DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application and claims filed on December 19, 2023. Claims 1-10 are pending, with claim 1 in independent claim form.
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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN202323201969.9 filed on 11/27/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 8-10 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 8 recited in line 4, the limitations "a hollow cavity" is indefinite, the two words have the same definition therefore it is unclear the further limitation the Applicant is seeking with the word “hollow”.
Claims not specifically recited are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. Appropriate clarification is required.
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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin US Patent (5,156,084) hereinafter Lin in view of Xu CN publication (215,754,067) hereinafter Xu.
Regarding claim 1,
Lin discloses a mincer (fig.1-2), comprising:
a container (1), which is provided with a cavity (space occupied by element 3 or 4) for accommodating an object (3 or 4) and provided with an opening (13) communicated with the cavity;
a cover body (2), which is detachably installed on the container (1) to seal the opening (13, see fig.1-2) and provided with a feeding port (23) communicated with the cavity (see fig.2)
Lin is silent about a flipping cover, which is hinged with the cover body and rotated to cover or expose the feeding port.
Lin and Xu disclose both art in the same field of endeavor of the claimed invention (i.e. food container).
Xu, in a similar art, teaches a food container (fig.3) with a flipping cover (200), which is hinged with the cover body (see fig.1) and rotated to cover or expose the feeding port (160, see fig.1).
Xu teaches the cover body with the feeding port and the flipping cover to prevent the turning cover opening accidentally (see pag.2 lines 14-16), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the cover of Lin with a flipping cover and assembly as taught by Xu, as it would be beneficiary to Lin to be able to prevent the turning cover opening accidentally and render apparatus more efficient and suitable.
Regarding claim 2,
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Lin in view of Xu, further discloses wherein one end of the flipping cover (200, Xu) away from a hinge point (210, Xu) is clamped with the cover body (120, Xu) through a clamping element (220, Xu).
Regarding claim 3,
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu discloses all limitation of claim 2,
Lin in view of Xu, further discloses wherein the clamping element (220, Xu) comprises a connecting plate (plate marked as 220 in fig.2, Xu) and a clamping block (221, Xu);
the connecting plate (plate marked as 220 in fig.2, Xu) is installed at one end of the flipping cover (200, Xu) away from the hinging point (210, see fig.2 and 5, Xu); the clamping block (221, Xu) is installed at one side of the connecting plate close to the flipping cover (see fig.2 and 5, Xu); and
the cover body (120, Xu) is provided with a clamping groove (111, Xu) matched with the clamping block (221, Xu).
Regarding claim 4,
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu discloses all limitation of claim 3,
Lin in view of Xu, further discloses wherein the clamping element (220, Xu) and the flipping cover (200, Xu) are integrally formed (see fig.2 and 5, Xu).
Regarding claim 5,
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu discloses all limitation of claim 3,
Lin in view of Xu, further discloses wherein one end of the clamping block (221, Xu) away from the flipping cover (200, Xu) is provided with a bevel (see bevel of element 221 in fig.3, Xu) which is inclined toward the other end of the clamping block (221, see fig.3, Xu).
Regarding claim 6,
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Lin in view of Xu, further discloses wherein the cover body (120, Xu) is provided with an avoidance groove (130, Xu) matched with the flipping cover (200, Xu), the flipping cover (200, Xu) is installed in the avoidance groove (130, Xu), and an end surface of the flipping cover (200, Xu) is flush with an end surface of the cover body (120, Xu) after the flipping cover covers the feeding port (160, see fig.3, Xu).
Regarding claim 7,
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Lin in view of Xu, further discloses wherein a plug (410, Xu) is installed at one side of the flipping cover (200, Xu) close to the feeding port (160, Xu), and
the plug (410, Xu) is matched with the feeding port (160, Xu).
Regarding claim 8, As best understood
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Lin further discloses wherein the cover body (2) comprises an upper cover (24) and a lower cover (25, see fig.1-2),
the upper cover (24) and the lower cover (25) are detachably connected (the covers are detachably connected since there are gears (i.e. elements 29) between the covers, the covers cannot be integrally (i.e. one piece) manufacture with the gears) , and the upper cover (24) and the lower cover (25) are enclosed into a hollow cavity (28, see fig 2).
Claims 9-10 are rejected (as best understood) under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of Xu as applied to claim 8 above, and in further view of Yang CN Publication (218,186,403) hereinafter Yang.
Regarding claim 9,
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu discloses all limitation of claim 8,
Lin does not disclose the cover body to be provided with a drainage hole communicated with the hollow cavity.
Lin and Yang disclose both art in the same field of endeavor of the claimed invention (i.e. food container).
Yang, in a similar art, teaches a food container cover (200) with a cover body (210) to be provided with a drainage hole (221 and 2211) communicated with the hollow cavity (space of element 211, see fig.3 and 6).
Yang teaches the drainage hole to convey liquid from the cover to a tray (see pag.4 lines 25-32), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the cover of Lin with a drainage hole and assembly as taught by Yang, as it would be beneficiary to Lin to be able to convey liquid from the cover to prevent gear rust.
Regarding claim 10,
The prior art Lin as modified by Xu and Yang discloses all limitation of claim 9,
Lin in view of Yang, further discloses wherein the drainage hole (221 and 2211) is concave downward (see fig.6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Smith O. BAPTHELUS whose telephone number is (571)272-5976. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-6:00.
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, Christopher L. Templeton can be reached at (571)270 1477. 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.
February 9, 2026
/BSO/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725