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 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: a control unit in claim 1 wherein control is a functional language with the recited term unit being a generic placeholder for means; and a temperature detection unit wherein temperature detection is a functional language with the term unit being a generic placeholder for means.
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.
A control unit is interpreted as a processor sch as a CPU as disclosed in the specification or its equivalents thereof.
A temperature detection unit is interpreted as a thermistor as disclosed in the specification or its 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites for a “second” predetermined period, but there is no proper context for the second predetermined period in absence of a first predetermined period.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al (US 2010/0198410) in view of Boedicker et al (US 2016/0324360) and Kim et al (US 2015/0292749).
Choi discloses the cooking apparatus claimed including a heating cooking chamber (11), a first heater (210; also see Figures 6 and 7) and a first fan (220) to blow first heated air by the first heater, a second heater (310) and a second fan (320) to blow second heated air by the second heater, a control unit (400; also, see Figure 11) configured to control the first heater, the first fan, the second heater, and the second fan wherein the control unit stops energization of the first heater (step S12 in Figure 12) and energizes the second heater (step S15) before completion of a preheating process (step S17 when the preheating is completed; para 0110).
But, Choi does not explicitly disclose for a notification of completion of the preheating process wherein the preheating process indicates a process wherein a temperature in the cooking chamber exceeds a threshold temperature at least once as claimed.
Boedicker discloses it is known to provide a cooking apparatus with an audible or a visual signal indicator including an buzzer or an LED light that indicates for a completion of a preheating of the cooking apparatus (para 0042).
Kim discloses it is known for a preheating process during which a heating temperature exceeds at least once and indicates for the completion of the preheating process (also, see para 0108 and Figure 7A).
In view of Boedicker, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Choi with an indicator that notifies a completion of a preheating process which enables a user to starting a cooking process which would include accommodating or inserting a food item into the cooking chamber wherein, in view of Kim, the preheating process would include a process in which a temperature of the cooking chamber would exceed a threshold temperature (i.e., a desired target preheating temperature) at least once to predictably ensure that the desired preheating temperature has indeed been reached and allows a user to begin a cooking operation as desired.
With respect to claim 2, Choi discloses the control unit that stops energization of the first heater and the first fan (step S14 in Figure 12) when a first predetermined period is elapsed (shown by the elapsed time in step S16) from the time of energization of the second heater (step S15), the first predetermined period would indicate a period when the temperature of the first heater is decreased or lowered as the first heater is stopped or deactivated which would no longer generating heat.
With respect to claim 3, Choi discloses for the control unit that stops energization of the first heater (see step 14 in Figure 12) wherein a completion of the preheating process (step 17; para 0110) is made after a second predetermined period is elapsed (in step S16), but Choi does not show the second predetermined period during which the temperature of the cooking chamber is decreased substantially to the threshold temperature. But, Kim discloses for the preheating temperature that is decreased to a temperature substantially identical to the threshold temperature (i.e., target temperature) once after the preheating temperature has exceeded the threshold target temperature (also, see Figure 7A), and it would have been obvious to adapt Choi with the second period that indicates for the temperature that is decreased substantially identical to the target threshold temperature to ensure that the desired preheating target temperature is achieved once after it has exceeded the target/threshold temperature.
With respect to claim 4, Choi as modified by Boedicker and Kim discloses the control unit that drives the second fan (320) during a cooking operation (para 0094 of Choi) wherein such cooking operation would be after a notification of the completion of the preheating process.
With respect to claim 5, Choi discloses the first heater (210) positioned at an upper portion of the cooking chamber with the second heater (310) positioned at a predetermined side of the cooking chamber wherein the upper portion is different from the predetermined side as shown in Figure 6.
With respect to claim 6, Choi further shows a predetermined region of the cooking chamber shown by a region below the first heater (210) and the first fan (220) wherein Kim discloses for the preheating process during which a heating temperature exceeds at least once and indicates for the completion of the preheating process (also, see para 0108 and Figure 7A).
With respect to claim 7, Choi discloses for a temperature sensor (para 0053) that detects a temperature of the cooking chamber to bring about and sustain the required/threshold temperature (para 0010) wherein Choi shows the control unit (160) that controls the first heater, the first fan, the second heater, and the second fan (see Figure 3) based on a detection of the result of the temperature detection unit/sensor which allows the control unit to meet a desired threshold/required temperature (also Figure 5).
With respect to claim 8, Choi discloses a third heater (bake heater or boil heater) disposed in the cooking chamber wherein the control unit controls the third heated based on the detection result of the temperature detection unit (also, see para 0010 and 0053, and Figure 5)
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Boedicker and Kim as applied to claims 1-8 above, and further in view of Nasu et al (US 2017/0171921).
Choi in view of Boedicker and Kim discloses the cooking apparatus claimed but does not show a pull-body on which an object to be heated is placed thereon wherein the pull-out body is configured to be pulled-out from the cooking chamber wherein the control unit stops energization of the first heater and the second heater when the pull-out body is pulled out.
Nasu discloses a cooking apparatus including a door (4) with a pull-out body (5) upon which an object to be heated is placed thereon wherein the pull-out body is pulled out from a cooking chamber when the door opens (see Figure 2), and Nasu further discloses a sensor (4008; also, see Figure 44) that senses when the door opens or closes wherein the sensor is connected to a heating control unit (4012) for controlling a heating element such that the heating element is activated only when the door is closed (para 0399) which suggests that the heating element is not activated when the door is open or that the pull-out body is pulled out of the cooking chamber.
Thus, in view of Nasu, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Choi, as modified by Boedicker and Kim, with a pull-out body on which an object/food is placed on so that the heated object or food item can be conveniently retrieved in and out of the cooking chamber wherein the opening and closing state of the pull-out body is sensed and connected to a heating control unit (160/170) of Choi which would also control the energization of the heating elements including the first heater and the second heater so that the first and second heaters are stopped or inactivated when the pull-out body is pulled from the cooking chamber for safety purposes and predictably prevent a user from being exposed to excessive heat or energy from the heaters when the pull-out body via the door is pulled out from the cooking chamber.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG Y PAIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4783. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30; M-F.
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 at 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.
/SANG Y PAIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761