DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness which are consistent with the proper “functional approach” to the determination of obviousness as laid down in Graham. The key to supporting any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is the clear articulation of the reason(s) why the claimed invention would have been obvious. The Supreme Court in KSR noted that the analysis supporting a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should be made explicit.
EXEMPLARY RATIONALES
Exemplary rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include:
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way;
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
(E) “Obvious to try” – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success;
(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art;
(G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 20-24, 31-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshino (EP 3255958A1).
Yoshino discloses the claimed invention except in reference to claim:
Claim(s) 14-18, 25-29, 34-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshino (EP 3255958A1) in view of Oleynik (US 2022/0118618A1).
Yoshino discloses in reference to claim:
14. An induction energy transmission system, comprising: a support plate; a supply unit arranged below the support plate and comprising a supply induction element for inductively providing energy; a household appliance designed for placement on the support plate and comprising a receiving induction element designed to receive the inductively provided energy; and a control unit designed to control the supply unit and to identify automatically the household appliance placed on the support plate.
An induction energy transmission system (100), in particular an induction cooking system, comprising a support plate (4) on which is provided the control components, a supply unit that is arranged below the support plate (4) and comprises at least one supply induction element (l la) for inductively providing energy, a control unit ( 45a) for controlling the supply unit, and at least one small household appliance (200) to be placed on the support plate (4), the small household appliance (200) having at least one receiving induction element (11 b) for receiving the inductively provided energy, the control unit (45a) being provided to automatically identify the small household appliance (200) placed on the support plate (4) (paragraph [0014]; figures 1, 3, and 4; paragraphs [0056] - [0060]).
PNG
media_image1.png
1001
894
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yoshino further discloses:
Note that the control over the inverter circuit 23 in the power feeding operation is not limited to predetermined electric power, and the control may be performed according to contents of the unique identification signal. For example, the primary control unit 45a may memorize the electric power to be fed as well as the voltage, frequency, and the like of the electric power in association with the unique identification signals of respective pieces of electrical equipment 200 and feed the electric power corresponding to the received unique identification signal by controlling the inverter circuit 23. Alternatively, the primary control unit 45a may store information about plural power feeding patterns in advance according to the type and equipment specifications of the electrical equipment 200 and control the inverter circuit 23 according to the received unique identification signal.
Yoshino can be said to disclose a method and means to identify the household appliance using a unique identification signal, and further to control the household appliance using stored information.
Yoshino does not explicitly disclose the use of a camera designed to take an optical image of the household appliance, wherein the control unit identifies automatically the household appliance based on the optical image.
Oleynik discloses a robotic kitchen system including using a camera 86-1r-4a (or multiple cameras and/or other sensors) to capture images and thereby visualize the environment 86-3 and/or workspace 86-1w. The general-purpose vision subsystem 86-1r-5 can identify objects based on the obtained images, and thereby determine that those objects are indeed present in the environment 86-3 and/or workspace 86-1w. The general-purpose vision subsystem 86-1r-5 is now described in further detail.
[0416] FIG. 87 illustrates an architecture of a general-purpose vision subsystem 86-1r-5, according to an exemplary embodiment. As shown, the general-purpose vision subsystem 86-1r-5 is made up of modules and components (e.g., cameras) configured to provide imaging, object detection and object analysis, for the purpose of identifying objects within the environment 86-3 and/or workspace 86-1w. The modules and systems of the general-purpose vision subsystem 86-1r-5 can leverage the library of known objects (and surfaces) stored in the cloud computing system 86-2 to more accurately or efficiently identify objects. Information about the identified objects can be stored in the workspace model 86-1r-6, which as described above is a data definition of the workspace 86-3.
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art to modify the Yoshino device to include the vision subsystem, i.e. the use of a camera designed to take an optical image of the household appliance, wherein the control unit identifies automatically the household appliance based on the optical image, as taught by Oleynik in place of the unique identification signal of Yoshino such that a large library of known objects could be used with the system.
36. (New) The method of claim 28, wherein the camera is integrated in the support plate.
Note that the control means are integrated on the support plate of Yoshino as seen in Fig. 9
15. The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, constructed in a form of an induction cooking system. See pot 5 being inductively heated for cooking.
16. The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, further comprising a communication interface 30adesigned for wireless data communication between the control unit and the household appliance.
The primary transmitter/receiver unit 30a is made up of a radio communication interface compatible with any of communication standards including, for example, wireless LAN, Bluetooth (registered trademark), and infrared data communication. The primary transmitter/receiver unit 30a conducts bi-directional telecommunication with a secondary transmitter/receiver unit 30b of the electrical equipment 200.
PNG
media_image2.png
897
927
media_image2.png
Greyscale
17. The induction energy transmission system of claim 16, wherein the communication interface is designed for wireless data communication via NFC (Near Field Communication) between the control unit and the household appliance. See 30a and 30b
Yoshino discloses an induction energy transmission system (100) having a communication interface (30a, 30b) for wireless data communication, in particular via NFC, between the control unit ( 45a) and the small household appliance (200) (paragraph [0014]; figures 1, 3, and 4; paragraphs [0056] - [0060]).
18. The induction energy transmission system of claim 16, wherein the control unit 45a is designed to identify the household appliance based on an identification signal transmitted via the communication interface. (paragraph [0014]; figures 1, 3, and 4; paragraphs [0056] - [0060]). The primary control unit 45a stores voltage information in advance in association with the unique identification signals of respective pieces of electrical equipment 200 and controls the inverter circuit 23 to attain a voltage corresponding to the received unique identification signal.
Alternatively, the primary control unit 45a may store information about plural power feeding patterns in advance according to the type and equipment specifications of the electrical equipment 200 and control the inverter circuit 23 according to the received unique identification signal. The primary control unit 45a stores voltage information in advance in association with the unique identification signals of respective pieces of electrical equipment 200 and controls the inverter circuit 23 to attain a voltage corresponding to the received unique identification signal.
Note the act of storing data suggests a memory unit.
25. The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, wherein the control unit is designed to control the energy provided by the supply unit based on a current power requirement of the household appliance.
When it is determined that an input operation has been performed on the secondary display/operating unit 43b, the secondary control unit 45b transmits a unique identification signal via the secondary transmitter/receiver unit 30b (S2). The unique identification signal is a communication signal (information signal) containing any predetermined information, examples of which include information, such as a MAC (Media Access Control) address, uniquely assigned to the electrical equipment 200, information indicating an equipment type of the electrical equipment 200, and information about equipment specifications such as a rated power, a rated voltage, and a rated frequency.
26. The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, wherein the support plate is designed as a cooktop plate. See figure 1 showing plate 4 as a cooktop plate
27. The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, wherein the support plate is designed as a kitchen countertop. See figure 1 showing plate 4 as a kitchen countertop.
37. (New) The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, wherein the camera is integrated in the support plate.
Note that the control means are integrated on the support plate of Yoshino as seen in Fig. 9
Regarding method claims 28-29, 34-35 see Claims 14-27, mutatis mutandis.
Claim(s) 20-24, 31-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Yoshino (EP 3255958A1) in view of Oleynik (US 2022/0118618A1).
20. The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, wherein the control unit is designed to determine a maximum power of the household appliance based on the operating parameter.
Note Yoshino discloses the primary control unit 45a may store information about plural power feeding patterns in advance according to the type and equipment specifications of the electrical equipment 200 and control the inverter circuit 23 according to the received unique identification signal. Note that the control over the inverter circuit 23 in the power feeding operation is not limited to predetermined electric power, and the control may be performed according to contents of the unique identification signal. For example, the primary control unit 45a may memorize the electric power to be fed as well as the voltage, frequency, and the like of the electric power in association with the unique identification signals of respective pieces of electrical equipment 200 and feed the electric power corresponding to the received unique identification signal by controlling the inverter circuit 23.
One of skill in the art would understand the disclosure of Yoshino to suggest that the maximum power of the household appliance to be used is part of the information stored as an operating parameter.
21. The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, wherein the control unit is designed to determine a number of power levels of the household appliance based on the operating parameter.
One of skill in the art would find it obvious to provide a control designed to determine a number of power levels of the household appliance based on the operating parameter since the user may wish to operate the appliance –e.g. a blender or mixer—at varying power levels.
22. The induction energy transmission system of claim 21, wherein the control unit is designed to calculate a distribution of a maximum power of the household appliance to the number of power levels based on a distribution function.
When it is determined that an input operation has been performed on the secondary display/operating unit 43b, the secondary control unit 45b transmits a unique identification signal via the secondary transmitter/receiver unit 30b (S2). The unique identification signal is a communication signal (information signal) containing any predetermined information, examples of which include information, such as a MAC (Media Access Control) address, uniquely assigned to the electrical equipment 200, information indicating an equipment type of the electrical equipment 200, and information about equipment specifications such as a rated power, a rated voltage, and a rated frequency.
One of skill in the art would find it obvious to provide a device designed to calculate a distribution of a maximum power of the household appliance to the number of power levels based on a distribution function so that the appliance does not overload the electric supply if the user attempts to use too many appliances at once where the combined power requirement is more than can be delivered by the electric supply.
23. The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, wherein the memory unit is integrated in the household appliance.
23. (Currently Amended) The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, further comprising a memory unit designed to store an operating parameter of the household appliance, wherein the memory unit is integrated in the household appliance.
Alternatively, the primary control unit 45a may store information about plural power feeding patterns in advance according to the type and equipment specifications of the electrical equipment 200 and control the inverter circuit 23 according to the received unique identification signal.
Note the act of storing data suggests a memory unit. Further note that Yoshino and Oleynik disclose the storing of data. One of skill would understand that the storage will need to be either on the household appliance or the hob. Choosing from a limited number of options as delineated would have been an obvious design choice. One would be motivated to provide the memory within the household appliance to promote the use of a large library of appliances without the need for large storage means on the hob.
24. (Currently Amended) The induction energy transmission system of claim 14, further comprising a memory unit designed to store an operating parameter of the household appliance and a communication interface designed for wireless data communication between the control unit and the household appliance, said control unit being designed to access the memory unit via the communication interface and to request the operating parameter.
The primary transmitter/receiver unit 30a is made up of a radio communication interface compatible with any of communication standards including, for example, wireless LAN, Bluetooth (registered trademark), and infrared data communication. The primary transmitter/receiver unit 30a conducts bi-directional telecommunication with a secondary transmitter/receiver unit 30b of the electrical equipment 200.
Regarding method claims 31-34 see Claims 14-27, mutatis mutandis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference specifically as applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOR S CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4776. The examiner can normally be reached M,W-F 6:30-10:30, 12-4.
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 5712705569. 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.
/THOR S CAMPBELL/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3761
tsc
