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
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. In this instance:
The air return port includes a reference character 212 within figure 2 however no port or opening is present at the end of the lead line.
The vent opening and closing device (claim 6 and [0061]).
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “500” is used in figure 5 to represent the air supply port which is number 600 from at least [0076]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: throughout the specification the phrase “air outlet 211” is used however as best as can be understood, from at least the discussion at [0054] the element 211 is an inlet relative to the ripening compartment.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The following limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses means or a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the means or generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
“air flow circulation assembly” includes the generic/nonce term “assembly” coupled with the function of “prompt air flow”. A return to the specification provides a fan frame and a fan ([0011]-[0013]). Therefor the limitation is interpreted as the same or equivalents thereof.
“vent opening and closing device” (claim 6) includes the generic/nonce term “device” coupled with the function of “vent opening and closing”. A return to the specification does not provide the device [0061].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
As discussed above “vent opening and closing device” is interpreted under §112(f), but the specification does not provide for the device.
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 1-10 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “outlet” in claim 1 is used by the claim in regard to “prompt air flow to enter the ripening space”. The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. Air enters a space via an inlet not an outlet.
Regarding claim 6, as discussed above “vent opening and closing device” is interpreted under §112(f), but the specification does not provide for the device.
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) 1-4 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klingshirn et al (US 9,546,808) in view of Shin et al (US 9,605,888).
Regarding claim 1, Klingshirn discloses a ripening compartment for a refrigerator, comprising:
a drawer (4) provided in a cabinet of the refrigerator in a drawable mode, an upper end of the drawer being open to form a top opening for taking and placing foods, and a rear wall plate of the drawer;
an upper cover plate (6) provided above the drawer, and configured to close the top opening of the drawer and define a ripening space together with the drawer when the drawer is completely pushed into the cabinet; and
an air flow circulation assembly (17) provided on a rear side of the rear wall plate of the drawer and configured to prompt air flow to enter the ripening space through an air outlet and then be blown out from the air return port (13 and 43).
Klingshirn lacks the outlet and return ports in the rear wall plate. Rather the outlet and return ports are in the upper cover plate. It has been held that the particular position of an element does not render a claim non-obvious when rearranging said element would not have modified the operation of the device. Further the particular location can be regarded as an obvious matter of design choice. MPEP 2144.04 VI. C. Moreover, Shin evidences a special atmosphere within a refrigerator drawer utilizing the rear wall for inlet and outlet air flows (522a and 522b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Klingshirn with the outlet and return ports in the rear wall plate as evidenced by Shin as a matter of mere design choice and moreover increases storage space in the vertical direction.
Regarding claim 2, Klingshirn and Shin further disclose the air flow circulation assembly comprises: a fan frame (Klingshirn schematically depicts a fan 17, as shown in Shin the fan 432 includes a frame therearound) provided on a rear side of the air outlet; and
a fan (17 of Klingshirn, corresponding to 432 of Shin) provided in the fan frame and configured to prompt the air flow in the ripening space to be blown out from the air return port and then fed back to the ripening space from the air outlet.
Regarding claim 3, Klingshirn and Shin further disclose the air return port is provided above the air outlet (Shin provides the air outlet 522a is below an air return port 522b as shown in figure 6); and the air flow circulation assembly further comprises: an air return cover (451 and 521 of Shin) extending forwards and upwards from a top of the fan frame to the air return port and configured to guide the air flow blown out from the air return port into the fan frame (the cover is a 3-dimensional structure and extends in all directions relative to the fan frame as shown in figures 5 and 6 of Shin).
Regarding claim 4, Klingshirn discloses the fan (17) is configured as an axial flow fan; an air guide portion (14) is provided at the air outlet, and the air guide portion is configured to obliquely downwards feed the air flow blown out by the axial flow fan into the ripening space.
Regarding claim 9, Klingshirn further discloses the upper cover plate comprises a top wall and a skirt formed by downward folding (shown in figures 1 and 2 the upper cover plate 6 includes a skirt extending vertically downward along a perimeter thereof), the skirt comprises a first skirt side wall and a second skirt side wall on two sides of the top wall and a skirt rear wall on a rear side of the top wall, each of the first skirt side wall and the second skirt side wall is in a wedge shape with a narrow front and a wide rear (shown in figures 1 and 2 the wedge shape corresponds to the wedge shape of the drawer), and the skirt rear wall protrudes backwards to form a refrigerating air supply port for conveying cooling air flow at a specified temperature into the ripening space (protrusion rearward shown at element 12); a first side wall plate and a second side wall plate on the two lateral sides of the drawer are correspondingly configured into high-front and low-rear structures matched with the first skirt side wall and the second skirt side wall, such that when the drawer is completely pushed into the cabinet, a bottom surface of the skirt abuts against top surfaces of the first side wall plate, the second side wall plate and the rear wall plate (complete pushed in position is shown in figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Klingshirn discloses a refrigerator, comprising:
a cabinet (1) having a refrigerating air duct (31) for providing cooling air flow defined therein; and
the ripening compartment for the refrigerator according to claim 1 provided within the cabinet (discussed above at claim 1);
wherein the refrigerating air duct is provided with at least one air supply port (47) for conveying the cooling air flow to the outside of the refrigerating air duct, and at least a part of the at least one air supply port is communicated with the refrigerating air supply port of the ripening compartment.
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klingshirn et al (US 9,546,808), in view of Shin et al (US 9,605,888), and in view of Kobayashi et al (JP2019-74273; translation attached)
Regarding claim 5, Klingshirn discloses a first vent (outlet of 47) communicated with a storage compartment of the refrigerator is formed in a side wall of the fan frame, so as to allow air flow in the storage compartment to be sucked into the fan frame from the first vent and enter the ripening space from the air outlet under an action of the fan (17);
Klingshirn lacks second vents as claimed. Kobayashi discloses front regions of side wall plates on both lateral sides of the drawer are provided with second vents (64)communicated with the storage compartment, so as to allow the air flow in the ripening space to flow into the storage compartment from the second vents under the action of the fan.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Klingshirn with the second vents as taught by Kobayashi in order to enhance air circulation.
Regarding claim 6, Klingshirn discloses a humidity sensor (19) for detecting a humidity within the ripening space; wherein a vent opening and closing device (48) is provided at the first air vent (47); the vent opening and closing device is configured to adjust an air flow area of the first vent according to the humidity, thereby changing a rate of air exchange between the ripening space and the storage compartment (7:5-21; the control of 14 and 48 is linked).
Regarding claim 7, Klingshirn as modified further discloses the air outlet is located in a middle of the rear wall plate of the drawer (522a shown in figure 6 of Shin as provided in modification above); a geometric center of the second vent is positioned higher than a geometric center of the air outlet (64 of Kobayashi as provided above includes outlets near a top of the side wall).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klingshirn et al (US 9,546,808), in view of Shin et al (US 9,605,888), and in view of Cauchy et al (US 6,295,820).
Regarding claim 8, Klingshirn, as modified, discloses the ripening compartment according to claim 1, including a rack (36) detachably provided in the drawer and configured to bear the foods, such that the air flow circulating in the ripening space flows in up-down directions and left-right directions of the foods.
Klingshirn lacks a tray
Cauchy discloses a compartment for produce including a rack (65) detachably provided in the drawer and configured to bear the foods, such that the air flow circulating in the ripening space flows in up-down directions and left-right directions of the foods; and
a tray (54) detachably provided below the rack and configured to collect juice dripping from the foods borne on the rack in a ripening process (6:1-14);
wherein the rack comprises a bearing surface and a support (supports 52 and/or 46 shown in figure 2), the bearing surface has a net structure (figure 4 shows perforations forming a net structure),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Klingshirn with the rack and tray as taught by Cauchy in order enhance air circulation and prevent produce being submerged in drained fluids.
Further regarding dimensions Klingshirn and Cauchy are silent concerning dimensions. It has been held that the optimization of a result-effective variable is obvious. In this instance bearing surface corresponds to storage area and height corresponds to storage height. Therefor because area and height are recognized as effecting the result of storage volumes; the value of 0.8-0.99 area and 1-3cm of height are not a product of innovation but of ordinary skill and is obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Piantong et al (US 2021/0278122 and CN106679269) inlet and outlet openings for refrigerator drawer.
Civanelli (US 8,365,549) air flow arrangement for refrigerator drawer
DeBoer (US 5,661,979) fruit refrigerator
Ritchie et al (US 7,685,837) fan assembly for refrigerator drawer
Bertolini et al (US 8,997,517) refrigerator drawer air flow
Mandel et al (US 6,170,276) air flow for refrigerator drawer
Park et al (US 10,718,552) refrigerator drawer air flow
Kim et al (US 8,028,538) refrigerator drawer air flow
Hernandez et al (US 9,182,168) refrigerator drawer air flow and dividers
Kim (US 10,436,494) refrigerator drawer air flow
Yu et al (US 11,859,894) fan assembly for refrigerator drawer
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R ZERPHEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5965. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-4:00 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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 5712707740. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R ZERPHEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights