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
Claims 15-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 05/15/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of group I in the reply filed on 05/15/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that is not a burden. This is not found persuasive because both inventions do very different things. Group I classifies food as grease generating or no, whereas Group II determines if grease has been generated. Even though Applicant’s specification describes the invention with a lack of specificity. Determining if the food generates grease is functionally very different that if it is generating grease. For example, uncooked bacon is “grease generating”, but is not “generating grease”. “grease generating” require food type identification, while “generating greases” only requires searching for grease in the image without any specific type of food identification. Prior Art that reads on one claim most likely would not read on the other set of claims. Applicant’s amendment does not align the two embodiments
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “control system” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim 1-14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “if the item of food is as classified grease generating”. This should be “if the item of food is classified as grease generating”.
Claims 2-14 are objected to as dependent upon a objected claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1-14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mental process of determining whether an appliance is setup for cooking properly without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s):
1. (Original) A cooking appliance, comprising:
“a body defining a cooking chamber;” is an inherent property of all cooking appliance, whether is a frying pan, crock pot, spoon, oven, toaster, grill or industrial cooking machines which is directed to the field of use. See MPEP 2106.05(h)
“a sensor monitoring the cooking chamber; and”, which is directed to an additional element which is well-understood, routine and conventional, which is used for pre-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g)
“a control system configured to: detect an item of food within the cooking chamber with the sensor; classify a type of the item of food from a list of classifications including at least grease generating and non-grease generating; if the item of food is as classified grease generating, determine if a grease catching vessel is located under the item of food; and if the grease catching vessel is not located under the item of food, generate a placement alert to notify a user to place the grease catching vessel under the item of food.”, which is directed to a mental process; where a person could look at an image of an item of food, classify it as grease or non-grease generating, visually determine If the catching vessel is located under the item of food or not as well vocally alert a person that grease catching vessel must be placed under the item of food. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)
9. (Original) A cooking appliance, comprising:
“a body defining a cooking chamber;” is an inherent property of all cooking appliance, whether is a frying pan, crock pot, spoon, oven, toaster, grill or industrial cooking machines which is directed to the field of use. See MPEP 2106.05(h)
“a sensor monitoring the cooking chamber; and” which is directed to an additional element which is well-understood, routine and conventional, which is used for pre-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g)
“a control system configured to: detect an item of food within the cooking chamber with the sensor; monitor the item of food for a generation of grease; if the item of food is generating grease, determine if a grease catching vessel is located under the item of food; and if the grease catching vessel is not located under the item of food, generate a placement alert to notify a user to place the grease catching vessel under the item of food.” which is directed to a mental process; where a person could look at an image of an item of food, classify it as generating grease or not generating grease, visually determine If the catching vessel is located under the item of food or not as well vocally alert a person that grease catching vessel must be placed under the item of food. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the “cooking appliance” is recited at a high level of generality, No improvement of the functioning of the appliance. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claims 2-8,10-14 do not add additional elements that amount to significantly more.
This listing of claims will replace all prior versions, and listings, of claims in the application:
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8-11 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (2017/0074522) in view of AmazingRibs(How To Use Drip Pans And Water Pans In Your Smoker Or Grill | Meathead's AmazingRibs.com, https://amazingribs.com/more-technique-and-science/more-cooking-science/drip-pans-and-water-pans/) in view of Payne (4,499,368)
Cheng discloses 1. (Original) A cooking appliance, comprising:
a body defining a cooking chamber; a sensor monitoring the cooking chamber; and(Cheng, paragraph 57, “[0057] In several embodiments, the chamber 102 is windowless. That is, the chamber 102, including the door 106, is entirely enclosed without any transparent (and/or semitransparent) parts when the door 106 is closed. For example, the chamber 102 can be sealed within a metal enclosure (e.g., with thermal insulation from/to the outside of the chamber 102) when the door 106 is closed. A camera 118A can be attached to an interior of the chamber 102. In some embodiments, the camera 118A is attached to the door 106. The camera 118A can be adapted to capture an image of a content at least partially inside the chamber 102. For example, the camera 118A can face inward toward the interior of the chamber 102 when the door 106 is closed and upward when the door 106 is opened as illustrated. In some embodiments, the camera 118A is installed on the ceiling (e.g., top interior surface) of the chamber 102. The camera 118A can be attached to the door 106 or proximate (e.g., within three inches) to the door 106 on the ceiling of the chamber 102 to enable easy cleaning, convenient scanning of labels, privacy, heat damage avoidance, and etc.”)
a control system configured to:
detect an item of food within the cooking chamber with the sensor;(Cheng, paragraph 70, “[0070] The camera 222 serves various functions in the operation of the cooking appliance 200. For example, the camera 222 and the display 230 together can provide a virtual window to the inside of the chamber despite the cooking appliance 200 being windowless. The camera 222 can serve as a food package label scanner that configures the cooking appliance 200 by recognizing a machine-readable optical label of the food packages. In some embodiments, the camera 222 can enable the computing device 206 to use optical feedback when executing a cooking recipe. In several embodiments, the light source 242 can illuminate the interior of the cooking appliance 200 such that the camera 222 can clearly capture an image of the food substance therein. In some embodiments, the light source 242 is part of the heating elements 218.”)
classify a type of the item of food from a list of classifications including at least grease generating and non-grease generating;(Cheng, paragraph 85, “[0085] At step 402, the computing device can select a cooking recipe (e.g., from a local cooking recipe library stored in the local memory (e.g., the operational memory 210 and/or the persistent memory 214) of the computing device and/or the cooking appliance, a heating library implemented by a cloud service accessible through a network interface (e.g., the network interface 226), or another external source connected to the computing device). Optionally, at step 404, the computing device can identify a food profile of an edible substance in or about to be in the cooking appliance. For example, the computing device can utilize a camera to identify the food profile (e.g., performing image recognition of the edible substance or scanning a digital label attached to an outer package of the edible substance). The food profile can identify the size of the edible substance, the weight of the edible substance, the shape of the edible substance, the current temperature of the edible substance, or any combination thereof.”, Cheng does not explicitly disclose “grease-generating” and “non-grease generating”, but discloses identifying the type of food which implicitly determines whether the food contains grease or not; For example it is common knowledge that vegetables do not contain grease while meats do. )
But does not expressly disclose “if the item of food is as classified grease generating, determine if a grease catching vessel is located under the item of food; and
if the grease catching vessel is not located under the item of food, generate a placement alert to notify a user to place the grease catching vessel under the item of food.”
AmazingRibs(How To Use Drip Pans And Water Pans In Your Smoker Or Grill | Meathead's AmazingRibs.com) teaches “The purpose of a drip pan is to collect the flavorful juices that come off the meat for use in a sauce or stock, to keep them off the flame and prevent flareups, and to keep oil from coating the water in the water pan preventing evaporation.”. Thus teaches the necessity for having a drip pan.
Payne (Fig. 4, #46, Col. 4 lines 29-44) discloses a Pan Removal Indicator which triggers a warning to a user when there is an occurrence of a pan removal condition. The combination of Payne and AmazingRIbs along with common sense discloses when a Pan removal condition triggers (i.e. a grease generating food item) to trigger an indicator that a pan (such as a drip pan) needs to be placed.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention of the instant application to use a drip pan when cooking grease generating foods as taught by AmazingRibs and using an indicator to alert the user about the necessity of having one.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been preventing flareups.
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Cheng with AmazingRibs and Payne to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne discloses 2. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 1, wherein the sensor is configured as an imager module, and the control system classifies the type of the item of food with image data captured by the imager module. (see claim 1 above)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne discloses 3. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to: if the grease catching vessel is located under the item of food, detect if water is located in the grease catching vessel; and if water is not in the grease catching vessel, generate a water alert to place water in the grease catching vessel.(See claim 1, where the concept of AmazingRibs teaches checking if there is water and the concept of Payne teaches using another indicator for water.)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne discloses 4. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 3, wherein the placement alert is different than the water alert. (see claim 3)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne discloses 8. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 1, wherein the sensor is located within the cooking chamber. (see claim 1)
Cheng discloses 9. (Original) A cooking appliance, comprising:
a body defining a cooking chamber; a sensor monitoring the cooking chamber; and(Cheng, paragraph 57, “[0057] In several embodiments, the chamber 102 is windowless. That is, the chamber 102, including the door 106, is entirely enclosed without any transparent (and/or semitransparent) parts when the door 106 is closed. For example, the chamber 102 can be sealed within a metal enclosure (e.g., with thermal insulation from/to the outside of the chamber 102) when the door 106 is closed. A camera 118A can be attached to an interior of the chamber 102. In some embodiments, the camera 118A is attached to the door 106. The camera 118A can be adapted to capture an image of a content at least partially inside the chamber 102. For example, the camera 118A can face inward toward the interior of the chamber 102 when the door 106 is closed and upward when the door 106 is opened as illustrated. In some embodiments, the camera 118A is installed on the ceiling (e.g., top interior surface) of the chamber 102. The camera 118A can be attached to the door 106 or proximate (e.g., within three inches) to the door 106 on the ceiling of the chamber 102 to enable easy cleaning, convenient scanning of labels, privacy, heat damage avoidance, and etc.”)
a control system configured to:
detect an item of food within the cooking chamber with the sensor; ;(Cheng, paragraph 70, “[0070] The camera 222 serves various functions in the operation of the cooking appliance 200. For example, the camera 222 and the display 230 together can provide a virtual window to the inside of the chamber despite the cooking appliance 200 being windowless. The camera 222 can serve as a food package label scanner that configures the cooking appliance 200 by recognizing a machine-readable optical label of the food packages. In some embodiments, the camera 222 can enable the computing device 206 to use optical feedback when executing a cooking recipe. In several embodiments, the light source 242 can illuminate the interior of the cooking appliance 200 such that the camera 222 can clearly capture an image of the food substance therein. In some embodiments, the light source 242 is part of the heating elements 218.”)
monitor the item of food for a generation of grease; (Cheng, paragraph 32 “monitor the status of the food”)
But does not expressly disclose “if the item of food is generating grease, determine if a grease catching vessel is located under the item of food; and if the grease catching vessel is not located under the item of food, generate a placement alert to notify a user to place the grease catching vessel under the item of food.”
AmazingRibs(How To Use Drip Pans And Water Pans In Your Smoker Or Grill | Meathead's AmazingRibs.com) teaches “The purpose of a drip pan is to collect the flavorful juices that come off the meat for use in a sauce or stock, to keep them off the flame and prevent flareups, and to keep oil from coating the water in the water pan preventing evaporation.”. Thus teaches the necessity for having a drip pan.
Payne (Fig. 4, #46, Col. 4 lines 29-44) discloses a Pan Removal Indicator which triggers a warning to a user when there is an occurrence of a pan removal condition. The combination of Payne and AmazingRIbs along with common sense discloses when a Pan removal condition triggers (i.e. a grease generating food item) to trigger an indicator that a pan (such as a drip pan) needs to be placed.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention of the instant application to use a drip pan when cooking foods generate grease as taught by AmazingRibs and using an indicator to alert the user about the necessity of having one.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been preventing flareups.
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Cheng with AmazingRibs and Payne to obtain the invention as specified in claim 9.
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne discloses 10. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 9, wherein the sensor is configured as an imager module, and the control system is configured to detect if the item of food is generating grease with image data captured by the imager module. (See claim 9)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne discloses 11. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 10, wherein the control system is further configured to: if the grease catching vessel is located under the item of food, detect if water is located in the grease catching vessel; and if water is not in the grease catching vessel, generate a water alert to place water in the grease catching vessel. (See claim 1, where the concept of AmazingRibs teaches checking if there is water and the concept of Payne teaches using another indicator for after.)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne discloses 14. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 10, wherein the imager module is located within the cooking chamber. (see claim 9)
Claim(s) 5-7 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne in further view of Martinez (PGPub 2024/0153092)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne discloses 5. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 1, wherein the control system is further configured to:
But does not expressly discloses “detect if the item of food is splattering foodstuff; and if the item of food is splattering foodstuff, generate a splatter reduction alert for the user to take a corrective action.” (Cheng, Fig. 9, paragraph 110 -111, discloses determining the state and asserting an alert )
Cheng doesn’t explicitly disclose a food splattering Martinez (paragraph 11-12, discloses “foods splattering’ as a condition a user may be interested in monitoring
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention of the instant application to include food splattering as one of the states of Cheng
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been as an additional state to monitor, which allows a user to preemptively stop bigger messes.
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Cheng in view of Amazingribs in view of Payne and Martinez to obtain the invention as specified in claim 5.
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne in view of Martinez discloses 6. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 5, wherein the splatter reduction alert includes a notification to cover the item of food. (Payne, fig 4, shows and indicator, The Examiner contends it is common knowledge when something in the stove, oven, microwave starts to splatter, two common ways of stopping it is reducing heat and covering the food item)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne in view of Martinez discloses 7. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 5, wherein the splatter reduction alert includes a notification to decrease a temperature within the cooking chamber. (Payne, fig 4, shows and indicator, The Examiner contends it is common knowledge when something in the stove, oven, microwave starts to splatter, two common ways of stopping it is reducing heat and covering the food item)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne in view of Martinez discloses 12. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 10, wherein the control system is further configured to: detect if the item of food is splattering foodstuff; and if the item of food is splattering foodstuff, generate a splatter reduction alert for the user to take a corrective action. (See claim 5)
Cheng in view of AmazingRibs in view of Payne in view of Martinez discloses 13. (Original) The cooking appliance of claim 12, wherein the splatter reduction alert includes a notification to cover the item of food or decrease a temperature within the cooking chamber. (See claim 6)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GANDHI THIRUGNANAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3261. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5PM.
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, Sumati Lefkowitz can be reached at 571-272-3638. 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.
/GANDHI THIRUGNANAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2672
Prosecution Insights