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 .
This application contains claims directed to the following patentably distinct species:
Species I: Fig. 1-18 (cylindrical portable smart refrigerator)
Species II: Fig. 20-25 (cuboidal portable smart refrigerator with different arrangement of components due to size and shape differences)
The species are independent or distinct because they have many mutually exclusive features,
including, inter alia, different housing shapes which require different arrangement of the inner components. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. Currently, no claim is generic.
There is a serious search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply: the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries). For example, Species I is classified in F25D 2331/809 and Species II is classified in F25D 2331/804.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election.
The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
During a telephone conversation with Richard R. Peters on February 25th, 2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Species II, claims 1-7. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. No claims are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 17/579,397, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. Specifically, no cuboidal or cubic portable-smart refrigerator is disclosed in the parent application 17/579,397 or any of the applications to which 17/579,397 claims priority. Accordingly, claims 1-7 are not entitled to the benefit of the prior application.”). Claims 1-7 have been examined based on the filing date of July 12th, 2024.
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 “cooling coil”, “thermal-chemical chamber assembly”, “thermo-electric cooler pump”, “liquid pump”, “integrated chiller”, and “integrated heater” must be shown in the elected species II 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
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: “thermal-chemical chamber assembly 1200” first occurring on Pg. 11, paragraph 48. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: item “812” of figure 8. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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
Claims 1-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 7: “a thermal-chemical chamber assembly” should read “the thermal-chemical chamber assembly”
Claim 2, line 1: “The portable-smart refrigerator of claim 1” should read “The cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator of claim 1”
Claim 2, line 1: “wherein the portable-smart refrigerator” should read “wherein the cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator”
Claim 3, line 1: “The portable-smart refrigerator of claim 2” should read “The cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator of claim 2”
Claim 4, line 1: “The portable-smart refrigerator of claim 3” should read “The cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator of claim 3”
Claim 4, line 1: “is cooled utilized” should read “is cooled utilizing”
Claim 5, line 1: “The portable-smart refrigerator of claim 4” should read “The cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator of claim 4”
Claim 6, line 1: “The portable-smart refrigerator of claim 5” should read “The cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator of claim 5”
Claim 7, line 1: “The portable-smart refrigerator of claim 6” should read “The cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator of claim 6”
Claim 2 is also objected to by virtue of its dependency on claim 1.
Claim 3 is also objected to by virtue of its dependency on claim 2.
Claim 4 is also objected to by virtue of its dependency on claim 3.
Claim 5 is also objected to by virtue of its dependency on claim 4.
Claim 6 is also objected to by virtue of its dependency on claim 5.
Claim 7 is also objected to by virtue of its dependency on claim 6.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1-7 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 1 recites the limitation "the thermal-chemical chamber assembly" in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing "the thermal-chemical chamber assembly" in lines 5-6 of claim 1 to “a thermal-chemical chamber assembly”.
Claim 1, line 7 recites, “at least one cooling coil” which is unclear to the Examiner as to how the at least one cooling coil of line 7 of claim 1 relates to the previously claimed one or more cooling coils of line 5 of claim 1. For purposes of examination, the Examiner will interpret the at least one cooling coil to be one of the previously claimed one or more cooling coils of line 5 of claim 1. The Examiner recommends changing “at least one cooling coil” of line 7 of claim 1 to read “at least one cooling coil of the one or more cooling coils”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the liquid" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner recommends changing “the liquid” in line 1 of claim 4 to read “a liquid”.
Claim 2 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 1.
Claim 3 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 2.
Claim 4 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 3.
Claim 5 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 4.
Claim 6 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 5.
Claim 7 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2-6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Lines 1-2 of claim 2 recite, “wherein the portable-smart refrigerator is cuboidal in shape” which does not further limit the subject matter of claim 1 as line 1 of claim 1 recites “A cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator”. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim 3 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 2.
Claim 4 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 3.
Claim 5 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 4.
Claim 6 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 5.
Claim 7 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 6.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Alexander et al. (US Patent No. 11,118,827), hereinafter Alexander.
Regarding claim 1, Alexander discloses a cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator (Fig. 1, cooler container assembly 1000, frame 300; Fig. 26, container 1000”; Col. 5, lines 14-19 and 24-26, FIGS. 1-23 illustrate a cooler container assembly 1000 (the "assembly"), or components thereof. Though the features below are described in connection with the cooler container assembly 1000, the features also apply to all cooler containers, such as cooler containers 1000', 1000", 1000"' disclosed herein… In one implementation, the frame 300 can have a rectangular shape (e.g., a square shape) with two or more (e.g., four) pillars 301; Col. 18, lines 1-18; FIG. 26 shows a schematic view of a cooler container 1000". Some of the features of the cooler container 1000" are similar to features of the cooler container 1000 in FIGS. 1-24B and cooling container 1000' in FIG. 25. Thus, reference numerals used to designate the various components of the cooler container 1000" are identical to those used for identifying the corresponding components of the cooler container 1000 in FIGS.1-24B and cooler container 1000' in FIG. 25, except that a """ has been added to the numerical identifier. Therefore, the structure and description for the various features of the cooler container 1000" and how it's operated and controlled in FIGS. 1-25 are understood to apply to the corresponding features of the cooler container 1000" in FIG. 26, except as described below. Though the features below are described in connection with the cooler
container assembly 1000", the features also apply to all cooler containers, such as cooler containers 1000', 1000, disclosed herein) comprising:
a payload assembly (Fig. 26, vessel 100”, sleeve portion 130”, change material 135”, second conduit 140B”, pump 146”, cooling system 200”, TEC 220”; Fig. 27A, chamber 126”), phase comprising:
a payload space configured for storage of an item to be refrigerated (Fig. 27A, chamber 126”; Col. 18, lines 19-24, The cooler container 1000" can have one or more sleeve portions 130" disposed about the chamber 126" of the container 1000" that can be filled with temperature sensitive contents (e.g., medicine, vaccines, tissue). The sleeve portion(s) 130" can optionally be discrete volumes disposed about the chamber 126"; Further, the chamber 126” of Alexander has the same structure as the claimed payload space and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed); and
a cooling/PCB assembly coupled with the payload space (Fig. 26, vessel 100”, sleeve portion 130”, change material 135”, second conduit 140B”, pump 146”, cooling system 200”, TEC 220”; Further, Fig. 26 of Alexander depicts the cooling system 200” to be coupled to the vessel 100” which contains the chamber 126”) and comprising:
a cooling-coil assembly comprising one or more cooling coils coupled with the thermal-chemical chamber assembly (Fig. 26, vessel 100”, sleeve portion 130”, second conduit 140B”, cooling system 200”; Col. 19, lines 21-30, Advantageously, the cooling fluid (e.g., liquid) rapidly cools the PCM 135" in the sleeve(s) 130" to charge the PCM 135". Optionally, the second conduit 140B" in the sleeve(s) 130" extends in a coil like manner (e.g., in a spiral manner) through the sleeve(s) 130" to thereby increase the surface area of the second conduit 140B" that contacts the PCM 135", thereby increasing the amount of heat transfer between the cooling fluid and the PCM 135". This configuration of the second conduit 140B" advantageously results in more rapid cooling/charging of the PCM 135");
a thermal-chemical chamber assembly that holds at least one cooling coil, wherein the thermal-chemical chamber is placed within an outer surface of the payload space (Fig. 26, vessel 100”, sleeve portion 130”, second conduit 140B”, cooling system 200”; Col. 1, lines 19-36, The cooler container 1000" can have one or more sleeve portions 130" disposed about the chamber 126" of the container 1000" that can be filled with temperature sensitive contents (e.g., medicine, vaccines, tissue). The sleeve portion(s) 130" can optionally be discrete volumes disposed about the chamber 126". The sleeve portion(s) 130" can house a phase change material (PCM) or thermal mass 135" therein. In one implementation, the phase change material 135" can be a solid-liquid PCM. In another implementation, the phase change material 135" can be a solid-solid PCM. The PCM 135" advantageously can passively absorb and release energy. Examples of possible PCM materials are water (which can transition to ice when cooled below the freezing temperature), organic PCMs (e.g., bio based or Paraffin, or carbohydrate and lipid derived), inorganic PCMs (e.g., salt hydrates), and inorganic eutectics materials. However, the PCM 135" can be any thermal mass that can store and release energy; Col. 19, lines 21-30, Advantageously, the cooling fluid (e.g., liquid) rapidly cools the PCM 135" in the sleeve(s) 130" to charge the PCM 135". Optionally, the second conduit 140B" in the sleeve(s) 130" extends in a coil like manner (e.g., in a spiral manner) through the sleeve(s) 130" to thereby increase the surface area of the second conduit 140B" that contacts the PCM 135", thereby increasing the amount of heat transfer between the cooling fluid and the PCM 135". This configuration of the second conduit 140B" advantageously results in more rapid cooling/charging of the PCM 135"); and
a thermo-electric cooler pump comprising a liquid pump with an integrated chiller and an integrated heater (Fig. 26, pump 146”, TEC 220”); and
a radiator assembly configured to radiate heat via one or more fans from the payload assembly (Fig. 26, fan(s) 280”, second heat sink 230”; Col. 18-19, lines 62-67 and 1-2, In operation, the TEC(s) 220" are operated (as described above in connection with the cooling container 1000, 1000') to remove heat from the first heat sink 210" and transfer said heat to the second heat sink 230". The fan(s) 280" are optionally operated to dissipate the heat from the second heat sink 230", thereby allowing the TEC(s) 220" to remove additional heat from the first heat sink 210" (e.g., to cool the first heat sink 210"); Further, the fan(s) 280” and second heat sink 230” of Alexander have the same structure as the claimed radiator assembly and are capable of functioning in the manner claimed); and
a lid assembly configured to provide access to payload assembly (Fig. 1, lid 400; Col. 5, lines 21-22, a lid 400 removably coupleable to a top end T of the container vessel 100; Further, the lid 400 of Alexander has the same structure as the claimed lid assembly and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed).
Regarding claim 2, Alexander discloses the portable-smart refrigerator of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein the portable-smart refrigerator is cuboidal in shape (Fig. 1, cooler container assembly 1000, frame 300; Fig. 26, container 1000”; Col. 5, lines 14-19 and 24-26, FIGS. 1-23 illustrate a cooler container assembly 1000 (the "assembly"), or components thereof. Though the features below are described in connection with the cooler container assembly 1000, the features also apply to all cooler containers, such as cooler containers 1000', 1000", 1000"' disclosed herein…In one implementation, the frame 300 can have a rectangular shape (e.g., a square shape) with two or more (e.g., four) pillars 301).
Regarding claim 3, Alexander discloses the portable-smart refrigerator of claim 2 (see the rejection of claim 2 above), wherein the item to be refrigerated comprises a medicine (Col. 18, lines 19-22, The cooler container 1000" can have one or more sleeve portions 130" disposed about the chamber 126" of the container 1000" that can be filled with temperature sensitive contents (e.g., medicine, vaccines, tissue)).
Regarding claim 4, Alexander discloses the portable-smart refrigerator of claim 3 (see the rejection of claim 3 above), wherein the liquid is cooled utilized a Peltier effect system in the thermo-electric cooler pump (Col. 5, lines 14-19, FIGS. 1-23 illustrate a cooler container assembly 1000 (the "assembly"), or components thereof. Though the features below are described in connection with the cooler container assembly 1000, the features also apply to all cooler containers, such as cooler containers 1000', 1000", 1000"' disclosed herein; Col. 7, lines 7-14, The cooling system 200 can include a first heat sink 210 (e.g., a cold side heat sink), one or more thermoelectric modules or TEC (e.g., Peltier elements) 220, and a second heat sink 230 (e.g., a hot side heat sink). The one or more thermoelectric modules (e.g., Peltier elements) 220 can be interposed between (e.g., in thermal communication with, in thermal contact with, in direct contact with) the first heat sink 210 and the second heat sink 230).
Regarding claim 5, Alexander discloses the portable-smart refrigerator of claim 4 (see the rejection of claim 4 above), wherein the Cooling/PCB assembly maintains the space in the payload assembly at a specified temperature range (Col. 21, lines 12-20, The circuitry EM can optionally log or record the data from the humidity sensor(s) and/or can operate one or more components of the cooling system 200, 200", such as the TECs 220, 220" and fan(s) 280, 280" based at least in part on the sensed humidity information from the humidity sensor(s) (e.g., to maintain the chamber 126, 126', 126" at a desired temperature or temperature range)).
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.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alexander et al. (US Patent No. 11,118,827), hereinafter Alexander in view of Jabou (US Patent No. 11,506,451), hereinafter Jabou.
Regarding claim 6, Alexander discloses the portable-smart refrigerator of claim 5 (see the rejection of claim 5 above), a vent coupled with the radiator assembly (Fig. 27B, air intake opening 203”, exhaust openings 205”; Col. 21, lines 21-26, With reference to FIG. 27B, air can enter the vessel 100" via one or more air intake openings 203", and be driven by one or more fans 280" though a channel or path 215" and past a first heat sink 230", where heat is transferred from the first heat sink 230" to the air. The air is then exhausted from the vessel 100" via one or more exhaust openings 205").
However, Alexander does not disclose the vent to be a honeycomb vent.
Jabou teaches the vent to be a honeycomb vent (Fig. 1, side apertures 24, Fig. 2, lower apertures 148; Col. 11, lines 28-34, The housing 18 incorporates lower perforations or apertures 148 on its bottom face 150 and side apertures 24 around the sides 152 of the housing 18 in the region of the heat sink 60. The apertures 24, 148 are typically hexagonal as shown in FIG. 1, forming a honeycomb structure that makes efficient use of the material and forms the strongest, yet largest area for air flow and heat exchange).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the vent of the cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator of Alexander of claim 6 to be a honeycomb vent as taught by Jabou. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because forming a honeycomb structure makes efficient use of the material and forms the strongest, yet largest area for air flow and heat exchange (Jabou, Col. 11, lines 32-34).
Regarding claim 7, Alexander discloses the portable-smart refrigerator of claim 6 (see the rejection of claim 6 above), wherein the honeycomb vent protects access to the radiator assembly while enabling the removal of heat by the radiator assembly (Alexander; Fig. 27B, air intake opening 203”, exhaust openings 205”; Col. 21, lines 21-26, With reference to FIG. 27B, air can enter the vessel 100" via one or more air intake openings 203", and be driven by one or more fans 280" though a channel or path 215" and past a first heat sink 230", where heat is transferred from the first heat sink 230" to the air. The air is then exhausted from the vessel 100" via one or more exhaust openings 205"; Further, Fig. 27B of Alexander depicts the air intake opening 203” and exhaust openings 205” to protect access to the radiator assembly while enabling the removal of heat by the radiator assembly). Further, the limitations of claim 7 are the result of the modification of references used in the rejection of claim 6 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jakobsen (US 20190335921) discloses a similar cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator.
Ilercil et al. (US Patent No. 8,646,282) discloses a similar cuboidal portable-smart refrigerator.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVON T MOORE whose telephone number is 571-272-6555. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:30-5.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/DEVON MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 February 27th, 2026
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763