DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-10, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Im (KR 20090079453 A, provided in Applicant’s IDS filed 04/16/2025).
Regarding claim 1, Im teaches an apparatus for providing airflow over food waste (100, Fig. 3), comprising:
a first housing (50, Fig. 3) coupled with a second housing (cylindrical main body 20, Fig. 3), the first housing having a chamber to hold food waste (chamber holding food waste A, Fig. 3), the second housing comprising a fan (71, Fig. 3),
the first housing and the second housing being coupled (100, Fig. 3) to form one or more input channels for the fan to cause air to flow from the second housing through the first housing into the chamber (see drawing below, Fig. 3), and
the first housing and the second housing forming one or more output channels for the air to flow from the chamber through the first housing and the second housing and out of a vent of the second housing,
PNG
media_image1.png
665
578
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein none of the one or more input channels intersect with any of the one or more output channels (the input channel and output channel do not overlap/intersect, drawing above).
Regarding claim 2, Im teaches wherein the vent is on at least one of a side surface or a bottom surface of the second housing (vent labeled above is on a bottom surface of the cylindrical main body 20, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4, Im teaches wherein the first housing comprises a first port connecting the one or more input channels with the chamber (communication holes 51 connecting the input channel to chamber holding waste A, Fig. 3) and a second port connecting the one or more output channels with the chamber (see drawing below),
PNG
media_image1.png
665
578
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and the chamber is free of openings below the first port and the second port (below the communication holes 51, there are no holes/openings on drying case 50, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Im teaches at least one wall separating the chamber from the one or more input channels (see drawing below).
PNG
media_image2.png
665
578
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Im teaches a lid coupled with the first housing to allow access for depositing the food waste in the chamber (10, Fig. 3), wherein at least a portion of the one or more input channels and the one or more output channels extend in the lid (lid has open space for the input channel and output channel to end and start from, respectively, see drawing above).
Regarding claim 8, Im teaches wherein the lid (10, Fig. 3) comprises: a lid base forming the portion of the one or more input channels (input channels end and output channels start at the empty space defined by the lid walls, see drawings below) and the one or more output channels extending in the lid; and a lid cover extending over the lid base to cover the portion (see drawing below).
PNG
media_image3.png
157
450
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Im teaches a system for providing airflow over food material (100, Fig. 3), comprising: a base (bottom portion of cylindrical body, Fig. 3 and see drawing below); a housing forming a chamber above the base (50, Fig. 3), the chamber to receive food material (space bounded by inner walls of drying case 50 holding food waste A, Fig. 3); a first channel extending between a first port in the base (inflow hole 62, Fig. 3) and a second port coupled with the chamber; a second channel extending between a third port coupled with the chamber and a fourth port in the base (see drawing below);
PNG
media_image4.png
665
579
media_image4.png
Greyscale
and a fan in the base to cause air to flow through the chamber (71, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 10, Im teaches wherein the housing is removably mounted on the base (drying case 50 is removable from cylindrical body 20, Fig. 3-4).
Regarding claim 12, Im teaches wherein the fan (71, Fig. 3) is configured to cause air to flow into the first channel via the first port (arrows on inflow hole 62, Fig. 3), from the first channel into the chamber via the second port (fan 71 intaking air from second port, then third port, then its fourth port, exhausts to first port that first channel starts on and finally enters chamber, see drawing above), out of the chamber into the second channel via the third port (air from chamber exits second port, enters third port until fourth port of second channel, see drawing above), and out of the base via the fourth port (see drawing above, where the air taken in by fan 71 via fourth port exits base through inflow hole 62, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13, Im teaches a heater in the base between the first port and the second port (61, Fig. 3).
Regarding the limitation of the heater to operate at a temperature between 90 degrees Fahrenheit and 120 degrees Fahrenheit this limitation is directed to the function of the apparatus and/or the manner of operating the apparatus. All the structural limitations of the claim has been disclosed by Im and the heater of Im is capable of operating at a temperature between 90-120 degrees Fahrenheit. As such, it is deemed that the claimed apparatus is not differentiated from the applicant' s invention (see MPEP §2114). NOTE: this is a recitation of intended use / functional language, and so long as the prior art structure reads on the instant claimed structure, this limitation would be met because the same structure would be capable of the same function; in this case, one could use the device at an ambient room temperature of 90 degrees Fahrenheit, to which the instant that the apparatus of Im is turned on, the heater would be operating at an ambient temperature of 90-120 degrees Fahrenheit.
Per MPEP 2114,II, claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 14, Im teaches wherein the housing (drying case 50, Fig. 3) has a height greater than a height of the base (base, see claim 9 drawing above).
Regarding claim 15, Im teaches wherein the second port and the third port are adjacent to a top half of the chamber (second and third port are in a top half of the chamber yet also adjacent, see drawing below),
PNG
media_image4.png
665
579
media_image4.png
Greyscale
and the chamber is free of openings below the second port and the third port (bottom wall defining chamber is free of communication holes 51 and is below second and third ports, see drawing above).
Regarding claim 16, Im teaches a lid movably coupled with the housing to allow access for depositing the food material in the chamber (lid 10, Fig. 3), wherein the second port and the third port are formed in the lid (the closed system formed by the lid 10 is what enables the labeled second port as a “port”, likewise the third port, see drawing above).
4. Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 20110155117 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Kim teaches an apparatus (Fig. 2-4), comprising: a base (ventilation chamber 20, Fig. 2) having a first flow path and a second flow path separated from the first flow path (see drawing below);
PNG
media_image5.png
482
403
media_image5.png
Greyscale
and a housing mounted on the base (30, Fig. 4), the housing forming a chamber to receive food waste (interior walls of reservoir 30, Fig. 4, receiving smoke/smell from a cooking chamber, abstract), the housing comprising a third flow path and a fourth flow path each separated from the chamber by at least one wall of the chamber (wall 21 and 21b for third and fourth ports, respectively, see below),
PNG
media_image6.png
450
393
media_image6.png
Greyscale
the third flow path coupled with the first flow path and a first port of the housing facing the chamber (see drawing below),
PNG
media_image7.png
450
393
media_image7.png
Greyscale
the fourth flow path coupled with the second flow path and a second port of the housing facing the chamber (see drawing above).
Regarding claim 18, Kim teaches a lid movably coupled with the housing (Fig. 2, see below) to allow access into the chamber for depositing the food waste in the chamber,
PNG
media_image8.png
237
181
media_image8.png
Greyscale
the lid forming the first port and the second port (see drawing below, where the upper walls that are from the lid above define the first and second ports).
PNG
media_image9.png
450
393
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, Kim teaches wherein the first flow path (see claim 17 drawing above, Fig. 3) has an inlet formed on at least one of a side surface or bottom surface of the base (outer inlet 22a, Fig. 3), and the second flow path (see claim 17 drawing above, Fig. 3) has an outlet formed on the at least one of the side surface of the bottom surface of the base (outer outlet 22b, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 20, Kim teaches wherein an exterior of the base and the housing is free of openings above the inlet and the outlet (Fig. 4, where there are no openings on the walls (and thus, exterior) above inlet 22a and outlet 22b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im (KR 20090079453 A), as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Yoo et al. (US 20120039757 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Im teaches an output channel between the first housing and the vent (first housing being drying case 50, see drawing below),
PNG
media_image1.png
665
578
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but fails to teach a filter in one or more output channels between the first housing and the vent.
Yoo teaches a food waste drying apparatus (Fig. 2), having a first housing (drying furnace 202, Fig .2) with a downstream filtering device (220, Fig. 2) containing a deodorizing filter (230, Fig. 2) in one or more output channels (flow pipe 225, Fig. 2), in order to remove odors from the gas ([0030]).
Im and Yoo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of food waste drying apparatuses with exhaust/output channels.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the output channel of Im by incorporating a deodorizing filter as taught by Yoo in order to remove odors from the food waste gas (Yoo, [0030]).
Regarding claim 11, Im teaches a second/exhaust channel coupled to a base (see drawing below),
PNG
media_image4.png
665
579
media_image4.png
Greyscale
but fails to teach a filter in the base coupled with the second channel.
Yoo teaches a food waste drying apparatus (Fig. 2) with a filtering device (220, Fig. 2) containing a deodorizing filter (230, Fig. 2) downstream of a fan (fan 206, Fig. 2), in order to remove odors from the gas ([0030]).
Im and Yoo are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of food waste drying apparatuses with exhaust channels.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base of Im by incorporating a deodorizing filter as taught by Yoo in order to remove odors from the food waste gas (Yoo, [0030]).
6. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Im (KR 20090079453 A), as applied to claim 1 above.
PNG
media_image1.png
665
578
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Im teaches an odor neutralizer coupled with the one or more input channels (heating wires 61, Fig. 3, where “removes odors by oxidizing the dust or odor through the high heat of the heating wire”, p.2, 1st paragraph of English translation); and a fan (71, Fig. 3) to direct particles emitted by the odor neutralizer into the chamber via the one or more input channels (“the high temperature heat generated from the hot wire 61 oxidizes the smell to alleviate the odor”, where the emitted particles are the now-oxidized odor particles and air, Fig. 3 and p.4, 1st paragraph of English translation).
Im fails to specifically teach the fan being positioned in the one or more input channels between the odor neutralizer and the chamber.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to have rearranged the heating wires to be positioned such that the fan is downstream of the flow path (i.e., placing the heating wires in the output channel, before encountering the fan, thus “between the odor neutralizer and the chamber), because “shifting the position… would not have modified the operation of the device” (MPEP 2144.04.VI.C).
Specifically, the heating wires still function as a deodorizing element within any portion of the recirculating air-based drying apparatus. The fan would operate without issue regardless of the positioning of the heating wires (i.e., fan’s function is to still direct gas to the chamber), likewise the walls/surfaces defining the input and output channels.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aham Lee whose telephone number is (703)756-5622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 10:00 AM - 8:00 PM EST.
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, Maris R. Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/Aham Lee/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/SEAN E CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799