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 .
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/5/2025 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-8,11-16,18-19 and 21-24 are pending in the current office actions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/5/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive in view of newly cited art applied in response to applicant’s claim amendments.
The 112 rejections made in the previous office action are withdrawn due to claim amendments.
Further, applicant’s characterization of the prior art references in page 14 of reply is not an accurate representation of the art. Especially regarding Dubeau. The Dubeau reference makes no mention regarding preheating or cooking for a lower amount of time. An examiner initiated interview summary is attached to this action regarding a discussion on the characterizations of the prior art.
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 1-6, 8, 11-15, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dubeau (PGPub# US 2022/0202239 A1) in view of Iantorno et al. (PGPub# US 2022/0046931 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Dubeau teaches a food preparation device 20 comprising: a first compartment 32a for preparing a first food according to first settings that include a first cooking temperature and a first cooking time (par. 105); a second compartment 32b for preparing a second food according to second settings that include a second cooking temperature and a second cooking time (par. 105); and a synchronization circuit 102 configured for calculating a first total cooking time, calculating a second total cooking time, and synchronizing a first finishing time of the first compartment and a second finishing time of the second compartment, such that the first compartment and the second compartment finish cooking at the same time, wherein during cooking, the first and second compartments operate according to their respective cooking temperature and cooking time included in their respective first and second settings (figures 13 and 16, par: 100-105: Settings are selected for each compartment including time and temperature and the controller determines finishing times for each compartment based on selected settings. Based on determined finishing times the controller adjusts the start time of one of the compartments to sync the finishing times.), wherein the synchronization circuit is configured to calculate a wait time of the first compartment or the second compartment according to a difference between the first total cooking time and the second total cooking time and wherein the wait time occurs before a pre-heating time of a respective compartment starts. (figure 16 and par. 102-105.)
Dubeau does not explicitly teach calculating a first pre-heating time based on the first cooking temperature for the first compartment, calculating a second pre- heating time based on the second cooking temperature for the second compartment, and during the pre-heating time, the respective compartment is performing a pre-heating function heating to a respective cooking temperature in the respective settings.
While it seems implicit within the disclosure that preheating is a normal operating procedure within the discussed cooking operation of Dubeau, Iantorno teaches a similar cooking apparatus with the goal of synchronizing the end time of each compartment. (figure 1 and abstract) Iantorno teaches that preheating time should be included in the determination of total cooking time. Iantorno teaches calculating/determining the preheating time by utilizing a reference or database. Iantorno teahes that the settings can be optimized depending on a users precision requirements for synchronization. (par. 61)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the preheating calculation time and function of Iantorno, to the total cooking time of Dubeau, in order to meet a users required precision for synchronization as taught by Iantorno. Using precise preheating times would produce more accurate synchronization times between cooking compartments.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Dubeau teaches cooking modes including air frying. (par. 91)
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Dubeau teaches wherein each of the first and second compartments can independently perform each of the functions. (par. 94)
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Dubeau teaches a first message bar for the first compartment for displaying information about the first settings; and a second message bar for the second compartment for displaying information about the second settings. (par. 89: Display 106 can display settings inputted for each compartment such as temperature as each compartment is capable of operating independently.)
Regarding claim 5, Dubeau teaches wherein the displaying information about the first settings comprises the first finishing time and the functions for the first compartment, and further wherein the displaying information about the second settings comprises the second finishing time and the functions for the second compartment. (par. 89: Display 106 can display settings inputted for each compartment such as temperature and time remaining/finishing time as each compartment is capable of operating independently.)
Regarding claim 6, Dubeau teaches wherein the first settings include a first cooking function of the first compartment, and the first cooking temperature is preset based on the first cooking function, and the second settings include a second cooking function of the second compartment, and the second cooking temperature is preset based on the second cooking function, and wherein the first cooking temperature is different from the second cooking temperature. (par. 88-92)
Regarding claim 8, Dubeau teaches the settings are user inputted. (par. 89)
Regarding claim 11, Dubeau teaches a dual cooking device 20 comprising: a first cooking zone 32a with first settings that include a first finishing time; a second cooking zone 32b with second settings that include a second finishing time; and a computer readable medium storing instructions configured to be executed by a processor 110 to synchronize the first finishing time and the second finishing time. (Figures 13 and 16, par:85, 88, 100-102: Settings are selected for each compartment and the controller determines finishing times for each compartment based on selected settings. Based on determined finishing times the controller/processor adjusts the start time of one of the compartments to sync the finishing times based on instructions stored in memory.) Dubeau teaches wherein the synchronizing comprises modifying a wait time for at least one of the first cooking zone or the second cooking zone, wherein the wait time of the first cooking zone or the second cooking zone is determined according to a difference of total cooking time between the first cooking zone and the second cooking zone. (figure 16 and par. 102-103.)
Dubeau does not explicitly teach calculating a first pre-heating time based on the first cooking temperature for the first compartment, calculating a second pre- heating time based on the second cooking temperature for the second compartment, and during the pre-heating time, the respective compartment is performing a pre-heating function heating to a respective cooking temperature in the respective settings.
While it seems implicit within the disclosure that preheating is a normal operating procedure within the discussed cooking operation of Dubeau, Iantorno teaches a similar cooking apparatus with the goal of synchronizing the end time of each compartment. (figure 1 and abstract) Iantorno teaches that preheating time should be included in the determination of total cooking time. Iantorno teaches calculating/determining the preheating time by utilizing a reference or database. Iantorno teahes that the settings can be optimized depending on a users precision requirements for synchronization. (par. 61)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the preheating calculation time and function of Iantorno, to the total cooking time of Dubeau, in order to meet a users required precision for synchronization as taught by Iantorno. Using precise preheating times would produce more accurate synchronization times between cooking compartments.
Regarding claim 15, Dubeau teaches the settings are user inputted. (par. 89)
Regarding claim 19, Dubeau teaches a method comprising: receiving an input for cooking settings for either a first cooking zone or a second cooking zone, wherein the cooking settings comprise at least a cooking time and a cooking temperature; receiving, when the settings are not synchronized between the first and second cooking zones, an input for settings for the other of the first cooking zone or the second cooking zone; and synchronizing, upon a synchronization finish input, the cooking time for the first cooking zone and the cooking time for the second cooking zone. (figures 13 and 16, par: 100-102: Settings are selected for each compartment and the controller determines finishing times for each compartment based on selected settings. Based on determined finishing times the controller adjusts the start time of one of the compartments to sync the finishing times.) wherein the synchronizing comprises modifying a wait time for at least one of the first cooking zone or the second cooking zone, wherein during the wait time, a corresponding cooking zone is on hold.
Dubeau does not explicitly teach calculating a first pre-heating time based on the first cooking temperature for the first compartment, calculating a second pre- heating time based on the second cooking temperature for the second compartment, and during the pre-heating time, the respective compartment is performing a pre-heating function heating to a respective cooking temperature in the respective settings.
While it seems implicit within the disclosure that preheating is a normal operating procedure within the discussed cooking operation of Dubeau, Iantorno teaches a similar cooking apparatus with the goal of synchronizing the end time of each compartment. (figure 1 and abstract) Iantorno teaches that preheating time should be included in the determination of total cooking time. Iantorno teaches calculating/determining the preheating time by utilizing a reference or database. Iantorno teahes that the settings can be optimized depending on a users precision requirements for synchronization. (par. 61)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the preheating calculation time and function of Iantorno, to the total cooking time of Dubeau, in order to meet a users required precision for synchronization as taught by Iantorno. Using precise preheating times would produce more accurate synchronization times between cooking compartments.
Regarding claim 21, Dubeau in view of Iantorno does not explicitly teach wherein when the first compartment is in a preheating mode or cooking mode, opening the first compartment causes heating stopping of both the first compartment and the second compartment and stopping of cook time countdown.
However, the combination of Dubeau and Iantorno teaches one of ordinary skill in the art that temperature impacts the timing of a cooking cycle and syncing of cooking cycles need to take into account temperatures of the compartments in order to accurately sync the operations. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the system stop heating and timers once a door is open to a cooking chamber in order to reset timers and allow the cooking operations to resync when doors are closed as both Dubeau and Iantorno teacher that the operating conditions of the chamber are important in order to effectively sync the cooking times of multiple compartments. If a compartment was open it would be detrimental to the controllers ability to sync based on previously entered information and a reset would need to be necessary to ensure effective syncing of the cooking operations.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dubeau (PGPub# US 2022/0202239 A1) in view of Iantorno et al. (PGPub# US 2022/0046931 A1) and Becke et al (US 2023/0272921 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Dubeau teaches wherein the first and second compartments contain temperature sensors. (par. 86)
Dubeau in view of Ianotrno does not explicitly teach wherein the first compartment comprises a first sensor for measuring the first food and the second compartment comprises a second sensor for measuring the second food, wherein the measuring comprises at least a weight or temperature.
Becke teaches a similar cooking system as for co-ordinating cooking end times between independent applicances. (abstract) Becke teaches that a temperature sensor can be used to measure the core temperature of food being cooked. Becke teaches that the sensor can be used in a known manner to determine the degree of cooking completed. (par. 29.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the temperature sensor of Becke, into each of the compartments/zones of Dubeau in view of Iantorno, in order to determine the degree of cooking completed in each compartment as taught by Becke.
Claims 18 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dubeau (PGPub# US 2022/0202239 A1) in view of Iantorno et al. (PGPub# US 2022/0046931 A1) and Boedicker et al. (PGPub# US 2016/0324360 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Dubeau in view of Iantorno does not explicitly teach wherein the pre-heating time is increased in one of the compartments to synchronize the finishing times. (Note: figure 16: Delayed start may read on increased preheat time)
Regardless, Boedicker teaches a multicompartment cooking apparatus used for syncing cooking cycles. Boedicker teaches that adjustments of a preheating time cycle can also be modified (increase or decrease) to allow two cooking processes to sync with one another. (abstract, figs, 4-6 and corresponding paragraphs.) Boedicker teaches that this can be done by modifying the duty cycle of the heating elements which would read on having the heater on and off for adjusted periods of time. (par. 40-43) In this case the “on” portion of the duty cycle would read on the claimed preheating time, and the “off” portion would read on the claimed waiting state time. See definition of duty cycle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the preheat modification of Boedicker, to the combination of Dubeau in view of Iantorno, in order to have more control over the synchronization of cooking compartments.
Regarding claims 22-24, Dubeau in view of Iantorno does not explicitly teach measuring temperature of the compartments and variably adjusting settings/timing to control the syncing operation of the pre-heating and heating cycles of the cooking compartments dynamically and in real time. (Boedicker: Par. 40-43)
However, Boedicker teaches a multicompartment cooking apparatus used for syncing cooking cycles. Boedicker teaches that adjustments of a preheating time cycle can also be modified (increase or decrease) to allow two cooking processes to sync with one another. (abstract, figs, 4-6 and corresponding paragraphs.) Boedicker teaches that this can be done by modifying the duty cycle of the heating elements which would read on having the heater on and off for adjusted periods of time. (par. 40-43) In this case the “on” portion of the duty cycle would read on the claimed preheating time, and the “off” portion would read on the claimed waiting state time. See definition of duty cycle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified cycle times/temperatures of a cooking operation of Dubeau in view of Iantorno, based on temperature measurements of Boedicker in order to best predict/control the cooking operations to sync with one another dynamically and in real time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5569. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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, Marivelisse Santiago-Cordero can be reached at 571-272-7839. 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.
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights