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 (IDS) submitted on 02/29/2024 was filed on or after the mailing date of the application.
The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A in the reply filed on 09/12/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09/12/2025.
Claims 1-6 and 9-14 remain pending in the application.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed on 07/21/2023 and 11/29/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 202310897174.1 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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. Therefore,
Regarding Claim 2, the “first valve member" and “second valve member” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
“… The present invention provides” is improper . Please amend the abstract to remove the recitation of “The present invention provides,” for clarity.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless 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 a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Regarding claim 2, the recitation of claim limitation “first valve member" in at least claim 2.
Regarding claim 2, the recitation of claim limitation “second valve member” in at least claim 2.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
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.
Claims 2-6 are 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.
Regarding Claim 2, the recitation of “a first valve member” and “a second valve member” is not described in the disclosure such that one skilled in the art would recognize applicant’s possession of the claimed subject matter.
Claim 2 further recites the limitations “a first valve member capable of opening or closing the first connector is slidingly fitted within the first connector in an axial direction; a second valve member capable of opening or closing the second connector is slidingly fitted within the second connector in the axial direction; and when the second connector is matingly spliced with the first connector, the second valve member abuts against the first valve member to cause the second valve member and the first valve member to move axially simultaneously to bring the first connector and the second connector into communication” in at least claim 2. The term “member” invokes a claim interpretation governed under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph), which requires a review of the specification to determine the appropriate structure, material or act to carry out the claimed limitation.
However, the specification as originally filed, fails to describe a corresponding structure or technique for “a first valve member” and “a second valve member”.
A mere restatement of the function does not suffice as a statement of structure. Thus, it does not appear that applicant had possession of the claimed invention because the specification does not disclose a structure which is “a first valve member” and “a second valve member”.
When a description of the structure, material or act is not provided or is not sufficient to perform the entire claimed function, or no association between the structure and the claimed function can be found in the specification, the written description fails to clearly define the boundaries of the claim
Therefore, the claims fail the written description requirement and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
Claims 3-6 are rejected to because of dependency from a rejected to claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 2-6 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.
Regarding Claim 2, limitation “a first valve member” and “a second valve member” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function “a first valve member capable of opening or closing the first connector is slidingly fitted within the first connector in an axial direction; a second valve member capable of opening or closing the second connector is slidingly fitted within the second connector in the axial direction; and when the second connector is matingly spliced with the first connector, the second valve member abuts against the first valve member to cause the second valve member and the first valve member to move axially simultaneously to bring the first connector and the second connector into communication.”
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 3-6 are rejected to because of dependency from a rejected to claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 14 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated Tarr et al. (US2019/0316824A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Tarr teaches an ice maker [10] and Tarr teaches comprising:
an ice making body [12] in which an ice making assembly [50] and a water pump [32] configured to supply water to the ice making assembly [0032-0034 “Reservoir 34 and third storage volume 36 thereof may receive and contain water to be provided to an ice maker 50 for the production of ice”] are mounted [fig. 2], wherein a first accommodating cavity [13] is provided in the ice making body [fig. 11, see also fig. 9 showing (24) being removable and insertable; 0062], and the first accommodating cavity [13] is formed with a first insertion port on a side wall of the ice making body [fig. 9 clearly showing a first insertion port on a side wall of the ice making body, where 24 is inserted to (12)];
a first connector [162B] connected to a cavity wall [fig. 11 clearly showing 162B connected to a cavity wall of the first accommodating cavity] of the first accommodating cavity [0067; 13], wherein the first connector [162B] is in communication with a water inlet end [31] of the water pump [0032 “flow through a conduit to and through pump”];
a water box [24] with an open top [208 see fig. 10] and having a water holding inner cavity [26] configured to hold water flowing from the ice making assembly [0042 “Drain aperture 114, may advantageously drain melt water away from first storage volume 16” see also fig. 2 where (114) clearly drains into inner cavity (26)], wherein the water box [24] can be inserted inwardly or detached outwardly from the first accommodating cavity [13] through the first insertion port [0059 “into and out of internal volume”; see also fig. 9]; and
a second connector [149B] connected to the water box [24] and in communication with the inner cavity [26] of the water box [0064 “selectively fills or blocks fluid outlet”; fig. 11 clearly showing (149B) in communication with the inner cavity], wherein the second connector [149B] is adapted to the first connector [fig. 11-12: see also para. 0067]; and
wherein when the water box [24] is inserted [0062 “inserted further into appliance”] into the first accommodating cavity [13], the second connector [149B] is matingly spliced with the first connector [162B] to bring into communication so that the water box [24] is in communication with the water inlet [31] end of the water pump [0064 “ selectively fills or blocks fluid outlet 31”; see also fig. 2 where (31) is in clear communication with the water pump]; and
when the water box [24] is detached from the first accommodating cavity [0067 “a non-mounted condition”], the first connector [162B] and the second connector [149B] are simultaneously in a closed state [0067 “preventing undesired leaks” para. 0067 disclosing that the first and second connector are in a closed state which prevents undesirable leaks].
Regarding Claim 14, Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 1 and Tarr teaches wherein a water tank [16] is connected within the ice making body [12] below the ice making assembly [see fig. 2 where 16 is below the ice making assembly which is why (72) is sloped away from the ice making assembly in the downward V direction], and the water tank [16] is configured to collect water flowing from the ice making assembly [0030 “temperature greater than the melting point” see also fig. 2 where water from the ice making assembly would travel into (16)], and a bottom [fig. 2; 114] of the water tank [16] is in communicated with the water inlet end [31] of the water pump [32] through a pipe [170a; see also fig. 2 where after the water passes through (114 where 170A is) the water flows to 31 and then to 32 thus (16) is in communication with the water inlet end and the water pump through a pipe].
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.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tarr et al. (US20190316824A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Hatanaka (US5555743A).
Regarding Claim 2, Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 1 and Tarr teaches wherein a second valve member [0064-0065: components of 149B] capable of opening or closing the second connector [0064 “selectively fills or blocks fluid outlet”] is slidingly fitted within the second connector in the axial direction [0065 “guide shaft 166B slidably disposed”; see also figs. 11-12 showing an axial sliding direction].
Tarr does not explicitly teach a first valve member capable of opening or closing the first connector is slidingly fitted within the first connector in an axial direction; and
when the second connector is matingly spliced with the first connector, the second valve member abuts against the first valve member to cause the second valve member and the first valve member to move axially simultaneously to bring the first connector and the second connector into communication.
However, Hatanaka teaches a first valve member [fig. 7; 59] capable of opening or closing the first connector [59 corresponding to 162b of Tarr] is slidingly fitted within the first connector [59] in an axial direction [col. 9; lines 23-33 “to enable up and down movement”]; and
when the second connector [ 40 corresponding to 149B of Tarr] is matingly spliced with the first connector [59], the second valve member [39 corresponding to 149B of Tarr] abuts against the first valve member [59] to cause the second valve member [39] and the first valve member [59] to move axially simultaneously [col. 9 line 59-col. 10 line 22 “pushing up”] to bring the first connector [59] and the second connector [39] into communication [see figs. 7-8].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Tarr to have a first valve member capable of opening or closing the first connector is slidingly fitted within the first connector in an axial direction; and when the second connector is matingly spliced with the first connector, the second valve member abuts against the first valve member to cause the second valve member and the first valve member to move axially simultaneously to bring the first connector and the second connector into communication in view of the teachings of Hatanaka where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures an ice maker that has a first and second valve member that abut each other moving in an axial way to open and close a first connector and be in communication with each other which one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize creates a better leak proof barrier.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tarr et al. (US20190316824A1), Hatanaka (US5555743A) and in view of Han et al. (KR2020/0077091A).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 2 and Tarr teaches the first accommodating cavity [13], the cavity wall [fig. 11], the water box [24], the second connector [149B], the first connector [Hatanaka; 59]
Modified Tarr does not explicitly teach a boss extending into the first accommodating cavity is provided on the cavity wall of the first accommodating cavity, a center of the boss has a central through hole provided in a horizontal direction, and a mounting portion configured to connect the first connector is provided on the boss; and a concave cavity which is recessed and into which the boss is inserted is provided on a side wall of the water box, an insertion portion which is hollow and matingly spliced with the central through hole is connected to the concave cavity, and the second connector is connected within a central hole of the insertion portion.
However, Han teaches a boss [WBH] extending into [Fig. 3 where clearly WBH is extending into the first accommodating cavity] the first accommodating cavity [fig. 3 showing the cavity corresponding to 13 of Tarr] is provided on the cavity wall [fig. 3 clearly having a cavity wall corresponding to fig. 11 of Tarr] of the first accommodating cavity [fig. 3 corresponding to 13 of Tarr], a center of the boss [fig. 3 where WBH has a center where WS is] has a central through hole [where WS clearly has a central through whole] provided in a horizontal direction [fig. 3], and a mounting portion [WS] configured to connect the first connector [fig. 3 showing a first connector inside of WS which corresponds to 59 of Hatanaka] is provided on the boss [WBH]; and
a concave cavity [fig. 2; 144 clearly showing a concave cavity] which is recessed [fig. 2] and into which the boss [WBH] is inserted is provided on a side wall [fig. 2 clearly showing 144 on a side wall of the water box] of the water box [140 corresponding to 24 of Tarr], an insertion portion [0042 “connected to the water supply connection”] which is hollow [fig. 2 clearly showing that 144 is hollow] and matingly spliced with the central through hole [WS] is connected to the concave cavity [144], and the second connector [CV corresponding to 149B of Tarr] is connected within a central hole [fig. 2 where CV has a central hole] of the insertion portion [Fig. 2 where CV clearly has a central hole in 144; see also fig. 6 showing the valve in CV].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Tarr teaching with Han by combining a boss extending into the first accommodating cavity is provided on the cavity wall of the first accommodating cavity, a center of the boss has a central through hole provided in a horizontal direction, and a mounting portion configured to connect the first connector is provided on the boss; and a concave cavity which is recessed and into which the boss is inserted is provided on a side wall of the water box, an insertion portion which is hollow and matingly spliced with the central through hole is connected to the concave cavity, and the second connector is connected within a central hole of the insertion portion where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures an ice maker with a boss in the first accommodating cavity on the wall a central through whole in the boss which receives a concave cavity from the water box connecting the first and second connectors which one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date would recognize allows for easy installation of the water box.
Regarding Claim 4, modified Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 3 and Hatanaka teaches wherein the first connector [59] comprises a valve casing [Fig. 7; 55 and the inside of 25 which is clearly encasing (59)] connected to the mounting portion [Han; where WS clearly has a mounting portion], a first valve stem [60] is slidingly fitted within the valve casing in a horizontal direction [col. 9; lines 23-33 “movement” it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the valve stem can be in any orientation ], a first valve core [61] capable of opening or closing [col. 9. Lines 30-32] the central through hole [Hans; WS] is connected to the first valve stem [fig.7], and one end of the first valve stem [61] is provided in the central through hole [Han; WS];
a first elastic member [64] is sheathed on the first valve stem [fig. 7 showing (64) sheathed on (60)], and the first elastic member [64] is configured to make the first valve core [61] always have a movement tendency to close [col. 9; lines 50-58] the central through hole [Hans; WS];
the second connector [Tarr; 149B] comprises a second valve stem [Tarr; 166B] slidingly fitted [Tarr; 0065 “guide shaft 166B slidably disposed”] within the central hole [Hans; CV] of the insertion portion [Hans; 0042], a second valve core [Tarr; 150B] capable of opening or closing [Tarr; 0064 “selectively fills or blocks fluid outlet”] the central hole [Hans; CV] is connected to the second valve stem [Tarr; fig. 11], a second elastic member [Tarr; 152B] is sheathed on the second valve stem [Tarr; fig. 11 clearly showing (152B) sheathed on (166B)], and the second elastic member [Tarr; 152B] is configured to make the second valve core [Tarr; 150B] always have a movement tendency to close [Tarr; 0066 “urge plug 150B toward fluid outlet”] the central hole [Hans; CV];
when the water box [Tarr; 24] is inserted into the first accommodating cavity [Tarr; 0064 “returned/mounted”], the second valve stem [Tarr; 150B] abuts against the first valve stem [60] to cause the second valve core [Tarr; 150B] to open [Tarr; 0064 “Water may be permitted to freely pass through”] the central hole [Hans; CV] and cause the first valve core [61] to open [col. 9; lines 65-67] the central through hole [Hans; WS]; and
when the water box [Tarr; 24] is detached [Tarr; 0064 “non-mounted”] from the first accommodating cavity [Tarr; 13], the second valve core [Tarr; 150B] closes [Tarr; 0064 “without spilling or leaking” indicating a closed state] the central hole [Hans; CV], and the first valve core [61] closes [col. 9; lines 51-54 “closes the water exit portion”] the central through hole [Hans; WS].
Regarding Claim 5, modified Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 4 and Hatanaka teaches wherein the first elastic member [64] has a stiffness coefficient greater than a stiffness coefficient [where fig. 8 shows that 64 compresses less than 42 which corresponds to 152B of Tarr indicating that the first elastic member has a greater stiffness coefficient than the second elastic member] of the second elastic member [Tarr; 152B].
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tarr et al. (US20190316824A1), Hatanaka (US5555743A), Han et al. (KR2020/0077091A) and in view of Kawahira et al. (GB2271838A) and further in view of Zhang et al. (CN114646160A).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 4 and Hatanaka teaches wherein an annular limit step [fig. 7 where (55) and (63) meet] against the first valve core [61] is provided on an inner wall [fig. 7 clearly showing 55 being on an inner wall of a central through hole] of the central through hole [Hans; WS], and the central hole [Hans; CV] the second valve core [Tarr 150B].
Hatanaka does not explicitly teach a first annular sealing portion is provided on the annular limit step and a second annular sealing portion against the central hole is provided on the second valve core.
However, Kawahira teaches a first annular sealing portion [fig. 18; 117] is provided on the annular limit step [fig. 18; what 177 is attached to that meets 65 corresponds to where 55 and 63 meet of Hatanaka].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Tarr teaching with Kawahira by combining a first annular sealing portion is provided on the annular limit step where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures an ice maker that has additional sealing which further prevents leaks [Kawahira; 0060]
Further, Zhang teaches a second annular sealing portion [23] against the central hole [21 corresponding to CV of Hans] is provided on the second valve core [22 corresponding to 150B of Tarr].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Tarr teaching with Zhang by combining a second annular sealing portion against the central hole is provided on the second valve core where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures an ice maker having a second annular sealing portion against the central hole that is provided on the second valve core making it very convenient to install and disassemble, and facilitating cleaning of the discharge structure, making it cleaner and more hygienic [Zhang; n0020].
Claim(s) 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tarr et al. (US20190316824A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Iwanami et al. (WO2022206669A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 1 and Tarr teaches further comprising a makeup water tank [34], wherein a top [fig. 3; where 13 provides a top] of the ice making body [12] is provided with a third accommodating cavity [13], a bottom [40] of the makeup water tank [34] is provided with a fourth connector [42] in communication with an inner cavity [36] of the makeup water tank [0034 “water may be flowed, such as through an opening 42 and through suitable conduits, from third storage volume 36”]; and the water inlet end [31] and the water pump [32]
Tarr does not explicitly teach a third insertion port is provided on the third accommodating cavity, the makeup water tank is movably inserted into the third accommodating cavity through the third insertion port, a bottom of the third accommodating cavity is provided with a third connector, the third connector is in communication with the water inlet end of the water pump and the fourth connector are brought into communication when the makeup water tank is inserted into the third accommodating cavity.
However, Iwanami teaches a third insertion port [fig. 8A where (50) is inserted] is provided on the third accommodating cavity [2 corresponding to 13 of Tarr], the makeup water tank [50 corresponding to 34 of Tarr] is movably inserted [0057 “is inserted”] into the third accommodating cavity [2 corresponding to 13 of Tarr] through the third insertion port [see fig. 2A], a bottom [0058 “inlet P relative to the connection part”] of the third accommodating cavity [2 corresponding to 13 of Tarr] is provided with a third connector [P], the third connector [P] is in communication with the water inlet end [ 10 corresponding to 31 of Tarr] of the water pump [12 corresponding to 32 of Tarr] and the fourth connector [52 corresponding to 42 of Tarr] are brought into communication when the makeup water tank [50 corresponding to 34 of Tarr] is inserted into the third accommodating cavity [ 0073 “needs to be connected”].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Tarr to have a third insertion port is provided on the third accommodating cavity, the makeup water tank is movably inserted into the third accommodating cavity through the third insertion port, a bottom of the third accommodating cavity is provided with a third connector, the third connector is in communication with the water inlet end of the water pump and the fourth connector are brought into communication when the makeup water tank is inserted into the third accommodating cavity in view of the teachings of Iwanami where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures an ice maker with a makeup water tank that is movably inserted into an accommodating cavity through an insertion port where at the bottom of the accommodating cavity is a connector which is in communication with the water inlet of the water pump and another connector that is situated on the makeup water tank which makes installation easier and provides reliable positioning for the liquid inlet [Iwanami; 0097].
Regarding Claim 10, modified Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 9 and Iwanami teaches wherein a guide portion [38A] extending in a vertical direction and bulging outward [see fig. 8a where 38A are extending in a vertical direction and bulging outward] is provided on a side wall [Fig. 8A where 4A is part of the side wall of the third accommodating cavity]of the third accommodating cavity [2], a guide groove [see drawing I below which a recreation of Iwanami fig. 8B] which is recessed [Drawing I clearly showing the guide groove being recessed from the edge of the main body of (50)] and matingly spliced with the guide portion [0074; “engages with the water storage tank”] is provided on an outer wall of the makeup water tank [fig. 8B where clearly the guide groove is on an outer wall of (50)], and a lower end of the guide groove penetrates the bottom of the makeup water tank [see Drawing I below].
PNG
media_image1.png
620
846
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[Drawing I a recreation of fig. 8B of Iwanami]
Regarding Claim 11, modified Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 10 and Iwanami teaches wherein both sides of the guide portion [38A] are provided with clamping plates [see Drawing I] which bulge outward and extend in a length direction of the guide portion [fig. 8B where clamping plates bulge outward (the bulge out at the ends of 38A) and extend in a length direction of the guide portion (the clamp plates extend in the same direction as 38A)]; and
clamping grooves [see Drawing I] in which the clamping plates [see Drawing I] are matingly clamped are provided on both inner side walls of the guide groove [fig. 8B where clamp plates are provided on both sides of the inner side walls of the guide groove].
Regarding Claim 12, modified Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 11 and Iwanami teaches wherein the clamping plates [see Drawing I] are arranged as wedge-shaped clamping plates having a thin upper end and a thick lower end [see Drawing I], and the clamping grooves are arranged as wedge-shaped clamping grooves having a wide lower end and a narrow upper end [see Drawing I].
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tarr et al. (US20190316824A1), Iwanami et al. (WO2022206669A1) Kim et al. (US6041607A) and in view of Kim et al. (US6041607A).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Tarr teaches the ice maker according to claim 9 and Iwanami teaches the pipe [10] and the third connector [P].
Modified Tarr does not explicitly teach a solenoid valve is connected to a pipe through which the third connector is in communication with the water pump to control on/off of the pipe.
However Kim teaches a solenoid valve [225] is connected to a pipe [230] through which the third connector [265 which corresponds to P of Iwanami] is in communication with the water pump to control on/off of the pipe [col. 5; lines 53-66 “Accordingly, the liquid is introduced”].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Tarr teaching with Kim by combining a solenoid valve is connected to a pipe through which the third connector is in communication with the water pump to control on/off of the pipe where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures an ice maker that has a solenoid valve to control on/off of the pipe which allows for a quick, reliable and controlled flow of water.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adam D Moore whose telephone number is (703)756-1932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 09:00AM-07:00PM (Eastern).
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (571) 270-5054. 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.
/ADAM DORREL MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/ELIZABETH J MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763