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 § 102
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 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) 1-2 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP0678710A1 cited by applicant. Regarding claim 1, EP0678710A1 discloses a baking oven comprising a main body forming a cooking chamber (7); a door (8) configured to open and close the cooking chamber (7); and a door lock comprising an interference member (15) configured to interfere with a movement of the door (8) while opening the cooking chamber (7); and a lock case (interior of the door, col. 2, lines 22-24) configured to accommodate the interference member (15) so as to be movable therein; wherein the interference member (15) is configured to move to an interference position for applying an interference with opening the door (8, Figure 2), an interference release position (Figure 3) for releasing the interference of opening the door (8), and a function release position (Figure 4) for restricting the interference of opening the door (8), the function release position is a position in which the interference member (15) is supported by the lock case (via locking-unlocking element 26) and in which movement of the interference member (15) is restricted to the interference release position and the interference position (the interference member 15 is blocked in the blocked position by the coding member 26). Regarding claim 2, EP0678710A1 discloses the door lock comprises a lever (14) configured to move the interference member (15) from the interference position (Figure 2) to the interference release position (Figure 3). Regarding claims 10-11, EP0678710A1 discloses the lock case comprises a release supporter (support of locking element 26) configured to support the interference member (15) in response to the interference member (15) being at the function release position, and the interference member (15) comprises a release interference member (locking element 26) configured to be supported by the release supporter.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 9 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 3935597A1 cited by applicant. Regarding claim 1, DE 3935597A1 discloses a domestic oven door lock has button below handle, lifted to release latch and pushed to hold latch open comprising a main body forming a cooking chamber (1); a door (2) configured to open and close the cooking chamber (1); and a door lock (7) comprising an interference member (8) configured to interfere with a movement of the door (2) while opening the cooking chamber (1); and a lock case configured to accommodate the interference member (8) so as to be movable therein; wherein the interference member (8) is configured to move to an interference position for applying an interference with opening the door (2), an interference release position (pushing handle 18 of the safety lever 19 upward in the direction of the arrow, Figure 1) for releasing the interference of opening the door (2), and a function release position (pushing the handle 18 in the direction of the oven, Figure 2) for restricting the interference of opening the door (2), the function release position is a position in which the interference member (8) is supported by the lock case and in which movement of the interference member (8) is restricted to the interference release position and the interference position (col. 2, line 56 to col. 3, line 31). Regarding claims 3 and 16, DE 3935597A1 discloses the lever is configured to move the interference member from the function release position (Figure 2) to the interference release position (Figure 1) as a force (pulling force) is applied to the lever that is greater than a force of the lock case supporting the interference member (undefined force) and the force applied to the lever (pulling force) is transferred to the interference member (8) in the function release position. Regarding claim 4, DE 3935597A1 discloses the lever (18, 19) configured to move in a moving direction different from a moving direction of the interference member (8), and the door lock comprises an inclined insertion surface (25) inclined with respect to the moving direction of the lever (18, 19) or the moving direction of the interference member (8) so as to transfer the force applied to the lever (18, 19) to a force for moving the interference member (8). Regarding claim 5, DE 3935597A1 discloses the lever (18, 19) is configured to push the interference member (8) from the function release position (Figure 2) to the interference release position (Figure 1) as the force applied to the lever (pulling force) is greater than a force of the lock case supporting the interference member (undefine force) and the force applied to the lever (pulling force) is transferred to the interference member (8) in the function release position, and wherein the door lock comprises a withdrawal guide (25) inclined with respect to the moving direction of the lever (18, 19) or the moving direction of the interference member (8) so as to transfer the force applied to the lever (18, 19) to a force for moving the interference member (8). Regarding claim 6, DE 3935597A1 discloses the door lock comprises a lever elastic body (spring 12) configured to apply an elastic force to the lever in a direction in which the lever is separated from the lock case. Regarding claim 7, DE 3935597A1 discloses the lock case comprises a lever guide (passage opening 21) extending along a moving direction of the lever to guide the movement of the lever (guide at least the horizontal movement of the lever). Regarding claims 9 and 17, DE 3935597A1 discloses the door lock comprises an interference elastic body (spring 12) configured to apply an elastic force to the interference member (8) to a direction in which the interference member (8) is moved from the interference release position (with lever (18, 19) pressed upward) to the interference position (Figure 1).
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8-9 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 10-0267934B1 in view of KR 10-2009-0089227A both cited by applicant. Regarding claim 1, KR 10-0267934B1 discloses a microwave oven comprising a main body for forming a cooking chamber (2); a door (3) which rotates to be opened and closed at the front of the main body; and a locking unit (11) including a locking pin (13) which is provided at the other one of the main body and the door (3) and can move between a locking position to be inserted into a locking hole (10) and an unlocking position to be withdrawn (par. 0014 to par. 0019, claim 1, and Figures 2 and 3). However, KR 10-0267934B1 does not disclose an interfering body moving to an interference release position for releasing the interference with opening of a door; and the movement of the interference to the interference release position and the interference position being restricted. KR 10-2009-0089227A discloses a locking device including the feature wherein the length of a body structure inserted into a first body (10) can be adjusted (claim 1, Figure 3). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention was made to utilize in KR 10-0267934B1 a locking device including the feature wherein the length of a body structure inserted into a first body can be adjusted as taught by KR 10-2009-0089227A in order to provide safety for the oven while operating. Regarding claims 2 and 8-9, KR 10-0267934B1 discloses a simple design change to the solenoid member which transfers the magnetic field to the locking pin (13) such that the locking pin (13) moves between the locking position and the release position (claim 1 and Figures 2 and 3). KR 10-0267934B1 also disclosed the elastic member (14) which provides elastic force so as to allow the locking pin (13) to protrude (par. 0014) and Figures 2 and 3). Regarding claims 12-13, It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art to have the door is configured to move to a closed position for closing the cooking chamber, an open position for opening the cooking chamber, and a limit position in which the door is supported by the interference member while the interference member is at the interference position on order to suit user specific application.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 10-0267934B1 in view of KR 10-2009-0089227A both cited by applicant, and further in view of KR 10-1995-0029516A also cited by applicant. Regarding claim 15, KR 10-0267934B1/KR 10-2009-0089227A discloses substantially all features of the claimed invention except a sensor configured to be in contact with the door latch; a controller electrically connected to the sensor; and a heating source electrically connected to the controller, wherein the controller is configured to control the heating source to stop an operation of the heating source in response to the door latch being separated from the sensor as the door is opened. KR 10-1995-0029516A discloses a door lock device has first and second sensors for detecting a position of a latch so as to stop an operation of a device according to the position (claim 5). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to utilize in KR 10-0267934B1/KR 10-2009-0089227A discloses a door lock device has first and second sensors for detecting a position of a latch so as to stop an operation of a device according to the position as taught by KR 10-1995-0029516A in order to stop and limit the movement of the device.
Claims 14 and 18-20 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Lin (US 12,287,099) discloses a door body structure and cooking device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANG T VAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4789. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00.
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 W 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.
/QUANG T VAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 April 3, 2026
Prosecution Insights