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 .
Priority
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.
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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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 uses the word “means,” and are 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:
(i) scissor mechanism (claims 6, 7, 8, 9, 23, 24, 27), 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 limitation
(i) scissor mechanism (claims 6, 7, 8, 9, 23, 24, 27), has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim 1 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
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 limitation:
(i) scissor mechanism (claims 6, 7, 8, 9, 23, 24, 27), US 2024/0147581, Figures 2-5, scissor mechanism 80a-b, arms 82a, 84a, 82b, 84b, (0061-0062)
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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 6, 7, 8, 9, 23, 24, 27 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.
Claims 6, 7, 8, 9, 23, 24, 27 recite “scissors mechanism” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what structural limitations are required by the phrase. Is a scissors mechanism a device that cuts material? Is a scissor mechanism a device that has the same shape as a scissor? Is a scissor mechanism a linkage system? Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) / (a)(2) as being anticipated by Bakke (US 2004/0265168).
With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Bakke teaches a thawing device configured to thaw frozen liquid contained in at least one bag (Figs 1-4, bag 16, 0048, Abstract), comprising: a housing (Figs 3, 4, base 52 having outer housing, 0030); a first heater plate assembly (movable case 56, front heating plate 66, 0054) supported by the housing (52); at least one first heater thermally coupled to the first heater plate assembly (0006, the heating plates are electrically heated by etched foil or other resistance heaters applied to their back surfaces); a second heater plate assembly (fixed case 54, rear heating plate 64, 0051) supported by the housing (52) and opposing the first heater plate assembly to define a bag receiving region between opposing faces of the first heater plate assembly and the second heater plate assembly (0054); at least one second heater thermally coupled to the second heater plate assembly (0006, the heating plates are electrically heated by etched foil or other resistance heaters applied to their back surfaces); the thawing device being arranged such that at least one of the first heater plate assembly and the second heater plate assembly is moveable (moveable case 56, 0054) relative to the other of the first heater plate assembly and the second heater plate assembly such that the first heater plate assembly and the second heater plate assembly engage with, and apply heat to, respective opposite sides of the at least one bag containing frozen liquid, with the frozen liquid being thawed to form thawed liquid within the at least one bag when the first and second heaters are operated (0054).
With respect to the limitations of claim 30, Bakke teaches each of the first and second heater plate assemblies is vertically oriented (see figures 3, 4)
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.
Claims 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Bakke (US 2004/0265168).
With respect to the limitations of claims 2 and 19, Bakke teaches a thawing device configured to thaw frozen liquid contained in at least one bag (Figs 1-4, bag 16, 0048, Abstract), comprising: a housing (Figs 3, 4, base 52 having outer housing, 0030); a first heater plate assembly (movable case 56, front heating plate 66, 0054) supported by the housing (52), the first heater plate assembly comprising: a first heater carrier plate (movable case 56) and a first thermally conductive heater plate (front heating plate 66) attached to the first heater carrier plate; at least one first heater thermally coupled (0006, the heating plates are electrically heated by etched foil or other resistance heaters applied to their back surfaces) to the first thermally conductive heater plate (66); at least one first temperature sensor thermally coupled to (0048, temperature of heating plates 24 is controlled by an electronic temperature controller using temperature sensors at or near the surfaces of heating plates 24) the first thermally conductive heater plate; a second heater plate assembly (fixed case 54, rear heating plate 64, 0051) supported by the housing (52) and opposing the first heater plate assembly to define a bag receiving region between opposing faces of the first heater plate assembly and the second heater plate assembly (0054), the second heater plate assembly comprising: a second heater carrier plate (fixed case 54) and a second thermally conductive heater plate (heating plate 64) resiliently biased (spring-loaded supports 70, 0052; 0054, rear heating plate 64 is flexibly supported in fixed case 54 by flexural support 68 which allows motion only in a direction normal to the heating surface of rear heating plate 64) relative to the second heater carrier plate.
Bakke discloses the claimed invention except for the first thermally conductive heater plate resiliently biased to the first heater carrier plate.
However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to duplicate the resiliently biased heater plate of Bakke, since it has been held that a mere duplication of working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to duplicate the resiliently biased heater plate for the purpose of providing a known biasing means that allows enhanced mixing and heat transfer of the thawing fluid (0054; see MPEP 2144.04).
With respect to the limitations of claims 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 16, Bakke discloses the first thermally conductive heater plate is resiliently biased away from (spring-loaded supports 70) the first heater carrier plate, and further the second thermally conductive heater plate is resiliently biased away from (70) the second heater carrier plate;
further comprising: a plurality of first resilient members (multiple spring-loaded supports 70) positioned between the first heater carrier plate and the first thermally conductive heater plate; and a plurality of second resilient members (multiple spring-loaded supports 70) positioned between the second heater carrier plate and the second thermally conductive heater plate;
the plurality of first resilient members comprises a plurality of first compression springs (multiple spring-loaded supports 70), and further the plurality of second resilient members comprises a plurality of second compression springs (multiple spring-loaded supports 70);
further comprising at least one scissors mechanism (Fig 4, support rails 78, 0052) operatively coupled to the first heater plate assembly (moveable case slider 80, 0052) and the second heater plate assembly (base 52, fixed case 54, rear heating plate 64);
further comprising an actuator operatively coupled to the at least one scissors mechanism, the actuator (opening handle 62, constant force return spring 82, 0052, 0054), in a first mode of operation, is operable to move the first heater plate assembly and the second heater plate assembly toward each other and further the actuator (0054), in a second mode of operation, is operable to move the first heater plate assembly and the second heater plate assembly away from each other to disengage from opposite sides of the at least one bag containing the thawed liquid (0054);
further comprising: a pair of scissors mechanisms (support rails 78) each operatively coupled to the first heater plate assembly and the second heater plate assembly;
the actuator (opening handle 62, constant force return spring 82) is operatively coupled to each of the pair of scissor mechanisms;
the at least one first heater is thermally coupled to the first thermally conductive heater plate (0006, the heating plates are electrically heated by etched foil or other resistance heaters applied to their back surfaces), and further the at least one second heater is thermally coupled to the second thermally conductive heater plate (0006);
further comprising: at least one first temperature sensor thermally coupled to the first thermally conductive heater plate (0048, temperature of heating plates 24 is controlled by an electronic temperature controller using temperature sensors at or near the surfaces of heating plates 24); and at least one second temperature sensor thermally coupled to the second thermally conductive heater plate (0048);
further comprising: at least one sample temperature sensor supported by one of the first and second thermally conductive heater plates (0048, a temperature sensor in contact with the surface of the bag being thawed, but insulated from heating plates 24 is used to determine when thawing is complete);
the actuator is mounted to pivot about a horizontal axis (opening handle 62, constant force return spring 82).
Claim 21 is similarly rejected as set forth in the rejection of claim 13 above.
Claims 23 and 24 are similarly rejected as set forth in the rejection of claims 6 and 7 above.
Claim 27 is similarly rejected as set forth in the rejection of claim 7 above.
With respect to the limitations of claim 31, Bakke teaches each of the first and second heater plate assemblies is vertically oriented (see figures 3, 4).
Claims 11 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Bakke (US 2004/0265168) as applied to claims 1, 2, 10 and 19, further in view of Voute (US 2003/0080126).
With respect to the limitations of claim 11, Bakke discloses the claimed invention except for further comprising: a first heater foam pad thermally coupled to the first thermally conductive heater plate; and a second heater foam pad thermally coupled to the second thermally conductive heater plate. However, Voute discloses using a foam pad thermally coupled to the plate (Fig 26, cover 750 may include an inner foam liner to inhibit or prevent shock or rupturing of flexible container 700, 0099) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the thawing device of Bakke having first and second conductive heater plates silent to the recited foam pad with the foam pad thermally coupled to the plate of Voute for the purpose of providing a known foam material that inhibits or prevent shock or rupturing of flexible container.
Claim 20 is similarly rejected as set forth in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Claims 14, 17, 18, 22, 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Bakke (US 2004/0265168) as applied to claims 1, 2, 12, 13 and 19, further in view of Gagas (US 2006/0049172).
With respect to the limitations of claim 14, Bakke discloses sensors supported by one of the first or second thermally conductive heater plates. Bakke discloses the claimed invention except for the sensors are pressure sensors. However, Gagas discloses the sensors are pressure sensors (0073, pressure switches) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the thawing device of Bakke having sensors supported by one of the first or second thermally conductive heater plates silent to pressure sensors with the sensors are pressure sensors of Gagas for the purpose of providing a known pressure sensor that monitors pressure applied to objects.
With respect to the limitations of claim 17, Bakke in view of Gagas discloses further comprising: a plurality of first heaters thermally coupled to the first thermally conductive heater plate to define a plurality of different first heater zones associated with the first thermally conductive heater plate; and a plurality of second heaters thermally coupled to the second thermally conductive heater plate to define a plurality of different second heater zones associated with the second thermally conductive heater plate (Gagas, 0058, use of two or more heating elements 34 can be used to improve the uniformity of temperature distribution and minimize thermal gradients within the chamber, and also to reduce start up times).
With respect to the limitations of claim 18, Bakke in view of Gagas discloses the claimed invention except for further comprising: a plurality of first sample temperature sensors supported by the first thermally conductive heater plate, with each of the plurality of first sample temperature sensors being associated with a respective one of the plurality of different first heater zones; and a plurality of second sample temperature sensors supported by the second thermally conductive heater plate, with each of the plurality of second sample temperature sensors being associated with a respective one of the plurality of different second heater zones. However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to duplicate the sample temperature sensors of Bakke, since it has been held that a mere duplication of working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
Claim 22 is similarly rejected as set forth in the rejection of claim 14 above.
Claims 28 and 29 are similarly rejected as set forth in the rejection of claims 17 and 18 above.
Claim 15, 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Bakke (US 2004/0265168) as applied to claims 1, 6, 7, 19 and 23, further in view of Schryver (US 2019/0041308).
With respect to the limitations of claim 15, Bakke discloses the claimed invention except for the actuator comprises a stepper motor; a rotatable screw driven by the stepper motor; and a nut threadably driven by the rotatable screw. However, Schryver discloses the actuator comprises a stepper motor (Figs 3-5, screw drive motor 305, 0057); a rotatable screw (screw shaft 320, 0057) driven by the stepper motor; and a nut (threaded flange sleeve 325, 0057) threadably driven by the rotatable screw is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the thawing device of Bakke having an actuator silent the recited stepper motor actuator with the actuator comprises a stepper motor; a rotatable screw driven by the stepper motor; and a nut threadably driven by the rotatable screw of Schryver for the purpose of providing a known motor actuator means that clamp or release objects situated between the heater plates (0057).
Claim 25 is similarly rejected as set forth in the rejection of claim 15 above.
With respect to the limitations of claim 26, Bakke discloses the actuator is mounted to pivot about a horizontal axis (opening handle 62, constant force return spring 82).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN S TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday [8:00-4:00].
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.
/THIEN S TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 6/1/2026
Prosecution Insights