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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cammack et al. (US Patent No. 3,344,751).
Re: Claim 1, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including ice cream extrusion system comprising a manifold unit and a nozzle unit,
the manifold unit comprising
a first manifold (Fig. 2, structures (43, 44, flow paths below) associated with feed (40)) having an inlet (43) that branches into a first set of flow paths, and a first set of valves (44) arranged to control a flow of a first ice cream mass through each flow path of the first set of flow paths,
a second manifold (Fig. 2, structures (43, 44, flow paths below) associated with feed (41)) having an inlet (43) that branches into a second set of flow paths, and a second set of valves (44) arranged to control a flow of a second ice cream mass through each flow path of the second set of flow paths, and
a manifold interface (9) to which all flow paths of the first and second set of flow paths lead, wherein the manifold interface comprises outlets (24, 25, 26, 27) for all the flow paths of the first and second set of flow paths, where each flow path has an individual outlet (24, 25, 26, 27) in the manifold interface (Fig. 4),
the nozzle unit (7) comprising
a nozzle interface (21) having inlets (38, 39) that are aligned with the outlets of the manifold interface, where each inlet of the inlets is arranged to receive ice cream mass from one aligned outlet of the outlets of the manifold interface (Fig. 4), and
a set of nozzle flow paths (11-20) leading from the inlets of the nozzle interface, where each nozzle flow path of the set of nozzle flow paths leads from an individual inlet in the nozzle interface, wherein all nozzle flow paths converge into a single and common nozzle flow path (10) that forms an extrusion nozzle (8) (Figs. 4-6).
Re: Claim 2, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including the manifold interface is a unitary structure that comprises the outlets of the manifold interface, and the nozzle interface is a unitary structure that comprises the inlets of the nozzle interface (Depicted in Fig. 4).
Re; Claim 3, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including the manifold interface has a surface that surrounds the outlets of the manifold interface (Depicted in Fig. 5, outer wall below upper wall(23) surrounds the outlets), the nozzle interface has a surface that surrounds the inlets of the nozzle interface (Depicted in Fig. 5), and said surfaces of the manifold interface and the nozzle interface abut each other and are complementary in shape (Fig. 4 depicts the surfaces abutting each other, and have complementary shapes as outlined by the inlets in the surface of the nozzle interface).
Re: Claim 9, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including an edge protection that is made of metal and arranged around the peripheral end of the extrusion nozzle (Col. 2, lines 62-66, metal edge at peripheral end).
Re: Claim 10, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including the nozzle unit comprises a further inlet (38, 39) at the side of the nozzle unit (Fig. 3 depicts further inlets), the further inlet being arranged to receive a further ice cream mass, and a further flow path that leads from the further inlet and converges with the other flow paths of the nozzle unit, into the single and common nozzle flow path that forms the extrusion nozzle (Depicted in Fig. 8, all flow paths merge).
Re: Claim 11, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including the replacement nozzle unit (Col. 1, Col. 1, lines 34-41, various nozzles may be placed into the device to create other resulting shapes) comprising
a nozzle interface (21) having inlets (38, 39) that are aligned with the outlets of the manifold interface, where each inlet of the inlets is arranged to receive ice cream mass from one aligned outlet of the outlets of the manifold interface (Fig. 4), and
a set of nozzle flow paths (11-20) leading from the inlets of the nozzle interface, where each nozzle flow path of the set of nozzle flow paths leads from an individual inlet in the nozzle interface, wherein all nozzle flow paths converge into a single and common nozzle flow path (10) that forms an extrusion nozzle (8) (Figs. 4-6).
the nozzle flow paths of the replacement nozzle unit converges into the single nozzle flow path in a different way than that of the nozzle flow paths of the nozzle unit of the ice cream extrusion system (Col. 1, Col. 1, lines 34-41, converge differently to form alternate shapes).
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.
Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cammack et al. (US Patent No. 3,344,751) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Carter (US Patent No. 3,070,933).
Re: Claim 4, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including flanges on the manifold and nozzle (Figs. 1-2) except for clamping them. However, Carter teaches each of the manifold unit and the nozzle unit comprises a respective flange for connecting the units to each other, the ice cream extrusion system comprising a clamp band (205) arranged to interact with the flanges for connecting the manifold unit to the nozzle unit (Fig. 13, Col. 6 lines, 39-47, clamp for connecting disparate parts throughout the device).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a clamp band as taught by Carter, since Carter states in col. 6, lines 40-41 that such a modification provides for rapid coupling and uncoupling of separate parts.
Re: Claim 5, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including a support structure (1) to which at least one of the manifold unit or the nozzle unit is attached, the support structure comprising a part (6) that surrounds a periphery of at least one of the manifold unit or the nozzle unit (Depicted in Fig. 1-3) except for a ring. However, Carter teaches a support structure (240) to which at least one of the manifold unit (262) or the nozzle unit (248) is attached, the support structure comprising a ring that surrounds a periphery of at least one of the nozzle unit (Fig. 13, Col. 6 lines, 39-47, clamp for connecting disparate part).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a clamps with ring as taught by Carter, since Carter states in col. 6, lines 40-41 that such a modification provides a central piece for the disparate parts of the invention to rapidly couple and uncouple to, such that the whole invention does not need to be dismantled to replace or provide maintenance to only one of either the nozzle or manifold.
Re: Claim 6, Cammack as modified by Carter in the rejection of claim 5 above discloses the claimed invention including a manifold unit is attached to the ring by a first clamp, and the nozzle unit is attached to the ring by a second clamp (Carter: Fig. 10, depicts two separate clamps, Col. 6 lines, 39-47, clamp for connecting disparate parts).
Re: Claim 7, Cammack discloses the claimed invention except for a condensation collector. However, Carter teaches a condensation collector (222) is arranged around a periphery of the nozzle unit (215) (Fig. 14, 17), for collecting water that is formed by condensation on an outer surface of the nozzle unit (column 6, lines 66-74, collects water).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a condensation collector as taught by Carter, since Carter states in column 6, lines 66-74 that such a modification collect condensation of moisture in the air forming on the outside of the housing by virtue of the cold ice cream flowing therethrough and lowering the ambient temperature to below the dew point. This water of condensation would, otherwise, flow downwardly and fall into the receptacles along with the ice cream where Subsequent freezing of the water therein would degrade the product.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cammack et al. (US Patent No. 3,344,751) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Buter et al. (US 2001/0031303 A1).
Re: Claim 8, Cammack discloses the claimed invention except for the nozzle and manifolds made exclusively from plastic. However, Buter teaches each of the manifold unit (101) and the nozzle unit (102) are made of a plastic material (Para. 31, plastic material used for construction).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include making the parts of the invention of plastic as taught by Buter, since Buter states in para. 31 that such a modification provides a fine smooth surface finish of a food grade material, and that plastic provides a low cost, easily manufactured material to any shape, and further, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cammack et al. (US Patent No. 3,344,751) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anderson (US Patent No. 3,385,234).
Re: Claim 12, Cammack discloses the claimed invention including
a first ice cream freezer arranged to feed a first ice cream mass (40) to the ice cream extrusion system (Col. 5, lines 7-11, ice cream freezer feeding ice cream into device),
a second ice cream freezer arranged to feed a second ice cream mass (41) to the ice cream extrusion system (Col. 5, lines 7-11, ice cream freezer feeding second ice cream into device),
a cutting apparatus (49) arranged to cut ice cream mass that is extruded by the ice cream extrusion system into individual pieces (Col. 5, lines 60-66, cutting apparatus),
a freezing apparatus arranged to receive the individual pieces (Col. 5, lines 69-71, freezer to receive individual pieces), and
a packaging (51) arranged to provide package material around each individual piece, such that wrapped ice cream products are formed except for expressly stating a second freezer for the second ice cream and a packaging machine for wrapping packaging.
However, Anderson teaches additional freezers (20-22) for additional ice cream masses (Fig. 1a, Col. 2, line 63, separate freezers) and a packaging machine (39, 114-116) arranged to wrap package material around each individual piece, such that wrapped ice cream products are formed (Figs. 1a-b, Col. 6, lines 39-45, wrapping finished product).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include additional product freezers and a packaging machine as taught by Anderson, since Anderson states in col. 2, line 63 and col. 6, lines 25-30 that multiple freezers provide improved continuous feeding and easy refilling without the worry of cross contamination, and further, the packaging machine advantageously packages the novelty by folding the wrapping around the confection novelty automatically after dispensing.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. References cited on PTO-892 provide additional examples of high viscous material being dispensed through a manifold and out of nozzle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES P. CHEYNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 pm.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/CHARLES P. CHEYNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754