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 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) 1-15 and 18-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stonehouse et al (US 5,845,501), in view of Garibyan et al (US 2019/0053939), and further evidenced by or in view of Shuntich (US 10,149,487) and Cutting (US 2019/0029248).
Regarding claims 1, 11-12, 22-23, and 25, Stonehouse discloses machine for cooling a single serving of a drink, the machine comprising:
a refrigeration system comprising an evaporator (7:14-19; the refrigerant in coil 16 is evaporating), the evaporator defining a cylindrical recess having an inward protrusion (3:52-57) at a bottom of the cylindrical recess and an open top portion, the cylindrical recess sized to receive a cylindrical aluminum can (10) such that (i) a sidewall of the evaporator is in contact with an aluminum sidewall of the cylindrical aluminum can, (ii) an openable end of the cylindrical aluminum can is proximal to the open top portion of the cylindrical recess, and (iii) at least a portion of a concave domed end of the cylindrical aluminum can is in contact with the inward protrusion such that downward movement of the cylindrical aluminum can relative to the evaporator is limited (3:52-57); and
wherein the cylindrical aluminum can does not contain a mixing paddle and the machine is operable to cool the single serving of the drink inside the cylindrical aluminum can.
Stonehouse lacks aluminum as the evaporator material. The examiner takes official notice that aluminum is an old and well known material to use for evaporators. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Stonehouse with aluminum for the evaporator material in order to take advantage of aluminum’s high thermal conductivity and wide availability.
Stonehouse lacks a transducer or actuator as claimed.
Garibyan discloses one or more transducers or actuators (130) attached to the sidewall of the evaporator (124/126; [0060] discusses evaporator) and operable to vibrate, shake, or rotate the sidewall of container when the container is in the cylindrical recess, and wherein the device is operable to cool while vibrating, shaking, or rotating the sidewall of the container by the one or more transducers or actuators. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Stonehouse with the actuator of Garibyan in order to enhance heat transfer and/or produce slush.
Shuntich evidences that slush type beverages are desirable and may be formed with ultrasonic actuators. Cutting evidences that ultrasonic vibrations act to dislodge ice.
Regarding claim 2, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, wherein the vibration, shaking, or rotation of the cylindrical aluminum can dislodge ice or frozen product formed on an inside surface of the aluminum sidewall of the cylindrical aluminum can. The act of providing ultrasonic vibrations dislodges ice as is well understood. For example see Cutting (US 2019/0029248).
Regarding claim 3, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, wherein the one or more transducers or actuators are operable to apply a pulsing force to the cylindrical aluminum can (an ultrasonic vibration, like that of Garibyan, is a pulsing force).
Regarding claim 4, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 3, wherein the pulsing force is an axial or radial pulsing force (Garibyan describes rotation and vibration in the radial direction includes radial force).
Regarding claims 5 and 9-10, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 3, but lacks plural actuators/transducers. It has been held that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP 2144.04. Therefor it would have been obvious to have provided a plurality of actuators/transducers in order to predictably increase vibration of the can. Moreover it follows when employing plural actuators/transducers to control them to operate in a complimentary fashion. With only two elements any actuation of both is sequential. Moreover with only two elements, they must be longitudinally or angularly offset in some reference frame.
Regarding claims 6-7, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, wherein the one or more transducers or actuators are disposed at the bottom of the cylindrical recess to shake the concave dome (Garibyan provides the actuator at the bottom of the container).
Regarding claim 8, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, wherein the one or more transducers or actuators are operable to move or rotate the entire cylindrical aluminum can (imparting a vibration to the can, to some degree, moves the entire can).
Regarding claim 13, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 11, wherein the cooled drink is consumable from the cylindrical aluminum can after the drink has been cooled and the cylindrical aluminum can has been removed from the cylindrical recess (Stonehouse discloses a soda can, as is well understood one may consume soda from a soda can).
Regarding claim 14, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 13, wherein the machine is operable to notify a user that the cooled drink is ready for removal from the cylindrical recess (Shuntich discloses sound output module 110 to notify a user that the beverage is ready).
Regarding claim 15, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 11, wherein the evaporator comprises an inward protrusion (3:52-57) for limiting axial movement of the cylindrical aluminum can relative to the evaporator when the cylindrical aluminum can is in the cylindrical recess.
Regarding claims 18-19, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 11, wherein the openable end of the cylindrical aluminum can comprises a tab configured to form an opening in the cylindrical aluminum can; wherein at least a portion of a cylindrical aluminum can deflects into the cylindrical aluminum can when the tab forms the opening in the cylindrical aluminum can (“330 ml two-part aluminum drinks can” as is understood in the art the “two-part” refers to the can itself plus the tab for opening).
Regarding claim 20, Stonehouse discloses the machine of claim 11, wherein the aluminum sidewall of the cylindrical aluminum can has a diameter of approximately 2.6 inches (“standard 330 ml two-part aluminium drinks can” where it is known that the standard can has a diameter of 2.6 inches)
Regarding claim 21, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 20, wherein the cylindrical aluminum can contains approximately 12 fluid ounces of the drink (330ml and 340ml are approximately 12 fluid ounces; as is well known in the art difference markets use slightly different volume standards such as 330ml and 355ml which are regarded as ‘approximately’ the same).
Regarding claim 24, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 22, wherein the cylindrical aluminum can contains a mixing paddle (Garibyan discloses a fin 112; as applied elsewhere the fin 112 is not regarded as a paddle however here the term paddle is interpreted to be inclusive of the fin 112).
Regarding claim 26, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 22, wherein the vibration, shaking, or rotation of the cylindrical aluminum can dislodges ice or frozen product formed on an inside surface of the aluminum sidewall of the cylindrical aluminum can. The act of providing ultrasonic vibrations dislodges ice as is well understood. For example see Cutting (US 2019/0029248).
Regarding claim 27, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 26, wherein the pulsing force is an axial or radial pulsing force (Garibyan describes rotation and vibration in the radial direction includes radial force).
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stonehouse et al (US 5,845,501), in view of Garibyan et al (US 2019/0053939), evidenced by or in view of Shuntich (US 10,149,487) and Cutting (US 2019/0029248), and further in view of Petrenko (US 2010/0206990)
Regarding claims 16-17, Stonehouse as modified discloses the machine of claim 11 but lacks a membrane. Petrenko discloses a membrane 112 between an actuator and freezing area. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Stonehouse with the membrane as taught by Petrenko in order to enhance ice dislodgement. Although Petrenko does not explicitly list aluminum as a material, the reference states “layer of other materials known in the art of electrical resistive elements” [0046]. The examiner takes official notice that aluminum is a known electrical resistive element material. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have utilized aluminum for its well known excellent heat transfer characteristics.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bloch (US 10,058,833) asymmetric oscillations
Chung et al (US 8,572,990) supercooling apparatus
Lucas (US 7,347,055) rapid can chiller
Schlosser (US 7,146,826) beverage chiller
Wild (US 2015/0128619) beverage cooler
Ravji et al (US 2012/0096876) frozen confection cooler
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