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 .
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 05/20/2026. The previous claim interpretations have been withdrawn. Furthermore, the previous 35 USC 112 rejections have been partially withdrawn. Claims 1-20 remain pending for consideration.
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.
Claims 1-20 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "liquid" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, the phrase “a housing defining an ice-making chamber to receive liquid” will be interpreted as -- a housing defining an ice-making chamber to receive a liquid --
Claim 5 recites the limitation “a length of the protrusion” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, the phrase “a length of the protrusion” will be interpreted as -- the length of the protrusion --
Claim 9 recites the limitation "liquid" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, the phrase “a housing defining an ice-making chamber to receive liquid” will be interpreted as -- a housing defining an ice-making chamber to receive a liquid --
Claim 13 recites the limitation "heating element" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For examination purposes, the phrase “wherein heating element” will be interpreted as -- wherein the heater --
Claims 2-4, 6-8, 10-12, 14-17, and 19-20 are also objected due to dependency.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 9-11, 14-15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitchell et al. (US 20170234594 A1, herein after referred to as Mitchell), in view of Dai et al. (CN114719479A, herein after referred to as Dai), in view of Lee (KR20190096531A), and in further view of Cao et al. (CN218781481U, herein after referred to as Cao).
Regarding claim 1, Mitchell teaches an ice-making system (ice making assembly 160 Fig. 3) for a household appliance (refrigerator appliance 100 Fig. 1), comprising: a housing (casing 170 Fig. 4) defining an ice-making chamber (chamber 173 Fig. 4) to receive a liquid (paragraph [0030]); an extrusion head (extruder 175 and extruder die 220 Figs. 4-5) coupled with the housing (Fig. 5), the extrusion head comprising a plurality of openings (extruding openings 222 Fig. 5) configured to receive ice (paragraph [0026]); and a heater (heater 180 Fig. 3) positioned proximate and external to the extrusion head (Figs. 3-4).
Mitchell teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the heater to heat the extrusion head at a temperature that is based on a preselected ice hardness level”.
However, Dai teaches a heater (the disclosed “heating module” in paragraph [9] corresponds to the heating element of Mitchell) to heat an extrusion head (the disclosed “ice outlet” in paragraph [9] corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell) at a temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with the disclosed “preset hardness” in paragraph [9]) that is based on a preselected ice hardness level (disclosed “preset hardness” of the ice cubes in paragraph [9]) to adjust the hardness of the generated ice cubes according to user needs (paragraph [7]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Mitchell to include “the heater to heat the extrusion head at a temperature that is based on a preselected ice hardness level” in view of the teachings of Dai to adjust the hardness of the generated ice cubes according to user needs.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “an ice breaker coupled with a protrusion of the extrusion head, wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion”.
However, Lee teaches an ice breaker (compression member 32 Fig. 3b) coupled with a protrusion of an extrusion head (upper platform of cylindrical body 31 Fig. 3b where cylindrical body 31 corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell), wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion (paragraph [0050] where it is disclosed that compression member 32 is assembled by “screw fitting”) to simplify the repair process when leakage occurs (paragraph [0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “an ice breaker coupled with a protrusion of the extrusion head, wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion” in view of the teachings of Lee to simplify the repair process when leakage occurs.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “to adjust a position of the ice breaker along a length of the protrusion and relative to a surface of the extrusion head”.
However, Cao teaches to adjust a position of an ice breaker (paragraph [25] and Fig. 2 where ice folding head 3 corresponds to the ice breaker of Lee) along a length of a protrusion (corresponds to the length of telescopic rod 13 Fig. 2 where telescopic rod 13 corresponds to the protrusion of Lee) and relative to a surface an extrusion head (upper surface of extruder body 1 paragraph [25] and Fig. 1 where extruder body 1 corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell) to obtain ice with the required length (paragraph [25]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “to adjust a position of the ice breaker along a length of the protrusion and relative to a surface of the extrusion head” in view of the teachings of Cao to obtain ice with the required length.
Regarding claim 9, Mitchell teaches a household appliance (refrigerator appliance 100 Fig. 1) comprising: an ice storage compartment (ice storage bin 164 Fig. 3); an ice-making system (ice making assembly 160 Fig. 3), the ice-making system comprising: a housing (casing 170 Fig. 4) defining an ice-making chamber (chamber 173 Fig. 4) to receive a liquid (paragraph [0030]); an extrusion head (extruder 175 and extruder die 220 Figs. 4-5) coupled with the housing (Fig. 5), the extrusion head comprising a plurality of openings (extruding openings 222 Fig. 5) configured to receive ice (paragraph [0026]); and a heater (heater 180 Fig. 3) configured to prevent a system failure (understood to be “when ice prevents or hinders rotation” of the auger as disclosed in paragraph [0027]) associated with the ice-making system (paragraph [0027]).
Mitchell teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the heater configured to heat the housing at a temperature that is based on a preselected ice hardness level”.
However, Dai teaches a heater (the disclosed “heating module” in paragraph [9] corresponds to the heating element of Mitchell) configured to heat a housing (the disclosed “ice outlet” in paragraph [9] corresponds to the housing of Mitchell) at a temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with the disclosed “preset hardness” in paragraph [9]) that is based on a preselected ice hardness level (disclosed “preset hardness” of the ice cubes in paragraph [9]) to adjust the hardness of the generated ice cubes according to user needs (paragraph [7]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Mitchell to include “the heater configured to heat the housing at a temperature that is based on a preselected ice hardness level” in view of the teachings of Dai to adjust the hardness of the generated ice cubes according to user needs.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “an ice breaker coupled with a protrusion of the extrusion head, wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion”.
However, Lee teaches an ice breaker (compression member 32 Fig. 3b) coupled with a protrusion of an extrusion head (upper platform of cylindrical body 31 Fig. 3b where cylindrical body 31 corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell), wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion (paragraph [0050] where it is disclosed that compression member 32 is assembled by “screw fitting”) to simplify the repair process when leakage occurs (paragraph [0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “an ice breaker coupled with a protrusion of the extrusion head, wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion” in view of the teachings of Lee to simplify the repair process when leakage occurs.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “to adjust a position of the ice breaker along a length of the protrusion and relative to a surface of the extrusion head”.
However, Cao teaches to adjust a position of an ice breaker (paragraph [25] and Fig. 2 where ice folding head 3 corresponds to the ice breaker of Lee) along a length of a protrusion (corresponds to the length of telescopic rod 13 Fig. 2 where telescopic rod 13 corresponds to the protrusion of Lee) and relative to a surface an extrusion head (upper surface of extruder body 1 paragraph [25] and Fig. 1 where extruder body 1 corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell) to obtain ice with the required length (paragraph [25]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “to adjust a position of the ice breaker along a length of the protrusion and relative to a surface of the extrusion head” in view of the teachings of Cao to obtain ice with the required length.
Regarding claim 18, Mitchell teaches a method (the method described in paragraph [0026]) for producing ice pellets (disclosed “ice nuggets” in paragraph [0026]), the method comprising: receiving, at a housing (casing 170 Fig. 4) defining an ice-making chamber (chamber 173 Fig. 4), a liquid (paragraph [0030]); producing ice (paragraph [0026]) from the liquid in the housing using a heat exchange system (disclosed “sealed system” in paragraph [0027] of Mitchell and fan 176 Fig. 3) associated with the housing (paragraph [0027]); heating an extrusion head (extruder 175 and extruder die 220 Figs. 4-5 and paragraph [0027]) coupled with the housing using a heater (heater 180 Fig. 3) positioned proximate and external to the extrusion head (Figs. 3-4); receiving the ice at a plurality of openings of the extrusion head (extruding openings 222 Fig. 5 and paragraph [0026]), wherein the ice is moved to the plurality of openings by an auger (auger 172 Fig. 4 and paragraph [0026]) positioned in the housing (Figs. 4-5); and forming the ice pellets by movement of the ice through the plurality of openings of the heated extrusion head (paragraph [0026]).
Mitchell teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the method for producing the ice pellets based on a preselected ice hardness level, the method comprising wherein a temperature to which the extrusion head is heated by the heater is based on the preselected ice hardness level”.
However, Dai teaches a method (the method described in paragraph [9] corresponds to the method of Mitchell) for producing ice pellets (paragraph [9]) based on a preselected ice hardness level (disclosed “preset hardness” of the ice cubes in paragraph [9]), the method comprising wherein a temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with the disclosed “preset hardness” in paragraph [9]) to which an extrusion head (the disclosed “ice outlet” in paragraph [9] corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell) is heated by a heater (the disclosed “heating module” in paragraph [9] corresponds to the heating element of Mitchell) is based on the preselected ice hardness level (paragraph [9]) to adjust the hardness of the generated ice cubes according to user needs (paragraph [7]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of Mitchell to include “the method for producing the ice pellets based on a preselected ice hardness level, the method comprising wherein a temperature to which the extrusion head is heated by the heater is based on the preselected ice hardness level” in view of the teachings of Dai to adjust the hardness of the generated ice cubes according to user needs.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the method comprising forming the ice pellets by cutting the ice pellets from the ice using an ice breaker, wherein the ice breaker is coupled with a protrusion of the extrusion head, and wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion”.
However, Lee teaches a method (the method described in paragraph [0047] corresponds to the method of Mitchell) comprising forming ice pellets (the disclosed “square ice” in paragraph [0047] corresponds to the ice pellets of Mitchell) by cutting the ice pellets from ice (paragraph [0047]) using an ice breaker (compression member 32 Fig. 3b), wherein the ice breaker is coupled with a protrusion of an extrusion head (upper platform of cylindrical body 31 Fig. 3b where cylindrical body 31 corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell), and wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion (paragraph [0050] where it is disclosed that compression member 32 is assembled by “screw fitting”) to simplify the repair process when leakage occurs (paragraph [0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of the combined teachings to include “the method comprising forming the ice pellets by cutting the ice pellets from the ice using an ice breaker, wherein the ice breaker is coupled with a protrusion of the extrusion head, and wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the protrusion” in view of the teachings of Lee to simplify the repair process when leakage occurs.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the method comprising to adjust a position of the ice breaker along a length of the protrusion and relative to a surface of the extrusion head”.
However, Cao teaches a method (the method described in paragraph [25] corresponds to the method of Mitchell) comprising to adjust a position of an ice breaker (paragraph [25] and Fig. 2 where ice folding head 3 corresponds to the ice breaker of Lee) along a length of a protrusion (corresponds to the length of telescopic rod 13 Fig. 2 where telescopic rod 13 corresponds to the protrusion of Lee) and relative to a surface an extrusion head (upper surface of extruder body 1 paragraph [25] and Fig. 1 where extruder body 1 corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell) to obtain ice with the required length (paragraph [25]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of the combined teachings to include “the method comprising to adjust a position of the ice breaker along a length of the protrusion and relative to a surface of the extrusion head” in view of the teachings of Cao to obtain ice with the required length.
Regarding claims 2 and 10, the combined teachings teach further comprising: a heat exchange system (disclosed “sealed system” in paragraph [0027] of Mitchell and fan 176 Fig. 3 of Mitchell) configured to produce the ice from the liquid in the ice-making chamber (paragraph [0027] of Mitchell); and an auger (auger 172 Fig. 4 of Mitchell) positioned in the housing (Fig. 4 of Mitchell) and configured to move the ice toward the extrusion head (paragraph [0026] of Mitchell).
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach further comprising a motor and gear box assembly (housing 240 and motor 174 Fig. 8 of Mitchell where a person skilled in the art would recognize that the motor would include a gear system that would allow the motor to transfer its rotational movement to shaft 232) configured to rotate the auger (paragraph [0040] of Mitchell), wherein a component of the motor and gear box (shaft 232 Fig. 7 of Mitchell) traverses the extrusion head and is coupled with the auger (Fig. 7 and paragraph [0039] of Mitchell).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, the combined teachings teach wherein the protrusion comprises a screw thread (paragraph [0050] of Lee where it is disclosed that compression member 32 is assembled by “screw fitting”), and wherein the ice breaker is rotatable about the screw thread (paragraph [0050] and Fig. 3b of Lee) to adjust the position of the ice breaker along the length of the protrusion and relative to the surface of the extrusion head (paragraph [25] of Cao).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, the combined teachings teach wherein the housing is a first housing (casing 170 Fig. 4 of Mitchell), and wherein the ice-making system further comprises a second housing (air duct 200 Fig. 4 of Mitchell), wherein the first housing and the extrusion head are positioned within the second housing (Fig. 4 of Mitchell).
Regarding claim 11, the combined teachings teach wherein the ice-making system further comprises a motor and gear box assembly (housing 240 and motor 174 Fig. 8 of Mitchell where a person skilled in the art would recognize that the motor would include a gear system that would allow the motor to transfer its rotational movement to shaft 232) configured to rotate the auger (paragraph [0040] of Mitchell), wherein a component of the motor and gear box (shaft 232 Fig. 7 of Mitchell) traverses the extrusion head and is coupled with the auger (Fig. 7 and paragraph [0039] of Mitchell).
Regarding claim 17, the combined teachings teach wherein the household appliance is a refrigerator (refrigerator appliance 100 Fig. 1 of Mitchell).
Regarding claim 19, the combined teachings teach further comprising: rotating the auger (paragraph [0040] of Mitchell) using a component (shaft 232 Fig. 7 of Mitchell) of a motor and gear box assembly (housing 240 and motor 174 Fig. 8 of Mitchell where a person skilled in the art would recognize that the motor would include a gear system that would allow the motor to transfer its rotational movement to shaft 232) configured to rotate the auger (paragraph [0040] of Mitchell), wherein the component of the motor and gear box traverses the extrusion head and is coupled with the auger (Fig. 7 and paragraph [0039] of Mitchell).
Claims 4, 12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitchell, Dai, Lee, and Cao as applied to claims 1, 9, and 20 above, and further in view of Wada (JP5070946B2).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach wherein the temperature is a first temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with the disclosed “preset hardness” in paragraph [9] of Dai) and wherein the ice-making system further comprises a controller (controller 190 Fig. 3 of Mitchell) configured to, based on the preselected ice hardness level (paragraph [9] of Dai), transmit a first signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate motor 174 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to a motor of the motor and gear box assembly (motor 174 Fig. 5 of Mitchell) to control a rotations per minute (RPM) of the auger (paragraph [0040] of Mitchell where it is understood that the rotational speed of auger 172 corresponds to the disclosed RPM of the auger), transmit a third signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate heater 180 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to the heater to control the first temperature at which the heater heats the extrusion head (paragraph [9] of Dai), and transmit a fourth signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate fan 176 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to the heat exchange system to control a second temperature of the housing (paragraph [0028] of Mitchell where the generated temperature associated to the control of fan 176 corresponds the disclosed second temperature of the housing).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the controller configured to, based on the preselected ice hardness level, transmit a second signal to a liquid fill assembly to control a volume of liquid received by the housing”.
However, Wada teaches a controller (the disclosed “control unit” in paragraph [0021] corresponds to the control unit of Mitchell) configured to, based on a preselected ice hardness level (the level of hardness associated with the disclosed “good quality ice chips” disclosed in paragraph [0007] corresponds to the preselected ice hardness level of Dai), transmit a second signal (corresponds to the signal generated by the control unit when operating water inlet valve 9 as described in paragraph [0021]) to a liquid fill assembly (water inlet valve 9 Fig. 1) to control a volume of a liquid (paragraphs [0007] and [0021]) received by a housing (the disclosed “ice making cylinder” in paragraph [0007] corresponds to the housing of Mitchell) to avoid overloading the drive motor (paragraph [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “the controller configured to, based on the preselected ice hardness level, transmit a second signal to a liquid fill assembly to control a volume of liquid received by the housing” in view of the teachings of Wada to avoid overloading the drive motor.
Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach wherein the temperature is a first temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with the disclosed “preset hardness” in paragraph [9] of Dai) and wherein the ice-making system further comprises a controller (controller 190 Fig. 3 of Mitchell) configured to, based on the preselected ice hardness level (paragraph [9] of Dai), transmit a first signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate motor 174 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to a motor of the motor and gear box assembly (motor 174 Fig. 5 of Mitchell) to control a rotations per minute (RPM) of the auger (paragraph [0040] of Mitchell where it is understood that the rotational speed of auger 172 corresponds to the disclosed RPM of the auger), transmit a third signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate heater 180 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to the heater to control the first temperature at which the heater heats the extrusion head (paragraph [9] of Dai), and transmit a fourth signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate fan 176 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to a heat exchange system (disclosed “sealed system” in paragraph [0027] of Mitchell and fan 176 Fig. 3 of Mitchell) to control a second temperature of the housing (paragraph [0028] of Mitchell where the generated temperature associated to the control of fan 176 corresponds the disclosed second temperature of the housing).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the controller configured to, based on the preselected ice hardness level, transmit a second signal to a liquid fill assembly to control a volume of the liquid received by the housing”.
However, Wada teaches a controller (the disclosed “control unit” in paragraph [0021] corresponds to the control unit of Mitchell) configured to, based on a preselected ice hardness level (the level of hardness associated with the disclosed “good quality ice chips” disclosed in paragraph [0007] corresponds to the preselected ice hardness level of Dai), transmit a second signal (corresponds to the signal generated by the control unit when operating water inlet valve 9 as described in paragraph [0021]) to a liquid fill assembly (water inlet valve 9 Fig. 1) to control a volume of the liquid (paragraphs [0007] and [0021]) received by a housing (the disclosed “ice making cylinder” in paragraph [0007] corresponds to the housing of Mitchell) to avoid overloading the drive motor (paragraph [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “the controller configured to, based on the preselected ice hardness level, transmit a second signal to a liquid fill assembly to control a volume of the liquid received by the housing” in view of the teachings of Wada to avoid overloading the drive motor.
Regarding claim 20, the combined teachings teach wherein the temperature is a first temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with the disclosed “preset hardness” in paragraph [9] of Dai), and wherein the method further comprises: transmitting, by a controller (controller 190 Fig. 3 of Mitchell) and based on the preselected ice hardness level (paragraph [9] of Dai), a first signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate motor 174 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to a motor of the motor and gear box assembly (motor 174 Fig. 5 of Mitchell) to control a rotations per minute (RPM) of the auger (paragraph [0040] of Mitchell where it is understood that the rotational speed of auger 172 corresponds to the disclosed RPM of the auger), a third signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate heater 180 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to the heater to control the first temperature at which the heater heats the extrusion head (paragraph [9] of Dai), and a fourth signal (understood to be the signal generated by controller 190 to activate and operate fan 176 as disclosed in paragraph [0028] of Mitchell) to a heat exchange system (disclosed “sealed system” in paragraph [0027] of Mitchell and fan 176 Fig. 3 of Mitchell) to control a second temperature of the housing (paragraph [0028] of Mitchell where the generated temperature associated to the control of fan 176 corresponds the disclosed second temperature of the housing).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the method comprising transmitting by the controller and based on the preselected ice hardness level a second signal to a liquid fill assembly to control a volume of the liquid received by the housing”.
However, Wada teaches a method (the method disclosed in paragraph [0007] corresponds to the method of Mitchell) comprising transmitting by a controller (the disclosed “control unit” in paragraph [0021] corresponds to the control unit of Mitchell) and based on a preselected ice hardness level (the level of hardness associated with the disclosed “good quality ice chips” disclosed in paragraph [0007] corresponds to the preselected ice hardness level of Dai) a second signal (corresponds to the signal generated by the control unit when operating water inlet valve 9 as described in paragraph [0021]) to a liquid fill assembly (water inlet valve 9 Fig. 1) to control a volume of a liquid (paragraphs [0007] and [0021]) received by a housing (the disclosed “ice making cylinder” in paragraph [0007] corresponds to the housing of Mitchell) to avoid overloading the drive motor (paragraph [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of the combined teachings to include “the method comprising transmitting by the controller and based on the preselected ice hardness level a second signal to a liquid fill assembly to control a volume of the liquid received by the housing” in view of the teachings of Wada to avoid overloading the drive motor.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitchell, Dai, Lee, and Cao as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Sugie et al. (JP2004093024A, herein after referred to as Sugie).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “further comprising a tank and an inlet line, wherein the inlet line is coupled with an outlet of the tank and an inlet of the housing, and wherein the inlet line is configured to transfer the liquid from the tank to the housing”.
However, Sugie teaches further comprising a tank (water supply tank 50b Fig. 2) and an inlet line (water supply pipe 52 Fig. 2), wherein the inlet line is coupled with an outlet of the tank (Fig. 2) and an inlet of a housing (Fig. 2 where ice-making cylinder 10 corresponds to the housing of Mitchell), and wherein the inlet line is configured to transfer a liquid (the disclosed “water” in paragraph [0034] corresponds to the liquid of Mitchell) from the tank to the housing (paragraph [0034]) to supply water to the housing (paragraph [0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “further comprising a tank and an inlet line, wherein the inlet line is coupled with an outlet of the tank and an inlet of the housing, and wherein the inlet line is configured to transfer the liquid from the tank to the housing” in view of the teachings of Sugie to supply water to the housing.
Claims 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitchell and Dai as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20100251733 A1, herein after referred to as Kim) and Sugie.
Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach wherein the heater is a first heater (the disclosed “heating module” in paragraph [9] of Dai) and the temperature is a first temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with the disclosed “preset hardness” in paragraph [9] of Dai).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the system further comprises a second heater”.
However, Kim teaches wherein the system further comprises a second heater (first heater 131 Fig. 4 where second heater 132 corresponds to the first heater of Mitchell) to separate ice in a stepwise manner (paragraph [0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the system further comprises a second heater” in view of the teachings of Kim to separate ice in a stepwise manner.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the second heater configured to prevent a system failure associated with the ice-making system and to heat the housing at a second temperature that is based on the preselected ice hardness level”.
However, Sugie teaches a second heater (ice melt heater 40 Fig. 2 corresponds to the second heater of Kim) configured to prevent a system failure (prevent “ice clogging” as disclosed in paragraph [0003]) associated with an ice-making system (ice maker main body B Fig. 2 corresponds to the ice-making system of Mitchell) and to heat a housing (ice-making cylinder 10 Fig. 2 corresponds to the housing of Mitchell) at a second temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with ice melt heater 40 when energized due to the rotation speed of induction motor 31 being equal or less than a threshold value as described in paragraph [0086]) that is based on a preselected ice hardness level (the hardness associated with the disclosed “high-quality ice” corresponds to the preselected ice hardness of Dai) to reduce unnecessary power consumption (paragraph [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “the second heater configured to prevent a system failure associated with the ice-making system and to heat the housing at a second temperature that is based on the preselected ice hardness level” in view of the teachings of Sugie to reduce unnecessary power consumption.
Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach wherein the heater is a first heater (the disclosed “heating module” in paragraph [9] of Dai) and the temperature is a first temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with the disclosed “preset hardness” in paragraph [9] of Dai).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the ice-making system further comprises a second heater”.
However, Kim teaches wherein an ice-making system (ice making device 100 Fig. 2 corresponds to the ice-making system of Mitchell) further comprises a second heater (first heater 131 Fig. 4 where second heater 132 corresponds to the first heater of Mitchell) to separate ice in a stepwise manner (paragraph [0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the ice-making system further comprises a second heater” in view of the teachings of Kim to separate ice in a stepwise manner.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the second heater positioned proximate and external to the extrusion head to heat the extrusion head at a second temperature that is based on the preselected ice hardness level”.
However, Sugie teaches a second heater (ice melt heater 40 Fig. 2 corresponds to the second heater of Kim) positioned proximate and external to an extrusion head (Fig. 2 where pressure head 12 corresponds to the extrusion head of Mitchell) to heat the extrusion head at a second temperature (corresponds to the temperature associated with ice melt heater 40 when energized due to the rotation speed of induction motor 31 being equal or less than a threshold value as described in paragraph [0086]) that is based on a preselected ice hardness level (the hardness associated with the disclosed “high-quality ice” corresponds to the preselected ice hardness of Dai) to reduce unnecessary power consumption (paragraph [0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “the second heater positioned proximate and external to the extrusion head to heat the extrusion head at a second temperature that is based on the preselected ice hardness level” in view of the teachings of Sugie to reduce unnecessary power consumption.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMBA NMN GAYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8809. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 4:30AM to 2:30PM.
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.
/SAMBA NMN GAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights