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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 1-3, 5, 7-19, and 21 in the reply filed on 01/12/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground that the two inventions share the same common elements. This is not found persuasive because there is no special technical feature that makes contribution over the prior arts.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 9,12, 14, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5 recites “ or frying oil”. This is unnecessary because the replacement oil would be frying oil. Applicant may have meant “fresh oil”.
Claims 9, 10, 12 and 14 recites “the total polar material” and “the amount of free fatty acids”, which lacks proper antecedent basis. Should read “a total polar material” and “an amount of free fatty acids”.
Claim 19 recites “the optical sensor”. Should read “an optical sensor”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 10, 13 and 16 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 10 recites the limitation “the pump chamber”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because there is no pump chamber in claim 5. Pump chamber is not brought in until claim 3.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the amount of total polar material of the frying oil in the vessel and/or the amount of free fatty acids ”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because this limitation is not in claim 5 but brought in until claim 8.
Claim 13 recites a storage tank”. This is indefinite as claim 1 sets forth “at least one storage tank” which also happens to have the additional sensor. Claim 13 recites “a storage tank”. It is unclear if the storage tank of claim 13 refers to the same one in claim 1 or is another storage tank without the sensor.
Claim 16 recites “the guided wave radar sensor”, however Claim 1 recites a “first” sensor and “an additional” sensor. It is unclear if the “the guided wave radar sensor” refers to either of the sensors of claim 1, to both, or to another sensor.
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, 8-9, 11-16, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iassonova (WO patent No. 2020139952) in view of Blodt (US Patent No. 20220283210).
Regarding Claim 1, Iassonova teaches a food processing line comprising a fryer for frying food products, the food processing line comprising (Paragraph 3, Food frying apparatus): a frying vessel for accommodating a frying oil (Figure 1, Oil Vat 108 contains oil for frying), at least one storage tank arranged in fluid communication with the frying vessel (Figure 1, Oil Source 104 in communication with Oil Vat 108), a first sensor (Figure 1 and Paragraph 36-37, Measurement transmitter 124 includes a capacitive sensor connected to it) arranged in the frying vessel (Figure 1 and Paragraph 36-37, Measurement transmitter 124 with capacitive sensor connected to it may be located in the oil Vat 108), an analysis unit for determining a permittivity of the frying oil accommodated in the frying vessel based on measurement data of the sensor (Figure 1 and Paragraph 36-37, Measurement transmitter 124 includes a capacitive sensor which can sense permittivity of oil and transmits data to Control unit 102), at least one additional guided wave radar sensor in the at least one storage tank (Figure 1, Oil level sensor 126 connected to the Oil Source 104), a control unit that is configured to control: i) an inflow of replacement frying oil into the frying vessel from the at least one storage tank that is arranged in fluid communication with the frying vessel (Figure 1 and Paragraph 39, Control Unit 102 uses the Oil level sensor 126 to control the inflow of the of fresh oil from Oil Source 104 to Oil Vat 108); and/or ii) an outflow of used frying oil from the frying vessel to the at least one storage tank that is arranged in fluid communication with the frying vessel (Figure 1 and Paragraph 39, Control Unit 102 uses the Oil level sensor 128 to control the outflow of the oil from Oil Vat 104 to waste Oil 106), based on the measurements of the sensor and based on the measurements of the at least one additional sensor which is arranged in the storage tank for frying oil (Figure 1 and Paragraph 36-38, Measurement transmitter, which includes multiple sensors connected to it, 124 and Oil level sensor 126 transmits data to Control unit 102 to control inflow and outflow of oil).
Iassonova fails to teach that the sensors are a guided wave radar sensor.
Blodt teaches measuring device for determining the dielectric value of a liquid medium (Abstract and Figure 1, Measuring device for dielectric value of a liquid medium) where the sensor is a wave guide sensors (Figure 1, The measuring device with two waveguides 11, 12 reads as radar sensor).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted Iassonova’s capacitive sensor with Blodt’s radar sensor since both sensor can sense the liquid’s dielectric value (MPEP 2144.06).
Regarding Claim 8, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the analysis unit is configured to determine an amount of total polar material of the frying oil in the vessel and/or an amount of free fatty acids in the frying oil in the vessel depending on the determined permittivity (Iassonova: Paragraph 35-37, Control 102 uses measurement transmitter 124, which can sense permittivity, to measure Free Fatty Acid value and Total Polar Material in the oil).
Regarding Claim 7, Iassonova teaches that the analysis unit is configured to determine the permittivity of the frying oil in the vessel based on measurement data (Paragraph 35-37, Control 102 uses Capacitive sensor, which can sense permittivity, to measure Free Fatty Acid value and Total Polar Material in the oil).
Iassonova fails to teach that the first guided wave radar sensor data is associated with a signal reflection at an interface between air and the frying oil.
Blodt teaches measuring device for determining the dielectric value of a liquid medium (Abstract and Figure 1, Measuring device for dielectric value of a liquid medium) where the first guided wave radar sensor data is associated with a signal reflection at an interface between air and the frying oil (Figure 1 and Paragraph 22-26, The measuring device with two waveguides 11, 12 reads as radar sensor and detects reflected signals from the liquid medium).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted Iassonova’s capacitive sensor with Blodt’s radar sensor since both sensor can sense the liquid’s dielectric value (MPEP 2144.06).
Regarding Claim 9, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the analysis unit is configured to determine the amount of total polar material of the frying oil in the vessel and/or the amount of free fatty acids in the frying oil in the vessel depending on predetermined calibration data (Iassonova: Paragraph 35-38 and 40, Control 102 uses capacitive sensor, to measure Free Fatty Acid value and Total Polar Material in the oil and may instantiate an analytical model defining an oil quality index for predicting a progression of such degradation. historical data such as indicative of time of day, time of month, time of year, holidays or times relative to holidays, or seasonal information can be provided as attribute information to the model, or such information can be logged in relation to other indicia of oil degradation for use in future application of the model, such as to provide predictive capability).
Regarding Claim 11, Iassonova teaches that the analysis unit is configured to determine an amount of foreign matter in the frying vessel or cleaning liquid or water, depending on the determined permittivity (Iassonova: Paragraph 35-37, Control 102 uses capacitive sensor, which can sense permittivity, to measure Free Fatty Acid value and Total Polar Material in the oil).
Regarding Claim 12, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the food processing lines comprise a memory unit configured to store a temporal course of the permittivity and/or the amount of total polar material and/or the amount of free fatty acids (Iassonova: Paragraph 34, Monitored sensed information, such as total polar material and free fatty acids, can be stored and retrieved, this reads as control 102 having a memory).
Regarding Claim 13, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the analysis unit is configured to determine a filling level of the frying oil in the frying vessel and/or in a storage tank that is arranged in fluid communication with the frying vessel based on measurements of the first guided wave radar sensor (Iassonova: Figure 1 and Paragraph 35 Control 102 uses the Level Sensor 110 and 126 at the Oil Vat 8 and Oil Source 104 to monitor and control oil levels).
Regarding Claim 14, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the analysis unit is configured to generate a warning if the permittivity exceeds a predetermined threshold and/or if the amount of total polar material exceeds a predetermined threshold and/or if the amount of free fatty acids exceeds a predetermined threshold (Iassonova: Paragraph 40 and 51, Control 102 may generate a notification if the evaluated oil quality index exceeds a threshold or is outside a specified range, which reads as the oil exceeding a threshold amount of free fatty acids and total polar material).
Regarding Claim 15, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the analysis unit is configured to predict an end of frying oil lifetime at which the permittivity will exceed a predetermined threshold (Iassonova: Paragraph 40-42 and 51, Control 102 may remove oil if the oil quality index from an analytical model exceeds a threshold or is outside a specified range).
Regarding Claim 16, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the analysis unit is configured to generate a warning based on the measurements of the guided wave radar sensor if the predicted end of lifetime falls within a predetermined time window for processing a batch of food products (Iassonova: Paragraph 40-42 and 51, Control 102 may generate a notification if the evaluated oil quality index exceeds a threshold or is outside a specified range, which reads as the oil exceeding a threshold amount corresponding to end of lifetime).
Regarding Claim 21, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the food processing line comprises an optical sensor for determining the color of the frying oil in the frying vessel or in the at least one storage tank (Iassonova: Paragraph 37, Measurement transmitter 124 also includes an Optical sensor used to detect the color of the oil in the oil vat), wherein the control unit is configured to control an inflow of replacement frying oil into the frying vessel from the at least one storage tank that is arranged in fluid communication with the frying vessel (Iassonova: Figure 1 and Paragraph 39-42, Control Unit 102 uses the Oil level sensor 126, and optical sensor to control the inflow of the of fresh oil from Oil Source 104 to Oil Vat 108); and/or an outflow of used frying oil from the frying vessel to the at least one storage tank that is arranged in fluid communication tithe frying vessel additionally based on the measurements of the optical sensor (Iassonova: Figure 1 and Paragraph 39-42, Control Unit 102 uses the Oil level sensor 128 and optical sensor to control the outflow of the of oil from Oil Vat 104 to waste Oil 106).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iassonova (WO patent No. 2020139952) in view of Blodt (US Patent No. 20220283210) and further in view of Gerwen (US Patent No. 20220218150).
Regarding Claim 2, Iassonova in view of Blodt fails to teach that the fryer is configured for continuously frying the food products, and comprises at least one conveyor for conveying the food products to be fried through the frying vessel.
Gerwen teaches a fryer (Abstract, Fryer) where the fryer is configured for continuously frying the food products, and comprises at least one conveyor for conveying the food products to be fried through the frying vessel (Paragraph 33, Apparatus has multiple conveyors to feed product into fryer).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Iassonova in view of Blodt to incorporate a conveyor as stated in Gerwen. The Conveyors have nonstick coatings to allow the food product to be removed and fried safely without sticking (Paragraph 33, Non-Stick Conveyors).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iassonova (WO patent No. 2020139952) in view of Blodt (US Patent No. 20220283210) and further in view of Palazzo (WO Patent No. 2020191150).
Regarding Claim 3, Iassonova in view of Blodt fails to teach that the fryer comprises a pump chamber which is part of the frying vessel and the first guided wave radar sensor is arranged in the pump chamber.
Palazzo teaches a system for transporting and measuring the quality of cooking oil exiting a fryer unit (Abstract, A system for transporting and measuring the quality of cooking oil exiting a fryer unit ) where the fryer comprises a pump chamber (Figure 6 and Paragraph 37, Pump 52 with in lets and outlets reads as a pump chamber) which is part of the frying vessel (Figure 6, Pump 52 is a part of the fryer unit) and the sensor is arranged in the pump chamber (Figure 6 and Paragraph 37, Pump 52 with in lets and outlets has Oil Quality Sensor, 58 and 60).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Iassonova to incorporate the arrangement of the pump chamber and the sensor as stated in Palazzo. Both of the inlet and outlet of the pump 52 may be fitted with a sensor to measure oil quality going in and out (Paragraph 37, Sensor).
Claims 5, 10, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iassonova (WO patent No. 2020139952) in view of Blodt (US Patent No. 20220283210) and further in view of Robertson (US Patent No. 20160033463).
Regarding Claim 5, Iassonova in view of Blodt teaches that the food processing line comprises a first storage tank that comprises a first type of replacement oil, or fresh oil (Figure 1, Oil Source 104 in communication with Oil Vat 108, contains fresh oil), and a third storage tank that comprises a third type of replacement oil which cannot be used anymore (Figure 1, Waste Oil 106 holds unusable oil).
Iassonova in view of Blodt fails to teach a second storage tank that comprises a second type of replacement oil, or frying oil, which is still usable
Robertson teaches a fryer (Abstract, Fryer) where the second storage tank that comprises a second type of replacement oil, or frying oil, which is still usable (Figure 1 and 5 and Paragraph 26, Filter Pan 40 which as a filter medium acts as storage for recycled oil that can be reused).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Iassonova in view of Blodt to incorporate a second storage as stated in Robertson. The Filter pan is able to collect oil from multiple different frying pots for recycling (Paragraph 28-29, Filter Pan).
Regarding Claim 10, Iassonova in view of Blodt and Robertson teaches that the fryer comprises a temperature sensor for measuring the temperature of the frying oil in the frying vessel or in the pump chamber (Iassonova: Figure 1, Temperature Sensor 112 in Oil Vat 108), wherein the analysis unit is configured to determine the amount of total polar material of the frying oil in the vessel and/or the amount of free fatty acids in the frying oil in the vessel depending on the measured temperature of the frying oil (Iassonova: Paragraph 5 and 38-39, Control 102 uses data from temperature sensor 112 to control oil degradation which includes monitoring the Free Fatty Acid value and Total Polar Material in the oil).
Regarding Claim 18, Iassonova in view of Blodt fails to teach that the food processing lines comprise an external filter which is fluidly connected to the frying vessel.
Robertson teaches a fryer (Abstract, Fryer) where the food processing lines comprise an external filter which is fluidly connected to the frying vessel (Figure 1 and 5 and Paragraph 26, Filter Pan 40 which as a filter medium and is external to the Fryer vat but connected fluidly).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Iassonova in view of Blodt to incorporate a filter as stated in Robertson. The Filter pan contains a pre-filtering medium like a sieve that removes large particles before filtration cycle (Paragraph 26, Filter Pan).
Regarding Claim 19, Iassonova in view of Blodt and Robertson teaches that the control unit is further configured to control the external filter based on the measurements of the first guided wave radar sensor and/or the optical sensor (Iassonova: Paragraph 56-57, Optical sensor and the capacitor sensor is used to obtain information indicative of oil degradation to activate filtration).
The combination of Iassonova and Robertson proposes using the external filter of Robertson along with the filtration system of Iassonova. Iassonova teaches using data collected from the sensors to obtain information regarding the frying oil degradation to control the filtration process. Robertson teaches using an external filter. The combination involves integrating the external filter into the filtration process and controlling when the oil is filtered through by using sensor data.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iassonova (WO patent No. 2020139952) in view of Blodt (US Patent No. 20220283210) and further in view of Fauveau (US Patent No. 7334451).
Regarding Claim 17, Iassonova in view of Blodt fails to teach that the first guided wave radar sensor comprises a stilling well.
Fauveau teaches a system and method for monitoring fluid levels in containers (Col 1 Line 5-9, System and method for monitoring fluid levels in containers) where the first guided wave radar sensor comprises a stilling well (Figure 1-2 and Col 3 Line 1-5, Waveguide 3 may be positioned in a stilling well).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Iassonova in view of Blodt to incorporate a stilling well as stated in Fauveau. The stilling well ensures accuracy of the sensor by reducing liquid turbulence (Col 3 Line 1-11, Stilling well).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMZEH HICHAM AMIN whose telephone number is (571)272-4235. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 am - 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, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/HAMZEH HICHAM AMIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JUSTIN C DODSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights