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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 3, 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites a method of using the apparatus, which renders the claim indefinite. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite. See MPEP §2173.05(p)(II).
Claim 3 recites a method of using the apparatus, which renders the claim indefinite. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite. See MPEP §2173.05(p)(II).
Claim 10 recites a method of using the apparatus, which renders the claim indefinite. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite. See MPEP §2173.05(p)(II). Claims 11-14 are also rejected under 35 USC 112(b) by virtue of their dependency on claim 10.
Claim 11 recites a method of using the apparatus, which renders the claim indefinite. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite. See MPEP §2173.05(p)(II). Claims 12-14 are also rejected under 35 USC 112(b) by virtue of their dependency on claim 11.
Claim 12 recites a method of using the apparatus, which renders the claim indefinite. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite. See MPEP §2173.05(p)(II). Claims 13 and 14 are also rejected under 35 USC 112(b) by virtue of their dependency on claim 12.
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.
Claim(s) 7, 8, 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stottmann et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,819,882).
Regarding claim 7, Stottmann et al. discloses a food processor assembly (title), comprising:
a receptacle for receiving food therein (reference #114);
a lid configured to selectively cover the receptacle (reference #128) and having a chute for conveying food ingot the receptacle (reference #134); and
a pusher assembly configured to push food through the chute into the receptacle (reference #250), comprising
a pusher body (reference #252, 256, 262); and
a spring that biases the pusher body relative to the lid to urge movement of the pusher body within the chute towards the receptacle (reference #268).
Regarding claim 8, Stottmann et al. discloses wherein the pusher assembly further comprises: a catch feature that is movably coupled with the pusher body and operably coupled with the spring, wherein the catch feature is configured to be selectively engaged with an engagement feature coupled with the chute, such that the spring biases the pusher body relative to the lid due to the engagement of the catch feature with the engagement feature coupled to the chute of the lid (reference #266).
Regarding claim 16, Stottmann et al. discloses a pusher assembly for a food processor assembly (reference #250), comprising:
a pusher body for insertion into a chute of said food processor assembly (reference #252, 256, 262); and
a spring operably coupled with the pusher body (reference #268).
Regarding claim 18, Stottmann et al. discloses a catch feature movably coupled to the pusher body and operably coupled with the spring, such that the spring biases the catch feature relative to the pusher body (reference #266; column 8, lines 10-30).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stottmann et al. in view of Davies (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2009/0162508).
Regarding claim 15 and 17, Stottmann et al. discloses all the limitations as set forth above. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose wherein the spring is a constant force spring. Davies teaches another food apparatus (title). The reference teaches the spring being a constant force spring ([0081]). Since the instant specification is silent to unexpected result, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the spring of Stottmann et al. to be a constant force spring, as taught by Davies, because selecting one of known designs for a spring would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 4-6 are allowed.
Claims 9, 19 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH INSLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ELIZABETH INSLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774