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 Objections Claim s 22-23 objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 22 and 23 recites “resonate frequency.” For consistency between the claims, it should be –resonant frequency--. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 11-12, 20 - 2 3 , and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujita ( US 2011/0192838 A 1 ) Claim 11 . Fujita discloses a n induction heating-type cooktop (Fig. 1) comprising: a working coil ( 112, Fig. 1 ) ; an inverter ( 111 , Fig. 1 ) configured to supply current to the working coil ( heating pot 114 ) , the inverter including a plurality of switching elements (switches 107 and 108 , Fig. 1 ) ; a cooking vessel determination part configured to determine a type of cooking vessel placed on the induction heating-type cooktop ( material discriminating part 117, par. 73 and 125 ) ; and a controller configured to change a driving method of the inverter based on the type of cooking vessel ( controller switches from the first to second control mode based on the type of pot material , par. 80 and 109 ) Claim 12. Fujita discloses t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 11, wherein the controller is further configured to change the driving method of the inverter to an operating frequency that is greater than or less than a resonant frequency based on the type of cooking vessel ( resonant frequency with the non-magnetic metal is about 90 kHz but the driving frequency is set at 30 kHz, par. 139 ) . Claim 20. Fujita discloses The induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 11, wherein the controller is further configured to: when the type of the cooking vessel includes a magnetic substance (magnetic pot, par. 109 ) , change the driving method of the inverter to operate at an operating frequency that is equal to or greater than a resonant frequency ( drive frequency for magnetic pot is set nearly the same as the resonance frequency for suppressing turn-off losses , par. 121 , where the resonant frequency for the magnetic material is around 20 kHz, par. 119 ) ; and when the type of the cooking vessel includes a non-magnetic substance, change the driving method of the inverter to operate at an operating frequency that is equal to or less than the resonant frequency ( resonant frequency with the non-magnetic metal is about 90 kHz but the driving frequency is set at 30 kHz, par. 139 ) . Claim 21. Fujita discloses t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 11, wherein one or more of the plurality of switching elements includes a silicon carbide (SiC) element (par. 33) . Claim 22. Fujita discloses a n induction heating-type cooktop ( Fig. 1 ) comprising: a working coil ( 112 ) configured to heat a cooking vessel (heating pot 114 ) ; an inverter configured to supply current to the working coil ( 111 , Fig. 1 ) , the inverter including a plurality of switching elements ( switches 107 and 108 , Fig. 1) ; and a controller configured to: in response to the cooking vessel being a magnetic type of cooking vessel, set an operating frequency of the inverter to a value that is greater than a first resonate frequency ( drive frequency for magnetic pot is set nearly the same as the resonance frequency for suppressing turn-off losses, par. 121, where the resonant frequency for the magnetic material is around 20 kHz, par. 119 ) ; and in response to the cooking vessel being a non-magnetic type of cooking vessel ( non-magnetic pot, par. 19) , set the operating frequency of the inverter to a value that is less than a second resonate frequency ( resonant frequency with the non-magnetic metal is about 90 kHz but the driving frequency is set at 30 kHz, par. 139 ) . Claim 23. Fujita discloses t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 22, wherein the second resonate frequency based on the non-magnetic type of cooking vessel is greater than the first resonate frequency based on the magnetic type of cooking vessel (resonant frequency with the non-magnetic metal is about 90 kHz, par. 139 and resonant frequency with the magnetic metal is about 20 kHz, 119) . Claim 27. Fujita discloses The induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 22, wherein one or more of the plurality of switching elements includes a silicon carbide (SiC) element (par. 33) or a gallium nitride (GaN) element. Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tamura (JP 2009099324 A) Claim 22. Tamura discloses a n induction heating-type cooktop ( Fig. 1 ) comprising: a working coil (71) configured to heat a cooking vessel (heating pot, par. 34) ; an inverter configured to supply current to the working coil (30 , Fig. 1 ) , the inverter including a plurality of switching elements ( switches 31 and 32 , Fig. 1) ; and a controller configured to: in response to the cooking vessel being a magnetic type of cooking vessel, set an operating frequency of the inverter to a value that is greater than a first resonate frequency (drive frequency for magnetic pot is set to 23 kHz; the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a value that is greater than a first resonate frequency” includes any resonate frequency because the first resonate frequency has not been defined, therefore, the apparatus is capable of setting the frequency above a resonant frequency) ; and in response to the cooking vessel being a non-magnetic type of cooking vessel (non-magnetic pot, par. 35) , set the operating frequency of the inverter to a value that is less than a second resonate frequency (drive frequency for non- magnetic pot is set to 70 kHz, par. 35; the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a value that is less than a second resonate frequency” includes any resonate frequency because the second resonate frequency has not been defined, therefore, the apparatus is capable of setting the frequency below a resonant frequency) . 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 3 -16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Tamura (JP 2009099324 A) . Claim 13. Fujita discloses the induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 12, wherein the controller is further configured to, in response to the operating frequency being set to a value that is less than or equal to the resonant frequency ( resonant frequency with the non-magnetic metal is about 90 kHz but the driving frequency is set at 30 kHz, par. 139 ) , adjust a duty cycle of the plurality of switching elements () . Fujita does not disclose adjust a duty cycle of the plurality of switching elements . Tamura discloses an induction cooker wherein for non-magnetic pans the drive control method uses duty control (par. 37, Fig. 3) wherein the switch 31 has a shorter cycle than switch 32 (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Filippa to incorporate the teachings of Tamura and control the duty cycle for non-magnetic pans and have the first cycle be shorter than the second cycle . Doing so would have the benefit of heating up the non-magnetic pots and reducing switching loss (par. 41 and 46, Tamura). Claim 14. Fujita in view of Tamura discloses t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 13, wherein the controller is further configured to adjust a first duty cycle of a first switching element among the plurality of switching elements to be less than a second duty cycle of a second switching element among the plurality of switching elements ( switch 31 has a shorter cycle than switch 32 (Fig. 3), Tamura ) . Claim 15. Fujita in view of Tamura discloses t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 14, wherein the first duty cycle of the first switching element is set to 50% or less ( switch 31 has a shorter cycle than switch 32 (Fig. 3), Tamura ) . Claim 16. Fujita in view of Tamura discloses t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 15, wherein the second duty cycle of the second switching element is set to 50% or more ( switch 32 has a longer cycle than switch 31 (Fig. 3), Tamura ) . Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita in view of Tamura as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Moon (US 2016 / 0381738 A1). Claim 17. Fujita in view of Tamura does not disclose t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 14, further comprising a heat dissipation fan configured to cool the plurality of switching elements, wherein the second switching element is disposed closer to the heat dissipation fan than the first switching element. Moon discloses an induction stovetop wherein a fan 295 is used to cool the switching elements 221-224 (Fig. 2) wherein the second switch 222 is placed closer to the fan 295 (par. 49). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fujita in view of Tamura to incorporate the teachings of Moon and have a fan to cool the switches . Doing so would have the benefit of cooling the switches. Additionally, Moon demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to select which switch would be closest to the fan in order to optimize cooling (par. 48-49, Moon). Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Tamura (JP 2009099324 A) and Isogai (JP 2 011028927 A) . Claim 18. Fujita discloses the induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 12, wherein the controller is further configured to: when the operating frequency is set equal to or greater than the resonant frequency ( drive frequency for magnetic pot is set nearly the same as the resonance frequency for suppressing turn-off losses, par. 121, where the resonant frequency for the magnetic material is around 20 kHz, par. 119 ) , adjust a heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop by varying the operating frequency ; and when the operating frequency is set equal to or less than the resonant frequency ( resonant frequency with the non-magnetic metal is about 90 kHz but the driving frequency is set at 30 kHz, par. 139 ) , adjust the heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop by changing a duty cycle of one or more switching elements among the plurality of switching elements . Fujita does not disclose adjust the heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop for non-magnetic vessels by changing a duty cycle of one or more switching elements among the plurality of switching elements . Tamura discloses an induction cooker wherein for non-magnetic pans the drive control method uses duty control (par. 37, Fig. 3) wherein the switch 31 has a shorter cycle than switch 32 (Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fujita to incorporate the teachings of Tamura and control the duty cycle for non-magnetic pans . Doing so would have the benefit of heating up the non-magnetic pots and reducing switching loss (par. 41 and 46, Tamura). Fujita in view of Tamura does not disclose adjust a heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop for magnetic vessels by varying the operating frequency . Isogai discloses an induction cooker wherein for magnetic pots the cooker controls the heat through frequency control (par. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fujita in view of Tamura to incorporate the teachings of Isogai and control the heat for magnetic pots with frequency control . Doing so would have the benefit of controlled change in the heating power and lower power loss (par. 5-6, Isogai). Claim 19. Fujita in view of Tamura and Isogai t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 18, wherein the controller is further configured to, when the operating frequency is set equal to or less than the resonant frequency, set the operating frequency to a fixed frequency (it is understood by the examiner that in duty control, the operating frequency is fixed, Fig. 4, Tamura) . Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Isogai (JP 2 011028927 A) . Claim 24. Tamura discloses t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 22, wherein the controller is further configured to: in response to the cooking vessel being the magnetic type of cooking vessel, adjust a heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop by varying the operating frequency ; and in response to the cooking vessel being the non-magnetic type of cooking vessel, adjust the heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop by changing a duty cycle of one or more switching elements among the plurality of switching elements (for non-magnetic pots the drive method is based on duty control, par. 37, Fig. 3 , Tamura ) . Tamura does not disclose in response to the cooking vessel being a magnetic type of cooking vessel, adjust a heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop by varying an operating frequency of the inverter; and Isogai discloses an induction cooker wherein for magnetic pots the cooker controls the heat through frequency control (par. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tamura to incorporate the teachings of Isogai and control the heat for magnetic pots with frequency control . Doing so would have the benefit of controlled change in the heating power and lower power loss (par. 5-6, Isogai). Claim 25. Tamura in view of Isogai discloses t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 24, wherein the controller is further configured to adjust a first duty cycle of a first switching element among the plurality of switching elements to be less than a second duty cycle of a second switching element among the plurality of switching elements (the drive control method uses duty control, par. 37, Fig. 3, wherein the switch 31 has a shorter cycle than switch 32, Fig. 3 , Tamura ) . Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura in view of Isogai as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Moon (US 2016 / 0381738 A1). Claim 26. Tamura in view of Isogai does not disclose the induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 25, further comprising a heat dissipation fan configured to cool the plurality of switching elements, wherein the second switching element is disposed closer to the heat dissipation fan than the first switching element. Moon discloses an induction stovetop wherein a fan 295 is used to cool the switching elements 221-224 (Fig. 2) wherein the second switch 222 is placed closer to the fan 295 (par. 49). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tamura in view of Isogai to incorporate the teachings of Moon and have a fan to cool the switches . Doing so would have the benefit of cooling the switches. Additionally, Moon demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to select which switch would be closest to the fan in order to optimize cooling (par. 48-49, Moon). Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Ribarich (US 9578692 B2 ). Claim 28. Tamura does not disclose t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 22, wherein the controller is further configured to adjust the operating frequency based on a pulse width modulation (PWM) control method. Ribarich discloses an induction cooker wherein the switching frequency control scheme is implemented using PWM (col 3, lines 35-50). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tamura to incorporate the teachings of Ribarich and control the frequency using PWM . Ribarich demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to control the frequency of the switches using PWM (col 3, lines 35-50, Ribarich). Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura (JP 2009 099324 A ) in view of Isogai (JP 2 011028927 A ) . Claim 29. Tamura discloses a n induction heating-type cooktop ( Fig. 1 ) comprising: a working coil ( 71 ) configured to heat a cooking vessel ( heating pots, par. 34 ) ; an inverter configured to supply current to the working coil ( 30 , Fig. 1 ) , the inverter including a plurality of switching elements ( switches 31 and 32 , Fig. 1 ) ; and a controller configured to: in response to the cooking vessel being a magnetic type of cooking vessel, adjust a heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop by varying an operating frequency of the inverter; and in response to the cooking vessel being a non-magnetic type of cooking vessel, adjust the heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop by changing a duty cycle of one or more switching elements among the plurality of switching elements (for non-magnetic pots the drive method is based on duty control, par. 37, Fig. 3) . Tamura does not disclose in response to the cooking vessel being a magnetic type of cooking vessel, adjust a heating output of the induction heating-type cooktop by varying an operating frequency of the inverter; and Isogai discloses an induction cooker wherein for magnetic pots the cooker controls the heat through frequency control (par. 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tamura to incorporate the teachings of Isogai and control the heat for magnetic pots with frequency control . Doing so would have the benefit of controlled change in the heating power and lower power loss (par. 5-6, Isogai). Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tamura in view of Isogai as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Kanakasab a i (US 2020/0244174 A1). Claim 30 . Tamura in view of Isogai does not disclose t he induction heating-type cooktop according to claim 29 , wherein one or more of the plurality of switching elements includes a silicon carbide (SiC) element. Kanakasab a i discloses an induction cooker wherein the switching elements can be made of silicon carbide (par. 31). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Tamura in view of Isogai to incorporate the teachings of Kanakasab a i and have switches made of silicon carbide . Kanakasabai demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to select silicon carbide as the material for the switches. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT SIMPSON A CHEN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6422 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Mon-Fri 8-5 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Steven Crabb can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (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. /SIMPSON A CHEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /ELIZABETH M KERR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761