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 Interpretation
“muffle” is used by the claims to indicate conventional structure known in the art [i.e., the interior of an oven; para. 0025: “Fig. 1 shows an oven 11…a muffle 14 as the interior”].
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
In this case, it seems the verb “muffle” is being unconventionally used as a noun, and the abstract should recite “An oven has [[a muffle with a muffle]]an interior with an upper side and a interior or is covered thereby, wherein the cover is planar and closed, and is permeable for the heat radiating from the radiant heating device. The cover covers the radiant heating device, wherein the top heating device surrounds the radiant heating device or extends outside of it.”
Drawings
Although multiple-circuit heaters are known in the art [Instant para. 0030: “In a further embodiment of the invention, it is also conceivable to use an aforementioned multiple-circuit heater to obtain grill areas of differing size. Such multiple-circuit heaters are known from radiant heating devices in hobs.”], and modifying the shape/size/number/position of structures for controlling (focusing/preventing) a heating profile are also known in the art [i.e., heat shields/reflectors/insulators as evidenced by the presented prior art [see the prior art made of record and not relied upon below]; Instant para. 0019: “Advantageously, different areas in which precisely one such heating conductor extends in each case are separated from one another by an aforementioned peripheral element, so that they do not over-radiate in the lateral direction.”], the drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “multiple-circuit heater”, “differently sized grill areas”, “different areas”, “precisely one such heating conductor”, and “each case” of claims 19-20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) [i.e., the figures must show the explicit arrangement/configuration of any/all conductors relative to each other and to the said peripheral-element/carrier/cover]. In this case, claim 20 has been interpreted as broadly requiring at least one peripheral element separating/defining at least two different areas that a heating conductor extends [e.g., a heating conductor 37 extending and connecting to a housing 41, the housing located in a different area defined by peripheral element 35 (see figs. 1 and 3, para. 0031, wherein figs. 1 and 3 are showing a singular heating conductor and not a multiple-circuit heater); and/or the conventional practice of duplicating essential working parts (Instant para. 0020: “These and further features are revealed in the description and in the drawings as well as in the claims, wherein the individual features can each be realized singly or severally in the form of sub-combinations in one embodiment of the invention and in other fields, and can represent embodiments advantageous and protectable per se, for which protection is claimed here. The subdivision of the application into individual sections and sub-headings does not limit the statements made thereunder in their general validity.”)]. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: line 7 should end with a comma. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 9-12, 14, and 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 9:
The term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The claim will be interpreted as more broadly reciting “wherein said radiant heating device has a heating conductor being ”.
Claims 10-12 are also rejected due to dependence on rejected claim 9.
Claim 11:
The recitation of “wherein said radiant heating device has a peripheral element, extending around said carrier, said peripheral element projecting past said carrier and past said heating conductor, wherein said radiant heating device is in contact with said cover by said peripheral element” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how the radiant device which “has a cover into said muffle” (claim 1) can also be “in contact with said cover”, and it is unclear which element of the heating device is being referred to in this instance (e.g., the cover, the heating conductor, planar carrier, peripheral element). The claim will be interpreted as reciting “wherein said radiant heating device has a peripheral element, extending around said carrier, said peripheral element projecting past said carrier and past said heating conductor, wherein said [[radiant heating device]]peripheral element is in contact with said cover ” so as to correspond to para. 0014: “The peripheral element is designed preferably annular or as an all-round ring. The peripheral element can thus limit the extent of the heating conductors, and hence a heated surface. Furthermore, it can be designed as a kind of spacer to the cover, which the radiant heating device is then in contact with by the peripheral element.”
Claim 14:
The limitation “said underside of said muffle ceiling” lacks sufficient antecedent basis and will be interpreted as “[[said]]an underside of said muffle ceiling”
Claim 17:
The recitation of “a surface area” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if it is intended to be distinct from “a surface area parallel to said muffle upper side” recited in claim 1. The claim will be interpreted as reciting “wherein said radiant heating device covers a center of [[a]]the surface area of said muffle upper side or of said muffle ceiling.”
Claim 18 is also rejected due to dependence on claim 17.
In view of the generally well-understood practice of arranging oven heating elements [Instant para. 0017: “Generally speaking, the radiant heating device should not be arranged towards one of the side walls on a peripheral area of the muffle ceiling, but rather in the center or in a middle area.”], Applicant is advised that should claim 17 be found allowable, claim 18 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m). In this case, it seems claim 18 requires that the heating device be arranged in the same area of the ceiling/upper side of the muffle (oven interior) as required in claim 17.
Claim 19:
The term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
The second recitation of “a multiple-circuit heater” in line 4 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if it is intended to be distinct from the first recitation in line 1.
The recitation of “a heating conductor”/“ two or three of said heating conductors”/ “said heating conductors” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if these structures are intended to be distinct from each other.
The claim will be interpreted as more clearly reciting “wherein said radiant heating device is a multiple-circuit heater for differently sized grill areas, wherein said radiant heating device has [[a]] heating [[conductor]]conductors being the multiple-circuit heater has precisely two or precisely three of said heating conductors, said heating conductors being separately controllable.”
Claim 20 is also rejected due to dependence on claim 19.
Claim 20:
Claim 20 is indefinite for the same reasons as presented in the drawing objection above [i.e., it is unclear which conductors are being referred to/required in each instance (area/case)], and is being interpreted as stated in the drawing objection.
Claim 21:
It is unclear what is required by the additional limitation “or has at least partially cast iron”, and since the claim already broadly requires the grill consists at least partially of cast iron [thus including grills comprising completely of cast iron], the claim will be interpreted as reciting “wherein a grill for supporting food in said muffle ”
Claim 22 is also rejected due to dependence on claim 21.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dengler (DE 102007042087 A1).
Regarding claim 1,
Dengler teaches:
An oven [cooking appliance 1] with a muffle [cooking space 11] with a muffle upper side [ceiling 112] and with a door [door 12], said door being openable, for sealing said muffle [fig. 1],
a muffle ceiling [i.e., ceiling 112] as an upper border of said muffle at said muffle upper side [see fig. 1],
a radiant heating device on said muffle upper side [heating conductor 4/heating circuit 31, of heating unit 3; figs. 4, 5], wherein said radiant heating device extends in a surface area parallel to said muffle upper side [fig. 1: heating zone 2'] and has a radiation direction downwards into said muffle [see fig. 1]
a top heating device on said muffle upper side [heating conductor 5/second heating circuit 32, of heating unit 3], wherein said top heating device extends around said radiant heating device [see figs. 3, 5],
wherein:
said radiant heating device has a cover into said muffle, wherein said cover is planar and closed, having no penetrations, and is permeable for said heat radiating from said radiant heating device [Dengler teaches a glass ceramic plate as the cover, the cover formed into the ceiling of the muffle so as to present a smooth underside surface; see figs. 1 and 2; p. 6: “The heating unit 3 is covered in the installed state of a glass ceramic plate (not shown). This results in the in the 1 and 2 shown smooth surface on the ground 113 and on the ceiling 112 of the cooking chamber 11”],
said cover covers said radiant heating device in a vertical projection [i.e., the glass plate vertically covering the heating device from a lower direction, and Dengler further teaches at least an outer housing of the oven further covering at least the radiant heating device; e.g., the outer housing being sealed and insulated to protect users from the other directions not directed towards the cooking chamber],
said top heating device surrounds said radiant heating device or extends outside of said radiant heating device [see figs. 4 and 5].
Regarding claim 2, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said radiant heating device is arranged higher than said top heating device.
In this case, while Dengler is mainly directed at an improved arrangement and combination of heating devices [heating conductors 4 and 5 as the radiant and top heating devices, the combination of 4/5 being arranged in a particular shape/pattern in the ceiling and floor of the oven],
Dengler only depicts an embodiment wherein conductors 4 and 5 are of similar type [e.g., both are radiant type, thus both requiring the flush glass plate cover; p. 5: “According to one preferred embodiment the at least one heating element is a Bandheizleiter, preferably is separated from the cooking chamber by a glass ceramic plate. Either the heating conductor of the main heating zone as well as the optionally provided additional Heating conductor can be designed in this form.”; see figs. 1, 2, 4, and 5],
and further teaches that the additional heating device may of a different type [i.e., a type that does not require the flush glass covering], e.g., a tubular heater that requires protrusion into the cooking chamber [p. 5: “The present invention is not limited thereto, but more particularly the except the Main heaters also provided additional heating elements as a tubular heater be provided, which protrude into the cooking chamber.”].
Therefore, in view of the above, Dengler teaches wherein at least the upper conductor 4 would be higher than an upper tubular heater 5.
Regarding claim 3, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 2.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein a plane in which said radiant heating device extends is higher than a plane in which said top heating device extends.
In this case, the plane of the radiant heating device 4 would be higher than the plane of the upper tubular heater 5 as described in claim 2.
Regarding claim 4, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said cover extends
above said top heating device or
above a plane in which said top heating device extends.
In this case, in view of the well-understood practice of directing the heat in ovens and thermal insulation, Dengler teaches the conventional use of the outer housing as additional covering extending over the heating devices, thereby focusing heat in the cooking space and protecting users [see figs. 1 and 2 showing an outer hosing extending above, below, and on horizontal sides thereof, the cover extending in different planes relative to the heating devices].
Regarding claim 5, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein a distance of said cover to
said radiant heating device or to
a heating conductor of said radiant heating device
is 0.5 cm to 2 cm.
, see
Regarding claim 6, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said top heating device surrounds said radiant heating device or said cover at a horizontal distance [see figs. 4 and 5], wherein said horizontal distance is between 1 cm and 10 cm.
In this case, Dengler generally teaches the conventional practice of maintaining a particular height/width ratio for an oven, and thus, in view of the conventional relative dimensions of residential ovens and their given components, and the well-understood relationship between radiant heating devices [e.g., the heating conductors 4 and 5, with a particular horizontal distance therebetween as seen in figs. 4 and 5], thus Dengler discloses the claimed range of the distance between the heating devices with sufficient specificity so as to render the modification described in claim 6 an obvious one to a PHOSITA [see MPEP 2131.03], at least with regards to the requirements of the given application, e.g., particular appliance size considerations [p. 4: “Preferably indicates the cooking appliance a shape in which the width of the cooking chamber compared to the height of the cooking chamber is much larger. In particular, the cooking space is dimensioned in this embodiment, that the food is placed or placed in these on the floor becomes. In this embodiment are therefore no rails for Bays, such as grates or sheets provided. A cooking appliance of this form is also called Drawer labeled. Especially with the small height of the cooking chamber offers the invention provided elliptical Heating zone. Due to the small cooking space and the itself Resulting small distance of the food to be cooked on the bottom of the Garraums is located, to the ceiling of the cooking chamber. the food can be cooked quickly heated become. Due to the elliptical shape, this heating of the Food independent of the shape of the food in addition be accelerated.”], or a desired heating response given known heating profiles/shapes of additional heating elements [p. 4: “In addition to the at least one main heating element forming the main heating zone can according to a embodiment be provided at least one further heating element, which is a heating zone outside the main heating zone forms. By such an additional heating element it will possible, additionally to the immediate warming an indirect warming of the food to be achieved by heating the interior of the cooking chamber. In the inventively provided Main heating zone, which has an elliptical shape, is the outside this main heating zone in a wall remaining area low and to be provided in this area heating element for heating the Garraums can therefore a small size or low Have length.”].
Regarding claim 7, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said top heating device is designed as a tubular heating element [p. 6: “Be tubular heaters (not shown) used in the cooking chamber 11 are introduced, they are preferably only as a heating element 5 used, that is to heat the edge regions of the soil 113 or the ceiling 112 of the cooking chamber 11 outside the main heating zone 2”].
Regarding claim 8, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 7.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said top heating device is designed to surround said radiant heating device at least once by at least 66% [see figs. 4 and 5].
Regarding claim 9, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said radiant heating device has a heating conductor being substantially exposed and being fastened to a planar carrier [see figs. 4 and 5 showing conductor 4 attached to a lower wall of the planar heating unit 3 wherein corresponding connections 6 allow for supplying power, wherein the conductor is exposed through the glass plate thereby allowing radiant heat to be emitted towards food in the cooking space (see fig. 1); p.2: “In cases, in where the food does not rest on any of the walls and, for example is held on a rail or a sheet, the heat is dissipated the food to be cooked by means of radiation from or the corresponding Hauptheizzonen are directed to the food”].
Regarding claim 10, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 9.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said heating conductor is at least partially inserted into said carrier to hold it [see figs. 4 and 5 showing conductor 4 at least partially inserted into heating unit 3, with corresponding connections 6 formed on an opposite side].
Regarding claim 11, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 9.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said radiant heating device has a peripheral element, extending around said carrier [see figs. 4 and 5, showing a peripheral element extending along an outer perimeter of heating unit 3],
said peripheral element projecting past said carrier and past said heating conductor [the peripheral element having a particular height projecting past a base surface of the heating unit 3, so as to allow connections through the peripheral element between the heating conductor and connections 6, the peripheral element projecting past the conductors thereby allowing installation of the glass plate covering the heating unit; p. 6: “The two heating conductors 4 and 5 are in the heating unit 3 so taken that these have connections 6 can be connected from the outside. In the 4 shown heating unit 3 can thus during assembly of the cooking appliance 1 in the cooking appliance 1 at the desired location, for example on the ground 113 of the cooking chamber 11 be inserted and connected. The heating unit 3 is covered in the installed state of a glass ceramic plate (not shown). This results in the in the 1 and 2 shown smooth surface on the ground 113 and on the ceiling 112 of the cooking chamber 11”],
wherein said radiant heating device is in contact with said cover by said peripheral element [i.e., the glass ceramic plate installed so as to cover the heating unit].
Regarding claim 12, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 11.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said peripheral element is the only part of said radiant heating device
to pass through said muffle ceiling or to reach a plane of said muffle ceiling or extends in said muffle ceiling [i.e., the flush mounted glass covering the peripheral element of heating unit 3, wherein heating unit 3 extends from and into the ceiling and away from the cooking space].
Furthermore, absent any alleged criticality, in view of Dengler teaching the glass plate covering the heating unit as advantageously flush with the ceiling, wherein the glass is installed on the outer peripheral element of the heating unit, and given the particular thicknesses selected for the muffle walls/ceiling and plate, Dengler discloses the range of modifications described in claim 12 with sufficient specificity, e.g., wherein the thicknesses of those elements are chosen such that it results in the peripheral element extending past the ceiling, extending to the ceiling, or extending in the ceiling.
Regarding claim 13, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said cover is held on said muffle ceiling [i.e., the glass plate held flush to the ceiling; figs. 1 and 2].
Regarding claim 14, Dengler the oven according to claim 13.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said cover
extends underneath a plane of said muffle ceiling or
is in contact with said underside of said muffle ceiling [i.e., the installed glass plate contacting the ceiling so as to form a smooth surface].
Regarding claim 15, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said muffle ceiling has an opening which is between 0.5 cm and 5 cm larger than said radiant heating device [see figs. 1 and 2, showing the upper heating unit 3 installed in a corresponding opening in the ceiling],
wherein said radiant heating device or heating conductors of said heating device are arranged in or above a plane of said muffle ceiling and concentrically to said opening [i.e., conductors 4 and 5 arranged above the glass plate which is flush with the ceiling].
In this case, Dengler generally teaches the conventional practice of maintaining a particular height/width ratio for an oven, and thus, in view of the conventional relative dimensions of residential ovens and their given components and conventional tolerances, Dengler discloses the claimed range of the different fit dimensions between a heating unit and its corresponding opening with sufficient specificity so as to render the modification described in claim 15 an obvious one to a PHOSITA [see MPEP 2131.03], at least with regards to the requirements of the given application, e.g., particular appliance size considerations [p. 4: “Preferably indicates the cooking appliance a shape in which the width of the cooking chamber compared to the height of the cooking chamber is much larger. In particular, the cooking space is dimensioned in this embodiment, that the food is placed or placed in these on the floor becomes. In this embodiment are therefore no rails for Bays, such as grates or sheets provided. A cooking appliance of this form is also called Drawer labeled. Especially with the small height of the cooking chamber offers the invention provided elliptical Heating zone. Due to the small cooking space and the itself Resulting small distance of the food to be cooked on the bottom of the Garraums is located, to the ceiling of the cooking chamber. the food can be cooked quickly heated become. Due to the elliptical shape, this heating of the Food independent of the shape of the food in addition be accelerated.”]
Regarding claim 16, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 15.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said radiant heating device is arranged in said opening [see figs. 1 and 2].
Regarding claim 17, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said radiant heating device covers a center of a surface area of said muffle upper side or of said muffle ceiling [see figs. 1 and 2].
Regarding claim 18, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 17.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said radiant heating device is arranged in a middle of said muffle upper side or of said muffle ceiling [see figs. 1 and 2].
Regarding claim 19, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein said radiant heating device is a multiple-circuit heater for differently sized grill areas [Dengler teaches that a heating circuit may include additional heating elements/a plurality of heating elements, wherein each element is shaped according to a desired heating area; p. 5: “The Heating element that generates the main heating zone, and the other heating element are each also referred to as a heating circuit. In the heating circuit can also provided a plurality of heating elements for generating the respective heating zone be.”; para. 0007: “The heating zones of the cooking appliance according to the invention can also be formed in each case by a plurality of heating conductors.”],
wherein said radiant heating device has a heating conductor being substantially exposed and is fastened to a planar carrier [see claim 9 above],
wherein a multiple-circuit heater has precisely two or precisely three of said heating conductors, said heating conductors being separately controllable [the plurality of heating elements being independently controllable; p. 5: “Preferably the at least one main heating element is independent of the at least one controllable further heating element. Due to the separate control the main heating elements can in particular a Schnellaufheizfunktion be realized in the area of the food.”].
Regarding claim 20, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 19.
Dengler also teaches:
wherein a peripheral element is provided, said peripheral element extending around said carrier and projecting past said carrier and past said heating conductor, wherein said radiant heating device contacts said cover with said peripheral element [see claim 11 above],
wherein different areas in which precisely one such heating conductor extends in each case are separated from one another by said peripheral element [Dengler teaches different areas e.g. an area occupied by the conductors, surrounded by the peripheral element and another area on the other side of the peripheral element, occupied by the connections 6; Dengler also teaches wherein a plurality of heating units 3 are placed adjacent to each other on the same ceiling, each unit comprising its own peripheral element, thereby defining different areas as well.].
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.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dengler (DE 102007042087 A1) in view of Rational (DE 202014102530 U1).
Regarding claim 21, Dengler teaches the oven according to claim 1.
Dengler also discloses:
wherein a grill for supporting food in said muffle is designed [i.e., conventional grates/sheets as removable cooking surfaces; p. 5: “On the sides 111 the cooking chamber are rails in the illustrated embodiment 13 for bays 131 , such as grates and sheets intended”].
Rational teaches cast iron as a known material for cooking surfaces [p. 2: “The cooking plate is preferably made of cast iron. In this way, both a high thermal conductivity and a high heat capacity results.”]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was made to select cast iron as the material for Dengler’s grills, since it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill. In re Leshing, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) and Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
Regarding claim 22, Dengler in view of Rational discloses the oven according to claim 21.
Dengler as modified by Rational also discloses:
wherein said grill is solid and consists completely of cast iron [Rational p. 2: “The cooking plate is preferably made of cast iron. In this way, both a high thermal conductivity and a high heat capacity results.”].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gross (US 5498853 A) – discloses a heating unit [fig. 1: radiant heater 1] comprising a planar metal carrier [support member 4/insulating member 5/holder 6], and a peripheral element [edge 8 as structure defining a heating profile/thermal outlet of the heating unit; col. 10: “The inner circumference 27 of the edge 8 which, according to FIG. 4, can also form a component separate from the support member 4, defines the thermal outlet of the heater 1 on the outer circumference.”]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE J EVANGELISTA whose telephone number is (571)272-6093. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9am - 5pm EST.
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 F 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.
/THEODORE J EVANGELISTA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
