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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/27/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 10/27/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-4, 7, and 9-15 remain pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 12, “the method of claim 1” should read “The method of claim 1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 7, and 9-15 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 1, the claim contains subject matter that is broader than what is reasonably conveyed. Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein the first meal receptacle holder surrounds a second portion of the sidewall of the first meal receptacle such that the second portion is not exposed when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder”. The Examiner notes that the Applicant has not indicated where such a limitation is supported in the Applicant’s disclosure, and there is no clear recitation of such a feature in the Applicant’s Specification. The Applicant’s Drawings (see, for example, Figure 1) show a meal receptacle holder 122 that only encloses a narrow band at the top of the side wall of the meal receptacle. There is nothing in the Applicant’s disclosure to indicate that the first meal receptacle holder surrounds a second portion of the sidewall of the first meal receptacle (i.e. any amount of the surface area of the sidewall, not just a narrow band at the top of the sidewall) such that the second portion is not exposed when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder. The written description requirement for a claimed genus may be satisfied through sufficient description of a representative number of species. A "representative number of species" means that the species which are adequately described are representative of the entire genus. Thus, when there is substantial variation within the genus, one must describe a sufficient variety of species to reflect the variation within the genus (See MPEP 2163.05). The Applicant appears to have only shown one species (enclosing a narrow band at the top of the side wall) of the broader genus of surrounding a second portion of the sidewall. Therefore, claim 1 fails to meet the written description requirement.
Regarding claim 1, the limitations “removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder by the exterior portion while the first meal receptacle holder is stopped, wherein the exterior portion of the first meal receptacle is a first portion of the sidewall exposed through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder” and “wherein removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder includes contacting the exposed sidewall portion through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder to lift the first meal receptacle relative to the holder” contain new matter. The Examiner notes that the Applicant has not indicated where such limitations are supported in the Applicant’s disclosure. The Applicant’s Specification (e.g., Paragraph 0056) discloses potential embodiments for removal of the meal receptacle by an exterior portion. In one embodiment, the meal receptacle is removed by contact with the bottom portion. In another embodiment, the meal receptacle holder supports the bottom portion of the meal receptacle and the meal receptacle is removed by contact with one or more exterior walls. The Applicant’s Specification further discloses (Paragraph 0073) the extraction actuator is configured to engage the bottom portion of the meal receptacle to move the meal receptacle out of an open end of the meal receptacle holder 122. Also, the Applicant’s Specification discloses (Paragraph 0117, 0118) an embodiment wherein the meal receptacle holder supports a meal receptacle 200 by a bottom portion 206 of the meal receptacle and a first and second rod are used to remove the meal receptacle from the holder. The Applicant appears to be attempting to combine elements of each of these two embodiments, and it is noted that the Applicant’s Specification states (Paragraph 0008) that “foregoing concepts, and additional concepts discussed below, may be arranged in any suitable combination”. However, subject matter must be 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. In this case, embodiments for removal of the meal receptacle through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder involve removal by the bottom portion. Removal by contact with the sidewalls is shown in embodiments with a meal receptacle holder beneath the meal receptacle, not via a side opening. And, as shown in Figures 11A through 11D, the contact with the side walls is on either side of the receptacle. It is unclear, for example how rods 516A and 516B could go through the side opening of a meal receptacle holder, since the rods would be spaced apart the same width as the holder. No clear combination of a holder below the receptacle and a holder with a side opening for accessing the receptacle is apparent either. Furthermore, the Applicant’s Specification states (Paragraph 0118) that removal by contact with the side walls requires the meal receptacle holder to move away from the meal receptacle, while the claims require that the meal receptacle is stopped. Therefore, claim 1 is rejected for containing new matter.
Claims 2-4, 7, and 9-15 are rejected as a result of depending upon rejected claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, the limitation “an uppermost rim of the top portion of the first meal receptacle is not contacted during removal of the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder” does not appear to have support in the Applicant’s Disclosure, and the Applicant has not indicated where such a limitation is supported in the Applicant’s disclosure. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected for containing new matter.
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 13 is 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.
The term “uppermost rim” in claim 13 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “uppermost” 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7, 9, 13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clothier (US 20050256774 A1) in view of Wilson (US 3677172 A), Hong Chiang Technology (Food Delivery Robot (Bullet Train) - Sushi Train. Sushi Conveyor. Food Delivery System.”), Rosalia (US 20170150843 A1), and Bergmann (US 20150197353 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Clothier teaches (Paragraph 0011, 0044-0045; Fig. 2 #36, 48, 50) a food preparation system and method wherein a conveyor system is provided for receiving and conveying food items through various stations to complete a food order which includes a track and at least one car (first meal receptacle holder) movable along the track, wherein each car 36 preferably includes a chassis 48 or other main body and a food-supporting platform 50 depending from the chassis, wherein the food-supporting platform 50 may be a tray or any other device capable of holding food items or vessels containing food items (first meal receptacle) prepared by the food establishment (where the vessel must necessarily be placed on the platform 50 at some point in the preparation process). In addition, Clothier teaches (Paragraph 0053) food preparation stations 18 are provided for adding selected food items or ingredients to a car to fulfill a food order (where one of ordinary skill in the art are would understand that food items are added to the vessel (meal receptacle) on the car in embodiments where a vessel is used, such as the exemplary embodiment wherein pizza dough and tomato paste are added to a pizza pan). Furthermore, Clothier teaches (Paragraph 0061; Fig. 1 #22, 26) a transfer station 22 is provided for transferring the food items from the cars 36 to the delivery devices 26, wherein the transfer station also includes a resonator puck that causes the car to stop at the transfer station. Clothier further teaches (Paragraph 0076; Fig. 1 #114, 128) an exemplary embodiment, wherein, when the car is at transfer station 22, a preparation person removes a pizza from the car, cuts it, boxes it, places it into the pizza bag 26 atop the induction cooktop 114, and presses a "complete" button 128 to move the car along the conveyor track to return to the ordering station 12.
Clothier is silent on the first meal receptacle holder providing a side opening in the holder through which an exterior portion of the first meal receptacle is accessible. Furthermore, Clothier is silent on the first meal receptacle having a top portion defining an opening to receive the at least one meal ingredient in an internal volume of the receptacle, a bottom portion, and a sidewall extending between the top and bottom portions. Clothier is further silent on stopping the first meal receptacle holder prior to removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder. Also, Clothier is silent on removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder by the exterior portion while the first meal receptacle holder is stopped, wherein the exterior portion of the first meal receptacle is a first portion of the sidewall exposed through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder, wherein the first meal receptacle holder surrounds a second portion of the sidewall of the first meal receptacle such that the second portion is not exposed when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder, and wherein removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder includes contacting the exposed sidewall portion through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder to lift the first meal receptacle relative to the holder. In addition, Clothier is silent on moving the first meal receptacle holder after the first meal receptacle is removed.
Wilson teaches (Col. 1, lines 69-71; Col. 2, lines 52-61; Fig. 1 #40, 50) a method of using a cooking rack-pan combination, wherein U-shaped rails 40 (meal receptacle holders) define a closed back for the rack, and an open front (side opening), wherein plurality of pans, such as the pan 50 (first meal receptacle) of FIGS. 1 and 3, may be supported, as shelves, on the U-shaped rails 40 in a stacked relationship, to be individually insertable and removable from the front of the rack, wherein the upper edges (rim) of the pans are rolled over slidably to engage the corresponding rails (the first meal receptacle holder surrounds a second portion of the sidewall of the first meal receptacle such that the second portion is not exposed when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder), and completely cover the rails. As shown in Figure 1, such U-shaped rails (when used as a single support or with only one pan on the rack as shown in Figure 1) allow access from both the top for distribution of ingredients and from the bottom for removal of the meal receptacle and provide access to an exterior portion of the meal receptacle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier to provides a side opening in the holder through which an exterior portion of the first meal receptacle is accessible (e.g., by substituting the meal receptacle holder for one like that of Wilson with brackets that allow access to the receptacle) and to configure the first meal receptacle holder to surround a second portion of the sidewall of the first meal receptacle such that the second portion is not exposed when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder in view of Wilson since both are directed to methods of preparing food products using meal receptacles on meal receptacle holders, since providing a side opening in the holder through which an exterior portion of the first meal receptacle is accessible and configuring the first meal receptacle holder to surround a second portion of the sidewall of the first meal receptacle such that the second portion is not exposed when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder is known in the art as shown by Wilson, since surrounding a second portion of the sidewall of the first meal receptacle such that the second portion is not exposed when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder, e.g. using the U=shaped rails, prevents the meal receptacle from sliding off the holder, keeping the food from spilling, since the upper edges of the pans are rolled over slidably to engage the corresponding rails, and completely cover the rails, which prevents the food in the individual pans from actually coming in contact with the rails or any other portion of the rack itself, so that cleaning of the rack is made easier and the need for cleaning the rack is less frequent than in the usual prior art assembly (Wilson, Col. 1, lines 70-75), since providing a side opening in the holder allows for removal of the meal receptacle for transport to a consumer or other location, and since allowing an exterior portion of the meal receptacle to be accessible allows a user or equipment to contact the meal receptacle for removal from the holder.
Hong Chiang Technology teaches (Video Description; Fig. 1-8; 0:00-0:14) a method of operating a food delivery robot, wherein a sushi conveyor (meal receptable holder) moves down a track, stops, opens, allows plates (meal receptacles) holding sushi to be removed, closes, and resumes movement.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier to stop the first meal receptacle holder prior to removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder, remove the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder while the first meal receptacle holder is stopped, move the first meal receptacle holder after the first meal receptacle is removed in view of Hong Chiang Technology since both are directed to methods of conveying meal receptacles using meal receptacle holders on tracks, since Clothier teaches stopping a meal receptacle holder, removing the food from the meal receptacle holder while the meal receptacle holder is stopped, and moving the meal receptacle holder after the food is removed, since stopping a meal receptacle holder prior to removing a meal receptacle from the meal receptacle holder, removing the meal receptacle from the meal receptacle holder while the meal receptacle holder is stopped, and moving the meal receptacle holder after the first meal receptacle is removed is known in the art as shown by Hong Chiang Technology, since stopping the meal receptacle holder while the meal receptacle is removed would lower the risk of food accidentally being spilled during removal of the meal receptacle, since removing the meal receptacle along with the food would remove or reduce the need for additional food containers, since removing the meal receptacle would allow the receptacle to be cleaned or discarded prior to reuse of the meal receptacle holder, preventing food distributed in subsequent production from contacting uncleaned meal receptacles, and since moving the meal receptacle holder after the meal receptacle was removed would allow additional meal receptacle holders to be moved into position for removal of their meal receptacles.
Rosalia teaches (Paragraph 0001, 0159; Fig.. 11 #1102, 1110, 1114) a modularized food preparation device and tray structure for use thereof, wherein individual trays 1102 are securely received and retained in a tray retention structure 1110 (meal receptacle holder) by engaging perimeter structures of the trays 1102 with tracks 1114 of the tray retention structure 1110. Rosalia further teaches (Paragraph 0161; Fig. 11 #1120) a grabber 1120 can transfer a tray 1102 to a cooking container by engaging a perimeter lip structure of the tray 1102 from the front side (contacting the exposed sidewall portion through the side opening), lifting the tray slightly, and then pulling it into the cooking container. As shown by Figure 11, the exterior portion of the first meal receptacle is a first portion of the sidewall exposed through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder (i.e. the tray/receptacle is removed from the retention structure/holder via the open front side).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier to remove the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder by the exterior portion the exterior portion wherein the exterior portion is a first portion of the sidewall exposed through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder and to remove the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder including contacting the exposed sidewall portion through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder to lift the first meal receptacle relative to the holder as taught by Rosalia since both are directed to methods of preparing food products using meal receptacles on meal receptacle holders, since removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder by the exterior portion the exterior portion wherein the exterior portion is a first portion of the sidewall exposed through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder and removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder including contacting the exposed sidewall portion through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder to lift the first meal receptacle relative to the holder is known in the art as shown by Rosalia, since cooperation between the tracks 1114 and the trays 1102 secure the trays until it is time to dispense the contents (Rosalia, Paragraph 0159), since removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder by a first portion of the sidewall exposed through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder would allow the meal receptacle holder be removed with less effort, since removing at the opening of the holder does not requiring raising receptacle completely above the holder for removal, and since contacting the exposed sidewall portion through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder to lift the first meal receptacle relative to the holder will ensure that friction between the holder and the receptacle does not prevent or slow removal of the receptacle.
Bergmann teaches (Paragraph 0001, Paragraph 0026, 0027; Fig. 3 #3, 4, 7, 8) a method and an apparatus for arranging a plurality of foods in at least one base portion of a packaging (meal receptacle), wherein a base portion 8 of a packaging (meal receptacle) is received in the receiving frame 7 of packaging receiver 4 of cart 3 (meal receptacle holder). As shown in Figure 3, the base portion 8 of a packaging (meal receptacle) comprises a top portion defining an opening to receive the at least one meal ingredient in an internal volume of the receptacle, a bottom portion, and a sidewall extending between the top and bottom portions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier to provide a meal receptacle comprising top portion defining an opening to receive the at least one meal ingredient in an internal volume of the receptacle, a bottom portion, and a sidewall extending between the top and bottom portions as taught by Bergmann since both are directed to methods of preparing meals by adding food products to meal receptacles with movable meal receptacle holders, since a meal receptacle comprising top portion defining an opening to receive the at least one meal ingredient in an internal volume of the receptacle, a bottom portion, and a sidewall extending between the top and bottom portions is known in the art as shown by Bergmann, since base portions to be filled can be moved between the individual food feeds at a sufficient conveying speed so that a cart having a base portion can always be provided beneath a food transfer end of the food feeds when foods are transferred (Bergmann, Paragraph 0012), since the bottom portion and sidewalls prevent food from falling out of the meal receptacle, and since the opening defined by the top portion allows food items to be added to the meal receptacle via gravity (Bergmann, Paragraph 0012), reducing the energy and complexity required to fill the meal receptacles.
Regarding claim 2, Clothier teaches Clothier teaches (Paragraph 0052; Fig. 6 #62, 84) that the car (receptacle) is equipped with a drive motor 84 and an electronic switch 62 controls the drive motor 84. Furthermore, Clothier teaches (Paragraph 0040; Fig. 1 #12, 16, 18, 20, 22, 34, 36) conveyor system 16 broadly includes an elongated track 34 and a plurality of cars 36 (i.e., at least two meal receptacle holders, each of which would be understood to each have an individual motor), wherein the purpose of the conveyor system 16 is to carry a car 36 to the ordering station 12, through the food preparation and heating stations 18,20, and to the transfer station 22 so that a food order can be initially transferred to the car 36 and food items can be subsequently added to the car 36 to complete the food order so that it may be delivered to a customer. Consequently, each car is understood to move independently using its own motor, which is further demonstrated by the fact that a car may be slowed and stopped to avoid collision with a car in front of it (i.e., the cars are moving independently). Additionally, as shown above, Clothier teaches (Paragraph 0045) the food-supporting platform 50 of the car 36 (meal receptacle holder) may be a tray or any other device capable of holding food items or vessels containing food items (meal receptacles) prepared by the food establishment.
Clothier is silent on the second meal receptacle holder providing an opening though which an exterior portion of the second meal receptacle is accessible and removing the second meal receptacle from the second meal receptacle holder by the exterior portion.
However, the above limitations would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Wilson and Rosalia for substantially the same reasons disclosed above with regard to claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Clothier, as modified above, is silent on placing the first meal receptacle on the first meal receptacle holder includes supporting a rim of the first meal receptacle with a U- shaped first meal receptacle holder.
Wilson teaches (Col. 1, lines 69-71; Col. 2, lines 52-61; Fig. 1 #40, 50) a method of using a cooking rack-pan combination, wherein U-shaped rails 40 (meal receptacle holders) define a closed back for the rack, and an open front, wherein plurality of pans, such as the pan 50 of FIGS. 1 and 3, may be supported, as shelves, on the U-shaped rails 40 in a stacked relationship, to be individually insertable and removable from the front of the rack, wherein the upper edges (rim) of the pans are rolled over slidably to engage the corresponding rails, and completely cover the rails.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier, as modified above, to support a rim of the first meal receptacle with a U- shaped first meal receptacle holder as taught by Wilson since both are directed to methods of preparing food products using meal receptacles on meal receptacle holders, since supporting a rim of the first meal receptacle with a U-shaped first meal receptacle holder is known in the art as shown by Wilson, since the U-shaped holder ensures that the meal receptacle is at least partially enclosed on three sides to prevent the receptacle from falling off the holder or spilling, since the open front of the U-shaped holder allows removal of the receptacle from the front and prevents the receptacle from getting stuck by abutting the front of the holder upon removal, and since a u-shaped holder uses less material in construction compared to a holder with a closed-front, reducing the weight that needs to be moved on the track and lowering the cost to purchase or manufacture holders, and since supporting the receptacle by a rim allows the receptacle to rest partially lowered into the U-shaped hold, preventing the receptacle from sliding off the holder.
Regarding claim 7, Clothier is silent on removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder including moving the first meal receptacle out of the first meal receptacle holder via an open end of the U-shaped first meal receptacle holder.
Wilson teaches (Col. 1, lines 69-71; Col. 2, lines 52-61; Fig. 1 #40, 50) a method of using a cooking rack-pan combination, wherein U-shaped rails 40 (meal receptacle holders) define a closed back for the rack, and an open front, wherein plurality of pans, such as the pan 50 of FIGS. 1 and 3, may be supported, as shelves, on the U-shaped rails 40 in a stacked relationship, to be individually insertable and removable from the front of the rack, wherein the upper edges (rim) of the pans are rolled over slidably to engage the corresponding rails, and completely cover the rails.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier, as modified above, to move the first meal receptacle out of the first meal receptacle holder via an open end of the U-shaped first meal receptacle holder as taught by Wilson since both are directed to methods of preparing food products using meal receptacles on meal receptacle holders, since moving a first meal receptacle out of the first meal receptacle holder via an open end of the U-shaped first meal receptacle holder is known in the art as shown by Wilson, since the U-shaped holder ensures that the meal receptacle is at least partially enclosed on three sides to prevent the receptacle from falling of the holder or spilling, since the open front of the u-shaped holder allows removal of the receptacle from the front and prevents the receptacle from getting stuck by abutting the front of the holder upon removal, since a u-shaped holder uses less material in construction compared to a holder with a closed-front, reducing the weight that needs to be moved on the track and lowering the cost to purchase or manufacture holders, and since removing the meal receptacle via the open end of the U-shaped holder requires little elevation of the receptacle upon removal, since the entire receptacle does not need to be moved above the holder, lowering energy costs for operating the process.
Regarding claim 9, Clothier is silent on the first meal receptacle holder supporting a rim of the top portion of the first meal receptacle, wherein the rim is not supported at a location of the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder.
Wilson teaches (Col. 1, lines 69-71; Col. 2, lines 52-61; Fig. 1 #40, 50) a method of using a cooking rack-pan combination, wherein U-shaped rails 40 (meal receptacle holders) define a closed back for the rack, and an open front (side opening), wherein plurality of pans, such as the pan 50 of FIGS. 1 and 3, may be supported, as shelves, on the U-shaped rails 40 in a stacked relationship, to be individually insertable and removable from the front of the rack (via the open side of the U-shaped rails), wherein the upper edges (rims of the top portions) of the pans are rolled over slidably to engage the corresponding rails, and completely cover the rails.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier, as modified above, to configure the first meal receptacle holder to support a rim of the top portion of the meal receptacle, wherein the rim is not supported at a location of the side opening of the meal receptacle holder as taught by Wilson since both are directed to methods of preparing food products using meal receptacles on meal receptacle holders, since configuring the first meal receptacle holder to support a rim of the top portion of the meal receptacle, wherein the rim is not supported at a location of the side opening of the meal receptacle holder is known in the art as shown by Wilson, since the u-shaped holder ensures that the meal receptacle is at least partially enclosed on three sides to prevent the receptacle from falling of the holder or spilling, since the open front side of the u-shaped holder allows removal of the receptacle from the front and prevents the receptacle from getting stuck by abutting the front of the holder upon removal, and since a u-shaped holder with an open front side uses less material in construction compared to a holder with a closed-front, reducing the weight that needs to be moved on the track and lowering the cost to purchase or manufacture holders, and since supporting the receptacle by a rim allows the receptacle to rest partially lowered into the U-shaped holder, preventing the receptacle from sliding off the holder.
Regarding claim 13, Clothier is silent on an uppermost rim of the top portion of the first meal receptacle is not being contacted during removal of the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder, though, as noted in the 35 USC 112(b) rejection above, the meaning of “uppermost rim” is unclear. For the purposes of further examination, “an” uppermost rim may be understood to be a rim of a particular side of the meal receptacle, such as the rim of the back side of the receptacle.
As shown above with regard to claim 1, Rosalia teaches (Paragraph 0001, 0159; Fig.. 11 #1102, 1110, 1114) a modularized food preparation device and tray structure for use thereof, wherein individual trays 1102 are securely received and retained in a tray retention structure 1110 (meal receptacle holder) by engaging perimeter structures of the trays 1102 with tracks 1114 of the tray retention structure 1110. Rosalia further teaches (Paragraph 0161; Fig. 11 #1120) a grabber 1120 can transfer a tray 1102 to a cooking container by engaging a perimeter lip structure of the tray 1102 from the front side (contacting the exposed sidewall portion through the side opening), lifting the tray slightly, and then pulling it into the cooking container. As shown by Figure 11, the exterior portion of the first meal receptacle is a first portion of the sidewall exposed through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder (i.e. the tray/receptacle is removed from the retention structure/holder via the open front side). Since Rosalia discloses contacting the rim from the front side, and “an” uppermost rim has been understood to be the rim of the back of the receptacle, Rosalia is understood to disclose not contacting the uppermost rim.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier to not contact the uppermost rim of the top portion of the first meal receptacle during removal of the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder in view of Rosalia since both are directed to methods of preparing food products using meal receptacles on meal receptacle holders, since not contacting the uppermost rim of the top portion of the first meal receptacle during removal of the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder is known in the art as shown by Rosalia, since removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder by a first portion of the sidewall exposed through the side opening of the first meal receptacle holder (i.e., contacting a location that is not the uppermost rim) would allow the meal receptacle holder be removed with less effort, since removing at the opening of the holder does not requiring raising receptacle completely above the holder for removal, since not contacting the uppermost rim would reduce the likelihood of the meal receptacle or the contents thereof being contaminated, and since not contacting the uppermost rim during removal prevent any food in contact with the uppermost rim from being spilled.
Regarding claim 15, Clothier is silent on the bottom portion of the first meal receptacle not being exposed when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder.
Bergmann teaches (Paragraph 0001, Paragraph 0026, 0027; Fig. 3 #3, 4, 7, 8) a method and an apparatus for arranging a plurality of foods in at least one base portion of a packaging (meal receptacle), wherein a base portion 8 of a packaging (meal receptacle) is received in the receiving frame 7 of packaging receiver 4 of cart 3 (meal receptacle holder). As shown in Figure 3, the receiving frame 7 (meal receptacle holder) includes a bottom that covers the bottom portion of the base portion 8 (meal receptacle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier to not expose the bottom portion of the first meal receptacle when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder as taught by Bergmann since both are directed to methods of preparing meals by adding food products to meal receptacles with movable meal receptacle holders, since not exposing the bottom portion of the first meal receptacle when the first meal receptacle is received on the holder is known in the art as shown by Bergmann, since a bottom of the meal receptacle holder that covers the bottom of the meal receptacle could catch food that leaks or spills from the meal receptacle, since not exposing the bottom could prevent the meal receptacle from being damaged from below, and since not exposing the bottom could prevent the meal receptacle from being dislodged from the holder by accidental contact from below.
Claim(s) 3 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clothier (US 20050256774 A1) in view of Wilson (US 3677172 A), Hong Chiang Technology (Food Delivery Robot (Bullet Train) - Sushi Train. Sushi Conveyor. Food Delivery System.”), Rosalia (US 20170150843 A1), and Bergmann (US 20150197353 A1), and further in view of Gageant (US 3136268 A).
Regarding claim 3, Clothier, as modified above, is silent on placing the first meal receptacle on the first meal receptacle holder including dropping the first meal receptacle onto the first meal receptacle holder.
Gageant teaches (Col. 5, lines 38-52; Fig. 3 #8, 32, 62) a method of automatic pie preparation, wherein a pan 62 (meal receptacle) is dropped from a pan dispenser into a circular opening in a pallet 8 (meal receptacle holder), wherein the pallet 8 is rotated by an indexing drive 32 to a dough dispenser.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier, as modified above, to drop a first meal receptacle onto a first meal receptacle holder as taught by Gageant since both are directed to methods of automatic food preparation comprising adding food ingredients into meal receptacles on meal receptacle holders, since dropping a first meal receptacle onto a first meal receptacle holder is known in the art as shown by Gageant, since using a dispenser to drop a receptacle onto a holder reduces labor costs, ensures consistent and accurate placement of the receptacle without human error, and reduces the potential for injury or contamination from contact between a human and machinery, and since dropping the receptacle allows gravitational forces to move the receptacle to the proper position, reducing energy costs and improving the efficiency of moving the receptacle onto the holder.
Regarding claim 14, Clothier, as modified above, is silent on the first meal receptacle remaining upright during placement of the first meal receptacle on the holder and removal of the first meal receptacle from the holder.
Gageant teaches (Col. 5, lines 38-52; Fig. 3 #8, 32, 62) a method of automatic pie preparation, wherein a pan 62 (meal receptacle) is dropped from a pan dispenser into a circular opening in a pallet 8 (meal receptacle holder), wherein the pallet 8 is rotated by an indexing drive 32 to a dough dispenser. As shown by Figures 3 and 4, the pans 62 remain upright when placed on the pallet 8.
As shown above with regard to claim 1, Rosalia teaches (Paragraph 0001, 0159; Fig.. 11 #1102, 1110, 1114) a modularized food preparation device and tray structure for use thereof, wherein individual trays 1102 are securely received and retained in a tray retention structure 1110 (meal receptacle holder) by engaging perimeter structures of the trays 1102 with tracks 1114 of the tray retention structure 1110. Rosalia further teaches (Paragraph 0161; Fig. 11 #1120) a grabber 1120 can transfer a tray 1102 to a cooking container by engaging a perimeter lip structure of the tray 1102 from the front side (contacting the exposed sidewall portion through the side opening), lifting the tray slightly, and then pulling it into the cooking container (where lifting and pulling would not change the orientation of the meal receptacle and keep it upright).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier to keep the first meal receptacle upright during placement of the first meal receptacle on the holder and removal of the first meal receptacle from the holder in view of Gageant and Rosalia, since each of Clothier, Gageant and Rosalia is directed to a method of preparing food products using meal receptacles on meal receptacle holders, since keeping meal receptacles upright during placement and removal is known in the art as shown by Gageant and Rosalia, since keeping the meal receptacle upright during removal would prevent food from spilling out, since keeping the meal receptacle upright during placement would prevent the need to later reposition the meal receptacle and ensure that food deposited into the meal receptacle remains in place.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clothier (US 20050256774 A1) in view of Wilson (US 3677172 A), Hong Chiang Technology (Food Delivery Robot (Bullet Train) - Sushi Train. Sushi Conveyor. Food Delivery System.”), Rosalia (US 20170150843 A1), and Bergmann (US 20150197353 A1), and further in view of Koppisch (US 2511534 A).
Regarding claim 10, Clothier, as modified above, is silent on the side opening being oriented perpendicular to a direction of movement of the first meal receptacle holder along the track.
Koppisch teaches (Col. 2, lines 48-51; Col. 4, lines 22-44; Fig. 6 #10, 11, 31, 33) an apparatus and method for conveying containers wherein an endless main conveyor or carrier comprises an endless chain 10 and container holders or receptacles 11 (receptacle holders) carried by the chain, wherein the receptacles 11 include a pocket 33 is open at its front (side opening) to permit lateral movement of glass containers 31 (receptacles) into and out, of the pocket. As shown in Figures 5 and 6, the side opening is oriented perpendicular to a direction of movement of the receptacle holders.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier, as modified above, to orient the side opening perpendicular to the direction of movement of the receptacles holders as taught by Koppisch, since both are directed to methods of conveying receptacles wit receptacle holders, since orienting the side opening perpendicular to the direction of movement of the receptacles holders is known in the art as shown by Koppisch, since orienting the side opening perpendicular to the direction of movement of the receptacle holders would allow access to the receptacle holders for adding or removing receptacles even if other receptacle holders were positioned immediately before and behind the receptacle holder on the track, and since a perpendicular orientation would allow the receptacles to be removed directly away from the track, keeping the removal device or operator away from the track and preventing accidental blockage or interference with the track when removing or adding the meal receptacles.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clothier (US 20050256774 A1) in view of Wilson (US 3677172 A), Hong Chiang Technology (Food Delivery Robot (Bullet Train) - Sushi Train. Sushi Conveyor. Food Delivery System.”), Rosalia (US 20170150843 A1), and Bergmann (US 20150197353 A1), and further in view of He (US 20140230660 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Clothier, as modified above, is silent on stopping the first meal receptacle holder prior to removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder occurring in response to receiving a first command from a controller, and moving the first meal receptacle holder after the first meal receptacle is removed occurring in response to receiving a second command from the controller.
As shown above, Hong Chiang Technology teaches (Video Description; Fig. 1-8; 0:00-0:14) a method of operating a food delivery robot, wherein a sushi conveyor (meal receptable holder) moves down a track, stops, opens, allows plates (meal receptacles) holding sushi to be removed, closes, and resumes movement. Also, Hong Chiang Technology teaches (Fig. 6) the food delivery is automated and unmanned, and return occurs automatically, which typically indicates a controller operated system.
Additionally, He teaches (Paragraph 0006, 0007, 0037) a method of operating an automated cooking system, wherein upon receiving an order for new dishes, a computer commands mini vehicles (meal receptacles) to move to some designated positions at the designated storage stations, and then food ingredients are loaded onto the designated transport containers from the designated storage containers, wherein the amounts of food ingredients loaded are determined by quantities specified in the recipe for the dishes (the automated dispensing into the receptacles is based on user orders). Additionally, He teaches (Paragraph 0034) computer 80 controls the movements and stops of the mini vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier in view of Hong Chiang Technology and He, to stop the first meal receptacle holder prior to removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder occurs in response to receiving a first command from a controller, and to move the first meal receptacle holder after the first meal receptacle is removed occurs in response to receiving a second command from the controller, since each of Clothier, Hong Chiang Technology, and He is directed to a method of operating meal receptacles moving along tracks, since and automated food delivery process comprising stopping the first meal receptacle holder prior to removing the first meal receptacle from the first meal receptacle holder and moving the first meal receptacle holder after the first meal receptacle is removed is known in the art as shown by Hong Chiang Technology, since automatically controlling the movements and stops of the meal receptacle with a computer (controller) is known in the art as shown by He, since controlling the stopping and movement of a meal receptacle with a controller command would reduce labor costs and remove the risk of delays from human error such as slowness or failure in moving the receptacles after removal of the meal receptacle is completed, and since automatically moving the meal receptacles after the meal receptacle is removed would minimize the food preparation time.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clothier (US 20050256774 A1) in view of Wilson (US 3677172 A), Hong Chiang Technology (Food Delivery Robot (Bullet Train) - Sushi Train. Sushi Conveyor. Food Delivery System.”), Rosalia (US 20170150843 A1), and Bergmann (US 20150197353 A1), and further in view of Peters (US 20110277420 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Clothier, as modified above, is silent on the side opening being oriented parallel to a direction of movement of the first meal receptacle holder along the track.
Peters teaches (Paragraph 0036, 0037, 0184, 0185; Fig. 17 #10, 170) a processing system for processing food products, with a conveyor system comprising tray carriers configured for conveying packaging trays 2 (meal receptacle), wherein a tray carrier 170 (meal receptacle holder) is advanced in a conveyance direction 10, which, as shown in Figures 17 and 18, is parallel to the open front end of the carrier.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Clothier, as modified above to configure the side opening to be oriented parallel to a direction of movement of the first meal receptacle holder along the track in view of Peters since both are directed to methods of conveying meal receptacles with meal receptacle holders, since a meal receptacle holder that is open at a side parallel to a direction of movement of the meal receptacle holder along a track is known in the art as shown by Peters, since a side opening parallel to the direction of movement of the first meal receptacle holder along the track would allow the meal receptacle to be unloaded from the meal receptacle holder in the direction of movement, allowing unloading and further processing to continue in the same direction without having to reorient or change the direction of the meal receptacle, since a side opening parallel to the direction of movement of the first meal receptacle holder along the track would allow for a continuous, one-way system with loading and unloading of the meal receptacle in the same direction as movement, preventing the need to provide personnel or equipment positioned at an angle or perpendicular to the track, reducing the space occupied perpendicular to the track.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-8, filed 01/31/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4, 7, and 9-15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, these arguments have been made in view of amendments to the claims, and, u