DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
2. Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-6 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10 August 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 18 August 2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
4. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 300, 310, 320, 330, 340, 350, 360, 370. These signs are described in pars 0054-0060 of the Specification with reference to a FIG. 11 that is also not present within the submitted drawings.
5. The drawings are further objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(g) because each sheet must include a top margin of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a left side margin of at least 2.5 cm. (1 inch), a right side margin of at least 1.5 cm. (5/8 inch), and a bottom margin of at least 1.0 cm. (3/8 inch), thereby leaving a sight no greater than 17.0 cm. by 26.2 cm. on 21.0 cm. by 29.7 cm. (DIN size A4) drawing sheets, and a sight no greater than 17.6 cm. by 24.4 cm. (6 15/16 by 9 5/8 inches) on 21.6 cm. by 27.9 cm. (8 1/2 by 11 inch) drawing sheets. See MPEP 608.02(V).
6. 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.
Specification
7. The use of the term “OVR Technology”, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Choi et al (US 20160231720 A1).
10. Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses a method for use with an aroma-emitting device (customized scent diffusing device and a customized scent diffusing method, Abstract, FIG. 12), the method comprising:
obtaining food-product data corresponding to a food product (reference scent constituting the composite scent associated with an odor of food, par 0090);
selecting, based on the food-product data, an aroma profile for the food product (determine respective centers, i.e., notes of aroma profile by applying the FCM algorithm to the reference scents, pars 0090-0091);
emitting, by the aroma-emitting device (odor to be generated by the scent diffusing device 60 based on the received information, par 0047), an aroma based on the aroma profile (composite scents to be generated by combining the respective spices…based on membership grade obtained, par 0093);
obtaining modification data corresponding to an instruction to modify the aroma (transmit the scent diffusing control message to the scent diffusing device according to the synchronization signal periodically received, pars 0057-0060); and
generating a new aroma profile for the food product based on the modification data (Information on the composite scent which needs to be generated by combining the respective spices depending on the spice cartridge configuration information may be constructed and stored in the alternate scent DB, par 0085).
Examiner notes that the scent diffusing control instruction is given periodically from the control module (pars 0059-0060) to include situations in which the instruction is to modify according to the alternative odor information (pars 0057-0058) including the specific example of modifying from a known scent A to a composite of scents C/D/E (pars 0075-0077), which satisfies the claimed method. Though not all methods of using the Choi device direct toward a food product-related scent, an alternative scent generated from the reference scent of food per FIG. 9 would fall on the spectrum of food-related scents as diagrammed per FIGS. 10A-B.
11. Regarding claim 2, Choi discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the modification data indicates an increase or decrease of one or more predetermined flavors (setting i.e. increasing the respective concentration levels of scents C, D, and E and transmit the generated information to the scent diffusing controller 10, pars 0075-0077).
12. Regarding claim 4, Choi discloses a system (scent diffusing system, par 0012, FIG. 1) comprising: an aroma-emitting device (scent diffusing device 60, pars 0031-0033, FIG. 1); a controller including one or more processors (controller 10 with various computing/processing modules, pars 0041-0043, FIGS. 1-2); and one or more computer-readable storage media storing program instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, are configured to cause the one or more processors to perform a method (prepared program is stored in a computer readable recording medium and is read and executed by a computer to implement the method of the present invention, par 0112) comprising:
obtaining food-product data corresponding to a food product (reference scent constituting the composite scent associated with an odor of food, par 0090);
selecting, based on the food-product data, an aroma profile for the food product (determine respective centers, i.e., notes of aroma profile by applying the FCM algorithm to the reference scents, pars 0090-0091);
emitting, by the aroma-emitting device (odor to be generated by the scent diffusing device 60 based on the received information, par 0047), an aroma based on the aroma profile (composite scents to be generated by combining the respective spices…based on membership grade obtained, par 0093);
obtaining modification data corresponding to an instruction to modify the aroma (transmit the scent diffusing control message to the scent diffusing device according to the synchronization signal periodically received, pars 0057-0060); and
generating a new aroma profile for the food product based on the modification data (Information on the composite scent which needs to be generated by combining the respective spices depending on the spice cartridge configuration information may be constructed and stored in the alternate scent DB, par 0085).
Examiner notes that the scent diffusing control instruction is given periodically from the control module (pars 0059-0060) to include situations in which the instruction is to modify according to the alternative odor information (pars 0057-0058) including the specific example of modifying from a known scent A to a composite of scents C/D/E (pars 0075-0077), which satisfies the claimed control method implemented by the system controller.
13. Regarding claim 5, Choi discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the modification data indicates an increase or decrease of one or more predetermined flavors (setting i.e. increasing the respective concentration levels of scents C, D, and E transmittingsmit the generated information to the scent diffusing controller 10, pars 0075-0077).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
14. 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.
15. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al (US 20160231720 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Field et al (US 20180280557 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Choi teaches the method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the food-product data includes reading information from spice cartridge such as a model number or unique fragrance ID (pars 0048-0050) that includes concentration level information or the like (par 0052). Choi does not specifically teach reading an optical code corresponding to the food product.
Field teaches an analogous scent dispenser with multiple scent cartridges and a control system (pars 0005 and 0010) wherein scent identification information can be optically read by a scanning a machine-readable symbol such as a barcode, matrix code, or the like (par 0103), the scents similarly including food or wine scents (par 0113).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include when obtaining food-product data in the method of Choi a step of reading an optical code corresponding to the food product as taught by Field, because this optical code would predictably provide the requisite scent information to enable tailorable scent release in a similar manner with a reasonable expectation of success, the modification involving combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
16. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al (US 20160231720 A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Field et al (US 20180280557 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Choi teaches the system of claim 4, wherein obtaining the food-product data includes reading information from spice cartridge such as a model number or unique fragrance ID (pars 0048-0050) that includes concentration level information or the like (par 0052). Choi does not specifically teach reading an optical code corresponding to the food product.
Field teaches an analogous scent dispenser with multiple scent cartridges and a control system (pars 0005 and 0010) wherein scent identification information can be optically read by a scanning a machine-readable symbol such as a barcode, matrix code, or the like (par 0103), the scents similarly including food or wine scents (par 0113).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include when obtaining food-product data in the control method of Choi a step of reading an optical code corresponding to the food product as taught by Field, because this optical code would predictably provide the requisite scent information to enable tailorable scent release in a similar manner with a reasonable expectation of success, the modification involving combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Conclusion
17. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ostrom et al (WO 2014087173 A1) discloses an analogous fragrance dispenser (page 1 line 32 to page 2 line 28) adapted to switch at the instruction of a timer between various food related fragrances (page 7 lines 21-33).
Manne (US 20170049597 A1) discloses an analogous system and method for delivering a sequence of scents (Title, pars 0007-0012, FIG. 2) as instructed by a processor using control signals (pars 0063-0065).
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric Talbert whose telephone number is (703)756-5538. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 Eastern Time.
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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/ERIC TALBERT/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/SEAN E CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights