Notice of AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on July, 15, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1,4-10 and 13-14 remain pending. The amended drawings overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed July 15, 2026, and thus withdrawn
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Remarks pgs. 13-14, filed July, 15, 2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C. 112 have been fully considered and withdrawn.
With respect to the 112(f) interpretations, Applicant’s traversal is non-responsive as it does not provide any reason for traversal. As such Examiner maintains the interpretation for all claims because they satisfy the 3-prong analysis under MPEP 2181, and Applicant has not provided a showing that the claimed limitations recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4-7, 9, 10 and 13 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 7 objected to because of the following informalities: they both depend upon the cancelled claim 3, they will be construed to depend from claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 6, 10, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN-113921001) and Liu (CN-112856501) and further in view of Yen (US 2010/0296218).
Regarding Claim 1, Chen discloses An integrated cooker [Fig. 1, para. 7] comprising:
a cooker body [paras. 48-52] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses an air fryer, and thus, necessarily discloses a cooker body. This will be understood as the body of the appliance surrounding the cooking cavity.);
a controller [Fig. 1 (10)];
a heating device [Fig. 1 (7), para. 52, 73];
a functional device [Fig. 1 (6), para. 52] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses the fan control unit includes a fan and fan motor.);
a functional driver device configured to receive a driving control signal from the controller to control a working state of the functional device [Fig. 1 (6), paras. 52, 66] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses the fan control unit further includes a motor drive control device, that controls the working state of the fan in response to received control signals from the controller (via the interface control circuit));
a heating control device configured to receive a heating control signal from the controller to control a working state of the heating device [Fig. 1 (7), paras. 52, 67, 73] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses the heating unit further includes a heating element control device, that controls the working state of the heating element in response to received control signals from the controller (via the interface control circuit), and thus teaches this limitation.);
a communication circuit [Fig. 1 (14)] including:
a primary interface connected to the controller [Fig. 1 (10-14), para. 56] (Examiner Note: An interface is a physical connection point between electrical components, and the claims do not recite or require any further structure for the interface. Chen discloses an interface formed by connection of the controller (10) at the interface control circuit (14), and thus, teaches this limitation.), and configured to receive at least one of the heating control signal or the driving control signal [Para. 21, 58] (Examiner Note: Functional language in an apparatus claim is anticipated when the prior art structure inherently possesses the functionally defined limitations of the claimed apparatus [MPEP 2114-I]. Chen discloses the controller sends control signals to the interface control circuit, which then sends them to the respective heat and fan control devices, and thus, configured to receive the heating and driving control signals. The electrical components are communicatively connected, and thus, necessarily configured to receive control signals);
a secondary interface connected to at least one of the heating control device or the functional driver device [Chen: Fig. 1 (14-4), para. 64] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses an interface formed by the connection of the cooking execution module (4) (connected to both the heating and fan control devices) at the interface control circuit (14) that is configured to send control signals to the heating and fan control devices, and thus, teaches this limitation.), and configured to send the at least one of the heating control signal or the driving control signal [Chen paras. 66, 67] (Examiner Note: Functional language in an apparatus claim is anticipated when the prior art structure inherently possesses the functionally defined limitations of the claimed apparatus [MPEP 2114-I]. Chen discloses the primary interface circuit sends control signals from the controller to the fan control unit and heating unit. The electrical components are communicatively connected, and thus, necessarily configured to send a control signal.); and
an identification circuit [Fig. 1 (14)] configured to connect the primary interface to the secondary interface [Chen: Fig. 1(10-14, 14-4), para. 19, 66-7] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses the interface control circuit connects a contact point of the primary interface to a contact point of the secondary interface, wherein the control signal is sent through the secondary interface to the corresponding control devices based on identification performed by the circuit, and thus discloses this limitation.) wherein: …,
wherein the controller, the functional driver device, the heating control device, and the heating device are all provided inside the cooker body. [Fig. 1, paras. 48-56] (Examiner Note: As discussed detail in the previous Action, Chen is understood to inherently disclose this limitation as the air fryer must contain the heating device and fan (and their control units) inside of the cooker body in order to perform cooking operations, and, the controller is embedded and connected by circuitry to the control devices disposed inside the air fryer.) [] (Examiner Note: )
Chen does not disclose the controller is configured to determine a first heating flag bit after initialization; or the controller is configured to determine a driving flag bit after initialization;
However, Liu discloses, the controller is configured to determine a first heating flag bit after initialization [Fig. 2, paras. 37-38]; or the controller is configured to determine a driving flag bit after initialization. [Fig. 2, paras. 37-38] (Examiner Note: Liu discloses that, after initialization, the controller assigns flag bits at the parallel I/O port, where a flag bit will be assigned based on the identified control device. Accordingly, the controller of Liu is configured to determine both flag bits, and thus would meet both alternatives of the limitation.)
Liu is in the same field of invention as the application because they are both related to controller systems for integrated cookers, and thus qualifies as analogous art. [MPEP 2141.01(a)]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen with a step for determining a flag bit corresponding to a control device as taught in Liu in order to improve functionality of the control system. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Liu and Chen could be combined with a reasonable expectation of success as they are both directed to the control systems of cookers. Furthermore, one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the disclosed method would determine a heating and driving flag bit when there is a heating control device and functional driver device connected to the controller. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate a method for determining flag bits because it allows for the interchangeability of peripheral components, and removes the need for multiple control circuits. Furthermore, these benefits have the combined effect of increasing customization and control of the controller sub-systems.
Chen and Liu do not disclose the identification circuit includes a first resistor, a first end of the first resistor being connected to a first contact point of the primary interface, and a second end of the first resistor being connected to a grounding contact point of the primary interface; or
the identification circuit includes a third resistor, a first end of the third resistor being connected to the first contact point of the primary interface, a second end of the third resistor being connected to a third contact point of the primary interface.
Yen discloses, the identification circuit includes a first resistor [Fig. 2 (R2)], a first end of the first resistor being connected to a first contact point of the primary interface and a second end of the first resistor being connected to a grounding contact point of the primary interface. [Fig. 2, paras. 25, 31] (Examiner Note: Yen discloses a pull-down resistor (R2) that is connected between the first contact point of the primary interface (CP1) and the ground, and thus discloses this limitation. As this limitation is only listed in the alternative, this limitation is satisfied.)
Yen is in the same field of invention as the application because both related to heating control circuits and thus qualifies as analogous art. [MPEP 2141.01(a)]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen in view of Liu with a pull-down resistor as taught in Yen in order to improve the accuracy of the logic circuit. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Yen could be combined with Chen with a reasonable expectation of success as they are both directed to the heating control circuits. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the pull-down resistor of Wang because it keeps logic low to ensure accuracy of the logic circuit. Accordingly, Claim 1 is rejected as obvious over Chen in view of Liu and further in view of Yen.
Regarding Claim 6, Chen and Liu in view of Yen discloses all of the limitations of Claim 1. Chen in view of Liu further discloses the identification circuit [Fig. 1 (14)] further includes a power supply contact point of the primary interface [Chen: Fig. 1, para. 21] (Examiner Note: Chen in view of Liu discloses an electrical control system, which necessarily must have a power supply module to power the control logic, and it must be connected to the controller and all the control devices to perform operations. Furthermore, the primary interface will necessarily have a power supply contact point to supply power through the identification circuit in order to send signals and perform logic operations to identify the control device associated with the control signal. Accordingly, Chen in view of Liu discloses this limitation.), and the controller is configured to determine a second heating flag bit after initialization [Chen: Para. 19; Liu: Para. 37-8] (Examiner Note: As discussed in claim 1 above, Chen in view of Liu discloses a controller that determines flag bits associated with the corresponding control device via an identification circuit (14).).
Chen and Liu do not disclose a second resistor, a first end of the second resistor being connected to the contact point, and a second end of the second resistor being connected to a power supply contact point of the primary interface
However, Yen further teaches a second resistor, a first end of the second resistor being connected to the contact point, and a second end of the second resistor being connected to a power supply contact point of the primary interface [Fig. 2 (R3), para. 31] (Examiner Note: Yen discloses a pull-up resistor (R3) that is disposed between a contact point of the power source and a contact point of the control module, and thus teaches this limitation.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen in view of Liu with the pullup resistor disclosed in Yen in order to ensure a high logic level. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Yen could be combined with Chen, because they are both related to heating control circuits. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the pull up resistor disclosed in Yen because it sets logic high, and prevent floating inputs. Accordingly, claim 6 is rejected as obvious over Chen in view of Liu, and further in view of Yen.
Regarding Claim 10, Chen and Liu in view of Yen discloses all of the limitations of Claim 1, and further discloses An integrated cooker control method, implemented by the controller of the integrated cooker according to claim 1, [Chen: paras. 52-56] (Examiner Note: As shown above, Chen in view of Liu and Yen discloses the controller of claim 1)
the integrated cooker control method comprising:
in response to detecting a heating control instruction, analyzing the heating control instruction and sending the heating control signal to the heating control device to control the working state of the heating device [Chen: Fig. 2 (S-5), paras. 52, 67, 83] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses a controller method wherein the controller executes the cooking command in response to a user selected cooking operation. The cooking commands are made up of a combination of heater, fan and light commands to execute the selected operation (e.g. change temperature, fan on, cake mode etc.) Chen further discloses that the controller sends control signals to the cooking executing module through the interface control circuit where the instructions are parsed into individual heating, fan and light commands that are sent to the respective control devices to execute with the peripheral component. Thus, when a heating instruction is initialized, the controller will analyze the instruction and send the heating control to the associated heating device. Accordingly, Chen discloses a method where upon detection of a heating instruction, the controller analyzes the instruction and sends it to control the heating device, and thus teaches this limitation.); and
in response to detecting a driving control instruction, analyzing the driving control instruction and sending the driving control signal to the functional driver device to control the working state of the functional device [Chen: Fig. 2 (S-5), paras. 52, 66, 83] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses a controller method wherein the controller executes the cooking command after user selection of a cooking operation. The cooking commands are made up of a combination of heater, fan and light commands to execute the selected operation (e.g. change temperature, fan on, cake mode etc.) Chen further discloses that the controller sends control signals to the cooking executing module through the interface control circuit where the instructions are parsed into individual heating, fan and light commands that are sent to the respective control devices to execute with the peripheral component. Thus, when a driving instruction is initialized, the controller will analyze the instruction and send the driving control to the associated driver device. Accordingly, Chen discloses a method where upon detection of a driving instruction, the controller analyzes the instruction and sends it to control the functional driving device, and thus teaches this limitation.).
Regarding Claim 13, Chen discloses [Fig. 1 (10)], the integrated cooker [Fig. 1] further including a cooker body [Fig. 1], a functional driver device [Fig. 1 (6)], a heating control device [Fig. 1 (7)], a heating device [Fig. 1 (7)], and a functional device [Fig. 1 (6)], with the controller, the functional driver device, the heating control device, and the heating device provided inside the cooker body [Fig. 1, paras. 48-56] (Examiner Note: As discussed in claim 1 above, Chen teaches this limitation.), the controller being configured to:
in response to detecting a heating control instruction, analyze the heating control instruction and send a heating control signal to the heating control device to control a working state of the heating device [Chen: Fig. 2 (S-5), paras. 52, 67, 83]; and
in response to detecting a driving control instruction, analyze the driving control instruction and send a driving control signal to the functional driver device to control a working state of the functional device [Chen: Fig. 2 (S-5), paras. 52, 66, 83];
wherein the integrated cooker further includes a communication circuit including: a primary interface connected to the controller, and configured to receive at least one of the heating control signal or the driving control signal [Fig. 1 (10-14), para. 21, 56-58];
a secondary interface connected to at least one of the heating control device or the functional driver device, and configured to send the at least one of the heating control signal or the driving control signal [Chen: Fig. 1 (14-4), para. 64-67]; and
an identification circuit [Fig. 1 (14)] configured to connect the primary interface to the secondary interface [Chen: Fig. 1(10-14, 14-4), para. 19, 66-7],
Chen does not disclose wherein: the identification circuit includes a first resistor, a first end of the first resistor being connected to a first contact point of the primary interface, and a second end of the first resistor being connected to a grounding contact point of the primary interface, and the controller is configured to determine a first heating flag bit after initialization; or
the identification circuit includes a third resistor, a first end of the third resistor being connected to the first contact point of the primary interface, a second end of the third resistor being connected to a third contact point of the primary interface, and the controller is configured to determine a driving flag bit after initialization.
However, Liu discloses, the controller is configured to determine a first heating flag bit after initialization [Fig. 2, paras. 37-38]; or the controller is configured to determine a driving flag bit after initialization. [Fig. 2, paras. 37-38] (Examiner Note: Liu discloses that, after initialization, the controller assigns flag bits at the parallel I/O port, where a flag bit will be assigned based on the identified control device. Accordingly, the controller of Liu is configured to determine both flag bits, and thus would meet both alternatives of the limitation.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen with a step for determining a flag bit corresponding to a control device as taught in Liu in order to improve functionality of the control system. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Liu and Chen could be combined with a reasonable expectation of success as they are both directed to the control systems of cookers. Furthermore, one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the disclosed method would determine a heating and driving flag bit when there is a heating control device and functional driver device connected to the controller. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate a method for determining flag bits because it allows for the interchangeability of peripheral components, and removes the need for multiple control circuits. Furthermore, these benefits have the combined effect of increasing customization and control of the controller sub-systems.
Chen and Liu do not disclose the identification circuit includes a first resistor, a first end of the first resistor being connected to a first contact point of the primary interface, and a second end of the first resistor being connected to a grounding contact point of the primary interface; or
the identification circuit includes a third resistor, a first end of the third resistor being connected to the first contact point of the primary interface, a second end of the third resistor being connected to a third contact point of the primary interface.
Yen discloses, the identification circuit includes a first resistor [Fig. 2 (R2)], a first end of the first resistor being connected to a first contact point of the primary interface and a second end of the first resistor being connected to a grounding contact point of the primary interface. [Fig. 2, paras. 25, 31] (Examiner Note: Yen discloses a pull-down resistor (R2) that is connected between the first contact point of the primary interface (CP1) and the ground, and thus discloses this limitation. As this limitation is only listed in the alternative, this limitation is satisfied.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen in view of Liu with a pull-down resistor as taught in Yen in order to improve the accuracy of the logic circuit. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Yen could be combined with Chen with a reasonable expectation of success as they are both directed to the heating control circuits. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the pull-down resistor of Wang because it keeps logic low to ensure accuracy of the logic circuit. Accordingly, Claim 13 is rejected as obvious over Chen in view of Liu and further in view of Yen.
Regarding Claim 14, Chen discloses An integrated cooker [Fig. 1, para. 7] comprising:
a cooker body [paras. 48-52];
a controller [Fig. 1 (10)];
a heating device [Fig. 1 (7), para. 52, 73];
a functional device [Fig. 1 (6), para. 52];
a functional driver device configured to receive a driving control signal from the controller to control a working state of the functional device [Fig. 1 (6), paras. 52, 66];
a heating control device configured to receive a heating control signal from the controller to control a working state of the heating device [Fig. 1 (7), paras. 52, 67, 73];
a communication circuit [Fig. 1 (14)] including:
a primary interface connected to the controller [Fig. 1 (10-14), para. 56], and configured to receive at least one of the heating control signal or the driving control signal [Para. 21, 58];
a secondary interface connected to at least one of the heating control device or the functional driver device [Chen: Fig. 1 (14-4), para. 64], and configured to send the at least one of the heating control signal or the driving control signal [Chen paras. 66, 67]; and
an identification circuit [Fig. 1 (14)] configured to connect the primary interface to the secondary interface [Chen: Fig. 1(10-14, 14-4), para. 19, 66-7]
wherein the controller, the functional driver device, the heating control device, and the heating device are all provided inside the cooker body. [Fig. 1, paras. 48-56]
Chen does not disclose wherein the identification circuit includes at least two of:
a first resistor, a first end of the first resistor being connected to a first contact point of the primary interface, and a second end of the first resistor being connected to a grounding contact point of the primary interface, and the controller is configured to determine a first heating flag bit after initialization;
a second resistor, a first end of the second resistor being connected to the first contact point of the primary interface, and a second end of the second resistor being connected to a power supply contact point of the primary interface, and the controller is configured to determine a second heating flag bit after initialization, the second heating flag bit being different from the first heating flag bit; and
a third resistor, a first end of the third resistor being connected to the first contact point of the primary interface, a second end of the third resistor being connected to a third contact point of the primary interface, and the controller is configured to determine a driving flag bit after initialization, and the driving flag bit being different from the first heating flag bit and the second heating flag bit
However, Liu teaches, the controller is configured to determine a first heating flag bit after initialization [Fig. 2, paras. 37-38]; or the controller is configured to determine a driving flag bit after initialization. [Fig. 2, paras. 37-38] (Examiner Note: Liu discloses that, after initialization, the controller assigns flag bits at the parallel I/O port, where a flag bit will be assigned based on the identified control device. Accordingly, the controller of Liu is configured to determine both flag bits, and thus would meet both alternatives of the limitation.)
Liu is in the same field of invention as the application because they are both related to controller systems for integrated cookers, and thus qualifies as analogous art. [MPEP 2141.01(a)]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen with a step for determining a flag bit corresponding to a control device as taught in Liu in order to improve functionality of the control system. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Liu and Chen could be combined with a reasonable expectation of success as they are both directed to the control systems of cookers. Furthermore, one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the disclosed method would determine a heating and driving flag bit when there is a heating control device and functional driver device connected to the controller. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate a method for determining flag bits because it allows for the interchangeability of peripheral components, and removes the need for multiple control circuits. Furthermore, these benefits have the combined effect of increasing customization and control of the controller sub-systems.
Chen and Liu do not disclose wherein the identification circuit includes at least two of:
a first resistor, a first end of the first resistor being connected to a first contact point of the primary interface, and a second end of the first resistor being connected to a grounding contact point of the primary interface;
a second resistor, a first end of the second resistor being connected to the first contact point of the primary interface, and a second end of the second resistor being connected to a power supply contact point of the primary interface; and
a third resistor, a first end of the third resistor being connected to the first contact point of the primary interface, a second end of the third resistor being connected to a third contact point of the primary interface,
However, Yen teaches wherein the identification circuit includes at least two of:
a first resistor [Fig. 2 (R2)], a first end of the first resistor being connected to a first contact point of the primary interface and a second end of the first resistor being connected to a grounding contact point of the primary interface. [Fig. 2, paras. 25, 31] (Examiner Note: Yen discloses a pull-down resistor (R2) that is connected between the first contact point of the primary interface (CP1) and the ground, and thus discloses this limitation. As this limitation is only listed in the alternative, this limitation is satisfied.); and
a second resistor [Fig. 2 (R3)], a first end of the second resistor being connected to the contact point, and a second end of the second resistor being connected to a power supply contact point of the primary interface [Fig. 2 (R3), para. 31] (Examiner Note: Yen discloses a pull-up resistor (R3) that is disposed between a contact point of the power source and a contact point of the control module, and thus teaches this limitation.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen in view of Liu with the pullup and pull-down resistors disclosed in Yen in order to improve functionality of the control circuit. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Yen could be combined with Chen, because they are both related to heating control circuits. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the pullup and pull-down resistors disclosed in Yen because they prevent floating inputs at both high and low logic, improving the accuracy and functionality of the logic circuit. Accordingly, Claim 14 is rejected as obvious over Chen in view of Liu, and further in view of Yen.
Claims 4-5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Liu, and Yen, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fan (CN-102820847).
Regarding Claim 4, Chen and Liu in view of Yen discloses all of the limitations of Claim 1.
Yen does not disclose wherein the identification circuit further includes: a triode, an emitter of the triode being connected to a second contact point of the primary interface;
an optocoupler, a first pin of the optocoupler being connected to a collector of the triode, and a second pin of the optocoupler being grounded; and a fourth resistor connected to a fourth pin of the optocoupler.
However, Fan discloses wherein the identification circuit further includes: a triode [Fig. 4 (Q6)], an emitter of the triode being connected to a second contact point of the primary interface [Fig. 4 (TX2)]; an optocoupler [Fig. 4 (IC3)], a first pin of the optocoupler being connected to a collector of the triode, and a second pin of the optocoupler being grounded; and a fourth resistor [Fig. 4 (R9)] connected to a fourth pin of the optocoupler. [Fig. 4, paras. 92, 97] (Examiner Note: Fan discloses wherein the contact point of the primary interface is a first contact point of the primary interface [Fig. 4 (RX2)]; and the identification circuit [Fig. 4] includes a triode [Fig. 4 (Q6)], an emitter of the triode being connected to a second contact point of the primary interface [Fig. 4 (TX2)]; an optocoupler [Fig. 4 (IC3)], a first pin of the optocoupler being connected to a collector of the triode, and a second pin of the optocoupler being grounded; and a resistor (Fig. 4 [R9]) connected to a fourth pin of the optocoupler. (para. 92))
Fan in the same field of invention as the application because they both relate to driving control circuits, and thus qualifies as analogous art. [MPEP 2141.01(a)]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen in view of Liu and Yen with the optocoupler circuit disclosed in Fan to provide galvanic isolation and improve signal transmission quality. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Chen and Fan could be combined with a reasonable expectation of success as they are both directed to the control systems of household appliances. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the optocoupler circuit disclosed in Fan because the circuit provides isolation from electromagnetic signal interference and improves the quality of signal transmission. [Para. 97] Accordingly, claim 4 is rejected as obvious over Chen, in view of Liu and Yen, and further in view of Fan.
Regarding claim 5, Chen in view of Liu and Yen discloses all the limitations of claim 1. (Examiner Note: Note the objection above.)
Neither Chen or Liu disclose wherein the identification circuit further includes: an optocoupler, a first pin of the optocoupler being connected to a third contact point of the primary interface, and a second pin and a third pin of the optocoupler being grounded; a triode, a collector of the triode being connected to a fourth pin of the optocoupler; and a resistor, a first end of the resistor being connected to a base electrode of the triode, and a second end of the resistor forming a signal transceiver of the secondary interface.
However, Yen teaches wherein the identification circuit further includes: an optocoupler [Fig. 4 (IC4)], a first pin of the optocoupler being connected to a third contact point of the primary interface [Fig. 4 (TX2)], and a second pin and a third pin of the optocoupler being grounded [Fig. 4 (Pins at R14, R8)]; a triode [Fig. 4 (Q5)], a collector of the triode being connected to a fourth pin of the optocoupler; and a resistor [Fig. 4 (R12)], a first end of the resistor being connected to a base electrode of the triode, and a second end of the resistor forming a signal transceiver of the secondary interface. [Fig. 4, paras. 91-93, 96] (Examiner Note: Fan discloses wherein the contact point of the primary interface is a first contact point of the primary interface [Fig. 4 (RX2)]; and the identification circuit [Fig. 4] includes: an optocoupler [Fig. 4 (IC4)], a first pin of the optocoupler being connected to a third contact point of the primary interface [Fig. 4 (TX2)], (Connected by way of IC3) and a second pin and a third pin of the optocoupler being grounded; a triode [Fig. 4 (Q5)], a collector of the triode being connected to a fourth pin of the optocoupler; and a resistor [Fig. 4 (R12)], a first end of the resistor being connected to a base electrode of the triode, and a second end of the resistor forming a signal transceiver of the secondary interface. [Fig. 4 (TX1), para. 96] Functional language in an apparatus claim is anticipated when the prior art structure inherently possesses the functionally defined limitations of the claimed apparatus [MPEP 2114-I]. Fan discloses a resistor (R12) connected to a base electrode of the triode (Q5) and connected to the transmit line of the controller (201), and thus teaches this limitation.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify Chen in view of Liu and Yen with the optocoupler circuit disclosed in Fan to provide galvanic isolation and improve signal transmission quality. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Chen and Fan could be combined with a reasonable expectation of success as they are both directed to the control systems of household appliances. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the optocoupler circuit disclosed in Fan because Fan discloses the circuit provides isolation from electromagnetic signal interference and improves the quality of signal transmission. [Para. 97] Accordingly, claim 5 is rejected as obvious over Chen in view of Liu and Yen, further in view of Fan.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Liu and Yen, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wu (US-20220151430).
Regarding Claim 7, Chen in view of Liu and Yen discloses all of the limitations of Claim 1 (Examiner Note: Note the objection above.), Chen further discloses the heating control device includes an input interface adapted to the secondary interface and an output interface adapted to the heating device. [Fig. 1 (14)] (Examiner Note: As an interface is understood as any physical connection between electrical components, Chen is understood to disclose this limitation as the interface control circuit provides an interface connection between the controller and heating/driving control modules. Furthermore, Liu discloses 4 parallel 8 bit I/O ports for parallel input/output of data in the external device. Parallel ports provide a standardized electrical interface connection with the heating control device and secondary interface, and thus, teaches this limitation.)
Chen in view of Liu and Yen does not disclose the heating control device includes a single-tube heating control device or a half-bridge heating control device;
However, Wu discloses “the heating control device includes a single-tube heating control device or a half-bridge heating control device”. [Paras. 31, 34] (Examiner Note: Wu discloses the heating control device can be a single-tube module or half-bridge driving scheme, and thus, discloses this limitation.)
Wu is analogous art to the claimed invention as they are both related to controller systems in household cooking appliances. [MPEP 2141.01(a)]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the teachings of Wu with Chen in view of Liu and Yen in order to control voltage in the control device. Single tube and half bridge circuits are well known in the controller arts as inverters and power supply switches, and one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize it could be combined with Chen with a reasonable expectation of success. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Wu because a half bridge or single-pipe module is required to provide effective switching of driving currents and power regulation. Furthermore, Wu discloses that single-pipe module is more economical for multi-heater systems. Therefore, claim 7 is rejected as obvious over Chen in view of Liu and Yen, and further in view of Wu.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Liu and Wang, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Widanagamage (WO-2008144805).
Regarding Claim 8, Chen in view of Liu and Yen discloses all of the limitations of Claim 1, Chen further discloses a power supply device connected to the controller, heating control device and functional driver. [Chen: para. 21] (Examiner Note: Chen discloses an electrical control system, which necessarily must have a power supply module to power the control logic, and it must be connected to the controller and all the control devices to perform operations.) and including a zero line contact point, and a live line contact point. [Chen: para. 21] (Examiner Note: Furthermore, Chen implicitly discloses a live and neutral line, as they are required for providing a path to and from the power source in order to power the device.)
Chen does not disclose the power supply device includes a ground line contact point.
However, Widanagamage teaches the power supply device includes a ground line contact point. [pg. 8 L 32-3] (Examiner Note: Widanagamage discloses a powerline with neutral (821, 824) live (822, 825) and earth (823, 826) lines, and thus teaches this limitation.)
Widanagamage is analogous art to the claimed invention as they are both related to powered kitchen appliances. [MPEP 2141.01(a)]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to combine the device disclosed in Chen with the ground line disclosed in Widanagamage to safely provide power to the electrical components. One having ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success to combine the teachings of Widanagamage with Chen because they are both related to control systems in household kitchen appliances, and 3-core power lines are well known to be used for supplying power in the art. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to use the 3-core power line disclosed in Widanagamage because the ground connection allows for safe transmission of electrical control signals without risking shorting of the circuit. Furthermore, 3 core power lines are well known in the cooking art, and a person having ordinary skill in the art would know a multi-core power line would be suitable for the device disclosed in Chen. Accordingly, claim 8 is rejected as obvious over Chen in view of Liu and Yen, and further in view of Widanagamage.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage, as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Hoshino (JP-2020177780).
Regarding Claim 9, Chen in view of Liu, Yen and Widanagamage discloses all of the limitations of Claim 8. Chen further discloses the heating control device is located among the functional driver device, and the controller. [Chen: Fig. 1 (6, 7, 10)] (Examiner Note: As Applicant’s Fig. 1 discloses 2 heating control devices in different relative arrangements with the functional driver device, and controller, located among will be understood to mean within a general vicinity of the claimed devices. Chen discloses the heating control device, the functional driver device and controller are in proximity of each other, and thus teaches this limitation. As discussed in claim 8, Chen inherently discloses a power supply device, but does not explicitly disclose its arrangement within the cooker body. (Chen: para. 21))
Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage do not disclose wherein the functional driver device and the power supply device are arranged inside the cooker body side-by-side,
the heating control device is located among the functional driver device, the power supply device, and the controller, and the functional device is detachably fixed at a bottom of the cooker body
the integrated cooker further comprising: a heat dissipator, provided between the heating control device and the functional driver device, and/or provided between the heating control device and the power supply device, and configured to dissipate heat from the heating control device and the functional driver device.
However, under MPEP 2144.VI-C, the rearrangement of parts is an obvious matter of design choice in the absence of new or unexpected results, and therefore the claimed limitation is obvious.
It would have been obvious to modify the controller system disclosed by Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage such that the power supply device is next to the functional driver inside the cooker body device because the rearrangement of parts is an obvious matter of design choice in the absence of new or unexpected results. [MPEP 2144.04-VI-C] Applicant has not disclosed that arranging the power supply device near the functional driver device claimed provides any unexpected advantage as other arrangements. A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the power supply device can be arranged in many different ways without affecting the power supply function. Furthermore, a person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize the benefit of that arranging the power supply close to the control modules in order to decrease the wiring harness and reduce the accumulation of noise between components. Accordingly, a person having ordinary skill in the art would expect the claimed power supply device arrangement to work equally as well as the arrangement disclosed in the prior art, and thus, this limitation is an obvious matter of design choice.
Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage, modified as per above, still does not disclose the heating control device is located among the functional driver device, the power supply device, and the controller, and the functional device is detachably fixed at a bottom of the cooker body.
However, under MPEP 2144.VI-C, the rearrangement of parts is an obvious matter of design choice in the absence of new or unexpected results, and therefore the claimed limitation is obvious.
It would have been obvious to modify the controller system disclosed by Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage such that the heating control device is located among the driver device, the power supply device, and the controller because the rearrangement of parts is an obvious matter of design choice in the absence of new or unexpected results. [MPEP 2144.04-VI-C] Applicant has not disclosed that arranging the heating control device amongst these modules provides any unexpected results. A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the heating control device can be arranged in many different ways amongst the control modules without affecting the heating control. A person having ordinary skill in the art would expect that placing the control modules closer to each other will make a smaller control system. Accordingly, a person having ordinary skill in the art would expect the claimed heating control device arrangement to work equally as well as the arrangement disclosed in the prior art, and thus, this limitation is an obvious matter of design choice.
Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage, modified as per above, still does not disclose the functional device is detachably fixed.
However, under MPEP 2144.V-C, the making a structure separable is an obvious matter of design choice in the absence of new or unexpected results, and therefore the claimed limitation is obvious.
It would have been obvious to modify the controller system disclosed by Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage such that the functional driver device is detachable because making separable is an obvious matter of design choice in the absence of new or unexpected results. [MPEP 2144.04-V-C] Applicant has not disclosed that arranging the heating control device amongst these modules provides any unexpected results. A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a detachable functional driver device will function equally as well as an integral functional driver device for provide driving control signals. A person having ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that detachable peripheral components are well known in the cooking control arts, and allows for the replacement of individual parts instead of a whole control system, simplifying operation and maintenance and reducing operational costs. Accordingly, a person having ordinary skill in the art would expect the detachable functional driver device to work equally as well as the integral functional driver device disclosed in the prior art, and thus, this limitation is an obvious matter of design choice.
Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage, modified as per above, still does not disclose the functional device is at a bottom of the cooker body.
However, under MPEP 2144.VI-C, the rearrangement of parts is an obvious matter of design choice in the absence of new or unexpected results, and therefore the claimed limitation is obvious.
It would have been obvious to modify the controller system disclosed by Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage such that the detachable functional driver device is arranged at the bottom of the cooker body because the rearrangement of parts is an obvious matter of design choice in the absence of new or unexpected results. [MPEP 2144.04-VI-C] Applicant has not disclosed that arranging the functional driver device at the bottom of the cooker body provides any unexpected results. A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the functional driver device device can be arranged in many different ways within the cooker body without affecting the driving control. A person having ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that arranging the functional driver device at the bottom of the cooker will work equally as well as a functional driver device arranged elsewhere in the cooker body. Accordingly, a person having ordinary skill in the art would expect the functional driver device arranged at the bottom of the cooker body to work equally as well as the functional driver device disclosed in the prior art, and thus, this limitation is an obvious matter of design choice.
Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage, as modified per above, still does not disclose the integrated cooker further comprising: a heat dissipator, provided between the heating control device and the functional driver device, and/or provided between the heating control device and the power supply device, and configured to dissipate heat from the heating control device and the functional driver device.
However, Hoshino teaches a heat dissipator [Fig. 8(82/82F)], provided between the heating control device and the functional driver device, and/or provided between the heating control device and the power supply device, and configured to dissipate heat from the heating control device and the functional driver device [Fig. 8, paras. 103, 107] (Examiner Note: Hoshino discloses a heat sink (82/82F) between a “power control switching elements 83 on the side of the invertor circuit 81R” and the IH coils (17R). This will be understood to disclose a heat sink provided between the heating control device and power supply device, and thus teaches this limitation. As it is a heat sink, it will necessarily dissipate heat from the surrounding systems and thus meets every limitation of the claim)
Hoshino is analogous art to the claimed invention as they are both related to controller systems in household appliances. [MPEP 2141.01(a)]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the application to modify the controller system disclosed by Chen in view of Widanagamage with a heat dissipating device provided between the heating control device and power supply device in order to provide heat dissipation to the control modules. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize Chen in view of Widanagamage can be combined with Hoshino with a reasonable expectation of success because they are all related to control systems for cookers. One having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the heat dissipating device taught in Hoshino with the device disclosed in Chen in view of Widanagamage because the heat dissipating device provides thermal regulation to prevent overheating and damage to the electrical components. Accordingly, claim 9 is rejected as obvious over Chen in view of Liu, Yen, and Widanagamage, and further in view of Hoshino.
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 John Michael Chambers whose telephone number is (571)272-2614. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am - 4 pm.
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.
/J.M.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/STEVEN W CRABB/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights