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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention, “HEATING APPARATUS” is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “FOOD COOKING DEVICE WITH MULTIPLE FUNCTIONS”.
The disclosure is also objected to because of the following informalities:
“food upon the heating surface has not lateral shielding wall” on p. 3, line 12
“The web page serves as an interface that is easily to be created” on p. 8, line 16 should be “The web page serves as an interface that is easily ”
“a container cover 600” on p. 9, line 7 should be “a container cover [[600]]400”
Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 113 in fig. 2.
The drawings are also objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show any related structure (e.g., shafts, axles, etc.), e.g., in conjunction with a motor similar to the vibrator, such that it performs the rotating of the heating surface as described in the specification [p. 4, lines 4-5; p. 8, lines 8-9]. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: (appropriate correction is required)
“apparatusof” in line 1 of claims 2-20 should be “apparatus of”
“stay” in line 2 of claim 3 should be deleted
“same” in claim 6 (“wherein the lateral heater and the bottom heater share the same power source”) should be deleted, in order to avoid any potential 112b issues with the power source of claim 1.
“wherein the current ratio between the first driving current and the second driving current are adjusted…” in claim 8 should be “wherein the current ratio between the first driving current and the second driving current [[are]]is adjusted…”
“wherein when the surrounding wall and the lateral heater is detached from the bottom platform” in claim 9 should be “wherein when the surrounding wall and the lateral heater [[is]]are detached from the bottom platform”
“wherein the heat insulation wall prevents heat escape from lateral direction” in claim 10 should be “wherein the heat insulation wall prevents heat escape from a lateral direction”
Similarly, claim 12 should recite “wherein the heat insulation wall has an air path for hot air heated by the bottom heater to stay in the air path for providing heat from the lateral [[side]]direction to…”
“…wherein controller adjusts…” in claim 15 should be “…wherein the controller adjusts…”
“wherein the heating surface is rotated to carry the container to rotate during food heating” in claim 17 should be “wherein the heating surface is rotated the container during food heating”
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 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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
“heater” in claim 1 (“a bottom heater for heating the heating surface… a food in a container heated by the bottom heater; a power source for providing a first driving current to the bottom heater to generate heat”) and claim 4 (“a lateral heater…wherein the lateral heater heats a surrounding wall”) is being interpreted as structure capable of generating heat from current, and equivalents thereof [i.e., a conventional electric heating element typically used in domestic cooking devices, e.g., resistive heating element, induction coil, etc.; pp. 1-4].
“power source” in claim 1 (“a power source for providing a first driving current to the bottom heater to generate heat”) is being interpreted as structure capable of providing AC or DC current from an indoor, 110V AC power source, and equivalents thereof [i.e., the conventional practice of safely filtering and converting domestic AC power into a desired voltage and current, e.g. a conventional domestic AC/DC converter including transistors, rectifiers, fuses, etc.; p. 5, lines 10-15].
“manual switch” in claim 7 (“further comprising a manual switch for changing a current ratio between the first driving current and the second driving current”) is being interpreted as a structure capable of receiving human input, and equivalents thereof [i.e., the conventional practice of using an HID for facilitating the control of an apparatus, e.g., a button or touch display; p. 6, lines 18-21].
“first position/second position” in claim 15 (“wherein controller adjusts the first driving current and the second driving current so that a first position of the container has a different temperature than a second position of the container to increase convection”) is used by the claim to indicate that a first portion of the container is heated to a different temperature than a second portion of the container [i.e., the conventional practice of controlling a heating process by individually adjusting distinct heating elements, e.g., creating different temperature zones/areas, in order to promote even cooking; p. 7, lines 25-28]
“vibrator” in claim 16 (“further comprising a vibrator, wherein the controller selectively activates the vibrator to generate a vibration to the container to shake the food in the container during food heating”) is being interpreted as a structure capable of generating a vibration [e.g., a motor; p. 8, lines 1-2: “The heating apparatus may further include a vibrator 612. Vibrator 612 may include a motor and related structure to create shaking motions.”], and equivalents thereof [i.e., the conventional practice of randomly moving food during heating by moving the container, e.g., stir frying; p. 8, lines 3-7: “In some embodiments, the controller selectively activates the vibrator 612 to generate a vibration to the container to shake the food in the container during food heating. It provides magic effect particularly in soup or some food processing. The vibration during heating makes the particles in the food to move in random directions, making them to interact more frequently to make the food more delicious.”].
In view of this interpretation of claim 16, claim 17 is interpreted as indicating that the vibrator structure [including e.g., a motor] also provides the rotation of the heating surface to rotate the container
“cook parameter” in claim 19 (“wherein the controller has a wireless interface to connect to a mobile phone for receiving a cook parameter from the mobile phone”), in view of the conventional practice of following recipes to cook various foods, in various cooking containers, with various types of cooking devices [p.1 , lines 9-27], the term is used by the claim to mean typical variables associated with preparing food [i.e., that cook parameter includes: parameters of the heating apparatus, and cooking parameters associated with a food to be cooked; p. 4, lines 7-17: “In some embodiments, the controller has a wireless interface to connect to a mobile phone for receiving a cook parameter from the mobile phone. The wireless interface is an HTTP server. In some embodiments, a QR code label is attached to the heating apparatus. The mobile phone scans the QR code label to connect to a remote server with a parameter of the heating apparatus. The remote server receives a photo taken by the mobile phone for a food being cooked in the container, and transmitting a cooking parameter associated with the food in the photo to the mobile phone. The mobile phone further transmits the cooking parameter to the controller to adjust the first driving current of the bottom heater.”],
In view of the interpretation of claim 19, it seems claim 20 uses the term parameter of the heating apparatus to mean, e.g., the container type [p. 8, lines 12-26] and uses the term cooking parameter to mean, e.g., food type and food amount [p. 8, line 27 – p. 9, line 6]
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: a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)). If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either: a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 2, 4-9, 11-12, 14-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2:
the limitations “a detected temperature of the second temperature sensor” and “the probe is placed within food in the container to detect food temperature” render the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether detected temperature and/or food temperature is intended to be distinct from the second temperature in claim 1. For the purposes of this office action, the claim is interpreted as reciting “…wherein the probe is connected with a wire for transmitting the second temperature to the controller, wherein the probe is placed within the ”
Claim 4:
the limitation “a surrounding wall” in line 2 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this is distinct from the previously recited “a surrounding” in lines 1-2. For the purposes of this office action, claim 4 is interpreted as reciting “…further comprising a lateral heater and a surrounding wall, wherein the lateral heater heats [[a]]the surrounding wall…”
Claim 9:
the limitation “lateral shielding wall” in “wherein when the surrounding wall and the lateral heater is detached from the bottom platform, food upon the heating surface has not lateral shielding wall” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. Since it seems the claim is referring to the inherent shielding provided by the removable surrounding wall/lateral heater of claim 4 [e.g., so as to prevent splatter when frying an egg; p. 6, lines 12-13; fig. 10], claim 9 is interpreted as reciting “wherein when the surrounding wall and the lateral heater is detached from the bottom platform, [[food]]the container upon the heating surface has [[not]]no lateral shielding ”
Claim 11:
the limitation “the lateral heater” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. The claim is interpreted as referring to the lateral heater of claim 4 [i.e., that claims 10 and 11 both depend on claim 4].
Claim 12:
the limitation “a container” in “…for providing heat from lateral side to a container enclosed by the heat insulation wall and the heating surface” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this is distinct from “a food in a container heated by the bottom heater” in claim 1. For the purposes of this office action, claim 12 is interpreted as reciting “…for providing heat from [[lateral side]]the lateral direction to [[a]]the container enclosed by the heat insulation wall and the heating surface”
Claim 14:
the limitations “the third temperature/the second driving current” in “…wherein the controller uses data of the first temperature sensor, the second temperature sensor and the third temperature to adjust the first driving current and the second driving current…” lack sufficient antecedent basis. The claim is interpreted as reciting “…wherein the controller uses data of the first temperature sensor, the second temperature sensor and the third temperature sensor to adjust the first driving current and the second driving current…” and referring to the second driving current of claim 4.
Claim 15:
the limitation “the second driving current” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. For the purposes of this office action, the claim is interpreted as referring to the second driving current of claim 4
Claim 16:
the term “selectively” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Since it seems that the claim is merely indicating that the controller controls the activation and deactivation of the vibrator such that food is moved (i.e., that the controller can deactivate the vibrator, e.g., when not heating), and in view of the conventional practice of moving food during heating to promote even cooking, claim 16 is interpreted as reciting “further comprising a vibrator, wherein the controller ”
Claim 20:
the limitation “a food” in “a food being cooked in the container” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this is distinct from “a food in a container heated by the bottom heater” in claim 1. For the purposes of this office action, claim 20 is interpreted as reciting “[[a]]the food being cooked in the container”
Claims 5-9 and 17-18 are also rejected because of dependence on a rejected claim.
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 1-11, 13-15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng (CN 217013657 U) in view of Bhogal (US 20180292092 A1).
Regarding claim 1,
Zeng discloses:
A heating apparatus [a cooking appliance with an oven mode (figs. 1-6), a grilling mode (figs. 11-14), a hot pot mode (figs. 15-16, 19-20), a barbecue mode (fig. 21)], comprising:
a bottom platform with a heating surface [base 9 as a bottom platform, configured to heat a lower surface of a roasting pan 200 or a pot body 400];
a bottom heater for heating the heating surface [lower heating element 5];
[roasting pan 200/pot body 400];
a power source for providing a first driving current to the bottom heater to generate heat [a conventional power cord as a power source supplies current to the lower heating element, wherein a user observes the cooking process and may adjust cooking temperature/time by adjusting power delivered to the heating element; paras. 0017, 24, 37, 92];
However, Zeng does not disclose:
a first temperature sensor disposed for detecting a first temperature of the heating surface;
a second temperature sensor disposed on a probe for detecting a second temperature of the food in the container heated by the bottom heater;
a controller coupled to the power source, the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor for determining the first driving current supplied to the bottom heater.
Bhogal, in the same field of endeavor [para. 0031: “Conventionally, cooking results are oftentimes dependent on multiple operation parameters (e.g., time, temperature settings, humidity, heat direction or heating patterns, airflow, etc.)”], teaches the conventional use of temperature sensors connected to a controller to facilitate a cooking process, including a first temperature sensor for detecting a temperature of a cooking cavity, and a second temperature sensor for detecting a temperature of a food [para. 0039: “The oven 100 can additionally function to automatically adjust oven control parameters to achieve a target food parameter (e.g., in real- or near-real time), and is preferably in communication with a remote user device 30 and/or a remote computing system 20.”; para. 0041: “The sensor system 700 of the oven 100 functions to collect cooking parameter values 130 during execution of a cooking session 120 of a foodstuff (and/or before or after), which can be used to correlate user feedback with updated operation instructions. More specifically, the sensors can function to monitor oven parameters and/or foodstuff parameters as a function of time. As shown in FIG. 9 and FIG. 10, the sensor system 700 can include…temperature sensors 790… insertion temperature sensors (e.g., probes), cooking cavity 200 temperature sensors… The sensors of the sensor system can be directly or indirectly coupled to the cooking cavity 200. The sensors can be connected to and controlled by the processor 500, or be otherwise controlled. The sensors are preferably individually indexed and individually controlled, but can alternatively be controlled together with other like sensors.”].
Furthermore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select a location of a temperature sensor according to the requirements of a given application [e.g., corresponding to the placement of heating elements and a desired heating element temperature profile; para. 0087: “As shown in FIG. 2 and FIG. 18, the operation instructions are preferably determined based on the food class of the foodstuff within the appliance cavity, and can optionally be determined based on the target output food condition, the target foodstuff parameters (e.g., temperature, weight, size, perimeter, etc.), or any other suitable variable. In an example, an initial set of operation instructions for food class: "chicken" with target output food conditions: "crispy skin" and "moist" can include a heating element temperature profile including a first time period of elevated temperature for all heating elements 300…”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the heating apparatus of Zeng by including a first temperature sensor disposed for detecting a first temperature of the heating surface; a second temperature sensor disposed on a probe for detecting a second temperature of the food in the container heated by the bottom heater; and a controller coupled to the power source, the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor for determining the first driving current supplied to the bottom heater, since this would facilitate the cooking process of Zeng, as taught by Bhogal.
Regarding claim 2, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Zeng as modified by Bhogal, specifically Bhogal, discloses:
wherein the probe is connected with a wire for transmitting a detected temperature of the second temperature sensor to the controller, wherein the probe is placed within food in the container to detect food temperature [see fig. 9, showing a wire connected to probe 790].
Regarding claim 3, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Zeng as modified by Bhogal, specifically Bhogal, discloses:
wherein a container cover corresponding to the container has a hole for inserting and fixing the probe to keep the probe stay within the food [see fig. 9, showing a hole in a container cover].
Regarding claim 4, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Zheng as modified by Bhogal discloses:
further comprising a lateral heater and a surrounding wall, wherein the lateral heater heats a surrounding wall [see Zheng fig. 6, showing upper heating component 2 as a lateral heater and a surround wall formed by, at least, upper cover 1; para. 0007], wherein the surrounding wall and the heating surface form a container space for storing the container to emit heat from multiple directions [i.e., oven mode; figs. 1-6], wherein the controller determines a second driving current supplied to the lateral heater to adjust a heating ratio between the lateral heater and the bottom heater [i.e., the controller of Bhogal automatically adjusting the heaters of Zheng].
Regarding claim 5, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 4.
Zeng further discloses:
wherein the lateral heater and the surrounding wall are removably coupled to the bottom platform [para. 0009], wherein when the lateral heater and the surrounding wall are removed from the bottom platform, food is heated above the heating surface in a first mode [i.e., grilling mode (figs. 11-14), hot pot mode (figs. 15-16, 19-20), barbecue mode (fig. 21)], wherein when the lateral heater and the surrounding wall are attached to the bottom platform, food is heated by both the lateral heater and the bottom heater in a second mode [i.e., oven mode; figs. 1-6].
Regarding claim 6, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 4.
Zeng further discloses:
wherein the lateral heater and the bottom heater share the same power source [para. 0091].
Regarding claim 7, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 6.
Zeng further discloses:
further comprising a manual switch for changing a current ratio between the first driving current and the second driving current [control panel 8 is used to adjust the heating elements; para. 0092].
Regarding claim 8, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 7.
Zeng further discloses:
wherein the current ratio between the first driving current and the second driving current are adjusted by reference to a time schedule during cooking [i.e., the conventional practice of a user adjusting the output of heating elements during a cooking process, e.g., by referencing a recipe; para. 0092].
Regarding claim 9, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 4.
Zeng further discloses:
wherein when the surrounding wall and the lateral heater is detached from the bottom platform, food upon the heating surface has not lateral shielding wall [see fig, 21, showing no lateral shielding for food on backing rack 300].
Regarding claim 10, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Zeng further discloses:
further comprising a heat insulation wall, wherein the heat insulation wall prevents heat escape from lateral direction [see figs. 1-6 showing the oven mode, wherein an outer wall of the top cover 1 and an outer wall of the base 9 form a barrier, inhibiting the escape of heat and allowing safe handling by the user, a conventional practice for an oven].
Regarding claim 11, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 10.
Zeng further discloses:
wherein the heat insulation wall encloses the lateral heater [see figs. 1-6 showing the oven mode, wherein the outer wall of upper cover 1 encloses upper heating element 2].
Regarding claim 13, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Zeng as modified by Bhogal discloses:
wherein the first temperature sensor is placed below the heating surface.
In this case, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select a location of a temperature sensor, such that the first temperature sensor is placed below the heating surface, according to the requirements of a given application, e.g., corresponding to the placement of heating elements and a desired heating element temperature profile,
Regarding claim 14, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Zeng as modified by Bhogal discloses:
further comprising a third temperature sensor placed in a different position from the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor, wherein the controller uses data of the first temperature sensor, the second temperature sensor and the third temperature to adjust the first driving current and the second driving current over time according to a time schedule [i.e., the conventional practice of a user adjusting the output of heating elements during a cooking process, e.g., by referencing a recipe; Bhogal para. 0092].
In this case, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to include an additional temperature sensor, placed in a different position from the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor, according to the requirements of a given application, e.g., in order to compensate for larger volumes of food, or to correspond to additional heating elements.
Regarding claim 15, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Zeng further discloses:
wherein controller adjusts the first driving current and the second driving current so that a first position of the container has a different temperature than a second position of the container to increase convection [in the grilling mode, only the upper heating element is activated to roast food (i.e., convection); paras. 0073-75].
Regarding claim 19, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Zeng as modified by Bhogal, specifically Bhogal, teaches:
wherein the controller has a wireless interface [para. 0037: “Seventh, by incorporating a wireless communication module, variants of the system can enable remote control of the cooking apparatus without physical or manual user input (e.g., starting or stopping cooking operation via a switch) to supply cooking instructions to the oven.”] to connect to a mobile phone [paras. 0050-51: “The user interface 30 functions to enable the user to interact with and monitor a cooking session at the oven, as well as provide user input (e.g., user instructions, user feedback) to the computing system 20 and/or the oven 100… The user device 40 can be a mobile device ( e.g., a laptop, tablet, phone, smartwatch, etc.), substantially static device ( e.g., desktop, television), or be any other suitable device.”] for receiving a cook parameter from the mobile phone, wherein the wireless interface is an HTTP server [para. 0056].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to include the wireless communication module of Bhogal since this would enable remote control and monitoring of the cooking apparatus and the cooking process [para. 0037].
Regarding claim 20, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 19.
Zeng as modified by Bhogal, specifically Bhogal, teaches:
wherein a QR code label is attached to the heating apparatus, wherein the mobile phone scans the QR code label to connect to a remote server [e.g., a global cloud server; para. 0100] with a parameter of the heating apparatus [Bhogal teaches the use of QR codes to automatically determine operating instructions; para. 0102: “In a fourth variation, the operation instructions can be automatically determined based on an identified food class, a foodstuff identifier (e.g., bar code, QR code, etc.) associated with a food class, dynamically determined by the oven or remote computing system (e.g., based on the foodstuff parameters, such as weight, starting temperature, ambient humidity, etc.), specified in a recipe, or otherwise determined.”],
wherein the remote server receives a photo taken by the mobile phone for a food being cooked in the container, and transmitting a cooking parameter associated with the food in the photo to the mobile phone, wherein the mobile phone further transmits the cooking parameter to the controller to adjust the first driving current of the bottom heater [Bhogal teaches the computer system 20, via an image analysis module, controls the cooking apparatus according to recorded images; paras. 0057, 70”].
In this case, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to arrange the elements of Bhogal’s method for controlling a cooking process (i.e., user’s mobile phone, QR codes, servers) such that a QR code label is attached to the heating apparatus and wherein the image is to be analyzed is taken by the mobile phone, according to the requirements of a given application, e.g., to tailor the cooking process of the user [Bhogal, para. 0030].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng (CN 217013657 U) in view of Bhogal (US 20180292092 A1) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Dixon (US 20220031107 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 10.
However, Zeng as modified by Bhogal does not disclose:
wherein the heat insulation wall has an air path for hot air heated by the bottom heater to stay in the air path for providing heat from lateral side to a container enclosed by the heat insulation wall and the heating surface.
Dixon, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a heat insulation wall having an air path for hot air to stay in [see fig. 3A, showing insulative layer 304 in a heat insulation wall; paras. 0052-53].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Zeng by having the heat insulation wall include an air path for hot air heated by the bottom heater to stay in the air path for providing heat from a lateral side to the container enclosed by the heat insulation wall and the heating surface, since Bhogal teaches this reduces heat loss [para. 0054].
Claims 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng (CN 217013657 U) in view of Bhogal (US 20180292092 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tan (US 20150351577 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Zeng in view of Bhogal discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1.
Although Zeng discloses a motor 10 for rotating food in the grilling mode [i.e., the conventional practice of moving food during cooking in order to, e.g., promote even cooking], Zeng as modified by Bhogal does not disclose:
further comprising a vibrator, wherein the controller selectively activates the vibrator to generate a vibration to the container to shake the food in the container during food heating.
Tan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches vibrators for vibrating food in a container [para. 0007: “In one embodiment, the vibration generator may comprise a first vibrator, and the controller is configured to control the first vibrator to vibrate the container to cause food reciprocating movement in a first horizontal direction in the container.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Zeng by including a vibrator, wherein the controller selectively activates the vibrator to generate a vibration to the container to shake the food in the container during food heating, since Tan teaches this allows for desirable stirring movement of the food, without the need for cleaning a stirring-impeller [para. 0006: “As the vibration generator, which may typically be positioned below the container instead of within the container, serves as a module to cause food horizontal movement in the container, the cooker of the invention enables the food in the container to move as desired without a stirring-impeller. Thus, the cleaning of the container would be easier compared with traditional stirring-impeller solution.”].
Regarding claim 18, Zeng in view of Bhogal and Tan discloses the heating apparatus of claim 16.
Zeng as modified by Bhogal and Tan discloses:
wherein the vibration of the vibrator is more than 20Hz.
In this case, since Tan discloses that at least the vibrator phase/amplitude can be adjusted so as to change the movement of the food [para. 0007: “In one embodiment, the vibration generator may comprise a first vibrator, and the controller is configured to control the first vibrator to vibrate the container to cause food reciprocating movement in a first horizontal direction in the container.”], selecting a particular rate of vibration would have been an obvious matter of design choice according to the requirements of a given application, e.g., the desired movement of the food, the size of food, etc.; wherein it would have also been obvious to a PHOSITA to discover the optimum vibration such that the vibration is more than 20Hz, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art [see MPEP 2144.05 II.].
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng (CN 217013657 U) in view of Bhogal (US 20180292092 A1) and Tan (US 20150351577 A1) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Schultz (US 20230380625 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Zeng in view of Bhogal and Tan discloses the heating apparatus of claim 16.
Although Zeng discloses a motor 10 for rotating food in the grilling mode [i.e., the conventional practice of moving food during cooking in order to, e.g., promote even cooking], Zeng as modified by Bhogal and Tan does not disclose:
wherein the heating surface is rotated to carry the container to rotate during food heating.
Schultz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein a heating surface is rotated during food heating [para. 0004: “Utilizing a vertical axis to rotate the cooking surface of a charcoal grill is the original concept of this patent application. A spherical container with a cooking surface in the middle has an electrical motor mounted to the bottom with a vertical axle which rotates the cooking surface. The cooking surface is removable and rests on the axle in the center. The accessory to any grill is a unique application of modern technology. The motor is protected from the heat source and specifically designed for this application. The metal used is food grade steel and is fitted to the grill to rotate the cooking surface at the perfect height. The attachment point of the axle to the cooking surface may be welded or threaded on. No toxic materials would be used in production of this with the intent to produce food for human consumption.”].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Zeng such that the heating surface is rotated to carry the container to rotate during food heating, as suggested by Schultz, since this would provide automatic, even heating with less monitoring needed [para. 0001].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE J EVANGELISTA whose telephone number is (571)272-6093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm 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 F 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.
/THEODORE J EVANGELISTA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761