CTNF 18/276,506 CTNF 96428 DETAILED ACTION 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 11-12 and 27-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by JUNG (KR 970019747 A) . Regarding claim 11, JUNG (KR 970019747 A) teaches an induction heating type cooktop (Page 19, electric induction effect caused by the magnetic field generated by the resonant static voltage to heat food inside the container) comprising: first and second working coils configured to generate a magnetic field for heating a cooking container (Page 10, a working coil 12 introduces an electric induction effect caused by the magnetic field generated by the resonant static voltage to heat food inside the container; Figure 2 Page 5, working coil 12 is composed of a first coil 13 and a second coil 14) ; an inverter configured to supply current to one or more of the first working coil and the second working coil (Page 10, inverter unit 9 that switches the voltage supplied from the rectification and smoothing unit according to a driving signal to provide a resonant voltage to the working coil) ; first and second resonance capacitor parts configured to resonate with the first and second working coils (Figure 2 Page 11, current flowing through the switching transistors are driven in response to the driving signals generated by the inverter driving section so that the working coil and resonance capacitors are in a continuous resonance state) ; and a switching part configured to selectively direct current through the second working coil and the second resonance capacitor part based on a type of the cooking container (Figure 2 Pages 10-11, relay 20 is configured to change the number of windings of the working coil; Page 13, first coil 13 and resonant capacitor 17 are selected when a container of high skin resistance is detected; Page 13, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) . Regarding claim 12, JUNG teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 11, wherein the switching part is further configured to (Figure 2 Pages 10-11, relay 20 is configured to change the number of windings of the working coil) : in response to the cooking container being made of a magnetic substance, direct the current to flow through the first working coil and the first resonance capacitor part without flowing through the second working coil and the second resonance capacitor part (Page 13, first coil 13 and resonant capacitor 17 are selected when a container of high skin resistance is detected) ; and in response to the cooking container being made of a non-magnetic substance, direct the current to flow through both of the first and second working coils and both of the first and second resonance capacitor parts (Page 13, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) . Regarding claim 27, JUNG teaches an induction heating type cooktop (Page 19, electric induction effect caused by the magnetic field generated by the resonant static voltage to heat food inside the container) comprising: a plurality of working coils configured to generate a magnetic field for heating a cooking container (Page 10, a working coil 12 introduces an electric induction effect caused by the magnetic field generated by the resonant static voltage to heat food inside the container; Figure 2 Page 5, working coil 12 is composed of a first coil 13 and a second coil 14) ; an inverter configured to supply current to one or more of the plurality of working coils (Page 10, inverter unit 9 that switches the voltage supplied from the rectification and smoothing unit according to a driving signal to provide a resonant voltage to the working coil) ; and a plurality of resonance capacitor parts configured to resonate with the plurality of working coils (Figure 2 Page 11, current flowing through the switching transistors is driven in response to the driving signals generated by the inverter driving section so that the working coil and resonance capacitors are in a continuous resonance state) , wherein the current selectively flows through one or more of the plurality of working coils and one or more of the plurality of resonance capacitors based on a type of the cooking container (Figure 2 Pages 10-11, relay 20 is configured to change the number of windings of the working coil; Page 13, first coil 13 and resonant capacitor 17 are selected when a container of high skin resistance is detected; Page 13, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) . Regarding claim 28, JUNG teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 27, wherein when the cooking container is a magnetic type of cooking container, the current flows through only some of the plurality of working coils and only some of the plurality of resonance capacitors (Page 13, first coil 13 and resonant capacitor 17 are selected when a container of high skin resistance is detected without traveling through the other coil and capacitor) . Regarding claim 29, JUNG teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 27, wherein when the cooking container is a non-magnetic type of cooking container, the current flows through all of the plurality of working coils and all of the plurality of resonance capacitors (Page 13, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) . Regarding claim 30, JUNG teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 27, wherein the plurality of working coils are connected in series (Page 9, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series) , and wherein the plurality of resonance capacitors are connected in series between two output ends of the inverter (Figure 2 Page 9, resonant capacitors 17 and 18 are connected in series between the output ends of the coils) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG (KR 970019747 A) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of KWON (KR 0176838 B1) . Regarding claim 13, JUNG teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 11. JUNG fails to explicitly teach: wherein the first resonance capacitor part includes a first resonance capacitor and a second resonance capacitor, wherein the second resonance capacitor part includes a third resonance capacitor and a fourth resonance capacitor, the third and fourth resonance capacitors being connected between the first resonance capacitor and the second resonance capacitor, and wherein the induction heating type cooktop further comprises a wire including a first end connected between the first resonance capacitor and the third resonance capacitor, and a second end connected between the second resonance capacitor and the fourth resonance capacitor. KWON (KR 0176838 B1) teaches an induction heating cooker, wherein: the first resonance capacitor part includes a first resonance capacitor and a second resonance capacitor (Figure 3 Page 5, C22/2 and C22’/2 capacitors are positioned in parallel to the induction coils) , wherein the second resonance capacitor part includes a third resonance capacitor (Figure 3 Page 6, non-conductive container dedicated capacitor C23) It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified JUNG with KWON and have the first resonance capacitor part comprise a first and a second resonance capacitor. This would have been done to minimize noise generation (KWON Page 7). JUNG modified with KWON fails to explicitly teach that “ wherein the second resonance capacitor part includes a third resonance capacitor and a fourth resonance capacitor, the third and fourth resonance capacitors being connected between the first resonance capacitor and the second resonance capacitor, and” “wherein the induction heating type cooktop further comprises a wire including a first end connected between the first resonance capacitor and the third resonance capacitor, and a second end connected between the second resonance capacitor and the fourth resonance capacitor.” However, KWON Figure 2 Pages 4-5 teaches that having capacitors in parallel is known in the art to be beneficial to reducing noise in a circuit. KWON Figure 3 teaches that having capacitor pairs, positioned in parallel, be in series with other capacitors is known in the art to be advantageous for reducing noise. It would thus have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the non-conductive container dedicated capacitor C23 be substituted with a pair of parallel capacitors C23/2 and C23’/2. This would have been as using a parallel set of capacitors is a known substitute in the art for using a single capacitor with predictable results. An annotated figure with the capacitors in parallel is provided below in KWON Annotated Figure 3. PNG media_image1.png 289 563 media_image1.png Greyscale KWON Annotated Figure 3; the non-conductive container dedicated capacitor C23 has been substituted with a parallel set of C23/2 capacitors which would result in the same capacitance value across Vc23 using the parallel capacitance formula CT = C1 +C2; wire is annotated with arrows at both ends wherein both ends are connected between both pairs of parallel capacitors This resulting circuit includes a third and fourth resonance capacitors in the forms of the two C23/2 capacitors, wherein the capacitors are connected between the C22/2’ and C22/2 capacitors. Furthermore, KWON Annotated Figure 3 teaches that there exists a wire which includes a first end connected between one of C22/2 and one of C23/2 and another end connected between another one of C22/2 and another one of C23/2. The Office further notes the electrical connection formed by the wire of KWON Annotated Figure 3 provides the same connective pathway as the wire W of Figure 6 of the applicant’s drawings filed 08/09/2023, and thus changing the exact schematic drawing of the wire would be merely obvious engineering choice. The Office further notes that the MPEP teaches that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP §2144.04.VI.B. In this case, having the non-conductive container dedicated capacitor C23 be comprised of two parallel capacitors has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG (KR 970019747 A) in view of KWON (KR 0176838 B1) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of KIM (KR 102057515 B1) . Regarding claim 14, JUNG as modified teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 13, wherein the switching part includes a first switch, the first switch being configured to selectively direct the current to flow through the second working coil and the second resonance capacitor part based on the type of the cooking container (Pages 8-9, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) . JUNG as modified fails to explicitly teach: the switching part includes a first switch and a second switch KIM (KR 102057515 B1) teaches an induction heating cooker for heating either magnetic or non-magnetic containers, wherein: the switching part includes a first switch and a second switch (Figure 7 Paragraphs 43-46, a plurality of relays are used and turned on/off when a magnetic container is placed vs when a non-magnetic container is placed) It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified JUNG with KIM and have the switching part include at least a first switch and a second switch. This would have been done to prevent a repulsive force from occurring for non-magnetic containers (KIM Paragraph 13). The Office further notes that the MPEP teaches that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP §2144.04.VI.B. In this case, having two switching parts instead of one to drive the current flow through the second working coil and the second resonance capacitor part based on the type of cooking chamber has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. Regarding claim 20, JUNG as modified teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 14, wherein the first and second switches are configured to: in response the cooking container being made of a magnetic substance, adjust a composite capacitance to be a first value (Pages 7-8, first coil 13 and resonant capacitor 17 are selected when a container of high skin resistance is detected) ; and in response the cooking container being made of a magnetic substance, adjust the composite capacitance to be a second value (Pages 8-9, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) , and wherein the second value is less than the first value (Figure 2, resonant capacitors 17 and 18 are placed in series which means that the resulting capacitance is less than the capacitance just resonant capacitor 17 given the series formula of 1/CT = 1/C1 + 1/C2) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG (KR 970019747 A) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of KIM (KR 102057515 B1) . Regarding claim 21, JUNG teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 11, wherein the switching part includes a plurality of switches (Pages 8-9, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) . JUNG fails to explicitly teach: the switching part includes a plurality of switches KIM (KR 102057515 B1) teaches an induction heating cooker for heating either magnetic or non-magnetic containers, wherein: the switching part includes a plurality of switches (Figure 7 Paragraphs 43-46, a plurality of relays are used and turned on/off when a magnetic container is placed vs when a non-magnetic container is placed) It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified JUNG with KIM and have the switching part include a plurality of switches. This would have been done to prevent a repulsive force from occurring for non-magnetic containers (KIM Paragraph 13). The Office further notes that the MPEP teaches that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP §2144.04.VI.B. In this case, using a plurality of switches instead of one to drive the current flow through the second working coil and the second resonance capacitor part based on the type of cooking chamber has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 22-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG (KR 970019747 A) in view of KWON (KR 0176838 B1) . Regarding claim 22, JUNG (KR 970019747 A) teaches an induction heating type cooktop (Page 19, electric induction effect caused by the magnetic field generated by the resonant static voltage to heat food inside the container) comprising: first and second working coils configured to generate a magnetic field for heating a cooking container (Page 10, a working coil 12 introduces an electric induction effect caused by the magnetic field generated by the resonant static voltage to heat food inside the container; Figure 2 Page 5, working coil 12 is composed of a first coil 13 and a second coil 14) ; an inverter configured to supply current to one or more of the first working coil and the second working coil (Page 10, inverter unit 9 that switches the voltage supplied from the rectification and smoothing unit according to a driving signal to provide a resonant voltage to the working coil) ; first and third resonance capacitors configured to resonate with the first and second working coils (Figure 2 Page 11, current flowing through the switching transistors are driven in response to the driving signals generated by the inverter driving section so that the working coil and resonance capacitors are in a continuous resonance state) ; and a switching part (Figure 2 Pages 10-11, relay 20) configured to: in response to operating in a first mode, direct the current to flow through the first working coil and the first resonance capacitors without flowing through the second working coil and the third resonance capacitor (Figure 2 Pages 10-11, relay 20 is configured to change the number of windings of the working coil; Page 13, first coil 13 and resonant capacitor 17 are selected when a container of high skin resistance is detected) ; and in response to operating in a second mode, direct the current to flow through both of the first and second working coils and all of the first and third resonance capacitors (Page 13, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) . JUNG fails to teach: first resonance capacitor comprises a first and second resonance capacitor third resonance capacitor comprises a third and fourth resonance capacitor KWON (KR 0176838 B1) teaches an induction heating cooker, wherein: first resonance capacitor comprises a first and second resonance capacitor (Figure 3 Page 5, C22/2 and C22’/2 capacitors are positioned in parallel to the induction coils) It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified JUNG with KWON and have the first resonance capacitor part comprise a first and a second resonance capacitor. This would have been done to minimize noise generation (KWON Page 7). JUNG modified with KWON fails to explicitly teach that “ third resonance capacitor comprises a third and fourth resonance capacitor”. However, KWON Figure 2 Pages 4-5 teaches that having capacitors in parallel is known in the art to be beneficial to reducing noise in a circuit. KWON Figure 3 teaches that having capacitor pairs, positioned in parallel, be in series with other capacitors is known in the art to be advantageous for reducing noise. It would thus have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the non-conductive container dedicated capacitor C23 be substituted with a pair of parallel capacitors C23/2 and C23’/2. This would have been as using a parallel set of capacitors is a known substitute in the art for using a single capacitor with predictable results. An annotated figure with the capacitors in parallel is provided below in KWON Annotated Figure 3. PNG media_image1.png 289 563 media_image1.png Greyscale KWON Annotated Figure 3; the non-conductive container dedicated capacitor C23 has been substituted with a parallel set of C23/2 capacitors which would result in the same capacitance value across Vc23 using the parallel capacitance formula CT = C1 +C2; wire is annotated with arrows at both ends wherein both ends are connected between both pairs of parallel capacitors The Office further notes that the MPEP teaches that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP §2144.04.VI.B. In this case, having the non-conductive container dedicated capacitor C23 be comprised of two parallel capacitors has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. Regarding claim 23, JUNG as modified teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 22, wherein the switching part is further configured to: in response to operating in the first mode, adjust a composite capacitance to be a first value (Pages 7-8, first coil 13 and resonant capacitor 17 are selected when a container of high skin resistance is detected) ; and in response to operating in the second mode, adjust the composite capacitance to be a second value (Pages 8-9, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) , and wherein the second value is less than the first value (Figure 2, resonant capacitors 17 and 18 are placed in series which means that the resulting capacitance is less than the capacitance just resonant capacitor 17 given the series formula of 1/CT = 1/C1 + 1/C2) . Regarding claim 24, JUNG as modified teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 22, wherein the first mode corresponds to a magnetic type of cooking container being placed on the induction heating type cooktop (Page 13, first coil 13 and resonant capacitor 17 are selected when a container of high skin resistance is detected) , and wherein the second mode corresponds to a non-magnetic type of cooking container being placed on the induction heating type cooktop (Page 13, coils 13 and 14 are connected in series and the resonant capacitors are selected when the container is made of aluminum with low skin resistance; Page 9, relay contacts change based on whether heating a magnetic or nonmagnetic metal) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JUNG (KR 970019747 A) in view of KWON (KR 0176838 B1) as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of KIM (KR 102057515 B1) . Regarding claim 25, JUNG as modified teaches the induction heating type cooktop according to claim 22. JUNG as modified fails to teach: the switching part includes a first switch and a second switch. KIM (KR 102057515 B1) teaches an induction heating cooker for heating either magnetic or non-magnetic containers, wherein: the switching part includes a first switch and a second switch (Figure 7 Paragraphs 43-46, a plurality of relays are used and turned on/off when a magnetic container is placed vs when a non-magnetic container is placed) It would have thus been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have modified JUNG with KIM and have the switching part include at least a first switch and a second switch. This would have been done to prevent a repulsive force from occurring for non-magnetic containers (KIM Paragraph 13). The Office further notes that the MPEP teaches that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. MPEP §2144.04.VI.B. In this case, having two switching parts instead of one to drive the current flow through the second working coil and the second resonance capacitor part based on the type of cooking chamber has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 15-19 and 26 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. Claim 15 recites specific connections between the first and second switches and the plurality of electrical components. Said structural arrangement requires a specific design of the circuit of the induction heating type cooktop which is not properly disclosed by any relevant prior art. Namely, the specific connections between the ends of the switches and various components in each mode of the switches is not properly taught by any relevant prior art. These specific connections indicate more structural significance than a mere duplication of parts. Paragraph 17 of the applicant’s specifications filed 08/09/2023 also teaches that having a large resonance current be distributed through a plurality of switches is advantageous, which additionally indicates significance beyond mere duplication of parts. Claims 16-19 are similarly objected to based on their dependency on claim 15. Claim 26 is objected to based on similar rationale to that of claim 15. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANKLIN JEFFERSON WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM-6PM (E.S.T). 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 (571) 270-5569. 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. /F.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /WOODY A LEE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 2 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 3 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 4 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 5 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 6 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 7 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 8 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 9 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 10 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 11 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 12 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 13 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 14 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 15 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 16 Art Unit: 3761 Application/Control Number: 18/276,506 Page 17 Art Unit: 3761
Prosecution Insights