DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Taplan (DE10127051) in view of Bilgin (WO2020182314). An English machine translation of Taplan (DE10127051) is included with the Notice of Reference Cited (PTO-892). Bilgin (US2022/0159794) is being used as an English language equivalent for Bilgin (WO2020182314).
With respect to the limitations of claim 1, Taplan teaches a cooking appliance (title, abstract) comprising: an upper plate (Fig 1, glass ceramic plate 1, 0020) configured to support an object to be heated (dish base 6, 0020); an intermediate heating element (disc 4 made of electrically conductive material, 0020) located at the upper plate; a working coil (copper coil 3, 0020) configured to generate a magnetic field passing through at least one of the object to be heated and the intermediate heating element (0008, 0009). Taplan discloses the claimed invention except for an inverter configured to control a current flowing through the working coil; and a coil height adjustor configured to adjust a height of the working coil.
However, Bilgin discloses an inverter configured to control a current flowing (Fig 1, driving circuit 103, 0017, 0053) through the working coil (induction coil 103); and a coil height adjustor (coil mount 105, 0053) configured to adjust a height of the working coil is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the cooking appliance of Taplan having a working coil silent to the recited inverter and coil height adjuster with an inverter configured to control a current flowing through the working coil; and a coil height adjustor configured to adjust a height of the working coil of Bilgin for the purpose of providing a known inverter configuration that has one or more switches that is used to drive a current through the induction coil (0017) and a known coil height adjustment configuration that changes a distance of the induction coil based on a cooking vessel material (0019).
With respect to the limitations of claims 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7, Taplan in view of Bilgin discloses the coil height adjustor is configured to adjust the height of the working coil based on a type of the object to be heated (Bilgin, 0019, current irregularities caused by such a cooking vessel with poor ferromagnetic properties influence the temperature of the induction coil and the driving circuit more than the increasing current due to the reduced impedance. Therefore, the overall temperature of the induction coil and/or of the driving circuit is reduced by increasing the distance between the induction coil and a cooking vessel with poor ferromagnetic properties).
the coil height adjustor (Bilgin, coil mount 105) is configured to adjust a distance between the working coil and the intermediate heating element (Taplan, coil 3, disc 4);
further comprising a motor configured to transmit power to the coil height adjustor (0037, the electromechanical actuation elements may, e.g., comprise linear actuators or any other type of electrical motor);
the coil height adjustor (Bilgin, coil mount 105) is configured to adjust a position of the working coil (induction coil 103) relative to the intermediate heating element (Taplan, disc 4) so as to be closer to the intermediate heating element when the object to be heated is a magnetic material and to be further from the intermediate heating element when the object to be heated is a non-magnetic material (Bilgin, 0019);
the coil height adjustor comprises: a supporter (Bilgin, Fig 3, carrying structure 310, 0058) configured to support the working coil (Bilgin, induction coil 302, 0058); and a lifter (electromechanical actuation element 315, 0058) configured to lift the supporter.
With respect to the limitations of claim 11, Taplan teaches a cooking appliance (title, abstract) comprising: an upper plate (Fig 1, glass ceramic plate 1, 0020) configured to support an object to be heated (dish base 6, 0020); an intermediate heating element (disc 4 made of electrically conductive material, 0020) located at the upper plate; a working coil (copper coil 3, 0020) configured to generate a magnetic field passing through at least one of the object to be heated and the intermediate heating element 0008, 0009); an inverter configured to control a current flowing through the working coil.
Taplan discloses the claimed invention except for an inverter configured to control a current flowing through the working coil; and a coil height adjustor configured to adjust a height of the working coil, the coil height adjustor is configured to adjust a distance between the working coil and the object to be heated.
However, Bilgin discloses an inverter configured to control a current flowing (Fig 1, driving circuit 103, 0017, 0053) through the working coil (induction coil 103); and a coil height adjustor (coil mount 105, 0053) configured to adjust a height of the working coil, the coil height adjustor is configured to adjust a distance between the working coil and the object to be heated is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the cooking appliance of Taplan having a working coil silent to the recited inverter and coil height adjuster with an inverter configured to control a current flowing through the working coil; a coil height adjustor configured to adjust a height of the working coil, the coil height adjustor is configured to adjust a distance between the working coil and the object to be heated of Bilgin for the purpose of providing a known inverter configuration that has one or more switches that is used to drive a current through the induction coil (0017) and a known coil height adjustment configuration that changes a distance of the induction coil based on a cooking vessel material (0019).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Taplan (DE10127051) in view of Bilgin (WO2020182314) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Katsuhara (JP2008293888). An English machine translation of Katsuhara (JP2008293888) is included with the Notice of Reference Cited (PTO-892).
With respect to the limitations of claim 5, Taplan in view of Bilgin discloses the claimed invention except for the intermediate heating element has at least one closed loop. However, Katsuhara discloses the intermediate heating element has at least one closed loop (Figs 3, 12, 13, 14, induction heating element 21, 52, 62, 72, 0045, 0051, 0054, 0055) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the cooking appliance of Taplan in view of Bilgin having an intermediate heating element silent to a closed loop with the intermediate heating element has at least one closed loop of Katsuhara for the purpose of induction heating element shape that improves heating efficiency of aluminum or copper pans with improved reliability (0044).
Claims 8, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Taplan (DE10127051) in view of Bilgin (WO2020182314) as applied to claim 1, further in view of Lee (KR101261510). An English machine translation of Lee (KR101261510) is included with the Notice of Reference Cited (PTO-892).
With respect to the limitations of claims 8, 9 and 10, Taplan in view of Bilgin discloses the claimed invention except for the lifter comprises: a supporting leg connected to the supporter; an accommodation groove in a lower end of the supporting leg; and an elastic element located in the accommodation groove; the lifter further comprises a support end located at the lower end of the supporting leg to support the supporting leg; elastic member is located between the lower end of the supporting leg and the support end. However, Lee discloses the lifter (Figs 3, 4, lifting device case 201, 0041) comprises: a supporting leg (motor gear clamp 202, 0043) connected to the supporter (central transmission gear 40, 0037); an accommodation groove in a lower end of the supporting leg (Figs 8-10, groove in position sensor unit 50 in contact with clamp 202, 00841); and an elastic element (spring 56, 0085) located in the accommodation groove; the lifter further comprises a support end located at the lower end of the supporting leg (bottom end of sensing pole 53, 0085) to support the supporting leg (202); elastic member is located between the lower end of the supporting leg and the support end (Fig 10, sensing pole 53, spring 56) is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the cooking appliance of Taplan in view of Bilgin having a lifter silent to the recited accommodation groove and elastic member with the lifter comprises: a supporting leg connected to the supporter; an accommodation groove in a lower end of the supporting leg; and an elastic element located in the accommodation groove; the lifter further comprises a support end located at the lower end of the supporting leg to support the supporting leg; elastic member is located between the lower end of the supporting leg and the support end of Lee for the purpose of providing a known position sensor configuration that senses the height of the coil and coil plate to proper elevation control (0081).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Taplan (DE10127051) in view of Herzog (US 2017/0142783).
With respect to the limitations of claim 12, Taplan teaches a cooking appliance (title, abstract) comprising: an upper plate (Fig 1, glass ceramic plate 1, 0020) configured to support an object to be heated (dish base 6, 0020); an intermediate heating element (disc 4 made of electrically conductive material, 0020) located at the upper plate; a first working coil (copper coil 3, 0020) configured to generate a magnetic field passing through at least one of the object to be heated and the intermediate heating element (0008, 0009). Taplan discloses the claimed invention except for a second working coil configured to generate a magnetic field passing through at least one of the object to be heated and the intermediate heating element, the second working coil being located at a different height than the first working coil relative to the intermediate heating element; and an inverter configured to control a current to flow through at least one of the first working coil and the second working coil.
However, Herzog discloses a second working coil configured to generate a magnetic field passing (Figs 1, 2, induction coils 1000-1500, 0057-0060) through at least one of the object to be heated and the intermediate heating element (Taplan, disc 4, dish base 6), the second working coil being located at a different height than the first working coil relative (Fig 2, shows induction coils 1000-1400 at lower height than induction coil 1500) to the intermediate heating element ; and an inverter (power supply circuitry 2400, 0078, 0082) configured to control a current to flow through at least one of the first working coil and the second working coil is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the cooking appliance of Taplan having a working coil silent to the recited inverter and second working coil with the second working coil configured to generate a magnetic field passing through at least one of the object to be heated and the intermediate heating element, the second working coil being located at a different height than the first working coil relative to the intermediate heating element; and an inverter configured to control a current to flow through at least one of the first working coil and the second working coil of Herzog for the purpose providing a known inverter configuration that is used to drive a current through the induction coil (0078, 0082) and a known second working coil configuration that allows induction hobs to be able to flexibly adapt to a pot size and to a pot position of a pot on a surface or top plate of an induction kitchen hob (Abstract, 0005).
With respect to the limitations of claim 13, Taplan in view of Herzog discloses an outer diameter of the first working coil is a first length (induction coils 1000-1400), and an outer diameter of the second working coil is a second length (induction coil 1500) that is greater than the first length.
Claims 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Taplan (DE10127051) in view of Herzog (US 2017/0142783) as applied to claims 12 and 13, further in view of Katsuhara (JP2008293888).
With respect to the limitations of claims 14, 17 and 18, Taplan in view of Herzog discloses the claimed invention except for an opening through which at least a portion of the magnetic field generated from the first working coil or the second working coil is located at the center of the intermediate heating element, a diameter of the opening being a third length that is greater than the first length; the third length is less than the second length; an outer diameter of the intermediate heating element is a third length that is less than the first length.
However, Katsuhara discloses an opening (Figs 3, 12, 13, 14, central opening of induction heating element 21, 52, 62, 72, 0045, 0051, 0054, 0055) through which at least a portion of the magnetic field generated from the first working coil or the second working coil (heating coil 6, 8, 0015, 0016) is located at the center of the intermediate heating element is known in the art. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to adapt the cooking appliance of Taplan in view of Herzog having an intermediate heating element silent to an opening with an opening through which at least a portion of the magnetic field generated from the first working coil or the second working coil is located at the center of the intermediate heating element of Katsuhara for the purpose of induction heating element shape that improves heating efficiency of aluminum or copper pans with improved reliability (0044).
Taplan in view of Herzog and Katsuhara discloses the claimed invention except for a diameter of the opening being a third length that is greater than the first length; the third length is less than the second length; an outer diameter of the intermediate heating element is a third length that is less than the first length. However, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to have a diameter of the opening being a third length that is greater than the first length; the third length is less than the second length; an outer diameter of the intermediate heating element is a third length that is less than the first length, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable diameter ranges involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04).
With respect to the limitations of claims 15 and 19, Taplan in view of Herzog discloses the first working coil is located further (Herzog, Fig 2, induction coils 1000-1400) from the intermediate heating element (Taplan, disc 4) than the second working coil (Herzog, induction coil 1500) is located to the intermediate heating element; the first working coil is located closer (Herzog, induction coil 1500) to the intermediate heating (Taplan, disc 4) element than the second working coil (Herzog, Fig 2, induction coils 1000-1400) is located to the intermediated heating element.
Claims 16 and 20 are also rejected because they are dependent upon claim 12.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN S TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday [8:00-4:00].
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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.
/THIEN S TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 1/21/2026