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 .
Specification
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
(1) Field of the Invention.
(2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The Specification lacks the BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION and DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION section headings.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1, 2, 15 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 1 and 2, “the X-axial direction” and “the Y-axial direction” should read “an X-axial direction” and “a Y-axial direction”.
Claim 15 is objected to because the claim language does not positively recite “moving” in the XY-plane and the Z-axial direction. The Examiner recommends amending the claim to recite:
The primary frying method of claim 13, wherein, in the step (c), resulting in the plurality of food materials colliding with inner surfaces and a bottom surface of the basket assembly on the basis of operation of the hand robot portion.
Claim 16 is objected to because the claim language does not positively recite “moving” in the XY-plane and the Z-axial direction. The Examiner recommends amending the claim to recite:
The primary frying method of claim 14, wherein, in the step (c), resulting in the plurality of food materials colliding with inner surfaces and a bottom surface of the basket assembly on the basis of operation of the hand robot portion.
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(s) 1-3 and 10-22 is/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.
Regarding claims 1 and 2, step (a) states “a step in which a hand robot portion . . . loads the basket assembly into a fryer accommodating oil” while step (b) states “immersing the plurality of food materials accommodated in the basket assembly into the oil accommodated in the fryer”. These steps appear to be describing the same process of placing a basket into a fryer containing oil. It is unclear if the claim language is intending to indicate that there are two separate steps of placing the basket in the fryer or if step(a) and step (b) are both describing the same process. For example, Paragraph 52 of the Applicant’s Specification states “the basket 110 and the grip 1300 are repeatedly loaded into and unloaded out of high-temperature oil heated in the fryer 3,”, indicated that loading involves immersion in oil. For the purposes of further examination, claims 1 and 2 have been interpreted to only require placing the basket in the fryer at least once.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the plurality of food materials" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the plurality of food materials" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the hand robot portion" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In claims 1 and 2, step (c) recites “when a direction in which the basket assembly is loaded into and unloaded out of the fryer is a Z-axial direction”. However, no step of unloading the basket assembly from the fryer is positively recited. Consequently, it is unclear if a step of unloading the basket assembly is required, and claims 1 and 2 are rejected as indefinite.
Claims 3, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, and 21 are rejected as indefinite as a result of depending upon indefinite claim 1.
Claims 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, and 22 are rejected as indefinite as a result of depending upon indefinite claim 2.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the X-axial direction" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because it is unclear if “the X-axial direction” refers to “an X-axial direction as recited on line 2 of claim 19 or “the X-axial direction” as recited on line 12 of claim 1 from which claim 19 depends.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the X-axial direction" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because it is unclear if “the X-axial direction” refers to “an X-axial direction as recited on line 2 of claim 20 or “the X-axial direction” as recited on line 11 of claim 2 from which claim 20 depends.
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, 3, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinnet (US 20200047349 A1) in view of Zeng (CN 209677198 U) and Saunders (GB 2412296 A).
Regarding claim 1, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051) a method of operating a robotic kitchen assistant (hand robot portion) with a fryer in a human/robot collaborative workspace (i.e., the robot is a collaborative robot). Sinnet further teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0071; Fig. 1B #20, 30, 32, 40, 50; Fig. 5A #200, 210, 212, 230) robotic kitchen assistant 20 is operable to manipulate baskets 32 from the basket holding stations 40, 50 to the Fryer 30 (loads the basket assembly into a fryer), wherein robotic kitchen assistant 200 includes a robotic arm adapter assembly 210 including a gripping feature 212 for holding a fryer basket 230. Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0017) the fryer contains oil. Furthermore, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0058, 0060) robotic kitchen assistant acts on the basket by dipping the basket containing food in the fryer (frying the plurality of food materials with the oil by immersing the plurality of food materials accommodated in the basket assembly into the oil accommodated in the fryer). This dipping constitutes a downward movement that is understood to be in a Z-axial direction where the plane perpendicular to the Z-axis may be understood to be an XY plane. In addition, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0060) the robotic kitchen assistant removes the basket from the fryer. Since the robotic kitchen assistant places the basket into the fryer by lowering the basket, and since the fryers 30 depicted in Figures 1A and 1B are enclosed on four sides, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that removal of the fryer basket would be an upward movement, i.e. in a Z-axial direction. Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials). While not explicitly stated, as the claimed Z-axial direction and a plane perpendicular to the Z-axial comprising an XY plane define a three-dimensional space, shaking of the basket is necessarily in at least any one direction of the X-axial direction, the Y-axial direction, and the Z-axial direction.
Sinnet is silent on the basket assembly having a pair of doors disposed to open openings at both sides by rotating in the same direction.
Zeng teaches (Paragraph 0010) a frying basket comprising a frying basket body defining a receiving space, wherein the side wall of the frying basket body is provided with a baffle (door) rotatably connected to the frying basket body to open or close the pouring opening. Zeng shows (Paragraph 0043) in Figure 2 that the position of the baffle (door) when open, showing that the door rotates outward. Additionally, Zeng teaches (Paragraph 0059) baffle 2 (door) may be in the front, behind, left, or right of the frying basket body 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sinnet to provide a door disposed to open by rotating outward as taught by Zeng since both are directed to methods of frying food in fryer baskets, since providing a basket with a door disposed to open by rotating outward is known in the art as shown by Zeng, since providing an opening on the side wall eliminates the need for a robotic arm and clamps to rotate the frying basket significantly during the food pouring and plating process, thereby reducing the performance requirements of the robotic arm cylinders and clamps (Zeng, Paragraph 0012), since food poured out from the side walls of the fryer basket can slide directly onto the plate without being turned over, preventing spillage, which makes it easy to pour the food and ensures reliable and hygienic plating (Zeng, Paragraph 0012), since, when the frying basket returns to a horizontal position, the baffle (door) returns to its initial position under the action of gravity, thus preventing food from leaking out of the frying basket (Zeng, Paragraph 0016).
Saunders teaches (Page 1, lines 15-22, 32-34; Page 2, line 1) a rotary unit for barbecue comprising a basket in which food items are tumbled, wherein the basket is formed with an opening for which a closure flap (door) is provided, which is mounted for pivoting (rotating) inwardly of the basket.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sinnet, as modified above to provide the basket with a second door that rotates inwardly (and therefore in the same direction as the door disclosed by Sinnet in view of Zeng) as taught by Saunders, since both are directed to methods of cooking food products in baskets that are agitated, since providing a basket for cooking food items with a door that rotates inwardly is known in the art as shown by Saunders, since, when the basket is oriented so that the opening is uppermost, the closure flap will pivot inwardly under gravity, allowing items of food to be introduced into or removed from the basket, but as the basket turns, the closure flap pivots to a closed position to enable items of food to be tumbled from face-to-face without falling out (Saunders, Page 2, lines 2-8), and since an inwardly rotating door does not extend beyond the confines of the basket, allowing food to be added or removed in spaces with little or no clearance for an outwardly opening door.
Furthermore, while Sinnet, as modified above, does not explicitly teach that a pair of doors rotating in the same direction, such a configuration would have been obvious to try since providing an outwardly rotating door and an inwardly rotating door to add and remove food items to baskets for cooking and being agitated without falling out (as taught by Saunders) is known in the art as shown by Zeng and Saunders, since providing a basket with an outwardly rotating door and an inwardly rotating door has a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions (doors on adjacent sides or doors on opposite sides (where an inwardly rotating door on one side and an outwardly rotating door on the opposite side would rotate in the same direction)), and since one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued these known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success (See MPEP 2143 E).
Regarding claim 3, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0050) the robotic kitchen assistant includes a programmable processor, links, and joints (body having a plurality of multi-joint arms, and configured to move the basket assembly) to communicate, compute, and control movements of the robotic arm (create work control instructions for moving the basket assembly) and end effectors including the gripping means (gripper configured to hold the basket assembly). Furthermore, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0071) as shown in Figure 5A gripping feature 212 for holding a fryer basket 230 is positioned at an end of the multi-joint arms of the body of the hand robot portion. Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0060) the robotic kitchen assistant acts on the basket (e.g., dips in fryer, agitates, hangs to drip, removes from fryer) which comprises up and down movement of the basket assembly, where up and down movement is understood to be in a Z-axial direction.
Regarding claim 13, as shown above with regard to claim 1, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials), wherein momentum is imparted to the food particles through the basket (separating the plurality of food materials using collision of an inside of the basket assembly and the plurality of food materials accompanying movement of basket on the basis of operation of the hand robot portion).
Claim(s) 2, 10, 14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinnet (US 20200047349 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051) a method of operating a robotic kitchen assistant (hand robot portion) with a fryer in a human/robot collaborative workspace (i.e., the robot is a collaborative robot). Sinnet further teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0071; Fig. 1B #20, 30, 32, 40, 50; Fig. 5A #200, 210, 212, 230) robotic kitchen assistant 20 is operable to manipulate baskets 32 from the basket holding stations 40, 50 to the Fryer 30 (loads the basket assembly into a fryer), wherein robotic kitchen assistant 200 includes a robotic arm adapter assembly 210 including a gripping feature 212 for holding a fryer basket 230. Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0017) the fryer contains oil. Furthermore, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0058, 0060) robotic kitchen assistant acts on the basket by dipping the basket containing food in the fryer (frying the plurality of food materials with the oil by immersing the plurality of food materials accommodated in the basket assembly into the oil accommodated in the fryer). This dipping constitutes a downward movement that is understood to be in a Z-axial direction where the plane perpendicular to the Z-axis may be understood to be an XY plane. In addition, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0060) the robotic kitchen assistant removes the basket from the fryer. Since the robotic kitchen assistant places the basket into the fryer by lowering the basket, and since the fryers 30 depicted in Figures 1A and 1B are enclosed on four sides, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that removal of the fryer basket would be an upward movement, i.e. in a Z-axial direction. Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials). While not explicitly stated, as the claimed Z-axial direction and a plane perpendicular to the Z-axial comprising an XY plane define a three-dimensional space, shaking of the basket is necessarily in at least any one direction of the X-axial direction, the Y-axial direction, and the Z-axial direction.
Regarding claim 10, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0050) the robotic kitchen assistant includes a programmable processor, links, and joints (body having a plurality of multi-joint arms, and configured to move the basket assembly) to communicate, compute, and control movements of the robotic arm (create work control instructions for moving the basket assembly) and end effectors including the gripping means (gripper configured to hold the basket assembly). Furthermore, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0071) as shown in Figure 5A gripping feature 212 for holding a fryer basket 230 is positioned at an end of the multi-joint arms of the body of the hand robot portion. Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0060) the robotic kitchen assistant acts on the basket (e.g., dips in fryer, agitates, hangs to drip, removes from fryer) which comprises up and down movement of the basket assembly, where up and down movement is understood to be in a Z-axial direction.
Regarding claim 14, as shown above with regard to claim 2, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials), wherein momentum is imparted to the food particles through the basket (separating the plurality of food materials using collision of an inside of the basket assembly and the plurality of food materials accompanying movement of basket on the basis of operation of the hand robot portion).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinnet (US 20200047349 A1) in view of Zeng (CN 209677198 U) and Saunders (GB 2412296 A), and further in view of Yoshimura (JP H04226886 A).
Regarding claim 11, Sinnet, as modified above, is silent on a tolerance enabling relative rotation between the basket assembly and the gripper when the gripper holds the basket assembly being set, so the gripper absorbs the shock generated between the fryer and the basket assembly.
Yoshimura teaches (Paragraph 0001, 0037) a tool holding mechanism for a robot that automatically performs tasks, wherein a holding member (gripper) is provided on the output shaft of the robot body, and a tool mounting member is provided on this holding member so as to be rotatable, and the tool can absorb external forces by rotating, so distortion, deformation, damage, etc. on the robot side or the target workpiece side caused by the tool directly receiving external forces can be prevented.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sinnet, as modified above, to set a tolerance enabling relative rotation between the basket assembly and the gripper when the gripper holds the basket so the gripper absorbs the shock generated between the fryer and the basket assembly in view of Yoshimura since both are directed to methods of operating robotic devices for holding external tools, since configuring a robot that a tool held by a holding member (gripper) can rotate to absorb external forces on the tool is known in the art as shown by Yoshimura, and since the tool can absorb external forces by rotating, so distortion, deformation, damage, etc. on the robot side or the target workpiece side caused by the tool directly receiving external forces can be prevented and continuous operation is possible, resulting in improved productivity of the robot operation (Yoshimura, Paragraph 0037).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinnet (US 20200047349 A1) in view of Yoshimura (JP H04226886 A).
Regarding claim 12, Sinnet, as modified above, is silent on a tolerance enabling relative rotation between the basket assembly and the gripper when the gripper holds the basket assembly being set, so the gripper absorbs the shock generated between the fryer and the basket assembly.
Yoshimura teaches (Paragraph 0001, 0037) a tool holding mechanism for a robot that automatically performs tasks, wherein a holding member (gripper) is provided on the output shaft of the robot body, and a tool mounting member is provided on this holding member so as to be rotatable, and the tool can absorb external forces by rotating, so distortion, deformation, damage, etc. on the robot side or the target workpiece side caused by the tool directly receiving external forces can be prevented.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sinnet, as modified above, to set a tolerance enabling relative rotation between the basket assembly and the gripper when the gripper holds the basket so the gripper absorbs the shock generated between the fryer and the basket assembly in view of Yoshimura since both are directed to methods of operating robotic devices for holding external tools, since configuring a robot that a tool held by a holding member (gripper) can rotate to absorb external forces on the tool is known in the art as shown by Yoshimura, and since the tool can absorb external forces by rotating, so distortion, deformation, damage, etc. on the robot side or the target workpiece side caused by the tool directly receiving external forces can be prevented and continuous operation is possible, resulting in improved productivity of the robot operation (Yoshimura, Paragraph 0037).
Claim(s) 15, 17, 19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinnet (US 20200047349 A1) in view of Zeng (CN 209677198 U) and Saunders (GB 2412296 A), and further in view of Ju (US 20200046169 A1).
Regarding claim 15, as shown above with regard to claim 13, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials), wherein momentum is imparted to the food particles through the basket (i.e., at least one inner surface of the basket assembly collides with the plurality of food materials). While not explicitly stated, as the claimed Z-axial direction and a plane perpendicular to the Z-axial comprising an XY plane define a three-dimensional space, shaking of the basket is necessarily in at least any one direction of the X-axial direction, the Y-axial direction, and the Z-axial direction.
Sinnet does not explicitly state that the basket assembly is moved with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction. However, since it is recognized in the prior art by Sinnet to robotically move the basket to prevent clumping, it is not seen that patentability would be predicated on the specific direction of movement. Regardless, movement of a basket assembly with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction is also known in the art from Ju.
Ju teaches (Paragraph 0006, 0015, 0018, 0020) a method of operating a robot system capable of safely and reliably handling residue in a fryer, wherein a residue removal mode may include a plurality of modes performed sequentially including a longitudinal traveling mode, wherein the robot arm may perform operation of lowering the fry basket into the fryer (along Z axis), moving the fry basket in a longitudinal direction and then raising the fry basket at least once (along Z axis) and a zigzag traveling mode in which the robot arm lowers the fry basket to a bottom of the fryer and then moves the fry basket to a zigzag path (moved with respect to the XY plane).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sinnet to move the basket assembly in the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction in step (c) in view of Ju since both are directed to methods of manipulating frying baskets immersed in oil in fryers using robotic arms, since shaking a basket assembly immersed in oil to separate food items in the basket is known in the art as shown by Sinnet, since moving a frying basket immersed in oil in the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction is known in the art as shown by Ju, since moving the frying basket in the Z-axial direction and the XY plane during step (c) will impart force/momentum to the food items from a variety of directions, better ensuring that food items clumped or lodged at different locations in the basket are shaken loose, and since moving the basket assembly in the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction in the fryer can remove food residue from the oil (Ju, Paragraph 0015, 0163, 0164) thus ensuring that food is not wasted and the oil is not contaminated.
Sinnet also does not explicitly state that inner surfaces and a bottom surface of the basket assembly collide with the plurality of food materials.
However, the claimed collisions of the plurality of food materials with inner surfaces and a bottom surface of the basket assembly would have been used during the course of normal experimentation and optimization procedures in the method of Sinnet, as modified above, based upon factors such as the size of the food and the basket (where a smaller basket and larger food materials will result in collisions with move surfaces), the number of food materials (where more food materials will result in more collisions with more surfaces of the basket assembly), the direction and momentum of the movement of the basket (where greater momentum will move the food materials farther towards different surfaces of the basket assembly), the shape of the basket, the length of time of the movement, etc. Furthermore, the Applicant has neither demonstrated the criticality nor identified any unique or unexpected benefit of the claimed collisions of the plurality of food materials with inner surfaces and a bottom surface of the basket assembly that would render it non-obvious.
Regarding claim 17, as shown above with regard to claim 1, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinnet further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials). Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0017) the fryer contains oil.
Sinnet does not explicitly state that the basket assembly is moved with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction. However, since it is recognized in the prior art by Sinnet to robotically move the basket to prevent clumping, it is not seen that patentability would be predicated on the specific direction of movement. Regardless, movement of a basket assembly with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction is also known in the art from Ju, and would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the same reasons stated above with regard to claim 15.
Furthermore, moving the basket assembly containing the food materials, including moving the basket assembly with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction (as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Ju as shown above), when the basket is immersed in the oil in the fryer, will necessarily result in a flow of oil around the basket and the food materials therein, which will result in force applied to the food items from the oil flow that will assist in separation.
Regarding claim 19, as shown above with regard to claim 1, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials), wherein momentum is imparted to the food particles through the basket (i.e., at least one inner surface of the basket assembly collides with the plurality of food materials).
Sinnet does not explicitly state that the basket assembly is moved by rotating around the X-axial direction, which is a front-rear movement direction of the basket assembly. However, since it is recognized in the prior art by Sinnet to robotically move the basket to prevent clumping, it is not seen that patentability would be predicated on the specific direction of movement. Regardless, movement of a basket assembly by rotating around the X-axial direction, which is a front-rear movement direction of the basket assembly is also known in the art from Ju.
Ju teaches (Paragraph 0006, 0015, 0018, 0020) a method of operating a robot system capable of safely and reliably handling residue in a fryer, wherein a residue removal mode may include a plurality of modes performed sequentially including a longitudinal traveling mode, wherein the robot arm may perform operation of lowering the fry basket into the fryer, moving the fry basket in a longitudinal direction and then raising the fry basket at least once and a zigzag traveling mode in which the robot arm lowers the fry basket to a bottom of the fryer and then moves the fry basket to a zigzag path. Ju further teaches (Paragraph 0145; Fig. 4 #290, 300, 360) the robot arm 300 may three-dimensionally move and rotate the end effector 360, wherein the end effector 360 may tilt the fry basket 290 in a first direction θ as shown in FIG. 5 or may tilt or invert the fry basket 290 in a second direction δ as shown in Figure 6, where direction δ comprises rotation around an X axial direction that is a front-rear movement direction as shown by Figures 5 and 6. Additionally, Ju teaches (Paragraph 0350, 0353) the robot arm may rotate the fry basket in direction δ (around X axis) during the lowering process and zigzag travelling mode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sinnet to separate the plurality of food materials using collision of the basket assembly and the plurality of food materials by rotating the basket assembly around the X-axial direction, which is a front-rear movement direction of the basket assembly in step (d) in view of Ju since both are directed to methods of manipulating frying baskets immersed in oil in fryers using robotic arms, since using collision of food materials and a basket assembly immersed in oil to separate food items in the basket is known in the art as shown by Sinnet, since rotating a frying basket immersed in oil around the X-axial direction, which is a front-rear movement direction of the basket assembly is known in the art as shown by Ju, since rotating the frying basket around the X-axial direction during step (d) will impart force/momentum to the food items from a variety of directions, better ensuring that food items clumped or lodged at different locations in the basket are shaken loose, and since the residue removal process of Ju, which includes rotation around the X axis, can remove food residue from the oil (Ju, Paragraph 0015, 0163, 0164) thus ensuring that food is not wasted and the oil is not contaminated.
Regarding claim 21, as shown above with regard to claim 1, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials). Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0017) the fryer contains oil. While not explicitly stated, moving the basket assembly containing the food materials, including moving the basket assembly by rotating around the X-axial direction (as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Ju as shown above), when the basket is immersed in the oil in the fryer, will necessarily result in a flow of oil around the basket and the food materials therein, which will result in force applied to the food items from the oil flow that will assist in separation.
Claim(s) 16, 18, 20, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sinnet (US 20200047349 A1) in view of Ju (US 20200046169 A1).
Regarding claim 16, as shown above with regard to claim 14, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials), wherein momentum is imparted to the food particles through the basket (i.e., at least one inner surface of the basket assembly collides with the plurality of food materials). While not explicitly stated, as the claimed Z-axial direction and a plane perpendicular to the Z-axial comprising an XY plane define a three-dimensional space, shaking of the basket is necessarily in at least any one direction of the X-axial direction, the Y-axial direction, and the Z-axial direction.
Sinnet does not explicitly state that the basket assembly is moved with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction. However, since it is recognized in the prior art by Sinnet to robotically move the basket to prevent clumping, it is not seen that patentability would be predicated on the specific direction of movement. Regardless, movement of a basket assembly with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction is also known in the art from Ju.
Ju teaches (Paragraph 0006, 0015, 0018, 0020) a method of operating a robot system capable of safely and reliably handling residue in a fryer, wherein a residue removal mode may include a plurality of modes performed sequentially including a longitudinal traveling mode, wherein the robot arm may perform operation of lowering the fry basket into the fryer (along Z axis), moving the fry basket in a longitudinal direction and then raising the fry basket at least once (along Z axis) and a zigzag traveling mode in which the robot arm lowers the fry basket to a bottom of the fryer and then moves the fry basket to a zigzag path (moved with respect to the XY plane).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sinnet to move the basket assembly in the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction in step (c) in view of Ju since both are directed to methods of manipulating frying baskets immersed in oil in fryers using robotic arms, since shaking a basket assembly immersed in oil to separate food items in the basket is known in the art as shown by Sinnet, since moving a frying basket immersed in oil in the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction is known in the art as shown by Ju, since moving the frying basket in the Z-axial direction and the XY plane during step (c) will impart force/momentum to the food items from a variety of directions, better ensuring that food items clumped or lodged at different locations in the basket are shaken loose, and since moving the basket assembly in the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction in the fryer can remove food residue from the oil (Ju, Paragraph 0015, 0163, 0164) thus ensuring that food is not wasted and the oil is not contaminated.
Sinnet also does not explicitly state that inner surfaces and a bottom surface of the basket assembly collide with the plurality of food materials.
However, the claimed collisions of the plurality of food materials with inner surfaces and a bottom surface of the basket assembly would have been used during the course of normal experimentation and optimization procedures in the method of Sinnet, as modified above, based upon factors such as the size of the food and the basket (where a smaller basket and larger food materials will result in collisions with move surfaces), the number of food materials (where more food materials will result in more collisions with more surfaces of the basket assembly), the direction and momentum of the movement of the basket (where greater momentum will move the food materials farther towards different surfaces of the basket assembly), the shape of the basket, the length of time of the movement, etc. Furthermore, the Applicant has neither demonstrated the criticality nor identified any unique or unexpected benefit of the claimed collisions of the plurality of food materials with inner surfaces and a bottom surface of the basket assembly that would render it non-obvious.
Regarding claim 18, as shown above with regard to claim 2, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials). Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0017) the fryer contains oil.
Sinnet does not explicitly state that the basket assembly is moved with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction. However, since it is recognized in the prior art by Sinnet to robotically move the basket to prevent clumping, it is not seen that patentability would be predicated on the specific direction of movement. Regardless, movement of a basket assembly with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction is also known in the art from Ju, and would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the same reasons stated above with regard to claim 16.
Furthermore, moving the basket assembly containing the food materials, including moving the basket assembly with respect to the XY plane and in the Z-axial direction (as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Ju as shown above), when the basket is immersed in the oil in the fryer, will necessarily result in a flow of oil around the basket and the food materials therein, which will result in force applied to the food items from the oil flow that will assist in separation.
Regarding claim 20, as shown above with regard to claim 2, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials), wherein momentum is imparted to the food particles through the basket (i.e., at least one inner surface of the basket assembly collides with the plurality of food materials).
Sinnet does not explicitly state that the basket assembly is moved by rotating around the X-axial direction, which is a front-rear movement direction of the basket assembly. However, since it is recognized in the prior art by Sinnet to robotically move the basket to prevent clumping, it is not seen that patentability would be predicated on the specific direction of movement. Regardless, movement of a basket assembly by rotating around the X-axial direction, which is a front-rear movement direction of the basket assembly is also known in the art from Ju.
Ju teaches (Paragraph 0006, 0015, 0018, 0020) a method of operating a robot system capable of safely and reliably handling residue in a fryer, wherein a residue removal mode may include a plurality of modes performed sequentially including a longitudinal traveling mode, wherein the robot arm may perform operation of lowering the fry basket into the fryer, moving the fry basket in a longitudinal direction and then raising the fry basket at least once and a zigzag traveling mode in which the robot arm lowers the fry basket to a bottom of the fryer and then moves the fry basket to a zigzag path. Ju further teaches (Paragraph 0145; Fig. 4 #290, 300, 360) the robot arm 300 may three-dimensionally move and rotate the end effector 360, wherein the end effector 360 may tilt the fry basket 290 in a first direction θ as shown in FIG. 5 or may tilt or invert the fry basket 290 in a second direction δ as shown in Figure 6, where direction δ comprises rotation around an X axial direction that is a front-rear movement direction as shown by Figures 5 and 6. Additionally, Ju teaches (Paragraph 0350, 0353) the robot arm may rotate the fry basket in direction δ (around X axis) during the lowering process and zigzag travelling mode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Sinnet to separate the plurality of food materials using collision of the basket assembly and the plurality of food materials by rotating the basket assembly around the X-axial direction, which is a front-rear movement direction of the basket assembly in step (d) in view of Ju since both are directed to methods of manipulating frying baskets immersed in oil in fryers using robotic arms, since using collision of food materials and a basket assembly immersed in oil to separate food items in the basket is known in the art as shown by Sinnet, since rotating a frying basket immersed in oil around the X-axial direction, which is a front-rear movement direction of the basket assembly is known in the art as shown by Ju, since rotating the frying basket around the X-axial direction during step (d) will impart force/momentum to the food items from a variety of directions, better ensuring that food items clumped or lodged at different locations in the basket are shaken loose, and since the residue removal process of Ju, which includes rotation around the X axis, can remove food residue from the oil (Ju, Paragraph 0015, 0163, 0164) thus ensuring that food is not wasted and the oil is not contaminated.
Regarding claim 22, as shown above with regard to claim 2, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0051, 0087; Fig. 11A #280) the robotic kitchen assistant 20 also has robust capabilities to agitate or shake the basket to facilitate cooking fried items, wherein, when the basket is placed in the fryer by the robotic kitchen assistant (during the step (b)), the agitation actuator 280 of the robotic arm assembly 210 shakes the basket. Sinner further teaches (Paragraph 0092) agitation of the food in the basket prevents the food from clumping together (separates the plurality of food materials). Also, Sinnet teaches (Paragraph 0017) the fryer contains oil. While not explicitly stated, moving the basket assembly containing the food materials, including moving the basket assembly by rotating around the X-axial direction (as would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Ju as shown above), when the basket is immersed in the oil in the fryer, will necessarily result in a flow of oil around the basket and the food materials therein, which will result in force applied to the food items from the oil flow that will assist in separation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Walker (US 9706876 B2) teaches a support assembly defining a basket for receiving and retaining the food product with two articulating side walls.
Chavan Dafle (US 20200055197 A1) teaches a gripper including two fingers each having a flexible membrane with a wedge-shaped geometry which may provide a point contact on a cylindrical object so that the object may pivot to a vertical position under the effect of gravity.
Tanaka (US 20230225559 A1) teaches a food processing apparatus including a reciprocating agitator configured to impart a repetitive contact to a basket, thereby inducing motion of the consumable items within the basket.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN P TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)272-2652. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at (571) 270-3475. 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.
/AUSTIN PARKER TAYLOR/Examiner, Art Unit 1792
/VIREN A THAKUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Prosecution Insights