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 . This action is made final.
Claims 1-4 and 6-20 filed on 03/13/2026 have been reviewed and considered by this office action.
Claims 1, 15, 16, and 20 have been amended.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on Application Nos. PCT/CN2022/083472, CN202111056165.7, and CN202111149278.1 filed on 03/28/2022, 09/29/2021, and 09/29/2021, respectively. Copies of certified papers required by 37 CFR 1.55 have been received. Priority is acknowledged under 35 USC 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 03/13/2026 has been reviewed and considered by this office action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 6-13, and 15-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art cited or any other prior art that was found does not show an adjustment relationship, plot, correspondence, or curve between the exhaust air volume of a hood or kitchen appliance and oil fume concentration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/13/2026, regarding the rejections of claims 1-4, 6-13, and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Regarding claim 14, Applicant’s remarks on page 13 appear to treat claim 14 as depending from claim 1. However, claim 14 is presently drafted as an independent claim and does not include the limitations added to claim 1. Accordingly, the rejection of claim 14 has been maintained. Applicant is requested to clarify the status of the claim. If Applicant intends claim 14 to include the limitations added to claim 1, Applicant may wish to amend claim 14 accordingly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Robinson et al. (US 2015/0211749 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Robinson discloses a control apparatus comprising one or more processors configured to:
obtain an oil fume concentration based on oil fume data outputted by a fume sensor ([0054]: VOC sensors 33A, 33B, 33C, which detect concentrations of organic materials in the air corresponding to oil fumes);
select one speed adjustment curve from a plurality of speed adjustment curves based on the oil fume concentration (FIG. 5 and [0025]: “the method further involves: establishing multiple flow rate curves, where each flow rate curve defines a relationship of how changes in thermal load condition affect target flow rate, and each flow rate curve has a common start point and a common end point”; [0066]: “excessive VOC conditions could be added together and used in combination to make the decision of whether and how to adjust the applicable flow rate curve”) and control operation of a kitchen appliance by using the selected speed adjustment curve ([0025]: “the adjusting of the set of operating parameters involves changing the flow rate curve that is used to define exhaust flow based upon monitored thermal load”); and
obtain an adjustment curve by processing a current speed adjustment curve based on an obtained manual speed adjustment operation (FIG. 7 and [0062-0064]: “a process is shown which adjusts the applicable flow rate curves based upon manual overrides that are triggered”),
wherein one or more processors are configured to control operation of the kitchen appliance by using the adjustment curve ([0064]: “Each 30 minute segment (for each hood section) is evaluated to determine whether the number of manual overrides is highly excessive (e.g., more than 12 per step 194), in which case the applicable flow rate curve is shifted by two levels per step 202 (e.g., from D to B relative to the curves of FIG. 5). If the manual overrides are not highly excessive, but instead are moderately excessive (e.g., between 3 and 12 per step 196), then the applicable flow rate curve is shifted by one levels per step 204 (e.g., from D to C relative to the curves of FIG. 5). If manual overrides have occurred, but the number is not highly excessive or moderately excessive (e.g., between 3 and 0.5 per step 198), then the applicable flow rate curve is not changed per step 206. If the manual overrides are, on average, not occurring (e.g., less than 0.5 per step 200), then the applicable flow rate curve may be shifted in the opposite direction by one level (e.g., from D to E) per step 210, unless the applicable flow rate curve is already one of the less aggressive curves E or F per step 208”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 110617521 A: a controller that can control range hood according to oil smoke concentration and the smoke exhaust resistance
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 Magdalena Kossek whose telephone number is (571)272-5603. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 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, Robert Fennema can be reached on (571)272-2748. 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.
/M.I.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights