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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Regarding claims 1-20, the claim limitation “one or more rectifier components configured to convert alternating current (AC) voltage to rectified direct current (DC) voltage…” has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “component” coupled with functional language “configured to convert alternating current (AC) voltage to rectified direct current (DC) voltage…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier; the term “rectifier” does not provide further clarity as to the structure. Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claims 1-20 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appear to be the corresponding structures described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph limitation: [para. 0027, lines 6-8, Detailed Description, cited:[ "the one or more rectifier components 60 can include, as in the illustrated embodiment, diode 68 (e.g., four diodes 68) …arranged as a bridge rectifier circuit 70. The bridge rectifier circuit 70 can be a Surface Mount Device (SMD) bridge rectifier…].
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not wish to have the claim limitation treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim so that it will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance with 35 U.S.C. § 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2016/147492A1 in view of Tong et al (US 8,693,197) both cited by applicant. Regarding claims 1, 5, 16 and 18, WO 2016/147492A1 discloses a power circuit device with a printed circuit board (11; par. 0022) comprising a first edge (left edge); a second edge (right edge) facing an opposite direction as the first edge (left edge); a first primary surface (top surface) comprising a first section (left side of left heat sink) and a second section (right side of left heat sink), the first section (left side of left heat sink) being disposed closer to the first edge (left edge) than the second section (right side of left heat sink), and the second section (right side of left heat sink) being disposed closer to the second edge (right edge) than the first section (left side of left heat sink); a second primary surface (bottom surface) facing an opposite direction as the first primary surface (top surface); a heat sink (30; par. 0021; left heat sink) projecting from the first primary surface (top surface), laterally between the first edge (left edge) and the second edge (right edge), and laterally between the first section (left side of left heat sink) and a second section (right side of left heat sink) of the first primary surface (top surface); a smoothing component (par. 0038: “electrolytic capacitor”) projecting from the first primary surface (top surface), the smoothing component (electrolytic capacitor) (i) in electrical communication (par. 0035) with the one or more rectifier components (4, par. 0034)and (ii) configured to smooth out the rectified DC voltage and output a smoothed DC voltage (printed circuit board (11) is designed to interface an external load with a ground wire terminal (22a, figure 8, par. 0039; claim 1) and an output wire terminal (23, Figure 9; par. 0013, par. 0041; claim 1); and inverter components (5; par. 0035) in electrical communication (par. 0035) with the one or more rectifier components (4, par. 0035) and the smoothing component (par. 0038: “electrolytic capacitor”), the inverter components (5, par. 0035) comprising (i) at least one capacitor (20, par. 0038) and at least one connector (printed circuit board (11) is designed to interface an external load with a ground wire terminal (22a, figure 8, par. 0039; claim 1) and an output wire terminal (23, Figure 9; par. 0013, par. 0041; claim 1)) for an induction coil (6; three inductors) both projecting from the first primary surface (top surface) of the printed circuit board (11, par. 0022) at the second section (right side of the left heat sink) and (ii) a controllable solid-state switching device (5, par. 0013) functionally operable with the at least one capacitor (20, par. 0038) and the at least one connector. However, WO 2016/147492A1 does not disclose one or more rectifier components configured to convert alternating current (AC) voltage to rectified direct current (DC) voltage. Tong discloses features have already been employed for the same purpose in a similar power converter, which converts an AC voltage to a DC voltage, and the DC voltage back to an AC voltage (col. 4, lines 54 to col. 5, lines 51; claim 1; Figures 1-2). Here, Tong discloses that the circuit is physically divided into a low-frequency signal portion and high-frequency signal portion by a heat sink, so electromagnetic interference from the high-frequency signal portion to the low-frequency signal is effectively prevented. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made when the same result is to be achieved, to apply these features with corresponding effect to the smoothing component of WO 2016/147492A1 by placing it on the left side of the left heat sink, thereby arriving at a power converter. Regarding claim 2, WO 2016/147492A1 discloses the one or more rectifier (4, Figure 8) components are arranged as a bridge rectifier circuit (four diodes configured as a bridge rectifier). Regarding claims 3-4, the person skilled in the art would place the rectifier components also in the first section, because the rectifier circuit is part of the low-frequency signal portion. The rectifier component (4) projecting from the first primary surface is disclosed in WO 2016/147492A1, in Figure 3 and projecting from the second primary surface is discloses in WO 2016/147492A1, in Figure 5. Regarding claims 6 and 17, is disclosed respectively, because the person skill in the art would not place the rectifier components in the second section as disclosed above, otherwise It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize in contradict the procedure to avoid the interference between the first and second sections. Regarding claim 7, WO 2016/147492A1 discloses the smoothing component comprises a capacitor (20, par. 0038). Regarding claims 8 and 9, WO 2016/147492A1 discloses that the person skill in the art would not place components of the low-frequency signal portion and high-frequency signal portion in the same section. Regarding claim 10, WO 2016/147492A1 discloses the smoothing capacitor is placed closer to the first edge, because it is on the left side of the heat sink, and the capacitor of the inverter components is placed closer to the second edge, because it is placed on the right side of the heat sink. Regarding claim 11, WO 2016/147492A1 discloses, in figure 8, a high-frequency output is considered as a design option, because it mainly depends on the control signal of the inverter transistors and the transistor characteristics. Regarding claim 12, WO 2016/147492A1 are implicit disclosed, in figure 8, power metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFET) or other kind of high-power transistors, since the power converter drives a three-phase motor (par. 0043). Regarding claims 13 and 19, WO 2016/147492A1 discloses the heat sink and the solid-state switching device being on either surface (par. 0037). It is common general knowledge to transfer heat with so called thermal VIA between two opposite primary surfaces of a printed circuit board. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention was made to implement thermal VIAs, because the heat sink especially provided to dissipate the heat of the solid-state switching device. Regarding claims 14-15 is disclosed according to the rejection of WO 2016/147492A1 in view of Tong above respectively, because the person skill in the art would not place the solid-state switching devices in the first section according the rejection of WO 2016/147492A1 in view of Tong above, otherwise It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to utilize in contradict the procedure to avoid the interference between the first and second sections. the first and second sections. Regarding claim 15, WO 2016/147492A1 discloses
Claim 20 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Neve ( US 2024/0381496) discloses induction cooktop assembly. Park et al (US 10,477,629) discloses induction heat cooking apparatus and method for driving the same.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUANG T VAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4789. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00.
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 W 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.
/QUANG T VAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 June 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights