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 .
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 (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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho Kim et al. (US Pub. 2005/0194380) (preciously cited) in view of Hildner et al. (EP 2851492) (new cited).
Regarding claim 1, Ho Kim et al. discloses a microwave oven comprising: a main body (10) defining a cooking room (11); a door (14) configured to open and close the cooking room (11); a door latch (20, 22) movably installed in the door (14); a sensor (33a, 33b, 33c) configured to contact the door latch (20, 22); a controller electrically connected to the sensor (33a, 33b, 33c) (Par. 29); a heating source (magnetron 12a) electrically connected with the controller; and wherein in response to the contact of the door latch (20, 22) with the sensor (33a, 33b, 3c) ending by opening the door, the controller is configured to control the heating source (12a) to stop operating (Fig. 1-3; Par. 23-30, and 36-38; Claim 10). Ho Kim et al. does not disclose a door lock including an interfering portion configured to interfere with a front surface of the door when opening the door and a deformable portion configured to elastically support the interfering portion such that the interfering portion is movable. Hildner et al. discloses a door lock (1) including an interfering portion (4.1) configured to interfere with a front surface of the door (2.1) when opening the door and a deformable portion (spring 6) configured to elastically support the interfering portion (4.1) such that the interfering portion is movable (Fig. 1-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Ho Kim et al., a door lock including an interfering portion configured to interfere with a front surface of the door when opening the door and a deformable portion configured to elastically support the interfering portion such that the interfering portion is movable, as taught by Hildner et al., for the purpose of avoiding an undesirable opening of the door (Par. 31).
Regarding claim 2, Hildner et al. discloses the interfering portion (4.1) is movable to a first position of interfering with opening of the door (2.1) (Fig. 1) and a second position of allowing opening of the door (2.1) (Fig. 2), and the deformable portion (6) is configured to elastically support the interfering portion (4.1) toward the first position (Fig. 1-2).
Regarding claim 3, Hildner et al. discloses the interfering portion (4.1), at the first position (Fig. 1), is configured to allow the door (2.1) to move between a closed position of closing the cooking room and an interference position (4.1) of limiting opening of the door (2.1) (Fig. 1), and the interfering portion (4.1), at the second position (Fig. 2), is configured to allow the door (2.1) to move between the closed position and an open position of opening the cooking room (Fig. 1-4).
Regarding claim 4, Hildner et al. discloses the door lock (1) comprises an operation surface (4.2, Fig. 1-4) formed in the interfering portion (4.1) such that the interfering portion (4.1) is movable by the door (2.1) moving from the open position to the closed position (Fig. 1-4).
Regarding claim 5, Hildner et al. discloses the interfering portion (4.1) is configured to limit opening of the door (2.1) by a friction force with the door (2.1) while the door (2.1) is located at the interference position (Fig. 1-4).
Regarding claim 6, Hildner et al. discloses the interfering portion (4.1) comprises a support surface (4.1.2) configured to support the door (2.1) in a direction in which the door (2.1) closes the cooking room while the door is located at the interference position (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Hildner et al. discloses the second position of the interfering position is spaced further from the door (2.1) than the first position of the interfering position (Fig. 1-2).
Regarding claim 8, Ho Kim et al. discloses the sensor (33a, 33b, 33c) is positioned inside the main body, and the door latch (20, 22) is in contact with the sensor while the door is located in the closed position (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Ho Kim et al. and Hildner et al. disclose the main body (10) comprises a control panel (15) position to a side of the door and including an operation inputter or a display (Ho Kim ; Fig. 1); the deformable portion (6) is installed on the control panel.
Regarding claim 10, Ho Kim et al. discloses the main body (10) comprises an outer case to which the door (14) is rotatably coupled (Fig. 1). Hildner et al. discloses the main body comprises an outer case (2.2) to which the door (2.1) is movable, and the deformable portion (4.2) is installed on the outer case (2.2) (Fig. 1-4).
Regarding claim 20, Ho Kim et al. discloses a microwave oven comprising: a main body (10) defining a cooking room (11); a door (14) configured to open and close the cooking room (11), wherein the door is in a closed position when the cooking room (11) is closed (Fig. 1-3; Par. 23-26). Ho Kim et al. does not disclose a door lock configured to interfere with opening of the door, wherein the door lock comprises: an interfering portion configured to be movable to a first position of interfering with opening of the door and a second position of allowing opening of the door; and a deformable portion coupled with the door and configured to elastically support the interfering portion such that the interfering portion is movable to the first position and the second position, and wherein the door is movable between the closed position and an interference position of limiting opening of the door by the interfering portion while the interfering portion is located at the first position, and movable between the closed position and an open position while the interfering portion is located at the second position. Hildner et al. discloses a door lock (1) configured to interfere with opening of the door (2.1), wherein the door lock (1) comprises: an interfering portion (4.1) configured to be movable to a first position of interfering with opening of the door (2.1) (Fig. 1) and a second position of allowing opening of the door (2.1) (Fig. 2); and a deformable portion (6) coupled with the door (2.1) and configured to elastically support the interfering portion (4.1) such that the interfering portion (4.1) is movable to the first position and the second position, and wherein the door (2.1) is movable between the closed position and an interference position of limiting opening of the door (2.1) by the interfering portion (4.1) while the interfering portion (4.1) is located at the first position (Fig. 1), and movable between the closed position and an open position while the interfering portion is located at the second position (Fig. 1-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Ho Kim et al., a door lock configured to interfere with opening of the door, wherein the door lock comprises: an interfering portion configured to be movable to a first position of interfering with opening of the door and a second position of allowing opening of the door; and a deformable portion coupled with the door and configured to elastically support the interfering portion such that the interfering portion is movable to the first position and the second position, and wherein the door is movable between the closed position and an interference position of limiting opening of the door by the interfering portion while the interfering portion is located at the first position, and movable between the closed position and an open position while the interfering portion is located at the second position, as taught by Hildner et al., for the purpose of avoiding an undesirable opening of the door.
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho Kim et al. (US Pub. 2005/0194380) in view of Hildner et al. (EP 2851492) and further view of Balekundri (US Pub. 2022/0099306) (previously cited).
Regarding claim 14, Ho Kim/Hildner disclose substantially all features of the claimed invention as set forth above including from Hildner, the deformable portion (6) comprises: a connection portion (3.2) connected with the interfering portion(4.1); and a coupling portion (3.1) extending from the connection portion (3.2) in a direction away from the interfering portion (Fig. 1-4) except a coupling hole in which a coupling member penetrates. Balekundri discloses a coupling hole (45a, 45b) in which a coupling member (screws in Fig. 5) penetrate (Fig. 4-5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Ho Kim, a coupling hole in which a coupling member penetrates, as taught by Balekundri, for the purpose of securing the locking mechanism.
Regarding claim 15, Hildner et al. discloses the deformable portion (6) further comprises an extension portion (3.3) extending from the connecting portion (3.3) in the direction away from the interfering portion (4.1), the extension portion configured to move with respect to the coupling portion (Fig. 1-4).
Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho Kim et al. (US Pub. 2005/0194380) in view of Balekundri (US Pub. 2022/0099306) and Hildner et al. (EP 2851492).
Regarding claim 16, Ho Kim et al. discloses a microwave oven comprising: an outer case (Fig. 1); an inner case (Fig. 1) positioned inside the outer case, and defining a cooking room (11); a door (14) configured to open and close the cooking room (11), wherein the door (14) is in a closed position when the cooking room (1) is closed; a control panel (15); an opening and closing device (15b) configured to lock and unlock the door closing the cooking room (11); a door latch (20, 22) provided in the door (14) and configured to be movable by the opening and closing device (15b); a magnetron (12a) positioned between the outer case and the inner case and configured to generate a high frequency; and a heating source (12a) is configured to stop operating according to a movement of the door (14) from the closed position to the open position (Fig. 1-3; Par. 23-34, and 36-38). Ho Kim does not disclose the control panel comprising a locking surface adjacent to the door and facing the door; a door lock configured to interfere with opening of the door, and coupled with the control panel, wherein the door lock includes: an interfering portion configured to be movable to a first position of interfering with opening of the door and a second position of allowing opening of the door; and a deformable portion coupled to the locking surface and configured to elastically support the interfering portion such that the interfering portion is movable to the first position and the second position, wherein the door is movable between the closed position and an interference position of limiting opening of the door by the interfering portion while the interfering portion is located at the first position, and movable between the closed position and an open position while the interfering portion is located at the second position, and a heating source is configured to stop operating according to a movement of the door from the closed position to the open position while the interfering portion is located at the second position. Balekundri discloses the control panel (Fig. 9, control panel with knobs) comprising a locking surface (Fig. 9, locking surface for latching member 9 is installed) adjacent to the door (7) and facing the door and coupled with the control panel (Fig. 9). Hildner et al. discloses a door lock (1) configured to interfere with a front surface of the door (2.1) when opening of the door (2.1), wherein the door lock (1) includes: an interfering portion (4.1) configured to be movable to a first position of interfering with opening of the door (2.1) (Fig. 1) and a second position of allowing opening of the door (2.1) (Fig. 2); and a deformable portion (6) coupled to the locking surface and configured to elastically support the interfering portion (4.1) such that the interfering portion (4.1) is movable to the first position and the second position, wherein the door (2.1) is movable between the closed position and an interference position (Fig. 1) of limiting opening of the door (2.1) by the interfering portion (4.1) while the interfering portion is located at the first position, and movable between the closed position and an open position while the interfering portion is located at the second position (Fig. 2) (Fig. 1-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize in Ho Kim et al., the control panel comprising a locking surface adjacent to the door and facing the door and coupled with the control panel, as taught by Balekundri, for the purpose of suitable to the user application for placing the door lock at the front of the oven; and a door lock configured to interfere with opening of the door, and coupled with the control panel, wherein the door lock includes: an interfering portion configured to be movable to a first position of interfering with opening of the door and a second position of allowing opening of the door; and a deformable portion coupled to the locking surface and configured to elastically support the interfering portion such that the interfering portion is movable to the first position and the second position, wherein the door is movable between the closed position and an interference position of limiting opening of the door by the interfering portion while the interfering portion is located at the first position, and movable between the closed position and an open position while the interfering portion is located at the second position, and a heating source is configured to stop operating according to a movement of the door from the closed position to the open position while the interfering portion is located at the second position, as taught by Hildner et al., for the purpose of avoiding an undesirable opening of the door.
Regarding claim 17, Ho Kim et al. discloses a sensor (33a, 33b, 33c) provided to be in contact with the door latch (20, 22); a controller electrically connected with the sensor (33a, 33b, 33c); and a high voltage capacitor and a high voltage transformer (12b) configured to apply a high voltage to the sensor (33a, 33b, 33c), wherein the controller is configured to control the high voltage capacitor or the high voltage transformer based on a signal transferred from the sensor (Fig. 1; Par. 23, 29-30 and 36-38; Claim 10).
Regarding claim 18, Hildner et al. discloses the second position of the interfering portion (4.1) is spaced further from the door (2.1) than the first position of the interfering position (Fig. 1-2).
Regarding claim 19, Hildner et al. discloses the door lock (1) comprises an operation surface (4.2, Fig. 1-4) formed in the interfering portion (4.1) such that the interfering portion (4.1) is movable by the door (2.1) moving from the open position to the closed position (Fig. 1-4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-13 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7828. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9AM - 9PM.
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 Landrum can be reached at (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 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.
/HUNG D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
HUNG D. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3761