DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This is in response to application no.19/052,861 filed on 02/13/2025. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Title
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.
Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is not in narrative form. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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, 3, 5, 8-10, 12, 14 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hwang et al. (US 20190186816 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hwang teaches the claim limitation as follows:
A refrigerator, comprising: a plurality of storage compartments (Figs. 3A-3B: compartments 324 of a refrigerator 302); a camera (cameras 310); a memory (¶0041-0042: memory 320); and at least one processor configured to: recognize a type of food material to be added in the refrigerator based on an image obtained through the camera (¶0081-0083: any one or more of the processes includes in method 700 may be performed by a controller (e.g., a processor) of a refrigerator…it should be noted that although operation 702 includes actually receiving a request to store the first type of food item in the refrigerator, in other approaches the refrigerator may actually be able to detect that a food item is or is going to be added to the refrigerator. ¶0049, 0051: image recognition of food item added to the refrigerator), obtain ethylene information associated with the food material based on the type of the food material (Fig. 7, ¶0085-0089: operation 706 includes comparing a characteristic of the first type of food item with a same type of characteristic for each type of food item determined as already being stored in the one or more of the compartments of the refrigerator…the compartment selected in operation 708 may be based on one or more chemical characteristics of the food items already stored therein and/or of the food item being added thereto. Some produce emits byproducts, e.g., such as ethylene gas which is a natural plant hormone that helps fruit ripen). Note that obtaining the chemical characteristics of the of the food item is implicitly disclosed in Hwang, obtain information associated with at least one other food material stored in one of the plurality of storage compartments (¶0084-0085: method 700 further includes determining each type of food item already stored in one or more of the compartments of the refrigerator), identify, based on the ethylene information associated with the food material and the information associated with the at least one other food material, a storage compartment in which the food material is to be stored either separately or collectively with the at least one other food material from among the plurality of storage compartments (¶0085-0089: Operation 708 further includes selecting a first of the compartments in which to store the first type of food item based at least in part on the comparison…the compartment selected in operation 708 may be based on one or more chemical characteristics of the food items already stored therein and/or of the food item being added thereto. Some produce emits byproducts, e.g., such as ethylene gas which is a natural plant hormone that helps fruit ripen), and provide information about the identified storage compartment in which the food material is to be stored (¶0092: after a compartment has been selected in operation 708, method 700 further includes outputting a recommendation to store the first type of food item in the first compartment).
Regarding claim 3, Hwang teaches the refrigerator of claim 1, wherein the camera is a first camera, the image is a first image and the refrigerator further comprises: a second camera to be disposed to face the plurality of storage compartments (Fig. 3B: a camera 310 is included in each of the compartments 324), wherein the at least one processor is configured to: determine, based on a second image obtained through the second camera, a storage compartment in which the at least one other food material is stored (¶0043, 0084: the types of food items stored in various ones of the compartments in the refrigerator may be determined using detection hardware such as a digital camera. ¶0087-0089: selecting compartments already includes at least one type of food item stored therein), recognize, based on the second image, a type of the at least one other food material (¶0043, 0084: the types of food items stored in various ones of the compartments in the refrigerator may be determined using detection hardware such as a digital camera), obtain, based on the recognized type of the at least one other food material, ethylene information associated therewith (¶0089: the compartment selected in operation 708 may be based on one or more chemical characteristics of the food items already stored therein and/or of the food item being added thereto. Some produce emits byproducts, e.g., such as ethylene gas which is a natural plant hormone that helps fruit ripen), and obtain, based on the storage compartment in which the at least one other food material is stored and the ethylene information associated therewith, information associated with the at least one other food material (¶0089: the compartment selected in operation 708 may be based on one or more chemical characteristics of the food items already stored therein and/or of the food item being added thereto. Some produce emits byproducts, e.g., such as ethylene gas which is a natural plant hormone that helps fruit ripen). Note that obtaining the characteristics of the of the food item is implicitly disclosed in Hwang.
Regarding claim 5, Hwang teaches the refrigerator of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is configured to identify, based on the ethylene information associated with the food material, the storage compartment in which the at least one other food material is stored, and the ethylene information associated with the at least one other food material, information about a storage compartment in which the at least one other food material is to be stored (¶0089: in situations where each of the compartments already includes at least one type of food item stored therein…the compartment selected in operation 708 may be based on one or more chemical characteristics of the food items already stored therein and/or of the food item being added thereto. Some produce emits byproducts, e.g., such as ethylene gas which is a natural plant hormone that helps fruit ripen).
Regarding claim 8, Hwang teaches the refrigerator of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: identify information about a storage compartment in which the food material is to be stored based on temperatures of the plurality of storage compartments and a setting temperature of the refrigerator (¶0089, 0093: the compartment selected in operation 708 may be a compartment which has a current ambient storage temperature which is closest to the ideal storage temperature associated with the first type of food item).
Regarding claim 9, Hwang teaches the refrigerator of claim 1, further comprising: a display, wherein the at least one processor is configured to provide information about the identified storage compartment through the display (¶0092: after a compartment has been selected in operation 708, method 700 further includes outputting a recommendation to store the first type of food item in the first compartment. See operation 710. The recommendation is preferably output using an output device, e.g., such as a display screen).
Regarding claims 10, 12, 14, 17 and 18, the claims are drawn to a method claim and recite the limitation analogous to claims 1, 3, 5, 8 and 9, and are rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claims 1, 3, 5, 8 and 9.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is drawn to a non-transitory computer-readable medium claim and recite the limitation analogous to claim 1, and is rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 4, 6, 7, 11, 13, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang et al. (US 20190186816 A1) in view of Eden et al. (US 20230228481 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Hwang teaches the refrigerator of claim 1, wherein the camera is disposed at a front surface of the refrigerator (Figs. 3A-3B: cameras 310).
Hwang does not explicitly teach the ethylene information comprises a degree of incidence of ethylene in the food material and a degree of sensitivity of the food material to ethylene.
However, Eden teaches the ethylene information comprises a degree of incidence of ethylene in the food material and a degree of sensitivity of the food material to ethylene (¶0080-0081: Method 600 may also include a step 630 of determining that the first food item and the second food item are incompatible for co-storage…such incompatibility may also or instead include one of the first food item and the second food item being an ethylene producer, e.g., which generates or gives off a high amount of ethylene (as compared to other produce items) as it ripens or ages, and the other of the first food item and the second food item being ethylene sensitive, e.g., where exposure to levels of ethylene given off by the one food item may accelerate the aging rate of the other food item).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwang’s refrigerator implemented method by incorporating the teaching of Eden as noted above, in order to determine foods that are incompatible for co-storage (Eden: ¶0081-0082).
Regarding claim 4, Hwang does not explicitly teach wherein the ethylene information associated with the at least one other food material comprises a degree of incidence of ethylene in the at least one other food material and a degree of sensitivity of the at least one other food material to ethylene.
However, Eden teaches wherein the ethylene information associated with the at least one other food material comprises a degree of incidence of ethylene in the at least one other food material and a degree of sensitivity of the at least one other food material to ethylene (¶0080-0081: Method 600 may also include a step 630 of determining that the first food item and the second food item are incompatible for co-storage…such incompatibility may also or instead include one of the first food item and the second food item being an ethylene producer, e.g., which generates or gives off a high amount of ethylene (as compared to other produce items) as it ripens or ages, and the other of the first food item and the second food item being ethylene sensitive, e.g., where exposure to levels of ethylene given off by the one food item may accelerate the aging rate of the other food item).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwang’s refrigerator implemented method by incorporating the teaching of Eden as noted above, in order to determine foods that are incompatible for co-storage (Eden: ¶0081-0082).
Regarding claim 6, Hwang does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to identify, based on a degree of sensitivity of the food material to ethylene and a degree of incidence of ethylene in the at least one other food material, information about a storage compartment in which the food material is to be stored.
However, Eden teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to identify, based on a degree of sensitivity of the food material to ethylene and a degree of incidence of ethylene in the at least one other food material (¶0080-0081: Method 600 may also include a step 630 of determining that the first food item and the second food item are incompatible for co-storage…such incompatibility may also or instead include one of the first food item and the second food item being an ethylene producer, e.g., which generates or gives off a high amount of ethylene (as compared to other produce items) as it ripens or ages, and the other of the first food item and the second food item being ethylene sensitive, e.g., where exposure to levels of ethylene given off by the one food item may accelerate the aging rate of the other food item), information about a storage compartment in which the food material is to be stored (¶0081-0082: After determining that the first food item and the second food item are incompatible for co-storage, and in response to such determination, the method 600 may then include a step 640 of providing a user notification including a recommendation to relocate one of the first food item and the second food item…the recommendation may include recommending to move the one food item to another drawer).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwang’s refrigerator implemented method by incorporating the teaching of Eden as noted above, in order to determine foods that are incompatible for co-storage (Eden: ¶0081-0082).
Regarding claim 7, Hwang does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to: identify, based on a degree of incidence of ethylene in the food material and a degree of sensitivity of the at least one other food material to ethylene, information about a storage compartment in which the food material is to be stored.
However, Eden teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to: identify, based on a degree of incidence of ethylene in the food material and a degree of sensitivity of the at least one other food material to ethylene (¶0080-0081: Method 600 may also include a step 630 of determining that the first food item and the second food item are incompatible for co-storage…such incompatibility may also or instead include one of the first food item and the second food item being an ethylene producer, e.g., which generates or gives off a high amount of ethylene (as compared to other produce items) as it ripens or ages, and the other of the first food item and the second food item being ethylene sensitive, e.g., where exposure to levels of ethylene given off by the one food item may accelerate the aging rate of the other food item), information about a storage compartment in which the food material is to be stored (¶0081-0082: After determining that the first food item and the second food item are incompatible for co-storage, and in response to such determination, the method 600 may then include a step 640 of providing a user notification including a recommendation to relocate one of the first food item and the second food item…the recommendation may include recommending to move the one food item to another drawer).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hwang’s refrigerator implemented method by incorporating the teaching of Eden as noted above, in order to determine foods that are incompatible for co-storage (Eden: ¶0081-0082).
Regarding claims 11, 13, 15 and 16, the claims are drawn to a method claim and recite the limitation analogous to claims 2, 4, 6 and 7, and are rejected due to the same reason set forth above with respect to claims 2, 4, 6 and 7.
The following are the prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ge et al. (US 20210190416 A1) describes a method and device for managing food in a refrigerator.¶0001
Johnston (US 20170262973 A1) describes refrigerators that identify spoiled food and alert a user to the presence of spoiled food. ¶0013
Bodin et al. (US 20080047282 A1) describes a computer implemented method, an apparatus, and a computer usable program product for optimal placement of items in a storage unit based on temperature readings within the storage unit.¶0002
Besore et al. (US 20180106523 A1) describes systems and methods for tracking and preserving a food inventory in a refrigerator appliance.¶0001
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHNAEL AYNALEM whose telephone number is (571)270-1482. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5:30 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, SATH PERUNGAVOOR can be reached at 571-272-7455. 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.
/NATHNAEL AYNALEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights