www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/975,665
`
`08/25/2020
`
`Shin'ichi HORII
`
`092570-03 15
`
`5084
`
`McDermott Will and Emery LLP
`The McDermott Building
`500 North Capitol Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20001
`
`MARTIN,ELIZABETHJ
`
`3763
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`02/15/2022
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`mweipdocket@mwe.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/975,665
`HORII et al.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`ELIZABETH J MARTIN
`3763
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1)C) Responsive to communication(s) filed on
`C) A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)C) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)0) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on__; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporatedinto this action.
`4\() Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`) )
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`____ is/are pending in the application.
`) © Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`L) Claim(s)__ is/are allowed.
`OD Claim(s
`)____ is/are rejected.
`1 Claim(s) _ is/are objectedto.
`1 Claim(s)
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)0 The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a) accepted or b)C) objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)() Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)L All
`1.1 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20220210
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined underthe
`
`first inventorto file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`2.
`
`The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/22/2021 wasfiled after the
`
`mailing date of the application on 8/25/2020. The submission is in compliance with the
`
`provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statementis being
`
`considered by the examiner.
`
`3.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f:
`
`Claim Interpretation
`
`(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. — An elementin a claim for a
`combination may be expressed as a meansorstep for performing a specified
`function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and
`such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or
`acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
`
`An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a meansorstep for
`performing a specified function withoutthe recital of structure, material, or acts in
`support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding
`structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
`
`4,
`
`The claimsin this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the
`
`plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by
`
`one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also
`
`commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification
`
`when 35 U.S.C. 112( or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph,is invoked.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 3
`
`As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following
`
`three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f or pre-AJA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth
`
`paragraph:
`
`(A)_the claim limitation uses the term “means”or “step” or a term used as a substitute for
`
`“means” that is a generic placeholder(also called a nonce term or a non-structural term
`
`having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
`
`(B)—the term “means”or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language,
`
`typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another
`
`linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
`
`(C)
`
`the term “means”or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient
`
`structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
`
`Use of the word “means”(or “step”) in a claim with functional languagecreates a
`
`rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C.
`
`112(f) or pre-AJA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumptionthat the claim limitation is
`
`interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(or pre-AJA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when
`
`the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited
`
`function.
`
`Absence of the word “means”(or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that
`
`the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-ATA 35
`
`U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under
`
`35 U.S.C. 112(f or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim
`
`limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely
`
`perform the recited function.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 4
`
`Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means”(or “step”) are being
`
`interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(or pre-AJA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, exceptas
`
`otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do
`
`not use the word “means”(or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-
`
`AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
`
`This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,”
`
`but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth
`
`paragraph, becausethe claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with
`
`functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the
`
`generic placeholderis not preceded bya structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “an
`99
`oe
`99 co
`99
`oe
`environmental adjustmentfacility”,
`a recognition unit’,
`
`“a determination unit’,
`
`“a control unit
`
`“a transmission unit’; “a reception unit”, “a circulation unit’, “a contact adjustment unit’, “a
`
`medium temperature holding unit” and “a recording unit’.
`
`A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding
`
`structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112() or pre-AJA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth
`
`paragraphlimitation:
`
`“an environmental adjustmentfacility” corresponds to a compressor 21, a refrigerant
`
`pipe 22, a condenser 23, an evaporator 24, and a fan 25 (paragraph 0032 of the published
`
`application.
`
`99 co
`
`“a control unit”
`
`“a recognition unit” correspond to as circuits having an input terminal
`
`and an output terminal, such as large scale integration (LSI) and field-programmable gate array
`
`(FPGA). Each ofthese circuits may be individually implemented in one chip, or these circuits
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 5
`
`may be implemented in one chip that include all or part of the configurations of each example of
`
`the embodiment(paragraph 0088 of the published application).
`
`“a recording unit” corresponds to a two-dimensional barcode, a QR code(registered
`
`trademark, the same applies hereinafter), an IC tag, an RFID, etc (paragraph 0029 of the
`
`published application).
`
`“a contact adjustment unit” correspondsto the inlet hole 37, the outlet hole 38, and the
`
`opening andclosing plate 36 (paragraph 0042 of the published application).
`
`Becausethis/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f or
`
`pre-AJA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph,it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the
`
`corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and
`
`equivalents thereof.
`
`If applicant does not intend to havethis/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C.
`
`112(f) or pre-ATA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may:
`
`(1) amend the claim
`
`limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-ATA 35 U.S.C. 112,
`
`sixth paragraph(e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2)
`
`present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform
`
`the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA
`
`35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
`
`5.
`
`The following is a quotation ofthe first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
`
`(a) INGENERAL.—Thespecification shall contain a written description
`of the invention, and of the mannerand process of making and usingit, in such
`full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to
`whichit pertains, or with whichit is most nearly connected, to make and use the
`same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventoror joint
`inventor of carrying out the invention.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 6
`
`The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
`
`The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and
`of the manner and process of making and usingit, in such full, clear, concise, and
`exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to whichit pertains, or with
`whichit is most nearly connected, to make and use the same,and shall set forth
`the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
`
`6.
`
`Claims2-6, 8-9, 13-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA),
`
`first paragraph,as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s)
`
`contains subject matter which was not describedin the specification in such a wayas to
`
`reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventoror a joint inventor, or
`
`for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the
`
`application wasfiled, had possession of the claimed invention.
`
`99
`Regarding claims 2-6, 8-9, 13-17, the claims recite “a recognition unit’,
`
`oe
`
`“a
`
`determination unit”, “a transmission unit’; “a reception unit”, “a circulation unit’, “a medium
`
`temperature holding unit”. The specification fails discloses the computer and the algorithm(s)
`
`that achieve the claimed function in sufficient detail that one of ordinary skill in the art can
`
`reasonably conclude that the inventor possessed the claim subject matter at the time offiling. It
`
`is not enoughthat oneskilled in the art could theoretically write a program to achieve the
`
`claimed function, rather the specification itself must explain how the claimed functionis
`
`achieved. The specification fails to teach those skilled in the art how to make andusethe full
`
`scope of the claimed invention without undue experimentation.
`
`7.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
`(b) CONCLUSION.—Thespecification shall conclude with one or more claims
`particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the
`inventor or a joint inventor regardsas the invention.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 7
`
`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 regardsas his
`invention.
`
`8.
`
`Claims 1-20 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.
`99
`oe
`Claim limitations “a recognition unit’,
`
`99
`“a determination unit’,
`
`oe
`
`“a transmission unit’; “a
`
`reception unit’, “a circulation unit’, “a contact adjustment unit’, “a medium temperature holding
`
`unit” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AJA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written
`
`description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the
`
`entire claimed function andto clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The
`
`specification fails to teach those skilled in the art how to makeand usethe full scope of the
`
`claimed invention without undue experimentation. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is
`
`rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
`
`Applicant may:
`
`(a)
`
`Amendthe claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AJA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
`
`(b)
`
`Amendthe written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what
`
`structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any
`
`new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 8
`
`(c)
`
`Amendthe written description of the specification such thatit clearly links the structure,
`
`material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing
`
`any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
`
`If applicantis of the opinion that the written description of the specification already
`
`implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links
`
`them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize whatstructure,
`
`material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
`
`(a)
`
`Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the
`
`corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly
`
`links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without
`
`introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
`
`(b)
`
`Stating on the record what the correspondingstructure, material, or acts, which are
`
`implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform
`
`the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP 8§ 608.01(0)
`
`and 2181.
`
`Claims 1, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 17 recite “the container” which lacks antecedent basis and fore
`
`examination purposesis interpreted to be -- each container--.
`
`9.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
`
`(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subjectto subsection (e), a claim
`in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and
`then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in
`dependentform shall be construed to incorporate by referenceall the limitations
`of the claim to which itrefers.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
`
`Subject to the following paragraph[i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 9
`
`forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim
`in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by referenceall the
`limitations of the claim to whichitrefers.
`
`10.
`
`Claims 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th
`
`paragraph,as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject
`
`matter of the claim upon which it depends,or for failing to includeall the limitations of the
`
`claim upon whichit depends.
`
`It is unclear how claim 11 and claim 19 further limit claim 1 and 12 since a container and
`
`vehicle are previously recited in the claims 1 and 12.
`
`Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper
`
`dependentform, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that
`
`the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`11.
`
`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 ofrejection if the prior art
`
`relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same undereither status.
`
`12.
`
`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 madein this Office action:
`
`A personshall 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.
`
`13.
`
`Claim(s) 1-6, 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
`
`Goldberg et al (US 20190047460).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 10
`
`Regarding claims 1, 11, 19, Goldberg teaches an environmental control system (Figs. 5,
`
`7a-7c, paragraph 0161), comprising: a plurality of containers (702) that stores goods (food items,
`
`paragraph 0143); a shelf (720) that is transported by a vehicle (vehicle, paragraph 0099) and
`
`accommodates the plurality of containers; an environmental adjustmentfacility (210, paragraph
`
`0120) that adjusts an environment in each container (paragraph 0121); and a control unit (166,
`
`paragraph 0130) that controls the environmental adjustmentfacility so that the environmentin
`
`the container is adjusted to a predetermined environmental range (temperature control schedule,
`
`paragraph 0123) based on anattribute set for each container (paragraph 0123), wherein an empty
`
`space in the shelf on the vehicle is kept track of based on information on transportation of each
`
`container (paragraph 0134-0135, understood when purchase is made the space on the shelf would
`
`be empty).
`
`Regarding claim 2, Goldberg teaches a recognition unit (166, paragraph 0130) that
`
`recognizes the attribute of each container (understood 166 includes processor-readable
`
`instructions, instruction sets, or instruction blocks that may control the operation of various
`
`subsystems or components and oneofordinary skill would recognize that for warmingor cooling
`
`the attributes of the container would be processed by 166); and a determination unit (166,
`
`paragraph 0130) that determines the environmental range to which the corresponding containeris
`
`to be adjusted by the environmental adjustmentfacility, based on the attribute recognized by the
`
`recognition unit (understood 166 includes processor-readable instructions, instruction sets, or
`
`instruction blocks that may control the operation of various subsystems or components and one
`
`of ordinary skill would recognize that for warming or cooling the attributes of the container
`
`would be processed by 166).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 11
`
`Regarding claim 3, Goldberg teaches a recognition unit (166, paragraph 0130) that
`
`recognizes the attribute of each container (understood 166 includes processor-readable
`
`instructions, instruction sets, or instruction blocks that may control the operation of various
`
`subsystems or components and oneofordinary skill would recognize that for warmingor cooling
`
`the attributes of the container would be processed by 166); a transmission unit (300) that sends
`
`the attribute recognized by the recognition unit to outside (paragraph 0131); and a reception unit
`
`(322) that receives from the outside the environmental range determined based on the sent
`
`attribute to which the corresponding containeris to be adjusted by the environmental adjustment
`
`facility (paragraph 0139).
`
`Regarding claim 4, Goldberg teaches a reception unit (322) that receives the attribute of
`
`each container from outside (paragraph 0139); and a determination unit (166, paragraph 0130)
`
`that determines the environmental range to which the corresponding container is adjusted by the
`
`environmental adjustmentfacility, based on the attribute received by the reception unit
`
`(understood 166 includes processor-readable instructions, instruction sets, or instruction blocks
`
`that may control the operation of various subsystems or components and one of ordinary skill
`
`would recognize that for warming or cooling the attributes of the container would be processed
`
`by 166).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Goldberg teaches a reception unit (322) that receives from outside
`
`the environmental range determined based onthe attribute to which the corresponding container
`
`is to be adjusted by the environmental adjustmentfacility (paragraph 0139).
`
`Regarding claim 6, Goldberg teaches the container includes a recording unit (system
`
`memory, paragraph 0130) that holds the attribute of the container, and the attribute includes the
`
`environmental range to which the corresponding containeris to be adjusted (paragraph 0123).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 12
`
`Regarding claim 10, Goldberg teaches the containeris a thermally insulating container
`
`(146).
`
`Regarding claims 12-18, and 20,it is noted that although the preamble of the claimsis
`
`directed towards a method,the structure of the combined teachings discloseall the structure
`
`being provided in the method steps, thus the method is also anticipated by the combined
`
`teachings. If a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the
`
`method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated or rendered
`
`obvious bythe prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the
`
`specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently or
`
`obviously perform the claimed process. Thus, the method, as claimed, would necessarily result
`
`from the normal operation of the apparatus. See MPEP 2112.02.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`14.
`
`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 ofrejection if the prior art
`
`relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same undereither status.
`
`15.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which formsthe 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 andthe 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
`whichthe invention was made.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 13
`
`16.
`
`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 ofthe priorart.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claimsat issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinentart.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`17.
`
`This application currently namesjoint inventors. In considering patentability of the
`
`claims the examiner presumesthat the subject matter of the various claims was commonly
`
`owned asofthe 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 ownedasofthe effective filing date
`
`of the later invention in order for the examinerto 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.
`
`18.
`
`Claims7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg
`
`in view of Thomas (US 20100191615).
`
`Regarding claim 7, Goldberg teaches the environmental adjustmentfacility includes a
`
`medium flow path (216, paragraph 0120) whichis providedin the shelf and through which a
`
`medium flows (air, paragraph 0120) butfails to explicitly teach a contact adjustment unit that
`
`adjust a degree of contact between each container and the medium.
`
`However, Thomasteaches a contact adjustment unit (ducted damper, claim 3(g)) that
`
`adjust a degree of contact between each container and the medium to efficiently control the
`
`climate in the transportation unit.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 14
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to modify the system of Goldberg to include a contact adjustment unit that adjust a
`
`degree of contact between each container and the medium in view ofthe teachings of Thomasto
`
`efficiently control the climate in the transportation unit.
`
`Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach wherein the medium isair(air,
`
`paragraph 0120 of Goldberg), and the air is able to return to the medium flow path after entering
`
`the container from the medium flow path (understood the air is capable of being recycled), and
`
`the contact adjustment unit is a damper (ducted damper, claim 3(g)) that adjusts a flow rate of the
`
`air that is the medium flowing in the container.
`
`Further, it is understood, claim 8 includes an intendeduserecitation, for example “...is
`
`able...”. The applicant is remindedthata recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed
`
`apparatus is intended to be does notdifferentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus
`
`satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an
`
`apparatus mayberecited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an
`
`apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
`
`Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach the environmental adjustmentfacility
`
`further includes a circulation unit (compressor, refrigerant coil, and fan paragraph 0120 of
`
`Goldberg) that circulates the medium in the medium flow path, and a medium temperature
`
`holding unit (166, compressor, refrigerant coil, and fan paragraph 0120-0121, 0123 of Goldberg)
`
`that holds the medium at a predetermined temperature.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/975,665
`Art Unit: 3763
`
`Page 15
`
`Conclusion
`
`19.
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J MARTIN whosetelephone numberis (571)270-
`
`3840. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30pm M-F.
`
`Examinerinterviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using
`
`a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicantis
`
`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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached on (571) 270-5054. The fax phone numberfor
`
`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 CustomerService
`
`Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA)or 571-272-1000.
`
`/ELIZABETH J MARTIN/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
`
`