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
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 06/15/2026. The 35 U.S.C. 112f in claims 1 and 10 is withdrawn. The 35 U.S.C. 112f in claim 5 is maintained. Claims 15-22 are new. Claims 1-6, 8 and 10-22 remain pending for consideration on the merits.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/15/2026 has been entered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “wherein the water distribution channel has a closed-loop configuration” 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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a cutting element” in claim 5.
“a rotating cleaning element” in claim 17.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding
structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitations: The cutting element 63 is configured to be constrained to the support element 61 so that the blade of the cutting element 63 is free and faces the outer side wall 21 of the refrigerating cylinder 20, as described on page 8 of the published application. The cleaning element comprises a rotating brush configured to prevent the formation and/or to remove any accumulations of snow at the cutting element 63 of the scraper device 60, as described in paragraph 0087 of the published application
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-6, 8 and 10-22 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.
The term “substantially” in claims 1, 15, 19 and 22 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 2-6, 8, 10-14, 16-18 and 20-22 are rejected based on dependency from a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 9-10, 15 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hartmut (DE 102008029695 B3, hereinafter Hartmut) in view of Lee et al (KR 101544154 B1, hereinafter Lee), Nakajo (KR 101793054 B1, hereinafter Nakajo) and Jiyon (JP H1068564 A, hereinafter Jiyon).
Regarding claim 1, Hartmut teaches an artificial snowmaking equipment (device 1), comprising: a refrigerating cylinder (container 3) configured to rotate about a longitudinal axis (axis 10) along which the refrigerating cylinder extends (via arrow 14, as shown on figure 1); a motor operatively connected to a rotating shaft of said refrigerating cylinder and configured to rotate said refrigerating cylinder (about a rotation axis 10 relative to the container 3 rotatably mounted and rotationally driven by means of a drive device, not shown in detail in the drawing, which has an electric motor and a transmission, paragraph 0030); a cooling unit (chiller, figure 5) operatively connected to said refrigerating cylinder (as shown on figure 5) and configured to cool an outer side wall of said refrigerating cylinder to a freezing temperature (via coolant channels 25, as shown on figure 5); a water supply system (liquid 2, figure 1) configured to bring a predetermined amount of water (liquid may then be in the container during the flake ice production, paragraph 0007) in contact with at least part of said outer side wall (lateral surface 9) of said refrigerating cylinder to wet the outer side wall (via liquid 2, figure 1) so as to create a layer of ice (ice 11) on said outer side wall (as shown on figure 1); at least one scraper device (ice scraper 17) configured to scrape at least part of said ice layer so as to obtain an artificial snow fall (to detach the ice layer 11 from the lateral surface 9 a release device is provided, which at the outside of the inner cavity 4 located portion of the lateral surface 9 an ice scraper 17, paragraph 0036); wherein said refrigerating cylinder (container 3) internally has a gap or inner ducts (coolant channel 25) extending along an inner surface of said refrigerating cylinder (as shown on figure 5) opposite said outer side wall (as shown on figure 2) and connected to said cooling unit (chiller, figure 5) so as to receive a flow of a refrigerating substance (coolant, paragraph 0044) to be conveyed inside said gap or inner ducts (coolant channel 25) to cool said outer side wall of the refrigerating cylinder (via coolant channel 25 incorporating an evaporator, paragraph 0040).
Hartmut teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein said water supply system comprises a water containment tank extending parallel to said longitudinal axis, said water containment tank defining a containment volume adapted to contain a predetermined level of water and at least part of said refrigerating cylinder so that said refrigerating cylinder is partially immersed in said water.
However, Lee teaches wherein said water supply system (as shown on figure 2) comprises a water containment tank (water supply tank 25) extending parallel to said longitudinal axis (as shown on figure 2), said water containment tank defining a containment volume (within water supply tank 25, as shown on figure 2) adapted to contain a predetermined level of water (as shown on figure 2) and at least part of said refrigerating cylinder so that said refrigerating cylinder is partially immersed in said water (as shown on figure 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the teachings of Hartmut to include wherein said water supply system comprises a water containment tank extending parallel to said longitudinal axis, said water containment tank defining a containment volume adapted to contain a predetermined level of water and at least part of said refrigerating cylinder so that said refrigerating cylinder is partially immersed in said water in view of the teachings of Lee in order to yield the predictable results of maintaining a partially submerged condition on water.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the water containment tank further comprises a water distribution channel operatively connected to a water source and configured to homogeneously distribute said predetermined amount of water in said tank, wherein said water distribution channel is arranged on a bottom of said tank and extends along the tank in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis.
However, Nakajo teaches wherein the water containment tank (raw water tank 30) further comprises a water distribution channel (along portion where control rod 31 is located, as shown on figure 8b) operatively connected to a water source (a raw water supply portion 3 for supplying raw water to the raw water tank, paragraph 0044) and configured to homogeneously distribute said predetermined amount of water in said tank (a raw water supply portion 3 for supplying raw water to the raw water tank, paragraph 0044), wherein said water distribution channel (first flow path 303, as shown on figure 5) is arranged on a bottom of said tank (raw water tank 30, figure 5) and extends along the tank in a along a direction parallel (as shown on figure 4c and 9) to the longitudinal axis (parallel to the longitudinal axis of raw water tank 30, as shown on figure 4c and 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include wherein the water containment tank further comprises a water distribution channel operatively connected to a water source and configured to homogeneously distribute said predetermined amount of water in said tank, wherein said water distribution channel is arranged on a bottom of said tank and extends along the tank in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis in view of the teachings of Nakajo in order to yield the predictable results of supplying raw water to the raw water tank.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the water distribution channel includes a plurality of outlet openings spaced along a length of the distribution channel and configured to distribute the water into the containment volume along an extension of the distribution channel, and wherein the water distribution channel includes a flow section that progressively decreases along the longitudinal axis such that the water is discharged from the plurality of openings at uniform pressure and at a uniform flow rate.
However, Jiyon teaches wherein the water distribution channel (water supply means 30, figure 6) includes a plurality of outlet openings (injection nozzle 32) spaced along a length of the distribution channel (as shown on figure 6) and configured to distribute the water into the containment volume (as shown on figure 6) along an extension of the distribution channel (as shown on figure 6), and wherein the water distribution channel (water supply means 30, figure 6) includes a flow section that progressively decreases (tapered section, as shown on figure 5) along the longitudinal axis such that the water is discharged from the plurality of openings (as shown on figure 5) at uniform pressure (the pressurized water is jetted through a plurality of jet nozzles 32 installed on the outer peripheral portion of the water supply pipe 31 in the length direction, paragraph 0032) and at a uniform flow rate (guiding the water to flow uniformly on the outer peripheral surface of the cooling drum 21, paragraphs 0031-0032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include wherein the water distribution channel includes a plurality of outlet openings spaced along a length of the distribution channel and configured to distribute the water into the containment volume along an extension of the distribution channel, and wherein the water distribution channel includes a flow section that progressively decreases along the longitudinal axis such that the water is discharged from the plurality of openings at uniform pressure and at a uniform flow rate in view of the teachings of Jiyon in order to yield the predictable results of providing an efficient and hygienical ice producer with a simple structure capable of uniformly supplying water to a cooling drum and forming a good ice layer.
Further, it is understood, claim 1 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach wherein said gap or inner ducts (coolant channel 25 of Hartmut) extend internally to the refrigerating cylinder (internally of container 3, as shown on figures 6-7 of Hartmut), parallel to the longitudinal axis (individual cooling channels 25 extend parallel to the longitudinal axis, as shown on figure 6 of Hartmut), continuously along the same inner surface (as shown on figures 6-7 of Hartmut).
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach wherein said cooling unit (chiller, figure 5 of Hartmut) comprises a tank (separator 35, figure 5 of Hartmut) for containing a refrigerating substance (coolant, paragraph 0044 of Hartmut) conveyable at least towards said refrigerating cylinder (container 3 of Hartmut) to cool said outer side wall (as shown on figure 5 of Hartmut).
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach wherein said outer side wall (outer side wall, figure 4c of Nakajo) of said refrigerating cylinder (ice making drum 1 of Nakajo) has a rough conformation (interpreted to have a threaded surface, as shown on figure 4c of Nakajo).
Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teach wherein said motor (drive device, paragraph 0030 of Hartmut) is configured to rotate said refrigerating cylinder (container 3 of Hartmut) at least one of a constant speed (about a rotation axis 10 relative to the container 3 rotatably mounted and rotationally driven by means of a drive device, not shown in detail in the drawing, which has an electric motor and a transmission, paragraph 0030 of Hartmut) or at a variable speed.
Further, it is understood, claim 10 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Regarding claim 15, the combined teachings teach wherein rotation of the refrigerating cylinder (rotating of cooling drum 21, figure 5 of Jiyon) causes successive portions of the outer side wall (outer portions of cooling drum 21, figure 5 of Jiyon) to cyclically enter and exit the water (enter and exit the water supplied by injection nozzle 32, figure 5 of Jiyon) while maintaining a continuous ice layer on the outer side wall (as shown on figure 5 of Jiyon).
Regarding claim 19, the combined teachings teach wherein the plurality of outlet openings (injection nozzle 32 of Jiyon) are configured to distribute water uniformly along the longitudinal axis (as shown on figure 6 of Jiyon).
Further, it is understood, claim 19 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Regarding claim 20, it is noted that claim 20 (sandblasted) contains a product by process limitation as represented by the recitation “sandblasted”. In product-by-process claims, “once a product appearing to be substantially identical is found and a 35 U.S.C. 102/103 rejection [is] made, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference.” MPEP 2113. This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102/103 is proper because the “patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production.” In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding claim 21, the combined teachings teach wherein the flow section of the water distribution channel (flow section entering pipe 31, figure 6 of Jiyon) hydraulically equalizes the water pressure along the longitudinal axis to reduce temperature gradients within the containment volume (the pressurized water is jetted through a plurality of jet nozzles 32 installed on the outer peripheral portion of the water supply pipe 31 in the length direction. The jetted water is uniformly and widely dispersed on the inner surface of the reflector 33, flows along the inner surface, and rotates through the edge of the reflector 33 in contact with the outer surface of the cooling drum 21, paragraph 0032 of Jiyon).
Regarding claim 22, the combined teachings teach wherein the water distribution channel (water supply means 30, figure 6 of Jiyon) is configured to maintain homogeneous water temperature throughout the containment volume (the temperature of the supplied water becomes uniform, whereby the freezing speed of the water adhering to the outer peripheral surface of the drum becomes almost constant. Therefore, it is possible to form an ice layer having a uniform thickness on the outer peripheral surface of the cooling drum 21, paragraph 0026 of Jiyon).
Further, it is understood, claim 22 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Claims 4-5 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hartmut as modified by Lee, Nakajo and Jiyon, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Said et al (US 20150052931 A1, hereinafter Said).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the at least one scraper device is operatively connected to said cooling unit to be maintained at a temperature below 0* C.
However, Said teaches wherein said scraper device (ice scraper blade 36) is operatively connected to said cooling unit (conventional source of refrigeration, as described in paragraph 0031) to be maintained at a temperature below 0* C (sheet of ice, paragraph 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include wherein the at least one scraper device is operatively connected to said cooling unit to be maintained at a temperature below 0* C in view of the teachings of Said in order to yield the predictable results of scraping and remove ice formed on the upper surface of the floor.
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teach wherein the at least one scraper device (ice scraper blade 36 of Said) comprises a support element (floor 14 of Said) along which a cooling duct (refrigerant pathway 28 of Said) is made and a cutting element (ice scraper blade 36 of Said) fixed to said support element (floor 14 of Said) to be in contact with said cooling duct (as shown on figure 3 of Said), said cooling duct (refrigerant pathway 28 of Said) being in fluid communication with said cooling unit (conventional source of refrigeration, as described in paragraph 0031 of Said) so as to cool the cutting element (refrigerant circulating within the refrigerant circulator 26 is in contact with the lower surface of the floor 14, to remove heat conducted through the floor 14, as described in paragraph 0025 of Said).
Regarding claim 17, the combined teachings teach further comprising a rotating cleaning element (rotary scraper shaft 34 of Said) arranged adjacent the at least one scraper device (adjacent to ice scraper blades 36, figure 3 of Said) and configured to remove accumulated snow particles from the at least one scraper device (a rotary scraper shaft 34 communicating with a hub 38 to which one or more ice scraper blades 36 are attached, paragraph 0027 of Said).
Further, it is understood, claim 17 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hartmut as modified by Lee, Nakajo and Jiyon, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Schill (US 3494144 A, hereinafter Schill).
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein said refrigerating cylinder comprises two thermally insulating head portions, said head portions being arranged transversely to said longitudinal axis and opposite with respect to said outer side wall.
However, Schill teaches wherein said refrigerating cylinder (drum 2) comprises two thermally insulating head portions (heat or cold insulation at the end faces 17 of the drum 2, col 3 lines 45-47), said head portions being arranged transversely to said longitudinal axis (as shown on figures 1 and 2) and opposite with respect to said outer side wall (opposite to outer walls of drum 2, as shown on figures 1 and 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include wherein said refrigerating cylinder comprises two thermally insulating head portions, said head portions being arranged transversely to said longitudinal axis and opposite with respect to said outer side wall in view of the teachings of Schill in order to yield the predictable results of possibly reducing the radiation of cold towards the interior of the cylinder.
Regarding claim 18, the combined teachings teach wherein the water distribution channel (trough 4 of Schill) has a closed-loop configuration (appearing to be in a closed loop, figures 2 and 7 of Schill).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hartmut as modified by Lee, Nakajo and Jiyon, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Dong et al (CN 115046342 A, hereinafter Dong).
Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein said water supply system is operatively connected to said cooling unit so as to perform a pre-cooling of the water to be conveyed in said tank.
However, Dong teaches wherein said water supply system (via water tank 7, figure 1) is operatively connected to said cooling unit (via heat exchanger 6, figure 1, corresponding to chiller of Hartmut) so as to perform a pre-cooling of the water to be conveyed in said tank (the heat exchanger 6 provides ice slurry for cooling air; the heat exchanger 6 is changed into water and returns to the water tank 7, paragraph 0007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include wherein said water supply system is operatively connected to said cooling unit so as to perform a pre-cooling of the water to be conveyed in said tank in view of the teachings of Dong in order to yield the predictable results of returning water to the water tank after heat exchange.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hartmut as modified by Lee, Nakajo and Jiyon, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Raver (US 2697919 A, hereinafter Raver).
Regarding claim 11, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein an inclination of the at least one scraper device is configured to be adjusted with respect to said outer side wall of said refrigerating cylinder.
However, Raver teaches wherein an inclination of the scraper devices (localized adjustment of the doctor blade 88 so proper clearance may be maintained the full length of the drum, col 3 lines 75-80) is configured to be adjusted (adjusting screws 98 allows multiple, independent, and localized adjustment of the doctor blade 88 so proper clearance may be maintained the full length of the drum, col 3 lines 75-80) with respect to said outer side wall of said refrigerating cylinder (outer side wall of drum 24, as shown on figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include wherein an inclination of the scraper devices is configured to be adjusted with respect to said outer side wall of said refrigerating cylinder in view of the teachings of Raver in order to yield the predictable results of maintaining proper clearance that may be maintained the full length of the drum.
Further, it is understood, claim 11 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hartmut as modified by Lee, Nakajo and Jiyon, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Fujitaka et al (JP H11183001 A, hereinafter Fujitaka).
Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach further comprising a blower arranged below said refrigerating cylinder and the at least one scraper device, said blower being configured to blow the artificial snow produced by the at least one scraper device, creating a snow flow outside the equipment.
However, Fujitaka teaches further comprising a blower (snow blowing devices 18) arranged below said refrigerating cylinder (below ice making drums 6 of ice making machines 3, as shown on figure 1) and the at least one scraper device (scraper 8), said blower (snow blowing devices 18) being configured to blow the artificial snow produced by the at least one scraper device, creating a snow flow outside the equipment (an ice storage is provided below the ice making room provided with the artificial snow generating device, and artificial snow generated by the artificial snow generating device is dropped and stored in the ice storage. Then, the artificial snow is carried out from the ice storage by a snow carrier, and the artificial snow is sprayed on a ski slope at a ski resort by a snow blower, paragraph 0003).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include further comprising a blower arranged below said refrigerating cylinder and the at least one scraper device, said blower being configured to blow the artificial snow produced by the at least one scraper device, creating a snow flow outside the equipment in view of the teachings of Fujitaka in order to yield the predictable results of allowing the artificial snow to be sprayed by a snow blower.
Further, it is understood, claim 12 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hartmut as modified by Lee, Nakajo and Jiyon, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Dugu (CN 113152946 A, hereinafter Dugu).
Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach an artificial snowmaking apparatus, comprising: an artificial snowmaking cabin; an artificial snowmaking equipment according to claim 1 wherein said artificial snowmaking equipment is mounted on a frame constrainable to a wall of said cabin and raised from aground.
However, Dugu teaches an artificial snowmaking (floating snow machine 4-1) apparatus, comprising: an artificial snowmaking cabin (snow shed, figure 1); an artificial snowmaking equipment (floating snow machine 4-1) according to claim 1 (corresponding to device 1 of Hartmut), wherein said artificial snowmaking equipment (floating snow machine 4-1) is mounted on a frame (ceiling 2-1) constrainable to a wall (top wall of the roof comprises a roof interlayer and a ceiling, paragraph ) of said cabin (snow shed, figure 1) and raised from aground (as shown on figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include an artificial snowmaking apparatus, comprising: an artificial snowmaking cabin; an artificial snowmaking equipment according to claim 1 wherein said artificial snowmaking equipment is mounted on a frame constrainable to a wall of said cabin and raised from aground in view of the teachings of Dugu in order to yield the predictable results of providing an indoor ice and snow park that breaks the season constraint to realize anti-season ice and snow experience.
Regarding claim 14, the combined teachings teach wherein the artificial snowmaking equipment (floating snow machine 4-1 of Dugu) is mounted at a ceiling (ceiling 2-1 of Dugu) of said cabin (snow shed, figure 1 of Dugu).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Hartmut as modified by Lee, Nakajo and Jiyon, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Higel (DE 102005039989 A1, hereinafter Higel).
Regarding claim 16, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the at least one scraper device is configured to remove only a portion of a thickness of the ice layer such that a remaining portion of the ice layer remains on the refrigerating cylinder.
However, Higel teaches wherein the at least one scraper device (ice scrapers 18) is configured to remove only a portion of a thickness of the ice layer such that a remaining portion of the ice layer remains (adjusting the distances between the ice scrapers 18 and the freezing roll 5 and for adjusting the parallelism of the ice scrapers 18 with respect to the axis of rotation of the freezing roll 5 are for every ice scraper 18 two self-locking alignment devices each 26 provided in the direction of the axis of rotation of the freezing roller 5 spaced apart from each other, paragraph 0026) on the refrigerating cylinder (freezing roller 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the equipment in the combined teachings to include wherein the at least one scraper device is configured to remove only a portion of a thickness of the ice layer such that a remaining portion of the ice layer remains on the refrigerating cylinder in view of the teachings of Higel in order to yield the predictable results of providing an adjustment unit for setting the distance between the ice scraper and the surface of the freezing roll.
Further, it is understood, claim 16 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10, filed 06/15/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 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 Jiyon JP H1068564 A, see claim 1 rejection above, in which the motivation to combine the references is providing an efficient and hygienical ice producer with a simple structure capable of uniformly supplying water to a cooling drum and forming a good ice layer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARIO DELEON whose telephone number is (571)272-8687. 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, Jerry Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/DARIO ANTONIO DELEON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights