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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 11-24 in the reply filed on 12-11-25 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 have been canceled.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11 ends with a “;” but should end with a “.”.
Claim 11 recites “initiate step step (a)” the repeated second “step” term should be removed and reads “initiate step (a)”.
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.
Claim 24 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.
Claim 24 recites “closing the first valve, and opening the first valve for a second period of time”, however, claim 24 previously recites “a second valve that, when open, enables grease dissolving fluid in the manifold to flow into the tank”. These recitations are contradictory since one uses the first valve to drain the fluid and the other uses the second valve to drain the fluid. Applicants’ specification recites in paragraph 44 “When each respective spray time has ended, the pump 146 is deactivated, the applicable spray valves are closed, and the applicable dump valves are opened for a period of time, then closed”. Therefore at least one of the valves are closed when draining the manifold according to applicant’s discloser. As a result, it is unclear which valves are energized to be open in step (g).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 11 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McMinn Jr. US 5,874,292 (US’292).
Regarding claim 11, US’292 teaches a method for removing cooking grease from a commercial range hood (automatic daily cleaning of commercial kitchen exhaust hoods 5, FIG. 1, col. 9, abstract) having a vent fan (fan 8, see fig. 1, col. 8), a vent duct (flue housing 2, col. 8, fig. 1), and at least one filter (baffle filter system 600, col. 11-12), the method comprising:(a) spraying a grease dissolving fluid onto at least one cleaning surface of the commercial range hood using a first nozzle manifold having at least one first spray nozzle (spray boom assembly 23 comprised of rotary nozzles 24 for spraying washing solution inside the exhaust system, col. 10-11 and 14, see fig. 1), wherein the grease dissolving fluid is a biologically enhanced, surfactant-based compound having a neutral pH (non-toxic PH neutral surfactant/disbursant oxidizer specifically designed to promote and enhance the propagation and proliferation of microorganic life, is sprayed inside the flue and exhaust hood 2, col. 14); and(b) initiating and terminating step (a) using a controller that adapted to initiate step (a) in accordance with a first predetermined time schedule and to perform step (a) for a first predetermined period of time (, electrical component control box 205 includes control wiring and timers to perform automatic daily cleaning, abstract, col. 3-4, 5-6, 15).
Regarding claim 22 the method of US’292 teaches the method of claims 11 of removing cooking grease from commercial range hood. US’292 further teaches repeatedly performing step (a) without performing a rinse cycle between each performance of step (a) (the cleaning is performed on a daily bases which reads on repeatedly performing, and US’292 does not require a rinse cycle).
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.
Claim(s) 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’292 as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of So US 2005/0247244 (US’244).
Regarding claim 12, US’292 teaches the method of claim 11 of removing cooking grease from commercial range hood.
US’292 does not teach wherein the at least one first spray nozzle is positioned to spray the grease dissolving fluid onto a front side of the at least one filter, the front side facing downwardly toward a cooking surface.
US’244 teaches a self-cleaning exhaust system (abstract). The system includes nozzle 232 positioned in front of filter 214 which faces downward used in commercial kitchen. The nozzle produces a fine spray onto the front surface while the fan is running to facilitate cleaning of the complete filter surface (para. 2, 36, 48-54, fig. 2 and 5). Therefore US’244 teaches positioning a nozzle to spray the grease dissolving fluid onto a front side of the at least one filter, the front side facing downwardly toward a cooking surface facilitate cleaning of the complete filter surface of exhaust systems, such as the exhaust system of US’292.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of US’292 to include wherein the at least one first spray nozzle is positioned to spray the grease dissolving fluid onto a front side of the at least one filter, the front side facing downwardly toward a cooking surface because US’244 teaches facilitate cleaning of the complete filter surface and use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (C).
Regarding claim 13-16, the modified method of US’292 teaches the method of claim 12 of removing cooking grease from commercial range hood.
The modified method of US’292 does not teach (c) initiating step (a) only if the controller detects that the vent fan is running, with regard to claim 13, (d) terminating step (a) if the controller detects that the vent fan has stopped running during the performance of step (a), with regard to claim 14, (e) activating the vent fan using the controller before initiating step (a), with regard to claim 15, (f) causing the vent fan to continue running during the entire duration of step (a), with regard to claim 16.
US’244 teaches the spray 40 coats all surfaces of the first filter 14 thus enhancing the capturing of contaminants by the first filter 14. By having the spray 40 in front of the first filter 14, the spray 40 is continuously drawn to the first filter 14 under the influence of the air flow 12, and thus continuously coats the surfaces of first filter 14, and will also flush the first filter 14. The pump 328 preferably has an interlock so that when the exhaust fan is operating, the pump 328 will be operating (para. 36-56). Therefore, US’244 teaches utilizing air flow to move the cleaning spray through the exhaust system and provide controlling interlocks to cause the vent to turn on and run during the cleaning step and stop the cleaning if the fan is not running. This provides a continuous supply of cleaning fluid to the filter and exhaust system for complete cleaning.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified method of US’292 to include c) initiating step (a) only if the controller detects that the vent fan is running, with regard to claim 13, (d) terminating step (a) if the controller detects that the vent fan has stopped running during the performance of step (a), with regard to claim 14, (e) activating the vent fan using the controller before initiating step (a), with regard to claim 15, (f) causing the vent fan to continue running during the entire duration of step (a), with regard to claim 16 because US’244 teaches it provides a continuous supply of cleaning fluid to the filter and exhaust system for complete cleaning and use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (C).
