Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/324,848

PASSIVE AND ACTIVE CALIBRATION METHODS FOR A RESISTIVE HEATER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 19, 2021
Examiner
KHLOK, BONITA
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Watlow Electric Manufacturing Company
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
50%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 50% of resolved cases
50%
Career Allow Rate
99 granted / 200 resolved
-20.5% vs TC avg
Strong +49% interview lift
Without
With
+49.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
242
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
51.8%
+11.8% vs TC avg
§102
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
§112
26.6%
-13.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 200 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/28/2025 has been entered. The status of the 04/29/2025 claims, is as follows: Claim 1 has been amended; Claims 15, 17-18, and 20 have been withdrawn; Claims 2, 7-14, 16, and 19 have been canceled; Claims 1, 3-6, 15, 17-18, and 20-27 are pending. Information Disclosure Statement The (3) information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/12/2025 and 04/09/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement are being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1, and 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steinhauser (US 20150055940) in view of Johnsgard (US 6342691) Regarding Claim 1, Steinhauser discloses a method of calibrating a heater (method 1000 of calibrating a heater assembly 802, para. 0086; fig. 23A), the method comprising: powering the heater (heater assembly 802) to a first temperature setpoint (predetermined temperature, step 1016; fig. 23A) (para. 0089), wherein the heater comprises a resistive heating element (heating element 812) (“temperature-dependent resistance characteristics of the heating elements 812”, para. 0086); turning-off power to the heater when the heater is at the first temperature setpoint (predetermined temperature) to passively cool the heater (step 1020; fig. 23A); concurrently obtaining a plurality of resistance measurements of the resistive heating element (heating element 812) and a plurality of reference temperature measurements of a reference area at the heater (temperature of heater assembly 802) (step 1022; fig. 23A) (para. 0087-0088 and 0090) (it is noted that the lookup table comprising the relationship between the resistance characteristics of heating assembly and temperature and in step 1022 the lookup table is updated based on new temperature data) as the heater (heater assembly 802) passively cools from the first temperature setpoint to a second temperature setpoint (step 1022; fig. 23A) (para. 0090) (it is noted that the lookup table comprises the relationship between the resistance characteristics and temperature, therefore when obtaining the lookup table in step 1022 to update the lookup table with the new temperature data, the resistance data and temperature data are obtained concurrently. It is also noted according to para. 0049-0050 of the original specification of the instant application, “reference member” refers to a reference area about the heater (i.e. a reference temperature). The reference area is the surface of the heater. The reference area can be also the TC wafer disposed on the heater to measure temperature along the surface of the heater. In this case, Steinhauser discloses the temperature of each heating zone is measured); and generating a resistance-temperature calibration table (lookup table) that correlates the plurality of resistance measurements (resistance) with the plurality of reference temperature measurements (range of expected temperature) (step 1010-1012) (para. 0087). Steinhauser does not disclose: the method comprising powering the heater in an isothermal environment, wherein the heater is thermally isolated when the method of calibrating the heater is performed. However, Johnsgard discloses the heater (base heaters 120A; fig. 1) is thermally isolated (col. 14, lines 11-19) by insulating walls 130A-H (col. 16, lines 52-64). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Steinhauser to comprise powering the heater in the isothermal environment, in such a way that the heater is thermally isolated within the insulating walls as taught by Johnsgard, in order to reduce heat loss thereby increase the energy efficiency and achieve temperature uniformity (col. 9, 4 lines 61-67, 40-44 respectively and also col. 16, lines 52-56). The modification would result in the method, in which the heater is heated in the isothermal environment (it is noted the environment is isothermal because it is the environment in which temperature is uniform in the chamber because the chamber would be insulated by insulating walls 130A-H) and the heater is thermally isolated when the method of calibrating the heater is performed (it is noted the heater assembly of Steinhauser would be insulated by the insulating walls 130A-H to prevent heat loss and yield temperature uniformity). Regarding Claim 21, Johnsgard discloses the isothermal environment (chamber 128) is an isothermal chamber (col. 4, 10, 16 lines 40-44, 27-50, 52-60 respectively. It is noted the chamber is insulated by insulating walls 130A-H to yield temperature uniformity inside). Regarding Claim 22, Johnsgard discloses the isothermal chamber (chamber 128) includes an insulating material (insulating walls 130A-H) that encases the heater (heaters 120) to thermally isolate the heater (col. 16, lines 52-56). Regarding Claim 23, the modification discloses the insulating material (insulating walls 130A-H of Johnsgard) is configured to reduce heat loss between the resistive heating element (heating element 812 of Steinhauser) and an exterior surface of the heater (heater assembly 802) (col. 4, 16 lines 40-44, 52-55 respectively of Johnsgard. It is noted that the temperature within the insulating chamber would be uniform because the chamber is insulated by insulating walls 130A-H of Johnsgard). Regarding Claim 24, the modification discloses in the isothermal environment (insulating chamber of Johnsgard), a surface temperature of the heater (surface temperature of the heater assembly 802 of Steinhauser) is equal to a temperature of the resistive heating element (heating element 812 of Steinhauser) (col. 4, 16 lines 40-44, 52-55 respectively of Johnsgard. It is noted the temperature within the chamber enclosed by the insulating walls of 130A-H is uniform, therefore temperature of the heater assembly of Steinhauser is equal to the temperature of heating element Steinhauser). Regarding Claim 25, the modification discloses in the isothermal environment (insulating chamber of Johnsgard), a surface temperature of the heater (surface temperature of heater assembly 802 of Steinhauser) is indicative of a temperature of the resistive heating element (temperature of heating element 812 Steinhauser) (col. 4, 16 lines 40-44, 52-55 respectively of Johnsgard. It is noted the temperature within the chamber enclosed by the insulating walls of 130A-H is uniform, therefore temperature of the heater assembly of Steinhauser is equal to the temperature of heating element Steinhauser). Regarding Claim 26, Steinhauser discloses further comprising continuously measuring the plurality of resistance measurements of the resistive heating element (resistance of heating element) and the plurality of reference temperature measurements of the reference area (temperature of heater assembly) (para. 0087). Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Steinhauser (US 20150055940) and Johnsgard (US 6342691) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Merchant (US 20180269089) Regarding Claim 3, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the reference area is an exterior surface of the heater. However, Merchant discloses a method of calibrating a heater (para. 0028-0031), wherein the reference area is an exterior surface of the heater (surface of support 150a) (“non-contact temperature sensors 120a, 120b are configured to obtain temperature measurements of the respective area over each of the substrate supports 150a, 150b”, para. 0024). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Steinhauser in view of Johnsgard, wherein the reference area is the exterior surface of the heater as taught by Merchant, in order to capture temperature data of the exterior surface of the heater such that the temperature data can be used to calibrate the heater. Regarding Claim 4, the modification discloses the method, wherein the plurality of reference temperature measurements of the exterior surface of the heater (surface temperature of substrate support 150a of Merchant) are obtained with an infrared camera (infrared camera 814) (para. 0071 of Steinhauser). Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Steinhauser (US 20150055940) and Johnsgard (US 6342691) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Uozumi (US 20220228924) Regarding Claim 5, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except the plurality of reference temperature measurements are obtained with a thermocouple is the thermocouple wafer disposed on the heater. However, Uozumi discloses a thermocouple (heating plate 61a) is the thermocouple wafer (heating plate 61a comprises a thermocouple sensor 61c) disposed on the heater (heater 61b) (para. 0078-0079; fig. 5B) (it is noted according to para. 0049-0050 of the original specification of the instant application, “reference member” refers to a reference area about the heater (i.e. a reference temperature). The reference area can be also the TC wafer disposed on the heater to measure temperature along the surface of the heater). PNG media_image1.png 339 336 media_image1.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Steinhauser in view of Johnsgard to obtain the plurality of reference temperature measurements using the thermocouple wafer disposed on the heater as taught by Uozumi, in order to utilize the thermocouple wafer to measure the temperature along the surface of the heater such that measurements of the temperature and resistance of the heater are used to obtain correlation between the resistance and temperature to calibrate the heater. Claims 6 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modification of Steinhauser (US 20150055940) and Johnsgard (US 6342691) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Endo (US 20210051769) Regarding Claim 6, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, wherein obtaining a resistance measurement from among the plurality of resistance measurements (resistance characteristics) comprises measuring the resistances of the heating element concurrently with obtaining the plurality of reference temperatures (temperature) (para. 0087 and 0090 of Steinhauser) (it is noted that the lookup table as shown in step 1022 comprises relationship between resistance and temperature. Therefore, the resistance and temperature are concurrently obtained). The modification does not disclose measuring at least one of an electric current and a voltage, and determining the resistance measurement based on the measured at least one electric current and the voltage. However, Endo discloses the method, wherein to obtain a resistance measurement from among the plurality of resistance measurements (resistance values of heater 23-1; fig. 6), the method further comprises measuring at least one of an electric current and a voltage (current value), and determining the resistance measurement (resistance values) based on the measured at least one electric current and the voltage (current) (para. 0032). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Steinhauser in view of Johnsgard to measure the current and determine the resistance measurement based on the measured current as taught by Endo because it is known in the art to measure the current to determine the resistance corresponding to the measured current through the heater. Regarding Claim 27, the modification discloses substantially all of the claimed features as set forth above, except further comprising periodically measuring the plurality of resistance measurements of the resistive heating element and the plurality of reference temperature measurements of the reference area. However, Endo discloses the plurality of resistance measurements (resistance values) and the plurality of temperature measurements (change in temperature of one first heater) are obtained periodically (measurement period 121-1 to 121-m) (para. 0048 and 0050). PNG media_image2.png 302 444 media_image2.png Greyscale Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Steinhauser in view of Johnsgard to obtain the plurality of resistance measurements and the plurality of temperature measurements periodically with respect to time as taught by Endo. Doing so would allow the controller to execute the offset adjustment again from the beginning as a feed-back loop when the variation in resistance values measured by the resistance sensor is larger than a predetermined value, such that the accuracy of the calibration table is ensured (para. 0051-0052 of Endo). Response to Argument Applicant's arguments filed on 04/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are respectfully considered moot in view of new ground of rejections. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BONITA KHLOK whose telephone number is (571)270-7313. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 9:00am-6pm. 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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached on (571)272-9059. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /BONITA KHLOK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /HELENA KOSANOVIC/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 19, 2021
Application Filed
Jul 26, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 31, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 28, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 02, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593937
MULTI-FUNCTIONAL OVEN WITH AIR FRYER CAPABILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582137
APPARATUS FOR PRODUCING NON-SPLATTER COOKING OIL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12551045
GRINDER AND COFFEE MACHINE HAVING SUCH A GRINDER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12544849
METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A WELDING PROCESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12520965
COLLAPSIBLE CAMPING STOVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
50%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+49.2%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 200 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month