DETAILED ACTION
Amendments filed on 6/18/2026 has been entered. Claims 5, 15 are cancelled.
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 .
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-4, 6-14, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mitchell (US 2021/0318051 A1), in view of Junge (US 2018/0142934 A1), and in view of Wernicki (4,727,720).
Claim 1: Mitchell discloses a method of operating an ice maker appliance (FIG.3), the method comprising:
determining, with a home position sensor (paragraph [63]: position sensor 298), that a portion (inherent as part of structure of the assembly) of an ice making assembly (200) of the ice maker appliance is in a home position (to clarify, the ice making assembly at zero position used as home position; paragraphs [63] [64]: controller with knowledge of the position of the ice making assembly 200 include a position sensor 298);
rotating the portion of the ice making assembly (200) from the home position towards a harvest position (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest);
Mitchell discloses the claimed limitations in claim 1, but fails to disclose determining, with a harvest position sensor, that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position; and directing a flow of air from an evaporator of a sealed system of the ice maker appliance to the portion of the ice making assembly in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position, whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized.
However, Junge teaches determining, with a harvest position sensor (paragraph [30]: level sensor 205 to sense whether or not a level of ice stored in ice bin is at full or not), that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) did not reach the harvest position (to clarify, sensor determines whether the ice level for harvest is reached); and directing a flow of air from an evaporator (170) of a sealed system (paragraph [31]: refrigerator includes sealed system) of the ice maker appliance (202) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200) in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) did not reach the harvest position, whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized (concerning limitations “whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized” is a clause which expresses the intended result of a process step recited previously which disclosed by Junge; MPEP 2111.04) for the purpose of determining the level of ice stored in the ice bin (paragraph [30]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Mitchell to include determining, with a harvest position sensor, that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position a sealed system of the ice maker appliance to the portion of the ice making assembly in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position as taught by Junge in order to determine the level of ice stored in the ice bin.
Further, Wernicki teaches directing a flow of air (column 3 lines 17-23: heat from ambient warm air flows through walls of ice extractor 15 melting lose any ice that is adhering to the inside of the ice extractor and ice falls to ice chute, and drops from there into ice bin) for the purpose of preventing the ice cube from hanging up during harvest (column 1 lines 50-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Mitchell to include directing a flow of air as taught by Wernicki in order to prevent the ice cube from hanging up during harvest.
Claim 2: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the portion of the ice making assembly comprises a carriage (yoke wheel used as carriage; paragraph [64] [65]: yoke wheel of the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest).
Claim 3: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, further comprising suspending an ice making operation (Junge; paragraph [48]: making ice is suspended when harvesting operation is complete when ice bin is full harvesting is deactivated) in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly (Junge; ice making system 200) did not reach the harvest position (Junge; paragraph [48]).
Claim 4: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, further comprising rotating the portion (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest) of the ice making assembly (200) to the home position after determining that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position (Wernicki; to clarify, when ice hanging up in harvest, then warm air flows through) and before directing the flow of air to the portion of the ice making assembly (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23: heat from ambient warm air flows through walls of ice extractor 15 melting lose any ice that is adhering to the inside of the ice extractor and ice falls to ice chute, and drops from there into ice bin).
Claim 6: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein directing the flow of air to the portion (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23) of the ice making assembly (200) further comprises operating a fan (Junge; 180) of the ice maker appliance (FIG.3) at a maximum speed (Junge; to clarify, fan is capable of running as max speed if needed; paragraph [44]: to vary the speed of fan 180 to influence temperature) and operating the sealed system at one hundred percent (Junge teaches variation of speed of fan, except for operating the sealed system at one hundred percent. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Junge to include operating the sealed system at one hundred percent in order to influence temperature of the warm air (paragraph [44]), since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Please note that in the instant application - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claim 7: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, further comprising rotating the portion (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest) of the ice making assembly (200) towards the harvest position a second time after directing the flow of air (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200).
Claim 8: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, further comprising
determining, with the harvest position sensor (Junge; 205), that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position (Junge; to clarify, level sensor 205 determines whether or not ice level is full or not ready to harvest) when rotating the portion (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest) of the ice making assembly (200) towards the harvest position the second time after directing the flow of air (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23: heat from ambient warm air flows through walls of ice extractor 15 melting lose any ice that is adhering to the inside of the ice extractor and ice falls to ice chute, and drops from there into ice bin) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200), and
directing an additional flow of air (to clarity, the invention of Wernicki is capable of directing additional ambient warm air; Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200) in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) did not reach the harvest position when rotating the portion of the ice making assembly (200) towards the harvest position the second time after directing the flow of air (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200), whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized (Wernicki; as the result of flow of warm air causing ice to melt or evaporates when any ice causing the assembly not to reach harvest mode).
Claim 9: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, further comprising
determining, with the harvest position sensor (Junge; 205), that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) reached the harvest position (Junge; to clarify, level sensor 205 determines whether or not ice level is full or not ready to harvest) when rotating the portion of the ice making assembly (200) towards the harvest position the second time after directing the flow of air (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23: heat from ambient warm air flows through walls of ice extractor 15 melting lose any ice that is adhering to the inside of the ice extractor and ice falls to ice chute, and drops from there into ice bin) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200);
rotating the portion of the ice making assembly (200) to the home position from the harvest position (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest); and
initiating an ice making cycle (Junge; based on broadest reasonable interpretation, once the assembly is ready to form ice it means ice making cycle is initiated; the ice making cycle is initiated when ice maker 200 is in an ice making mode; see paragraph [43]) in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly reached the harvest position (Junge; level sensor 205 determines whether or not ice level is full or not ready to harvest).
Claim 10: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the ice in the portion of the ice making assembly (200) is vaporized (Wernicki; as the result of flow of warm air causing ice to melt or evaporates when any ice causing the assembly not to reach harvest mode) without activating a heater (Junge; heater 214) in the ice making assembly (200).
Claim 11: Mitchell discloses an ice maker appliance (FIG.3), comprising:
an ice making assembly (200); and
a controller (164), the controller configured for:
determining, with a home position sensor (paragraph [63]: position sensor 298), that a portion (inherent as part of structure of the assembly) of the ice making assembly is in a home position (to clarify, the ice making assembly at zero position used as home position; paragraphs [63] [64]: controller with knowledge of the position of the ice making assembly 200 include a position sensor 298);
rotating the portion of the ice making assembly from the home position towards a harvest position (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest);
Mitchell discloses the claimed limitations in claim 11, but fails to disclose determining, with a harvest position sensor, that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position; and directing a flow of air from an evaporator of a sealed system of the ice maker appliance to the portion of the ice making assembly in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position, whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized.
However, Junge teaches determining, with a harvest position sensor (paragraph [30]: level sensor 205 to sense whether or not a level of ice stored in ice bin is at full or not), that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) did not reach the harvest position (to clarify, sensor determines whether the ice level for harvest is reached); and directing a flow of air from an evaporator (170) of a sealed system (paragraph [31]: refrigerator includes sealed system) of the ice maker appliance (202) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200) in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) did not reach the harvest position, whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized (concerning limitations “whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized” is a clause which expresses the intended result of a process step recited previously which disclosed by Junge; MPEP 2111.04) for the purpose of determining the level of ice stored in the ice bin (paragraph [30]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Mitchell to include determining, with a harvest position sensor, that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position a sealed system of the ice maker appliance to the portion of the ice making assembly in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position as taught by Junge in order to determine the level of ice stored in the ice bin.
Further, Wernicki teaches directing a flow of air (column 3 lines 17-23: heat from ambient warm air flows through walls of ice extractor 15 melting lose any ice that is adhering to the inside of the ice extractor and ice falls to ice chute, and drops from there into ice bin) for the purpose of preventing the ice cube from hanging up during harvest (column 1 lines 50-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Mitchell to include directing a flow of air as taught by Wernicki in order to prevent the ice cube from hanging up during harvest.
Claim 12: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the portion of the ice making assembly comprises a carriage (yoke wheel used as carriage; paragraph [64] [65]: yoke wheel of the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest).
Claim 13: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the controller (164) is further configured for suspending an ice making operation (Junge; paragraph [48]: making ice is suspended when harvesting operation is complete when ice bin is full harvesting is deactivated) in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly (Junge; ice making system 200) did not reach the harvest position (Junge; paragraph [48]).
Claim 14: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the controller (164) is further configured for rotating the portion (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest) of the ice making assembly (200) to the home position after determining that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position (Wernicki; to clarify, when ice hanging up in harvest, then warm air flows through) and before directing the flow of air to the portion of the ice making assembly (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23: heat from ambient warm air flows through walls of ice extractor 15 melting lose any ice that is adhering to the inside of the ice extractor and ice falls to ice chute, and drops from there into ice bin).
Claim 16: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein directing the flow of air to the portion (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23) of the ice making assembly (200) further comprises operating a fan (Junge; 180) of the ice maker appliance (FIG.3) at a maximum speed (Junge; to clarify, fan is capable of running as max speed if needed; paragraph [44]: to vary the speed of fan 180 to influence temperature) and operating the sealed system at one hundred percent (Junge teaches variation of speed of fan, except for operating the sealed system at one hundred percent. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Junge to include operating the sealed system at one hundred percent in order to influence temperature of the warm air (paragraph [44]), since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. Please note that in the instant application - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claim 17: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the controller (164) is further configured for rotating the portion of the ice making assembly (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest) towards the harvest position a second time after directing the flow of air (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200).
Claim 18: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 17, wherein the controller (164) is further configured for
determining, with the harvest position sensor (Junge; 205, controller 134 is in operative communication with sensors), that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position (Junge; to clarify, level sensor 205 determines whether or not ice level is full or not ready to harvest) when rotating the portion of the ice making assembly (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest) towards the harvest position the second time after directing the flow of air (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23: heat from ambient warm air flows through walls of ice extractor 15 melting lose any ice that is adhering to the inside of the ice extractor and ice falls to ice chute, and drops from there into ice bin) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200), and
directing an additional flow of air (to clarity, the invention of Wernicki is capable of directing additional ambient warm air; Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23) to the portion of the ice making assembly in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) did not reach the harvest position when rotating the portion of the ice making assembly towards the harvest position the second time after directing the flow of air (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200), whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized (Wernicki; as the result of flow of warm air causing ice to melt or evaporates when any ice causing the assembly not to reach harvest mode).
Claim 19: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 17, wherein the controller (164) is further configured for
determining, with the harvest position sensor (Junge; 205, controller 134 is in operative communication with sensors), that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) reached the harvest position (Junge; to clarify, level sensor 205 determines whether or not ice level is full or not ready to harvest) when rotating the portion of the ice making assembly (200) towards the harvest position the second time after directing the flow of air (Wernicki; column 3 lines 17-23: heat from ambient warm air flows through walls of ice extractor 15 melting lose any ice that is adhering to the inside of the ice extractor and ice falls to ice chute, and drops from there into ice bin) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200);
rotating the portion of the ice making assembly (200) to the home position from the harvest position (paragraph [64] [65]: the ice making assembly 200 rotates toward predetermined position, ready for harvest); and
initiating an ice making cycle (Junge; based on broadest reasonable interpretation, once the assembly is ready to form ice it means ice making cycle is initiated; the ice making cycle is initiated when ice maker 200 is in an ice making mode; see paragraph [43]) in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly reached the harvest position (Junge; level sensor 205 determines whether or not ice level is full or not ready to harvest).
Claim 20: Mitchell as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the ice in the portion of the ice making assembly (200) is vaporized (Wernicki; as the result of flow of warm air causing ice to melt or evaporates when any ice causing the assembly not to reach harvest mode) without activating a heater (Junge; heater 214) in the ice making assembly (200).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to all the claims under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments on pages 8-9 are related to limitations “directing a flow of air from an evaporator of a sealed system of the ice maker appliance to the portion of the ice making assembly in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position, whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized”.
Examiner response: as indicated in the office action, Junge teaches determining, with a harvest position sensor directing a flow of air from an evaporator (170) of a sealed system (paragraph [31]: refrigerator includes sealed system) of the ice maker appliance (202) to the portion of the ice making assembly (200) in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly (200) did not reach the harvest position, whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized (concerning limitations “whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized” is a clause which expresses the intended result of a process step recited previously which disclosed by Junge. Therefore, concerning limitations “whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized” are not given weight because it expresses the intended result of a process step recited previously (MPEP 2111.04). Further, two clauses “in response to determining that the portion of the ice making assembly did not reach the harvest position, whereby ice in the portion of the ice making assembly is vaporized”, are directly related as cause and effect relations between the two quoted clauses.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI whose telephone number is (313)446-6612. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
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, Len Tran can be reached on (571) 272-1184. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/PAUL ALVARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights