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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/15/2023, 07/26/2024, and 09/03/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Status of the Claims
In the claim dated 05/09/2023, claims 11-24 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1 recites the limitation: “an identifying facility configured to identify the cooking compartment divider in the cooking compartment and to adapt an operating state of the household cooking appliance to the cooking compartment divider in response to an identification of the cooking compartment divider” being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder “facility” that is coupled with functional language “identify the cooking compartment …an identification of the cooking compartment divider” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
With regards to the corresponding structure of the claimed “identifying facility” , Applicant’s Specification, pub,para.0048 discloses: “ An “electronic” identification can be achieved for example with the aid of suitable sensors or also with the aid of a resistance measurement.”
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 this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Brunner (EP2299181A1 (cited in 05/15/2023)).
Regarding claim 11, Brunner discloses
A household cooking appliance (10, see fig.1), comprising:
a cooking compartment (12, see fig.1) for receiving food to be cooked (product to be cooked, see para.0013);
a cooking compartment divider (36, see fig.1) received in the cooking compartment (12, see fig.1) for dividing the cooking compartment (12, see fig.1 and para.0016: “with a cooking chamber divider 36 which is arranged in the cooking chamber 12 in an operational state”) into different cooking compartment sections (partial cooking spaces 76 and 78, see fig.1) and designed for removal from the cooking compartment (12, see fig.1, the cooking chamber divider 36 is removable from the cooking chamber 12); and
an identifying facility (combo sensor unit 72 and control unit 16, see fig.1) configured to identify the cooking compartment divider (36, see fig.2 and para.0006: “at least one sensor unit which is provided for the purpose of detecting at least one characteristic variable of the cooking chamber divider in a signal” and para.0019: “The sensor unit 72 is provided for the purpose of detecting electrical resistance values between the six contact pads 58 in signals as characteristic variables of the cooking chamber divider 36”) in the cooking compartment (12, see fig.1) and to adapt an operating state (state that changes the operating mode and displays the change, see para.0019) of the household cooking appliance (10) to the cooking compartment divider (36) in response to an identification of the cooking compartment divider (see para.007, 0019: “the control unit 16 is provided to change from one operating mode to another operating mode on the basis of the signal of the sensor unit 72 and to display this change”).
Regarding claim 12, Brunner further discloses the household cooking appliance of claim I constructed in a form of a household oven (10, see fig.1).
Regarding claim 13, Brunner further discloses the identifying facility (combo sensor unit 72 and control unit 16, see fig.1) is configured to mechanically and/or electronically identify the cooking compartment divider (see para.0019: “. The sensor unit 72 is provided for the purpose of detecting electrical resistance values between the six contact pads 58 in signals as characteristic variables of the cooking chamber divider 36.”).
Regarding claim 14, Brunner further discloses the operating state (state that changes the operation mode and displays the change, see para.0019) of the household cooking appliance (10, see fig.1) comprises a cooking procedure and/or a display option (display, see para.0019).
Regarding claim 15, Brunner further discloses guide rails (34, see fig.1. See guide rails in annotated fig.1 below) mounted in the cooking compartment (12, see fig.1), said cooking compartment divider (36) including a base unit (38, see fig.2) which is guided in a movable manner (see fig.1) on the guide rails (34, see fig.1. See guide rails in annotated fig.1 below) of the cooking compartment (12, see fig.1).
PNG
media_image1.png
778
829
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig.1 of Brunner
Regarding claim 16, Brunner further discloses the base unit (38, see fig.2) includes an electrical and/or electronic component (heating elements 40 and 42, see fig.2), said identifying facility (combo sensor unit 72 and control unit 16, see fig.1) configured to identify the electrical and/or electronic component (See para.0012: “, the at least one sensor unit can also be provided to sense a number of heating elements and/or their functionality”).
Regarding claim 17, Brunner further discloses the electrical and/or electronic component is a heating element component (heating elements 40 and 42, see fig.2).
Regarding claim 18, Brunner further discloses the identifying facility (combo sensor unit 72 and control unit 16, see fig.1) is configured to perform an electrical resistance measurement on the electrical and/or electronic component ((heating elements 40 and 42, see fig.2) in order to identify the electrical and/or electronic component (see para.0019: “The sensor unit 72 is provided for the purpose of detecting electrical resistance values between the six contact pads 58 in signals as characteristic variables of the cooking chamber divider 36. The resistance values of the resistor elements 60, 62, 64 of the cavity divider 36 provide information in a coded form regarding a presence of heating elements 40, 42, a type of heating elements 40, 42 and their electrical heating power” and para.0012: “ the at least one sensor unit can also be provided to sense a number of heating elements and/or their functionality”).
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 19-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunner in view of Gregory (US 20160095469 A1)
Regarding claim 19, Brunner discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the cooking compartment divider includes an accessory unit connected to the base unit in a detachable manner.
Gregory discloses a powered cooking accessory for use in an oven, comprising:
the cooking compartment divider (34, see fig.3) includes an accessory unit (40, see fig.3) connected to the base unit (a portion of 34, see fig.3) in a detachable manner (See fig.3 and para.0021).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the cooking compartment divider of Brunner to incorporate the “accessory unit connected to the base unit in a detachable manner” as taught by Gregory. Doing so provides “a powered accessory useable in a system with an oven wherein communication between the accessory and an oven is facilitated such that the oven can provide specific functionality related to control of the accessory” (See para.003 of Gregory).
Regarding claim 20, Brunner in view of Gregory further discloses the accessory unit (40 of Gregory, see fig.3, is included in the modification. See rejection of claim 19 above) is at least one of an insulation unit, a grill unit and a pizza baking unit (grill plate 40 is a grill unit).
Regarding claim 21, Brunner discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the base unit includes connecting elements configured to connect the accessory unit to the base unit in a detachable manner.
Gregory further discloses the base unit (the portion of 34, see fig.3) includes connecting elements (see connecting elements in annotated fig.2 below) configured to connect the accessory unit (40) to the base unit (the portion of 34, see fig.3) in a detachable manner (“grill grate 40 can be assembleable within a receiving portion 42 of glider rack 34”, see figs.2-3 and para.0021, grill grate 40 is detachable and replaced by items 43/46 ).
PNG
media_image2.png
590
614
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig.2 of Gregory
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the base unit of Brunner to incorporate the “connecting elements configured to connect the accessory unit to the base unit in a detachable manner” as taught by Gregory. Doing so provides “a powered accessory useable in a system with an oven wherein communication between the accessory and an oven is facilitated such that the oven can provide specific functionality related to control of the accessory” (See para.003 of Gregory).
Regarding claim 22, Brunner in view of Gregory further discloses the connecting elements are guide rails (see connecting elements in annotated fig.2 of Gregory above).
Regarding claim 23, Brunner further discloses the identifying facility (combo sensor unit 72 and control unit 16, see fig.1) is configured to identify the base unit (38, see fig.2 and para.0019: “The sensor unit 72 is provided for the purpose of detecting electrical resistance values between the six contact pads 58 in signals as characteristic variables of the cooking chamber divider 36”, wherein the cooking space divider 36 is formed as a flat, substantially rectangular plate 38).
Claim 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunner in view of Gregory as applied to claim 19, and further in view of Lee (US 20040040447 A1)
Regarding claim 24, the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the identifying facility is configured to identify a model variant of the accessory unit and to adapt the operating state of the household cooking appliance to the model variant.
Lee discloses a cooking apparatus equipped with heaters and a method of controlling the same, comprising:
the identifying facility (502, see fig.5) is configured to identify a model variant of the accessory unit (see para.0029: “identifying a kind of accessory, such as a wire rack 720, a crumb tray 714 or the like”) and to adapt the operating state of the household cooking appliance to the model variant (kind of accessory, see para.0029: “the ON/OFF control mode …, which is suitable for a corresponding accessory, is automatically performed”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the identifying facility of Brunner, as modified by Gregory above, to be “configured to identify a model variant of the accessory unit and to adapt the operating state of the household cooking appliance to the model variant” as taught by Lee. The modification increases users' convenience by identifying the kind of an accessory, and automatically performing the ON/OFF control mode of the heaters suitable for the corresponding accessory.” (See para.0033 of Lee).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20060096969 A1 discloses an electric oven includes a main body formed with a cooking chamber and a door opening/closing the cooking chamber. The electric oven further includes a heater unit provided in the main body and for heating the cooking chamber; a partition plate detachably provided in the cooking chamber and partitioning the cooking chamber into a first cooking chamber and a second cooking chamber; a mode selecting unit provided to select one of cooking modes for a single type cooking chamber without the partition plate, and for a double type cooking chamber with the partition plate; and a controller which detects whether the partition plate is mounted in the cooking chamber, and adjusts the mode selecting unit corresponding either to the single type cooking chamber or to the double type cooking chamber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIFFANY T TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3673. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 10am - 6pm.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached on (571) 272-9059. 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 or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TIFFANY T TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761