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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 8-18 are pending, claims 1-7 having been cancelled and claims 11-14 having been withdrawn. Applicant's response filed September 11, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-10 and 15-18 will be examined on the merits.
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.
Claims 8-10 and 15-18 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.
Claim 8 recites that a “predetermined time is a time from a start of freezing of the liquid in the supercooled state until a start of thawing of the frozen liquid” and that the controller is configured to “start thawing the frozen liquid after the predetermined time stored in the memory has elapsed.” Claim 8 then goes on to recite “starting a thawing of the frozen liquid after a prescribed interval has elapsed from the start of the freezing of the liquid.” It is unclear what the relationship is between the “predetermined time” and the “prescribed interval” and precisely when the controller is configured to start thawing of the frozen liquid. Further confusion is presented when claim 8 is viewed with respect to claim 15. Claim 15 recites that the prescribed interval is predetermined and is “an interval from an instant at which the freezing of the liquid in the supercooled state starts until a temperature of a surface of the frozen liquid reaches a temperature of not less than 5C and not more than 10C greater than a temperature at which a crack occurs in the frozen liquid.” It is unclear when the starting of the thawing of the frozen liquid is supposed to occur – when the predetermined time stored in the memory of a time from a start of freezing of the liquid in the supercooled state until a start of thawing of the frozen liquid, or when the prescribed interval elapses when the prescribed interval is an interval from an instant at which the freezing of the liquid in the supercooled state starts until a temperature of a surface of the frozen liquid reaches a temperature of not less than 5C and not more than 10C greater than a temperature at which a crack occurs in the frozen liquid, or are the predetermined time and the prescribed interval the same thing? Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
Claims 9, 10 and 15-18 are rejected for depending on rejected claim 8.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection under 35 USC § 112 based on Applicant’s newly added amendments to the claims which make the scope of the claims indefinite as discussed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-3296. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30pm.
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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at 571-272-1344. 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.
/DOUGLAS LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