Regarding claim 17, US’292 teaches the method of claim 11 of removing cooking grease from commercial range hood.
US’292 does not teach wherein the grease dissolving fluid sprayed in step (a) has a volume median diameter droplet size of no more than 150 microns.
US’244 teaches a self-cleaning exhaust system (abstract). The system includes nozzles that "atomizes" the cleaning solution 36 to form a fine spray, preferably a very fine spray (para. 36). The first cleaning spray may have droplets of a size to combine with droplets of contaminants before the contaminant droplets contact the first filter. This will assist the combined droplets falling from the air flow before contacting the first filter, and to assist the combined droplets being captured by the first filter and draining from the first filter after capture (para. 12 and 24-25). Therefore, US’244 teaches identified droplet size is a variable that affects predictable functional results regarding to the capturing of contaminants and incorporation with airflow to promote cleaning of contaminants.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of US’292 to include wherein the grease dissolving fluid sprayed in step (a) has a volume median diameter droplet size of no more than 150 microns because US’244 teaches to conform the droplet size to be large or as small as necessary to capturing of contaminants and incorporation with airflow to promote cleaning of contaminants, and one of ordinary skill in the art would know to conform the droplet size to be large or as small as necessary to achieve the desired result and it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation, see MPEP 2144.05.
Claim(s) 18-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US’292 as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Kellogg et al. US 2013/0074823 (US’823).
Regarding claim 18-19, US’292 teaches the method of claim 11 of removing cooking grease from commercial range hood.
US’292 does not teach further comprising:(g) spraying the grease dissolving fluid onto at least one cleaning surface of the commercial range hood using a second nozzle manifold having at least one second spray nozzle; and(h) initiating and terminating step (g) using the controller, the controller being adapted to initiate step (g) in accordance with a second predetermined time schedule and to perform step (g) for a second predetermined period of time, with regard to claim 18 and wherein the at least one second spray nozzle is positioned to spray the grease dissolving fluid onto the vent duct, with regard to claim 19.
US’823 teaches a cleaning system for a cooking range exhaust having a range hood (abstract). The system includes multiple spay conduits able to treat different sections of the exhaust hood and different zones. The hood spray conduit 22 can be zoned and configured to be individually actuated, such as to clean a particular portion of a range hood, as desired by a user. In an embodiment, the hood spray conduit 22 includes a plurality of individually actuatable zones, with each zone traversing a portion of the backsplash and including at least one fixed spray opening. At a first time, a first zone comprising at least one spray opening can be actuated and used to direct degreasing composition to a first portion of the backsplash. At a second later time, a second zone comprising at least one spray opening can be actuated and used to direct degreasing composition to a second portion of the backsplash. The flue spray conduit can extend into a fan subsystem as shown in FIG. 5. The flue spray conduit 24, like the hood spray conduit 22, can be zoned and configured to be individually actuated, such as to clean a particular portion of a flue, as desired by a user (para. 57-65, para. 1). Therefore, US’823 teaches providing different spray manifolds for treating different sections of the exhaust to arrange the system of US’292 to more versatile in how it treats surfaces of the exhaust.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of US’292 to include comprising:(g) spraying the grease dissolving fluid onto at least one cleaning surface of the commercial range hood using a second nozzle manifold having at least one second spray nozzle; and(h) initiating and terminating step (g) using the controller, the controller being adapted to initiate step (g) in accordance with a second predetermined time schedule and to perform step (g) for a second predetermined period of time, with regard to claim 18 and wherein the at least one second spray nozzle is positioned to spray the grease dissolving fluid onto the vent duct, with regard to claim 19 because US’823 teaches it is more versatile in how it treats surfaces of the exhaust and use of known technique to improve similar methods in the same way is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (C).
Regarding claims 20-21, the modified method of US’292 teaches the method of claim 18 of removing cooking grease from commercial range hood.
The modified method of US’292 does not teach wherein the second predetermined time schedule is different from the first predetermined time schedule, with regard to claim 20 and wherein the second predetermined period of time is different from the first predetermined period of time, with regard to claim 21.
As discussed above with regard to the teachings of US’823, US’823 teaches spray conduits can be zoned and configured to be individually actuated, such as to clean a particular portion of a flue, as desired by a user. The time of the treatment is chosen sufficient for the degreasing composition to react with grease built up (para. 52-69, para. 1). Therefore, US’823 teaches that different zone can be treated based on user preference, which would be dictated based on particular location grease built up. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated, based on the teachings of US’823, to treat different areas of the hood for different amounts of time which reads on wherein the second predetermined time schedule is different from the first predetermined time schedule, with regard to claim 20 and wherein the second predetermined period of time is different from the first predetermined period of time, with regard to claim 21
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of US’292 to include wherein the second predetermined time schedule is different from the first predetermined time schedule, with regard to claim 20 and wherein the second predetermined period of time is different from the first predetermined period of time, with regard to claim 21 because US’823 teaches to perform zone cleaning for times sufficient to react with grease built up, as desired by a user, and one of ordinary skill in the art would know to cleaning for as much or little time as necessary to achieve the desired result and it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation, see MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 23 the modified method of US’292 teaches the method of claims 18 of removing cooking grease from commercial range hood. US’292 further teaches repeatedly performing step (a) without performing a rinse cycle between each performance of step (a) (the cleaning is performed on a daily bases which reads on repeatedly performing, and US’292 does not require a rinse cycle).
Claim(s) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Welsh, II et al. US 5,472,342 (US’342) in view of Yajima US 2008/0011781 (US’781).
Regarding claim 24, US’342 teaches a method for reducing buildup and facilitating removal of cooking grease from a commercial range hood having a vent fan, a vent duct, and at least one filter (a device for removal of grease from the exhaust fumes from a kitchen exhaust hood having a filter, exhaust duct and fan, col. 1-2 and 4, fig. 2), the method comprising:(a) providing a pump (pump 65) that is in downstream fluid flow communication with a tank (reservoir 39, see fig. 2) containing a supply of a grease dissolving fluid and in upstream fluid flow communication with a manifold containing at least one opening a spray valve (spray nozzles 53 and 57 supplies water/detergent grease removing solution, col .4-5, see fig. 2); (b) providing at least one nozzle manifold in downstream fluid flow communication with the pump, each at least one nozzle manifold comprising at least one nozzle positioned and oriented to spray the grease dissolving fluid onto at least one cleaning surface of the commercial range hood (spray nozzles supplies water/detergent grease removing solution to the interior surfaces of the exhaust system, col 3-5, see fig. 2);(c) providing a first valve that, when closed, isolates the manifold from the pump (solenoid-operated valves V3 and V4 are turned on to dispense the solution, col. 3 see fig. 2); (e) providing a controller adapted to selectively energize the pump and to selectively open and close the first valve (he control and sequencing of the various valves can be done either by electrical-mechanical means with timed relays or by a programmed computing controller. The typical sequence is described hereinafter, with the operation using timing relays described as "Operation 1", and that using the programmable controller described as "Operation 2, col 3-5); (f) activating the pump and opening the first valve for a first predetermine time period, resulting in the grease dissolving fluid being sprayed from the at least on spray nozzle onto at least one cleaning surface of the commercial range hood;(g) after performing step (f), deactivating the pump, closing the first valve (the pump is activated and valves V3 and V4 are opened to shunt solution to the nozzles, the valves are closed and the pump is shut off when the cleaning cycle ends, col. 3-5).
US’342 does not teach (d) providing a second valve that, when open, enables grease dissolving fluid in the manifold to flow into the tank; the controller energizing the second valve opening the first valve for a second period of time, the second period of time being adapted to result in a portion of the grease dissolving fluid contained within the manifold at the conclusion of step (f) to drain from the manifold into the tank.
US’781 teaches a chemical liquid supply device capable of preventing chemical liquid from being discarded and applying the clean liquid is provided (abstract). The chemical liquid supply device according to the present invention further comprises a suck back valve provided between the nozzle and the application valve and returning the chemical liquid in the nozzle after applying the chemical liquid from the nozzle (para. 16). in order to prevent liquid dropping from a tip of the nozzle 11 after stopping the application of the chemical liquid, the suck back valve 26 operates to backflow the chemical liquid remaining in the nozzle 11. The chemical liquid supplied to the moving head 12 through the supply tube 21 can be returned to the buffer tank 19 through the circulation tube 27 (para. 40-41). Therefore, US’781 attempts to solve the problem of a dripping dispense nozzle by providing a valve that operates to return solution in a dispense line to a solution supply tank. This arrangement requires a valve that, when open, enables fluid to flow into a tank; for a time adapted to result in a portion of the fluid at the conclusion of a dispense step to drain into the tank for reuse and drip prevention. Applicants specification recites that the dump valve is designed to prevent dripping of the fluid once the nozzle supply is shut off, see para 6, 31-32 and 41 of applicants discloser.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of US’342 to include d) providing a second valve that, when open, enables grease dissolving fluid in the manifold to flow into the tank; the controller energizing the second valve opening the first valve for a second period of time, the second period of time being adapted to result in a portion of the grease dissolving fluid contained within the manifold at the conclusion of step (f) to drain from the manifold into the tank because US’342 teaches it prevents dripping of the dispense nozzle and applying a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious, see MPEP 2141 III (D).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN FLANAGAN BERGNER whose telephone number is (571)270-1133. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
/ERIN F BERGNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713