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
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
A heating element in claim 1 wherein heating is a functional language with the term element being a generic placeholder for means.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A heating element is interpreted as a heating plate or a heating coil as disclosed in the specification or its equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites for a water intake duct of the steam bubble retention device that “runs into” the suction opening, but it is unclear what structure or arrangement would constitute such arrangement. For purposes of examination, the recited “runs into” is interpreted as the water intake duct that “is directed toward” the suction opening. Clarification is required.
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(s) 1, 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wentzel (DE 3012590).
Wentzel discloses the device claimed including a heating chamber (1), a water inlet (4), a water outlet (8; also, see Figure 1) having an outlet duct with an suction opening (shown by its opened end) through which hot water is supplied thereto wherein in the suction opening is arranged within the heating chamber at a distance to a bottom of the heating chamber and facing a top side of the heating chamber, a heating element (5) for heating the water in the heating chamber, the water outlet further comprising a steam bubble retention device (shown by a deflection shell 10) that forms a water intake duct (shown by its concave channel) that runs or is directed toward the suction opening and prevents steam bubbles to flow through the suction opening of the outlet duct (also, see para 0013 of the English translation).
With respect to claim 6, Wentzel discloses the steam bubble retention device shaped in a circular dome shape forming an intake duct/channel that encloses an end region of the outlet duct of the water outlet wherein an intake opening is located below the suction opening of the water outlet.
With respect to claim 8, Wentzel discloses an upper end of the intake duct that further include a vent hole (13) where the gas/bubble can be let out.
Claim(s) 1 and 6 is/are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Harney (US 2,784,291).
Harney discloses the device claimed including a heating chamber (12), a water inlet (26), a water outlet (44) having an outlet duct with an suction opening (shown by its opened end) through which hot water is supplied thereto wherein the suction opening is arranged within the heating chamber at a distance to a bottom of the heating chamber and facing a top side of the heating chamber, a heating element (46) for heating the water in the heating chamber, the water outlet further comprising a steam bubble retention device that forms a water intake duct (40) that runs or is directed toward the suction opening wherein steam bubbles are prevented from flowing through the suction opening of the outlet duct. It is also noted that such retention or prevention of the steam bubbles is deemed as an inherent characteristic or function of the steam bubble retention device that is formed of the same substantially same structure including a water intake duct. Also, see MPEP 2112.01.
With respect to claim 6, Harney discloses that the steam bubble retention device is shaped as a hat-shaped tubular intake duct (which is shown by a bell-shaped hood) that encloses an end region of the outlet duct (44) wherein an intake opening of the intake duct is located at a distance below the suction opening.
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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wentzel (DE 3012590) in view of Abraham (US 2012/0051724).
Wentzel discloses the heating device claimed including the water outlet that is coupled with the steam bubble retention device having the intake duct having an opening/channel but does not show the intake opening of the intake duct that is located below the heating element.
Abraham discloses it is known to provide a water outlet (16) having an outlet duct (16) that is situated below a heating element, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Wentzel to provide the water outlet at a lower position below the heating element as taught by Abraham, as alternative water outlet location, which would predictably include the steam bubble retention device having its intake opening located wherein the water outlet is situation which would predictably be below the heating element so that heated water without gas bubble is supplied to the water outlet as desired.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wentzel (DE 3012590) in view of McKay (US 2021/0052106).
Wentzel discloses the heating device claimed except for a pumping device connected to the outlet duct as claimed.
McKay discloses it is known to provide a pumping device (92) connected to a water outlet duct (112).
In view of McKay, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Wentzel with the outlet duct having a pumping device that is known to more effectively deliver water out of the heating chamber to the water outlet.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 and 10-15 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG Y PAIK whose telephone number is (571)272-4783. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30; M-F.
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, Steven W. Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5095. 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.
/SANG Y PAIK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights