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 Objections
Claim 12 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 recites “a ionization sensor” should be changed to “an ionization sensor”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 8 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 a1 as being anticipated by Gremm (EP 2981154).
Regarding claims 1 and 19, Gremm discloses “a cooktop” (Fig. 4 is an entire induction hob 21) comprising:
“a power delivery module including a burner” (on page 5, four induction coils 11 a, 11 b, 11 c and 11 d are arranged. These induction coils 11 are all identical. Examiner noted that it is inherently and necessarily that a power supply device is included in order to supply electricity to the induction coils. Examiner noted that “one of four induction coils” can be burner);
“an actuator” (on page 3, i.e., an induction coil obviously not full or sufficiently covered can be switched off and another, which is not yet in operation but sufficiently covered, switched on for heating operation. This suggest there must be a switch to switch on and off) for selectively heating the burner via “the power delivery module” (four induction coils 11 a, 11 b, 11 c and 11 d are arranged. These induction coils 11 are all identical. An induction coil obviously not full or sufficiently covered can be switched off and another. This suggest that in the cooking area there four induction coils (11a-11d), the one or more induction coil is not sufficiently covered or fully covered by the cookware(s), the induction coil(s) can be switched off and another can be on);
“an audible alert module” (on page 3, After recognizing a noncentric or improperly placed pot different actions can follow. Thus, an operator can easily be made aware of it by an optical and / or acoustic signal. Examiner noted that acoustic signal must require audible module in order to alert user); and
a control system configured to:
“detect a presence a cooking vessel with a detection signal that includes at least one of a characteristic of an electro-magnetic field or an ionization current from the power delivery module” (on page 2, In this case, the detection coil can detect a field generated by the induction coil for normal inductive heating of the erected pot. Thus, the detection of the position of the pot in the current heating operation of the induction coil without any change in this detection is possible);
“determine if a location of the cooking vessel is centered on the burner within a first threshold distance” (on page 3, After recognizing a noncentric or improperly placed pot different actions can follow. Thus, an operator can easily be made aware of it by an optical and / or acoustic signal. Alternatively, the heating operation can be influenced on the induction coil, for example, the power can be lowered slightly. In still further alternatives, with an above-described principle of many induction coils per hob, an induction coil obviously not full or sufficiently covered can be switched off and another, which is not yet in operation but sufficiently covered, switched on for heating operation. Examiner interpret that “a first threshold distance” means “when pot location is noncentric to a heating region”. In other words, a first threshold can be defined based on the position and/or coverage of the container relative to the cooking region. When the detected position or coverage fails to satisfy the first threshold, the induction heater will be turned off); and
“if the location of the cooking vessel is not centered within the first threshold distance, prevent the actuator from selectively heating the burner and generate a first audible alert with the audible alert module” (After recognizing a noncentric or improperly placed pot different actions can follow. Thus, an operator can easily be made aware of it by an optical and / or acoustic signal. Alternatively, the heating operation can be influenced on the induction coil, for example, the power can be lowered slightly. In still further alternatives, with an above-described principle of many induction coils per hob, an induction coil obviously not full or sufficiently covered can be switched off and another).
Regarding claim 8, Gremm discloses “the burner is configured as an induction burner that generates an electro-magnetic field and the detection signal includes the at least one characteristic a characteristic of the electro-magnetic field” (on page 3, i.e., a plurality of detection coils on an induction coil or hob are present and evenly distributed … For example, if the induction coil operates at a frequency of 17 kHz and greater, for example 50 kHz or even 80 kHz, the transmitter operates at a frequency of approximately 80 kHz to 1 MHz or even slightly higher. This also ensures that no interference occurs. However, frequencies in the range of 150 kHz or 200 kHz up to 300 kHz or 400 kHz are considered to be particularly advantageous.. It is inherently and necessarily the induction coil produce the at least one characteristic a characteristic of the electro-magnetic field).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gremm (EP 2981154) in view of Sakakibara et al. (US 8,796,599).
Regarding claim 7, Gremm discloses the first audible alert.
Gremm is silent regarding a voice that guides a user with directional vocabulary.
Sakakibara et al. teaches “a voice that guides a user with directional vocabulary” (col.25, at lines 3-19, the notification unit 13 to output a voice message for notifying that the heating is halted (S1605). For example, the notification unit 13 outputs a voice message "heating will be halted" … the control unit 8 causes the notification unit 13 to output a voice message for prompting the user to cook. For example, the notification unit 13 outputs a voice message "please start cooking"). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Gremm with Sakakibara, by adding Sakaibara et al.’s user voice alert to Gremm’s voice alert module, to guide user during cooking or heating process.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gremm (EP 2981154) in view of Sakakibara et al. (US 8,796,599).
Regarding claim 9, Gremm discloses “the burner is configured as an induction burner with a power-delivery induction coil” (on page 3, i.e., a plurality of detection coils on an induction coil or hob are present and evenly distributed)
Gremm is silent regarding at least one detector coil.
Sakakibara et al. teaches “the burner is configured as an induction burner with a power-delivery induction coil and at least one detector coil” ([0030], i.e., induction heating coils 15a to 15h … The induction heating coils 15. [0033] Sensor coils 25). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Gremm with Sakakibara, by adding Sakakibara et al.’s sensor coils to Gremm’s sensor system, to more accurate detect the presence of cookware (para.0016) as taught by Sakakibara et al.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gremm (EP 2981154) in view of OK et al. (US 20200059996)
Regarding claim 10, Gremm discloses all the features of claim limitations as set forth above except for the burner is configured as an induction burner and the control system is configured to electrically stimulate the burner in a sequenced pattern and the power delivery system transmits the detection signal every time the burner is electrically stimulated.
OK et al. teaches “the burner is configured as an induction burner and the control system is configured to electrically stimulate the burner in a sequenced pattern and the power delivery system transmits the detection signal every time the burner is electrically stimulated” ([0007] A sensor 20 is connected with the alternating-current-power supplying unit 1 and senses voltages or electric currents output from the alternating-current-power supplying unit 1. A control unit 30 calculates voltages or electric currents supplied to the heating coil (Coil) on the basis of voltages or electric currents measured by the sensor 20, and generates control signals for controlling operations of a switch driving unit 40 on the basis of the calculated voltages or electric currents. The switch driving unit 40 controls on/off operations of the switch unit 7 on the basis of the control signals received from the control unit 30. Examiner noted that “ON/FF operations of switch unit” is considered as a sequenced pattern). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Gremm with OK et al., by adding OK et al.’s switch control algorithm to Gremm’s cooking device, to ensures high credibility and high efficiency in controlling a high-output induction may be implemented at a low cost (para.0062) as taught by OK et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-17 are allowed.
Claims 2-6 and 20 are 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.
Examiner’s Remark
The combination of Gremm (EP 2981154) and EP 3855868 is silent regarding
Claim 2 recites “if the location of the cooking vessel is not within the second threshold distance, generate a second audible alert with the audible alert module that is different than the first audible alert” and Claim 11 recites “generate an audible alert that changes based on the plurality of threshold distances as the cooking vessel is moved towards or away from the position centered on the burner”.
EP ‘868 teaches “the control system is further configured to: determine if the location of the cooking vessel is not within a second threshold distance that is further than the first threshold distance” (fig.5, d and d’ show the distance of the cookpot at different threshold distances).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY CHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7107. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
/JIMMY CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights