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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Acero Acero et al (US 2009/0139980).
Regarding claim 1, An electric heating assembly for a consumer appliance, the electric heating assembly comprising: (See Figs 1 and 4)
a resistive heating element extending between a first end portion and a second end portion; (Resistive, paragraph [0008] states the heating elements may be resistive, heating element 10. Dividing the heating element horizontally in half effectively provides for a first and second end. )
a first voltage supply line connecting the electric heating assembly to a first voltage source proximal to the first end portion; (A first voltage supply line is coming from power supply 26 which is located at one end of the heating element. See Paragraph [0025])
a first switching element disposed along the first voltage supply line to selectively restrict a current from the first voltage source; (A first switch 20 or 66 is located along the first supply line.)
a second voltage supply line connecting the electric heating assembly to a second voltage source proximal to the second end portion; (A second voltage supply line is coming from power supply 28 which is located at a second end of the heating element. See Paragraph [0025])
a second switching element disposed along the second voltage supply line to selectively restrict a current from the second voltage source; and (A second switch 22 or 64 is located along the second supply line.)
a controller in operative communication with the first and second switching elements (Controller, not labeled, is connected to the switching elements. See Paragraph [0030] Also controllers 52, 54, 48, 50, Paragraph [0009]), the controller being configured to control the first and second switching elements in tandem according to a selected heating cycle. (The controller controls the switches separately or in tandem based on the heating cycle. See Paragraphs [0025]-[0030])
Regarding claim 6, as no structure for an enclosure is claimed, the upper and lower designations for elements are considered to be arbitrary. Figs 1-4 show the switching elements connected in the claimed manner to a first and second heating element. Regarding claim 8. Figs 2 and 3 show the controller being capable of controlling a first and second heating element 16, 18 in tandem via switches 64 and 66.
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) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Acero Acero et al (US 2009/0139980) in view of Morandotti et al (US 2019/0230750).
The teachings of Acero Acero have been discussed above. Acero Acero fails to disclose, the selected heating cycle comprises a duty cycle setting a predetermined cycling rate for opening-closing the first and second switching elements in tandem.
Morandotti discloses, a cooking appliance having a resistive heating element and selecting a predetermined duty cycle for the heating element. (The controller of the cooking system 10 may selectively control a power level of a microwave element, a set temperature of a heating element, a duty cycle of a heating element, or various other attributes of the cooking apparatus 12, See Paragraph [0028])
It would have been obvious to adapt Acero Acero in view of Mo randotti to provide the selected heating cycle comprises a duty cycle setting a predetermined cycling rate for opening-closing the first and second switching elements in tandem for heating the food to a desired quality level.
Acero Acero fails to disclose, wherein the first and second voltage sources are set at inverse phases; the first voltage source is set at approximately 120 Volts, and wherein the second voltage source is set at approximately 120 Volts. It would have been obvious to provide the desired phase and voltage since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 5, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Acero Acero et al (US 2009/0139980) in view of Gelber et al (US 2018/0017265)).
The teachings of Acero Acero have been discussed above. Acero Acero fails to disclose a plurality of heating elements connected in parallel.
The question is why would one having ordinary skill in the art use multiple heating elements connected in parallel. Gelber et al discloses a cooking appliance having a plurality of heating element 24 and 26 connected in parallel. (See Abstract and Paragraph [0007]) It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to adapt Acero Acero in view of Gelber to provide the plurality of heating element connected in parallel for achieving a higher heat output.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Acero Acero et al (US 2009/0139980) in view of Herbst et al (US 4,484,243).
The teachings of Acero Acero have been discussed above. Acero Acero fails to disclose a sheath defining an enclosed volume along a longitudinal length between the first end portion and the second end portion; a resistive wire disposed within the enclosed volume to generate heat in response to an electrical current; and a thermally conductive electrical insulation radially positioned between the resistive wire and the sheath.
Herbst discloses a heating element for a cooking appliance having a sheath defining a closed volume 18. (See Figs 1, 2 and Columns 3-4), a resistive wire 58 and a thermally conductive insulation 20 between the wire 58 and sheath 18. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the sheath for grounding the heating assembly, the resistive wire for generating heat and the insulation for preventing arcing between the sheath and wire.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-18 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN W JENNISON whose telephone number is (571)270-5930. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-5.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 571-270-5569. 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.
/BRIAN W JENNISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 7/17/2026
Prosecution Insights