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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A, Figures 1-3 and 8 in the reply filed on 01/15/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 2-13 are cancelled. Claim 1 remains pending for consideration on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/02/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the published application on 11/14/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1 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.
Claims 1 recite the phrase “and/or” which renders the claim indefinite. This language is indefinite because it is not clear what is being claimed and what the scope is. No person of the ordinary skill in the art would know what “and/or” means with reasonable certainty. Therefore, the scope is unclear and for purposes of examination, the limitations that follow “and/or” will be considered in the alternative.
Claim 1 recite “controlling the defrosting unit corresponding to the ice making evaporator to be started”. However, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claim are. It is unclear to the Examiner how the defrosting unit is controlled without a controller being recited. Clarity is advised.
Claim 1 recite “the number of ice making times of the ice making device reaches a preset number of normal defrosting ice making times”. However, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claim are. It is unclear to the Examiner how the ice making devices reaches a preset normal defrosting ice making times? Is the ice making device defrosted while simultaneously producing ice? Clarity is advised.
Claim 1 recite “the number of ice making times of the ice making device is greater than or equal to a preset number of full ice defrosting ice making times; and the number of normal defrosting ice making times is greater than the number of full ice defrosting ice making times”. However, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claim are. It is unclear to the Examiner how the number of ice making times is greater than or equal to a preset number of full ice defrosting ice making times? What is the full ice defrosting ice making times explicitly? What is the normal defrosting ice making times explicitly? Clarity is advised.
Claim 1 recite “the cumulative running time of the compressor after the last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished is greater than or equal to a preset full ice defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator”. However, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claim are. It is unclear to the Examiner what is the preset full ice defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator explicitly? Clarity is advised.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mashita (JP 2014035128 A, hereinafter Mashita) in view of Ito et al (JP 2006226615 A, hereinafter Ito) and Yamamoto et al (JP H11173733 A, hereinafter Yamamoto).
Regarding claim 1, Mashita teaches a refrigerator control method (control unit 76), comprising: collecting working parameters of an ice making system (the control unit 76 performs the defrosting operation and the ice making operation in the B2 time zone 24 hours after the minimum temperature time zone B1, paragraph 0046); when the working parameters meet a preset defrosting condition (minimum temperature time zone B1) of an ice making evaporator (evaporator 34).
Mashita teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach controlling the defrosting unit corresponding to the ice making evaporator to be started, wherein the working parameters comprise a cumulative running time of a compressor or a number of ice making times of an ice making device after last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished, wherein the situation that the working parameters meet the preset normal defrosting condition comprises the following situations: the cumulative running time of the compressor after the last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished reaches a preset normal defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator, or the number of ice making times of the ice making device reaches a preset number of normal defrosting ice making times.
However, Ito teaches controlling a defrosting unit (defrosting control unit) corresponding to the ice making evaporator to be started (a defrosting control unit that performs a defrosting operation of the cooler, paragraph 0009); and when information on an amount of ice in an ice bin is detected to be full ice information (performing a defrosting operation of the cooler at a preset defrosting start timing, and detects whether the ice amount in the ice storage box is full according to an arbitrary instruction, paragraph 0009), and when the working parameters meet a preset full ice defrosting condition of the ice making evaporator (when the ice storage amount is detected to be full by the ice amount detection lever, the rapid ice making operation may be terminated, paragraph 0032), controlling the defrosting unit corresponding to the ice making evaporator to be started (the defrost heater (11) is energized so as to heat the cooler (6) to melt the frost and discharge it as defrost water to the outside, paragraph 0014), wherein the working parameters comprise a cumulative running time of a compressor or a number of ice making times of an ice making device after last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished (performing the defrosting operation for a certain time from when the rapid ice making operation is started or until the ice making is completed a predetermined number of times, paragraph 0010), wherein the situation that the working parameters meet the preset normal defrosting condition (performing the defrosting operation for a certain time from when the rapid ice making operation is started or until the ice making is completed a predetermined number of times, paragraph 0010) comprises the following situations: the cumulative running time of the compressor after the last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished reaches a preset normal defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator, or the number of ice making times of the ice making device reaches a preset number of normal defrosting ice making times (performing the defrosting operation for a certain time from when the rapid ice making operation is started or until the ice making is completed a predetermined number of times, paragraph 0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method in the teachings of Mashita to include controlling the defrosting unit corresponding to the ice making evaporator to be started, wherein the working parameters comprise a cumulative running time of a compressor or a number of ice making times of an ice making device after last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished, wherein the situation that the working parameters meet the preset normal defrosting condition comprises the following situations: the cumulative running time of the compressor after the last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished reaches a preset normal defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator, or the number of ice making times of the ice making device reaches a preset number of normal defrosting ice making times in view of the teachings of Ito in order to yield the predictable result of minimizing the adverse effect on the stored food due to the temperature rise during the defrosting before entering the defrosting operation.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach the situation that the working parameters meet the preset full ice defrosting condition comprises the following situations: the cumulative running time of the compressor after the last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished is greater than or equal to a preset full ice defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator, or the number of ice making times of the ice making device is greater than or equal to a preset number of full ice defrosting ice making times; and the normal defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator is greater than the full ice defrosting cycle, and the number of normal defrosting ice making times is greater than the number of full ice defrosting ice making times.However, Yamamoto teaches the situation that the working parameters meet the preset full ice defrosting condition (the ice making time can be shortened by continuing the rapid ice making, and the rapid ice making is continued by continuing the ice making in this manner. Can be completed in a stable time. Further, since the defrosting operation is started when the set number of ice making ends, paragraph 0054) comprises the following situations: the cumulative running time of the compressor (the accumulated operating time of the compressor 72, paragraph 0052) after the last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished (the defrost operation is started (see step S5, paragraph 0052) is greater than or equal to a preset full ice defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator (the ice making time can be shortened by continuing the rapid ice making, and the rapid ice making is continued by continuing the ice making in this manner. Can be completed in a stable time. Further, since the defrosting operation is started when the set number of ice making ends, paragraph 0054), or the number of ice making times of the ice making device is greater than or equal to a preset number of full ice defrosting ice making times; and the normal defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator is greater (the defrosting operation is started, the ice making time in the rapid ice making is delayed. By extending the defrosting operation until the condition ends, rapid ice making can be continued, paragraph 0051) than the full ice defrosting cycle (when the ice detection lever 46 detects full ice, the second fan 56 is stopped to perform control to enter a precool operation and a defrost operation, paragraph 0056), and the number of normal defrosting ice making times is greater (the defrosting operation until the condition ends, rapid ice making can be continued, and rapid ice making can be completed in a stable time, paragraph 0014) than the number of full ice defrosting ice making times (performing a plurality of ice making operations until the ice is full, in an initial stage of the rapid ice making, When the condition for performing the defrosting operation is satisfied, a control unit that performs the ice making operation at least once and then performs the defrosting operation, and then performs the rapid ice making until the set condition is completed is provided, paragraph 0011).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method in the combined teachings to include the situation that the working parameters meet the preset full ice defrosting condition comprises the following situations: the cumulative running time of the compressor after the last defrosting of the ice making evaporator is finished is greater than or equal to a preset full ice defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator, or the number of ice making times of the ice making device is greater than or equal to a preset number of full ice defrosting ice making times; and the normal defrosting cycle of the ice making evaporator is greater than the full ice defrosting cycle, and the number of normal defrosting ice making times is greater than the number of full ice defrosting ice making times in view of the teachings of Yamamoto in order to yield the predictable result of preventing over frost on the cooler.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARIO DELEON whose telephone number is (571)272-8687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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.
/DARIO ANTONIO DELEON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763