food item (38, Col. 2 lines 25-45 when the doughnuts are permitted to rise to the surface of the grease they are at the same time sprinkled or sprayed with hot grease so that they are sufficiently fried on their top or exposed portions);
a roller apparatus (Col. 1 lines 80-105 shaft 9, links 22, 23) having a roller (9) which, when positioned above the food item (38), submerges the food (38) in a second volume of shortening (Col. 2 lines 1-10 hot liquid grease in pan 4); and
one or more submerger plates (33), the one or more submerges (33) arranged to submerge the food item (38) in the second volume of shortening (Col. 2 lines 1-10 hot liquid grease in pan 4, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Carpenter teaches the submerger of claim 11
wherein the cascade-providing apparatus (33, 34, 35, 36, 37) includes a manifold (Col. 2 lines 1-10 number of perforations) which is fluidly coupled to a supply of shortening (Col. 2 lines 1-10 hot liquid grease), the supply of shortening providing the first volume of shortening (Col. 2 lines 1-10 hot liquid grease is allowed to run out in the form of a large number of small streams).
Regarding claim 16, Carpenter teaches the submerger of claim 11 wherein the roller apparatus (9, 22, 23, 29, 30, 31, 32) includes a driver (29, 30, 31, 32) and a roller (9), the driver configured to rotate the roller (Col. 1 lines 95-110).
Regarding claim 17, Carpenter teaches the submerger of claim 11 comprising a plurality of submerger plates (tray 33, Fig. 1 a plurality of trays 33, show by flanges 35) arranged adjacent to each other (Fig. 1),
and wherein a first one of the plurality of submerger plates (33) positioned adjacent to the roller apparatus (9, 22, 23, 29, 30, 31, 32).
Regarding claim 21, Carpenter teaches the submerger of claim 11, and Carpenter a roller (9) configured to submerge the food item (38) into the frying medium as the roller pivotably moves about an axis (Fig. 1, where food items are moved about the axis of roller 9).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carpenter (US1956853A) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Rini (US5351607A).
Regarding claim 4, Carpenter teaches the machine of claim 2, but is silent on wherein the cascade-providing apparatus includes a manifold which is fluidly coupled to a supply of frying medium, the manifold configured to direct the frying medium to the food item to cook the first portion.
Rini teaches wherein the cascade-providing apparatus (60) includes a manifold (114) which is fluidly coupled to a supply of frying medium (Col. 4 lines 20-40 supply pipe 92 provides a source of heated liquid to the distribution manifold 114), the manifold (114) configured to direct the frying medium (Col. 6 lines 15-35 A supply pipe 92 provides a source of heated liquid to the distribution manifold 114, and heated water discharged through openings 166) to the food item (12) to cook the first portion (Col. 3 lines 20-30 a hot water shower which cooks the top half of the bagels).
Carpenter and Rini are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of food devices. It would have been obvious to have modified Carpenter to incorporate the teachings of Rini to have a manifold coupled to a source which directs a cooking medium to the food item so as to be able to shower heated liquids at a temperature that may be altered externally from the liquids contained in the vessel, which can be at a higher temperature (Rini Col. 4 lines 35-45).
Claim 5-6 and 13-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carpenter (US1956853A) as applied to claims 2 and 11 above, and further in view of Rini (US5351607A) and further in view of Vallortigara (WO2010045988A1).
Regarding claim 5, Carpenter teaches the machine of claim 2, wherein the cascade-providing apparatus (33, 34, 35, 36, 37) includes: a trough (33), but is silent on a manifold fluidly coupled to a supply of frying medium, the manifold including one or more fluid outlets; a diffuser having a receiving portion which receives the one or more fluid outlets; and a trough arranged to surround the diffuser.
PNG
media_image3.png
322
724
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 4 of Rini
PNG
media_image4.png
242
382
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 of Rini
Rini teaches a manifold (114) fluidly coupled to a supply of frying medium (Col. 4 lines 20-40 supply pipe 92 provides a source of heated liquid to the distribution manifold 114), the manifold (114) including one or more fluid outlets (166);
a diffuser (102) having a receiving portion (104) which receives the one or more fluid outlets (166, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to have modified Carpenter to incorporate the teachings of Rini to have a manifold coupled to a source with a plurality of outlets and a diffuser that receives the outlets so as to be able to shower heated liquids at a temperature that may be altered externally from the liquids contained in the vessel, which can be at a higher temperature (Rini Col. 4 lines 35-45).
Carpenter and Rini are silent on a trough arranged to surround the diffuser.
Vallortigara teaches a trough (3) arranged to surround the diffuser (8, Pg. 7 lines 5-20).
Carpenter, Rini, and Vallortigara are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of food devices. It would have been obvious to have modified Carpenter and Rini to incorporate the teachings of Vallortigara to have a trough around a diffuser in order to be able to disperse liquid through two sets of nozzles, on both of the diffuser and the trough, in order to affect the formation of the liquid ejected on the food items below as a function of the viscosity of liquid being dispersed (Vallortigara Pg. 7 lines 5-20).
Regarding claim 6, Carpenter, Rini, and Vallortigara teach the machine of claim 5 and Carpenter teaches wherein the trough (33) includes a base flange (34), a side flange (35) that extends from the base flange (33), and an end flange (36, 37) that has an arcuate shape which is configured to direct the frying medium to the food item to cook the first portion (Col. 2 lines 1-10), but is silent on wherein the trough includes a base flange that receives the diffuser.
Vallortigara teaches wherein the trough (3) includes a base flange (3A) that receives the diffuser (8).
It would have been obvious to have modified Carpenter and Rini to incorporate the teachings of Vallortigara to have a trough with a base that receives a diffuser in order to be able to disperse liquid through two sets of nozzles, on both of the diffuser and the trough, in order to affect the formation of the liquid ejected on the food items below as a function of the viscosity of liquid being dispersed (Vallortigara Pg. 7 lines 5-20).
Regarding claim 13, Carpenter teaches the submerger of claim 11, Carpenter teaches wherein the cascade-providing apparatus (33, 34, 35, 36, 37) includes: a trough (33), but is silent on wherein the cascade-providing apparatus includes: a cascade lid having a recess; a manifold having an inlet positioned in the recess, the inlet configured to provide the first volume of shortening; a diffuser positioned proximate to the recess, the diffuser having a U-shaped structure sized and shaped to receive the first volume of shortening provided by the inlet; and a trough arranged to surround the diffuser, the trough configured to receive the first volume of shortening from the diffuser.
Rini teaches wherein the cascade-providing apparatus (60) includes: a manifold (114) having an inlet (166), the inlet (166) configured to provide the first volume of shortening (Col. 6 lines 15-35 A supply pipe 92 provides a source of heated liquid to the distribution manifold 114, and heated water discharged through openings 166);
a diffuser (102), the diffuser (8) having a U-shaped structure sized and shaped (Fig. 6) to receive the first volume of shortening provided by the inlet (166); and
a diffuser (8) positioned proximate to the recess (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to have modified Carpenter to incorporate the teachings of Rini to have a manifold having an inlet and a diffuser that receives liquid from the inlet so as to be able to shower heated liquids at a temperature that may be altered externally from the liquids contained in the vessel, which can be at a higher temperature (Rini Col. 4 lines 35-45).
Carpenter and Rini are silent on a cascade lid having a recess; a manifold having an inlet positioned in the recess, a trough arranged to surround the diffuser, the trough configured to receive the first volume of shortening from the diffuser.
PNG
media_image5.png
690
654
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Vallortigara
Vallortigara teaches a cascade lid (3) having a recess (Fig. 1);
a manifold (5) having an inlet (21) positioned in the recess (Fig. 1),
a trough (3a) arranged to surround the diffuser (8), the trough (3a) configured to receive the first volume of shortening (S)from the diffuser (8).
It would have been obvious to have modified Carpenter and Rini to incorporate the teachings of Vallortigara to have a lid, a manifold with an inlet within the recess of the lid, a diffuser, and a trough around the diffuser in order to be able to disperse liquid through two sets of nozzles, on both of the diffuser and the trough, in order to affect the formation of the liquid ejected on the food items below as a function of the viscosity of liquid being dispersed (Vallortigara Pg. 7 lines 5-20).
Regarding claim 14, Carpenter, Rini, and Vallortigara teach the submerger of claim 13, and Carpenter teaches wherein the trough (33) includes a base plate (34), and a pair of end flanges (36, 37), each one of the end flange extending outwardly from a respective side flange (Fig. 3), but is silent on a base flange which receives the diffuser, a pair of side flanges which extend outwardly from the base flange.
Vallortigara teaches a base flange (plate 3a) which receives the diffuser (8), a pair of side flanges which extend outwardly from the base flange (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to have modified Carpenter and Rini to incorporate the teachings of Vallortigara to have a trough with a base that receives a diffuser in order to be able to disperse liquid through two sets of nozzles, on both of the diffuser and the trough, in order to affect the formation of the liquid ejected on the food items below as a function of the viscosity of liquid being dispersed (Vallortigara Pg. 7 lines 5-20).
PNG
media_image6.png
704
1008
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3 of Carpenter
Regarding claim 15, Carpenter, Rini, and Vallortigara teach the submerger of claim 14, and Carpenter teaches wherein each end flange (36, 38) has a valley-shaped structure which is sized and shaped (Annotated Fig. 3) to direct the first volume of shortening from the trough (34) to the exposed portion of the food item (Col. 2 lines 1-10 hot liquid grease is allowed to run out in the form of a large number of small streams).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Carpenter does not teach the amended limitation of claims 1 and 11 of “the submerger fixedly positioned in a vertical direction,” Carpenter is understood to teach the limitation, as shown in at least Fig. 1 of Carpenter, the equivalent submerger of Carpenter, is shown to be fixed at least in one vertical position. The limitation does not recite that the submerger is fixed in a postion “with no raising, lowering or other vertical displacement of the submerger or its component s to submerge the food item in the frying medium,” as applicant argues on Pg. 7 of the remarks. The limitation only requires a fixing in a vertical direction rather than an inability of the submerger to move.
Regarding applicant’s argument that prior art does not teach the newly added claim 21, it is understood the Carpenter does teach the roller in the claim, where the roller rotates about its own axis, which allows the food to be submerged in the frying medium. The limitation does not require the roller to “submerge the donut through pivotal movement,” rather it requires that the “roller pivotably moves about an axis,” that allows the food item to be submerged into the frying medium. Carpenter’s rotating of the roller about an axis, raises and lower bars 12 and 13 and trays 33, which allows the food to be submerged as a by product of the pivoting motion of the roller.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ABIGAIL RHUE whose telephone number is (571)272-4615. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10-6.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABIGAIL H RHUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 5/26/2026
/WOODY A LEE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights