Appeal 2006-3025
Application 10/714,110
dishes. (Specification [0035]). “[T]he value for the solubility of the soiling
of the dishes is derived from the water temperature of the rinsing liquid and
length of time of the rinse operation until the increase in the turbidity of the
rinsing liquid has reached the value zero.” (Specification [0034]).
Independent claim 12 is illustrative of the invention:
12. A method of cleaning dishes in a dishwasher in accordance
with a programmed wash cycle implemented by a central control unit and
comprising a rinse step where a rinse liquid is recirculated in the dishwasher
and a cleaning step where a wash liquid is recirculated in the dishwasher, the
method comprising:
determining a solubility of soil on the dishes to be cleaned; and
setting at least one operating parameter of the cleaning step based on
the determined solubility.
The Examiner relies on the following prior art references to show
unpatentability:
Bashark US 3,888,269 Jun. 10, 1975
Smith US 5,586,567 Dec. 24, 1996
Appellants appeal from the Examiner’s rejection of claims 2, 8-10,
and 12-20 under 35 U.S.C § 103(a) as unpatentable over Bashark in
combination with Smith.1
1 In the Final Rejection, mailed November 23, 2005, claims 12, 2, 8-10, and
13-20 were provisionally rejected under the judicially created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of
copending Application No. 10/713,305, and claims 12, 16-17, and 19-20
were provisionally rejected under the judicially created doctrine of
obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 7-8 of
copending Application No. 10/713,304. These rejections were indicated as
withdrawn in the Advisory Action, miled February 1, 2006. Thus,
2
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013