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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The reference in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
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 5 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 5 recites “the ventilation channel”, “the air intake fan”, and “the exhaust fan” all of which lack antecedent basis. Claim 5 depends from claim 1, the above terms are introduced in claim 4.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al (US 12,129,161).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a refrigerating mechanism for pipeline of an automatic bubble tea machine (MPEP 2111.02 “If the body of a claim fully and intrinsically sets forth all of the limitations of the claimed invention, and the preamble merely states, for example, the purpose or intended use of the invention, rather than any distinct definition of any of the claimed invention’s limitations, then the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction. Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 182 F.3d 1298, 1305, 51 USPQ2d 1161, 1165 (Fed. Cir. 1999). See also Rowe v. Dror, 112 F.3d 473, 478, 42 USPQ2d 1550, 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ("where a patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention, the preamble is not a claim limitation");” moreover in this instance Lee provides for the production and dispensing of milk and teas, 3:30-32), comprising:
a cold air interaction box (105), a ventilation structure (225), an air intake structure (221) and an air exchange structure (220);
wherein the air intake structure (221) and the air exchange structure (220) are installed in a refrigerator box (100);
the cold air interaction box (105) is installed on an upper end of the refrigerator box (100) and is communicated with the air intake structure (221) and the air exchange structure (220); and the ventilation structure (225) is installed in an installing box (101) and is communicated with the cold air interaction box (105).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses the air intake structure (221) comprises a cold air intake fan (231) and an air intake chamber (227); the air intake chamber is installed in the refrigerator box (100); the cold air intake fan (231) is installed in the air intake chamber (227); and the air intake chamber is communicated with the cold air interaction box (105) through an air exchange channel (223).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses the air exchange structure (220) comprises a cold air exchange fan (233) and air exchange chamber (chamber within 220); the air exchange chamber is installed in the refrigerating box (100); the cold air exchange fan is installed in the air exchange chamber; and the air exchange chamber is communicated with the cold air interaction box (105) through an air exchange channel.
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses the ventilation structure comprises a ventilation channel (channel within 225 and continuing into 105), an air intake fan (235) and an exhaust fan (337); and the air intake fan and the exhaust fan are installed at each end of the ventilation channel, respectively.
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses the ventilation channel comprises a transverse channel and two longitudinal channels (within 225 is regarded as the transverse channel and within the space about 235 is regarded as longitudinal, and within the space about 337 is regarded as longitudinal); the two ends of the transverse channel are respectively communicated with each of the two longitudinal channels; and the air intake fan (235) and the exhaust fan (337) are respectively installed in one end of each of the two longitudinal channels.
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses the refrigerating box is provided with an air exchange channel (214); the cold air interaction box (105) is communicated with the air intake structure (221) and the air exchange structure (220) through an air exchange channel (229).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Anderson et al (US 9,127,881) – chilled beverage dispenser
Baker (US 6,832,487) – chilled beverage dispenser
Frankfurt (US 3,889,487) – chilled beverage dispenser
Simard (US 2,076,922) -- chilled beverage dispenser
Sandell (US 2,065,949) – chilled beverage dispenser
Bachner (US 646,162) – chilled beverage dispenser
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R ZERPHEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5965. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-4:00 PM.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 5712707740. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER R ZERPHEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights