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
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 05/27/2026. As directed by the amendment: claim(s) 1 and 3 has/have been amended; no claim(s) has/have been cancelled and new claim(s) 17 has/have been added. Thus, claims 1-4 and 17 are presently pending in this application.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ieda et al (JP 2001301447 A) in view of Buiting et al (US 3,636,426).
Regarding claim 1, Ieda discloses a heating apparatus, comprising:
a motor control unit, having an inverter (Fig. 1 #7 inverter device) and a controller (Fig. 1 #20 control device) that are connected to each other;
an electric heater (Fig. 1 #s16 and 18 first and second heating means);
and a motor (Fig. 1 #6 three-phase motor), having three-phase windings, wherein ends of the three-phase windings are connected to the inverter (Fig. 1 #7 inverter device).
PNG
media_image1.png
422
530
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Ieda does not disclose other ends of the three-phase windings are connected to a star wherein the electric heater is electrically connected between the star point and a power supply.
Nonetheless, Buiting which solves the same problem of powering the heater teaches other ends of the three-phase windings are connected to a star (Col. 3 lines 60-65 ---" When the contacts KA-KC are closed they complete the wye connection of the motor windings and establish a neutral terminal or lead as indicated at N. Protector P4 further comprises a heater H6 which is connected in series with a remote sensing thermistor TH6 between one of the supply leads (LC) and the neutral lead N.”) wherein the electric heater is electrically connected between the star point and a power supply.
PNG
media_image2.png
305
439
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Nonetheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the electric heater being electrically connected between a star point of the motor and a power supply, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 V. C.
Regarding claim 2, Ieda in view of Buiting teaches the heating apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Ieda teaches further comprising a switch (Fig. 1 #s 15 and 17 first and second electromagnetic relay) disposed between the motor (Fig. 1 #6 three-phase motor) and the electric heater (Fig. 1 #s16 and 18 first and second heating means).
Regarding claim 3, Ieda in view of Buiting teaches the heating apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 2), and Ieda teaches wherein the switch (Fig. 1 #s 15 and 17 first and second electromagnetic relay) is configured to switch the electric heater (Fig. 1 #s16 and 18 first and second heating means) and the motor (Fig. 1 #6 three-phase motor) to form a serial connection (Fig. 1 shows a serial connection between the motor, switch, and heater.) or parallel connection loop.
Regarding claim 4, Ieda in view of Buiting teaches the heating apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 2), and Ieda teaches wherein the switch (Fig. 1 #s 15 and 17 first and second electromagnetic relay) is connected to the controller (Fig. 1 #20 control device), and the controller (Fig. 1 #20 control device) controls opening and closing of the switch (Fig. 1 #s 15 and 17 first and second electromagnetic relay) (Page 5 para 3-4 “The inverter device 7 and the relays 15 and 17 are controlled by a control device 20 described later.”).
Regarding claim 17, Ieda in view of Buiting teaches the heating apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), but does not explicitly teach wherein the electric heater is directly electrically connected to the star point.
Nonetheless, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the electric heater being directly electrically connected to the star point, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 V. C.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-6, filed 05/27/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Buiting et al (US 3,636,426).
Applicant argues that the cited prior art does not teach ends of the three-phase windings are connected to a star point wherein the electric heater is electrically connected between the star point and a power supply. Examiner respectfully agrees.
However, newly cited prior art Buiting teaches ends of the three-phase windings are connected to a star point wherein the electric heater is electrically connected between the star point and a power supply. See the rejection of claim 1.
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 JOE E MILLS JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-8449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/JOE E MILLS JR./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/CHRIS Q LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights