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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/21/2022, 10/23/2023, and 12/26/2023 were filed. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Piel et al (US 11,382,190).
Regarding claim 10, Piel discloses a heating apparatus, comprising:
a cavity capacitor (Fig. 9 #940 and 950 electrodes), used for placement of an object to be treated;
an electromagnetic wave generation module (Fig. 9 #922 RF signal generator), configured to generate an electromagnetic wave signal for heating the object to be treated in the cavity capacitor(Fig. 9 #940 and 950 electrodes);
and a controller (Fig. 9 #912 system controller), configured to perform the thawing method according to claim 1 (If a prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of an apparatus claim, then, a recitation with respect to the manner in which the claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus. See MPEP 2114.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al (WO 2018223947 A1) in view of Piel et al (US 11,382,190).
Regarding claim 1, Xu discloses a thawing method for a heating apparatus, the heating apparatus comprising a cavity capacitor used for placement of an object to be treated, and an electromagnetic wave generation module that generates an electromagnetic wave signal used for heating the object to be treated, wherein the thawing method comprises:
acquiring a feature parameter that reflects the weight of the object to be treated, a power value of the electromagnetic wave signal (Abstract ---" The tray is provided with a weighing sensor (271) configured to sense the weight of the food to be processed, and determine the operating power of the radio frequency generation module (230).”), and a rate of change in a dielectric coefficient of the object to be treated (Page 3 para. 5 ---" Optionally, the detecting module is configured to further calculate a rate of change of the dielectric coefficient of the object to be processed according to a load impedance of the radio frequency generating module to determine a thawing progress of the object to be processed.”);
and determining the thawing progress of the object to be treated according to the feature parameter, the power value and the rate of change (Fig. 8 #s S804-S837).
However, Xu does not disclose receiving a thawing instruction input by a user.
Nonetheless, Piel in the same field of endeavor being dielectric heating devices teaches receiving a thawing instruction input by a user (Col. 4 lines 11-15 ---" According to an embodiment, during operation of the defrosting system 100, a user (not illustrated) may place one or more loads (e.g., food and/or liquids) into the defrosting cavity 110, and optionally may provide inputs via the control panel 120 that specify characteristics of the load(s).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thawing method of Xu by incorporating the step of inputting thawing instructions as taught by Piel for the benefit of establishing an initial state for the impedance matching network of the system at the beginning of the defrosting operation. (Piel Col. 4 para. 1)
Regarding claim 2, Xu in view of Piel teaches the thawing method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Xu teaches wherein the step of determining the thawing progress of the object to be treated according to the feature parameter, the power value and the rate of change comprises:
determining a threshold value of change in the dielectric coefficient of the object to be treated according to the feature parameter and the power value (Page 3 para. 5 ---" Optionally, the detecting module is configured to further calculate a rate of change of the dielectric coefficient of the object to be processed according to a load impedance of the radio frequency generating module to determine a thawing progress of the object to be processed.”);
and when the rate of change is less than the threshold value of change, controlling the electromagnetic wave generation module to stop working (Page 4 para. 2 ---"When the rate of change of the dielectric coefficient of the object to be processed drops to less than or equal to the second rate threshold, the operation is stopped.”).
Regarding claim 3, Xu in view of Piel teaches the thawing method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 2), and Xu teaches wherein the step of determining a threshold value of change in the dielectric coefficient of the object to be treated according to the feature parameter and the power value comprises:
according to the feature parameter and the power value, matching a corresponding threshold value of change based on a preset comparison relationship (Page 3 para. 3 ---" When the weight of the object to be treated is greater than or equal to the second weight threshold and less than or equal to a third weight threshold, the operating power is rated power;
The first weight threshold is greater than zero, the first weight threshold is less than the second weight threshold, the second weight threshold is less than the third weight threshold, and the preset range is greater than or equal to the first The weight threshold is less than or equal to the third weight threshold.”),
However, Xu in view of Piel does not teach wherein in the case of the same power value, the threshold value of change is inversely proportional to the weight reflected by the feature parameter; and/or in the case of the same weight reflected by the feature parameter, the threshold value of change is proportional to the power value.
Xu do(es), however, teach that a power value is determined, a rate of change in a dielectric coefficient is determined and the weight of the object to be treated is determined. Therefore, power value, dielectric coefficient, and weight are recognized as a result-effective variables, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2144.05(II)(B). In this case, the recognized result is that thawing of the object is performed. Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim, i.e. that power value, weight, and dielectric coefficient are known, were disclosed in the prior art by Xu, it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the threshold value of change being inversely proportional to the weight and/or the threshold value of change being proportional to the power value.
Regarding claim 4, Xu in view of Piel teaches the thawing method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Xu teaches wherein the step of acquiring a feature parameter that reflects the weight of the object to be treated comprises: acquiring a capacitance value of the cavity capacitor, the feature parameter being the capacitance value (Page 7 para. 2 ---" The detecting module 250 can be configured to further calculate the dielectric constant of the object to be processed and the rate of change of the dielectric coefficient according to the load impedance Z .sub.2 of the radio frequency generating module 230 to determine the thawing progress of the object to be processed. The formula for calculating the dielectric constant of the object to be treated is as follows:
X .sub.2 = 1/2πfC (4)
ε=4πKdC/S (5)
In formulas (4), (5): f is the frequency of the radio frequency wave; C is the capacitance of the capacitor formed by the upper electrode plate 240a and the lower electrode plate 240b; ε is the dielectric constant of the object to be treated; K is the electrostatic constant; d is the thickness of the upper plate; S is the area of the upper plate.” Capacitance can be determined using the formula X .sub.2 = 1/2πfC.).
Regarding claim 5, Xu in view of Piel teaches the thawing method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Piel teaches the heating apparatus further comprising a matching module that adjusts a load impedance of the electromagnetic wave generation module by adjusting its own impedance, wherein the step of acquiring a feature parameter that reflects the weight of the object to be treated comprises: controlling the electromagnetic wave generation module to generate an electromagnetic wave signal with a preset initial power (Fig. 14 #1412 supply a relatively low power RF signal through the variable impedance matching network to the electrode(s));
and adjusting the impedance of the matching module (Fig. 14 #1418 reconfiguring the variable impedance matching network),
and determining an impedance value of the matching module that realizes an optimal load matching of the electromagnetic wave generation module (Fig. 14 #1416 an acceptable or best match for the variable inductance network).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thawing method of Xu in view of Piel by incorporating the steps of controlling the electromagnetic wave generation module, adjusting the impedance of the matching module, and determining an impedance value of the matching module as taught by Piel for the benefit of obtaining a desired signal power level. (Piel Col. 37 para. 2)
Regarding claim 6, Xu in view of Piel teaches the thawing method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 5), and Piel teaches the matching module comprising a plurality of matching branches that can be switched on and off independently, wherein the step of adjusting the impedance of the matching module, and determining an impedance value of the matching module that realizes an optimal load matching of the electromagnetic wave generation module comprises:
traversing on-off combinations of the plurality of matching branches (Col. 16 Table 1), and obtaining a matching degree parameter that corresponds to each on-off combination and reflects a load matching degree of the electromagnetic wave generation module (Col. 35 lines 59-67 and Col. 36 lines 1-2 ---" Assuming each of the variable inductance networks has a structure similar to the network 500 of FIG. 5, for example, and assuming that the states from Table 1, above, apply, then for the first type of load, system controller may initialize the variable inductance network so that the cavity match network (e.g., network 411 or 1011/1016) has state 12 (i.e., about 80 percent of the maximum possible inductance of network 411 or 1011/1016), and the RF signal source match network (e.g., network 410 or 1021) has state 2 (i.e., about 10 percent of the maximum possible inductance of network 410).”);
comparing the matching degree parameters of the on-off combinations of the plurality of matching branches; and determining, according to a comparison result, the on-off combination that realizes the optimal load matching (Col. 39. Lines 3-13 ---" For example, referring again to Table 1, above, if the current configuration corresponds to state 12 for the cavity matching network and to state 3 for the RF signal source matching network, the system controller may test states 11 and/or 13 for the cavity matching network, and may test states 2 and/or 4 for the RF signal source matching network. If those tests do not yield a favorable result (i.e., an acceptable match), the system controller may test states 10 and/or 14 for the cavity matching network, and may test states 1 and/or 5 for the RF signal source matching network, and so on.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thawing method of Xu in view of Piel by incorporating the steps of traversing on-off combinations of the plurality of matching branches, obtaining a matching degree parameter, comparing the matching degree parameters of the on-off combinations of the plurality of matching branches, and determining, according to a comparison result, the on-off combination as taught by Piel for the benefit of obtaining a desired signal power level. (Piel Col. 37 para. 2)
Regarding claim 7, Xu in view of Piel teaches the thawing method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 6), and Piel teaches wherein the step of traversing on- off combinations of the plurality of matching branches, and obtaining a matching degree parameter that corresponds to each on-off combination and reflects a load matching degree of the electromagnetic wave generation module comprises:
acquiring a pre-configured number set, the number set comprising combination numbers of the on-off combinations of the plurality of matching branches (Col. 16 Table 1), and the combination numbers corresponding to the impedance values (The impedance value for each of the combination can be calculated by the operator since the inductance for each inductor will be chosen and known by the operator.;
and determining, based on the number set, branch numbers of the matching branches corresponding to each of the combination numbers one by one, and controlling the on-off of the corresponding matching branches according to the branch numbers (Col. 15 lines 34-39 ---" Starting from the maximum inductance state in which all switches 511-514 are open, the system controller may provide control signals 521-524 that result in the closure of any combination of switches 511-514 in order to reduce the inductance of the network 500 by bypassing corresponding combinations of inductors 501-504.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thawing method of Xu in view of Piel by incorporating the steps of acquiring a pre-configured number set and determining, branch numbers of the matching branches corresponding to each of the combination numbers one by one, and controlling the on-off of the corresponding matching branches according to the branch numbers as taught by Piel for the benefit of obtaining a desired signal power level. (Piel Col. 37 para. 2)
Regarding claim 8, Xu in view of Piel teaches the thawing method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 7), and Piel teaches wherein the feature parameter is the impedance value of the matching module or the combination number for the optimal load matching (Fig. 16 Table 1 shows the combinations) (Col. 35 lines 49-52 ---" Assuming, however, that the system controller does have a priori information regarding the load characteristics, the system controller may attempt to establish an initial configuration near the optimal initial matching point.”; Col. 35 lines 59-67 and Col. 36 lines 1-2 ---" Assuming each of the variable inductance networks has a structure similar to the network 500 of FIG. 5, for example, and assuming that the states from Table 1, above, apply, then for the first type of load, system controller may initialize the variable inductance network so that the cavity match network (e.g., network 411 or 1011/1016) has state 12 (i.e., about 80 percent of the maximum possible inductance of network 411 or 1011/1016), and the RF signal source match network (e.g., network 410 or 1021) has state 2 (i.e., about 10 percent of the maximum possible inductance of network 410).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the thawing method of Xu in view of Piel by incorporating the feature parameter being the combination number for the optimal load matching as taught by Piel for the benefit of obtaining a desired signal power level. (Piel Col. 37 para. 2)
Regarding claim 9, Xu in view of Piel teaches the thawing method as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Piel teaches wherein the step of acquiring a feature parameter that reflects the weight of the object to be treated comprises: controlling the electromagnetic wave generation module to generate an electromagnetic wave signal with a preset initial power (Col. 9 lines 43-51 ---" In response to control signals provided by system controller 312 over connection 314, RF signal generator 322 is configured to produce an oscillating electrical signal having a frequency in the ISM (industrial, scientific, and medical) band, although the system could be modified to support operations in other frequency bands, as well. The RF signal generator 322 may be controlled to produce oscillating signals of different power levels and/or different frequencies, in various embodiments.”).
However, Xu in view of Piel does not teach adjusting the frequency of the electromagnetic wave signal in a candidate frequency range, and determining a frequency value of the electromagnetic wave signal that realizes an optimal frequency matching of the cavity capacitor, the feature parameter being the frequency value of the electromagnetic wave signal that realizes the optimal frequency matching.
Piel do(es), however, teach that the frequency of the electromagnetic wave signal can be adjusted. Therefore, the frequency of the electromagnetic wave signal is recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result. In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2144.05(II)(B). In this case, the recognized result is that thawing of the object is performed. Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim, i.e. that the frequency of the electromagnetic wave signal can be adjusted, were disclosed in the prior art by Piel, it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adjust the frequency of the electromagnetic wave signal to match an optimal frequency of the cavity capacitor.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOE E MILLS JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-8449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOE E MILLS JR./Examiner, Art Unit 3761