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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Welch (US 4119833).
Welch discloses in reference to claim:
1. A heating device (A) for heating water, comprising - a container (B) having an inlet channel (F) and an outlet channel (G); wherein at least one plate (J) is mounted movably in order to change the a distance (K) between the plates (H J) and thereby the a volume provided between the plates (H J) two spaced-apart plates (H J) which configured to act as electrodes and each comprise an electrical connection (L M) for connection to an electrical voltage source (using conductors 60, 84) for generating a current flow through the water located between the plates (H J).
PNG
media_image1.png
912
908
media_image1.png
Greyscale
2. The heating device (9) according to claim 1, further comprising a drive means (N) for moving the movable plate (J), and a control device (94) for controlling and/or activating and deactivating the drive means (N).
5. The heating device (9) according to claim 2, wherein the drive means (N comprises a controllable motor/actuator (92) with a lever mechanism (94) for connecting the motor/actuator (92) to the movable plate (J).
Manually operable cam means N, best seen in FIGS. 2 and 4, permit the second electrode J to be moved relative to the first electrode H to vary the width of the passage K therebetween through which water flows. By rotating the handle 94 the cam 96 is rotated in the space 58, and the second electrode J is moved relative to the first electrode H to vary the spacing between the tapered surfaces 10 and 12, and the width of the water passage K. By varying the width of the passage K the resistance to flow of electricity between the first and second electrodes H and J may be varied, as well as the rate at which water flows through the passage K, with these two factors cooperating to determine the temperature at which water discharges through the outlet G.
9. A water-conducting device such as a washing machine (80), dishwasher or hot beverage maker (1), comprising a flow conducting system and a heating device (A) arranged therein according to claim 1.
Note Welch discloses a water heater which can be considered a hot beverage maker.
10. The water-conducting device according to claim 9, wherein the device is a washing machine, dishwasher or hot beverage maker.
Note Welch discloses a water heater which can be considered a hot beverage maker.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Russell (US 4029937)
Russell discloses in reference to claim:
1. A heating device (10) for heating water, comprising - a container (226) having an inlet channel (12) and an outlet channel (14); wherein at least one plate (17) is mounted movably in order to change the a distance 16 between the plates (17, 18) and thereby the a volume provided between the plates (17, 18) two spaced-apart plates (17, 18) which configured to act as electrodes and each comprise an electrical connection (301, 229) for connection to an electrical voltage source (using conductors 299, 274) for generating a current flow through the water located between the plates (17, 18).
PNG
media_image2.png
670
941
media_image2.png
Greyscale
2. The heating device according to claim 1, further comprising a drive means (233) for moving the movable plate (17), and a control device (31) for controlling and/or activating and deactivating the drive means (242).
5. The heating device according to claim 2, wherein the drive means 233 comprises a controllable motor/actuator (242) with a lever mechanism (241) for connecting the motor/actuator (242) to the movable plate (17).
3. The heating device according to claim 2, further comprising a detector (71) for detecting the conductance (inverse real dissipative impedance) of the water located between the plates (17, 18).
The amount of current flow is a function of the voltage, distance and resistance of the liquid between the electrodes. Under proper conditions, sufficient current flow is established through the liquid which in conjunction with the resistive or real dissipative impedance thereof produces sufficient energy or wattage loss in the liquid. This energy or wattage loss appears in the form of heat or temperature rise in the water. The construction and operation of current sensing and limiting circuit 51 may be provided in the following manner. In this embodiment, a current sensing resistor 71 is connected as illustrated in series with electrodes 17 and 18 through terminals 40 and 45. When triac 43 is switched "on", the instantaneous current flow through the resistive liquid is registered by a voltage drop across sensing resistor 71, proportional to the magnitude of alternating current flowing to and from the electrodes. This sensed alternating current signal is passed through a transformer 72 and thereupon rectified by a full wave diode rectifying bridge network 73 to develop a dc voltage which is proportional to the peak current flow through the liquid.
9. A water-conducting device such as a washing machine (80), dishwasher or hot beverage maker (1), comprising a flow conducting system and a heating device (9) arranged therein according to claim 1.
Note Russell discloses a water heater which can be considered a hot beverage maker.
10. The water-conducting device according to claim 9, wherein the device is a washing machine, dishwasher or hot beverage maker. Note Russell discloses a water heater which can be considered a hot beverage maker.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness which are consistent with the proper “functional approach” to the determination of obviousness as laid down in Graham. The key to supporting any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is the clear articulation of the reason(s) why the claimed invention would have been obvious. The Supreme Court in KSR noted that the analysis supporting a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should be made explicit.
EXEMPLARY RATIONALES
Exemplary rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include:
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way;
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
(E) “Obvious to try” – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success;
(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art;
(G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over either Welch or Russell.
Welch or Russel discloses the claimed invention except the specific limitations relating to volume of the container and the size of the plates and the spacing therebetween. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide a volume in the range 200 ml to 2000 ml, and a plate size having a value in the range of 10 cm2 to 500 cm2, and the spacing of the plates variable in the range of 5 cm to 0.5 cm, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in size of one or more components. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Further note that the claimed sizes are generally reasonable for use in the typical environment that Welch and Russell would be used such as a water heater for household use.
Russel discloses the claimed invention except in reference to claim:
4. The heating device according to claim 3, wherein the control device is configured to set the distance of the plates from one another as a function of the detected conductance.
Russell discloses a control device 31 for setting the distance between electrode plates to compensate for the detected conductance, but fails to teach being configured to [automatically] set the distance as a function of the detected conductance. However given the consistent focus on automation of controls in consumer appliances, it would have been obvious to the artisan having the knowledge, creativity and common sense normally brought to bear when considering combinations and modifications to provide a means to automatically adjust the electrode spacing based on the sensed conductance with known means.
6. The heating device according to claim 4, wherein the drive means comprises a controllable motor with a spindle coupled thereto for connecting or coupling the motor to the movable plate.
Russell discloses the use of a drive means for setting the electrode distance including a spindle 241 coupled to a shaft for connecting or coupling the manual control 31 to the movable plate 17. As the use of controlled motor/shaft/spindle devices are well known and common in the art for providing automated control of devices using rotating shafts like 241/242/31, one of skill in the art would have found it obvious to provide such an automated control including a controllable motor with a spindle coupled thereto for connecting or coupling the motor to the movable plate.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOR S CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4776. The examiner can normally be reached M,W-F 6:30-10:30, 12-4.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 5712705569. 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.
/THOR S CAMPBELL/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3761
tsc