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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 9 and 26 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.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase "optionally" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 26 discloses that “one or more open spaces provide an obstructive path for the radiative heating between the cover layer and the heating layer.” It is unclear how an open space provides an obstructive path. The definition of “obstructive” in the Oxford dictionary is “causing a blockage.” It is unclear how an open space causes blockage. For examination, the limitation will be interpreted as –the open space provides a path for radiative heating--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 24 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ogino (WO 2012004971 A1).
Claim 24. Ogino discloses a heater (radiant heating seat device, page 1, par. 1) comprising:
a cover layer (guard portion 7, Fig. 2);
a heating layer (heating element 5, Fig. 2);
one or more standoffs located between and in contact with the cover layer and the heating layer (heat conductive portion 8 is located between the guard portion and the heating element, Fig. 2); and
one or more open spaces defined between the cover layer and the heating layer and adjacent to the one or more standoffs (vertically long openings 6, Fig. 2, page 7);
wherein the heating layer is configured to generate heat that is transferred via radiative heating through the one or more open spaces from the heating layer to the cover layer (opening allows for radiation to pass through, page 2) and via conductive heating through the one or more standoffs from the heating layer to the cover layer (heat conduction portion conducts heat from the heating elements, page 2);
wherein the one or more standoffs maintain the one or more open spaces between the cover layer and the heating layer and prevent a collapse of the one or more open spaces so that the heat generated by the heating layer can be transferred via the radiative heating through the one or more open spaces (heat conductive portion 8 are molded from resin, maintains the opening, and is capable of preventing structural collapse to a certain degree).
Claim 27. Ogino discloses the heater according to claim 24, comprising at least one configuration selected from a group consisting of:
i) wherein the radiative heating is in a range between about 42oC and 120oC (heating elements generates temperature from 60o C-90o C, page 5);
ii) wherein the radiative heating has a heat flux of between about 500-5000 W/m2
iii) wherein the heat flux of the radiative heating is greater than a heat flux of the conductive heating;
iv) wherein the cover layer comprises a thermal effusivity in a range of about 20-300 Ws(1/2)n/m2K.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 7-8, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino (WO 2012004971 A1) in view of De Pelsemaeker (US 20210229522 A1).
Claim 1. Ogino discloses a heater (radiant heating seat device, page 1, par. 1) comprising:
a cover layer (guard portion 7, Fig. 2);
a heating layer (heating element 5, Fig. 2);
one or more standoffs located between and in contact with the cover layer and the heating layer (heat conductive portion 8 is located between the guard portion and the heating element, Fig. 2); and
one or more open spaces defined between the cover layer and the heating layer and adjacent to the one or more standoffs (vertically long openings 6, Fig. 2, page 7);
wherein the heating layer is configured to generate heat that is transferred via radiative heating through the one or more open spaces from the heating layer to the cover layer (opening allows for radiation to pass through, page 2) and via conductive heating through the one or more standoffs from the heating layer to the cover layer (heat conduction portion conducts heat from the heating elements, page 2);
wherein the one or more standoffs create and maintain the one or more open spaces between the cover layer and the heating layer and prevent a collapse of the one or more open spaces so that the heat generated by the heating layer can be transferred via the radiative heating through the one or more open spaces (heat conductive portion 8 are molded from resin and can prevent structural collapse); and
Ogino does not disclose wherein the cover layer comprises a thermal effusivity in a range of about 20-300 Ws(1/2)n/m2K.
De Pelsemaeker discloses a method for controlling the temperature of a heated surface wherein thermal effusivity is described as a useful quantity for characterizing the thermal inertia of a material when trying to control the sensory perception of the heated surface (par. 44). The effective thermal effusivity can be reduced by changing the material or increasing the roughness of the surface (par. 47) so that a passenger can touch the surface with a higher dry bulb temperature for a longer period of time without being hurt (par. 47-49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino to incorporate the teachings of De Pelsemaeker and select and modify the cover layer material such that it has a low thermal effusivity in order to improve passenger comfort and safety (par. 3, De Pelsemaeker).
Claim 3. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker discloses the heater according to claim 1, comprising at least one configuration selected from a group consisting of:
i)_wherein the radiative heating is in a range between about 42oC and 120oC (heating elements generates temperature from 60o C-90o C, page 5)
ii) wherein the radiative heating has a heat flux of between about 500-5000 W/m2;
iii) wherein the heat flux of the radiative heating is greater than a heat flux of the conductive heating.
Claim 7. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker discloses the heater according to claim 1, wherein the heater comprises a spacer layer disposed between the heating layer and the cover layer (heat conductive portion 8 is located between the heater and guard portion, Fig. 2).
Claim 8. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker does not disclose the heater according to claim 7, wherein the spacer layer comprises a thermal effusivity in a range of about 20-300 Ws(1/2)/m2K.
De Pelsemaeker discloses a method for controlling the temperature of a heated surface wherein thermal effusivity is described as a useful quantity for characterizing the thermal inertia of a material when trying to control the sensory perception of the heated surface (par. 44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker to incorporate the teachings of De Pelsemaeker and select the spacer material such that it has a low thermal effusivity in order to reduce the transfer of thermal energy to the surface layer to improve passenger comfort and safety (par. 3, De Pelsemaeker).
Claim 22. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker discloses the heater according to claim 1, wherein the one or more standoffs are in direct physical contact with or directly extend from the regions of the cover layer that are configured to generate the heat (heat conductive portion 8 contacts the guard portion, Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 4 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Katsuhiko (JP 2010052710 A) and Chang (US 3536515 A).
Claim 4. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker does not disclose the heater according to claim 3, wherein the heater comprises an adhesive provided on the heating layer and the cover layer comprises flocking.
Katsuhiko further discloses a vehicle heater wherein the cover layer 21 for the heater 2 (Fig. 10) is flocked (par. 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker to incorporate the teachings of Katsuhiko and replace the cover layer with a flocked layer on the surface of the heater. Doing so would have the benefit of reducing power consumption (par. 38, Katsuhiko) and preventing distributing the heat so that if the driver’s body contacts the heat radiating member 21 (flocked surface) it will not harm the driver (par. 37, Katsuhiko)
Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker and Katsuhiko does not disclose an adhesive provided on the heating layer.
Chang discloses that manufacturing a flock-coated sheet involves applying an adhesive to the sheet and then adhering elongated flock particles to the adhesive (claim 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker and Katsuhiko to incorporate the teachings of Chang and apply an adhesive to the heating layer since this is a well-known method of manufacturing flock as demonstrated by Chang.
Claim 17. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, and Chang discloses the heater according to claim 4, wherein the flocking is configured to move locally with different thermal expansion locations of the heating element (the flocking is capable of moving locally with different thermal expansion locations).
Claim(s) 5 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, and Chang as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Okamoto (US 20120061365 A1).
Claim 5. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker and Katsuhiko discloses the heater according to claim 4, wherein the heater comprises a support structure (heater is disposed on an instrument panel lower portion 1, Fig. 1, page 7) provided on a back side of the heating layer (heater is disposed on an instrument panel lower portion 1 where it is understood that that the backside of the heater faces the instrument panel portion, page 7) and
Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, and Chang does not disclose thermal resistance between the heating layer and the support structure is higher than a thermal resistance between the heating layer and the cover layer.
Okamoto discloses a heater for a vehicle wherein the thermal resistance between the heating layer 2 and the backing layer 4 (Fig. 1) is higher than the thermal resistance of the exterior member 3 (claim 14, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, and Chang to incorporate the teachings of Okamoto and have the thermal resistance between the heating layer and the support structure to be higher. Doing so would have the benefit of more efficiently directing heat towards the occupant rather than heat directed to the backside of the heater (par. 42, Okamoto).
Claim 13. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, Chang, and Okamoto discloses the heater according to claim 5, comprising an insulation layer (heat insulating material 9, Fig. 2) between the back side of the heating layer and the support structure (heat insulating material 9 is on the backside of the heater where it is understood that it would be between the instrument panel and the heater, page 7, Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hioki (US 2010258645 A1).
Claim 6. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker does not disclose the heater according to claim 1, wherein the cover layer comprises a thermal emissivity having a range between about 0.8 and 0.95.
Hioki discloses a heater for a vehicle wherein a thermal radiation member which is made of a material having a high thermal emissivity is disposed on a surface of the electric heater.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker to incorporate the teachings of Hioki and have the cover layer be made of a material with a high thermal emissivity so that the material can efficiently radiate the heat from the heater. Doing so would improve the heating efficiency.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Ito (US 20220322496 A1).
Claim 9. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker does not disclose the heater according to claim 8, wherein the heater comprises a detector that is configured to detect contact of the cover with an object or a proximity of the object relative to the cover layer, and optionally a thermal effusivity of the detector is in a range of about 20-300 Ws(1/2)n/m2K.
Ito discloses a radiant heater wherein there is a sensor that detects the contact of the finger (par. 67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker to incorporate the teachings of Ito and have a contact sensor. Doing so would have the benefit of preventing burns to the user (par. 67, Ito).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, Chang, and Okamoto as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Lee (US 20190135077 A1).
Claim 14. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, Chang, and Okamoto does not disclose the heater according to claim 13, wherein the insulation layer comprises pores that allow air to circulate at the back side of the heating element to accelerate a cool down of the heating layer after the heating layer is turned OFF
Lee discloses a planar heater for a vehicle wherein the backside of the heating element 110 (Fig. 5) comprises a foam layer 130 with a plurality of pores (par. 50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, Chang, and Okamoto to incorporate the teachings of Lee. Doing so would have the benefit of allowing air to circulate and cool down the heating element (par. 50, Lee).
Claim 15. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, Chang, Okamoto, and Lee does not disclose the heater according to claim 14, wherein the heating layer comprises a resistive heating wire.
Lee further discloses that the heater may include heating wires (par. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, Chang, Okamoto, and Lee to incorporate the teachings of Lee. Doing so would have the benefit of using woven heating wires that allow for flexibility (par. 38, Lee).
Claim(s) 18 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Katsuhiko and Ogino (US 20120168420 A1).
Claim 18. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker does not disclose the heater according to claim 1, wherein the cover layer comprises flocking, and the element layer is flexible and configured to conform to a vehicle A-surface that is curved and has at least two degrees of curvature.
Katsuhiko discloses a vehicle heater wherein the cover layer 21 for the heater 2 (Fig. 10) is flocked (par. 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker to incorporate the teachings of Katsuhiko and replace the cover layer with a flocked layer on the surface of the heater. Doing so would have the benefit of reducing power consumption (par. 38, Katsuhiko) and preventing distributing the heat so that if the driver’s body contacts the heat radiating member 21 (flocked surface) it will not harm the driver (par. 37, Katsuhiko)
Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker and Katsuhiko does not disclose the heating element heating element is flexible and configured to conform to a curved surface having at least two degrees of curvature.
Ogino ‘420 discloses a heater for a vehicle wherein the heater can be curved in two places (Fig. 3b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker and Katsuhiko to incorporate the teachings of Ogino ‘420. Doing so would have the benefit of a single heater radiating heat to the back seat passenger’s legs and feet (par. 50) while being able to flex according to the back seat’s orientation.
Claim 21. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker, Katsuhiko, and Ogino ‘420 discloses a vehicle class A surface comprising the heater according to claim 18 (the prior art’s heater is capable of being implemented into a surface of class A vehicle).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Katsuhiko (JP 2010052710 A).
Claim 23. Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker discloses the heater according to claim 22, wherein the cover layer comprises flocking, and wherein:
i) wherein the radiative heating is in a range between about 42oC and 120oC (heating elements generates temperature from 60o C-90o C, page 5); and
ii) wherein the radiative heating has a heat flux of between about 500-5000 W/m2; and
iii) wherein the heat flux of the radiative heating is greater than a heat flux of the conductive heating.
Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker does not disclose the cover layer comprises flocking.
Katsuhiko further discloses a vehicle heater wherein the cover layer 21 for the heater 2 (Fig. 10) is flocked (par. 38) and the radiant heater reaches temperatures of 50oC.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino in view of De Pelsemaeker to incorporate the teachings of Katsuhiko and add a flock layer on the cover on the surface of the heater. Doing so would have the benefit of reducing power consumption (par. 38, Katsuhiko) and preventing distributing the heat so that if the driver’s body contacts the heat radiating member 21 (flocked surface) it will not harm the driver (par. 37, Katsuhiko). Additionally, Katsuhiko demonstrates that it is within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the desired temperature range of a radiant car heater.
Claim(s) 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogino as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Lee (US 20190135077 A1).
Claim 25. Ogino does not disclose the heater according to claim 24, wherein the one or more standoffs comprise joint structures, adhesives or welded contacts connecting together the cover layer and the heating layer, and/or infrared porous interface materials.
Lee discloses a car heater wherein layers adhere to each other through an adhesive (par. 19).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ogino to incorporate the teachings of Lee and use an adhesive to bond the heat conducting portion and guard portion to the heater. Lee demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art knows that the layers can be connected through adhesives.
Claim 26. Ogino in view of Lee discloses the heater according to claim 25, wherein the one or more open spaces provide an obstructive path for the radiative heating between the cover layer and the heating layer (opening provides a path for radiative heating, page 2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMPSON A CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6422. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached on (571) 270-5095. 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.
/SIMPSON A CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761