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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 09/07/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
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 an 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.
Regarding claim 1, claim includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
an operating device for setting an operating mode of the cooking appliance
a heating device for heating the cooking chamber
a control device for controlling at least the heating device
a monitoring device
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
In this case, the limitation “an operating device for setting an operating mode of the cooking appliance” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0010 “the operating device can be arranged physically on the device, but can also be detached therefrom in the form of a remote control or in the form of a portable device with suitable operating software”.
Additionally, the limitation “a heating device for heating the cooking chamber” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0010 “A heating device can be a radiant heating element such as a top heat or bottom heat heating element, but also a circulating air heater in which a fan distributes the radiant heat generated by an annular heating element in the cooking chamber, but can also comprise other types of heating such as microwave radiation or steam”.
Moreover, the limitation “a control device for controlling at least the heating device” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0010 “The control device can be a physical component of the cooking appliance, but can also be arranged in part in a portable device or on an external programme memory”.
Lastly, the limitation “a monitoring device” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0016 “The monitoring device can, for example, comprise a high-frequency sensor device”.
Regarding claim 5, claim limitation “image recording device” do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
In this case, the limitation “image recording device” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0017 “the case of cooking appliances which are already equipped with an image recording device, e.g., in the form of a camera”.
Regarding claim 9, claim includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a heating device for heating the cooking chamber
a control device for controlling at least the heating device
a monitoring device
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
In this case, the limitation “a heating device for heating the cooking chamber” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0010 “A heating device can be a radiant heating element such as a top heat or bottom heat heating element, but also a circulating air heater in which a fan distributes the radiant heat generated by an annular heating element in the cooking chamber, but can also comprise other types of heating such as microwave radiation or steam”.
Moreover, the limitation “a control device for controlling at least the heating device” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0010 “The control device can be a physical component of the cooking appliance, but can also be arranged in part in a portable device or on an external programme memory”.
Lastly, the limitation “a monitoring device” being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents as disclosed para 0016 “The monitoring device can, for example, comprise a high-frequency sensor device”.
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: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated over Tanaka (JP 2010127545 A and see PDF translation attached).
Regarding independent claim 1, Tanaka discloses, a method for operating a cooking appliance (see heating cooker 1in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2) having a cooking chamber (see heating chamber 2 in Fig. 2) for receiving a food to be cooked (see Fig. 1 and disclosed in the specification “food is placed in the heating chamber 2”), an operating device (see setting means 41 in Fig. 2) for setting an operating mode of the cooking appliance (disclosed in the specification “setting means 41, and the user can instruct the cooking device 1 with the cooking menu, cooking temperature, and method by operating the setting means 41”), a heating device (see a flat heater 33, a hot air heater 34 in Fig. 2) for heating the cooking chamber (disclosed in the specification “A flat heater 33 is provided on the upper surface of the heating chamber 2, a hot air heater 34 is provided on the rear surface […] these constitute a heating means”), and a control device (see control means 30 in Fig. 2) for controlling at least the heating device in such that a heating program is carried out after the operating mode has been set (disclosed in the specification “When it is determined that there is no food in the heating chamber 2, the upper exhaust hole 22 is closed by the exhaust opening / closing means 24, and based on the setting of the setting means 41, the control means 30 causes the hot air heater 34 and the flat heater 33 as heating means”), the method comprising:
determining a loading state of the cooking chamber by a monitoring device (see food detection means 31 in Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specification “The food detection means 31 is not limited to the open / close detection sensor, and may be a weight sensor that detects the weight of the food, an ultrasonic sensor that detects the position of the food, or an infrared light receiving sensor that detects the presence of the food”) after an operating mode of the cooking appliance has been set (disclosed in the specification “At the time of preheating, the door 4 in front of the heating chamber 2 is closed first, the cooking temperature and cooking time are set by the setting means 41, preheating is instructed to the heating cooker 1, and preheating is started”), the determining of the loading state comprising at least one distinction as to whether the food to be cooked is located in the cooking chamber (disclosed in the specification “When preheating is started, the presence or absence of food in the heating chamber 2 is first detected by the food detection means 31”); and
as a function of the determined loading state (determined presence or absence of food), selecting a heating program (selecting absence of food heating program or selecting presence of food heating programs as disclosed the specification “When it is determined that there is no food in the heating chamber 2, the upper exhaust hole 22 is closed by the exhaust opening / closing means 24, and based on the setting of the setting means 41, the control means 30 causes the hot air heater 34 and the flat heater 33 as heating means […] When food is present in the heating chamber 2, after confirming the presence of the food, check the setting conditions and menus instructed by the user by the setting means 41, and cook without applying steam (to make the surface crisp) Judge whether it is cooking, pottery, boiled food, normal warming) or steaming cooking (steamed food, food that wants to prevent drying, steam warming)”) from a plurality of stored heating programs (presence of food heating program and absence of food heating program) and carrying out the selected heating program (disclosed in the specification “When it is determined that there is no food in the heating chamber 2, the upper exhaust hole 22 is closed by the exhaust opening / closing means 24, and based on the setting of the setting means 41, the control means 30 causes the hot air heater 34 and the flat heater 33 as heating means”).
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka discloses, the method of claim 1, and wherein the plurality of heating programs comprises at least one heating program with low heating power (disclosed in the specification “When storage of food is detected by the food detection means 31, steam is generated by the steam generation means 51 while the oven is heated by the hot air heater 34, the hot air fan 35, the hot air motor 36, etc., and the steam is supplied into the heating chamber 2”) and one heating program with high heating power (disclosed in the specification “the steam generating means 51 is driven, and after a predetermined time has elapsed, the steam generating means 51 is stopped and grill cooking by the flat heater 33 is started […]Since the steam in the heating chamber 2 is discharged to the outside and is heated by the flat heater 33, the steam can be baked while drying the food surface without condensing the steam on the food surface, and the food surface is burnt ”).
Regarding claim 3, Tanaka discloses, the method of claim 2, and wherein the one heating program with high heating power (both heaters 33 and 34 are on) is carried out when a loading state is determined in which no food to be cooked is located in the cooking chamber (disclosed in the specification “When it is determined that there is no food in the heating chamber 2, the upper exhaust hole 22 is closed by the exhaust opening / closing means 24, and based on the setting of the setting means 41, the control means 30 causes the hot air heater 34 and the flat heater 33 as heating means”), and wherein the one heating program with low heating power (only heater 33 is on) is carried out when a loading state is determined in which the food to be cooked of a first class of food (cook without applying steam to make the surface crisp) to be cooked is located in the cooking chamber (disclosed in the specification “the steam generating means 51 is driven, and after a predetermined time has elapsed, the steam generating means 51 is stopped and grill cooking by the flat heater 33 is started […]Since the steam in the heating chamber 2 is discharged to the outside and is heated by the flat heater 33, the steam can be baked while drying the food surface without condensing the steam on the food surface, and the food surface is burnt ”).
Regarding claim 4, Tanaka discloses, the method of claim 3, and wherein a heating program with medium heating power (with steam generator and heater 34 are on) is carried out when a loading state is determined in which the food to be cooked of a second class of food (steamed food, food that wants to prevent drying, steam warming) to be cooked is located in the cooking chamber (disclosed in the specification “When storage of food is detected by the food detection means 31, steam is generated by the steam generation means 51 while the oven is heated by the hot air heater 34, the hot air fan 35, the hot air motor 36, etc., and the steam is supplied into the heating chamber 2”).
Regarding claim 6, Tanaka discloses, the method of claim 1, and wherein, as a function of an opening and subsequent closing of a cooking chamber door, the loading state of the cooking chamber is again determined and, if necessary, a change of the heating program occurs when the loading state is changed (disclosed in the specification “he food detection means 31 shown in the figure is an open / close detection sensor using a mechanical switch that detects the opening / closing of the door 4, and can detect the presence / absence of food in and out by detecting the opening / closing of the door 4”).
Regarding claim 7, Tanaka discloses, the method of claim 1, and wherein, at least when a loading state is determined in which no food to be cooked is located in the cooking chamber, the end of the selected and carried out heating program is displayed (disclosed in the specification “the food detection means 31 detects the presence or absence of food in the heating chamber 2, and if there is no food in the heating chamber 2, the user is warned that no food is stored and ends cooking […] The end of cooking is notified to the user by a display (not shown) provided on the door 4 or a buzzer sound on the control means 30”).
Regarding claim 8, Tanaka discloses, the method of claim 1, and wherein the determined loading state of the cooking chamber is used to check a plausibility of program steps of a cooking program controlling the cooking appliance (disclosed in the specification “the food detection means 31 detects the presence or absence of food in the heating chamber 2, and if there is no food in the heating chamber 2, the user is warned that no food is stored and ends cooking”).
Regarding claim 9, Tanaka discloses, a cooking appliance (1), comprising:
a cooking chamber (2) configured to receive a food to be cooked (see Fig. 1 and disclosed in the specification “food is placed in the heating chamber 2”);
a heating device (see a flat heater 33, a hot air heater 34 in Fig. 2) configured to heat the cooking chamber (disclosed in the specification “A flat heater 33 is provided on the upper surface of the heating chamber 2, a hot air heater 34 is provided on the rear surface […] these constitute a heating means”);
a control device (see control means 30 in Fig. 2) configured to control at least the heating device (disclosed in the specification “When it is determined that there is no food in the heating chamber 2, the upper exhaust hole 22 is closed by the exhaust opening / closing means 24, and based on the setting of the setting means 41, the control means 30 causes the hot air heater 34 and the flat heater 33 as heating means”); and
a monitoring device (see food detection means 31 in Fig. 2 and disclosed in the specification “The food detection means 31 is not limited to the open / close detection sensor, and may be a weight sensor that detects the weight of the food, an ultrasonic sensor that detects the position of the food, or an infrared light receiving sensor that detects the presence of the food”) configured to determine a loading state of the cooking chamber and to carry out theft method of claim 1 (see claim 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka in view of Ishii (US 5360965 A).
Regarding claim 5, Tanaka discloses, the method of claim 1.
However, Tanaka does not explicitly disclose, wherein the determination of the loading state comprises evaluation of at least one image of the cooking chamber recorded by an image recording device comprising the monitoring device.
Nonetheless, Ishii teaches, the microcomputer 67 calculates the area S of the food from image information from the CCD camera 62, wherein the microcomputer 67 functions as image processing means (see Col. 23 lines 37-40).
Since Tanaka discloses the determination of the loading state comprises detection of the presence or absence in the cooking chamber recorded by sensor comprising the monitoring device (disclosed in the specification “The food detection means 31 is not limited to the open / close detection sensor, and may be a weight sensor that detects the weight of the food, an ultrasonic sensor that detects the position of the food, or an infrared light receiving sensor that detects the presence of the food”), it would have been obvious to modify the determination of the loading state step of Tanaka wherein the determination of the loading state comprises evaluation of at least one image of the cooking chamber recorded by an image recording device comprising the monitoring device as taught/suggested by Ishii in order to obtain real-time visual feedback of food while cooking, without having to open the door and an automated kitchen appliance that make cooking more precise, convenient, and safer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VY T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6015. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday approx. 6:00 am-3:30 pm ET.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached on (571) 272-9059. 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.
/VY T NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights