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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1–13, in the reply filed on 5 February 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 14–16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 73 (fig. 5), 912 and 914 (fig. 9), 80 and 85a (fig. 11), 923-_1 923_2 in fig. 13.
The drawings are objected to because figs. 4 and 6 show sectional drawings with grey filled-in sections rather than the hatching required by 37 C.F.R. 1.84(h)(3). Shading is not permitted for cross sections (37 C.F.R. 1.84(m)). These figures also lack the associated broken line required by 1.84(h)(3).
The drawings are objected to because fig. 1C includes a reference character 24 (associated with an LED indicator) with a lead line that points nowhere, and that further does not have an arrow (under 37 C.F.R. 1.84(r)(1)), not that one would seem appropriate given its intended target. Reference character 24 is used correctly in fig. 3.
The drawings are objected to because 907 is found twice in Figure 13 and it is unclear why.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract is objected to because it appears “second” in the 2nd to last and last lines is misspelled “sec_ond”
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In ¶ 25 of the submitted specification, “captive power port plug 62 that can then flexibly engaged over a power port 58” should be amended to recite “that can be then be flexibly engaged” or “that can then flexibly engage.”
¶ 26 of the submitted specification recites “pan 22,” which should be “pan 20.”
¶ 31 of the submitted specification mentions “the second cylindrical shell 42.” Nowhere else in the disclosure is cylindrical shell 42 referred to as “second,” only as “cylindrical shell 42.” Furthermore, the disclose does not provide for any “first” cylindrical shell or similar element. As such, it seems the term “second” should be struck.
¶ 39 of the submitted specification recites “battery voltage 921.” However, reference character 921 is associated with the common node, and the battery voltage is elsewhere described as “vBat.” Appropriate correction is required.
In ¶ 53 of the submitted specification, a space should be added between “(Gate 11XX ON)” and “and.”
The use of the terms Bluetooth (misspelled as “BlueTooth” in ¶ 44) and Anderson Powerpole (misspelled as “PowerPole” in ¶ 5), which are trade names or marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The terms should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the terms should be capitalized wherever they appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, ℠, or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Comment: The Office’s research finds that “Anderson connector” in ¶ 29 is a generic term.
Claim Objections
Claim 2, 3, 8, and 10–13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “the battery system,” but this should recite “the battery assembly” to comport with the presentation of the limitation in claim 1.
Claim 3 recites “the second cylindrical shell” (ll. 6–7). As discussed for the specification above, there seems to be no “second” cylindrical shell, and the term “second” should be struck.
The last section of claim 3 is insufficiently divided into sections (see 37 C.F.R. 1.75(i)), which also contributes to poor grammatical transitions. New claim body sections should begin at the language of “in the locked position for the non-operating mode” (l. 8) and “upon reaching the extended position” (l. 13).
Claim 8 recites “the gasket sealing pan” (l. 4). There is no exact antecedent basis for this limitation, but it is clearly referring to the “intermediate gasket” introduced earlier in the claim. The claim should be amended to use the same language for clarity.
Claim 10, ll. 1–2, should be amended to recite “the power controller PCB.”
In claim 11 on line 2, “PCT” should be “PCB.”
In claim 11 on line 3, the comma after “and” should be struck.
Claim 12 recites “the common node” twice. This lacks antecedent basis, but is clearly a reference to the “common connection point” of claim 10. The claim(s) should be amended to use the same language for clarity.
Claim 13 ends by reciting “off,” with one side with a double-quotation mark and the other with a single quotation mark. Both quotation marks should be struck as unnecessary.
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.
Claims 1–13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the metal pan” (l. 5), which has insufficient antecedent basis, as the claim only earlier mentions “a pan.”
Claim 4 recites, “the connector carrier in the retracted position.” The language renders the claim indefinite because there is no exact antecedent basis for this concept. Instead, claim 1 introduces a “connector carriage,” with claim 2 further explaining that this connector carriage is retractable. Further, claim 3 introduces the “connector carrier,” but there is no explanation of any retractability associated therewith, as even the retractability discussed there is only associated with the connector carrier. A best guess is that claim 4 should be amended to replace “connector carrier” with “connector carriage” here.
Claim 10 recites “the common connection point,” but this limitation lacks antecedent basis, and should employ the definite article.
Claims 2, 3, 5–9, and 11–13 are rejected due to dependency upon rejected claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1–13 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome objections, as well as the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Ruben (US Pub. 2020/0096204) is clearly the closest prior art of record because of how it discloses the battery assembly, connector carriage, and first and second contact sets of the connector exactly as claimed. Ruben differs from what is claimed in that it does not disclose a pan, a pan base that receives the heater, and a foil heater on the bottom of the pan. Although it would seem that Ruben lays clear grounds to establish an argument to replace its own liquid container and heating system with an electrically heated pan known in the prior art, there are numerous obstacles in the way to arguing for the obviousness of such a modification.
Firstly, what Ruben discloses exactly must be appreciated without the benefit of hindsight from the present disclosure. Ruben is directed to what it calls an “electronic stove,” but what is really a tall, narrow container for “heating liquids and high liquid content meals” (¶ 4). The unique nature of Ruben’s apparatus is most stark from what is shown in fig. 1A–D, where the entire apparatus is configured to be kept and stored, in a non-operating mode, in a vertical cylindrical configuration, which is very much the opposite of what is achievable with a pan (i.e. a broad container, usually shallow). Adjustments to the shape of the heated container would void the convenience of this arrangement. The significance of this arrangement is also highlighted by the battery lock clip 64 that further secures the battery assembly to the liquid container and heating system, which further disinvites significant modifications to the shape of the heated container.
Secondly, independent claim 1 requires that the pan be concentrically received in the pan base. Ruben features an entirely different arrangement, where what is received, in a cylindrical shell, is a copper heater core surrounded by a foil heater. Ruben’s copper heater core is significantly dissimilar from a pan. Furthermore, to enable a reasonably sized pan from being received in a base otherwise as disclosed in Ruben would require a significant redesign of the base of Ruben (which is essentially the structure that houses heater control PCB 72, perhaps best shown in fig. 3A), which is not rendered obvious even in light of other electrically-heated pan prior art given that such prior art is not easily combined with the particular battery assembly and connector carriage disclosed in Ruben.
While one of ordinary skill in the art, if given the task of redesigning Ruben to replace its tall heatable container with a pan, would likely be capable of performing the task, the prior art suggests that, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would not have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to do such.
While using a battery to heat a pan heater is of course generally known, most pans are not designed to be heated by batteries because the power supply is insufficient. Most references that disclose a pan to be heated by a battery mention it in passing as an option. Pans specifically designed to have a battery as their power source are rare.
Ma et al. (CN 109393936 A) is an example of a reference with a pan heater that seems fairly designed to be powered by a battery.
Will (US Pub. 2020/0244088) is an example reference that shows a pan heater powered by batteries in a manner significantly different from what is claimed and disclosed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John J. Norton whose telephone number is (571) 272-5174. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM EST.
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, Edward (Ned) F. Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-8648. 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.
/JOHN J NORTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761