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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/19/2023 and 08/15/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Status of the Claims In the claim dated 05/19/2023, claims 1-20 are pending. 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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for dete rmining 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 . Claim s 1, 9, 12, 14-15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski (US 20140048058 A1) in view of Park (US20070145042A1) Regarding claim 1, Donarski discloses A method ( see abstract) of operating an oven appliance ( 10, see fig.1 ), the oven appliance ( 10, see fig.1 ) comprising a cooking chamber ( 14, see fig.1), a gas heat source ( 50, see fig.1 ), and an electric heat source (52, see fig.1 ), the method comprising: obtaining a burner prioritization ( cycle of operation, see para.0024) from a user of the oven appliance ( see para.0024: “user has selected a broiling cycle of operation through the user interface 42”) ; obtaining a temperature set point for a cooking process ( see para.0018: “the user may select a temperature set point which the user desires the temperature of the cooking cavity 14 to reach or a cycle of operation which includes one or more temperature set points the temperature of the cooking cavity reaches during the course of the cycle of operation ”); determining, based on the temperature set point ( temperature set point , see para.0028) and the burner prioritization ( cycle of operation , see para.0026) , a target heating rate ( predetermined broiling rate ) for the cooking process ( See para.0026: “ a predetermined broiling rate based on the selected cycle of operation” and para.0028: “The temperature set point for the air temperature in the cooking cavity 14 … may be used to adjust the broiling rate of the thermal radiation”); operating the electric heat source ( 52, see fig.1) to heat the cooking chamber ( 14, see fig.1 and para.0025: “ electric heating element 52 to broil a food item in the broiling zone”) . Donarski does not expressly disclose determining that a heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate; and operating the gas heat source in response to determining that the heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate. Park discloses a c offee maker and microwave oven and method for controlling the same, comprising: determining that a heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate (see para.0136: “ the rate ΔT of temperature change calculated is lower than a preset value (S 240 )”); and operating the gas heat source ( gas heat source 50 of Donarski ) in response to determining that the heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate (see para.0137 of Park: “If the rate ΔT of temperature change calculated is lower than a preset value, the heat conservation heater 138, or 238 is operated together with the heating heater 137, or 237, to extract coffee (S250)”. In Park, the heater 138/238 is operated if the rate ΔT of temperature change calculated is lower than a preset value. Therefore, by applying the teachings of Park, in the modification of Donarski in view of Park, the gas heat source 50 of Donarski is operated together with the electric heating element 52 of Donarski if the rate ΔT of temperature change calculated is lower than the preset value/ target heating rate). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Donarski to apply the teachings of Park so as the method comprises “determining that a heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate; and operating the gas heat source in response to determining that the heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate”. Doing so shortens a time period required for cooking while providing for more even and consistent heating of the food (see para.0147 of Park and para.0047 of Donarski ). Regarding claim 9, Donarski further discloses operation of the gas heat source is based on a closed loop feedback control algorithm (“The gas heating element 50 is activated and deactivated during both the preheating and broiling phases based on the air temperature in the cooking cavity 14 as determined by the temperature sensor 30”, see para.0044). Regarding claim 12, Donarski further discloses a user interface panel ( 42, see fig.1), wherein the burner prioritization ( cycle of operation, see para.0013 ) and the temperature set point ( temperature set point, see para.0018) are provided through the user interface panel (see para.0013: “ a user interface 42 for selecting a cycle of operation” and para.0018: “the controller 40 may also be coupled with the user interface 42 for receiving user selected inputs and communicating information to the user. For example, the user may select a temperature set point” ) . Regarding claim 14, Donarski further discloses a temperature sensor ( 30, see fig.1) located inside the cooking chamber (14, see fig.1) and configured to sense a temperature inside the oven appliance (see para.0020: “the temperature sensor 30 for determining an air temperature within the cooking cavity 14”). Regarding claim 15, Donarski further discloses An oven appliance (10, see fig.1), comprising: a cabinet ( 12, see fig.1 ) defining a cooking chamber ( 12, see fig.1) ; an electric heat source (52, see fig.1 ), provided within the cooking chamber ( 12, see fig.1 ); a gas heat source ( 50, see fig.1) provided within the cooking chamber (12); a temperature sensor (30, see fig.1) provided within the cooking chamber ( 12, see fig.1 ) and configured to sense a temperature of the cooking chamber (see para.0020: “temperature sensor 30 may be provided in one or more locations within and/or adjacent to the cooking cavity 14 to determine the temperature within the cooking cavity 14 ”); and a controller (40, see fig.1) operably connected to the electric heat source ( 52, see fig.1 and para.0029 ), the gas heat source (50, see fig.1 and para.0029), and the temperature sensor (30, see fig.1 ), wherein the controller (40, see fig.1 ) is configured to execute an operation comprising: obtaining a burner prioritization (selected cycle of operation, see para.0024) from a user of the oven appliance ( see para.0024: “user has selected a broiling cycle of operation through the user interface 42” ) ; obtaining a temperature set point for a cooking process ( see para.0018: “the user may select a temperature set point which the user desires the temperature of the cooking cavity 14 to reach or a cycle of operation which includes one or more temperature set points the temperature of the cooking cavity reaches during the course of the cycle of operation ”); determining, based on the temperature set point (see para.0028) and the burner prioritization (see para.0026) , a target heating rate for the cooking process ( See para.0026: “ a predetermined broiling rate based on the selected cycle of operation” and para.0028: “The temperature set point for the air temperature in the cooking cavity 14 … may be used to adjust the broiling rate of the thermal radiation”); operating the electric heat source ( 52, see fig.1) to heat the cooking chamber ( 14, see fig.1 and para.0025: “ electric heating element 52 to broil a food item in the broiling zone”) . Donarski does not expressly disclose determining that a heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate; and operating the gas heat source in response to determining that the heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate. Park discloses Coffee maker and microwave oven and method for controlling the same, comprising: determining that a heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate (see para.0136: “ the rate ΔT of temperature change calculated is lower than a preset value (S 240 )”); and operating the gas heat source ( gas heat source 50 of Donarski ) in response to determining that the heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate (see para.0137: “If the rate ΔT of temperature change calculated is lower than a preset value, the heat conservation heater 138, or 238 is operated together with the heating heater 137, or 237, to extract coffee (S250)”. In Park, the heater 138/238 is operated if the rate ΔT of temperature change calculated is lower than a preset value. Therefore, in the modification of Donarski in view of Park, the gas heat source 50 of Donarski is operated together with the electric heating element 52 if the rate ΔT of temperature change calculated is lower than the preset value/ target heating rate). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller of Donarski to apply the teachings of Park so as the controller comprises “determining that a heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate; and operating the gas heat source in response to determining that the heating rate of the cooking chamber is below the target heating rate”. Doing so shortens a time period required for cooking while providing for more even and consistent heating of the food (see para.0147 of Park and para.0047 of Donarski ). Regarding claim 19, Donarski further discloses operation of at least one of the gas heat source or the electric heat source is based on a closed loop feedback control algorithm (“The gas heating element 50 is activated and deactivated during both the preheating and broiling phases based on the air temperature in the cooking cavity 14 as determined by the temperature sensor 30”, see para.0044). Claim s 2 -3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Gramlich (US 20040262284 A1) Regarding claim 2, the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the burner prioritization is a heating speed selection. Gramlich discloses a cooking device, comprising: the burner prioritization (operating mode, see para.0014) is a heating speed selection (See para.0014: …” the retractable knob 28 for activating a high-speed heating unit 15 or for regulating a high-speed heating mode”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the burner prioritization of Donarski in view of Park to be “a heating speed selection” as taught by Gramlich . Doing so allows to regulate the speed of the heating unit(s) which ensures that food is cooked evenly. Regarding claim 3 , Donarski in view of Park/ Gramlich further discloses the heating speed selection is a high speed selection (See para.0014 of Gramlich : …” the retractable knob 28 for activating a high- speed heating unit 15 or for regulating a high- speed heating mode”). Claim 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park/ Gramlich as applied to claim 2 and further in view of Takesh i (JP2013073805A) Regarding claim 4 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except utilization of the gas heat source is proportional to the heating speed selection. Takesh i discloses a heating cooker, comprising: utilization of the gas heat source (gas heating cooker, see para.0099) is proportional to the heating speed selection (see para.0127: “high-speed heating”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Donarski in view of Park / Gramlich to have “ utilization of the gas heat source is proportional to the heating speed selection” as taught by Takesh i . Doing so allows to regulate the speed of the gas heat source which ensures that food is cooked evenly. Claim 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Cho (KR20040093944A) Regarding claim 5, the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the burner prioritization is a user acquiescence level to combustion byproducts. Cho discloses gas-radiation cooking machine and control method thereof, comprising: t he burner prioritization is a user acquiescence level to combustion byproducts (See para.0033 and 0039: “ the user selects the menu, you have selected the first-stage combustion”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the burner prioritization of Donarski in view of Park to be “ a user acquiescence level to combustion byproducts ” as taught by Cho. Doing so causes the combustion of good quality (see para.006 of Cho). Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Bowles (US20060090741A1) Regarding claim 6 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except determining, based on the temperature set point, an electric heating temperature range and a gas undershoot temperature limit, the gas undershoot temperature limit being below the electric heating temperature range; determining that a chamber temperature has dropped to the gas undershoot temperature limit; and operating the gas heat source to maintain the chamber temperature above the gas undershoot temperature limit. Bowles discloses a gas range and method for using the same, comprising: determining, based on the temperature set point ( (See fig.4, SET is defined as a desired cooking temperature input by an operator via input interface 106, 0035) , an electric heating temperature range (see fig.4, when T1<Set, electric broil is on, 0037) and a gas undershoot temperature limit (fig.4, Set-offset 2, gas bake burner is on,0037) , the gas undershoot temperature limit (Set-offset 2) being below the electric heating temperature range ( T1<Set ); determining that a chamber temperature has dropped to the gas undershoot temperature limit (see fig.4); and operating the gas heat source ( gas bake burner, see fig.4 ) to maintain the chamber temperature above the gas undershoot temperature limit ( see fig.4 and para.0037 ) . Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the m ethod of Donarski in view of Park to have “determining, based on the temperature set point, an electric heating temperature range and a gas undershoot temperature limit, the gas undershoot temperature limit being below the electric heating temperature range; determining that a chamber temperature has dropped to the gas undershoot temperature limit; and operating the gas heat source to maintain the chamber temperature above the gas undershoot temperature limit” as taught by Bowles. Doing so facilitates improving the overall bake/broil evenness (see para.0044 of Bowles). Regarding claim 7, Donarski in view of Park/ Bowles further discloses cycling the electric heat source ( broil element, see fig.4 ) to maintain the chamber temperature within the electric heating temperature range ( T1<Set ) . Regarding claim 8, Donarski in view of Park/ Bowles further discloses adjusting the gas undershoot temperature limit (Set-offset 2) based on the burner prioritization (bake on, see fig.4) . Claim 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Sawaki (US 20200204992 A1) Regarding claim 10 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the burner prioritization is obtained upon installation and first use of the oven appliance. Sawaki discloses an information processing apparatus, comprising: the burner prioritization ( burner prioritization of Donarski ) is obtained upon installation and first use of the oven appliance (see para.0300 of Sawaki : “When the application program 1351 installed by the non-administrator user is executed for the first time”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the burner prioritization of Donarski in view of Park to be “ obtained upon installation and first use of the oven appliance ” as taught by Sawaki . Doing so ensures that the oven operates correctly and safety. Claim 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 1 and further in view of McKee (US 20130202761 A1) Regarding claim 11 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the burner prioritization is obtained from memory as the burner prioritization from a prior cooking cycle. McKee discloses t he burner prioritization is obtained from memory as the burner prioritization from a prior cooking cycle (see para.0019: “ cook setting that was previously used to achieve the perfectly cooked food under a cook setting name such as Cook_setting X”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the burner prioritization of Donarski in view of Park to be “obtained from memory as the burner prioritization from a prior cooking cycle” as taught by McKee. Doing so achieves the perfectly cooked food (See para.0019 of McKee). Claim 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Czach (US 20230218111 A1) Regarding claim 13 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except a controller in operative communication with a remote device through an external network, and wherein the burner prioritization and the temperature set point are provided through the remote device. Czach discloses a grill device, comprising: a controller (112, see fig.1) in operative communication with a remote device ( mobile device and/or a computer, see para.0027) through an external network (a transmitter and a receiver , see para.0027), and wherein the burner prioritization ( control cycles, see para.0027 ) and the temperature set point ( temperature set points, see para.0027) are provided through the remote device (See para.0027: “. The controller 112 may be configured to transmit information, such as sensor readings, alerts, etc., to the remote location and to receive information, such as temperature set points, control cycles, etc., from the remote location”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the controller of Donarski in view of Park in view of Czach so as the “controller in operative communication with a remote device through an external network, and wherein the burner prioritization and the temperature set point are provided through the remote device” as taught by Czach . Doing so allows the system to be more flexible by enabling the placement of the remote device at a significant distance from the controller. Claim 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 15 and further in view of Gramlich (US 20040262284 A1) Regarding claim 16 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the burner prioritization is a heating speed selection, and wherein the heating speed selection is one of a slow speed selection, a medium speed selection, or a high speed selection. Gramlich discloses a cooking device, comprising: the burner prioritization (operating mode, see para.0014) is a heating speed selection (See para.0014: …” the retractable knob 28 for activating a high- speed heating unit 15 or for regulating a high- speed heating mode”). and wherein the heating speed selection is one of a slow speed selection, a medium speed selection, or a high-speed selection ( See para.0014) . Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the burner prioritization of Donarski in view of Park to be “a heating speed selection and wherein the heating speed selection is a high speed selection ” as taught by Gramlich . Doing so allows to regulate the speed of the heating unit(s) which ensures that food is cooked evenly. Claim 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park/ Gramlich as applied to claim 16 and further in view of Takesh i (JP2013073805A) Regarding claim 17 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except utilization of the gas heat source is proportional to the heating speed selection. Takesh i discloses a heating cooker, comprising: utilization of the gas heat source (gas heating cooker, see para.0099) is proportional to the heating speed selection (see para.0127: “high-speed heating”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the oven appliance of Donarski in view of Park / Gramlich to have “ utilization of the gas heat source is proportional to the heating speed selection” as taught by Takesh i . Doing so allows to regulate the speed of the gas heat source which ensures that food is cooked evenly. Claim 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 15 and further in view of Bowles (US20060090741A1) Regarding claim 18 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the operation comprises: determining, based on the temperature set point, an electric heating temperature range and a gas undershoot temperature limit, the gas undershoot temperature limit being below the electric heating temperature range; and adjusting at least one of an electric undershoot temperature limit or the gas undershoot temperature limit based on the burner prioritization. Bowles discloses a gas range and method for using the same, comprising: the operation comprises: determining, based on the temperature set point (See fig.4, SET is defined as a desired cooking temperature input by an operator via input interface 106, 0035 ), an electric heating temperature range (see fig.4, when T1<Set, electric broil is on, 0037) and a gas undershoot temperature limit (fig.4, when T1<Set-offset 2, gas bake burner is on,0037) , the gas undershoot temperature limit (Set-offset 2) being below the electric heating temperature range (T1< Set) ; and adjusting the gas undershoot temperature limit (T1<Set-offset 2) based on the burner prioritization (bake on, see fig.4). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the oven appliance’s operation of Donarski in view of Park to comprise “comprises: determining, based on the temperature set point, an electric heating temperature range and a gas undershoot temperature limit, the gas undershoot temperature limit being below the electric heating temperature range; and adjusting at least one of an electric undershoot temperature limit or the gas undershoot temperature limit based on the burner prioritization” as taught by Bowles . Doing so facilitates improving the overall bake/broil evenness (see para.0044 of Bowles). Claim 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donarski in view of Park as applied to claim 15 and further in view of Sawaki (US 20200204992 A1) Regarding claim 20 , the modification discloses the claimed limitations as set forth, except the burner prioritization is obtained upon installation and first use of the oven appliance. Sawaki discloses an information processing apparatus, comprising: the burner prioritization ( burner prioritization of Donarski ) is obtained upon installation and first use of the oven appliance (see para.0300 of Sawaki : “When the application program 1351 installed by the non-administrator user is executed for the first time”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the burner prioritization of Donarski in view of Park to be “ obtained upon installation and first use of the oven appliance ” as taught by Sawaki . Doing so ensures that the oven operates correctly and safety. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 20150276229 A1 discloses an improved system for control of a gas oven appliance is provided. A valve provides for control of the flow of gas to the burner. After preheating the oven, the valve is cycled between high and low (or zero) gas flow rates at frequency that provides the overall desired heating rate of the cooking chamber during cooking operations. A variety of valve types may be used including proportional types and predetermined set point types (e.g., high-low, high-medium-low, or on-off). During cooking operations, between periods of cycling, the valve is at least partially closed (e.g., set to a lower gas flow rate or an off state). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT TIFFANY T TRAN whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-3673 . The examiner can normally be reached on FILLIN "Work schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday, 10am - 6pm . Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Helena Kosanovic can be reached on (571) 272-9059. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /TIFFANY T TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761