DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application and claims filed on May 08,2024. Claims 1-16 are pending, with claims 1 and 13 in independent claim form.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. IN 202311037828 filed on 06/01/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “an adjustment level” of claim 4 line 6, must be referred and shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “an adjustment ring” of claim 4 line 4, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Throughout the claims the recitation of “a first axis of rotation (A1); an auger configured to rotate about a second axis of rotation (A2)“ is suggested to be replaced with “a first axis of rotation; an auger configured to rotate about a second axis of rotation“, please remove the parentheses.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13-16 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 13 is redundant since the only difference to claim 1 is the preamble.
Claim 16 in lines 1-2, recited the limitations “wherein the food-product grinding assembly is configured to be retro-fitted to the food processing device” is indefinite, the limitation of the claim is unclear since the food processing device of claim 1 discloses the same limitation of claim 13.
Claim 16 in line 2, recited the limitations “the food processing device”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims not specifically recited are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim. Appropriate clarification is required.
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.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eicher DE Publication (102,016,103,806) hereinafter Eicher1 in view of Eicher et al. US Patent (9,844,291) hereinafter Eicher2.
Regarding claim 1,
Eicher1 discloses a food processing device (1) comprising:
a rotation source (2) generating a rotatory motion (inherent function of motor) about a first axis of rotation (see fig.1 below);
an auger (24) configured to rotate about a second axis of rotation (marked as R), the auger (24) being mechanically coupled to the rotation source (2, see Col.4 lines 39-44),
PNG
media_image1.png
463
768
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the rotation source (2) is configured to impart rotatory motion to the auger (24, see Col.4 lines 39-44),
wherein the auger (24) is configured to receive a food-product from a top passage (see fig.1) and transfer the food-product towards a bottom passage (see fig.1); and
a cutter assembly (13,14) positioned vertically below the auger (24), the cutter assembly (13,14) configured to receive the food-product from the auger (24) via the bottom passage, wherein the cutter assembly (13,14) comprises:
a stator cutter (13); and
a rotating cutter (14) configured to rotate relative to the stator cutter (13),
wherein the auger (24) is mechanically coupled to the rotating cutter (14) via a coupler (17,23) to cause the rotating cutter (14) to rotate about the second axis of rotation, to grind the food product (see pag. 5 lines 26-51 and pag.6 lines 1-4).
Eicher1 is silent about the first axis of rotation of the rotation source to be offset from the second axis of rotation of the auger.
Eicher1 and Eicher2 disclose both art in the same field of endeavor of the claimed invention (i.e. food processing device).
Eicher2, in a similar art, teaches a coffee mill (fig.1) with a first axis of rotation (marked as 17 in fig.4) of the rotation source (1) to be offset from a second axis of rotation (R) of the auger (24, see fig. 1)
Eicher2 teaches the axles of rotation to save in space and ensure the perfect arrangement of combination of the mill (see Col.2 lines 6-8), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the food processing device of Eicher1 with the first axis of rotation of the rotation source to be offset from the second axis of rotation of the auger as taught by Eicher2, as it would be beneficiary to Eicher1 to be able to save in space and ensure the perfect arrangement of combination of the mill and facilitate accessibility during repair.
Regarding claim 2,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Eicher1 further discloses a hopper (22) positioned vertically above the auger (24,see fig.1), wherein the hopper (22) is configured to store the food-product to be grinded, and wherein the hopper(22) is further configured to supply the food-product to the auger (24), via a bottom opening of the hopper and the top passage of the auger (see fig.1).
Regarding claim 3,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Eicher1 further discloses an adjustment assembly (12,18-21), configured to cause the stator cutter (13) to move vertically relative to the rotating cutter (14) along the second axis of rotation (R).
Regarding claim 4,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 3,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the adjustment assembly (12,18-21) comprises: an adjustment sleeve (20),
wherein the stator cutter (13) is fitted to the adjustment sleeve (20); an adjustment ring (18) coupled to the adjustment sleeve (20) and positioned concentrically outside the adjustment sleeve (20); and an adjustment lever (21) fitted to the adjustment ring (18),
wherein the adjustment ring (18) is configured to be rotated via operation of the adjustment lever (21, vertical push of element 21), to cause the adjustment sleeve (20) and the stator cutter (13) to move vertically relative to the rotating cutter (14) along the second axis of rotation (R, see Col.4 lines 39-44 and col.5 lines 1-12).
Regarding claim 5,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 4,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the adjustment ring (18) is coupled to the adjustment sleeve(20) via a threaded coupling (19, see fig.1, element 20 is connected to element 7 and element 7 threaded to element 18).
Regarding claim 6,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the coupler (17,23) is a vertical shaft (see fig.1), wherein the vertical shaft (17,23) is coupled to a nozzle (6) at a bottom end of the shaft (see fig.1).
Regarding claim 7,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Eicher1 further discloses a gear assembly (3), wherein the rotation source (2) is configured to impart rotatory motion to the auger (24) via the gear assembly (3).
Regarding claim 8,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 7,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the gear assembly (3) comprises: a primary gear coupled with the rotation source (2); and a secondary gear fitted to the auger (24) and engaged to with the primary gear (pag.2 lines 45-48 recited planetary gear which conventionally consist of a primary gear and secondary gears).
Regarding claim 9,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 7,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the gear assembly (3) further comprises a planetary gear assembly (see pag.2 lines 45-48).
Regarding claim 10,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Eicher1 further discloses the hopper (22) with storage area (space in the center of element 22).
Eicher1 is silent about the hopper to be positioned adjacent to the rotation source and is separated from the rotation source by a wall of the hopper.
Eicher2, in the similar art, teaches a coffee mill (fig.1) with a hopper (12) to be positioned adjacent to the rotation source (1) and is separated from the rotation source (1) by a wall of the hopper (12, see fig. 4 showing element 4 as one piece/wall).
Eicher2 teaches the arrangement of the hopper and motor to save in space and ensure the perfect arrangement of combination of the mill (see Col.2 lines 6-8), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the food processing device of Eicher1 with the hopper to be positioned adjacent to the rotation source and is separated from the rotation source by a wall of the hopper as taught by Eicher2, as it would be beneficiary to Eicher1 to be able to save in space and ensure the perfect arrangement of combination of the mill and facilitate accessibility during repair.
Regarding claim 11,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the auger (24) is configured to transfer the food-product in a grinding region (grinding gap), conventional with coffee cone grinder) between the stator cutter (13) and the rotating cutter (14).
Regarding claim 12,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 1,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the rotation source (2) is one of: an electric motor, or a handle configured to be operated manually (see col.4 line 21).
Regarding claim 13,
Eicher1 discloses a food-product grinding assembly (2) comprising:
an auger (24) configured to mechanically couple to a rotation source (2) of a food processing device,
wherein the rotation source (2) is configured to generate a rotatory motion (inherent function of motor) about a first axis of rotation (see fig.1 of claim 1),
wherein upon coupling, the auger (24) is configured to be rotated by the rotation source (2, see Col.4 lines 39-44),
wherein the auger (24) is configured to receive a food-product from a top passage (see fig.1) and transfer the food-product towards a bottom passage (see fig.1); and
a cutter assembly (13,14) positioned vertically below the auger (24), the cutter assembly (13,14) configured to receive the food-product from the auger (24) via the bottom passage, wherein the cutter assembly (13,14) comprises:
a stator cutter (13); and
a rotating cutter (14) configured to rotate relative to the stator cutter (13),
wherein the auger (24) is mechanically coupled to the rotating cutter (14) via a coupler (17,23) to cause the rotating cutter (14) to rotate about the second axis of rotation, to grind the food product (see pag. 5 lines 26-51 and pag.6 lines 1-4).
Eicher1 is silent about the first axis of rotation of the rotation source to be offset from the second axis of rotation of the auger.
Eicher1 and Eicher2 disclose both art in the same field of endeavor of the claimed invention (i.e. food processing device).
Eicher2, in a similar art, teaches a coffee mill (fig.1) with a first axis of rotation (marked as 17 in fig.4) of the rotation source (1) to be offset from a second axis of rotation (R) of the auger (24, see fig. 1)
Eicher2 teaches the axles of rotation to save in space and ensure the perfect arrangement of combination of the mill (see Col.2 lines 6-8), therefore it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan before the effective filing date to manufacture the food processing device of Eicher1 with the first axis of rotation of the rotation source to be offset from the second axis of rotation of the auger as taught by Eicher2, as it would be beneficiary to Eicher1 to be able to save in space and ensure the perfect arrangement of combination of the mill and facilitate accessibility during repair.
Regarding claim 14,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 13,
Eicher1 further discloses an adjustment assembly (12,18-21), configured to cause the stator cutter (13) to move vertically relative to the rotating cutter (14) along the second axis of rotation (R).
wherein the adjustment assembly (12,18-21) comprises: an adjustment sleeve (20),
wherein the stator cutter (13) is fitted to the adjustment sleeve (20); an adjustment ring (18) coupled to the adjustment sleeve (20) and positioned concentrically outside the adjustment sleeve (20);
wherein the adjustment ring (18) is coupled to the adjustment sleeve (20) via threaded coupling (19, see fig.1, element 20 is connected to element 7 and element 7 threaded to element 18); and an adjustment lever (21) fitted to the adjustment ring (18),
wherein the adjustment ring (18) is configured to be rotated via operation of the adjustment lever (21, vertical push of element 21), to cause the adjustment sleeve (20) and the stator cutter (13) to move vertically relative to the rotating cutter (14) along the second axis of rotation (R, see Col.4 lines 39-44 and col.5 lines 1-12).
Regarding claim 15,
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 13,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the auger (24) is configured to mechanically couple to the rotation source (2) of the food processing device via a gear assembly (3),
wherein the gear assembly (3) comprises: a primary gear fitted to the rotation source (2); the gear assembly (3) comprises a secondary gear fitted to the auger (24) and the primary gear is configured to couple with the secondary gear to transfer rotatory motion from the rotation source to the auger of the food-product grinding assembly (pag.2 lines 45-48 recited planetary gear which conventionally consist of a primary gear and secondary gears).
Regarding claim 16, (as best understood)
The prior art Eicher1 as modified by Eicher2 discloses all limitation of claim 13,
Eicher1 further discloses wherein the food-product grinding assembly is configured to be retro-fitted to the food processing device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Smith O. BAPTHELUS whose telephone number is (571)272-5976. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-6:00.
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, Christopher L. Templeton can be reached at (571)270 1477. 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.
March 5, 2026
/BSO/Examiner, Art Unit 3725
/Christopher L Templeton/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3725