Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/614,999

APPARATUS FOR SPREADING AND SHAPING A FLOWABLE FROZEN FOOD

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 25, 2024
Examiner
LONG, DONNELL ALAN
Art Unit
3754
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
944 granted / 1251 resolved
+5.5% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
1290
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
47.9%
+7.9% vs TC avg
§102
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1251 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 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 16 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. Regarding claim 16, the phrase "may comprise" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). 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. Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 14, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weinreich (2136224). Regarding claim 1, Weinreich discloses an apparatus, comprising: (i) an inverted funnel (18 and 20 or 31 and 20) including a top orifice (the top opening of 18 or 31) having a first area and a bottom orifice (the bottom opening of 20) having a second area (Figs. 1 and 3), wherein the second area is larger than the first area (Figs. 1 and 3); (ii) a shape-forming plate (36) that is releasable coupled directly or indirectly to the bottom orifice of the inverted funnel (col. 4, lines 59-64), the shape-forming plate comprising a plurality of shape-forming orifices (Figs. 2 and 4). Regarding claim 3, the top orifice is configured to directly or indirectly releasably couple to an outlet (30) of a soft-serve ice cream machine (12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17), and wherein the top orifice is sized to receive the outlet of the soft-serve ice cream machine in a male-female configuration (Fig. 3), and wherein the inverted funnel further comprises a down-spout portion (31) extending downwardly from the top orifice towards the bottom orifice, wherein the down-spout portion has an internal diameter that is the same or substantially the same as the top orifice (Fig. 3). Regarding claim 4, the inverted funnel comprises on outwardly flaring portion (20) between the bottom orifice and the down-spout portion. Regarding claim 14, further comprising a coupling component releasably engaged with the inverted funnel and the shape-forming plate (implied in col. 4, lines 60-64), wherein the coupling component releasably couples the inverted funnel directly or indirectly to the shape-forming plate (col. 4, lines 60-64). Regarding claim 17, Weinreich discloses a system, comprising: (i) an apparatus according to claim 1; and (ii) a soft-serve ice cream machine including a product outlet (11 or 30), wherein the product outlet of the soft-serve ice cream machine is directly or indirectly coupled to the inverted funnel of the apparatus (Figs. 1 and 3). Regarding claim 18, Weinreich discloses a method of making a shaped frozen food serving, comprising: (i) providing an apparatus configured to spread and shape a flowable frozen food according to claim 1; (ii) discharging a flowable frozen food from a soft-serve ice cream machine into the apparatus (col. 3, lines 5-24); (iii) receiving the flowable frozen food in the apparatus (col. 3, lines 33-39), passing the flowable frozen food through the apparatus (col. 3, lines 33-39), and discharging the flowable frozen food from the apparatus to provide a shaped frozen food serving (col. 3, lines 33-39). Regarding claim 19, the method further comprising directly or indirectly attaching the apparatus onto an outlet (11 or 30) of the soft-serve ice cream machine. 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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinreich. Regarding claim 2, Weinreich does not explicitly disclose the second area is at least about 2 times larger than the first area. However, Figs. 1 and 3 of Weinreich show the second area appears to be at least about 2 times larger than the first area. Weinreich teaches that the size of the second area is important for reducing friction between the flowable material and the wall of the funnel (col. 3, lines 40-54). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the second area to be at least about 2 times larger than the first area, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05 II-A). Furthermore, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations. Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinreich in view of Forth et al. (2987859). Regarding claim 15, Weinreich DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the coupling component comprises one or more screws, one or more nuts-and-bolts, a clamp, or one or more clips. Attention, however, is directed to the Forth reference, which discloses a coupling component comprises one or more screws, one or more nuts-and-bolts, a clamp, or one or more clips (col. 2, lines 61-63). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Weinreich reference in view of the teachings of the Forth reference by including one or more screws, one or more nuts-and-bolts, a clamp, or one or more clips because Weinreich teaches that any suitable means may be employed to releasably connect the funnel and the plate (col. 4, lines 60-64). Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinreich in view of Ney (5208050). Regarding claim 16, Weinreich DIFFERS in that it does not disclose the inverted funnel may comprise one or more o-rings housed in associated grooves, wherein the one or more o-rings are located to interface directly or indirectly with an outlet of a soft-serve ice cream machine. Attention, however, is directed to the Ney reference, which discloses one or more o-rings housed in associated grooves (col.5, lines 52-55). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Weinreich reference in view of the teachings of the Ney reference by including one or more o-rings housed in associated grooves in the funnel because o-rings are a well-known means for creating a fluid seal to prevent leaks. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-13 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONNELL ALAN LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5610. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM-5PM. 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, PAUL DURAND can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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. /DONNELL A LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754 /PAUL R DURAND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754 November 17, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 25, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600613
BEATER BAR FOR FROZEN BEVERAGE DISPENSING MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12589923
MAGNETIC SUCTION STRUCTURE OF VACUUM CUP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575703
Hand Sanitizer Dispensing Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12558827
Parabolic Mixing Nozzle
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12551738
RETRACTABLE SPOUT CLOSURE SYSTEM WITH FLAME MITIGATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+15.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1251 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month