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 .
Claim Status
The claim set has been amended prior to first action on the merits. Claim 1 has been canceled. Claims 2-21 are new.
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.
Claims 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shoukyuu et al. (WO 2005/040698 A1, machine translation), hereafter referred to as “Shoukyuu.”
Regarding Claim 2: Shoukyuu teaches an ice maker (see Figure 9) comprising: a tray (11) configured to define an ice making chamber (12); a support (34) configured to support the tray (11); and a heater (16) configured to provide heat to at least one of the tray (11) or the ice making chamber (12), wherein the support (34) comprises a guide groove (groove for 16) configured to guide a portion of the heater (see Figure 9).
Regarding Claim 19: Shoukyuu teaches refrigerator (title, Figure 11) comprising the ice maker (11) of claim 2.
Claims 2, 10-12, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Smith et al. (5,582,754), hereafter referred to as “Smith.”
Regarding Claim 2: Smith teaches an ice maker (66) comprising: a tray (118) configured to define an ice making chamber (120); a support (86, 68) configured to support the tray (118); and a heater (76, 100) configured to provide heat to at least one of the tray (118) or the ice making chamber (120), wherein the support (86, 68) comprises a guide groove (78) configured to guide a portion (portions of 76) of the heater (76).
Regarding Claim 10: Smith teaches wherein at least a portion of the heater (100) is disposed between the tray (118) and the support (86).
Regarding Claim 11: Smith teaches wherein the tray (118) comprises a chamber wall (walls 120) configured to define the ice making chamber (see Figure 5), wherein the support (86, 68) comprises a chamber accommodation portion (bays 88 and grooves 98) configured to accommodate the chamber wall (see Figure 5), and wherein at least a portion of the heater (114 of 100) is disposed at the chamber accommodation portion (Column 8, lines 32-38).
Regarding Claim 12: Smith teaches wherein the support (86, 68) comprises a heater coupling portion (86) to which the heater (100) is coupled (see Figure 5), wherein the heater coupling portion (86) comprises a heater accommodation groove (bays 88, grooves 98) in which at least a portion (114) of the heater (100 has a notch) is accommodated (Column 8 , lines 32-39).
Regarding Claim 14: Smith teaches an ice maker (66) comprising: a tray (118) configured to define an ice making chamber (120); a support (86, 68) configured to support the tray (118); and a heater (electrodes 76, 100) configured to provide heat to at least one of the tray (Column 8, lines 5-11) or the ice making chamber (Column 8, lines 5-11), wherein at least a portion of the heater (electrodes 76, 100) is disposed between the tray (68) and the support (68, see Figures 5-6).
Regarding Claim 15: Smith teaches wherein the support (86, 68) comprises a heater coupling portion (86) to which the heater (electrodes 76, 100) is coupled (see Figures 5-6).
Regarding Claim 16: Smith teaches an ice maker (66) comprising: a tray (118) configured to define an ice making chamber (120); a support (86, 68) configured to support the tray (see Figure 5); and a heater (electrodes 76, 100) configured to provide heat to at least one of the tray (Column 8, lines 5-11) or the ice making chamber (Column 8, lines 5-11), wherein the heater (100) is installed to the support (86) to make contact with the tray (see Figure 6).
Regarding Claim 17: Smith teaches wherein the tray (118) comprises a chamber wall (walls of 120) configured to define the ice making chamber (see Figure 5), wherein the support (86, 68) comprises a chamber accommodation portion (88, 98) configured to accommodate the chamber wall (walls of 120), and wherein at least a portion of the heater (100) is installed to the chamber accommodation portion (see Figure 5).
Regarding Claim 18: Smith teaches wherein the support (86, 68) comprises a heater coupling portion (68) to which the heater (76) is coupled, wherein the heater coupling portion (68) comprises a heater accommodation groove (70) to which at least a portion of the heater (76) is installed.
Claims 14, 16, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lin et al. (US 2013/0239594 A1), hereafter referred to as “Lin.”
Regarding Claim 14: Lin teaches an ice maker (40) comprising: a tray (70) configured to define an ice making chamber (90); a support (130) configured to support the tray (70); and a heater (electrodes 72) configured to provide heat to at least one of the tray (paragraph [0030]) or the ice making chamber (paragraph [0030]), wherein at least a portion of the heater (electrodes 72) is disposed between the tray (70) and the support (130, see Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 16: Lin teaches an ice maker (40) comprising: a tray (70) configured to define an ice making chamber (90); a support (130) configured to support the tray (70); and a heater (electrodes 72) configured to provide heat to at least one of the tray (70) or the ice making chamber (90), wherein the heater (electrodes 72) is installed to the support (130) to make contact with the tray (paragraph [0027]).
Regarding Claim 20: Lin teaches a refrigerator (10) comprising the ice maker (40) of claim 14.
Regarding Claim 21: Lin teaches a refrigerator (10) comprising the ice maker (40) of claim 16.
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 (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 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoukyuu et al. (WO 2005/040698 A1, machine translation), hereafter referred to as “Shoukyuu,” in view of Ryu et al. (US 2010/0050681 A1), hereafter referred to as “Ryu.”
Regarding Claim 3: Shoukyuu fails to teach wherein the guide groove comprises: a first guide groove; and a second guide groove extending in a different direction from the first guide groove.
Ryu teaches a guide groove (447) comprises: a first guide groove (first 447); and a second guide groove (second 447) extending in a different direction from the first guide groove (see Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the guide groove comprises: a first guide groove; and a second guide groove extending in a different direction from the first guide groove to the structure of Shoukyuu as taught by Ryu in order to advantageously provide secured fixing of wiring for the supply of power to the heater (see Ryu, paragraph [0032]).
Regarding Claim 4: Shoukyuu fails to teach wherein the first guide groove is configured to guide a power terminal of the heater.
Ryu teaches a first guide groove (first 447) is configured to guide a power terminal (423) of electric device (paragraph [0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the first guide groove is configured to guide a power terminal of the heater to the structure of Shoukyuu as taught by Ryu in order to advantageously provide secured fixing of wiring for the supply of power to the heater (see Ryu, paragraph [0032]).
Regarding Claim 5: Shoukyuu fails to teach further comprising at least one connector connected to the power terminal of the heater and accommodated in the second guide groove.
Ryu teaches at least one connector (37c) connected to a power terminal (423) of an electric device (paragraph [0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided at least one connector connected to the power terminal of the heater to the structure of Shoukyuu as taught by Ryu in order to advantageously provide secured fixing of wiring for the supply of power to the heater (see Ryu, paragraph [0032]).
Shoukyuu modified supra fails to teach the one connector accommodated in the second guide groove.
However, since the general condition of the claim is disclosed by the prior art references, it is not inventive to rearrange the parts of the structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided one connector connected to the power terminal of the heater and accommodated in the second guide groove the structure of Shoukyuu in order to advantageously provide secured fixing of wiring for the supply of power to the heater (see Ryu, paragraph [0032]). Furthermore, absent evidence of criticality, rearrangement of parts is merely design choice and would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art would before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. See MPEP 2144.04 VI. A. and C.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shoukyuu et al. (WO 2005040698 A1, machine translation), hereafter referred to as “Shoukyuu,” in view of Son et al. (US 2013/0014535 A1), hereafter referred to as “Son.”
Regarding Claim 13: Shoukyuu teaches wherein the tray (11) comprises: a second tray (11 is a second tray/bottom tray) configured to define another portion of an ice making chamber (cavities 12), wherein the support (34) is configured to support the second tray (11), and wherein the heater (16) is configured to provide heat to the second tray (11).
Shoukyuu fails to teach wherein the tray comprises: a first tray configured to define a portion of the ice making chamber; and the first tray and the second tray together defining the ice making chamber.
Son teaches a tray (110 and 120) comprises: a first tray (110) configured to define a portion (115) of an ice making chamber (115 and 122); and the first tray (110) and a second tray (120) together defining the ice making chamber (115 and 122).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the tray comprises: a first tray configured to define a portion of the ice making chamber; and the first tray and the second tray together defining the ice making chamber to the structure of Shoukyuu as taught by Son in order to advantageously provide spherical shaped ice (see Son, paragraphs [0048] and [0052]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9 are rejected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten without any patentably significant broadening in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Rosenberg (1,852,064).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIRSTIN U OSWALD whose telephone number is (571)270-3557. The examiner can normally be reached 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. M-F.
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 at 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 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.
/KIRSTIN U OSWALD/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights