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 § 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 3503236 A1 (hereinafter “DE’236”) in view of US 6,647,978 B1 (hereinafter “US’978”).
PNG
media_image1.png
754
1074
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 1, DE’236 discloses an extraction device for removing air comprising cooking vapors from an area above a cooking hob, the extraction device comprising:
a suction arm (6) including a suction head (7), which comprises a suction opening (a suction opening is not explicitly disclosed, nonetheless the purpose of said suction head 7 is to suction air or cooking vapors from the space surrounding said suction head 7, therefore a suction opening must be present for said suction head to operate, thus a suction opening is deemed inherent), and a suction base (8), which comprises an air duct configured to conduct the air, the air duct being arranged downstream of the suction opening,
a fan configured to suck in the air from the area above the cooking hob through the suction opening and the air duct (see the provided English translation, para. [0009]: “The flat hood 7 is articulatedly mounted on an extraction pipe 8 which stands perpendicular to the hob 5 and extends into the depth of the kitchen unit 1 and is coupled there to a suction fan.”),
a filter element configured to remove particles and/or droplets and/or odors from the air sucked in, which filter element is arranged or arrangeable upstream of the fan (see the provided English translation, para. [0009]: “The extractor hood 6 consists of a flat hood 7 extending over the hob 5, in which conventional filter elements are housed.”), and
wherein the suction arm (6) is centrally arranged or arrangeable in relation to the cooking hob (5) or is arranged or arrangeable midway between lateral edges of the cooking hob (5), such that both a center or centerline of the suction arm (6) and a centerline of the cooking hob (5) lie in one plane that is vertically oriented (see the figure), and a position of the suction head (7) and/or of the suction opening is changeable from a first position within boundary lines of and at least approximately at a height level of a cooktop of the cooking hob to a second, elevated position above the height level of the cooktop (see the provided English translation, para. [0010]: “The extraction pipe 8 is advantageously designed telescopically, so that the extractor fan 6 is height-adjustable in relation to the hob 1.”), and
wherein the suction base (8) of the suction arm (6) is pivotally connected or connectable to the cooking hob (5) such that the suction base (8) is pivotable about a vertical pivot axis (see the provided English translation, para. [0010]: “The articulated mounting of the flat hood 7 on the extraction pipe 8 makes it possible to rotate the flat hood 7 both in the horizontal plane around its axis and to pivot it relative to its stationary position.”; See also the rotation arrow(s) in the figure which indicate that suction base 8 is pivotable about a vertical pivot axis.).
DE’236 does not disclose an outlet opening configured to exhaust the air.
PNG
media_image2.png
718
1151
media_image2.png
Greyscale
US’978 teaches an extraction device comprising: an outlet opening configured to exhaust the air (see Col. 4, Lns. 40-44: “The outlet duct 78 preferably discharges the filtered air for recycling back into the kitchen. Alternatively, the outlet duct 78 can be connected to an exhaust duct (not shown) in the floor to carry the vented air for discharge outside the house.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify DE’236 to comprise an outlet opening configured to exhaust the air as taught and/or suggested by US’978, since such a modification would either recycle the filtered air back into the kitchen or would discharge the vented air outside the house.
Regarding Claim 3, DE’236 further discloses wherein the suction opening of the extraction device is arrangeable at different height positions, at or just above a level of a rim of a pot, which is positioned or positionable on a cooking zone of the cooking hob (see the provided English translation, para. [0010]: “The extraction pipe 8 is advantageously designed telescopically, so that the extractor fan 6 is height-adjustable in relation to the hob 1.”).
Regarding Claim 5, DE’236 further discloses wherein the suction head (7) is configured to be horizontally shifted, towards a position directly above one cooking zone (9) of the cooking hob (5). See also the provided English translation, para. [0010]: “The articulated mounting of the flat hood 7 on the extraction pipe 8 makes it possible to rotate the flat hood 7 both in the horizontal plane around its axis and to pivot it relative to its stationary position.”; See also the rotation arrow(s) in the figure which indicate that suction base 8 is both pivotable and extendable or retractable about a vertical pivot axis, and the suction head 7 is pivotable about its longitudinal axis which is perpendicular to the vertical axis of suction base 8.
Regarding Claim 6, DE’236 further discloses wherein the suction base is constructed in segments and/or is length adjustable (see the provided English translation, para. [0010]: “The extraction pipe 8 is advantageously designed telescopically, so that the extractor fan 6 is height-adjustable in relation to the hob 1.”). Furthermore, telescopic is defined as having or consisting of concentric tubular sections designed to slide into one another.
Regarding Claim 7, DE’236 discloses wherein the suction head is movable from a first position to a second position (see the provided English translation, para. [0010]: “The extraction pipe 8 is advantageously designed telescopically, so that the extractor fan 6 is height-adjustable in relation to the hob 1.”):
DE’236 does not disclose:
by means of an automated, electrically driven, adjustment device, or
by mechanical actuation, supported by spring force and/or including a release of a locking mechanism.
US’978 teaches wherein the suction head (18) is movable from a first position to a second position (see at least Figs. 6 & 7):
by means of an automated, electrically driven, adjustment device (see Col. 2, Lns. 7-12: “Separate actuators control the raising and lowering of the column and the extension and retraction of the vent hood relative to the column. The movement of the vent hood actuator is amplified by linkages so as to maximize the extension of the vent hood with minimal space requirements for the actuator.”), or
by mechanical actuation, supported by spring force and/or including a release of a locking mechanism (see again Col. 2, Lns. 7-12: “Separate actuators control the raising and lowering of the column and the extension and retraction of the vent hood relative to the column. The movement of the vent hood actuator is amplified by linkages so as to maximize the extension of the vent hood with minimal space requirements for the actuator.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify DE’236 wherein the suction head is movable from a first position to a second position by means of an automated, electrically driven, adjustment device, or by mechanical actuation, supported by spring force and/or including a release of a locking mechanism as taught and/or suggested by US’978, since such a modification would free a user from having to manually move said suction head thereby providing greater ease of use. See also In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 193, 194 (CCPA 1958) (Appellant argued that claims to a permanent mold casting apparatus for molding trunk pistons were allowable over the prior art because the claimed invention combined "old permanent-mold structures together with a timer and solenoid which automatically actuates the known pressure valve system to release the inner core after a predetermined time has elapsed." The court held that broadly providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art.).
Regarding Claim 8, DE’236 further discloses wherein a base or bottom of the suction base (8): rests on a central point or central area of the cooking hob (5; see also the figure) and is vertically extendable (see the provided English translation, para. [0010]: “The extraction pipe 8 is advantageously designed telescopically, so that the extractor fan 6 is height-adjustable in relation to the hob 1.”).
Regarding Claim 14, DE’236 further discloses a combination appliance (1) comprising:
the extraction device according to claim 1. and
the cooking hob (5), the cooking hob comprising a cooktop (see the figure) and at least two cooking zones (9),
wherein the suction arm (6) is centrally arranged in relation to the cooking hob (5) or is arranged between lateral edges of the cooking hob, such that both the center or centerline of the suction arm (6) and the centerline of the cooking hob (5) lie in the one plane that is vertically oriented, and the position of the suction head (7) and/or of the suction opening is changeable from the first position to the second, elevated position, and
wherein the suction base (8) of the suction arm is pivotally connected to the cooking hob (5) such that the suction base (8) is pivotable about a vertical pivot axis. See also the provided English translation, para. [0010]: “The articulated mounting of the flat hood 7 on the extraction pipe 8 makes it possible to rotate the flat hood 7 both in the horizontal plane around its axis and to pivot it relative to its stationary position.”; See also the rotation arrow(s) in the figure which indicate that suction base 8 is both pivotable and extendable or retractable about a vertical pivot axis, and the suction head 7 is pivotable about its longitudinal axis which is perpendicular to the vertical axis of suction base 8.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’236 in view of US’978 as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2,554,694 (hereinafter “US’694”) and/or US 6,604,520 B2 (hereinafter “US’520”).
Regarding Claim 2, DE’236 in view of US’978 does not disclose wherein the suction opening is arranged:
on a bottom side of the suction head, accomplishing a flat or a bowl-shaped or a cone-shaped aspiration direction, or
on at least one lateral surface of the suction head in order to facilitate suction in an at least approximately horizontal direction, and
wherein the suction opening is configured to suck in air from a cooking hob section on which a cooking zone is accommodated.
PNG
media_image3.png
892
1410
media_image3.png
Greyscale
US’694 teaches an extraction device wherein the suction opening is arranged:
on a bottom side of the suction head (23; see also Col. 3, Lns. 64-68: “The tube 21 is then fitted into the horizontal leg of the L with the opening in hood 23 facing downwardly, and is adjusted as nearly as possible so as to lie directly above the vessel being used.”), accomplishing a flat or a bowl-shaped or a cone-shaped aspiration direction (see Fig. 1), and
wherein the suction opening is configured to suck in air from a cooking hob section (see 5) on which a cooking zone (7) is accommodated.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 wherein the suction opening is arranged: on a bottom side of the suction head, accomplishing a flat or a bowl-shaped or a cone-shaped aspiration direction, and wherein the suction opening is configured to suck in air from a cooking hob section on which a cooking zone is accommodated as taught and/or suggested by US’694, since such a modification would provide a suction opening which faces the cooking hob thereby ensuring that cooking vapors generated therefrom are suctioned efficiently and have a substantially unobstructed path to said extraction device.
PNG
media_image4.png
698
1446
media_image4.png
Greyscale
US’520 teaches an extraction device wherein the suction opening (6) is arranged:
on at least one lateral surface of the suction head (see Figs. 1 & 3) in order to facilitate suction in an at least approximately horizontal direction (see also Col. 4, Lns. 14-16: “Intake orifices 6 for receiving the hot-food vapors to be drawn in are disposed on both sides of the intake device 3.”), and
wherein the suction opening is configured to suck in air from a cooking hob section (2) on which a cooking zone is accommodated (see Col. 3, Ln. 65 through Col. 4, Ln. 8: “Referring now to the figures of the drawings in detail and first, particularly to FIG. 1 thereof, there is shown part of a vapor extraction device that can be inserted into a recess of a cooktop next to or between open hot-food areas of a kitchen. Such open hot-food areas may be, for example, a recessed cooktop with one or more cooking points or a grill or fryer inserted into the cooktop. FIG. 1 illustrates the intake device of the invention in a position in which it is moved out into the working position. FIG. 2 illustrates a side view of FIG. 1, together with the cooktop 2 receiving the housing 1 of the configuration.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 wherein the suction opening is arranged: on at least one lateral surface of the suction head in order to facilitate suction in an at least approximately horizontal direction, and wherein the suction opening is configured to suck in air from a cooking hob section on which a cooking zone is accommodated as taught and/or suggested by US’520, since such a modification would provide a suction opening which faces laterally positioned cooking hob areas thereby ensuring that cooking vapors generated therefrom are suctioned efficiently and have a substantially unobstructed path to said extraction device.
Claims 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’236 in view of US’978 as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of US’520.
Regarding Claim 4, DE’236 in view of US’978 does not disclose wherein a top side of the suction arm is configured to be arranged at a height position at a level of a top surface of the cooktop, flush with the top surface of the cooktop, wherein in said height position:
i. the extraction device assumes an inactive state in which the suction arm forms a section of the cooktop surface, or
ii. the extraction device is operable as a downdraft extraction device with the suction opening facing upwards, wherein the suction head:
- comprises said suction opening on its top side, or
- comprises said suction opening on its bottom side and is invertible.
US’520 teaches an extraction device wherein a top side (4) of the suction arm (3) is configured to be arranged at a height position at a level of a top surface of the cooktop (2), flush with the top surface of the cooktop (see Figs. 3 & 4), wherein in said height position:
i. the extraction device assumes an inactive state in which the suction arm (3) forms a section of the cooktop surface (2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 wherein a top side of the suction arm is configured to be arranged at a height position at a level of a top surface of the cooktop, flush with the top surface of the cooktop, wherein in said height position: the extraction device assumes an inactive state in which the suction arm forms a section of the cooktop surface as taught and/or suggested by US’520, since such a modification would provide a means to substantially conceal said extraction device when in an inactive state thus providing an aesthetic appeal to some users; in addition, such a modification would provide an expanded cooktop surface by converting said top side of the suction arm into useable cooktop surface when the extraction device assumes an inactive state.
Regarding Claim 9, DE’236 in view of US’978 does not disclose wherein the suction arm includes a releasable filter element configured to filter out odors and/or pathogens and/or particles or droplets, which is arranged next to and/or accessible through the suction opening.
US’520 teaches an extraction device wherein the suction arm includes a releasable filter element configured to filter out odors and/or pathogens and/or particles or droplets, which is arranged next to and/or accessible through the suction opening (see Col. 4, Lns. 16-19: “Located behind the intake orifices 6, inside the intake device, is a non-illustrated filter material that can be taken out for cleaning purposes or exchanged after the upper limiting plate 4 has been lifted off.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 wherein the suction arm includes a releasable filter element configured to filter out odors and/or pathogens and/or particles or droplets, which is arranged next to and/or accessible through the suction opening as taught and/or suggested by US’520, since such a modification would provide a means to clean suctioned air prior to recycling said suctioned air back into the room housing said cooktop or prior to releasing said suctioned air into an external environment thereby preventing or, at a minimum, ameliorating the discharge of contaminated air from said extraction device.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’236 in view of US’978 as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2016/0054007 A1 (hereinafter “US’007”).
Regarding Claim 10, DE’236 in view of US’978 does not disclose at least one supplementary element selected from a group of supplementary elements consisting of the listed supplementary elements recited in Claim 10.
PNG
media_image5.png
471
1301
media_image5.png
Greyscale
US’007 teaches an extraction device wherein a suction arm (123) comprises the following supplementary element: lighting means (132) configured to illuminate at least a section of the cooktop (see paragraph [0026]: “In one embodiment, the functional element is a light source. The light source is, preferably, attached to the point of the support part oriented towards the work plate, such as towards the lower side of the arm or the screen or towards the front side of the post or the trunk, for example.” And paragraph [0111]: “Light sources 132 are attached to the lower side of the arm 124 in its rear area, as well as to the front side of the post 123, in its upper area. Good lighting of the work surface 110 can thus be achieved.”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 wherein the suction arm comprises the following supplementary element: lighting means configured to illuminate at least a section of the cooktop as taught and/or suggested by US’007, since such a modification “makes possible an effective lighting of the stove top, and thereby a lighting of the pots and pans and their contents as well. A simple and secure monitoring of the progress of the cooking is thereby made possible.” (See US’007, para. [0042]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’236 in view of US’978 and US’007 as applied to Claim 10 above, and further in view of US 10718526 B2 (hereinafter “US’526”).
Regarding Claim 11, DE’236 in view of US’978 and US’007 does not disclose wherein at least one of the supplementary elements is assignable to a specific cooking zone, or is configured to be assigned to at least two varying cooking zones.
US’526 teaches a cooktop burner illumination system that may be incorporated into an extraction device wherein at least one of the supplementary elements (80A-80D) is assignable to a specific cooking zone (74A-74D), or is configured to be assigned to at least two varying cooking zones (see at least the Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 and US’007 wherein at least one of the supplementary elements is assignable to a specific cooking zone, or is configured to be assigned to at least two varying cooking zones as taught and/or suggested by US’526, since such a modification would indicate which cooktop burner is controlled by a particular burner control that a user is interacting with prior to activation of the cooktop burner, e.g., to indicate to a user that a burner control that the user has touched or is otherwise proximate to controls a particular cooktop burner. Another illumination scheme may be used to indicate which cooktop burner is being adjusted when a user is adjusting a particular burner control, e.g., to indicate to a user that a burner control that the user is currently manipulating is changing the output of a particular cooktop burner. (see US’526, Abstract).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’236 in view of US’978 and US’007 as applied to Claim 10 above, and further in view of US 3653318 A (hereinafter “US’318”).
Regarding Claim 12, DE’236 in view of US’978 and US’007 does not disclose wherein the suction arm includes at least one electric connection cable configured for electric supply and/or for signal transfer, which is run in an interior of the suction base.
US’318 teaches an extraction device wherein the suction arm (28) includes at least one electric connection cable (42) configured for electric supply and/or for signal transfer, which is run in an interior of the suction base (22).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 and US’007 wherein the suction arm includes at least one electric connection cable configured for electric supply and/or for signal transfer, which is run in an interior of the suction base as taught and/or suggested by US’318, since such a modification would provide protection and concealment of said electric connection cable creating a more aesthetic and compact design when compared to running said electric connection cable outside of said suction base and would also obviate the need to provide separate protective tubing for said electric connection cable thus saving cost and added complexity.
Claims 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE’236 in view of US’978 as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of WO 2009104141 A1 (hereinafter “WO’141”).
Regarding Claim 13, DE’236 in view of US’978 does not disclose wherein the suction arm is removable from the cooking hob by a pluggable air duct connection.
PNG
media_image6.png
758
1133
media_image6.png
Greyscale
WO’141 teaches a coupling (1) for coupling a suction arm (12) to a central vacuum source placed behind a partition (3) wherein the suction arm (12) is removable from the partion (3) by a pluggable air duct connection (see Figs. 1 & 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 wherein the suction arm is removable from the cooking hob by a pluggable air duct connection as taught and/or suggested by WO’141, since such a modification would provide a means of easily coupling and decoupling said suction arm to said cooking hob thereby providing greater packaging flexibility when shipping said cooking hob and suction arm combination, further providing easier assembly or disassembly and furthermore providing the ability to easily decouple said suction arm from said cooking hob via a pluggable air duct which facilitates maintenance, repair or replacement of said suction arm.
Regarding Claim 15, DE’236 further discloses said suction base (8) including a first end connected to the suction head (7).
DE’236 in view of US’978 does not disclose a second end comprising a first connection piece configured for a removable connection of the suction arm to a second connection piece included in a stationary bottom unit of the extraction device, the second connection piece interacting with the first connection piece.
WO’141 teaches a coupling (1) for coupling a suction arm (12) comprising: a second end comprising a first connection piece (11) configured for a removable connection of the suction arm (12) to a second connection piece (see 2, 4) included in a stationary bottom unit (3) of the extraction device, the second connection piece (see 2, 4) interacting with the first connection piece (11).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify DE’236 in view of US’978 to comprise a second end comprising a first connection piece configured for a removable connection of the suction arm to a second connection piece included in a stationary bottom unit of the extraction device, the second connection piece interacting with the first connection piece as taught and/or suggested by WO’141, since such a modification would provide a means of easily coupling and decoupling said suction arm to said cooking hob thereby providing greater packaging flexibility when shipping said cooking hob and suction arm combination, further providing easier assembly or disassembly and furthermore providing the ability to easily decouple said suction arm from said cooking hob via a pluggable air duct which facilitates maintenance, repair or replacement of said suction arm.
Claims 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 6,322,754 B1 (hereinafter “US’754”) in view of JP S63267854 A (hereinafter “JP’854”); or, in the alternative, unpatentable over JP’854 in view of US’754.
PNG
media_image7.png
816
1790
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 17, US’754 discloses an extraction device for removing air from an area above a worktop (2, 2a), the extraction device comprising:
a suction arm (best seen in isolated form in Fig. 3) having an elongated suction base (see at least 31) and a suction head (11, 13) pivotally connected to a first end of the suction base about a first lateral pivot axis (38; see also Col. 5, Lns. 22-24: “The pivotability of the three-dimensional joint 36, restricted in all directions, is indicated by means of two double arrows 37, 38.”), the suction base defining therein an air duct in fluid communication with an inlet opening (8) in the suction head; the suction base extending forward along a centerline of said worktop (2, 2a) from a second end of the suction base adjacent to a rear of the worktop and being further pivotally connected at said second end to a stationary bottom unit (1) disposed beneath the worktop about a second lateral pivot axis (35; see also Col. 4, Ln. 66 through Col. 5, Ln. 4: “Further degrees of freedom are indicated by means of the double arrows 34, 35, namely the free pivotability around the vertical joint axis 23a and around the horizontal joint axis 24a of the joint 24, which can be formed between the rear telescope arm 31a and the upper joint part of the joint 23.”) parallel to the first lateral pivot axis (38); and
wherein said suction arm is adjustable between a resting position and an operative position wherein said suction opening of the suction head is located above and adjacent to one or more of working zones of the worktop (see Col. 4, Lns. 42-52: “The coupled-on protection arrangement 11 is, with the aid of the carrier arm 14, moveable back and forth in each of its height disposition and laterally and transversely to the working side 21 of the work table 1 and is preferably fixable in the respective position. For the purpose of setting the height there can serve a non-illustrated weight compensating device, or the vertical joints concerned may be fixable or so stiffly moveable that they can be overcome manually but remain in the respective position. Moveability is served by a base joint 23 having a vertical joint axis 23a and a joint 24 having a horizontal joint axis 24a.”); and
wherein a height of said suction opening in the suction head relative to said worktop is adjustable by adjusting a first pivot angle between the suction base and the cooktop relative to said second lateral pivot axis (see again Col. 4, Lns. 42-52: “The coupled-on protection arrangement 11 is, with the aid of the carrier arm 14, moveable back and forth in each of its height disposition and laterally and transversely to the working side 21 of the work table 1 and is preferably fixable in the respective position. For the purpose of setting the height there can serve a non-illustrated weight compensating device, or the vertical joints concerned may be fixable or so stiffly moveable that they can be overcome manually but remain in the respective position. Moveability is served by a base joint 23 having a vertical joint axis 23a and a joint 24 having a horizontal joint axis 24a.”), and
wherein the suction base of the suction arm is pivotally connected to the working hob such that the suction base is pivotable about a vertical pivot axis (see at least Col. 4, Lns. 50-52: “Moveability is served by a base joint 23 having a vertical joint axis 23a and a joint 24 having a horizontal joint axis 24a.”).
US’754 does not disclose a cooktop; a fan disposed in said bottom unit and configured to suck said air in through said inlet opening; wherein the duct in said suction base being is also in fluid communication with an outlet opening of said bottom unit, wherein air sucked in through said inlet opening will be conducted through said duct and out to an ambient environment through said outlet opening.
PNG
media_image8.png
499
1318
media_image8.png
Greyscale
JP’854 teaches an extraction device for removing air from an area above a cooktop, comprising: a cooktop (2); a fan (4) disposed in said bottom unit (1) and configured to suck said air in through said inlet opening (see at least 72); wherein the duct (5) in said suction base being is also in fluid communication with an outlet opening (15) of said bottom unit (1), wherein air sucked in through said inlet opening (72) will be conducted through said duct (5) and out to an ambient environment through said outlet opening (15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify US’754 to comprise a cooktop; a fan disposed in said bottom unit and configured to suck said air in through said inlet opening; wherein the duct in said suction base being is also in fluid communication with an outlet opening of said bottom unit, wherein air sucked in through said inlet opening will be conducted through said duct and out to an ambient environment through said outlet opening as taught and/or suggested by JP’854, since the suction arm disclosed by US’754 is usable in a different context, such as in the context of a cooking device or cooktop which incorporates a suction arm; furthermore, combining the teachings of US’754 and JP’854 would result in a cooktop incorporating a suction arm which has positional adjustability such that it can be adjusted in three dimensions (vertically, transversely and laterally) thus providing the ability to customize and optimize the location of the air suction arm inlet in relation to where cooking fumes are being generated or, alternatively, would provide a means to reposition said suction arm, as desired by a user, to a less obstructive position for a given task or operation being performed in relation to said cooktop.
In the alternative, JP’854 discloses a cooktop incorporating a statically positioned suction arm. US’754 teaches a suction arm which is adjustable in three-dimensions (vertically, transversely and laterally) via the claimed pivot axes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify JP’854 to comprise a suction arm having the claimed pivot axes and by extension the spatial adjustability stemming therefrom as taught and/or suggested by US’754, since such a modification would result in a cooktop incorporating a suction arm which has positional adjustability such that it can be adjusted in three dimensions thus providing the ability to customize and optimize the location of the air suction arm inlet in relation to where cooking fumes are being generated or, alternatively, would provide a means to reposition said suction arm, as desired by a user, to a less obstructive position for a given task or operation being performed in relation to said cooktop.
Regarding Claim 18, US’754 further discloses and/or teaches said elongated suction base (31) being telescopically extensible (see 33), wherein through concurrent adjustment of said first pivot angle (see 38), a length of said elongated suction base (see 33), and a second pivot angle (see 35) between the suction head (see 11, 13) and the suction base (31) relative to said first lateral pivot axis (38), said suction opening (8) can be freely adjusted within a vertical plane substantially intersecting said centerline in the area above said worktop or cooktop (as disclosed and/or taught by cooktop 2 of JP’854).
Regarding Claim 20, US’754 further discloses and/or teaches wherein through concurrent adjustment of a lateral pivot angle of said suction base together with said first pivot angle, the length of said suction base and said second pivot angle, said suction opening can be freely adjusted within a three dimensional space in the area above said cooktop (as disclosed and/or taught by cooktop 2 of JP’854), unconfined by any particular plane (see US’754, Col. 4, Ln. 60 through Col. 5, Ln. 24: “The carrier arm 31 is a telescopic arm consisting of at least two carrier arm parts 31a, 31b which is selectively manually telescopable and may be fixable in its respective telescope disposition preferably by means of a non-illustrated fixing device. This degree of freedom is indicated by the double arrow 33. Further degrees of freedom are indicated by means of the double arrows 34, 35, namely the free pivotability around the vertical joint axis 23a and around the horizontal joint axis 24a of the joint 24, which can be formed between the rear telescope arm 31a and the upper joint part of the joint 23. In the forward region of the carrier arm 31 is a particular joint in the form of a pivotable three-dimensional or ball joint 36 restricted in all directions, which joint makes possible a corresponding pivotability of the rearward protection arrangement part 11b which with the illustrated exemplary embodiment may be formed by means of a suction hood 13. The three-dimensional joint 36 may be arranged directly between the protection arrangement 11 and the carrier arm 31. With the present configuration there is arranged between the protection arrangement 11 and the carrier arm 31 the quick coupling 14a, whereby the three-dimensional joint 36 is arranged between the coupling part 14b associated with the carrier arm 31 and the forward carrier arm part 31b. Within the scope of the invention it is, however, also possible to arrange the three-dimensional joint 36 between the protection arrangement 11 and the quick coupling part 14c associated therewith, or between two other protection arrangement parts. The pivotability of the three-dimensional joint 36, restricted in all directions, is indicated by means of two double arrows 37, 38.”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on December 15, 2025 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the references are either in the same field of endeavor or are reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned. Please see form PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited) attached to, or included with, this Office Action.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE A PEREIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-3932 and whose fax number is (571) 270-4932. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 - 5:00 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven B. McAllister can be reached at (571) 272-6785. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JORGE A PEREIRO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799