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 claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by the applicant’s amendments to the claims.
Drawings
As stated in a previous action, the drawings filed on 10/03/22 are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 has been amended to state, “without any additional input of liquid from the fill pump or output of liquid from a drainage flow pump.” The examiner found seven instances of the word “additional” in the applicant’s original specification (paragraphs 0019, 0022-0023, 0047, and 0059). However, the examiner did not find any support for this limitation. The applicant is requested to show where this limitation is supported in the disclosure.
Claim 1 has also been amended to state, “dividing a volume pre-saved in the memory …” Paragraph 0022 of the applicant’s original specification appears to provide the strongest support for this limitation. It states, “The memory 106 may, therefore, include … volume data 112.” However, the examiner could not find support for the concept of “pre-saving” in the memory, nor could the examiner find support for dividing a volume pre-saved in the memory. Here, the disclosure only seems to support a general memory that can store a wide variety of data. It does not appear to support a specific calculation based on pre-saving a specific value. For the purposes of examination, the examiner will interpret any teaching of memory that is able to store a wide variety of data to anticipate the claimed limitation.
Claims 2-9 are dependent on claim 1 and are rejected, as a result of their dependency.
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 has been amended to include the limitation, “without liquid level sensors.” The examiner could not find support for this limitation in the applicant’s original disclosure. Five instances of the word “without” were found in the applicant’s original specification (paragraphs 0019, 0027, 0030, and 0060), but none of these instances appear to mention “without liquid level sensors.” The applicant is requested to show where this amended limitation is supported in the disclosure.
Claims 12-13 depend on claim 11 and are also rejected, as a result of their dependency.
Furthermore, claim 12 has been amended to include the limitation, “by modifying the first steam flow rate to the second steam flow rate.” Although the examiner found support in the applicant’s disclosure for the existence of a first steam flow rate and a second steam flow rate, the examiner could not find any support for “modifying” the first steam flow rate to the second steam flow rate. The applicant is requested to show where this amended limitation is supported in the disclosure.
Claim 13 is dependent on claim 12 and is also rejected as a result of its dependency.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 15 has been amended to state, “and a volume pre-saved in the memory between the minimum level and a zero level to automatically de-activate the drainage pump in order to …” For similar reasons as given in claim 1 above, this limitation was not found in the applicant’s disclosure. Although, there is general disclosure of a memory containing volume data, the examiner could not find support for the concept of pre-saving the data and applying it in the manner claimed. The applicant is requested to show where this limitation is supported in the disclosure.
Claims 16-20 depend on claim 15 and are also rejected, as a result of their dependency.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2-9, 11-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Independent claims 1, 10, and 15 were previously directed to a method. In the 01/14/26 response, the claims were amended to instead be directed to “A memory and a processor …” The examiner interprets the claims to now be directed to an apparatus, rather than a method, where the apparatus is the memory and processor. However, all of the dependent claims are still directed to “The method of claim …”
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Examiner’s Note - 35 USC § 101
For reasons discussed in a previous action, claims 1-20 qualify as eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Linden (US PgPub 20160061458) in view of Saksena (US PgPub 20060107943) and Cho et al (US PgPub 20190203944).
With respect to claim 1, van der Linden discloses:
A memory and a processor, the memory including instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to carry out (figure 4; paragraph 0040 states, “The process of controlling the system can be implemented by the controller 20 having a processor communicatively coupled with a memory.”)
a method of estimating liquid in a steam generation system for a cooking appliance (figure 2A; figure 5; paragraph 0006 states, “embodiments of the apparatus may be adapted for a refrigerator, freezer, and other food storage and cooking devices.”; paragraph 0001 states, “Disclosed herein is an oven steam injection system for heating food …”; paragraph 0044 states, “The processor may determine a proper amount of steam to send to the food …”), comprising the steps of:
filling, with a fill pump, a steam generator with a quantity of liquid past a minimum level associated with a minimum operational level to a maximum level associated with a maximum operational level (paragraphs 0025-0027 state, “The heater reservoir of the steam generator 3 is provided with a generator level sensor 11 for detecting a level of water in the heater reservoir of the steam generator 3. When the level of water in the steam generator 3, as detected by the generator level sensor 11, is below a predetermined low level heater threshold 3a, the generator supply pump 5 is operated to pump water from the drain reservoir 7 to the steam generator 3 … When the level of water in the steam generator 3, as detected by the generator level sensor 11, is above a predetermined high level heater threshold 3b, a generator drain valve 9 is operatively coupled to the steam generator 3 is opened to drain water from the steam generator 3 to the drain reservoir 7.”)
With respect to claim 1, van der Linden differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose:
obtained by a first sensor and obtained by a second sensor (van der Linden paragraphs 0025-0027 discloses minimum and maximum levels but only a single level sensor 11, as opposed to a first sensor for maximum level and a second sensor for minimum level.)
running the steam generator at a first steam flow rate until the quantity of liquid in the steam generator returns to the minimum level
without any additional input of liquid from the fill pump or output of liquid from a drainage flow pump
dividing a volume pre-saved in the memory between the minimum level and the maximum level by the time the steam generator was running to quantify the first steam flow rate
after quantifying the first steam flow rate and during a present steam cycle, determining a quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs by determining a time the steam generator injected steam and multiplying the time by the first steam flow rate
based on the first steam flow rate, determining a time remaining before the quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs is below a threshold and the one or more liquid reservoirs needs to be refilled
via input of liquid from the fill pump
With respect to claim 1, Saksena discloses:
obtained by a first sensor and obtained by a second sensor (Saksena figure 2, references 72, 74, and 76; paragraph 0013 states, “Three water level sensors 72, 74 and 76 are also provided …” Paragraph 0005 of Saksena states, “During normal steaming operations water level varies between a higher level and a lower level in accordance with steam exiting the heating chamber and replacement water being added back to the heating chamber.” Paragraph 0017 of Saksena states, “Where the low level sensor 72 acts as a safety, the controller 80 will typically prevent any operation of the burner unit or other heating unit whenever the water level is below sensor 72.” The claimed limitation is obvious in view of the combination. As seen above, van der Linden (paragraphs 0025-0027) teaches filling a steam generator with a quantity of liquid past a minimum level associated with a minimum operational level to a maximum level associated with a maximum operational level. What van der Linden lacks is the separate first and second sensors tied to the different levels. This is what Saksena teaches. However, please note that Saksena also teaches high and low operational levels, as shown above.)
running the steam generator at a first steam flow rate until the quantity of liquid in the steam generator returns to the minimum level (obvious in view of combination; Saksena paragraphs 0012-0013 state, “Disposed between the steam superheater 16 and cooking chamber 14 is a valve 32 that controls the flow rate of superheated steam … device 70 is controlled such that water initially flows into the heating chamber through water inlet 26 at a first flow rate until water level in the heating chamber rises to a first set water level …”)
without any additional input of liquid from the fill pump or output of liquid from a drainage flow pump (The examiner interprets this limitation to mean that a steam generator is run until desired levels are reached, without additional liquid beyond the levels being pumped in. This is obvious in view of combination. Both van der Linden and Saksena disclose operating based on levels and not necessarily exceeding those levels.)
dividing a volume between the minimum level and the maximum level by the time the steam generator was running to quantify the first steam flow rate (This limitation is obvious in view of the combination; As discussed above, both van der Linden and Saksena disclose reservoir/chamber volume and minimum/low and maximum/high levels. Both van der Linden and Saksena also disclose a timer (see paragraph 0043 of van der Linden and also claim 15 of Saksena). The combination of van der Linden, as modified by Saksena, discloses all of the variables (minimum level, maximum level, water volume, flow rates, and timer to measure time) necessary for the claimed mathematical operation. The claimed limitation reflects an obvious mathematical calculation based on known variables.)
after quantifying the first steam flow rate and during a present steam cycle, determining a quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs by determining a time the steam generator injected steam and multiplying the time by the first steam flow rate (This limitation is obvious in view of the combination; The combination of van der Linden, as modified by Saksena, discloses all of the variables (minimum level, maximum level, water volume, flow rates, and timer to measure time) necessary for the claimed mathematical operation. The claimed limitation reflects an obvious mathematical calculation based on known variables.)
based on the first steam flow rate, determining a time remaining before the quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs is below a threshold and the one or more liquid reservoirs needs to be refilled (This limitation is obvious in view of the combination; The combination of van der Linden, as modified by Saksena, discloses all of the variables (minimum level, maximum level, water volume, flow rates, and timer to measure time) necessary for the claimed mathematical operation. The claimed limitation reflects an obvious mathematical calculation based on known variables.)
via input of liquid from the fill pump (obvious in view of combination; both van der Linden and Saksena discloses refilling based on levels (paragraphs 0018). Doing so via an input of liquid from a fill pump would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.)
With respect to claim 1, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Saksena into the invention of van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of accurately accounting for water expansion and/or the substantial regular production of steam through the use of multiple sensors.
With respect to claim 1, Cho et al discloses:
pre-saved in the memory (paragraph 0127 states, “The controller 130 may be implemented with memory (not shown) storing algorithms for controlling operations of the components in the cooker 1 or data for programs embodying the algorithms, and a processor …”
With respect to claim 1, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Cho et al into the invention of modified van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of storing useful data that improves the functioning of the system, apparatus, and/or method.
With respect to claim 2, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
obtaining a steam cycle requirement of the present steam cycle by a selected steam cycle setting input from a user (van der Linden paragraph 0040 states, “The process begins at step 400 where a user initiates the desired heating of food within oven cavity 1.”)
obtaining a usage requirement of the present steam cycle by multiplying the first steam flow rate by a remaining steam cycle requirement of the present steam cycle (obvious mathematical calculation in view of data disclosed by modified van der Linden; all of the variables necessary for the claimed calculation are either explicitly disclosed by modified van der Linden or obvious to derive in view of the different data points disclosed by modified van der Linden)
comparing the usage requirement with the quantity of liquid remaining in one or more liquid reservoirs to confirm the quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs is sufficient to complete the remaining steam cycle requirement (obvious in view of combination; modified van der Linden teaches remaining quantity of liquid in one or more liquid reservoirs, as seen in figure 2A and discussed above)
if the usage requirement exceeds the quantity of liquid remaining in one or more liquid reservoirs, automatically generate a notification to a user (obvious in view of combination; Cho et al paragraph 0038 states, “Also in the control panel 20, a display 22 for displaying an operations state of the cooker 1 may be positioned.” Notifying a user through a display/interface an operation state of a cooker, including operations discussed in van der Linden and Saksena, would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.)
With respect to claim 3, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
after a predetermined number of cycles of the selected steam cycle setting, refilling the steam generator to the maximum level obtained by the second sensor (see paragraphs 0025-0027 and 0040 of van der Linden; also, paragraph 0018 of Saksena states, “During normal steaming operations, as steam exits the heating chamber through the steam outlet 37, the water level in the heating chamber drops … the device 70 is controlled such that water again flows into the heating chamber through the water Inlet 26 at a refill flow rate slow enough to enable continued generation of steam until the water level again rises to the second set water level reflected by high level sensor 76.” The predetermined number of cycles is the number of cycles until the water level drops to the set water level that triggers refilling. A)
running the steam generator at a second steam flow rate until the quantity of liquid in the steam generator returns to the minimum level (obvious in view of combination; paragraph 0017 of Saksena states, “In one example, the controller 80 maintains the burner 24 or other heating unit off until the first set water level is reached, but it is possible some heating could occur before the first set water level is reached. Where the low level sensor 72 acts as a safety, the controller 80 will typically prevent any operation of the burner unit 24 or other heating unit whenever the water level is below sensor 72. Saksena represents the principle of controlling different variables (such as temperature and flow rate) to keep the water at different levels. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the obviousness of varying the variables and levels as needed by the user, while maintaining the broad principle.)
without any additional input of liquid from a fill pump or output of liquid from a drainage fill pump (obvious for similar reasons as given for similar limitation in claim 1 above)
dividing the volume between the minimum level and the maximum level by the time the steam generator was running to quantify the second steam flow rate (This limitation represents an obvious mathematical calculation. As discussed above, modified van der Linden discloses multiple flow rates, multiple levels, water volumes, and a timer. The variables necessary to the claimed mathematical operation are disclosed.)
With respect to claim 4, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
determining that the first steam flow rate is different than the second steam flow rate (obvious in view of combination; paragraphs 0013-0018 of Saksena explicitly disclose different flow rates.)
With respect to claim 5, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
during a subsequent steam cycle, determining a time remaining before the quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs is below a threshold and the one or more liquid reservoirs needs to be refilled based on the second steam flow rate (obvious in view of combination; As discussed above, the various variables necessary to make such a determination are disclosed in the art. The claimed limitation represents an obvious mathematical calculation.)
With respect to claim 8, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
wherein the one or more liquid reservoirs includes at least two liquid reservoirs (van der Linden figure 2A, references 3 and 7) and the quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs is an aggregate quantity from the at least two liquid reservoirs (obvious in view of the fact that van der Linden discloses multiple reservoirs. A user mentally designating the aggregate quantity of liquid from the at least two liquid reservoirs to serve as “quantity of liquid remaining” is an obvious choice by the user.)
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Linden (US PgPub 20160061458) in view of Saksena (US PgPub 20060107943).
With respect to claim 10, van der Linden discloses:
A memory and a processor, the memory including instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to carry out (figure 4, paragraph 0040)
a method of estimating liquid in a steam generation system (figure 2A; figure 5; paragraph 0006 states, “embodiments of the apparatus may be adapted for a refrigerator, freezer, and other food storage and cooking devices.”; paragraph 0001 states, “Disclosed herein is an oven steam injection system for heating food …”; paragraph 0044 states, “The processor may determine a proper amount of steam to send to the food …”)
after the present steam cycle, filling the steam generator with a quantity of liquid past a minimum level associated with a minimum operational level to a maximum level associated with a maximum operational level (paragraphs 0025-0027 state, “The heater reservoir of the steam generator 3 is provided with a generator level sensor 11 for detecting a level of water in the heater reservoir of the steam generator 3. When the level of water in the steam generator 3, as detected by the generator level sensor 11, is below a predetermined low level heater threshold 3a, the generator supply pump 5 is operated to pump water from the drain reservoir 7 to the steam generator 3 … When the level of water in the steam generator 3, as detected by the generator level sensor 11, is above a predetermined high level heater threshold 3b, a generator drain valve 9 is operatively coupled to the steam generator 3 is opened to drain water from the steam generator 3 to the drain reservoir 7.”)
running the steam generator under the same selected steam cycle setting until the quantity of liquid in the steam generator returns to the minimum level (paragraphs 0025-0027 and 0040; paragraph 0040 states, “The process beings at step 400 where a user initiates the desired heating of food within oven cavity 1 … At step 401, the water level in drain reservoir 7 is detected … and compared with a predetermined low level threshold … If the level of water in the drain reservoir 7 is below the low level threshold 7a … water is added to the drain reservoir 7 from the main water supply 10, and the level of water is detected again …” Here, it appears that after the user initiates the desired heating process, the running and refilling operations happed under the same cycle.)
With respect to claim 10, van der Linden differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose:
determining a first steam flow rate of a steam generator for a present steam cycle
obtained by a first sensor and obtained by a second sensor (van der Linden paragraphs 0025-0027 discloses minimum and maximum levels but only a single level sensor 11, as opposed to a first sensor for maximum level and a second sensor for minimum level.)
dividing a volume between the minimum level and the maximum level by the time the steam generator was running to determine a second steam flow rate
comparing the first steam flow rate to the second steam flow rate for a loss of efficiency of the steam generator
With respect to claim 10, Saksena discloses:
determining a first steam flow rate of a steam generator for a present steam cycle (Saksena paragraphs 0012-0013 state, “Disposed between the steam superheater 16 and cooking chamber 14 is a valve 32 that controls the flow rate of superheated steam … device 70 is controlled such that water initially flows into the heating chamber through water inlet 26 at a first flow rate until water level in the heating chamber rises to a first set water level …”)
obtained by a first sensor and obtained by a second sensor (Saksena figure 2, references 72, 74, and 76; paragraph 0013 states, “Three water level sensors 72, 74 and 76 are also provided …” Paragraph 0005 of Saksena states, “During normal steaming operations water level varies between a higher level and a lower level in accordance with steam exiting the heating chamber and replacement water being added back to the heating chamber.” Paragraph 0017 of Saksena states, “Where the low level sensor 72 acts as a safety, the controller 80 will typically prevent any operation of the burner unit or other heating unit whenever the water level is below sensor 72.” The claimed limitation is obvious in view of the combination. As seen above, van der Linden (paragraphs 0025-0027) teaches filling a steam generator with a quantity of liquid past a minimum level associated with a minimum operational level to a maximum level associated with a maximum operational level. What van der Linden lacks is the separate first and second sensors tied to the different levels. This is what Saksena teaches. However, please note that Saksena also teaches high and low operational levels, as shown above.)
dividing a volume between the minimum level and the maximum level by the time the steam generator was running to determine a second steam flow rate (Saksena paragraph 0013 states, “water again flows into the heating chamber through the water inlet 26 at a second flow rate … Use of the second, slow flow rate can help reduce the impact that incoming water has on the temperature of the water that has already been heated to the set temperature.” Here, the second flow rate is disclosed without necessarily being “calculated” by dividing a volume between the minimum level and the maximum level by the time the steam generator was running. However, these are variables known to Saksena, as discussed above, and performing such a simple mathematical operation of known variables would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Also, for reasons similar to those given with respect to claim 1 above, this limitation is obvious in view of the combination of van der Linden and Saksena. As discussed above, both van der Linden and Saksena disclose reservoir/chamber volume, as well as minimum/low and maximum/high levels. Both van der Linden and Saksena also disclose a timer (see paragraph 0043 of van der Linden and also claim 15 of Saksena). The combination of van der Linden, as modified by Saksena, discloses all of the variables (minimum level, maximum level, water volume, flow rates, and timer to measure time) necessary for the claimed mathematical operation. The claimed limitation reflects an obvious mathematical calculation based on known variables.)
comparing the first steam flow rate to the second steam flow rate for a loss of efficiency of the steam generator (As discussed, Saksena discloses a first flow rate and a second flow rate of water, which implies a first flow rate and second flow rate of steam. Comparing values that are contemplated by the data would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. The “loss of efficiency” appears to be an intended use that is a natural consequence of the comparing. Since the comparing is obvious, so too is the consequence.)
With respect to claim 10, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Saksena into the invention of van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of accurately accounting for water expansion and/or the substantial regular production of steam.
With respect to claim 11, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
before a subsequent steam cycle, obtaining a starting quantity of liquid in one or more liquid reservoirs; during the subsequent steam cycle, determining a quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs without liquid level sensors by determining a time the steam generator injected steam and multiplying the time by the second steam flow rate (obvious for reasons discussed above; all the variables necessary to fulfill the claimed limitation are either explicitly disclosed by modified van der Linden or products of obvious mathematical calculation in view of the information disclosed by modified van der Linden; The examiner interprets “without liquid level sensors” to mean that certain determinations are made based on certain variables that are not directly based on the liquid level sensors, such as time. This is taught in the art. For example, paragraph 0043 of van der Linden discloses a timer, which operates independently of the liquid level sensors.)
With respect to claim 12, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
determining a time remaining before the quantity of liquid remaining in the one or more liquid reservoirs is below a threshold and the one or more liquid reservoirs needs to be refilled (obvious for reasons discussed above; all the variables necessary to fulfill the claimed limitation are either explicitly disclosed by modified van der Linden or products of obvious mathematical calculation in view of the information disclosed by modified van der Linden)
by modifying the first steam flow rate to the second steam flow rate (The examiner broadly interprets “modifying the first steam flow rate to the second steam flow rate” to merely reference the reality that there are different flow rates between a refilling operation and a non-filling operation, which is obvious to the art.)
Claim(s) 6-7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Linden (US PgPub 20160061458) in view of Saksena (US PgPub 20060107943) and Cho et al (US PgPub 20190203944), as applied to claims 1-5 and 8 above, and further in view of Toshihiro (JP2003329207A) (both original foreign document and machine translation are attached).
With respect to claim 6, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
The method of claim 4 (as applied to claim 4 above)
With respect to claim 6, van der Linden, as modified, differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose:
upon a determination that the second steam flow rate is different than the first steam flow rate by a threshold amount indicating a loss of efficiency of the steam generator, generating a notification to a user that the steam system needs servicing
With respect to claim 6, Toshihiro discloses:
upon a determination that the second steam flow rate is different than the first steam flow rate by a threshold amount indicating a loss of efficiency of the steam generator, generating a notification that the steam system needs servicing (This limitation is obvious in view of applying the broad teachings of Toshihiro to the invention of modified van der Linden. Paragraph 0001 of Toshihiro states, “The present invention relates to a method for maintaining and managing equipment such as boilers … food processing machines …” Paragraph 0021 states, “Next, the specific contents of the maintenance management method in the above configuration will be described. The operational information includes abnormality occurrence data, operational data, management data, and the like … and the management data includes data such as operating efficiency …” Paragraphs 0011-0012 and 0027 disclose sending an alarm notification. The claimed limitation captures the concept of abnormal condition monitoring and notification, with respect to the loss of efficiency in the context of a steam cooking appliance. The context of a steam cooking appliance, with first and second steam flow rates, is disclosed in modified van der Linden, as discussed above. Toshihiro discloses the principle of abnormality monitoring (which suggests a threshold that is “normal”) of a wide variety of parameters in a wide variety of application contexts (which involve steam boiling and food processing machines), where operating efficiency is one of the considered parameters. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the broad abnormal condition monitoring and notification principles of Toshihiro to the context of modified van der Linden. Also, as discussed above, Cho et al also discloses notifications, via a display.)
With respect to claim 6, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Toshihiro into the invention of modified van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of monitoring for abnormal behavior and notifying a user when abnormal behavior is found.
With respect to claim 7, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
wherein the notification specifically addresses the loss of efficiency of the steam generator and the need for a descaling process (obvious in view of combination; As seen above, Toshihiro specifically contemplates efficiency as one of the considered parameters in its abnormal condition monitoring operations. Toshihiro also discloses many different application contexts, including those that include steam and food processing, while van der Linden gives specific details about a steam cooking application context, and one of ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to apply the broad principles of Toshihiro to the specific application context of modified van der Linden. Scaling is a common operational issue (official notice is taken) when it comes to pumping water, and notifying when descaling is needed, as one type of operational condition operator, would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.)
With respect to claim 9, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
The method of claim 8 (as applied to claim 8 above)
With respect to claim 9, van der Linden, as modified, differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose:
when the aggregate quantity from the two or more liquid reservoirs is below a threshold and the two or more liquid reservoirs needs to be refilled, generating a notification to fill the two or more liquid reservoirs
With respect to claim 9, Toshihiro discloses:
when the aggregate quantity from the two or more liquid reservoirs is below a threshold and the two or more liquid reservoirs needs to be refilled, generating a notification to fill the two or more liquid reservoirs (As discussed with respect to claim 6 above, Toshihiro discloses the general principle of condition monitoring and notification, based on a wide variety of data parameters and as applied to a wide variety of application contexts, including those related to steam and food processing. Paragraph 0021 of Toshihiro further discloses, “The abnormality data indicates that an abnormality has actually occurred and caused the boiler 1 to stop and corresponds to, for example, the occurrence of misfire or low water level.” Though the application context here is slightly different than the details of the claimed context, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the same principles and motivation are at work (i.e. having a lack of liquid to create steam causes problems, and one remedy is to refill). The specific claimed configuration of two liquid reservoirs is further detailed in the invention of modified van der Linden. The claimed limitation is therefore obvious in view of the teachings of modified van der Linden in view of Toshihiro.)
With respect to claim 9, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Toshihiro into the invention of modified van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of monitoring for abnormal behavior and notifying a user when abnormal behavior is found.
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Linden (US PgPub 20160061458) in view of Saksena (US PgPub 20060107943), as applied to claims 10-12 above, and further in view of Toshihiro (JP2003329207A) (both original foreign document and machine translation are attached).
With respect to claim 13, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
The method of claim 12 (as applied to claim 12 above)
With respect to claim 13, van der Linden, as modified, differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose:
after the subsequent steam cycle, generating a notification if an additionally requested steam cycle will not be completed prior to when the one or more liquid reservoirs need to be refilled
With respect to claim 13, Toshihiro discloses:
after the subsequent steam cycle, generating a notification if an additionally requested steam cycle will not be completed prior to when the one or more liquid reservoirs need to be refilled (This limitation is obvious for similar reasons as given with respect to claims 6 and 9 above. Modified van der Linden discloses the application context. Toshihiro discloses the principle of condition monitoring and notification when an abnormal condition is found. The claimed limitation represents one example of an abnormal condition, which one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize to be caused by a scenario contemplated by the art (i.e. low liquid level).)
With respect to claim 13, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Toshihiro into the invention of modified van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of monitoring for abnormal behavior and notifying a user when abnormal behavior is found.
With respect to claim 14, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
The method of claim 10 (as applied to claim 10 above)
With respect to claim 14, van der Linden, as modified, differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose:
determining the loss of efficiency of the steam generator when the first steam flow rate is different than the second steam flow rate by a threshold amount
generating a notification that the steam generator needs servicing
With respect to claim 14, Toshihiro discloses:
determining the loss of efficiency of the steam generator when the first steam flow rate is different than the second steam flow rate by a threshold amount (obvious for the same reasons given with respect to claim 6 above)
generating a notification that the steam generator needs servicing or replacement based on the threshold amount (obvious for the same reasons given with respect to claim 6 above)
With respect to claim 14, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Toshihiro into the invention of modified van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of monitoring for abnormal behavior and notifying a user when abnormal behavior is found.
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over van der Linden (US PgPub 20160061458) in view of Saksena (US PgPub 20060107943), Toshihiro (JP2003329207A) (both original foreign document and machine translation are attached), and Cho et al (US PgPub 20190203944).
With respect to claim 15, van der Linden discloses:
A memory and a processor, the memory including instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to carry out (figure 4; paragraph 0040)
a method of estimating liquid in a steam generation system (figure 2A; figure 5; paragraph 0006 states, “embodiments of the apparatus may be adapted for a refrigerator, freezer, and other food storage and cooking devices.”; paragraph 0001 states, “Disclosed herein is an oven steam injection system for heating food …”; paragraph 0044 states, “The processor may determine a proper amount of steam to send to the food …”)
With respect to claim 15, van der Linden differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose:
before a first steam cycle, determining a first drainage flow rate of a drainage pump by measuring a time to reduce a liquid level in a steam generator from a maximum level associated with a maximum operational level obtained by a second sensor to a minimum level associated with a minimum operational level obtained by a first sensor based on actuation of the drainage pump
after the first steam cycle, actuating the drainage pump until the liquid level in the steam generator is equal to the minimum level
utilizing the first drainage flow rate and a volume pre-saved in the memory between the minimum level and a zero level to automatically de-activate the drainage pump in order to minimize dry cycle duration of the drainage pump when the liquid level in the steam generator reaches the zero level
With respect to claim 15, Saksena discloses:
before a first steam cycle, determining a first drainage flow rate of a drainage pump by measuring a time to reduce a liquid level in a steam generator from a maximum level associated with a maximum operational level obtained by a second sensor to a minimum level associated with a minimum operational level obtained by a first sensor based on actuation of the drainage pump (This limitation is obvious in view of the combination of van der Linden in view of Saksena. Figure 4 of van der Linden discloses various steps, including: 1) detecting water level in a drain reservoir (reference 401); 2) determining whether water in the drain reservoir is below a low threshold (reference 402); and adding water to the drain reservoir if the water in the drain reservoir is below a low threshold (reference 403).Van der Linden also discloses pumping water from a drain reservoir (reference 406). Van der Linden does not explicitly disclose “flow rate” in this context, though it does disclose the various variables that one of ordinary skill in the art would use to determine flow rate, such as liquid level and time. However, paragraphs 0011-0012 of Saksena state, “The heating chamber 18 includes an inlet 26 for ingress of water into the heating chamber from a water source and an outlet 28 for egress of water from the heating chamber (as when the chamber is to be drained) … Disposed between the steam superheater 16 and cooking chamber 14 is a valve 32 that controls the flow rate …” As discussed in claim 1 above, Saksena discloses multiple flow rates and also control of flow rate. Also, as discussed in claim 1 above, van der Linden and Saksena both discuss minimum/low and maximum/high levels. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the flow rate principles of Saksena to the variables and application context of van der Linden to arrive at the claimed invention.)
after the first steam cycle, actuating the drainage pump until the liquid level in the steam generator is equal to the minimum level (obvious in view of combination; As seen in figure 4, van der Linden teaches actuating the drainage pump based on liquid levels.)
With respect to claim 15, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Saksena into the invention of van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of accurately accounting for water expansion and/or the substantial regular production of steam.
With respect to claim 15, Toshihiro discloses:
utilizing the first drainage flow rate to automatically de-activate the drainage pump in order to minimize dry cycle duration of the drainage pump when the liquid level in the steam generator reaches the zero level (paragraph 0021 of Toshihiro states, “The abnormality data indicates that an abnormality has actually occurred and caused the boiler to stop, and corresponds to, for example, the occurrence of misfire or low water level.” Although the application context is slightly different, the same causes taught with the abnormality in this context also apply to those of dry cycle durations, that is, not enough water to boil/steam, resulting in problems when you continue to try to boil/steam water that is not there. As discussed above, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize applying the broad abnormal condition monitoring principles of Toshihiro to a wide variety of contexts, including that of modified van der Linden. The combination would result in the ability to monitor for a wide variety of abnormal operation conditions, including those, like dry cycle duration, that are caused by low liquid levels. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that being notified of such abnormal conditions would allow for the user to minimize or mitigate damage caused by such abnormal conditions.)
With respect to claim 15, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Toshihiro into the invention of modified van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of accounting for abnormal behavior.
With respect to claim 15, Cho et al discloses:
and a volume pre-saved in the memory between the minimum level and a zero level (paragraph 0127 discloses memory storing various algorithms and data; storing the claimed data would be obvious)
With respect to claim 15, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Cho et al into the invention of modified van der Linden. The motivation for the skilled artisan in doing so is to gain the benefit of storing useful data that improves the functioning of the system, apparatus, and/or method.
With respect to claim 16, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
after a predetermined number of steam cycles including the first steam cycle and additional steam cycles but before a second steam cycle, determining a second drainage flow rate of the drainage pump by measuring a second time to reduce the liquid level in the steam generator from the maximum level to the minimum level with input only from the drainage pump (obvious in view of combination, for reasons discussed above; van der Linden discloses application context and control of liquid levels. Saksena discloses control of flow rate in the context of liquid levels. Multiple cycles are implied by using the cooker multiple times, which would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Cookers are not designed to only cook once.)
after the second steam cycle, actuating the drainage pump until the liquid level in the steam generator is equal to the minimum level (obvious in view combination, for reasons discussed above; please note figure 4 of van der Linden)
With respect to claim 17, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
comparing the first drainage flow rate and the second drainage flow rate (obvious in view of combination; determination of various flow rates is obvious to modified van der Linden (particularly in view of the multiple flow rates discussed in Saksena), and comparing two known data values is an obvious mental step)
upon a determination that the second drainage flow rate is different than the first drainage flow rate by a threshold amount, generating a notification that specifically addresses a drainage pump efficiency (obvious in view of combination; Toshihiro discloses notification, as discussed above. Toshihiro also discloses monitoring of abnormal conditions, which suggests some threshold definition of what constitutes normal and abnormal. As discussed above, Cho et al also discloses displaying operational state. It would be obvious to generate a notification about any issue that affects operational state, including drainage pump efficiency.)
With respect to claim 18, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
wherein the notification includes a recommendation for descaling (obvious in view of combination; As discussed above, the art discloses notifications about issues that affect operational state. Scaling is a well-known issue that affects systems that pump water (official notice is taken). Generating a notification/recommendation about a known issue that affects operational state would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.)
With respect to claim 19, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
wherein determining the first drainage flow rate of the drainage pump includes, with a fill pump, filling a liquid level in the steam generator to the maximum level, turning the fill pump off, and, with the drainage pump, reducing the liquid level in the steam generator to the minimum level (obvious in view of combination; These are operations contemplated by the operation of the apparatus represented by modified van der Linden.)
With respect to claim 20, van der Linden, as modified, discloses:
before the first steam cycle, determining a first fill flow rate of the fill pump by determining a time to fill the steam generator between the minimum level and the maximum level and dividing the time by a volume between the minimum level and the maximum level (obvious in view of combination; As discussed above, van der Linden discloses the application context of the steam generator, as well as structural elements like pump and levels. Saksena further discloses levels for a steam oven system and various flow rates. Volume, time, and levels are also known variables to van der Linden, and making determinations and calculations based on known variables is obvious.)
before a second steam cycle, determining a second fill flow rate of the fill pump by determining a time to fill the steam generator between the minimum level and the maximum level and dividing the time by a volume between the minimum level and the maximum level (obvious for reasons discussed above)
comparing the first fill flow rate and the second fill flow rate (obvious for reasons discussed above)
upon a determination that the second fill flow rate is different than the first fill flow rate by a threshold amount, generating a notification (obvious for reasons discussed above; Toshihiro discloses condition monitoring that suggests thresholds based on what is considered “abnormal.” Toshihiro also discloses notifications of abnormal conditions.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Xiao et al (US PgPub 20100107886) discloses a method for determining the liquid level in a boiler.
Hansen et al (US PgPub 20040261632) discloses a humidity control system for combination oven.
Kamen et al (US PgPub 20120006670) discloses a water vapor distillation apparatus, method and system.
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 LEONARD S LIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-2148. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00 AM - 7 PM.
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, ARLEEN M VAZQUEZ can be reached at (571)272-2619. 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.
/LEONARD S LIANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2857 05/06/26
/ARLEEN M VAZQUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights