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 .
Response to Reply
Claims 1-20 are pending in the present application, of which claims 11-20 are withdrawn from consideration. In the most recent reply filed 12/8/2025 the claims do not contain any amendments. The remarks filed therewith are fully considered but are not persuasive for the reasons indicated below.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. herein referred to as “Park” (USPN 7,565,822, cited on IDS filed 8/3/2023).
As to claim 1, Park discloses a washing machine appliance comprising: a cabinet; a wash tub positioned within the cabinet; a wash basket rotatably mounted within the wash tub (washing machine includes a body 10, outer tub 20, drum 30, opening 11); a heating element in thermal communication with the wash tub whereby the heating element is positioned and configured to generate steam within the wash tub (Fig. 3: steam generator 100 supplies steam into drum 30; steam generator 100 has a heater 110 for heating water, and the heater 110 may be a coil heater, a sheath heater or an induction heater); a control panel (control assembly 400), the control comprising a plurality of input selectors and a display, wherein one input selector of the plurality of input selectors is configured to output a cycle selection and a steam option selection; and a controller, the controller configured for: receiving, from the one input selector of the plurality of input selectors, the cycle selection and the steam option selection; and activating the heating element during the selected cycle of the washing machine appliance in response to the received steam option selection (Fig. 4: see plurality of input selectors for cycle selection and steam option at 416; col. 4, lines 53-54: course select part 420 may be a touch panel).
Particularly, course select part 420 is a single input selector that allows for selection of a standard wash with a steam cycle (feature 422). Indicator lamp 450 illuminates during the steam cycle. However, the input 420 is the single input selector that allows for selection of both a wash cycle and a steam cycle.
As top claim 2, Park discloses wherein the one input selector is a touch-responsive input selector, wherein the one input selector is configured to output a cycle selection without steam in response to a first touch input and is configured to output the cycle selection and the steam option selection in response to a second touch input (as noted above, the course selection part 420 may be a touch panel, and a second touch input may be performed by pressing button 416 for steam).
As to claim 6, Park discloses wherein the touch-responsive input selector comprises a button (steam button 416).
As to claim 7, Park discloses wherein the control panel further comprises one or more indicator lights associated with the selected cycle, the controller configured to illuminate the one or more indicator lights associated with the selected cycle in a first way in response to a selected cycle without a steam option and to illuminate the one or more indicator lights associated with the selected cycle in a second way in response to the cycle selection and the steam option selection (claims 8 and 15).
As to claim 8, Park discloses wherein the control panel further comprises a text steam indicator, the controller configured to activate an indicator light associated with the text steam indicator in response to the cycle selection and the steam option selection (steam wash displayer 460 is provided in the control assembly 400 for notifying the user that steam washing is performed, the steam wash displayer 460 may be a LCD, LED, and/or lamp turning on/off during the steam washing).
As to claim 9, Park discloses wherein the text steam indicator is translucent, the indicator light associated with the text steam indicator positioned behind the text steam indicator, whereby activating the indicator light associated with the text steam indicator illuminates the text steam indicator (steam wash displayer 460 is provided in the control assembly 400 for notifying the user that steam washing is performed, the steam wash displayer 460 may be a LCD, LED, and/or lamp turning on/off during the steam washing).
As to claim 10, Park discloses wherein the controller is further configured to output a first cycle time on the display in response to a selected cycle without a steam option and to output a second cycle time on the display in response to the cycle selection and the steam option selection (see Fig. 4 of Park: time indication is dependent on the cycle selection, which would be a differing/longer time with a steam option selected).
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.
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park as applied to claims above, and further in view of non-patent literature article in Sensors Journal titled Development of a Carbon Nanotube-Based Touchscreen Capable of Multi-Touch and Multi-Force Sensing herein referred to as “Touchscreen NPL”, previously cited in the PTO-892 filed 9/15/2025.
As to claims 3-5, Park is silent regarding its screen having a short press, long press, double touch, or touch-responsive input selectors. However, in the art of touchscreens it is useful in having both multi-touch and multi-force detection as important characteristics of a force sensing touchscreen (Touchscreen NPL, 2015 at page 15: “Another important characteristic of the force sensing touchscreen was the simultaneous detection of both multi-touch and multi-force.”); this reads on the short press, long press, double touch, and/or touch-responsive input selectors as claimed. It would have been obvious at the time of the invention to incorporate the well-known touchscreen sensing features of Touchscreen NPL to the touch input control panel of Park to allow for greater flexibility in user selections, increased speed and productivity through direct manipulation, space-saving design, and improved user experience as the interface is more intuitive.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant primarily contests that the applied prior art fails to teach an input selector that allows for selection of both a cycle selection and a steam selection. However, the prior art at Park appears to do both. As noted above, with regard to Park: “Particularly, course select part 420 is a single input selector that allows for selection of a standard wash with a steam cycle (feature 422). Indicator lamp 450 illuminates during the steam cycle. However, the input 420 is the single input selector that allows for selection of both a wash cycle and a steam cycle. “. For these reasons Applicant’s remarks regarding this feature are not persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 RITA P ADHLAKHA whose telephone number is (571)270-0378. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8-5pm EST.
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, Michael Barr can be reached at 571-272-1414. 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.
/RITA P ADHLAKHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711