DETAILED ACTION
The communication dated 8/25/2023 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 8 requires that the temperature control device is positioned on a side wall of the tub, however claim 1 on which claim 8 depends already requires that the temperature control device is positioned in one side of the tub. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-3, 5-6, 8-14, 16-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kopera U.S. Publication 2020/0100644 (henceforth referred to as Kopera).
As for claim 1, Kopera teaches a dishwasher (Fig. 1: part 100) comprising: a tub (Fig. 1: part 102); and a temperature control device (Fig. 2: part 210) positioned in one side of the tub, wherein the temperature control device comprises: a housing (Fig. 3); a flow path formed inside the housing and along which a fluid drawn from the tub flows (Figs. 4-5); a heater (Fig. 3: part 218) coupled to one side of the housing; a switch (Fig. 1: part 120) configured to turn off the heater in response to identification that a fluid around the heater reaches a predetermined temperature (paragraph [0023]), the switch including a switch coupling (paragraphs [0032]-[0033]; the wired connection) coupled to the housing and a sensor (Fig. 3: part 122) protruding toward an inside of the housing and configured to measure a temperature of the fluid (paragraph [0023]); and a holder (paragraph [0022]; the location within which controller 120 is located), and wherein the sensor measures a temperature of the fluid inside the housing (paragraph [0023]).
Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the holder is coupled to the housing and configured to fix the switch to the housing and cover the switch coupling; and the sensor protrudes further toward the inside of the housing than the holder. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claims 2 and 17, Kopera further teaches that the holder includes a hole corresponding to the sensor so that the sensor protrudes toward the inside of the housing (Fig. 3).
Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that: the switch coupling is positioned between the holder and the housing and configured to couple to the holder. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 3, Kopera further teaches that: the temperature control device includes a coupling member configured to couple the holder to the housing (Figs. 2-3).
Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the sensor protrudes further toward the inside of the housing than the coupling member. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 5, Kopera further teaches a metal material (paragraph [0030]; an electric resistance heating element uses a metal material).
Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the holder is positioned adjacent to the heater, is coupled to the switch coupling to transfer heat to the switch. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 6, Kopera further teaches that the temperature control device comprises a seal positioned between the holder and the housing (Figs. 2-3; where the temperature control device is attached is equivalent to a seal).
As for claim 8, Kopera further teaches that the temperature control device is positioned on a side wall of the tub (Fig. 2).
As for claim 9, Kopera further teaches that: the fluid is air drawn from a washing room provided inside the tub into the temperature control device, and the temperature control device includes a fan (Fig. 3: part 216) positioned upstream of the switch and the heater inside the flow path and configured to draw air into the flow path.
As for claim 10, Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the switch is positioned upstream of the heater. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 11, Kopera further teaches that the temperature control device includes a temperature sensor positioned downstream of the heater and configured to measure temperature of air passing through the heater (paragraph [0023]; Fig. 3).
As for claim 12, Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the fan, the switch, the heater, and the temperature sensor are arranged in order from top to bottom. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 13, Kopera further teaches that the temperature control device includes an outlet (Fig. 3: part 214) configured to discharge inside air of the housing.
Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the outlet is provided below the temperature sensor. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 14, Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that a protrusion direction of the sensor is parallel to a rotational axis direction of the fan. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 16, Kopera teaches a dishwasher (Fig. 1: part 100) includes: a tub (Fig. 1: part 102) forming a washing room; and a dryer (Fig. 2: part 210) positioned in a side wall of the tub, wherein the dryer comprises: a housing (Fig. 3) forming a flow path which inside air of the washing room enters (Figs. 4-5), a heater (Fig. 3: part 218) coupled to one side of the housing and configured to dry inside air of the flow path, a switch (Fig. 1: part 120) configured to turn off the heater in response to identification that air around the heater reaches preset temperature (paragraph [0023]), and a holder (paragraph [0022]; the location within which controller 120 is located), wherein the switch includes: a switch coupling (paragraphs [0032]-[0033]; the wired connection) coupled to the housing, and a sensor (Fig. 3: part 122).
Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the switch is coupled to the housing, positioned upstream of the heater; the holder is coupled to the housing and the switch to fix the switch to the housing; and the sensor is protruding further toward an inside of the housing than the switch coupling and the holder. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 19, Kopera further teaches a fan (Fig. 3: part 216) and the heater inside the flow path and configured to suck air into the flow path, and a temperature sensor positioned below the heater and configured to measure temperature of air passed through the heater (paragraph [0023]; Fig. 3).
Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the switch is positioned above the heater; and the fan is positioned above the switch. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
As for claim 20, Kopera teaches a dishwasher (Fig. 1: part 100) includes: a cabinet (Fig. 1); a tub (Fig. 1: part 102) provided inside the cabinet and forming a washing room; and a dryer (Fig. 2: part 210) positioned in one side of the tub, wherein the dryer includes: a housing (Fig. 3) made of a plastic material (paragraph [0050]), a heater (Fig. 3: part 218) coupled to the housing and configured to dry inside air of the housing, a thermostat (Fig. 1: part 120) configured to turn off the heater in response to identification that air around the heater reaches preset temperature (paragraph [0023]), and a holder (paragraph [0022]; the location within which controller 120 is located), the holder being made of a metal material (paragraph [0030]; an electric resistance heating element uses a metal material) to transfer heat to the thermostat, wherein the thermostat includes a sensor (Fig. 3: part 122).
Kopera differs from the instant claims in failing to teach that the thermostat is coupled to the housing; the holder is coupled to the housing and the switch to fix the switch to the housing coupled to the housing and the thermostat to fix the thermostat to the housing; and the sensor is protruding further toward an inside of the housing than the holder. However, absent the demonstration of any new or unobvious results, the claimed configuration is considered by Examiner to be prima facie obvious as a rearrangement of parts. It is old and well known to rearrange parts, with no change in their respective functions, due to size/space design criteria, the manufacturing expense thereof or purely for aesthetics. See MPEP § 2144.04, VI, C. Rearrangement of Parts.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 7, 15, and 18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Kopera U.S. Publication 2020/0100644, the closest prior art, differs from the instant claims in failing to teach the limitations of each respective dependent claim. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the dishwasher taught by Kopera as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEVON J SHAHINIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1384. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-6:00pm.
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 Barr can be reached at (571)272-1414. 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.
/LEVON J SHAHINIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711