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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8, 10-12, 14-16, and 18-19 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/285,472 in view of Ford (US 20120227758 A1).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Instant claim
Reference claim
Claim 1: A heater coupon comprising a ceramic block having a first surface and a second surface,
at least one heater trace formed within the ceramic block and
a connector for electrically connecting the at least one heater trace to a PCB (printed circuit board).
Claim 1: A heater coupon comprising a ceramic block having a first surface and a second surface,
at least one heater trace formed within the ceramic block and
a connector for electrically connecting the at least one heater trace to an external wire
wherein the connector comprises a first connecting arm for connecting with respect to the first surface and a second connecting arm for connecting with respect to the second surface of the ceramic block.
Claim 1 does not disclose that the heater trace is connected to a PCB.
Ford discloses a hair dryer (Fig. 1) wherein the flexible PCB is heat-staked to each of the heating means of the heaters (par. 100).
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 the referenced claim 1 to incorporate the teachings of Ford and connect the heater trace to the PCB. Doing so would have the benefit of controlling the power to the heaters.
Claim 2
Claim 3
Claim 4
Claim 5
Claim 6
Claim 7
Claim 8
Claim 10
Claim 11
Claim 12
Claim 14
Claim 15
Claim 16
Claim 18
Claim 19
Claim 1 in view of Ford.
Claim 1 in view of Ford.
Claim 1 in view of Ford.
Claim 2
Claim 3
Claim 4
Claim 5
Claim 6
Claim 10
Claim 11
Claim 13
Claim 16
Claim 17
Claim 19
Claim 20
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claim 3 wherein the connector provides a direct connection between the heater coupon and the PCB must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
reference characters "100" has been used to designate both heater coupon and hair dryer.
reference characters "40" has been used to designate both metallization surface and wiring loom.
reference characters "42" has been used to designate both second metallization surface and wire guide.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 10, 12, and 17 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 10 and 12 recites “the heater tracer.” This should be –the at least one heater tracer--.
Claim 17 recites “A heater coupon” this should be –The heater coupon--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 2-3, 7-11, 13-14, and 16-22 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 2 recites “the connector connects at one end to the heater coupon and at the other end to the PCB.” However, in claim 1 it already states “a connector for electrically connecting the at least one heater trace to a PCB.” Which means one end of the connector is connected to a heater trace. It is unclear if the connector is connected to the heater coupon and to the PCB or if it is connected to the heater trace one on end and the PCB on the other.
Claim 3 has a similar argument to claim 2.
Claim 7 recites “wherein the at least one heater trace is screen printed onto one of the layers of ceramic sheet that form the ceramic block.” The limitation “layers of ceramic sheet” is lacking antecedent basis. It appears applicants may be referring to the “plurality of layers of ceramic material” disclosed in claim 6. For examination, claim 7 will be interpreted to be dependent on claim 6.
Claim 8 recites “the first connecting arm” and “the second connecting arm.” The limitations lack antecedent basis. It appears applicants may be referring to claim 4. For examination, claim 8 will be interpreted to be dependent on claim 4.
Claims 9, 11, 13, 19, and 21 recites “the depth of the recess.” There are multiple different recesses and it is unclear which of them are being recited.
Claim 10 recites that the "first recess extends from the first surface to the heater trace.” Claim 9 states that the first connecting arm for connecting with respect to the first surface of the ceramic block and claim 1 state the connector is connected to the heater trace. It is unclear how the first connecting arm is connected to the first surface and the heater trace at the same time when the heater trace extends down from the first surface. For examination, “the first surface” in claim 10 is interpreted as a “third surface” and the surface that the heater trace is printed on is interpreted as “the first surface.”
Regarding claim 13, the phrase "substantially" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 14 recites “at least two connectors are provided.” It is unclear if these two connectors include the connector recited in claim 1 or if they are two different connectors. For examination, it will be interpreted as at least two connectors different from the first connector.
Claims 16, 18-19, and 21-22 recite “a further said connector.” It is unclear if this is new connector or if it is connector recited in claim 1. For examination, it will be interpreted as --a second connector--.
Claim 17 recites “the integrated thermal sensor.” The limitation lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 18 recites “the first connecting arm,” “the second connecting arm,” and “the further said connector.” The limitations lack antecedent basis.
Claim 20 recites “heater tracer layer.” Claim 1 recites at least one heater tracer but does not disclose a heater tracer layer. It is unclear if this heater tracer layer is the same as the at least one heater tracer.
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, 5-6, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jo (KR 2011/0042746 A) in view of Ford (US 2012/0227758 A1).
Claim 1: Jo discloses a heater coupon (heater body 100, Fig. 4) comprising
a ceramic block (heater body 100) having a first surface (a surface of 110, Fig. 4) and a second surface (a surface of 130, Fig. 4),
at least one heater trace formed within the ceramic block (heating pattern 160 in the heating body, Fig. 5) and
a connector for electrically connecting the at least one heater trace (heating lead wire 140b is connected to the heating pattern 160, Fig. 4 and Fig. 5) to
Jo does not disclose a PCB.
Ford discloses a hair dryer (Fig. 1) wherein the flexible PCB is heat-staked to each of the heating means of the heaters (par. 100).
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 Jo to incorporate the teachings of Ford and connect the heater trace to the PCB. Doing so would have the benefit of controlling the power to the heaters.
Claim 2: Jo in view of Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein the connector connects at one end to the heater coupon and at the other end to the PCB (combined prior art results in lead wire 140 connected to the heating body on end and the PCB board on the other).
Claim 3: Jo in view of Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein the connector provides a direct connection between the heater coupon and the PCB (combined prior art results in lead wire 140 connected to the heating body on end and the PCB board on the other).
Claim 5: Jo in view of Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein the connector is located at an end of the ceramic block (lead wire 140b is at an end of the heating body, Fig. 4).
Claim 6: Jo in view of Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein the ceramic block is formed from a plurality of layers of ceramic material (heating body has multiple layers, Fig. 4, wherein the layers are a form of ceramic, page 28).
Claim 14: Jo in view of Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein at least two connectors are provided and the at least two connectors are electrically isolated from each other (multiple lead wires 14b, Fig. 4).
Claim 15: Jo in view of Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein an integrated thermal sensor is formed within the ceramic block (temperature sensor pattern 160, Fig. 5, page 22).
Claim 16: Jo in view of Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 15, wherein the integrated thermal sensor is connected to an external wire via a further said connector (pattern 160 is connected to temperature sensor lead wire 140a, Fig. 4 and Fig. 5).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jo in view of Ford discloses the as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Natsuhara (US 2001/0010310 A1).
Claim 7: Jo in view of Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein the at least one heater trace is
Jo in view of Ford does not disclose that the heater tracer is screen printed.
Natsuhara discloses a heater body wherein the heating pattern is screen printed.
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 Jo in view of Ford to incorporate the teachings of Natsuhara and screen print the heating pattern. Natsuhara demonstrates that one of ordinary skill in the art would know that screen printing can be used to deposit the heating pattern.
Claim(s) 1, 4, and 8-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuta (US 20150139681 A1) in view of Ceva (DE 102007002879 A1)
Claim 1: Mizuta discloses a heater coupon (heater 5, Fig. 1) comprising
a ceramic block (dielectric substrate 9 made of ceramic material, par. 48) having a first surface (dielectric substrate 9 has a top surface, Fig. 2A) and a second surface (dielectric substrate 9 has a bottom surface, Fig. 2A),
at least one heater trace formed
a connector for electrically connecting the at least one heater trace (connector 13, Fig. 4) to
Mizuta does not disclose the heater trace is formed within the ceramic block and the connector connects to a PCB.
Ceva discloses heating elements used for hair straightening wherein a ceramic plate 2 encloses the cable 5 (Fig. 1, par. 21).
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 Mizuta to incorporate the teachings of Ceva and enclose both heaters with a ceramic plate. Doing so would have the benefit of protecting the heating resistance element from moisture (par. 39, Ceva).
This results in a heater trace enclosed in a ceramic body.
Mizuta in view of Ceva does not disclose a PCB.
Ford discloses a hair dryer (Fig. 1) wherein the flexible PCB is heat-staked to each of the heating means of the heaters (par. 100).
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 Mizuta in view of Ceva to incorporate the teachings of Ford and connect the heater trace to the PCB. Doing so would have the benefit of controlling the power to the heaters.
Claim 4: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford discloses the heater coupon (heater, Fig. 1) according to claim 1, wherein the connector (connector 13, Fig. 4) comprises a first connecting arm (spring contact 16f, Fig. 7A) for connecting with respect to the first surface of the ceramic block (electrode 10f, Fig. 7A) and a second connecting arm (spring contact 16r, Fig. 7A) for connecting with respect to the second surface of the ceramic block (electrode 10r, Fig. 7A).
Claim 8: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein the ceramic block is provided with a first recess (10f rests in a recess, Fig. 3B) for accommodating the first connecting arm and a second recess (10r rests in a recess, Fig. 3C) for accommodating the second connecting arm.
Claim 9: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 8, wherein the first recess has a wall and a tab (recess has a wall and electrode 10f, Fig. 3B), the wall defining a depth of the recess within the ceramic block (wall defines a depth of the recess. Fig. 3B) and delimiting an area of the tab and the tab providing a surface to which the first connecting arm can be attached (wall defines an area of connecting electrode 10f which is connected to the spring contact 16f, Fig. 7A).
Claim 10: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 9, wherein the first recess extends from the first surface to the heater trace (recess extends down from the top surface of the heater supporting member 6, Fig. 3B).
Claim 11: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 9, wherein the second recess has a wall and a tab, the wall defining a depth of the recess within the ceramic block and delimiting an area of the tab (wall defines a depth of the recess, Fig. 3C) and the tab providing a surface to which the second connecting arm can be attached (wall defines an area of connecting electrode 10r which is connected to the spring contact 16r, Fig. 7A).
Claim 12: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 11, wherein the second recess extends from the second surface to the heater trace (recess extends down from the bottom surface of the protective layer 12, Fig. 3C).
Claim 13: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford discloses the heater coupon according to claim 10, wherein the first recess and the second recess are substantially the same depth and area (Fig. 3B and 3C).
Claim(s) 15 and 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jo.
Claim 15: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Ford does not disclose the heater coupon according to claim 1, wherein an integrated thermal sensor is formed within the ceramic block.
Jo discloses a heater coupon for a hairdryer wherein a temperature sensor pattern 160 is formed within the ceramic block (Fig. 5, page 22)
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 Mizuta in view of Ceva to incorporate the teachings of Jo and have temperature sensor pattern 160. Doing so would have the benefit of high-precision temperature control by improving the heat transfer rate and temperature detection rate (page 16, Jo).
Claim 17: Mizuta in view of Ceva does not disclose the heater coupon according to claim 11, wherein the second recess extends from the second surface to the integrated thermal sensor.
Jo discloses a heater coupon for a hairdryer wherein a temperature sensor pattern 160 is formed within the ceramic block (Fig. 5, page 22)
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 Mizuta in view of Ceva to incorporate the teachings of Jo and have temperature sensor pattern 160. Doing so would have the benefit of high-precision temperature control by improving the heat transfer rate and temperature detection rate (page 16, Jo).
Mizuta in view of Ceva and Jo does not disclose that the thermal sensor is in the second recess from the second surface.
Mizuta further discloses a heater with three heat generating members (Fig. 22A/B).
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 Mizuta in view of Ceva and Jo to have placed the temperature sensor on the bottom and have it connect to the second recess. Doing so would have been obvious to try for one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 18: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Jo discloses the heater coupon according to claim 15, wherein the ceramic block is provided with a third recess for accommodating the first connecting arm of the further said connector and a fourth recess for accommodating the second connecting arm of the further said connector (multiple connectors and recesses on either end of the heater (Fig. 3A).
Claim 19: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Jo discloses the heater coupon according to claim 18, wherein the third recess has a wall and a tab, the wall defining a depth of the recess within the ceramic block and delimiting an area of the tab and the tab providing a surface to which the first connecting arm of the further said connector can be attached (it is understood by the examiner that the recesses and connectors at the other end of the Fig. 3A has a similar structure as disclosed in Fig. 3B-C).
Claim 20: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Jo discloses the heater coupon according to claim 19, wherein the fourth recess extends from the first surface to the heater trace layer (it is understood by the examiner that the recesses and connectors at the other end of the Fig. 3A has a similar structure as disclosed in Fig. 3B-C).
Claim 21: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Jo discloses the heater coupon according to claim 19 wherein the fourth recess has a wall and a tab, the wall defining a depth of the recess within the ceramic block and delimiting an area of the tab and the tab providing a surface to which the second connecting arm of the further said connector can be attached (it is understood by the examiner that the recesses and connectors at the other end of the Fig. 3A has a similar structure as disclosed in Fig. 3B-C).
Claim 22: Mizuta in view of Ceva and Jo discloses the heater coupon according to claim 21, wherein the fourth recess extends from the second surface and the integrated thermal sensor is exposed to the second connecting arm of the further said connector (it is understood by the examiner that the recesses and connectors at the other end of the Fig. 3A has a similar structure as disclosed in Fig. 3B-C).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMPSON A CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6422. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SIMPSON A CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights