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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/16/2023 and 12/26/2024 have been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 12 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 15 and 16, respectively, of copending Application No. 18/561,730 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 15 of copending Application No. 18/561,730 anticipates instant claim 1, and claim 16 of copending Application No. 18/561,730 anticipates instant claim 12.
The table below compares instant claims with claims of copending Application No. 18/561,730. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application 18/561,721
Copending Application 18/561,730
Claim 1. A cooking device, comprising:
a housing having a cooking cavity;
a gas circulation apparatus disposed in the housing and configured to drive gas in the cooking cavity to flow and circulate,
the gas circulation apparatus comprising a gas driving part, wherein when driven by the gas driving part, gas has a first part flowing in a first direction and a second part flowing in a second direction, one of the first direction and the second direction being a circumferential direction of the gas driving part, and another of the first direction and the second direction being a radial direction of the gas driving part,
wherein the gas driving part comprises:
a driving cover body having a plurality of air holes on a side surface of the driving cover body facing towards the cooking cavity of the cooking device; and
a fan blade part rotatably arranged in the driving cover body,
wherein the driving cover body comprises:
a driving cover body top wall; and
a driving cover body side wall connected to the driving cover body top wall, the fan blade part being located below the driving cover body top wall and surrounded by the driving cover body side wall,
wherein the driving cover body side wall is formed as a divergent side wall, a small diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is connected to the driving cover body top wall, and a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is away from the driving cover body top wall,
wherein the cooking device further comprises a heating apparatus arranged in the cooking cavity
and adjacent to the driving cover body, wherein the driving cover body side wall has a virtual extension surface extending towards the cooking cavity, wherein a range formed by deflecting a predetermined small angle β towards two sides of the virtual extension surface with a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall as a fulcrum is a predetermined range, and wherein a peripheral edge of the heating apparatus does not exceed the predetermined range.
Claim 1. A cooking device, comprising:
a housing having a cooking cavity;
a gas circulation apparatus disposed in the housing and configured to drive gas in the cooking cavity to flow and circulate;
a heating apparatus disposed in the cooking cavity; a shelf apparatus comprising a bottom shelf and a top shelf disposed above the bottom shelf, a gap being formed between the top shelf and the bottom shelf, and the gap being formed as a gas flow channel located below the top shelf; and a gas guide structure configured to guide gas blown out by the gas circulation apparatus to flow into the gas flow channel and then pass through the top shelf.
Claim 10. The cooking device according to claim 1,wherein the gas circulation apparatus comprises a gas driving part, wherein when driven by the gas driving part, gas has a first part flowing in a first direction and a second part flowing in a second direction, one of the first direction and the second direction being a circumferential direction of the gas driving part, and another of the first direction and the second direction being a radial direction of the gas driving part.
Claim 13. The cooking device according to claim 10 wherein the gas driving part comprises:
a driving cover body having a plurality of air holes on a side surface of the driving cover body facing towards the cooking cavity of the cooking device; and
a fan blade part rotatably arranged in the driving cover body.
Claim 14. The cooking device according to claim 13,
wherein the driving cover body comprises
a driving cover body top wall and
a driving cover body side wall connected to the driving cover body top wall, wherein: the fan blade part is located below the driving cover body top wall and surrounded by the driving cover body side wall;
the driving cover body side wall is formed as a divergent side wall; a small diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is connected to the driving cover body top wall; and a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is away from the driving cover body top wall.
(in claim 1, above: a heating apparatus disposed in the cooking cavity)
Claim 15. The cooking device according to claim 14, wherein the heating apparatus is adjacent to the driving cover body, wherein the driving cover body side wall has a virtual extension surface extending towards the cooking cavity, wherein a range formed by deflecting a predetermined small angle β towards two sides of the virtual extension surface with a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall as a fulcrum is a preset range, and wherein a peripheral edge of the heating apparatus does not exceed the preset range.
Claim 12. The cooking device according to claim 1, wherein the small angle β satisfies a relationship: 0°< β≤10°.
Claim 16. The cooking device according to claim 15, wherein the small angle β satisfies a relationship: 0°< β≤10°.
Claims 1 and 12 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 16 and 17, respectively, of copending Application No. 18/561,294 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 16 of copending Application No. 18/561,294 anticipates instant claim 1, and claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/561,294 anticipates instant claim 12.
The table below compares instant claims with claims of copending Application No. 18/561,294. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application 18/561,721
Copending Application 18/561,294
Claim 1. A cooking device, comprising:
a housing having a cooking cavity;
a gas circulation apparatus disposed in the housing and configured to drive gas in the cooking cavity to flow and circulate,
the gas circulation apparatus comprising a gas driving part,
wherein when driven by the gas driving part, gas has a first part flowing in a first direction and a second part flowing in a second direction, one of the first direction and the second direction being a circumferential direction of the gas driving part, and another of the first direction and the second direction being a radial direction of the gas driving part,
wherein the gas driving part comprises:
a driving cover body having a plurality of air holes on a side surface of the driving cover body facing towards the cooking cavity of the cooking device; and a fan blade part rotatably arranged in the driving cover body, the fan blade part being located below the driving cover body top wall and surrounded by the driving cover body side wall,
wherein the cooking device further comprises a heating apparatus arranged in the cooking cavity and adjacent to the driving cover body,
wherein the driving cover body comprises: a driving cover body top wall; and a driving cover body side wall connected to the driving cover body top wall,
wherein the driving cover body side wall is formed as a divergent side wall, a small diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is connected to the driving cover body top wall, and a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is away from the driving cover body top wall,
wherein the driving cover body side wall has a virtual extension surface extending towards the cooking cavity, wherein a range formed by deflecting a predetermined small angle β towards two sides of the virtual extension surface with a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall as a fulcrum is a predetermined range, and wherein a peripheral edge of the heating apparatus does not exceed the predetermined range.
Claim 1. A cooking device, comprising:
a housing having a cooking cavity;
a gas circulation apparatus disposed in the housing and configured to drive gas in the cooking cavity to flow and circulate,
wherein the gas circulation apparatus comprises a gas driving part,
(this language is understood to be functional language that is achieved by the claimed structure)
wherein the gas driving part comprises
a driving cover body and a fan blade part rotatably disposed in the driving cover body, the driving cover body having a plurality of air holes being provided on a side surface of the driving cover body facing towards the cooking cavity;
a heating apparatus disposed in the cooking cavity and adjacent to the plurality of air holes,
Claim 15. The cooking device according to claim 1, wherein the driving cover body comprises a driving cover body top wall and a driving cover body side wall, ….
Claim 15. … wherein: the driving cover body side wall is a divergent side wall; a small diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is connected to the driving cover body top wall; and a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall faces away from the driving cover body top wall
Claim 16. The cooking device according to claim 15, wherein the driving cover body side wall has a virtual extension surface extending towards the cooking cavity, wherein a range formed by deflecting a predetermined small angle β towards two sides of the virtual extension surface with the large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall as a fulcrum is a preset range, and wherein a peripheral edge of the heating apparatus does not exceed the preset range.
Claim 12. The cooking device according to claim 1, wherein the small angle β satisfies a relationship: 0°< β≤10°.
Claim 17. The cooking device according to claim 16, wherein the small angle β satisfies a relationship: 0°< β≤10°.
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: “heating apparatus” in claim 1.
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.
Applicant’s filed specification describes the heating apparatus as element number 30, and wherein heating apparatus 30 may comprise outer peripheral heating apparatus 31, and may further comprise inner peripheral heating apparatus 32. The structure of these elements is described as follows: “the inner peripheral heating apparatus 32 and the outer peripheral heating apparatus 31 may be composed of different heating tubes” (paragraph [0151] of the filed specification). “For example, the heating apparatus 30 may be made of metal, quartz, graphene, etc.” [0152].
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 2, 5 – 7, and 26 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 2 recites, “a fan blade part” in lines 2-3. Claim 2 depends from claim 1, and claim 1 already recites “a fan blade part.” Therefore, it is unclear if the fan blade part recited in claim 2 is the same fan blade part as that recited in claim 1, or is a different fan blade part. Claim 2 also recites “a fan blade part” in lines 3-4, and it is unclear if this is the same fan blade part as one of those recited previously, or a different fan blade part. Claims 5 – 6 are also rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 2.
Similarly, claim 7 recites, “a fan blade part,” and it is unclear if this is the fan blade part recited in claim 1, or a different fan blade part.
Similarly, claim 26 recites, “a fan blade part.” Claim 26 depends from claim 2, and it is unclear if this is the fan blade part recited in claim 1, or a fan blade part recited in claim 2, or another fan blade part.
Claim 7 recites, “the gas driving part cavity.” Claim 7 depends from claim 1, but claim 1 does not recite a gas driving part cavity. However, claim 2 recites “a gas driving part cavity.” It is unclear whether claim 7 is intended to recite “a gas driving part cavity” and depend from claim 1, or instead depend from claim 2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 recites allowable subject matter, but is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting. Claims 2, 5 – 7, and 26 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not teach, disclose, or suggest the cooking device of claim 1, and in particular, wherein the gas driving part comprises: a driving cover body having a plurality of air holes on a side surface of the driving cover body facing towards the cooking cavity of the cooking device: and a fan blade part rotatably arranged in the driving cover body, wherein the driving cover body comprises: a driving cover body top wall; and a driving cover body side wall connected to the driving cover body top wall, the fan blade part being located below the driving cover body top wall and surrounded by the driving cover body side wall, wherein the driving cover body side wall is formed as a divergent side wall, a small diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is connected to the driving cover body top wall, and a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall is away from the driving cover body top wall, wherein the cooking device further comprises a heating apparatus arranged in the cooking cavity and adjacent to the driving cover body, wherein the driving cover body side wall has a virtual extension surface extending towards the cooking cavity, wherein a range formed by deflecting a predetermined small angle p towards two sides of the virtual extension surface with a large diameter end of the driving cover body side wall as a fulcrum is a predetermined range, and wherein a peripheral edge of the heating apparatus does not exceed the predetermined range.
CN 212089204 is considered the closest prior art, and discloses a gas driving part comprising a driving cover body (Fig. 7, first cover body 31 comprising top plate 311 and top wall 312, second cover body 32 comprising top plate 321 and bottom wall 322, third cover body 33 comprising bottom wall 332 and side wall 333) having a plurality of air holes (air inlet hole 323 and air inlet hole 331), and a fan blade part (Fig. 7, fan 40). However, CN 212089204 does not disclose the relative positioning and structure of all of the elements of the gas driving part as claimed. Applicant’s disclosure indicates that the claimed structure advantageously results in the gas that flows through the driving cover body side wall being directly blown towards the heating apparatus, thus improving heat exchange with food in the cooking cavity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH KERR whose telephone number is (571)272-3073. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, 8:30 AM - 4:30 PM.
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 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.
/ELIZABETH M KERR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761