DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN110250951A) in view of Dollner et al. (EP2764806A1) (with paragraph numbers referencing machine) and Frielinghaus (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2019/0254481).
Regarding claim 1, Wang et al. discloses a method of instituting a quiet blending mode ([0042]), the method comprising:
capturing, via at least one sensor, one or more sound and/or vibration inputs from a blender ([0012]; [0057]; [0060]; [0062]);
comparing the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs to a threshold parameter ([0017]; [0081]; [0083]; [0084]); and
transmitting a command to a blender motor to reduce power when the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs exceed the threshold parameter ([0013]; [0017]; [0019]-[0020]; [0033]; [0042]; [0064];[0069]; [0083]).
However, Wang et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the threshold parameter is at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe, or a user-inputted threshold parameter.
Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus both teach food/beverage preparing machines (title) wherein the threshold parameter is at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe (Dollner et al. [0018]; [0049]-[0053]; [0100]-[0102]; Frielinghaus [0016]), or a user-inputted threshold parameter (Frielinghaus [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the threshold parameter of Wang et al. to be at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe, as taught by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect such a combination to be suitable given that all references teach food/beverage preparing machines. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do the foregoing because allowing the user to set a threshold parameter or basing the threshold parameter on a specific step of a blending process or recipe takes into account the specific food resulting in a particularly precise termination of the process and because different operations or steps of a process or recipe have different noise levels so different threshold parameters recognize and evaluate a single noise event and make it possible to locate which process could cause the event of a deviation from the normal noise image to provide an alert (Dollner et al. ([0049]-[0062], [0093]-[0102]; Frielinghaus [0016]).
Regarding claim 2, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses further comprising:
receiving, via an interface, an input to initiate the quiet blending mode ([0062] (receives an input to be powered on, and then starts quiet blending mode of capturing vibration data from sensor, comparing and transmitting ([0063])); and
engaging the quiet blending mode to capture the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs ([0012]; [0060]-[0062]).
Regarding claim 3, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the at least one sensor comprises a microphone ([0057]).
Regarding claim 4, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the at least one sensor comprises an accelerometer ([0057]).
Regarding claim 5, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the capturing, the comparing, and the transmitting are continuously completed to form a feedback loop ([0028]; [0066]; [0068]-[0072]; [0081]-[0087]).
Regarding claim 6, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses further comprising transmitting a second command to the blender motor to increase power when the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs are below the threshold parameter ([0069]; [0085]-[0087]).
Regarding claim 7, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein transmitting the command to the blender motor is in accordance with a blender program ([0040]; [0041]; [0057]; [0105]; [0106]).
Regarding claim 8, Wang et al. discloses a system for instituting a quiet blending mode ([0042]), the system comprising:
a blender comprising a motor ([0040];
a capture component comprising at least one sensor configured to capture one or more sound and/or vibration inputs from the blender ([0012]; [0057]; [0060]; [0062]); and
a controller communicatively coupled to the motor and the capture component ([0040]-[0042]), the controller configured to:
instruct the at least one sensor to capture the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs from the blender ([0012]; [0057]; [0060]; [0062]),
compare the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs to a threshold parameter ([0017]; [0081]; [0083]; [0084]), and
instruct the motor to reduce power when the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs exceed the threshold parameter ([0013]; [0017]; [0019]-[0020]; [0033]; [0042]; [0064];[0069]; [0083]).
However, Wang et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the threshold parameter is at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe, or a user-inputted threshold parameter.
Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus both teach food/beverage preparing machines (title) wherein the threshold parameter is at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe (Dollner et al. [0018]; [0049]-[0053]; [0100]-[0102]; Frielinghaus [0016]), or a user-inputted threshold parameter (Frielinghaus [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the threshold parameter of Wang et al. to be at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe, as taught by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect such a combination to be suitable given that all references teach food/beverage preparing machines. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do the foregoing because allowing the user to set a threshold parameter or basing the threshold parameter on a specific step of a blending process or recipe takes into account the specific food resulting in a particularly precise termination of the process and because different operations or steps of a process or recipe have different noise levels so different threshold parameters recognize and evaluate a single noise event and make it possible to locate which process could cause the event of a deviation from the normal noise image to provide an alert (Dollner et al. ([0049]-[0062], [0093]-[0102]; Frielinghaus [0016]).
Regarding claim 9, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses further comprising an interface communicatively coupled to the controller ([0062] (receives an input to be powered on)).
Regarding claim 10, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the interface is a user device interface ([0062] (receives an input by user to be powered on)).
Regarding claim 11, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the interface is a user interface of the blender ([0062] (the food processor receives an input to be powered on)).
Regarding claim 12, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive, via the interface, an input to initiate the quiet blending mode ([0062] (receives an input to be powered on, and then starts quiet blending mode of capturing vibration data from sensor, comparing and transmitting ([0063])); and
engage the quiet blending mode to capture the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs ([0012]; [0060]-[0062]).
Regarding claim 13, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the at least one sensor comprises a microphone ([0057]).
Regarding claim 14, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the at least one sensor comprises an accelerometer ([0057]).
Regarding claim 15, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to complete the capturing, the comparing, and the transmitting continuously to form a feedback loop ([0028]; [0066]; [0068]-[0072]; [0081]-[0087]).
Regarding claim 16, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to transmit a second command to the motor to increase power when the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs are below the threshold parameter ([0069]; [0085]-[0087]).
Regarding claim 17, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the controller is configured to instruct the motor is in accordance with a blender program ([0040]; [0041]; [0057]; [0105]; [0106]).
Regarding claim 18, Wang et al. discloses a blender ([0040]), comprising:
a motor ([0040]; and
a controller communicatively coupled to the motor ([0040]-[0042]), the controller configured to:
capture, via at least one sensor, one or more sound and/or vibration inputs from the motor ([0012]; [0057]; [0060]; [0062]),
compare the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs to a threshold parameter ([0017]; [0081]; [0083]; [0084]), and
instruct the motor to reduce power when the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs exceed the threshold parameter ([0013]; [0017]; [0019]-[0020]; [0033]; [0042]; [0064];[0069]; [0083]).
However, Wang et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the threshold parameter is at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe, or a user-inputted threshold parameter.
Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus both teach food/beverage preparing machines (title) wherein the threshold parameter is at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe (Dollner et al. [0018]; [0049]-[0053]; [0100]-[0102]; Frielinghaus [0016]), or a user-inputted threshold parameter (Frielinghaus [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to modify the threshold parameter of Wang et al. to be at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe, as taught by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus. One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect such a combination to be suitable given that all references teach food/beverage preparing machines. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do the foregoing because allowing the user to set a threshold parameter or basing the threshold parameter on a specific step of a blending process or recipe takes into account the specific food resulting in a particularly precise termination of the process and because different operations or steps of a process or recipe have different noise levels so different threshold parameters recognize and evaluate a single noise event and make it possible to locate which process could cause the event of a deviation from the normal noise image to provide an alert (Dollner et al. ([0049]-[0062], [0093]-[0102]; Frielinghaus [0016]).
Regarding claim 19, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses an interface communicatively coupled to the controller ([0062] (receives an input to be powered on)),
wherein the controller is further configured to:
receive, via the interface, an input to initiate the quiet blending mode ([0062] (receives an input to be powered on, and then starts quiet blending mode of capturing vibration data from sensor, comparing and transmitting ([0063])); and
engage the quiet blending mode to capture the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs ([0012]; [0060]-[0062]).
Regarding claim 20, Wang et al. in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus discloses all the limitations as set forth above. Wang et al. as modified by Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus further discloses wherein the controller is further configured to transmit a second command to the motor to increase power when the one or more sound and/or vibration inputs are below the threshold parameter ([0069]; [0085]-[0087]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of Dollner et al. and Frielinghaus teaching the limitation of wherein the threshold parameter is at least one of: a varied threshold parameter that is based on a step of a blending process or recipe.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH INSLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ELIZABETH INSLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights