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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 7/13/26 has been entered. Claims 1-19 remain pending in the application. Application’s amendments to the Drawings, Specification, and Claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 5/22/26.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/13/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts the amended claim is not taught by the prior art.
Examiner asserts that the amendment is addressed in the rejection below as a separation of parts.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of claims 1-7 and 13-19 in the reply filed on 5/7/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 11371752 to Buescher (Buescher).
Regarding claim 1, Buescher teaches a gas valve controller (102, Figure 1) on a gas valve control printed circuit board (microcontrollers in their normal use have circuit boards or are on circuit boards); a first power conductor coupled to a blower motor (116, Figure 1) of the water heater appliance (162, Figure 1); and a second power conductor (Vdd, Figure 1) coupled to the blower motor of the water heater appliance through a relay (156, Figure 1) such that a current drawn by the blower motor bypasses the gas valve control printed circuit board (bypass line shown leading to 116 that does not pass through the microcontroller).
Buescher is silent on wherein the relay is physically separated from the gas valve control printed circuit board. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the relay is physically separated from the gas valve control printed circuit board, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. (In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961)).
Regarding claim 2, Buescher teaches wherein the gas valve controller is coupled to the relay through a signal line (vdd passes through microcontroller and to relay through 160, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Buescher teaches wherein the gas valve controller is configured to communicate a control signal for the relay via the signal line (160, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 4, Buescher teaches wherein the control signal comprises one or more AC pulses or DC pulses (DC connected to the microcontroller passing to the relay when power is applied it would be considered at least one pulse).
Regarding claim 5, Buescher teaches wherein the second power conductor is coupled to the gas valve control printed circuit board (vdd, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Buescher teaches wherein further comprising one or more sensors configured to detect an environmental condition associated with the blower, wherein the gas valve controller is configured to control the relay based at least in part on one or more signals from the one or more sensors (174, Figure 1, Col. 4 lines 3-50).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buescher in view of JP2000266343 to Sakamoto et al. (Sakamoto).
Regarding claim 6, Buescher is silent on wherein the second power conductor is coupled to the gas valve control printed circuit board via a fuse.
Sakamoto teaches a fuse between power and a controller (43, Figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Buescher with the teachings of Ki Sakamoto to to provide wherein the second power conductor is coupled to the gas valve control printed circuit board via a fuse. Doing so would protect the controller from being damaged.
Claim(s) 13-16, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buescher in view of U.S. PGPUB 20080011245 to Donnelly (Donnelly).
Regarding claim 13 Buescher teaches a gas valve (112, Figure 1), a blower (116, Figure 1) and the rest of the claim per the rejection of claim 1.
Beuscher is silent on a tank.
Donnelly teaches a water heater with a tank (Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Buescher with the teachings of vto provide a water heater with a tank. Doing so would provide structure likely already present in Buescher and/or provide structure that allows the device to hold water to be heated.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is rejected per claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is rejected per claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is rejected per claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 18, Buescher teaches wherein further comprising a ground conductor coupled to the blower motor (ground connection shown in Figure 1).
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is rejected per claim 7 above.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buescher in view of Donnelly and Sakamoto.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is rejected per claim 6 above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 STEVEN S ANDERSON II whose telephone number is (571)272-2055. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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 Hoang can be reached at 574-272-6460. 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.
/STEVEN S ANDERSON II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights