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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step 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 means or step 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 claims in 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(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
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-AIA 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 language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is 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 sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Regarding claim 1, claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are 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.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 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.
In particular, the claim limitation “a receive means” that use the word “means” is 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. In para "[0048]", the specification states: “A radio standard for the transmit/receive means 22 may in principle, as has been explained above, be of many and varied designs. It is advantageously selected from the above-stated options Bluetooth or BLE, but also Zigbee, WLAN or similar, and proprietary solutions without a generally applicable standard can be applied.” Therefore, the “receive means” is taken to be a radio standard selected from Bluetooth or BLE, but also Zigbee, WLAN or similar, and proprietary solutions.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 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-AIA 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 § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egenter (US20200196399) in view of Gremm (EP2981154) with citations made to attached machine translations.
PNG
media_image1.png
344
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 of Egenter
PNG
media_image2.png
296
726
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 3 of Egenter
PNG
media_image3.png
276
630
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 of Egenter
Regarding claim 1, Egenter teaches
A method for operating an induction cooktop having a plurality of induction heating coils (16 a and 16 b), wherein:
each said induction heating coil (16 a and 16 b) has a heating zone ([0050] a heating area is respectively formed with an area which corresponds approximately to the area of the induction heating coils 16 in each case),
a cooking vessel (27) can be arranged to overlap with at least one said heating zone ([0050] cooking vessel 27 is arranged in the heating area 17 a),
each said induction heating coil (16 a and 16 b) is designed for transmission or transfer of energy in order to heat one said cooking vessel ([0006] Each induction heating coil is designed to transmit or to transfer energy for heating a cooking vessel in the heating area),
wherein an inverter ([0049] converter apparatus 20, taken to be the equivalent of an inverter) is provided to drive each said induction heating coil ([0006] controlled in a known manner by a converter),
each said cooking vessel (27) has a transmit device (34) with a transmit antenna (44) for transmitting a signal as a function of energy received from one said induction heating coil ([0054] captures precisely energy or the signals or pings received by the receiving coil; integrated circuit 40 controls a transmitting apparatus 42 with a transmitting antenna 44),
a heating zone (17a) of said induction heating coil (16a) at least in part overlaps with said cooking vessel (27),
a receive means is provided for receiving signals ([0049] transmitting/receiving device 22) from said transmit device (34) of one said cooking vessel (27) or all said transmit devices of said cooking vessels on said induction cooktop (14),
a controller (18) is provided which obtains said signals from said receive means (22) and has information for transmission or transfer of energy of said induction heating coils or obtains said information ([0007] for the purpose of receiving signals from a transmitting apparatus of a cooking vessel or from all transmitting apparatuses of cooking vessels on the induction hob),
wherein said method has the following steps:
at least one said cooking vessel (27) is arranged over one said heating zone (17a) of one said induction heating coil (16a. Fig. 1) ,
a plurality of said induction heating coils are driven for transmission or transfer of energy in a pattern, wherein duration and/or amplitude are varied as a code ([0060] Fig. 6 for four induction heating coils I1 to I4, how a binary coding is transmitted as a statement regarding the respective induction heating coil), wherein said code consists in that
an amplitude of said transmitted or transferred energy within said code varies over time, and/or a duration of energy transfer varies, and/or a duration between two said energy transfers varies, and/or a number of said energy transfers varies ([0010, 0059-0061] Fig. 6 coding involves varying the amplitude of the transmitted or transferred energy within the coding over time, and/or varying the duration of the energy transfer, and/or varying the duration between two energy transfer operations, and/or varying the number of energy transfer operations)
wherein one said code has at least one sequence of at least two pulses and forms a pulse sequence ([0023] two pulses),
if one said cooking vessel overlaps with one said heating zone of one said induction heating coil which has transferred energy with a specific code, said transmit device transmits to said receive means a signal or a sequence of a plurality of signals, which are uniquely dependent on said code and/or are associable with precisely said code ([0011] If a cooking vessel covers a heating area of an induction heating coil which has transferred energy with a specific or individual coding, the transmitting apparatus of the cooking vessel transmits a signal or a sequence of a plurality of signals) ,
said controller obtains said signals received by said receive means and compares said signals with information about said energy transmitted or transferred by said induction heating coils as said codes ([0011] The controller receives the signals received by the receiving device and compares said signals with information relating to the energy transmitted or transferred by the induction heating coils as codings which are known to the controller), in order to establish which said transferred energy code from a specific induction heating coil fits with a received signal or a sequence of a plurality of signals ([0011]The controller can thus determine which coding of transferred energy from a particular induction heating coil matches a received signal or a sequence of a plurality of signals, wherein the signal has been received at the same time or shortly afterward), in order on said basis to associate said cooking vessel transmitting said signal or said sequence of a plurality of said signals with said heating zone or with said induction heating coil associated with said heating zone ([0011] On the basis thereof, the controller can assign the cooking vessel transmitting this signal or this sequence of a plurality of signals to the heating area or to the induction heating coil associated with the heating area).
Egenter is silent on wherein transmission or transfer of said energy proceeds as a code at a frequency of at least 50 kHz.
Gremm teaches wherein transmission or transfer of said energy proceeds as a code at a frequency of at least 50 kHz ([0015] if the induction coil operates at a frequency of 17 kHz and greater, for example 50 kHz or even 80 kHz, the transmitter operates at a frequency of approximately 80 kHz to 1 MHz or even slightly higher).
Egenter and Gremm are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of induction cooktops. It would have been obvious to have modified Egenter to incorporate the teachings of Gremm to have the transmission or transfer of energy as a code be at a frequency of at least 50 kHz so that the operating frequency of the induction coil does not interfere with the transmission of the code (Gremm [0015]).
Regarding claim 2, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein one said cooking vessel (27) has a receive coil (32) in order to store an alternating magnetic field of an induction heating coil as electrical energy in order to emit the signal by means of the transmit antenna of the transmit device ([0013] a cooking vessel has a receiving coil in order to store an alternating magnetic field of an induction heating coil), wherein said magnetic field is used for said transfer of said energy ([0013] used to transfer energy, as electrical energy or to convert it into electrical energy).
Regarding claim 3, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein an energy storage (38) means which is connected to said receive coil (32) is provided in said cooking vessel ([0053] cooking vessel module 34 of cooking vessel 27), wherein said energy received by said receive coil is stored in said energy storage means ([0014, 0054] wherein the energy received by the receiving coil is stored in the energy storage) and wherein a signal or a sequence of a plurality of signals is emitted by said transmit device corresponding to said stored energy ([0014, 0054] A signal or a sequence of a plurality of signals can then be emitted by the transmitting apparatus with or in accordance with the stored energy).
Regarding claim 4, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein said transmission or said transfer of said energy in the case of said induction heating coils, for which it is unknown that or whether their heating zone is overlapped by one said cooking vessel, is frequently and/or regularly repeated to detect said cooking vessels arranged in said heating zone ([0017] In a further configuration, the transmission or transfer of energy in induction heating coils, in the case of which it is not known whether their heating area is covered by a cooking vessel, can be repeated frequently and/or regularly in order to detect cooking vessels arranged in their heating area).
Regarding claim 5, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 4, and Egenter teaches wherein said transmission or said transfer of said energy in the case of said induction heating coils is frequently and/or regularly repeated at a frequency or a time interval of less than 5 sec ([0017] a frequency or repetition frequency corresponding to an interval of time of preferably less than 5 seconds).
Regarding claim 6, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein said transmission or said transfer of said energy of said induction heating coils for detection of said cooking vessels arranged in said heating zone also proceeds at least in an event that a change in an extent of overlap of one said heating zone by one said cooking vessel is detected ([0019] Provision can be advantageously made for the transmission or transfer of energy from the induction heating coils with coding for detecting cooking vessels arranged in the heating area to be at least also carried out if a change in a coverage of a heating area by a cooking vessel is detected).
Regarding claim 7, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 2, and Egenter teaches wherein said method is only carried out when one said cooking vessel with said receive coil and with one said transmit device has been discovered on said induction cooktop ([0021] Provision may also be made for the method to be carried out only when a special cooking vessel with the above-mentioned receiving coil and a transmitting apparatus has been discovered on the induction hob or in a heating area), wherein said cooking vessel (27) also additionally has an integrated circuit (40) and at least one sensor (36).
Regarding claim 8, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein one said code consists of pulses ([0022] pings or pulses), of which at least two said pulses form said at least one pulse sequence ([0022-0023] two pulses), wherein said pulses are generated at an operating frequency or said resonant frequency of an oscillator circuit with said induction heating coil ([0022] an operating frequency or the resonant frequency of a resonant circuit containing the induction heating coil, where a resonant circuit is understood to be the equivalent of an oscillator circuit), wherein one said pulse has one or more oscillations ([0022] a ping or a pulse has one or more oscillations).
Regarding claim 9, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 8, and Egenter teaches wherein said pulse has one or more oscillations with a total duration of between 0.1 μsec and 50 μsec ([0022] A total duration of a ping or pulse is preferably between 1 μsec and 500 μsec, in particular between 20 μsec and 100 μsec).
Regarding claim 10, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein, when all said induction heating coils are being driven for transfer of energy in order to detect said cooking vessels arranged in said heating zone ([0027] if all induction heating coils are controlled to transfer energy for the purpose of detecting cooking vessels arranged in the heating area),
said energy is first of all transferred for a short time as a pulse ([0027] energy can first of all be transferred for a short time as a ping/pulse), a pause is then provided ([0027] pause)
and then a plurality of different codes is generated by way of a varying number of short sequences energy transfers and pausing or by waiting for a specific multiple of a waiting time ([0027] a multiplicity of different coding can then be generated using a varying number of short sequences of transferring energy and pausing or by waiting for a particular multiple of a waiting time),
and each of said induction heating coils is driven with a different code, but each said induction heating coil always recurrently with the same code, for transmission or transfer of energy with said code ([0027] Each of the induction heating coils is controlled in this case with a different coding to transmit or transfer energy with this coding).
Regarding claim 11, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 10, and Egenter teaches wherein said waiting time is between 5% and 20% of a duration of said codes ([0027] multiple of a waiting time can be, in particular, between 5% and 20% or 30% of the duration of the entire coding).
Regarding claim 12, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein said controller stores which one said cooking vessel is arranged in said heating zone of which induction heating coil ([0028] controller advantageously stores which cooking vessel is arranged in the heating area of which induction heating coil), wherein said controller detects cooking vessels newly arranged in a heating zone of one said induction heating coil in the same way ([0028] controller detects cooking vessels newly arranged in a heating area of an induction heating coil in the same manner).
Regarding claim 13, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein transmission or transfer of one said code is omitted ([0030] transmission or transfer of a coding stops as long as an induction heating coil) for so long as, once one said induction heating coil has detected and associated one said cooking vessel, no change or movement of said cooking vessel in its heating zone is registered by a change in said operating parameters of said oscillator circuit with said induction heating coil ([0030] after detecting and assigning a cooking vessel to itself or to its heating area, does not register any change or movement of this cooking vessel in its heating area)
wherein a code is then not transmitted again to said or to all said induction heating coils until a change or movement of said cooking vessel in its heating zone is registered by one said induction heating coil or by other sensors ([0030] A coding is preferably transmitted to this induction heating coil or to all induction heating coils again only when a change or movement of the cooking vessel).
Regarding claim 14, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein all said induction heating coils simultaneously begin to transfer a code as said transmission of energy ([0055] a synchronization ping illustrated using dotted lines can be simultaneously generated for all four induction heating coils).
Regarding claim 15, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein each said code first has a pulse or energy is briefly transferred for synchronization ([0055] a synchronization ping)and, from said synchronization pulse onwards, each said induction heating coil has a different code (Fig. 3 [0058] The number of the induction heating coils emitting this coding can be directly read by counting these pings).
Regarding claim 16, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 15, and Egenter teaches wherein, after said synchronization pulse ([0055] a synchronization ping illustrated using dotted lines, Fig. 3), at least two further pulses follow in a time interval within all said codes (Fig. 3 two pings/pulses for I1 to I4 shown) and a number of following pulses corresponds to a numbering of said induction heating coils ([0058] The number of the induction heating coils emitting this coding can be directly read by counting these pings).
Regarding claim 17, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 16, and Egenter teaches wherein within a code said time interval is in each case identical until a final pulse before said next synchronization pulse ([0033] The interval of time between two pings within a coding is particularly advantageously the same in each case up to the last ping before the next synchronization ping).
Regarding claim 18, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein said transmit device sends a processed item off information or directly a number of said induction heating coil as a designation or a position of said induction heating coil on said induction cooktop as at least two pulse sequences, which has been evaluated from said code received from one said induction heating coil ([0038] Provision is advantageously made, in principle, for the transmitting apparatus to transmit an item of already processed information as a signal; in particular, this is directly the number of the induction heating coil which has been evaluated from the coding received from an induction heating coil).
Regarding claim 20, Egenter and Gremm teach an induction cooktop for carrying out the method as claimed in claim 1, and Egenter teaches wherein said induction cooktop (13) has a plurality of said induction heating coils (16a, 16b), wherein at least one said heating zone ([0050] a heating area is respectively formed with an area which corresponds approximately to the area of the induction heating coils 16 in each case) is associated with each said induction heating coil (16a, 16b).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egenter (US20200196399) and Gremm (EP2981154) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bunya (JP6768830) with citations made to attached machine translations.
Regarding claim 19, Egenter and Gremm teach the method as claimed in claim 18, and Egenter teaches wherein said evaluation proceeds in said transmit device ([0038] An evaluation is advantageously carried out in the transmitting apparatus), but is silent on wherein said position of said induction heating coil on said induction cooktop is sent as x/y coordinates.
Bunya teaches wherein said position of said induction heating coil on said induction cooktop is sent as x/y coordinates ([0079] mapping information identifies each of the plurality of coils 80 in the X-Y coordinates).
Egenter, Gremm, and Bunya are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of induction cooktops. It would have been obvious to have modified Egenter and Gremm to incorporate the teachings of Bunya to have the position of the coils be in the form of x/y coordinates so separate coils may have unique position identifiers associated with the x/y axis plane such that the location of the coils may be accurately identified in relation the cooking device (Bunya [0079]).
Response to Arguments
Regarding applicant’s arguments towards the indefiniteness rejection on claim 1, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 9/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments towards the limitation of “transmission or transfer of said energy proceeds a s a code at a frequency of at least 50 kHz,” applicant argues that “the only reason for the heightened frequency of operation for the detection coils (15, 115) of Grimm is to avoid interference with its parallel (i.e., simultaneously) operated induction heating coils (11)” which is in contrast with the claimed method “which according to the process recited transmits energy with a code as the only induction coil in the detection step, whereby the code is particularly important. Notably, when this detection step occurs, the sole induction coil claimed cannot be operated for heating. Stated otherwise, in the claimed method there is no simultaneous heating and detection steps.” However, the claim language is still broad and does not narrowly explain that only one induction coil is in operation, and it does not specify that there cannot be an induction coil that may be operated in a heating capacity, as it is only specified that “a plurality of said induction heating coils are driven for transmission or transfer of energy…” It does not specify that only one induction coil is in operation and does not specify that all of the induction coils are used for transmission or transfer of energy, such that none of them may be transmitting heat or induction power. Therefore, given that Grimm teaches the “heightened frequency” and would have had motivation to have combined and modified Egenter for the purposes of preventing interference with an operating frequency of the induction coil, as an improvement on the frequency/coil combination as taught in Egenter.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ABIGAIL RHUE whose telephone number is (571)272-4615. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10-6.
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 at (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 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.
/ABIGAIL H RHUE/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 1/15/2026
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761