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 .
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 6 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 recites “wherein the ice making assembly being formed integral to the ice holding bin so that the ice falls directly into the ice holding bin negates a need for a barback employee to physically transport the ice from the ice making assembly to the bar for use by the bartender” and should recite “wherein the ice making assembly being formed integral to the ice holding bin so that the ice falls directly into the ice holding bin - - .
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.
Claim(s) 1-12 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1-3, 7-9, and 12 recite “standard bar”. The term “standard bar” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “standard bar” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim(s) 2-6 and 8-11 are rejected to as being dependent from a rejected claim.
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.
(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) 7-8 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rand et al. (US 2006/0191285).
Per claim 7, Rand teaches a method for making ice and dispensing the ice directly into a bartenders ice bin for immediate use in making one or more drinks, comprising the steps of:
making ice continuously in an ice making assembly having a cold element and a water source (“The ice maker 72 can be any suitable conventional standard or clear automated ice maker, such as that disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,872,317, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated by reference. The ice maker 72 is connected to a water supply line and as it produces ice the "cubes" fall and are collected in the ice bin 70. The ice bin 70 moves with the freezer drawer 28 so that the ice cubes can be accessed easily”, para. 0033);
dropping the ice through an ice outlet aperture (see annotated figure above of figure 2 of US4,872,317 (incorporated by reference)) of the ice making assembly so that the ice falls directly into a recessed compartment of an insulated ice holding bin (70,14) that is positioned underneath a standard bar (“under-counter cabinet”, para. 0028);
storing the ice in the insulated ice holding bin for immediate use by a bartender to make one or more drinks (“The freezer drawer 28 preferably holds an ice bin 70 which has a stepped bottom nested in the drawer bin 39 below an ice maker 72”, para. 0033).
Per claim 8, Rand meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 7. Further, Rand teaches wherein the ice making assembly is not visible to one or more patrons seated at the standard bar (when the ice making assembly is positioned under the counter the ice making assembly is not visible to patrons seated at the standard bar).
Per claim 10, Rand meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 7. Further, Rand teaches wherein the ice outlet aperture is vertically oriented (the ice outlet aperture inherently has a vertical component, thus the ice outlet aperture is “vertically oriented”).
Per claim 11, Rand meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 7. Further, Rand teaches wherein the ice outlet aperture (see annotated figure above of figure 2 of US4,872,317 (incorporated by reference)) is perpendicular to the recessed compartment for holding ice (compartment for 70) (to clarify, the ice outlet aperture has a horizontal component and the recessed compartment has a vertical component, thus the ice outlet aperture is perpendicular to the recessed compartment).
Per claim 12, Rand teaches a method for making ice and dispensing the ice directly into a bartenders ice bin for immediate use in making one or more drinks, comprising the steps of:
making ice continuously in an ice making assembly having a cold element and a water source (“The ice maker 72 can be any suitable conventional standard or clear automated ice maker, such as that disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,872,317, the entire disclosure of which is incorporated by reference. The ice maker 72 is connected to a water supply line and as it produces ice the "cubes" fall and are collected in the ice bin 70. The ice bin 70 moves with the freezer drawer 28 so that the ice cubes can be accessed easily”, para. 0033);
dropping the ice through an ice outlet aperture of the ice making assembly (see annotated figure above of figure 2 of US4,872,317 (incorporated by reference)) so that the ice falls directly into a recessed compartment of an insulated ice holding bin (70,14) that is positioned underneath a standard bar (“under-counter cabinet”, para. 0028);
storing the ice in the insulated ice holding bin for immediate use by a bartender to make one or more drinks without a need for a barback employee to transport the ice from the ice making assembly to the insulated ice holding bin (“The freezer drawer 28 preferably holds an ice bin 70 which has a stepped bottom nested in the drawer bin 39 below an ice maker 72”, para. 0033).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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) 1-6 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rand et al. (US 2006/0191285).
Per claim 1, Rand teaches a device for making and dispensing ice directly into a bartender’s ice bin for immediate use in one or more drinks, comprising:
an ice making assembly (72) for continuously making ice,
wherein the ice making assembly has a size allowing the ice making assembly to fit under a standard bar (“a preferred under-counter mounted, vertically stacked drawer refrigerator/freezer 12 includes a cabinet 14”, para. 0029) and wherein the ice making assembly forms an ice outlet aperture (“The ice maker 72 is connected to a water supply line and as it produces ice the "cubes" fall and are collected in the ice bin 70”, para. 0033) (to clarify, the space adjacent the ice maker that accommodates for the ice to fall into the ice bin is considered the “ice outlet aperture”; see annotated figure below of figure 2 of US4,872,317 (incorporated by reference)); and
an ice holding bin (14,70) for receiving the ice made by the ice making assembly,
wherein the ice holding bin includes an insulated exterior (14) for keeping the ice cold that forms a recessed compartment for holding the ice (compartment for 70) and making the ice available for immediate use (when a user want to use ice the ice in the ice holding bin is immediately available);
wherein the ice making assembly (72) is formed integral to the ice holding bin (14,70) so that the recessed compartment (compartment for 70) for holding ice is positioned directly in front of, and beneath, the ice making assembly (see figure 3) so that ice made in the ice making assembly falls through the ice outlet aperture and directly into the ice holding bin and is thereby immediately available for use by the bartender (“The ice maker 72 is connected to a water supply line and as it produces ice the "cubes" fall and are collected in the ice bin 70”, para. 0033; see figure 3) but fails to explicitly teach wherein the ice making assembly is formed integral to the ice holding bin.
PNG
media_image1.png
369
439
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However per MPEP 2144.02, section V, paragraph B, “the use of a one piece construction instead of the structure disclosed in [the prior art] would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the ice making assembly be formed integral with the ice holding bin in order to advantageously reduce the number of parts in the assembly, thereby reducing assembly time and assembly cost.
Per claim 2, Rand, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rand, as modified, teaches wherein the ice making assembly is not visible to one or more patrons seated at the standard bar (when the ice making assembly is positioned under the counter the ice making assembly is not visible to patrons seated at the standard bar).
Per claim 3, Rand, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 2. Further, Rand, as modified, teaches wherein the ice making assembly has a height (inherent) but fails to explicitly teach wherein the ice making assembly has a maximum height of 24 inches so as to fit under the standard bar.
However, per MPEP 2144.04, section IV, paragraph A, “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the ice making assembly be a maximum of 24 inches in order to advantageously fit the ice making assembly in compact spaces.
Per claim 4, Rand, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rand, as modified, teaches wherein the ice outlet aperture is vertically oriented (the ice outlet aperture inherently has a vertical component, thus the ice outlet aperture is “vertically oriented”).
Per claim 5, Rand, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rand, as modified, teaches wherein the ice outlet aperture (see annotated figure below of figure 2 of US4,872,317 (incorporated by reference)) is perpendicular to the recessed compartment for holding ice (compartment for 70) (to clarify, the ice outlet aperture has a horizontal component and the recessed compartment has a vertical component, thus the ice outlet aperture is perpendicular to the recessed compartment).
Per claim 6, Rand, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Rand, as modified, teaches wherein the ice making assembly (72) being formed integral to the ice holding bin (14,70) (see rejection of claim 1) so that the ice falls directly into the ice holding bin (“The ice maker 72 is connected to a water supply line and as it produces ice the "cubes" fall and are collected in the ice bin 70”, para. 0033; see figure 3).
Further, it is understood claim 6 includes the recitation “so that the ice falls directly into the ice holding bin negates a need for a barback employee to physically transport the ice from the ice making assembly to the bar for use by the bartender” which is considered to be a statement of intended use. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here (MPEP 2114, section II). While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
To clarify, the system of Rand, as modified, is configured so that when the ice falls into the bin the system is configured so that the ice falls directly into the ice holding bin negating a need for a barback employee to physically transport the ice from the ice making assembly to the bar for use by the bartender.
Per claim 9, Rand meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 8. Further, Rand teaches wherein the ice making assembly has a height (inherent) but fails to explicitly teach wherein the ice making assembly has a maximum height of 24 inches so as to fit under the standard bar.
However, per MPEP 2144.04, section IV, paragraph A, “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the ice making assembly be a maximum of 24 inches in order to advantageously fit the ice making assembly in compact spaces.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Broadbent (US 2014/0144175) teaches an undercounter ice maker.
Dasher et al. (US 2001/0037657) teaches an undercounter ice maker.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J TEITELBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-5142. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am-4:30 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FRANTZ JULES can be reached on (571) 272-66816681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DAVID J TEITELBAUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763