DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 28 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Xu fails to disclose a hollow shaft having a first end generally vertically aligned with an upper rim of the body (p. 14). Applicant argues that Xu’s water pipe 9 connects to the lid through the intermediary water inlet joint 12, which is a separate component positioned on the lid, rather than the water pipe 9 itself having a first end generally vertically aligned with the upper rim of the steamer basket body (pp. 14–15).
Applicant’s argument is wholly unpersuasive. Figure 3 of Xu clearly shows an upper end of each of the water pipe 9 and the cooker body 8 aligning at the same vertical position. At least based on the claim language, the Office sees no reason why any structure of the lid—whether structurally or functionally connected to the hollow shaft or not—would affect how the basket body and water pipe of Xu read on the claim.
Applicant further argues that Xu’s water pipe 9 connects at its lower end to the water storage space 17, and is thus positioned at a bottom region of the apparatus and not at a position aligned with the upper rim of the steamer basket body (p. 15).
Again, Applicant’s argument is wholly unpersuasive. Xu’s water pipe 9 naturally has two ends, one of which is clearly vertically aligned at the upper rim of the body, and the other of which communicates with a dispensing opening at its bottom, aligning with claim 1.
Applicant makes reference to how Xu’s water pipe extends along the side of the steamer (p. 15), but does not explain why this prevents Xu from reading on the claim, as claim 1 has no limitation requiring a different arrangement. The requirement that the hollow shaft be positioned at a horizontal center of the body is in dependent claim 4, which is rejected further in view of Liu, which Applicant does not make any argument with respect to.
Applicant’s arguments concerning dependent claims still rejected rely on the arguments made against the rejection of claim 1, and are therefore addressed above.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
¶ 28 of the submitted specification also mentions “button 38,” but in none of the figures does 38 point to any button. In figs. 4, 6, and 8, it clearly appears to point to a hinge.
Claim Objections
Claims 8 and 10–19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8 should be amended to strike the “and” at the end of line 8, as an appropriate conjunction is already suitably provided for before on line 12.
Claims 10–19 are objected to due to dependency upon an objected-to claim.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu (CN 108652429 A).
Xu discloses an appliance for heating a food product, comprising:
a housing (7) having an interior with a heating cavity therein (appreciable from fig. 3);
a lid (11) enclosing an upper opening of the heating cavity (see fig. 3);
a water supply (4, 5, 12) including a portion directed through the lid (12) for introducing water to the heating cavity;
a heating element (2) adjacent a lower portion of the heating cavity (see fig. 3); and
a steamer basket (8) receivable within the heating cavity (“cooker 8 is detachably located and mounted in the inner container 7”) and defining a body with a perforated lower wall (10) positionable above the lower portion of the heating cavity (see fig. 3) such that the food product is suspended above the lower portion of the heating cavity during heating of water (17) therein and such that steam generated by heating water within the lower portion of the heating cavity permeates the food product, the steamer basket further including a hollow shaft (9) extending from a first end generally vertically aligned with an upper rim of the body (where it meets 12, see fig. 3) to a second end in communication with a dispensing opening through the lower wall (the bottom of 9, see fig. 3), the first end being positionable adjacent the portion of the water supply directed through the lid to further direct the water through the lower wall of the body without contacting the food product within the steamer basket (see 12 and 9 in fig. 3).
Claim Rejections — 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Goyon et al. (WO 2018/142086 A1).
Xu does not disclose a vessel receivable within the interior of the housing, wherein: the heating cavity is defined within the vessel; and the steamer basket is receivable within the vessel.
However, Goyon discloses a similar apparatus where a vessel (5) is receivable within an interior of a housing (4), wherein: the heating cavity is defined within the vessel; and a similar steamer plate (10) is receivable within the vessel.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the simple housing of Xu with the housing and vessel of Goyon (with the vessel of Goyon taking the functional place of the housing of Xu) to provide superior support and heat retention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhu et al. (WO 2021/175159 A1)
Xu discloses a water tank (4) connectable with the water supply for receipt of water therein from the water tank (see 4, 5, and 6 in fig. 4).
Xu does not disclose that the housing defines a base and a cooking body extending from the base, the cooking body defining the heating cavity, the appliance further comprising: a water tank removably receivable on the base.
However, Zhu discloses a similar apparatus with a housing that defines a base (100) and a cooking body extending from the base (110, 122), the cooking body defining a heating cavity (with 300), the appliance further comprising: a water tank (labeled as 140 in fig. 2, not discussed in the disclosure, but its function made clear given water tank support seat 128 that is discussed in the disclosure) removably receivable on the base (evident from fig. 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement the base and cooking body of Zhu onto the housing of Xu to provide structural support for these elements (Xu does not describe how it sits on anything, particularly since there is nothing beneath its heating element 2).
Claims 4–6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (CN 110179315 A).
Claim 4: Xu discloses that a hollow shaft (9) is coupled with the perforated lower wall of the body (see 9 and 10 in fig. 3).
Xu does not disclose that the portion of the water supply directed through lid is a nozzle that is generally centrally disposed within the lid; and the hollow shaft is at a horizontal center thereof.
However, Liu discloses a similar apparatus where a portion of a water supply directed through a lid (20, 32, 33) is a nozzle (24) that is generally centrally disposed within the lid (see figs. 1 and 2); and a hollow shaft (6) is at a horizontal center thereof (see figs. 1 and 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to remove Xu’s water joint 13 and the associated pipe 6, and to in its place reconfigure the pumping mechanism 5, water inlet joint 12, and water pipe 9 of Xu to adopt a central configuration, as suggested by Liu, to simplify the water supply and conveniently provide water directly to the center of the heater.
Claim 5: Xu modified by Liu discloses that the hollow shaft (Xu: 9) extends vertically from the bottom wall of the basket to a position adjacent the lid (Xu: see fig. 3) and positioned around the nozzle to receive water therefrom (Liu: see figs. 1 and 2).
Claim 6: Xu does not disclose its hollow shaft including a free end having a molded silicone component.
However, Liu discloses “a water pump water outlet pipe is a silicon rubber pipe,” which seems to refer to “a water inlet pipe port sleeve rubber sleeve port” 30, which is analogous to the claimed nozzle.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have appreciated how the heat resistance and flexibility of the silicone rubber sleeve of Liu would render it helpful to facilitate a connection between the parts while at the same time resisting damage from the hot cooking environment, and would have understood that it would be equally function whether positioned on the nozzle of the lid or at the corresponding end of the hollow shaft (to connect to the other element), and would have added it to the hollow shaft of Xu for that reason.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wanat (US Pub. 2005/0005778) and Zhou et al. (CN 107969931 A).
Xu does not disclose a controller configured to: execute a first cooking mode including controlling the heating element to heat the lower portion of the heating cavity to a heating temperature selected to cause evaporation of water received within the lower portion of the heating cavity at an evaporation rate selected to match a known steam absorption rate of the food product; and execute a second heating mode, wherein water is maintained at a predetermined temperature to heat the food product when immersed in a liquid received within the heating cavity.
However, Wanat discloses a similar apparatus with a controller (10) configured to execute a first cooking mode (¶ 42, “at least two modes,” “steaming”; facilitated by the temperature control clearly suggested in ¶¶ 45 and 46 in conjunction with dial 48, including temperatures that produce steam) including controlling a heating element (¶ 35, “heater”) to heat a lower portion of a heating cavity (described in ¶ 35) to a heat temperature selected to cause evaporation of water received within the lower portion of the heating cavity; and a execute a second heating mode (¶ 42, “at least two modes, boiling”; facilitated at least by the temperature control to sub-steaming temperature described in ¶¶ 45 and 46), wherein water is maintained at a predetermined temperature to heat the food product when immersed in a liquid received within the heating cavity (ibid.).
Furthermore, Zhou discloses a controller (“control module”) configured to control a heating element (4) to a heating temperature selected to cause evaporation of water at an evaporation rate selected to match a known absorption rate of the food product (“Because the type of food steam oven cooking, and food such as roast chicken, roasting or cake, bread different types and humidity environment to be different, Therefore, as preferred. stored in the memory preset humidity value P0 is corresponding to different food humidity requirement of multiple humidity value”; although the steam absorption rate of the food product is not mentioned here, the variable evaporation rates of Zhou would invariably, and could be selected to, match with the steam absorption rates of different food products).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement controller with first and second cooking modes taught by Wanat into Xu to enable it to be alternately used for steaming and boiling, and to incorporate the evaporation rate selection feature of Zhou into a same type of controller to improve the steaming mode by aligning it better with the type of food being steamed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is allowed.
Claims 8 and 10–19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objection set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
This action is made final. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John J. Norton whose telephone number is (571)272-5174. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM 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, the examiner’s supervisor, Edward (Ned) F. Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-8648. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN J NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights