Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/400,513

MULTIFUNCTIONAL CONTROL ASSEMBLY AND CHARCOAL OVEN

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 29, 2023
Examiner
WEINERT, WILLIAM C
Art Unit
3762
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Haohong Electric Technology (Hubei) Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
76 granted / 127 resolved
-10.2% vs TC avg
Strong +39% interview lift
Without
With
+38.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
167
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
67.0%
+27.0% vs TC avg
§102
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
§112
9.6%
-30.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 127 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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. Claim (s) 1-3 and 7, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park ( KR 102377194 B1 ) in view of Lee ( US 4759342 A ) . Regarding claim 1 , Park teaches a multifunctional control assembly (multifunctional cooking appliance 100) applied to a charcoal oven (FIG. 5, charcoal bowl 110) , wherein the charcoal oven has a fuel rack for placing charcoals (FIG. 5, the bottom portion of the charcoal bowl 110) , and the multifunctional control assembly comprises: a partition member (FIG. 5, main body 10) , wherein the partition member is provided on the fuel rack and configured to partition the fuel rack into a concentration zone located at an inner side of the partition member and a dispersal zone located at an outer side of the partition member (FIG. 5, the zones inside and outside the main body 10). Park fails to teach an extension member, wherein the extension member is provided on the partition member and in contact with the partition member, and a storage groove for storing water or spices is formed at the extension member. However, Lee teaches an extension member (FIG. 1, shoulder 26) , wherein the extension member is provided on the partition member and in contact with the partition member, and a storage groove (FIG. 1, reservoir 28) for storing water or spices is formed at the extension member. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Park by including a water storage ring about the main body , as taught by Lee , with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Park with these aforementioned teachings of Lee with the motivation of allowing a user to store utensils (e.g., unused skewers) or create steam if the assembly is covered within a grill. Regarding claim 2 , the combination of Park and Lee teaches that the partition member has a narrow end and a flared end, the partition member is configured to gradually shrink in a direction from the flared end to the narrow end, and the flared end is configured to face the fuel rack (Park, FIG. 5) . Regarding claim 3 , the combination of Park and Lee teaches that the extension member has a first side wall ( Lee, FIG. 2, the exterior wall of annular side wall 24 ) , a second side wall (FIG. 2, peripheral wall 22) and two third side walls (FIG. 2, the bottom wall of the reservoir 28 and the interior wall of the annular side wall 24) ; the first side wall fits a profile of an outer wall of the partition member, the second side wall is connected to an end of the first side wall close to the flared end, the two third side walls are spaced apart and connected to the first side wall and the second side wall (FIG. 2, the bottom wall of the reservoir 28 and the interior wall of the annular side wall 24 are connected to the other walls) , and the first side wall, the second side wall and the two third side walls enclose to form the storage groove with an opening towards the narrow end (FIG. 2, the top opening of the reservoir is nearest to the narrow end of the annular wall 24) . Regarding claim 7 , the combination of Park and Lee teaches that at least two storage grooves are formed on the extension member (Lee, FIG. 2, the reservoir may be divided into left and right halves) , and the storage grooves are provided on the partition member along a circumferential direction of the partition member. Regarding claim 8 , the combination of Park and Lee teaches that the partition member is detachably connected to the extension member (Lee, FIG. 2, the reservoir 28 could be detached from the rest of the assembly if cut) . Regarding claim 10 , the combination of Park and Lee teaches that the oven body is formed with a roasting chamber (Park, FIG.5, the interior of the charcoal bowl 110) , a fuel rack (FIG. 5, the bottom surface of the charcoal bowl 110) is provided in the roasting chamber; the multifunctional control assembly according to claim 1, wherein the multifunctional control assembly is provided on the fuel rack; and a grill (FIG. 5, the pedestal 120) , wherein the grill is provided in the roasting chamber and connected to a chamber wall of the roasting chamber, and the grill is located above the multifunctional control assembly (FIG. 5, the pedestal 120 is disposed above certain parts of the assembly) . Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Lee as applied to claim s 1-3 and 7, 8, and 10 above, and further in view of Kim ( KR 20080094872 A ) . Regarding claim 4 , the combination of Park and Lee fails to teach a heat insulation plate, wherein a connection hole is formed at the heat insulation plate, the connection hole is sleeved on a periphery wall of the narrow end, and the heat insulation plate is extended away from the narrow end. However, Kim teaches a heat insulation plate (FIG. 2, thermal insulation plate 30) , wherein a connection hole (FIG. 2, the hole formed by bridge 35, which rests on the bonpan 20) is formed at the heat insulation plate, the connection hole is sleeved on a periphery wall of the narrow end (FIG. 2, the bridge 35 rests near a narrow end of the bonpan 20) , and the heat insulation plate is extended away from the narrow end (FIG. 2) . At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Park by including a heat insulation plate, as taught by Kim , with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Park with these aforementioned teachings of Kim with the motivation of giving a user a stand to store non-cookable items. Regarding claim 5 , the combination of Park, Lee, and Kim teaches that the heat insulation plate comprises a plurality of plate-shaped units (Kim, FIG. 2, the various plate portions between the holes of the thermal insulation plate 30) , the plate-shaped units are connected one by one in sequence along a circumferential direction of the narrow end and are enclosed to form the connection hole, and the plate-shaped units are detachably connected (FIG. 2, the assembly may be taken apart) . Claim(s) 6 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park and Lee as applied to claim s 1-3 and 7, 8, and 10 above, and further in view of Ish-Hurwitz ( US 12022839 B2 ) . Regarding claim 6 , the combination of Park, Lee, and Kim fails to teach that each of the plate-shaped units is provided with a limit clamping slot at one side edge and an inserting member at another side edge, and the inserting member is inserted into the limit clamping slot between two neighboring plate-shaped units. However, Ish-Hurwitz teaches that each of the plate-shaped units is provided with a limit clamping slot at one side edge and an inserting member at another side edge, and the inserting member is inserted into the limit clamping slot between two neighboring plate-shaped units (FIG. 17, the portions of the assembly held together by flanges 126 and 128) . At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Park by including a hanging connecting device, as taught by Ish-Hurwitz , with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Park with these aforementioned teachings of Ish-Hurwitz with the motivation of making the assembly more modular. Regarding claim 9 , the combination of Park and Lee fails to teach that one of the partition member and the extension member is provided with a hanging catch, the other one of the partition member and the extension member is provided with a hanging hole, and the hanging catch is threaded through and connected to the hanging hole, so that the extension member is hung on the partition member. However, Ish-Hurwitz teaches that one of the partition member and the extension member is provided with a hanging catch, the other one of the partition member and the extension member is provided with a hanging hole, and the hanging catch is threaded through and connected to the hanging hole, so that the extension member is hung on the partition member (FIG. 17, the portions of the assembly held together by flanges 126 and 128) . At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the teachings of Park by including a hanging connecting device, as taught by Ish-Hurwitz , with a reasonable expectation of success of arriving at the claimed invention. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Park with these aforementioned teachings of Ish-Hurwitz with the motivation of making the assembly more modular. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT WILLIAM C. WEINERT whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6988 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 9:00-5:00 ET . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Steve McAllister can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-6785 . 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. /WILLIAM C WEINERT/ Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /Allen R. B. Schult/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 29, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601516
AUTOMATED COOLING SYSTEM FOR A BUILDING STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593945
System And Method For Providing A Hot Towel
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12583291
AIR VENT APPARATUS FOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12553613
OVEN APPLIANCE AND EMBOSSED HEAT SHIELD FOR AN OVEN APPLIANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12545078
ENGINEERING VEHICLE AND AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEM THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
60%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+38.7%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 127 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month