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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm (US 20060260476 A1), hereinafter Helm, in view of Raghavan (US 20150030728 A1), hereinafter Raghavan.
Regarding claim 1, Helm discloses an oven comprising:
a housing providing a cooking volume surrounded by outer walls (“a cooking device with a cooking chamber 10” paragraph [0041]);
a water inlet communicating with a water valve to introduce cleaning water into the cooking volume (“A transport means 41 is provided, which conducts a fluid, i.e. the liquid present in the water reservoir 34 in particular, out of the air trap 33 into the cooking chamber 10 and, as mentioned, into the vicinity of the fan wheel 15 paragraph [0051] and “a cleaning agent can also be introduced into the transported liquid. There are several possibilities for this, which are not illustrated here in detail. Thus, liquid cleaning agents, for example, can be fed into the connection pipe 40 by means of pumps or valves, which are actuated accordingly by the device control system 34B” paragraph [0057] and “FIG. 3 shows an additional possibility. Here, as a supplement to the embodiment in FIG. 1, it is provided that a junction 45 is also arranged in the connection pipe 40. This junction 45 can be provided with a 3/2-way valve, for example. From the junction 45, a branch pipe 46 leads to the cooking device outlet 36. This means that, through a suitable control means at the junction 45, the water conveyed in the connection pipe 40 or the liquid there is either transported further into the cooking chamber 10 or is transported directly to the cooking device outlet 36 via the branch pipe 46” paragraph [0071]);
a drain for discharging cleaning water from the cooking volume (“the cleaning fluid runs together with the deposits removed from the cooking chamber 10 to the cooking device outlet 36 and on into the local waste water network” paragraph [0064]);
at least one fan for circulating air and water through the cooking volume (“The transport means 41 conveys the liquid through the connection pipe 40 into the cooking chamber 10 and, in the embodiment shown in FIG. 1, into the vicinity of the fan wheel 15 of the circulating air system 14” paragraph [0056]);
a steam generator for generating steam for introduction into the cooking volume (“a steam generation system in the cooking chamber” paragraph [0068]); and
a controller communicating with the water valve, the fan, and the steam generator (“The individual process steps can all be performed by an automatic system such as the controller 34B” paragraph [0081]) to provide a cleaning cycle including the steps of:
(a) opening the water valve to allow water to flow in through the water inlet while operating the fan to circulate water and a detergent material through the cooking volume (“The transport means 41 conveys the liquid through the connection pipe 40 into the cooking chamber 10 and, in the embodiment shown in FIG. 1, into the vicinity of the fan wheel 15 of the circulating air system 14. In this case, a cleaning agent can also be introduced into the transported liquid. There are several possibilities for this, which are not illustrated here in detail. Thus, liquid cleaning agents, for example, can be fed into the connection pipe 40 by means of pumps or valves, which are actuated accordingly by the device control system 34B. A further possibility lies in the use of cleaning tabs or other additional devices and containers such as are known, for example, from EP 1 209 419 A2 or EP 1 103 599 A1. The rotating fan wheel 15 now directs the liquid discharging from the connection pipe 40, in particular together with the cleaning fluid contained therein or simultaneously supplied thereto, into the cooking chamber 10. As a result of this, the inside wall and the installation parts in the cooking chamber 10 are cleaned by the action of the cleaner and the impinging liquid” paragraphs [0056]-[0058]);
(b) allowing a draining of detergent and water from the cooking volume (“the contents of the air trap 33 are rinsed out again by means of the vapor quenching means 51 and/or the transport means 41 to now remove the cleaner or dilute the contents of the air trap 33 accordingly. By supplying water, the cleaning fluid runs together with the deposits removed from the cooking chamber 10 to the cooking device outlet 36 and on into the local waste water network” paragraph [0064); and
(c) introducing additional rinse water through the water inlet into the cooking volume while operating the fan (“In the clear rinsing process, the procedure is substantially the same as the cleaning process, but a clear rinsing agent is supplied instead of the cleaning agent” paragraph [0066]);
(d) allowing a draining of additional rinse water from the cooking volume (“At the end of the clear rinsing step, the liquid in the air trap 33 is exchanged again to free the cooking chamber 10 as far as possible of any clear rinsing agent now contained therein” paragraph [0067]); and
(e) after all previous steps, introducing steam into the cooking volume to dissipate accumulated detergent foam (“At the end of all the cleaning processes, a vaporising step can also be provided in the automatic cleaning, for example, to also remove any remaining residues of clear rinsing agent or also detergent residues. This is very effective in particular in cooking devices with a steam generation system in the cooking chamber, since possibilities are readily provided there to feed water in liquid form into the cooking chamber and vaporise it” paragraph [0068]).
PNG
media_image1.png
486
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
486
494
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Helm does not explicitly disclose insulated outer walls and at least one door that may open and close to provide access to the cooking volume.
However, Raghavan teaches the cooking volume surrounded by insulated outer walls (“The outer surfaces of the boiler 22 and the cooking cavity 14 are covered with an insulating material 44 such as fiberglass to minimize heat loss from these elements out of the housing 12” paragraph [0038]) and at least one door that may open and close to provide access to the cooking volume (“The cooking cavity 14 may be accessed through a door 16 connected by a hinge at one vertical side of the cooking cavity 14. The door 16 may close over the cooking cavity 14 during the cooking operation” paragraph [0031]).
PNG
media_image3.png
462
512
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
478
544
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In view of Raghavan’s teachings, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the cooking volume surrounded by insulated outer walls as is taught in Raghavan, in the oven disclosed by Helm because Raghavan states that the insulation minimizes heat loss from the housing. Therefore, including insulation will improve efficiency in Helm by minimizing heat loss from the housing. Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include at least one door that may open and close to provide access to the cooking volume as is taught in Raghavan, in the oven disclosed by Helm because including a door will permit the loading of food into the oven and the sealing of the food within the oven during operation which will improve convenience and/or efficiency.
Regarding claim 5, Helm, as modified by Raghavan, discloses the oven of claim 1 further including a heater for heating the cleaning water and where in the controller operates to activate the heater during step (a) (“It is advantageous if heating elements provided in the cooking chamber are also directly used to heat the cleaning fluid. This can be achieved by a skilful arrangement and utilisation of the distribution means” paragraph [0021]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm, in view of Raghavan, and further in view of Durth (DE 19838864 A1), hereinafter Durth.
Regarding claim 2, Helm, as modified by Raghavan, discloses the oven of claim 1.
Helm, as modified by Raghavan, does not disclose wherein the controller further operates to include a step before step (a) of introducing steam into the cooking volume to soften accumulated grease.
However, Durth teaches wherein the controller further operates to include a step before step (a) of introducing steam into the cooking volume to soften accumulated grease (“A special embodiment of the invention is characterized in that a cleaning program is first selected and then started, the following cleaning steps being able to be carried out in succession: a) steaming, preferably with the fan switched on; b) Introducing a cleaner, preferably with the power onFan; c) action of the cleaner, preferably when the cleaner is switched offFan; d) rinse aid, especially with water, preferably with fan on” all citations from the machine translation appended to the foreign reference).
In view of Durth’s teachings, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include wherein the controller further operates to include a step before step (a) of introducing steam into the cooking volume to soften accumulated grease as is taught in Durth, in the oven disclosed by Helm because Durth teaches “The cleaning effect according to the invention is still thereby improves steam especially for loosening dirt.” Therefore, including the initial steaming step will loosen dirt to be washed in Helm.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm, in view of Raghavan, and further in view of Harlamert (US 8193470 B1), hereinafter Harlamert.
Regarding claim 4, Helm, as modified by Raghavan and Durth, discloses the oven of claim 1.
Helm, as modified by Raghavan does not disclose wherein the controller further operates to include a step of providing a rinse cycle after step (e) in which additional water is introduced through the water inlet into the cooking volume and circulated by the fan and then allowed to drain from the cooking volume.
However, Harlamert teaches wherein the controller further operates to include a step of providing a rinse cycle in which additional water is introduced through the water inlet into the cooking volume and circulated by the fan and then allowed to drain from the cooking volume (“In a representative self-cleaning cycle, there are multiple discrete phases in which varying combinations of water and the cleaning solution are held in or circulated throughout the interior cavity of the oven for various time periods, including, for example, a pre-rinse phase, a filling phase, a wash phase, a rinse phase, pump filling phase, a purging phase, a final rinse phase, and a flushing phase” column 2, line 17 and “water is discharged directly onto the convection fan 42 for distribution throughout the interior cavity 22 of the oven 10” column 3, line 62).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm, in view of Raghavan, and further in view of Allesina (DE 10357779 B4), hereinafter Allesina.
Regarding claim 6, Helm, as modified by Raghavan, discloses the oven of claim 1.
Helm, as modified by Raghavan, does not disclose a display and wherein the controller operates to instruct a user to introduce of detergent material into the cooking cavity before step (a).
However, Allesina teaches a display and wherein the controller operates to instruct a user to introduce of detergent material into the cooking cavity before step (a) (“The signals of the sensors 1, 2 or 7 can also on the control unit 13 to be displayed inform the user if refilling is useful or necessary” all citations from the machine translation appended to the foreign reference).
PNG
media_image5.png
536
736
media_image5.png
Greyscale
In view of Allesina’s teachings, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include a display and wherein the controller operates to instruct a user to introduce of detergent material into the cooking cavity before step (a) as is taught in Allesina, in the oven disclosed by Helm because Allesina states “The user already knows at the beginning of the cleaning process, whether sufficient liquid in the tanks 4 . 5 is available.” Therefore, including the teachings of Allesina will enable the user to know whether there is sufficient detergent in Helm.
Claims 7, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm, in view of Raghavan, and further in view of McKee (US 20190242587 A1), hereinafter McKee.
Regarding claims 7, 8, and 10, Helm, in view of Raghavan, discloses the oven of claim 1.
Helm, in view of Raghavan, does not disclose a set of dividers dividing the cooking volume into at least two cavities;
an exhaust conduit associated with each chamber having an exhaust conduit valve and leading between each chamber and air outside of the housing; and
a controller communicating with the heaters, fans, and exhaust conduit valves to operate during a cooking mode to independently control heating of each cavity and exhaust from each cavity according to separate cooking schedules and to operate during a cleaning mode to open the exhaust conduit valves and water inlet valve to allow circulation of cleaning water by the fan through the cavities and at least a portion of the exhaust conduits;
wherein the exhaust conduit valve is displaced from a respective chamber by a portion of the exhaust conduit;
wherein each exhaust conduit provides a separate channel from a respective chamber to outside air.
However, McKee teaches a set of dividers dividing the cooking volume into at least two cavities (“The cooking volume 16 may be subdivided into cooking cavities 20a, 20b, and 20c (for example) from top to bottom, by means of shelf assemblies 22” paragraph [0055]);
an exhaust conduit associated with each chamber having an exhaust conduit valve and leading between each chamber and air outside of the housing (“Either the inlet port 134 or the outlet port 136 (in this this case the outlet port 136) may pass through an electronically controlled valve 138 controlled by a controller 140 so that exchange of fresh air or exhausted steam from each cavity 20 may be separately controlled” paragraph [0083]); and
a controller communicating with the heaters, fans, and exhaust conduit valves to operate during a cooking mode to independently control heating of each cavity and exhaust from each cavity according to separate cooking schedules (“Referring now to FIG. 17, the controller 140 may provide for a microprocessor 150 communicating with a memory 152 holding a stored program executed by the microprocessor 150 for the control of the oven as discussed herein and generally to allow independent temperature and humidity control of each cavity 20 according to predefined schedules. In this regard, the controller 140 may receive input signals from user controls 30 (also shown in FIG. 1), the latter, for example, providing information designating whether steam or combi cooking will be used in each cavity 20, and may provide control signals to each of the valves 138 discussed above” paragraph [0088]) and to operate during a cleaning mode to open the exhaust conduit valves and water inlet valve to allow circulation of cleaning water through the cavities and at least a portion of the exhaust conduits (“The controller 140 also controls the pump 146 to affect the cleaning process described with respect to FIG. 15 by pumping water and cleaning solution through the manifold 141 to recycle back down to the drains into the sump 86” paragraph [0089]);
wherein the exhaust conduit valve is displaced from a respective chamber by a portion of the exhaust conduit (Figure 14);
wherein each exhaust conduit provides a separate channel from a respective chamber to outside air (Elements 136 provide separate channels that share an exit).
PNG
media_image6.png
406
428
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
414
468
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
412
466
media_image8.png
Greyscale
In view of McKee’s teachings, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the multi-cavity structure as is taught in McKee, in the oven disclosed by Helm because McKee states “The present invention relates to ovens for the preparation of food, and in particular, to a multi-zone oven providing independent control of the temperature and use of steam in each zone” (paragraph [0003]). Therefore, including the structure taught by McKee will enable cooking at different temperatures simultaneously thereby expanding usefulness of the oven of Helm.
Claim 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm, in view of Raghavan, in view of McKee, and further in view of Mizutani (JP 2009089993 A), hereinafter Mizutani.
Regarding claim 9, Helm, as modified by Raghavan and Mizutani, discloses the multi-cavity oven of claim 8.
Helm, as modified by Raghavan and McKee, does not disclose wherein the portion of the exhaust conduit exits downwardly from the cooking cavity.
However, Mizutani teaches wherein the portion of the exhaust conduit exits downwardly (“the exhaust duct is inclined downward toward the downstream. Therefore, oil droplets and water droplets adhering to the inner surface of the exhaust duct flow by inclination and are guided to the exhaust path, and can be discharged outside the kitchen room” all citations from the machine translation appended to the foreign reference).
In view of Mizutani’s teachings, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include wherein the portion of the exhaust conduit exits downwardly as is taught in Mizutani, in the multi-cavity oven as presently modified because Mizutani states that the downward direction of the exhaust conduit guides droplets to the discharge end of the exhaust. Therefore, including the downward direction will improve discharge of water and oil droplets in the multi-chamber oven as modified.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is allowable.
None of the prior art of record teaches or suggests an oven with all of the limitations of claim 11 particularly the limitations directed to the divider wall as set forth in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitations “wherein the exhaust conduits exit to outside air at openings separated from each other by a divider wall extending along a direction of airflow from the conduits from the openings and beyond the openings.” The closes prior art to claim 11 is Helm, Raghavan, and McKee. McKee teaches conduits which are joined at a terminal point to condense moisture. Further modifying McKee to possess a divider at this point would be contrary to those teachings. Therefore, it would not be obvious to modify Helm, Raghavan, and McKee to have the features of claim 11. Therefore, these limitations, when combined with every other limitation of the claim, distinguishes the claim from the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Nameless2 (DE 10054642 A1) “After the soaking stage, the detergent acts through a pre-set nes time interval without the fan wheel being operated. In the The subsequent stage of washing off water is through the first nozzle or the nozzle wing and the second nozzle fed to the cooking space to the Wash off detergents and residual dirt. Finally the Cooking space warmed up with hot steam during or after washing after opening a vapor flap to the cooking space, let it dry”
PNG
media_image9.png
398
498
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Henry (US 20120111849 A1) “Cleaning by means of the steam supply unit 46 preferably takes place in that before spraying with the fluid, steam is introduced through the arm unit 28 into the cooking chamber 10', thereby softening the food residues and making them easy to detach” paragraph [0027]
Klose (DE 102015103671 A1) “it can be determined to display the information of the filling program, with how many portions of detergent or solid detergent, the reservoir can be filled, preferably a warning is given if only 1 or no portion of detergent or solid detergent determined in the reservoir becomes”
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 LOGAN P JONES whose telephone number is (303)297-4309. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:00 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, Michael Hoang can be reached at (571) 272-6460. 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.
/LOGAN P JONES/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762