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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 19 December 2023 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because the citation in the Other Documents section has not been provided a date. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits (see strike-through). Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-12) in the reply filed on 13 December 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 13 and 14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 13 December 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only (claim 12 recites claims 11 and 1). See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim 12 has not been further treated on the merits.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 3, “an chamber” should read --a chamber---
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Unezawa (JP-05253161-A).
In regards to claim 1, Unezawa teaches a warewash machine, comprising: a chamber (1) having an inlet opening and an outlet opening (i.e.; left and right side opening, and front side opening in Fig. 2); a hood-type door (15) movable upward and downward between an open position to allow access to the chamber through the inlet opening and the outlet opening, and a closed position that closes the inlet opening and the outlet opening; a wire form ware rack (24) supported in a lower portion of the chamber, the wire form ware rack having a ware support surface (i.e.; the bottom of the wire frame) that is located below a bottom of the inlet opening and a bottom of the outlet opening (i.e.; in the dotted position in Fig. 5 when the door is closed).
In regards to claim 2, Unezawa teaches the wire form ware rack (24) includes multiple rack supporting structures (e.g.; the side wires) for supporting the wire form ware rack on corresponding structures (17) of the warewash machine, and a primary support frame (i.e.; the bottom of the rack) defining the ware support surface.
In regards to claim 6, Unezawa teaches a wire form ware rack (24) for holding trays to be washed in a chamber (1) of a hood-type warewash machine, the wire form ware rack comprising: multiple rack supporting structures (e.g.; the side wires) for supporting the wire form ware rack on corresponding structures (17) of the warewash machine; a primary support frame (i.e.; the bottom of the rack) defining a ware support surface; wherein the multiple rack support structures are configured and oriented relative to the primary support frame such that the ware support surface will be located below a bottom of a ware inlet opening and a bottom of a ware outlet opening (i.e.; the left and right side opening, and front side opening in Fig. 2) of the warewash machine when the rack support structures are engaged with the corresponding structures of the warewash machine (i.e.; in the dotted position in Fig. 5 when the door is closed).
In regards to claim 11, Unezawa teaches a warewash machine including the wire form rack (24) of claim 6, the warewash machine including a hood-type door (15) movable upward and downward between an open position to allow access to an chamber (1) of the warewash machine through the inlet opening and the outlet opening, and a closed position that closes the inlet opening and the outlet opening, wherein the wire form rack is supported in a lower portion of the chamber with the support surface below the bottom of the ware inlet opening and the bottom of the ware outlet opening (i.e.; in the dotted position in Fig. 5 when the door is closed).
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 3, 4 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unezawa (JP-05253161-A) in view of Sullivan et al. (US Pat. No. 7,407,059 B2).
In regards to claim 3, Unezawa does not teach the ware support surface is defined, at least in part, by first and second wire form supports running from a front of the primary support frame to a back of the primary support frame, wherein a plurality of wire form rail members extend upward from and laterally between the first and second wire form supports, and the plurality of wire form rail members are spaced apart from each other along a direction from the front of the primary support frame to the back of the primary support frame to define a plurality of lateral tray receiving slots therebetween; and a lateral spacing between the first and second wire form supports is sufficient to allow the handle portions of trays, located within the lateral tray receiving slots, to fit between the first and second wire form supports such that at least part of each handle extends below the ware support surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
509
657
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sullivan teaches a wire form ware rack (12, Fig. 6), wherein the ware support surface is defined, at least in part, by first and second wire form supports (A, B; see annotation above) running from a front of the primary support frame to a back of the primary support frame, wherein a plurality of wire form rail members (C) extend upward from and laterally between the first and second wire form supports, and the plurality of wire form rail members are spaced apart from each other along a direction from the front of the primary support frame to the back of the primary support frame to define a plurality of lateral tray receiving slots (D) therebetween; and a lateral spacing between the first and second wire form supports is sufficient to allow the handle portions of trays, located within the lateral tray receiving slots, to fit between the first and second wire form supports such that at least part of each handle extends below the ware support surface (e.g.; the handle of a tray can fit below the wire support surface due to the vertical spacing defined between 14 and the bottom of the wire form rack). Note the functionality of the slots is dependent upon the sizing of a particular tray as similarly represented by the wares in Fig. 1A.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Unezawa’s wire for rack such that the ware support surface is defined, at least in part, by first and second wire form supports running from a front of the primary support frame to a back of the primary support frame, wherein a plurality of wire form rail members extend upward from and laterally between the first and second wire form supports, and the plurality of wire form rail members are spaced apart from each other along a direction from the front of the primary support frame to the back of the primary support frame to define a plurality of lateral tray receiving slots therebetween; and a lateral spacing between the first and second wire form supports is sufficient to allow the handle portions of trays, located within the lateral tray receiving slots, to fit between the first and second wire form supports such that at least part of each handle extends below the ware support surface as taught by Sullivan. The motivation would be for the purpose of supporting a variety of wares as illustrated by Sullivan in Fig. 1A.
In regards to claim 4, Unezawa does not teach the multiple rack supporting structures include a first support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, a second support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, and a laterally extending rear wire form support that is located above the ware support surface.
Sullivan teaches a wire form rack having multiple rack supporting structures including a first support leg (25) extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, a second support leg (25) extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, and a laterally extending rear wire form support (22) that is located above the ware support surface.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Unezawa’s wire form rack such that the multiple rack supporting structures include a first support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, a second support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, and a laterally extending rear wire form support that is located above the ware support surface. The motivation would be for the purpose of supporting additional detachable basins (14, 16, 18) to hold ware.
In regards to claim 7, Unezawa does not teach the multiple rack supporting structures include a first support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame and a second support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, wherein, when the ware support surface is oriented horizontally, a vertical distance between a bottom of each of the first support leg and the second support leg and the support surface is no more than 1.50 inches.
Sullivan teaches a wire form rack having multiple rack supporting structures including a first support leg (25) extending downward and outward from the primary support frame and a second support leg (25) extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, wherein, when the ware support surface is oriented horizontally, a vertical distance is defined between a bottom of each of the first support leg and the second support leg and the support surface. Although Sullivan is silent to the particular dimension of the distance, the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device (Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984)). In the instant case, sizing the distance would involve routine skill in the art based on the desired spacing of the basin below the support surface.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Unezawa’s wire form rack such that the multiple rack supporting structures include a first support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame and a second support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, wherein, when the ware support surface is oriented horizontally, a vertical distance between a bottom of each of the first support leg and the second support leg and the support surface is no more than 1.50 inches. The motivation would be for the purpose of supporting additional detachable basins (14, 16, 18) to hold ware.
In regards to claims 8 and 9, Unezawa does not teach the ware support surface is defined, at least in part, by first and second wire form supports running from a front of the primary support frame to a back of the primary support frame, wherein a plurality of wire form rail members extend upward from and laterally between the first and second wire form supports, and the plurality of wire form rail members are spaced apart from each other along a direction from the front of the primary support frame to the back of the primary support frame to define a plurality of lateral tray receiving slots therebetween (claim 8); and a lateral spacing between the first and second wire form supports is sufficient to allow the handle portions of trays, located within the lateral tray receiving slots, to fit between the first and second wire form supports such that at least part of each handle extends below the ware support surface (claim 9).
Sullivan teaches a wire form ware rack (12, Fig. 6), wherein the ware support surface is defined, at least in part, by first and second wire form supports (A, B; see annotation above) running from a front of the primary support frame to a back of the primary support frame, wherein a plurality of wire form rail members (C) extend upward from and laterally between the first and second wire form supports, and the plurality of wire form rail members are spaced apart from each other along a direction from the front of the primary support frame to the back of the primary support frame to define a plurality of lateral tray receiving slots (D) therebetween; and a lateral spacing between the first and second wire form supports is sufficient to allow the handle portions of trays, located within the lateral tray receiving slots, to fit between the first and second wire form supports such that at least part of each handle extends below the ware support surface (e.g.; the handle of a tray can fit below the wire support surface due to the vertical spacing defined between 14 and the bottom of the wire form rack). Note the functionality of the slots is dependent upon the sizing of a particular tray as similarly represented by the wares in Fig. 1A.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Unezawa’s wire for rack such that the ware support surface is defined, at least in part, by first and second wire form supports running from a front of the primary support frame to a back of the primary support frame, wherein a plurality of wire form rail members extend upward from and laterally between the first and second wire form supports, and the plurality of wire form rail members are spaced apart from each other along a direction from the front of the primary support frame to the back of the primary support frame to define a plurality of lateral tray receiving slots therebetween (claim 8); and a lateral spacing between the first and second wire form supports is sufficient to allow the handle portions of trays, located within the lateral tray receiving slots, to fit between the first and second wire form supports such that at least part of each handle extends below the ware support surface (claim 9) as taught by Sullivan. The motivation would be for the purpose of supporting a variety of wares as illustrated by Sullivan in Fig. 1A.
In regards to claim 10, Unezawa does not teach the multiple rack supporting structures include a first support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, a second support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, and a laterally extending rear wire form support that is located above the ware support surface.
Sullivan teaches a wire form rack having multiple rack supporting structures including a first support leg (25) extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, a second support leg (25) extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, and a laterally extending rear wire form support (22) that is located above the ware support surface.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date and with reasonable expectation of success to modify Unezawa’s wire form rack such that the multiple rack supporting structures include a first support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, a second support leg extending downward and outward from the primary support frame, and a laterally extending rear wire form support that is located above the ware support surface. The motivation would be for the purpose of supporting additional detachable basins (14, 16, 18) to hold ware.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record is discussed above. The prior art of record does not teach modifying Unezawa such that a rack support structure is located externally on the machine, the rack support structure holding a wire form rack support, wherein the wire form rack support includes a rack support surface, wherein, when the wire form ware rack is removed from the lower portion of the chamber and the wire form rack support is positioned into the lower portion of the chamber, the rack support surface is substantially aligned with the bottom of the inlet opening and the bottom of the outlet opening.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the PTO-892 for additional prior art related to the Applicant’s disclosed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STANTON L KRYCINSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-5381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-5:00PM ET.
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571)272-8227. 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.
/Stanton L Krycinski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3631