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 .
Drawings
Figures 4 and 5 have informalities wherein cross-sectional hatching is required because of the sectional view of the invention.
(h) Views. The drawing must contain as many views as necessary to show the invention. The views may be plan, elevation, section, or perspective views. Detail views of portions of elements, on a larger scale if necessary, may also be used. All views of the drawing must be grouped together and arranged on the sheet(s) without wasting space, preferably in an upright position, clearly separated from one another, and must not be included in the sheets containing the specifications, claims, or abstract. Views must not be connected by projection lines and must not contain center lines. Waveforms of electrical signals may be connected by dashed lines to show the relative timing of the waveforms.
(3) Sectional views. The plane upon which a sectional view is taken should be indicated on the view from which the section is cut by a broken line. The ends of the broken line should be designated by Arabic or Roman numerals corresponding to the view number of the sectional view, and should have arrows to indicate the direction of sight. Hatching must be used to indicate section portions of an object, and must be made by regularly spaced oblique parallel lines spaced sufficiently apart to enable the lines to be distinguished without difficulty. Hatching should not impede the clear reading of the reference characters and lead lines. If it is not possible to place reference characters outside the hatched area, the hatching may be broken off wherever reference characters are inserted. Hatching must be at a substantial angle to the surrounding axes or principal lines, preferably 45°. A cross section must be set out and drawn to show all of the materials as they are shown in the view from which the cross section was taken. The parts in cross section must show proper material(s) by hatching with regularly spaced parallel oblique strokes, the space between strokes being chosen on the basis of the total area to be hatched. The various parts of a cross section of the same item should be hatched in the same manner and should accurately and graphically indicate the nature of the material(s) that is illustrated in cross section. The hatching of juxtaposed different elements must be angled in a different way. In the case of large areas, hatching may be confined to an edging drawn around the entire inside of the outline of the area to be hatched. Different types of hatching should have different conventional meanings as regards the nature of a material seen in cross section.
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 12 and 17 refer to “A cooking appliance” and they should refer to - - The cooking appliance - -. Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 14-17 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 6 recites the limitation "the peripheral wall of the cooking plate" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the condensates" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 15 is also rejected due to dependency on claim 14.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the inner walls" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the condensates" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 17 is also rejected due to dependency on claim 16.
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.
Claim(s) 1,3-7,10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (CN211911385U).
With regards to claim 1, Chen discloses a cooking appliance configured for cooking food(air oven with baking plate, Title), the cooking appliance comprising: a cooking chamber (oven core 3, Fig. 1), a cooking plate (roast board 4, Fig. 1) that can be moved in a direction of travel (A1) between a first plate position in which the cooking plate is located entirely within the cooking chamber (roast board 4 pushed all way to the end of rail frame 7 inside of oven core 3, Fig. 2) and a second plate position in which the cooking plate is stopped at the end of a withdrawal movement and located at least partly outside the cooking chamber (roast board 4 can be withdrawable from oven core 3 along rail frame 7, Fig. 2), the cooking plate comprising a bottom part and peripheral walls delimiting an internal volume (roast board 4 includes a roast board body 12, fixed foot rest 13 and oil leak hole 15, Fig. 6,7);and a collection device configured to collect cooking juices from food on the cooking plate (connect food tray 1 to collect juices from food on roast board 4, Fig. 7), the collection device comprising a collection located underneath the cooking plate (connect food tray 1 to collect juices from food on roast board 4, Fig. 7), and in that the cooking plate comprises a drainage port opening into the internal volume and located plumb with the collection tray (oil leak hole 15 in the edge of roast board body 12 of roast board 4, Fig. 7), the drainage port being configured to allow the cooking juices contained in the internal volume (12) to drain into the collection tray regardless of the position of the cooking plate (oil leak hole 15 is configured to allow cooking from roast board body 12 wherein juices are urged by protruding pieces 14, Fig. 6).
With regards to claim 3, Chen discloses wherein the drainage port is provided on a peripheral wall of the cooking plate that extends substantially parallel to the direction of travel (oil leak hole 15 is provided on a bottom of the roast board body 12 that extends parallel in the direction of travel of the roast board 4 along a slod rail frame 7, Fig. 2,7).
With regards to claim 4, Chen discloses wherein the cooking plate comprises supporting ribs provided on the bottom part and configured to support food placed on the cooking plate (the front of roast board body 12 is equipped with protruding piece 14 which supports food placed on the surface of roast board 4, Fig. 5).
With regards to claim 5, Chen discloses wherein the supporting ribs delimit cooking juice drainage channels configured to guide and direct at least part of the cooking juices contained in the internal volume towards the drainage port (adjacent protruding pieces 14 define channels which can affect the direction of oil leak to oil leak hole 15, Fig. 5).
With regards to claim 6, Chen discloses wherein the cooking juice drainage channels are configured to guide and direct the cooking juices contained in the internal volume towards the peripheral wall of the cooking plate, which is provided with the drainage port (adjacent protruding pieces 14 define channels which can affect the direction of oil leak to oil leak hole 15, Fig. 5).
With regards to claim 7, Chen discloses wherein the cooking plate comprises a side collection channel configured to collect the cooking juices dripping into the cooking juice drainage channels and to guide and direct said cooking juices toward the drainage port as seen below:
PNG
media_image1.png
459
475
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 10, Chen discloses wherein the direction of travel is substantially horizontal when the cooking appliance is resting on a horizontal surface (the direction of travel of the plate 4 is horizontal along guide support frame 6 when oven body 2 is resting on a horizontal surface, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 11, Chen discloses wherein the cooking chamber comprises an access opening and the cooking appliance comprises a door configured to be movable between a closed position which closes the access opening and prevents access to the cooking plate, and an open position which frees up the access opening and allows the cooking plate to be moved between the first plate position and the second plate position (oven core 3 has an opening and roast door 16 which can open and close the opening of oven core 3 wherein the roast door 16 in an open position allows for connect food tray 1 to be accessed and moved, Fig. 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim(s) 2,8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, and further in view of Bouvier et al (EP3335601A1).
With regards to claim 2, Chen does not disclose wherein the bottom part of the cooking plate comprises at least one sloping guide surface configured to guide and direct cooking juices contained in the internal volume towards the drainage port.
Bouvier et al teaches wherein the bottom part of the cooking plate comprises at least one sloping guide surface configured to guide and direct cooking juices contained in the internal volume towards the drainage port (cooking plate 1 having a hollow zone 35 formed of two slopes, a first slop 21 and second slope which end at discharge orifice 81, Fig. 6).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chen and Bouvier et al before him or her, to modify the cooking plate of Chen to include the slopes and orifices of Bouvier et al because the combination allows for reducing smoke emissions due to clusters of caramelized food liquid left after cooking.
With regards to claim 8, Chen does not disclose wherein each cooking juice drainage channel comprises a bottom wall that has a sloping guide surface configured to guide and direct the cooking juices contained in the cooking juice drainage channel towards the side collection channel.
Bouvier et al teaches wherein each cooking juice drainage channel comprises a bottom wall that has a sloping guide surface configured to guide and direct the cooking juices contained in the cooking juice drainage channel towards the side collection channel (hollow zone 35 has a bottom wall that has two slopes, a first slop 21 and second slope which end at peripheral portion 11 with discharge orifice 81, Fig. 6).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chen and Bouvier et al before him or her, to modify the cooking plate of Chen to include the slopes and orifices of Bouvier et al because the combination allows for reducing smoke emissions due to clusters of caramelized food liquid left after cooking.
With regards to claim 9, Chen does not disclose wherein side collection channel comprises a bottom wall that is sloped and that is configured to guide and direct the cooking juices contained in the side collection channel towards the drainage port.
Bouvier et al teaches wherein side collection channel comprises a bottom wall that is sloped and that is configured to guide and direct the cooking juices contained in the side collection channel towards the drainage port (hollow zone 35 has a bottom wall that has two slopes, a first slop 21 and second slope which end at peripheral portion 11 with discharge orifice 81, Fig. 6).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chen and Bouvier et al before him or her, to modify the cooking plate of Chen to include the slopes and orifices of Bouvier et al because the combination allows for reducing smoke emissions due to clusters of caramelized food liquid left after cooking.
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamaguchi (CN102822603A).
With regards to claim 16, Chen does not disclose wherein the cooking chamber comprises two deflection components provided respectively on two side walls of the cooking chamber, each deflection component being configured to extend at least in part above the cooking plate and to guide and direct the condensates trickling down the respective side wall of the cooking chamber towards the cooking plate.
Yamaguchi teaches wherein the cooking chamber comprises two deflection components provided respectively on two side walls of the cooking chamber (heating chamber 131 comprises side plates 132 on the left and right wall which are formed of a plurality of convex shapes 139, Fig. 2), each deflection component being configured to extend at least in part above the cooking plate and to guide and direct the condensates trickling down the respective side wall of the cooking chamber towards the cooking plate (side plates 132 and the plurality of convex shapes 139 are above the cooking plate of the heating chamber 131 to direct water towards water receiving portion 138, Fig. 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chen and Yamaguchi before him or her, to modify the oven core of Chen to include the side plates and shapes of the cooking cavity of Yamaguchi because the combination allows for simplification of drainage of dew produced during a cooking cycle.
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen and Yamaguchi as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Xu et al (WO2019086030A1).
With regards to claim 17, Chen and Yamaguchi does not teach wherein the cooking plate further comprises two side edges extending substantially parallel to the direction of travel, each deflection component being configured to extend at least in part above a respective side edge and to allow the condensates flowing over said deflection component to drain onto the respective side edge.
Xu et al teaches wherein the cooking plate further comprises two side edges extending substantially parallel to the direction of travel, each deflection component being configured to extend at least in part above a respective side edge and to allow the condensates flowing over said deflection component to drain onto the respective side edge (tray 13d includes two side plates 131d configured to allow condensate to flow to the top surface of tray 13d, Fig. 62).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Chen, Yamaguchi and Xu et al before him or her, to modify the cooking tray of Chen and Yamaguchi to include the side plates of the tray of Xu et al because the combination allows for efficient drainage of dew in a cooking apparatus.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-15 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. The prior art does not disclose or teach a fixed separating component arranged between the collection tray and the cooking plate wherein the separating component comprising a through slot. Claims 13-15 are dependent on claim 12 and therefore objected as well.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS JOHN WARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7am - 4pm.
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, EDWARD LANDRUM can be reached at 5712725567. 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.
/THOMAS J WARD/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JOHN J NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights