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 Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to the claims filed on 12/18/2025 are acknowledged and entered. According to the Amendments to the claims, claims 1-10 has /have been amended. Accordingly, claims 1-10 are pending in the application. An action on the merits for claims 1-10 are as follow.
Claim Limitation
Claim Interpretations - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term "means" or "step" or a term used as a substitute for "means" that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word "for" (e.g., "means for") or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
(C) the term "means" or "step" or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word "means" (or "step") in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word "means" (or "step") in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre- AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word "means" (or "step") are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word "means" (or "step") are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
A. Claim limitation “a voltage providing unit configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with functional language “to provide” and without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claims 1, 3 and 9-10 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: Under Spec. [51], Fig 2, a voltage providing unit 35.
B. Claim limitation “a controller configured to control the first switch and the second switch” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “unit” coupled with functional language “control” and without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claims 1, 3, 5 and 7 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: Under Spec. [51], Fig 4, a control unit 10.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the repeating cycles” in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “whose temperature is lower than that of the other” in line 24, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what these whose and the other respectively stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “a driving signal” in line 2, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what the relation between this “a driving signal” and a driving signal mentioned in Claim 1 line 23 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the other” in line 3, it is unclear about what this the other stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the temperatures” in line 3, rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the relation between this the temperatures and “temperature” mentioned in claim 1 line 24 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein the controller performs a third control and a fourth control” in line 18, rendering the claim indefinite. Without mentioned a first control and a second control, it is unclear where these a third control and a fourth control came from? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the repeating cycles” in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “whose current is lower than that of the other” in line 24, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what these whose and the other respectively stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “a driving signal” in line 2, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what the relation between this “a driving signal” and a driving signal mentioned in Claim 3 fourth to the last line are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the other” in line 3, it is unclear about what this the other stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “currents” in line 3, rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the relation between this currents and “current” mentioned in claim 3 line 24 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “the repeating cycles” in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “whose temperature is lower than that of the other” in line 17, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what these whose and the other respectively stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “a driving signal” in line 2, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what the relation between this “a driving signal” and a driving signal mentioned in Claim 5 fourth to the last line are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “to the other” in line 3, it is unclear about what this the other stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the temperatures” in line 3, rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the relation between this the temperatures and “temperature” mentioned in claim 5 line 17 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “wherein the controller performs a third control and a fourth control” in line 12, rendering the claim indefinite. Without mentioned a first control and a second control, it is unclear where these a third control and a fourth control came from? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the repeating cycles” in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “whose current is lower than that of the other” in line 17, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what these whose and the other respectively stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “a driving signal” in line 2, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what the relation between this “a driving signal” and a driving signal mentioned in Claim 7 fourth to the last line are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “to the other” in line 3, it is unclear about what this the other stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “currents” in line 3, rendering the claim indefinite. It is unclear what the relation between this currents and “current” mentioned in claim 7 line 17 are? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “whose current is lower than that of the other” in line 13-14, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what these whose and the other respectively stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the repeating cycles” in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “performing a third control” in line 11 and “performing a fourth control” in line 14, rendering the claim indefinite. Without mentioned a first control and a second control, it is unclear where these a third control and a fourth control came from? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “whose current is lower than that of the other” in line 15-16, rendering the claim indefinite because it is unclear about what these whose and the other respectively stands for? Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the repeating cycles” in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction/ clarification is required.
The rest of the claims are also been rejected because each claim depends on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1)/ 102(a) (2) as being anticipated by Ito et al. (JP 4489339).
Regarding Independent Claim 5, Ito et al. disclose a power conversion device (1 denotes a commercial power supply, 2 denotes a diode bridge that rectifies the commercial power supply, 3 denotes a smoothing capacitor, [0003], Figs 1-9) which performs switching to output an input voltage, the power conversion device comprising:
a first switch (switching elements 7a, [0003], Figs 1-9) configured to constitute an arm element of the power conversion device (Figs 1-9);
a second switch (switching elements 7a and 7b connected in parallel, [0003], Figs 1-9) connected parallel to the first switch; and
a controller (11 denotes a microcomputer, [0015], Figs 1-9) configured to control the first switch and the second switch (11 configured to control 7a and 7b, Figs 1-9),
wherein the input voltage has a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (details see Figs 1-2);
wherein the first range is defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage (Clearly, “the first range is” is capable of been “defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage” as claimed, Figs 1-9),
wherein the controller performs a first control and a second control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the input voltage (an oscillation circuit for controlling the drive circuit, [0006]; the switching elements 7a and 7b operate… repeatedly on and off, [0034], Fig 1),
wherein the first control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the input voltage falls within the first range (the output signal… is input to drive circuits 8a and 8b, and switching elements 7a and 7b are turned on and off at the same timing, [0003], Fig 1; Clearly “the first control is” capable of been “defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the input voltage falls within the first range” as claimed),
wherein the second control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the input voltage falls within the second range (8a and 8b denote drive circuits for driving the switching elements 7a and 7b, respectively… oscillation circuits 9a and 9b for controlling the drive circuits 8a and 8b, respectively, [0015], Fig 1; Clearly “the second control is” capable of been “defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the input voltage falls within the second range” as claimed).
Claim 6, Ito et al. further disclose: wherein the second control is further defined to provide a driving signal to any one of the first switch and the second switch and to provide an off control signal to the other when the temperatures of the first switch and the second switch are the same (see [0003], Fig 1; Clearly, “the second control is” is capable of “further defined to provide a driving signal to any one of the first switch and the second switch and to provide an off control signal to the other when the temperatures of the first switch and the second switch are the same” as claimed).
Regarding Independent Claim 7, Ito et al. disclose a power conversion device (1 denotes a commercial power supply, 2 denotes a diode bridge that rectifies the commercial power supply, 3 denotes a smoothing capacitor, [0003], Figs 1-9) which performs switching to output an input voltage, the power conversion device comprising:
a first switch (switching elements 7a, [0003], Figs 1-9) configured to constitute an arm element of the power conversion device (Figs 1-9);
a second switch (switching elements 7a and 7b connected in parallel, [0003], Figs 1-9) connected parallel to the first switch; and
a controller (11 denotes a microcomputer, [0015], Figs 1-9) configured to control the first switch and the second switch (11 configured to control 7a and 7b, Figs 1-9),
wherein the input voltage has a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (details see Figs 1-2);
wherein the first range is defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage (Clearly, “the first range is” is capable of been “defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage” as claimed, Figs 1-9),
wherein the controller performs a third control and a fourth control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the input voltage (an oscillation circuit for controlling the drive circuit, [0006]; the switching elements 7a and 7b operate… repeatedly on and off, [0034], Fig 1),
wherein the third control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the input voltage falls within the first range (the output signal… is input to drive circuits 8a and 8b, and switching elements 7a and 7b are turned on and off at the same timing, [0003], Fig 1; Clearly “the third control is” capable of been “defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the input voltage falls within the first range” as claimed),
wherein the fourth control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose current is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the input voltage falls within the second range (8a and 8b denote drive circuits for driving the switching elements 7a and 7b, respectively… oscillation circuits 9a and 9b for controlling the drive circuits 8a and 8b, respectively, [0015], Fig 1; Clearly “the fourth control is” capable of been “defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose current is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the input voltage falls within the second range” as claimed).
Claim 8, Ito et al. further disclose: wherein the fourth control is further defined to provide a driving signal to any one of the first switch and the second switch and to provide an off control signal to the other when currents of the first switch and the second switch are the same (see [0003], Fig 1; Clearly, “the fourth control is” is capable of “further defined to provide a driving signal to any one of the first switch and the second switch and to provide an off control signal to the other when currents of the first switch and the second switch are the same” as claimed).
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-4 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (JP 4489339) in view of Gurwicz et al. (US 5,371,668).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Ito et al. disclose an electric range (induction heating cooker for use in ordinary households, [0001], Figs 1-9) comprising:
a plate (Clearly, there is a surface plate of the induction heating cooker, [0001]) on which an object to be heated is seated;
a working coil (4 denotes a heating coil, [0003]) disposed under the plate and configured to heat the object to be heated using an induced current (induction heating cooker of the present invention, [0005]);
a voltage providing unit including a capacitor (capacitor 3, [0003], Figs 1-9) configured to provide rectified voltage to the working coil, the rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (details see Figs 1-2);
a first switch (switching elements 7a, [0003], Figs 1-9) switched to apply the rectified voltage to the working coil;
a second switch (switching elements 7a and 7b connected in parallel, [0003], Figs 1-9) connected in parallel to the first switch; and
a controller (11 denotes a microcomputer, [0015], Figs 1-9) configured to control the first switch and the second switch (11 configured to control 7a and 7b, Figs 1-9),
wherein the first range is defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage (Clearly, “the first range is” is capable of been “defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage” as claimed, Figs 1-9),
wherein the controller performs a first control and a second control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the rectified voltage (an oscillation circuit for controlling the drive circuit, [0006]; the switching elements 7a and 7b operate… repeatedly on and off, [0034], Fig 1),
wherein the first control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the first range (the output signal… is input to drive circuits 8a and 8b, and switching elements 7a and 7b are turned on and off at the same timing, [0003], Fig 1; Clearly “the first control is” capable of been “defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the first range” as claimed),
wherein the second control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the second range (8a and 8b denote drive circuits for driving the switching elements 7a and 7b, respectively… oscillation circuits 9a and 9b for controlling the drive circuits 8a and 8b, respectively, [0015], Fig 1; Clearly “the second control is” capable of been “defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the second range” as claimed).
Ito et al. disclose the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except does not disclose: a voltage providing unit including a capacitor configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range;
a first switch switched to apply the unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil;
wherein the controller performs a first control and a second control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage,
wherein the first control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the first range,
wherein the second control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the second range.
Gurwicz et al. further teach an electric range (an induction hob 82, Col 5 line 9, Fig 3) comprising: a voltage providing unit (“a voltage providing unit” taught by Ito et al. already) including a capacitor (capacitor 31, Fig 1) configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage (the voltage… is an unsmoothed rectified waveform, Col 6 line 4-6) to the working coil (inductor 40, Fig 1. Note: (“the working coil” taught by Ito et al. already), the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (whose amplitude is a rectified sinusoid of mains frequency, Col 6 line 7-8, Fig 1);
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ito et al. with Gurwicz et al.’s further teaching of a voltage providing unit including a capacitor configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range; a first switch switched to apply the unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil; wherein the controller performs a first control and a second control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage, wherein the first control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the first range, wherein the second control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the second range; because Gurwicz et al. each, in Col 1 line 48-58 that providing an improved inverter with control means for controlling the switching of the main switching devices.
Claim 2, Ito et al. further disclose: wherein the second control is further defined to provide a driving signal to any one of the first switch and the second switch and to provide an off control signal to the other when the temperatures of the first switch and the second switch are the same (see [0003], Fig 1; Clearly, “the second control is” is capable of “further defined to provide a driving signal to any one of the first switch and the second switch and to provide an off control signal to the other when the temperatures of the first switch and the second switch are the same” as claimed).
Regarding Independent Claim 3, Ito et al. disclose an electric range (induction heating cooker for use in ordinary households, [0001], Figs 1-9) comprising:
a plate (Clearly, there is a surface plate of the induction heating cooker, [0001]) on which an object to be heated is seated;
a working coil (4 denotes a heating coil, [0003]) disposed under the plate and configured to heat the object to be heated using an induced current (induction heating cooker of the present invention, [0005]);
a voltage providing unit including a capacitor (capacitor 3, [0003], Figs 1-9) configured to provide rectified voltage to the working coil, the rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (details see Fig 2);
a first switch (switching elements 7a, [0003], Figs 1-9) switched to apply the rectified voltage to the working coil;
a second switch (switching elements 7a and 7b connected in parallel, [0003], Figs 1-9) connected in parallel to the first switch; and
a controller (11 denotes a microcomputer, [0015], Figs 1-9) configured to control the first switch and the second switch (11 configured to control 7a and 7b, Figs 1-9),
wherein the first range is defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage,
wherein the controller performs a third control and a fourth control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the rectified voltage (an oscillation circuit for controlling the drive circuit, [0006]; the switching elements 7a and 7b operate… repeatedly on and off, [0034], Fig 1),
wherein the third control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the first range (the output signal… is input to drive circuits 8a and 8b, and switching elements 7a and 7b are turned on and off at the same timing, [0003], Fig 1; Clearly “the third control is” capable of been “defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the first range” as claimed),
wherein the fourth control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose current is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the second range (8a and 8b denote drive circuits for driving the switching elements 7a and 7b, respectively… oscillation circuits 9a and 9b for controlling the drive circuits 8a and 8b, respectively, [0015], Fig 1; Clearly “the second control is” capable of been “defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose current is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the second range” as claimed).
Ito et al. disclose the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except does not disclose: a voltage providing unit including a capacitor configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range;
a first switch switched to apply the unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil;
wherein the controller performs a third control and a fourth control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage,
wherein the third control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the first range,
wherein the fourth control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose current is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the second range;
Gurwicz et al. further teach an electric range (an induction hob 82, Col 5 line 9, Fig 3) comprising: a voltage providing unit (“a voltage providing unit” taught by Ito et al. already) including a capacitor (capacitor 31, Fig 1) configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage (the voltage… is an unsmoothed rectified waveform, Col 6 line 4-6) to the working coil (inductor 40, Fig 1. Note: (“the working coil” taught by Ito et al. already), the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (whose amplitude is a rectified sinusoid of mains frequency, Col 6 line 7-8, Fig 1);
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ito et al. with Gurwicz et al.’s further teaching of a voltage providing unit including a capacitor configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range; a first switch switched to apply the unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil; wherein the controller performs a third control and a fourth control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage, wherein the third control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the first range, wherein the fourth control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose current is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the second range; because Gurwicz et al. each, in Col 1 line 48-58 that providing an improved inverter with control means for controlling the switching of the main switching devices.
Claim 4, Ito et al. further disclose: wherein the fourth control is further defined to provide a driving signal to any one of the first switch and the second switch and to provide an off control signal to the other when currents of the first switch and the second switch are the same (see [0003], Fig 1; Clearly, “the fourth control is” is capable of “further defined to provide a driving signal to any one of the first switch and the second switch and to provide an off control signal to the other when the currents of the first switch and the second switch are the same” as claimed).
Regarding Independent Claim 9, Ito et al. disclose a method of controlling a power conversion device (Figs 1-9) for an electric range (induction heating cooker for use in ordinary households, [0001], Figs 1-9) including a working coil (4 denotes a heating coil, [0003], Figs 1-9), a voltage providing unit (1 denotes a commercial power supply, [0003], Figs 1-9) including a voltage providing unit including a capacitor (capacitor 3, [0003], Figs 1-9) configured to provide rectified voltage (details see Figs 1-2), a first switch (switching elements 7a, [0003], Figs 1-9) switched to apply the rectified voltage to the working coil, a second switch (switching elements 7a and 7b connected in parallel, [0003], Figs 1-9) connected in parallel to the first switch, the method comprising:
starting to supply the rectified voltage, the rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (details see Figs 1-2), wherein the first range is defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage (Clearly, “the first range is” is capable of been “defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage” as claimed, Figs 1-9),
performing a first control, the first control being defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the first range (the output signal… is input to drive circuits 8a and 8b, and switching elements 7a and 7b are turned on and off at the same timing, [0003], Fig 1; Clearly it is capable of “performing a first control, the first control being defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the first range” as claimed),
performing a second control, the second control being defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the second range (8a and 8b denote drive circuits for driving the switching elements 7a and 7b, respectively… oscillation circuits 9a and 9b for controlling the drive circuits 8a and 8b, respectively, [0015], Fig 1; Clearly it is capable of “performing a second control, “the second control being defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the second range” as claimed); and
repeating the first control and the second control in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the rectified voltage (an oscillation circuit for controlling the drive circuit, [0006]; the switching elements 7a and 7b operate… repeatedly on and off, [0034], Fig 1).
Ito et al. disclose the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except does not disclose: a voltage providing unit including a capacitor configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range;
a first switch switched to apply the unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil;
wherein the controller performs a first control and a second control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage,
wherein the first control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the first range,
wherein the second control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the second range;
repeating the first control and the second control in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage.
Gurwicz et al. further teach an electric range (an induction hob 82, Col 5 line 9, Fig 3) comprising: a voltage providing unit (“a voltage providing unit” taught by Ito et al. already) including a capacitor (capacitor 31, Fig 1) configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage (the voltage… is an unsmoothed rectified waveform, Col 6 line 4-6) to the working coil (inductor 40, Fig 1. Note: (“the working coil” taught by Ito et al. already), the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (whose amplitude is a rectified sinusoid of mains frequency, Col 6 line 7-8, Fig 1);
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Ito et al. with Gurwicz et al.’s further teaching of a voltage providing unit including a capacitor configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range; a first switch switched to apply the unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil; wherein the controller performs a first control and a second control repeatedly in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage, wherein the first control is defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the first range, wherein the second control is defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the second range, repeating the first control and the second control in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage; because Gurwicz et al. each, in Col 1 line 48-58 that providing an improved inverter with control means for controlling the switching of the main switching devices.
Regarding Independent Claim 10, Ito et al. disclose a method of controlling a power conversion device (Figs 1-9) for an electric range (induction heating cooker for use in ordinary households, [0001], Figs 1-9) including a working coil (4 denotes a heating coil, [0003], Figs 1-9), a voltage providing unit (1 denotes a commercial power supply, [0003], Figs 1-9) including a voltage providing unit including a capacitor (capacitor 3, [0003], Figs 1-9) configured to provide rectified voltage (details see Figs 1-2), a first switch (switching elements 7a, [0003], Figs 1-9) switched to apply the rectified voltage to the working coil, a second switch (switching elements 7a and 7b connected in parallel, [0003], Figs 1-9) connected in parallel to the first switch, the method comprising:
starting to supply the rectified voltage, the rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (details see Figs 1-2), wherein the first range is defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage (Clearly, “the first range is” is capable of been “defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage” as claimed, Figs 1-9),
performing a third control, the third control being defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the first range (the output signal… is input to drive circuits 8a and 8b, and switching elements 7a and 7b are turned on and off at the same timing, [0003], Fig 1; Clearly it is capable of “performing a third control, the third control being defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the first range” as claimed),
performing a fourth control, the fourth control being defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the second range (8a and 8b denote drive circuits for driving the switching elements 7a and 7b, respectively… oscillation circuits 9a and 9b for controlling the drive circuits 8a and 8b, respectively, [0015], Fig 1; Clearly it is capable of “performing a fourth control, “the fourth control being defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the rectified voltage falls within the second range” as claimed); and
repeating the third control and the fourth control in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the rectified voltage (an oscillation circuit for controlling the drive circuit, [0006]; the switching elements 7a and 7b operate… repeatedly on and off, [0034], Fig 1).
Ito et al. disclose the invention as claimed and as discussed above; except does not disclose: a voltage providing unit including a capacitor configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range; a first switch switched to apply the unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil,
starting to supply the unsmoothed rectified voltage, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range, wherein the first range is defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage,
performing a third control, the third control being defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the first range,
performing a fourth control, the fourth control being defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the second range; and
repeating the third control and the fourth control in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage
Gurwicz et al. further teach an electric range (an induction hob 82, Col 5 line 9, Fig 3) comprising: a voltage providing unit (“a voltage providing unit” taught by Ito et al. already) including a capacitor (capacitor 31, Fig 1) configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage (the voltage… is an unsmoothed rectified waveform, Col 6 line 4-6) to the working coil (inductor 40, Fig 1. Note: (“the working coil” taught by Ito et al. already), the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range (whose amplitude is a rectified sinusoid of mains frequency, Col 6 line 7-8, Fig 1);
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Ito et al. with Gurwicz et al.’s further teaching of a voltage providing unit including a capacitor configured to provide an unsmoothed rectified voltage, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range; a first switch switched to apply the unsmoothed rectified voltage to the working coil, starting to supply the unsmoothed rectified voltage, the unsmoothed rectified voltage having a cycle that repeatedly alternates between a first range and a second range, wherein the first range is defined as being equal to or higher than a preset voltage and the second range is defined as being less than the preset voltage, performing a third control, the third control being defined to provide a driving signal to both the first switch and the second switch and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the first range, performing a fourth control, the fourth control being defined to provide a driving signal to one of the first switch and the second switch whose temperature is lower than that of the other, to provide an off control signal to the other, and is performed when the unsmoothed rectified voltage falls within the second range; and repeating the third control and the fourth control in a period corresponding to the repeating cycles of the unsmoothed rectified voltage; because Gurwicz et al. each, in Col 1 line 48-58 that providing an improved inverter with control means for controlling the switching of the main switching devices during operation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1-10 have been considered but are moot because of the amendment and the updated rejection with new prior art made of record.
Conclusion
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is advised to refer to the Notice of References Cited for pertinent prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUANGYUE CHEN whose telephone number is 571/272-8224. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00-5:00 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, supervisor Ibrahime Abraham can be reached on 571/270-5569, supervisor Kosanovic Helena can be reached on 571/272-9059, supervisor Steven Crabb can be reached on 571/270-5095, or supervisor Edward Landrum can be reached on 571/272-5567. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571/273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866/217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800/786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571/272-1000.
/KUANGYUE CHEN/
Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761