DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Groups I and II lack unity of invention because the groups do not share the same or corresponding technical feature of a processor arranged in communication with the temperature sensor and digital light processor, the processor configured to: receive the output corresponding to the remote temperature, determine real time cooking information, generate the image based on the real time cooking information, and cause the digital light processor to display the image. The claimed and limited processor of group I is a specific technical feature which the method does not require. It is further noted group II is merely limited by detecting temperature which encompasses with a thermometer, by a user, of the food and/or more specifically without a technical features which is specifically a remote temperate sensor positioned above the cooktop.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore remains FINAL.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-9 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson et al. (WO2018/165038) in view of Jenkins et al. (WO2019/2019371).
Olson teaches with respect to claim 1, a cooking assisting unit (par. 0067) for a cooktop (par. 0069; stove top) having a cooktop surface including at least one heating element (par. 0069 stove top) for heating foodstuff accommodated in a utensil, the cooking assisting unit comprising:
a remote temperature sensor (par. 0101 IR camera; par. 00148) positioned above the cooktop (fig. 1 ref. 110 par. 0067) and configured to detect a remote temperature (par. 0101) and generate a first output corresponding to the remote temperature (par. 00148)
a time of flight sensor (par. 0081) positioned above the cooktop (fig. 1 ref. 110; par. 0067), the time of flight sensor configured to detect depth (par. 0081) and generate a second output (par. 0081)
a digital light processor (par. 0091) positioned above the cooktop (par. 0091 fig. 1 ref. 120) and
a processor (par. 0021, 0047) arranged in communication with the remote temperature sensor (par. 0047 IR camera), the time of flight sensor (par. 0047 depth sensor; par. 0081), and the digital light processor (par. 0047 visible camera par. 0091), the processor configured to:
receive the first output of the remote temperature sensor (par. 0047) and the second output of the time of flight sensor (par. 0047),
determine real time cooking information (00101), wherein the real time cooking information comprises at least one information selected from a group of information consisting of a foodstuff image (par. 00101), a foodstuff temperature (par. 00101), a cooktop surface temperature (par. 00101), a cooking time (par. 00101, 0011), and a meal recipe step (par. 00119), and
cause the digital light processor to display an image that is based on the real time cooking information (par. 00105; par. 0033, 0035)
wherein the image is displayed on at least one feature selected from a group of features consisting of the foodstuff (par. 00105), the utensil (par. 0012 equipment, the cooktop surface, and a nearby surface (par. 00105 kitchen location.
Olson teaches the food preparation system used with stove tops to determine food cooking characteristics and projection of real time cooking information and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to look to the art of such as taught by Jenkins (par. 0049-0050).
Jenkins teaches a cook top surface and providing an electronic cookbook which communicate with the heat source system 46 to execute one or more stages (or steps) of bringing the cooking device 86 (or a cooking environment associated with the food item) to a desired temperature as specified by the cooking recipe and for a duration of time specified by the cooking recipe. Time and/or temperature control provided by the operation of the electronic cookbook 30 may be used to eliminate mistakes that may otherwise occur when setting the amount of energy provided by the heat source 50 (e.g., heat source output). In some examples, the electronic cookbook 30 may be in signal communication with one or both of the heat source system 46 and the cooking device system 82 to cause the control of the food environment at the precise temperature set forth in the cooking recipe by measurements of temperature and modulation or adjustment of the energy provided by the heat source 50 (e.g., heating units of the heating source system 46) to maintain the food environment at precisely the desired temperature. (par. 0044).
Jenkins further teaches measurement control by the heat source system 46 to use the measurement information to determine that the food item is boiling (or any other phase change is occurring) or that the food item is about to boil over (par. 00109)
Thus since Olson teaches time of flight sensor, since a time of flight sensor is a depth sensor, since both teach measuring temperature of the a cooktop, since both teach determining temperature for providing real time projection of food preparation instructions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to detect a presence of liquid and/or liquid level as taught by Jenkins (par. 0072) in the utensil with respect to a same time of flight sensor, i.e. a stove top depth sensor as taught by Olson and generate a second output corresponding to the presence of liquid and/or liquid level as taught by Jenkins thus achieving the art recognized purpose of providing cooking specific information to a user during cooking and more specifically the added advantage with respect to stove top cooking as taught by Jenkins of providing control of temperature conditions by detecting measurable information (par. 0106) as taught by Jenkins and desired by Olson.
Claim 2, the real time cooking information comprises the cooktop surface temperature (par. 00101).
Claim 3, further comprising:
a wireless (par. 0013) and/or wired communication module arranged in communication with the processor (par. 0047) and the cooktop (par. 0047),
wherein the processor is further configured to: download recipes comprising step by step guides to meal preparation (par. 0067; internet, servers), and determine a current step (par. 0019), a next step (par. 0019), and an elapsed duration of the current step (par. 0033),
wherein the real time cooking information comprises the cooking time (par. 0033), which comprises a remaining cooking time in the current step (par. 0033) and/or an overall cooking time (par. 0033 start timer), and
wherein the meal recipe step comprises the current step (par. 0019) and/or the next step (par. 0019).
Claim 4, the cooktop is a smart cooktop (par. 0051; neural)
the real time cooking information comprises the current foodstuff temperature (par. 00101), and
the processor is further configured to: receive temperature instruction from the smart cooktop (par. 00101), determine a difference between the temperature instruction and the current foodstuff temperature (par. 00148; compare),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the processor to cause the cooktop to adjust heat generated by the at least one heating element to reduce the difference (par. 0105-0106) as taught by Jenkins thus achieving the advantage of controlled cooking which allows allow users, such as novice cooks, to obtain professional results because the precise control of temperature and timing afforded by the electronic control of the heat source system 46 may provide reproducible results, not requiring the use of a chefs expertise in judging food doneness from a combination of the feel, texture, and color of the food during the cooking process as further taught by Jenkins (par. 0046) and Olson.
Claim 5, Olson teaches the time of flight sensor for detecting depth information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to detect a boil over condition thus achieving the art recognized purpose of providing cooking specific information to a user during cooking as taught by Olson and more specifically the added advantage with respect to stove top cooking as taught by Jenkins of providing control of temperature conditions by detecting food conditions such as to determine that the food item is boiling (or any other phase change is occurring) or that the food item is about to boil over (par. 00109) as taught by Jenkins.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to detect a boil over condition and provide the additional indication to the user by generating an alarm if response to the condition as taught by Jenkins for its art recognized intended purpose of additionally (or alternatively) transmit the indication of the error in the cooking process to the cooking device system and attempt to warn the user of the error as further taught by Jenkins (par. 00151).
Claim 6, wherein the digital light processor is laser based (par. 0067) and the remote temperature sensor and/or time of flight sensor is/are infrared based (par. 00101) and/or a sensor array (par. 0081).
Claim 7, the remote temperature sensor is contactless and/or infrared (par. 00101).
Claim 8, Olson teaches affixing the cooking assisting unit components above the cooktop (par. 0067, par. 0069 stove top). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide elements for securing the cooking assistant unit, such as in the instant case affixing elements configured to mount the cooking assisting unit at a vent hood of the stove top as taught by Olson thus achieving the art recognized purpose of providing projection images and sensor locations which provide a user with real time cooking and display information as taught.
Claim 9, the real time cooking information comprises the foodstuff image depicting (par. 0014), which depicts an ideal version of foodstuff of a menu step (par. 0014).
Claim 14, Olson teaches the remote temperature sensor detects the remote temperature and generates the first output corresponding to the remote temperature (par. 00148)
the time of flight sensor detects depth and generates the second output corresponding to the such (par. 0081) and
the processor determines the real time cooking information and causes the digital light processor to display the image on the at least one feature (par. 0091; 0092).
Thus since Olson teaches time of flight sensor, since a time of flight sensor is a depth sensor, since both teach measuring temperature of the a cooktop, since both teach determining temperature for providing real time projection of food preparation instructions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to detect a presence of liquid and/or liquid level as taught by Jenkins (par. 0072) in the utensil with respect to a same time of flight sensor, i.e. a stove top depth sensor as taught by Olson and generate a second output corresponding to the presence of liquid and/or liquid level as taught by Jenkins thus achieving the art recognized purpose of providing cooking specific information to a user during cooking and more specifically the added advantage with respect to stove top cooking as taught by Jenkins of providing control of temperature conditions by detecting measurable information (par. 0106) as taught by Jenkins and desired by Olson.
Claim 15, Olson teaches the time of flight sensor for detecting depth information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to detect a likelihood of occurrence of a boil over condition with respect to the completion cooking time of Olson thus achieving the art recognized purpose of providing cooking specific information to a user during cooking as taught by Olson and more specifically the added advantage with respect to stove top cooking as taught by Jenkins of providing control of temperature conditions by detecting food conditions such as to determine that the food item is boiling (or any other phase change is occurring) or that the food item is about to boil over (par. 00109) as taught by Jenkins.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to detect a boil over condition and provide the additional indication to the user by generating an alarm if response to the condition as taught by Jenkins prior to the expiration of a cooking time for its art recognized intended purpose of additionally (or alternatively) transmit the indication of the error in the cooking process to the cooking device system and attempt to warn the user of the error as further taught by Jenkins (par. 00151).
Claim 16, t would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to teach the alarm comprises at least one alarm selected from a group of alarms consisting of: electronically communicated text messages, electronically communicated heat deactivation instructions to the heating element, audible tones; and visual displays of alphanumeric characters, images, and/or colors as taught by Jenkins thus achieving the benefit and added advantage as taught by Jenkins of providing user specific information which gets the user attention at the time of alert (par. 00151).
Claim 17, Olson teaches the real time cooking information further comprises at least one further information selected from a group consisting of duration of execution of a current recipe step (par. 0033), time to a next recipe step (par. 0033 how long), action included in the next recipe step (par. 0014, 0023).
Claim 18, the image is displayed on the foodstuff (par. 0092) and/or the utensil (par. 0091).
Claim 19, the image is displayed on the foodstuff (par. 0092) and/or the utensil (par. 0091).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Horst and a time of flight sensor have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Olson.
With respect to applicants urging directed to Jenkins being silent to a time of flight sensor. Olson teaches a time of flight sensor (par. 0081) positioned above the cooktop (fig. 1 ref. 110; par. 0067), the time of flight sensor configured to detect depth (par. 0081) and generate a second output (par. 0081)
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN N LEFF whose telephone number is (571)272-6527. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30-5:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at (571)270-34753475. 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.
/STEVEN N LEFF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Prosecution Insights