DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 01/07/2021. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the English translation of JP2021-001560 application.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application 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:
temperature detection unit in claim 1, interpreted as sensor as described in paragraph [55 ] of the original disclosure, and equivalents thereof
a heat generating portion in claim 6, interpreted as heater as described in paragraph [7] of the original disclosure, and equivalents thereof
heating cooking chamber in claim 7, interpreted as chamber as described in Fig. 2 the original disclosure, and equivalents thereof
control unit in claim 7, interpreted as processor as described in paragraph [ 27] of the original disclosure, and equivalents thereof
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.
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 (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 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.
(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, 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Mineoka et al., US 20160360577 (hereafter Mineoka).
Regarding claim 1,
A heating cooking apparatus comprising: (abstract)
a housing including an opening (see annotated figure below); a cover portion (1002) including a suction hole portion (1027) and a blow-out hole portion (1028, 1029), the cover portion covering the opening; (Fig. 24)
PNG
media_image1.png
688
778
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Partial Fig. 24 in Mineoka
a fan (1019) disposed in the housing and configured to generate a flow of air from the suction hole portion to the blow-out hole portion; (Fig. 24)
a first heater disposed in the housing; (1021 in Fig. 24)
a temperature detection unit disposed in the housing and configured to detect a temperature; (Paragraph [435] teaches temperature sensor 1070.)
and a wall portion (1018b-2) disposed on an upstream side of the temperature detection unit in a direction of the flow of the air. (Fig. 30)
PNG
media_image2.png
532
856
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. 30 in Mineoka
Regarding claim 2,
The heating cooking apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the wall portion includes a first wall disposed on an upstream side of the temperature detection unit in the direction of the flow of the air, (1018b-2 in Fig. 30)
and a second wall disposed between the first heater and the temperature detection unit. (1097a in Fig. 30)
Regarding claim 7,
The heating cooking apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising: a heating cooking chamber configured to accommodate an object to be heated; (chamber 1002 in Fig. 22 in Mineoka)
and a control unit configured to control the fan and the first heater(Fig. 26) based on a detection result of the temperature detection unit, (Paragraph [255] teaches “During the grill cooking, the upper heater 20 and the middle heater 21 are turned ON and OFF based on temperatures detected by the upper inside temperature sensor 370A so that the temperature of the lower space 373B is kept from going over 100° C.”)
wherein the fan suctions the air from an inside of the heating cooking chamber to an inside of the housing through the suction hole portion and blows the air from the inside of the housing to the inside of the heating cooking chamber through the blow-out hole portion. (Fig. 24 in Mineoka)
Regarding claim 8,
The heating cooking apparatus according to claim 7, further comprising a second heater disposed in the heating cooking chamber, wherein the control unit controls the second heater based on the detection result of the temperature detection unit. (Paragraph [255] in Mineoka teaches “During the grill cooking, the upper heater 20 and the middle heater 21 are turned ON and OFF based on temperatures detected by the upper inside temperature sensor 370A so that the temperature of the lower space 373B is kept from going over 100° C.”)
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.
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(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mineoka as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Han et al., US 20220039595 (hereafter Han).
The heating cooking apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the housing includes a base portion facing the cover portion, (1018b in Fig. 30)
PNG
media_image3.png
591
912
media_image3.png
Greyscale
and the first wall includes a main body wall extending from the base portion… (1018b-2 extending from base 1018b in Fig. 30)
and an inclined wall disposed at an end most portion of the main body wall (Fig. 30)
Primary combination of references is silent about a main body wall extending from the base portion toward the cover portion, … the inclined wall inclined toward the cover portion in the direction of the flow of the air.
Han teaches a main body wall extending from the base portion toward the cover portion, ( Han teaches temperature sensor 2 covered by shielding covers 41 and 42 in Fig. 7. Fig. 1 teaches that the shielding cover extends from base towards the cover portion.)
PNG
media_image4.png
563
552
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 in Han
… the inclined wall inclined toward the cover portion in the direction of the flow of the air. (Paragraph [33] teaches “The temperature measuring device 2 is located in the space enclosed by the first shielding piece 41 and second shielding piece 42. The included angle between the first shielding piece 41 and second shielding piece 42 is an acute angle.”)
PNG
media_image5.png
464
544
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 7 in Han
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to design the first wall and inclined angle towards the cover portion as taught in Han in the apparatus in Mineoka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “The included angle between the angle bisector of the included angle between the first shielding piece 41 and second shielding piece 42 and the wind direction of the wind blown by the fan 3 is greater than or equal to 0 degrees and less than or equal to 20 degrees to reduce the resistance of the shielding cover 4 to the wind blown by the fan 3” as taught in paragraph [34] in Han.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mineoka as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hirama et al., US 5378875 (hereafter Hirama).
The heating cooking apparatus according to claim 1, wherein a material of the wall portion is a metal, (Paragraph [442] in Mineoka teaches “A metallic heat shielding plate 1097”)
and the temperature detection unit is a thermistor. (Primary combination of references is silent about this.
Hirama teaches a thermistor as temperature sensor in abstract.)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to add a thermistor as temperature sensor as taught in Hirama in the apparatus in Mineoka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “The thermistor 51 composing the temperature sensor 50 varies in electric resistance by the heat transferred to the metal wall 15. This heat is the heat transferred from one or both of the heated object and wave absorber 12” as taught in column 11, lines 53-56 in Hirama.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mineoka as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Han et al., US 20220039595 (hereafter Han).
Regarding claim 5,
The heating cooking apparatus according to claim 1,wherein the suction hole portion is disposed in a center portion of the cover portion, and the blow-out hole portion is disposed along an outer periphery of the suction hole portion, (Fig. 24 in Mineoka)
the fan is a centrifugal fan (Paragraph [455] teaches “the circulation fan 1019 is a centrifugal fan”) facing the suction hole portion, (Fig. 24 in Mineoka)
and the temperature detection unit and the wall portion are disposed on an outer periphery of the centrifugal fan. (Mineoka is silent about this.
Han teaches that sensor 2 and wall 4 are disposed at an outer periphery of centrifugal fan 3 in Fig. 6.)
PNG
media_image6.png
435
522
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. 6 in Han
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to position the temperature sensor and wall on an outer periphery of fan as taught in Han in the apparatus in Mineoka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “The fan 3 is a centrifugal fan, where the blades of the centrifugal fan are at an acute angle to the radial direction, so that the wind from the centrifugal fan and the radial direction of the centrifugal fan are at an acute angle; the included angle between the angle bisector of the included angle between the first shielding piece 41 and second shielding piece 42 and the radial direction of the centrifugal fan is greater than or equal to 10 degrees to less than or equal to 80 degrees, to thereby reduce the resistance of the shielding cover 4 to the wind blown by the fan 3” as taught in paragraph [35] in Han.
Regarding claim 6,
The heating cooking apparatus according to claim 5, further comprising… wherein the first heater includes a heat generating portion disposed in the housing and configured to generate heat when a current flows through the heat generating portion, (Mineoka teaches heater 1021 in Fig. 24.)
..an energization unit disposed outside the housing and connected to an external power source, (Primary combination of references is silent about this.
Han teaches heater wiring going out of the fan housing. It is implied that they are connected to an external power source through further wiring and circuit.)
…and a coupling portion coupling the heat generating portion and the energization unit, (Fig. 7 in Han teaches coupling portion.)
PNG
media_image5.png
464
544
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. 7 in Han
the heat generating portion is disposed along the outer periphery of the centrifugal fan, (Han teaches heater 1 disposed along the outer periphery of fan 3 in Fig. 6.)
and the coupling portion is closer to the temperature detection unit than the heat generating portion is. ( Paragraph [32] in Han teaches “Where the light-wave tube is in a superior arc, the two ends of the superior arc are two wire-outgoing ends of the light-wave tube, with the temperature measuring device 2 set between the two wire-outgoing ends, to reduce radiation and heating of the temperature measuring device 2 by the light of the light-wave tube.”)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to position heater and coupling portion as taught in Han in the apparatus in Mineoka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “Where the light-wave tube is in a superior arc, the two ends of the superior arc are two wire-outgoing ends of the light-wave tube, with the temperature measuring device 2 set between the two wire-outgoing ends, to reduce radiation and heating of the temperature measuring device 2 by the light of the light-wave tube” as taught in paragraph [32] in Han.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAHMIDA FERDOUSI whose telephone number is (303)297-4341. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 9:00AM-3:00PM; PST.
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.
/FAHMIDA FERDOUSI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights