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 with traverse of Group 4 in the reply filed on 6/1/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no search and examination burden between Groups 4 and 7. This is not found persuasive because there is a serious search and examination burden in treating the claimed divergent inventions in the same application, since each group implicates wholly different search areas (the search for the top guide is entirely different from the search for control forces on a food product… etc.).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 3-6, 9-10, 12, and 14-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claim 15 has been amended to include the features of nonelected Group 7, and therefore it has also been withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 8, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 2 and 8 begin with “An assembly according to claim 1…”, where no assembly is defined in claim 1. The examiner interprets that applicant intends to refence the control assembly introduced in claim 1. Claims 2 and 8 should instead begin with “The control assembly according to claim 1…”.
Claim 13 similarly begins with “A machine of claim 11…”, and should instead read “The food portioning machine of claim 11”….
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the machine" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the examiner will interpret that “the machine” refers to the food portioning machine previously introduced in claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 2, 8, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Thomas Hiti et al. (US 20090107311 A1 – hereinafter Hiti).
Regarding claim 1, Hiti teaches a control assembly for guiding a food product (Fig. 2, Loaf 50) along a flow path towards a cutter (Fig. 1, Cutting Harp 300) of a food portioning machine (Fig. 1) when the food product is supported on a support plane (Fig. 1, top surface of Bottom Conveyor 84) defined by the machine, comprising: an assembly support (Fig. 8, Support 80) for mounting on the food portioning machine; a pair of side guides (Fig. 7, Rollers 152 and 154) carried by the assembly support for engaging opposite side surfaces of a food product lying on the support plane; and a positioning mechanism (Fig. 7, positioning mechanism comprised of Cylinder 158 and Support System 120) which is carried by the assembly support and is operable: to move the side guides relative to the assembly support towards and away from the support plane (Fig. 7 and Fig. 8, movement shown); and to change the spacing between the side guides in a transverse direction with respect to the flow path (Fig. 7 and Fig. 8, movement shown), a top guide (Fig. 4, Top Conveyor 104) for engaging an upper surface of a food product.
Regarding claim 2, Hiti further teaches an assembly of claim 1, wherein the positioning mechanism is operable to selectively and/or simultaneously (a) move the side guides relative to the assembly support towards and away from the support plane and (b) change the spacing between the side guides in a transverse direction with respect to the flow path (Fig. 7 and Fig. 8, movement shown).
Regarding claim 8, Hiti further teaches an assembly of claim 1, wherein the positioning mechanism is operable to move the top guide relative to the assembly support towards and away from the support plane (Fig. 12 and Fig. 13, movement shown).
Regarding claim 11, Hiti further teaches a food portioning machine including the control assembly of claim 1 (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, Hiti further teaches a machine of claim 11, wherein the control assembly is arranged to engage a food product when the food product is at a position adjacent to a cutter of the machine (Fig. 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLA LORRAINE KEENA whose telephone number is (571)272-1806. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571) 272-4502. 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.
/ELLA L KEENA/Examiner, Art Unit 3724 /BOYER D ASHLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3724
Prosecution Insights