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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 08/25/2026 is acknowledged.
The amendment filed 08/25/2026 cancels non-elected claims 10-20 and presents new claims 21-31. Applicant’s response indicates that the newly added claims belong to the elected Group I.
Accordingly, claims 1-9 and 21-31 are currently pending examination.
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.
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) 1-4, 7-9, and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102((a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Park (US2020/0022528) or over Park in view of Haan (US 2009/0165734).
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches an electric steam generating device (Figures 6-7; fluid heat exchanger 150) comprising:
a
a heating element (heater 155) at least partially surrounded by the
a fluid passage (fluid passage defined by first and second pipes 152 and 153) through the cast body (151) and spaced apart from the heating element (155; Fig. 7),
wherein the
wherein the fluid passage includes a first portion (first pipe 152) having a first size (Fig. 7; diameter 152D) and a second portion (second pipe 153) having a second size (diameter 153D).
Park teaches the claimed invention except for the body (151) being a cast body. The instant application, in paragraph 0026, refers to cast body 104 as “being formed of a cast metal” and that the heating element is placed inside the body during casting. Within the context provided by the specification, “cast” is used to refer to the process by which the body is manufactured.
"[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." See MPEP 2113. In this case, the body (151) of Park is structurally the same as the claimed body such that the manner of manufacturing the body is not afforded patentable weight.
Alternatively, in the event that “cast” should be interpreted as a structural limitation, a “cast body” is well known in the art.
Haan relates to a steam boiler (Abstract; Fig. 3) having similar structure as detailed in Park including a flow path (330) and a heating element (110) disposed within a body (150). Haan teaches that the body (150) is formed by die casting or injection molding (para. 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park with Haan, by substituting the body, or the process of making thereof, of Park, with that of Haan, for in doing so would amount to a simple substitution of art recognized bodies performing the same function of containing a flow path and heater for heating fluid and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (See MPEP 2144.06-II).
Regarding claim 2, Park teaches the device of claim 1, and further teaches a passage adapter (connection tube 154; Fig. 6) coupled to the first portion of the fluid passage and the second portion of the fluid passage (para. 0069).
Regarding claim 3, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the first size of the first portion (152) has a small diameter (diameter 152D) or small cross sectional flow area, and the second size of the second portion (153) has a large diameter (diameter 153D) or a large cross sectional flow area.
Regarding claim 4, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the first size of the first portion (152) has a small width(diameter 152D) and the second size of the second portion (153) has a large width (diameter 153D).
Regarding claim 7, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 1, including a flushing valve (Park; Figures 1-5 show valve 170 downstream of the heat exchanger 150 and operable to allow flow to ejector 190), wherein the flushing valve is operated according to a flush cycle (valve 170 is selectively operated between an open and closed position).
Regarding claim 8, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 7, including wherein the flush cycle occurs at a predetermined time with respect to a time of day or a time of a steam cycle (Park; the valve 170 operates to open at close at certain intervals that are related to time of day. The claim language does not recite or require any additional structure. As such, the valve 170 of Park is structurally capable of operating at predetermined time periods. See MPEP 2114).
Regarding claim 9, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 7, including wherein the flush cycle removes scale, minerals, or debris from the fluid passage (Park; the valve 170 operates to open at close at certain intervals. The claim language does not recite or require any additional structure. As such, the valve 170 of Park is structurally capable of operating such that scale, minerals or debris is removed from the passage. See MPEP 2114).
Regarding claim 31, Park teaches a steam generating device (Figures 6-7; fluid heat exchanger 150) comprising:
A heat conducting
a heating element (heater 155) at least partially surrounded by the heat conducting
a fluid passage (fluid passage defined by first and second pipes 152 and 153) extending through the heat conducting
wherein the a second section (second pipe 153) having a second width (diameter 153D) different from the first width (152D).
Park teaches the claimed invention except for the body (151) being a cast body. The instant application, in paragraph 0026, refers to cast body 104 as “being formed of a cast metal” and that the heating element is placed inside the body during casting. Within the context provided by the specification, “cast” is used to refer to the process by which the body is manufactured.
"[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." See MPEP 2113. In this case, the body (151) of Park is structurally the same as the claimed body such that the manner of manufacturing the body is not afforded patentable weight.
Alternatively, in the event that “cast” should be interpreted as a structural limitation, a “cast body” is well known in the art.
Haan relates to a steam boiler (Abstract; Fig. 3) having similar structure as detailed in Park including a flow path (330) and a heating element (110) disposed within a body (150). Haan teaches that the body (150) is formed by die casting or injection molding (para. 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park with Haan, by substituting the body, or the process of making thereof, of Park, with that of Haan, for in doing so would amount to a simple substitution of art recognized bodies performing the same function of containing a flow path and heater for heating fluid and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (See MPEP 2144.06-II).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Park (US2020/0022528), or over Park in view of Haan (US 2009/0165734), and in further view of Yanik (US 8234881)
Regarding claim 5, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 1 including the first and second portion having a circular cross section (see Park). Park is silent on the first portion having circular cross section and the second portion having a rounded rectangular cross section or the first portion having a rounded rectangular cross section and the second portion having a circular cross section.
Yanik relates to a multichannel heat exchanger (Abstract) and teaches the heat exchanger having a flow path having multiple sections with some having a circular cross section and some having a rounded rectangular cross section (See Fig. 11, circular cross sectional flow paths 178 and rounded rectangular flow paths 176) (12:34-49 details that the cross sectional shapes allow for larger or smaller amounts of flow).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park with Yanik by replacing the cross sectional shape of either the first portion or the second portion of Park, to have a rounded rectangular shape as taught by Yanik for in doing so would allow for varying flow amount through the flow passage which would allow for the tailoring of the heating of the fluid flowing through the passage. Furthermore, the cross sectional shape of the passage portions would be considered a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed passage was significant. See MPEP 2144.04-IV-B.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Park (US2020/0022528), or over Park in view of Haan (US 2009/0165734), and in further view of Chen (US20170227253)
Regarding claim 6, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 1, except for a supply valve and a flow sensor configured to measure of flow of fluid into the fluid passage, wherein the supply valve is operated in response to the measured flow of fluid.
Chen relates to a water heater (Abstract) having a flow path and heater disposed within a body (Fig. 2 and 7) and teaches a supply valve (valve 3) and a flow sensor (para. 0041; flow sensor extends into inlet tube 13) configured to measure of flow of fluid into the fluid passage (para. 0053; flow sensor of the tube 13 detects water flowing in inlet tube 13), wherein the supply valve is operated in response to the measured flow of fluid (para. 0053; “…when the temperature is higher than 102° C., or the flow sensor of the first inlet tube 13 of the heating assembly 1 detects no water flowing signal…the electrically controlled system will automatically switch off the working power of the solenoid valve 3 and the heating element 11 so that the water vapor higher than 100° C. in the heating assembly cannot flow from the first water outlet 14 into the buffer assembly 2 smoothly and eject outside the instantaneous heater.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park with Chen by adding to the flow passage and the heat exchanger of Park, the supply valve and flow sensor of Chen, for in doing so would provide a means to safely control the supply of heated water in order to protect a user from injury (para. 0053 of Chen).
Claim(s) 21, 22, 25, and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Park (US2020/0022528), or over Park in view of Haan (US 2009/0165734), and in further view of Kupiszewski (US 9835380).
Regarding claim 21, Park teaches an electric steam generating device (Figures 6-7; fluid heat exchanger 150) comprising:
a
a heating element (heater 155) embedded within
a fluid passage (fluid passage defined by first and second pipes 152 and 153) defined through the
wherein the fluid passage includes and inlet portion (first pipe 152) having a first cross sectional area and steam generation portion (second pipe 153) having a second cross sectional area.
Park teaches the claimed invention except for the body (151) being a cast body. The instant application, in paragraph 0026, refers to cast body 104 as “being formed of a cast metal” and that the heating element is placed inside the body during casting. Within the context provided by the specification, “cast” is used to refer to the process by which the body is manufactured.
"[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." See MPEP 2113. In this case, the body (151) of Park is structurally the same as the claimed body such that the manner of manufacturing the body is not afforded patentable weight.
Alternatively, in the event that “cast” should be interpreted as a structural limitation, a “cast body” is well known in the art.
Haan relates to a steam boiler (Abstract; Fig. 3) having similar structure as detailed in Park including a flow path (330) and a heating element (110) disposed within a body (150). Haan teaches that the body (150) is formed by die casting or injection molding (para. 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park with Haan, by substituting the body, or the process of making thereof, of Park, with that of Haan, for in doing so would amount to a simple substitution of art recognized bodies performing the same function of containing a flow path and heater for heating fluid and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (See MPEP 2144.06-II).
Park, alone or in combination with Haan, teaches the claimed invention except for the second cross sectional area being greater than the first cross sectional area.
Kupiszewski relates to a heat exchanger in which a flow path is formed within the heat exchanger body (Fig. 1E, flow path defined by 42 formed within 22). Kupiszewski teaches that the cross sectional area of the flow path can increase in diameter from inlet (34) to outlet (40). Therefore, Kupiszewski teaches that the cross sectional area at the outlet is greater than the cross sectional area at the inlet.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park with Kupiszewski, by replacing the constant cross sectional area of the flow passage of Park, with the increasing cross sectional area taught by Kupiszewski for in doing so would allow for the flow rate flowing through the flow passage to be controlled (5:40-54; Kupiszewski).
Additionally, using an external heating element in lieu of an internal heating
element for the purpose of providing additional heat to the chamber of the roaster would have been obvious as:
1) Both constant and variable cross sectional flow paths address a recognized problem of providing flowing fluid through a heat exchanger,
2) There are a finite number of identified and predictable solutions to this
Problem (the flow path can have a constant cross sectional area or a variable one in which a first part has a larger/smaller cross sectional area than another), and
3) One of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued using external
heating elements with a reasonable expectation of success.
Based on the above, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success,
it is likely that product [was] not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. In
that instance the fact that a combination was obvious to try might show that it was
obvious under 35 USC 103. See MPEP 2143-I-E.
Regarding claim 22, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 21, and further teaches wherein the inlet portion and the steam generation portion are coupled via a passage adapter (connection tube 154; Fig. 6) (para. 0069).
Regarding claim 25, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 21, and further teaches a temperature sensor thermally coupled to the cast body (Park teaches a temperature sensor 160 that detects temperature of the water output from the body 150-para. 0047. As such the temperature sensor 160 us thermally coupled to body 150).
Regarding claim 26, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 21, and further teaches a supply valve in fluid communication with the inlet portion of the fluid passage (Park; Figures 1-5 teaches Valve 130 upstream of the body and in fluid communication with the inlet portion of the fluid passage).
Regarding claim 29, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 21, including a flushing valve (Park; Figures 1-5 show valve 170 downstream of the heat exchanger 150 and operable to allow flow to ejector 190) in fluid communication with the fluid passage.
Regarding claim 30, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 29, including wherein the flushing valve is configured to selectively open to remove scale, minerals, or debris from the fluid passage (Park; the valve 170 operates to open at close at certain intervals. The claim language does not recite or require any additional structure. As such, the valve 170 of Park is structurally capable of operating such that scale, minerals or debris is removed from the passage. See MPEP 2114).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Park (US2020/0022528), or over Park in view of Haan (US 2009/0165734), in view of Kupiszewski (US 9835380), and in further view of Yanik (US 8234881)
Regarding claim 23, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 21, including wherein the inlet portion comprises a circular cross-section (See Park), but is silent on the steam generation portion comprises a rounded rectangular cross-section.
Yanik relates to a multichannel heat exchanger (Abstract) and teaches the heat exchanger having a flow path having multiple sections with some having a circular cross section and some having a rounded rectangular cross section (See Fig. 11, circular cross sectional flow paths 178 and rounded rectangular flow paths 176) (12:34-49 details that the cross sectional shapes allow for larger or smaller amounts of flow).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park, as modified by Kupiszewski, with Yanik by replacing the cross sectional shape of the second portion of the flow passage of Park, to have a rounded rectangular shape as taught by Yanik for in doing so would allow for varying flow amount through the flow passage which would allow for the tailoring of the heating of the fluid flowing through the passage. Furthermore, the cross sectional shape of the passage portions would be considered a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed passage was significant. See MPEP 2144.04-IV-B.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Park (US2020/0022528), or over Park in view of Haan (US 2009/0165734), in view of Kupiszewski (US 9835380), and in further view of Klein (US 20170074545)
Regarding claim 24, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 21, except for wherein the cast body comprises aluminum.
Klein relates to a flow through water heater (Figs. 1-3B; para. 0046) in which flow passage (14) having an inlet (16) and an outlet 18) is arranged within a body (12).
Klein teaches that the body (12) is defined by an outer sleeve (20) of material and that this material can be “copper, silver, nickel-coated aluminum, carbon nanotubes and/or the like” or be made from “materials having thermal conductivities greater than 100W/mK” (para. 0048).
In this case, Klein teaches an aluminum material being suitable as a thermally conductive material for a heating body in which fluid flowing in a flow passage is heated.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park, as modified by Kupiszewski, with Klein by replacing the material of the body of Park, being inherently of some material, with the aluminum material of Klein, for in doing so would amount to the mere selection of a know material based on its suitability for its intended purpose. See MPEP 2144.07.
Claim(s) 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Park (US2020/0022528), or over Park in view of Haan (US 2009/0165734), in view of Kupiszewski (US 9835380), and in further view of Klein (US 20170074545)
Regarding claim 27-28, the primary combination teaches the device of claim 26, except for a flow sensor configured to measure fluid flow into the inlet portion (claim 27) and a controller configured to operate the supply valve based on the fluid flow measured by the flow sensor (claim 28).
Klein relates to a flow through water heater (Figs. 1-3B; para. 0046) in which flow passage (14) having an inlet (16) and an outlet 18) is arranged within a body (12).
Klein teaches a flow sensor (48) configured to measure fluid flow into the inlet (sensors 48a and 48b arranged at inlet and outlet, respectively; para. 0061) (para. 0065 refers to 48 as a pressure and/or flow sensors) and a controller (102; Fig. 6A) configured to operate a supply valve (pump or valve 122-para. 0065) based on the fluid flow measured by the flow sensor (para. 0065; measured flow rate from 48 is used as feedback control for controlling pump/valve 122 in order to regulate the flow rate of the fluid).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Park, as modified by Kupiszewski, with Klein by adding to the supply valve and inlet of the fluid passage of Park, with the flow sensor and controller of Klein, for in doing so would provide feedback control in order to regulate the flow rate of the fluid through the fluid passage.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 12016484 to Devlin et al. details a fluid heater in which a flow passage of variable size is formed within a body (Fig. 2).
US 20110041705 to Reichl et al. details a flow through heating unit in which a flow passage having variable size is formed (Figs. 2a/2b).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN C DODSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0529. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 12:00-8:00 PM (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, Steven 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.
/JUSTIN C DODSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
