DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is
clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/30/24, 1/14/26
and 8/25/26 were considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Drawings
4. The drawings are objected to because in figure 28, after step 1420 “TES” should be -- YES --. 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.
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 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.
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-3, 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yasaka et al. (Yasaka), US publication no. 2017/0097185 A11.
As per claim 1, Yasaka teaches a method of controlling a refrigerator including a housing and a door rotatably coupled to the housing [figure 1; para 131], the method comprising:
identifying an angle between the door and the housing; rotating the door to allow the door to be opened or closed based on the identified angle [figure 13; para 235, 399, 407]; and
stopping opening or closing the door based on identifying that the door is stopped while opening or closing the door [figure 13; para 172, 372-374, 397, 410];
Yasaka teaches:
[0172] Meanwhile, in the power transmitting state, when the motor M is stopped, since the mounting member 51 is pressed again at the middle position Mi by the idler gear
pressing member 61, the pair of idler gears 44 move to the power non-transmitting direction and is switched from the power transmitting state to the power non-transmitting state.
[0235] The door controlling device 110 related to the embodiment is connected to a motor driving circuit L driving the motor M described above to control the motor M
as illustrated in FIG. 12 and physically includes a central processing unit (CPU), a memory, an analog-digital (AID) converter, etc. In addition, by a cooperation between the CPU and a peripheral device according to a program stored in a predetermined area of the memory, the door controlling device 110 is configured to serve as a zero setter 91, an opening angle detector 92, an induced voltage detector 93, a target induced voltage memory 94, and an applied voltage controller 95 as illustrated in FIG. 13.
[0372] In the power transmitting state, when, for example, a switching signal for switching the power transmitting state to the power non-transmitting state is transmitted to the controller (unillustrated), the controller controls a voltage applied to the motor M and stops rotation of the motor M or instantaneously rotates the motor M in the reverse direction.
[0373] In this way, the center gear 43 stops rotating or instantaneously rotates in the reverse direction by interlocking with the motor M, and the swing torque described above decreases.
[0399] The speed calculator 720 according to the embodiment is configured to acquire an opening degree signal that represents an opening degree of the door from a door
opening degree detection apparatus E configured to detect an opening degree of the door D and acquire a time signal that represents a movement time of the door D from a CPU embedded timer to output the movement speed calculated based on each of the signals as a calculated speed to the motor controller 73.
As per claim 2, Yasaka teaches the identifying the angle between the door and the housing comprises identifying the angle between the door and the housing based on a change in at least one of an output signal of a first rotation sensor or an output signal of a second rotation sensor while opening or closing the door [para 235, 397, 399, 410].
As per claim 3, Yasaka teaches the rotating the door to allow the door to be opened or closed comprises controlling the speed at which the door is opened or closed based on the identified angle between the door and the housing [para 235, 238, 397, 399, 410].
As per claim 8, Yasaka teaches rotating the door to allow the door to be opened or closed based on obtaining a user input for opening or closing the door [para 395-399].
As per claim 13, Yasaka teaches the rotating the door to allow the door to be opened or closed based on the identified angle comprises: controlling a motor drive to apply a substantially maximum driving voltage to the drive motor based on the identified angle between the door and the housing being less than a first angle while opening the door [para 395-399 , 404-407].
7. Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yasaka et al. (Yasaka), US publication no. 2017/0097185 in view of Yoon (Yoon), US publication no. 2021/0270519.
As per claim 9, Yasaka fails to teach the obtaining the user input for opening or closing the door comprises identifying the user input for opening or closing the door based on a voice signal obtained from a microphone.
Yoon teaches the obtaining the user input for opening or closing the door comprises identifying the user input for opening or closing the door based on a
voice signal obtained from a microphone [para 45].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention to combine the teachings of Yasaka and Yoon because they disclose a refrigerator system, the specify teachings of Yoon stated above would have further enhanced the flexibility and functionality of Yasaka system to obtain predictable results with implementing a microphone device and voice enable auto open/close a door.
As per claim 11, Yoon teaches obtaining the user input for opening or closing the door further comprises identifying the user input for opening or closing the door
based on a user motion obtained from an object sensor [figure 5; para 109-110].
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 4-7, 10, 12 and 14-20 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
9. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of records do not teach: in claim 4, the stopping opening or closing the door comprises stopping opening of the door based on identifying that the door is being closed while opening the door. In claim 5, the stopping opening or closing the door further comprises stopping closing of the door based on identifying that the door is being opened while closing the door. In claim 6, detecting a user around the refrigerator based on an output signal of an object sensor; and, closing the opened door based on a time, for which the user is undetected, being greater than or equal to a first period of time. In claim 7, the stopping opening or closing the door further comprises stopping opening or closing of the door based on a time, for which the rotation of the door is stopped, is greater than or equal to a second period of time. In claim 10, determining that the user input is identified based on a similarity between
the voice signal obtained from the microphone and a reference voice signal for opening or closing the door exceeding a reference value. In claim 12, determining that the user input is identified based on a similarity between the user motion obtained from the object sensor and a reference motion for opening or closing the door exceeding
a reference value. In claim 14, controlling the motor drive to open the door at a first
speed based on the identified angle between the door and the housing being greater than or equal to the first angle and less than a second angle while opening the
door, wherein the second angle is greater than the first angle.
10. Examiner's note: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. MPEP 2141.02 VI: “PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS."
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Moller, US publication no. 2020/0072532 A1, discloses a door system for a refrigeration device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN CAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3664. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached on 571-272-9. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/CHUN CAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
1 Yasaka is cited by applicant.
Prosecution Insights