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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Viroli et al. (WO2021052876A1).
Viroli discloses in reference to claim:
1. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance (Fig. 1), comprising:
- a plurality of cooking zones (90, 91) each having an induction coil (90/91) for generating an electromagnetic field; and
- a power supply unit (34/35) coupled to the induction coils (90/91) and configured to selectively control an energy input into the induction coils (90/91);
wherein the power supply unit (34-35) comprises:
- a quasi-resonant generator (page 15, lines 10-13) coupled to at least one respective induction coil (90/91), and being configured to power and control the at least one respective induction coil (90/91) for controlling the respective generated electromagnetic field (page 15, lines 29-31); and
- a half-bridge generator (page 15) being coupled to at least one respective induction coil (90/91), configured to power and control the at least one respective induction coil (90/91) for controlling the respective generated electromagnetic field,
Viroli discloses (fig. 1 in combination with page 15, lines 10-17) an induction cooking appliance (page 1, lines 2-6), comprising at least: - a plurality of cooking zones (90, 91) each having at least one induction coil (implicitly present at ref. 90, 91) for generating an electromagnetic field; and - a power supply unit (comprising at least ref. 34, 35) coupled to the induction coils and configured to selectively control an energy input into the induction coils; wherein the power supply unit (comprising at least ref. 34, 35) comprises: - at least one quasi-resonant generator (page 15, lines 10-17) coupled to at least one respective induction coil, and in particular being configured to power and control the at least one respective induction coil for controlling the respective generated electromagnetic field; and - at least one half-bridge generator (page 15, lines 10-17) being coupled to at least one respective induction coil, and in particular being configured to power and control the at least one respective induction coil for controlling the respective generated electromagnetic field. Note that page 15, lines 10-17 of Viroli dislcoses that the use of "...half bridge and/or quasi-resonant signal..." are foreseen for the "...at least two frequency generating units 34, 35...". This is clearly the teaching = to combine two or more different types of frequency generating units according to the needs.
PNG
media_image1.png
593
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
2. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1, wherein the power supply unit comprises at least a plurality of quasi-resonant generators each one coupled to at least one respective induction coil and in particular configured to power and control the respective induction coils for controlling the respective electromagnetic field. See page 15 of Viroli
3. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1, wherein the power supply unit comprises at least a plurality of half-bridge generators each one coupled to at least one respective induction coil, and in particular configured to power and control the respective induction coil for controlling the respective electromagnetic field. See page 15 of Viroli
4. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1, wherein each induction coil (90/91) is adapted to deliver a respective maximum power (inherent that any coil in adapted to deliver a maximum power respective to that coil);
wherein the at least one half-bridge generator is coupled to the induction coil being adapted to deliver the largest respective maximum power, and is configured to power and control the respective induction coil being adapted to deliver the largest respective maximum power; and/or wherein the at least one quasi-resonant generator is coupled to the induction coil being adapted to deliver the lowest respective maximum power, and is configured to power and control the respective induction coil being adapted to deliver the lowest respective maximum power. See page 15 of Viroli
5. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1 wherein each induction coil is adapted to deliver a respective minimum power and a respective maximum power;
wherein at least one induction coil (3) being coupled to one respective half-bridge generator presents a power difference between the respective minimum power and the respective maximum power being larger than the respective power differences between the respective minimum powers and the respective maximum powers of the other induction coils.
9. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1 wherein each said quasi-resonant generator comprises comprising a respective quasi-resonant inverter circuit having a power switching device. See page 15 of Viroli
10. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1 wherein each said half-bridge generator comprises a respective half-bridge inverter circuit having a plurality of power switching devices. See page 15 of Viroli
11. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1 wherein the power supply unit comprises one or more a microcontrollers (microcontrol unit 50) configured to control operation of the least one quasi-resonant generator and the at least one half-bridge generator
12. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1 wherein the power supply unit comprises a plurality of drivers (22) coupled to the at least one quasi- resonant generator and the at least one half-bridge generator and one or more microcontrollers , each one coupled to one or more respective drivers wherein each microcontroller is configured to command the drivers for controlling operation of the at least one quasi-resonant generator and the at least one half-bridge generator.
13. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1 wherein the power supply unit comprises one or more power board assemblies 20 coupled and/or coupleable to an external power supply 10 and each carrying and/or comprising at least one quasi-resonant generator and/or at least one half-bridge generator (see page 15 and figure 1)
14. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 13, wherein each power board assembly 20 comprises a rectifier unit being coupled and/or coupleable to the external power supply 10 and configured to convert an AC power signal provided by the external power supply 10 into a rectified DC power signal;
wherein each rectifier unit is coupled to at least one quasi-resonant generator and/or to at least half-bridge generator.
See page 15 , The at least one DC signal generating unit 33 is a rectifier, wherein the rectifier in particular is a bridge rectifier and/or is constituted by diodes, wherein the at least one DC signal generating unit 33 preferably comprises a surge protection unit 42 and a bus voltage detection unit 43. In a first embodiment, the at least two heating frequency generating units 34, 35 are inverters, in particular generators, in particular using IGBT's and/or a half bridge and/or using a qua siresonant signal. The first electrical power is supplied to the heating units 90, 91 by means of e heating frequency generating units 34, 35, in particular by means of heating frequency signals 36, 37.
15. (New) Induction cooking appliance comprising:
first and second cooking zones having associated therewith first and second induction coils, respectively, each adapted to generate an electromagnetic field for heating food;
a power supply unit comprising a quasi-resonant generator coupled to and configured to power and control the first induction coil to generate the associated electromagnetic field, and a half-bridge generator coupled to and configured to power and control the second induction coil to generate the associated electromagnetic field, wherein the quasi-resonant generator is not coupled to the second induction coil to power and control the same, and the half-bridge generator is not coupled to the first induction coil to power and control the same; and
a signaling device adapted to provide an indication to a user that the second cooking zone, having associated therewith the second induction coil, is to be used in dependence on a specific cooking operation or cooking program requiring elevated cooking performance that cannot be achieved by the quasi-resonant generator powering and controlling the first induction coil. See explanation with respect to claim 1-14, mutatis mutandis
16. (New) The induction cooking appliance according to claim 15, said second induction coil being adapted to deliver the largest maximum power in operation compared to all induction coils of the appliance, and said first induction coil being adapted to deliver the lowest maximum power in operation compared to all induction coils of the appliance. See explanation with respect to claim 1-14, mutatis mutandis
17. (New) The induction cooking appliance according to claim 15, said power supply unit comprising a power board assembly adapted to be coupled to an external power supply, the power board assembly comprising both the quasi-resonant generator and the half-bridge generator, and a microcontroller configured to selectively control their operation. See explanation with respect to claim 1-14, mutatis mutandis
18. (New) The induction cooking appliance according to claim 16, further comprising third and fourth cooking zones having associated therewith third and fourth induction coils, respectively, each adapted to generate an electromagnetic field for heating food;
said quasi-resonant generator being coupled to and configured to power and control the third induction coil to generate the associated electromagnetic field, and said half-bridge generator coupled to and configured to power and control the fourth induction coil to generate the associated electromagnetic field. See explanation with respect to claim 1-14, mutatis mutandis
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 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.
The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness which are consistent with the proper “functional approach” to the determination of obviousness as laid down in Graham. The key to supporting any rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is the clear articulation of the reason(s) why the claimed invention would have been obvious. The Supreme Court in KSR noted that the analysis supporting a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should be made explicit.
EXEMPLARY RATIONALES
Exemplary rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include:
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way;
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
(E) “Obvious to try” – choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success;
(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art;
(G) Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viroli et al. (WO2021052876A1) in view of Pippia (US 2015/0008216A1).
Viroli discloses the claimed invention except in reference to claim:
6. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 1 further comprising a signaling device configured to indicate to a user the cooking zone to use in dependence of a specific cooking operation and/or cooking program to be executed.
7. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 6, wherein the signaling device is configured to indicate the use of a said cooking zone having an induction coil being coupled to one respective half-bridge generator in dependence of the needed cooking performance.
8. (Currently Amended) Induction cooking appliance according to claim 6, wherein the signaling device is configured to indicate the use of a said cooking zone having an induction coil being coupled to one respective quasi-resonant generator in dependence of the needed cooking performance.
Pippia discloses a similar heating device including a signaling device configured to indicate the use of a said cooking zone.
[0094] Specifically, the control unit checks whether any pan (i.e., either the pan P.sub.1 or any other pan) has been detected in the second cooking zone 115.sub.6 (decision node 230). In the affirmative case (exit branch Y of the decision node 230), another check is performed aimed at determining whether the temperature sensor Ts has been re-associated to the second cooking zone (decision node 235), with such re-association to the second cooking zone that may follow manual de-association of the temperature sensor Ts from the first cooking zone 115.sub.1, or preferably (as herein assumed by way of example) that may precede (i.e. cause) its automatic de-association therefrom. In the affirmative case (exit branch Y of the decision node 235), i.e. the temperature sensor Ts has been de-associated from the first cooking zone 115.sub.1 and re-associated to the second cooking zone 115.sub.6, the control unit infers that, e.g. due to cooking zones layout rearrangement, the user needs to change cooking zone for the ongoing cooking process (e.g., pan P.sub.1 moved in the second cooking zone 115.sub.6 together with the temperature sensor Ts, as illustrated in FIG. 5B scenario), or that the user has changed pan for the food under cooking (so that another pan P.sub.2, different from the pan P.sub.1, is detected in the second cooking zone 115.sub.6, as illustrated in FIG. 5D scenario).
It would have been obvious to one of skill in the art to provide the signaling means as discussed by Pippia on the device of Viroli such that the user can be guided through cooking process.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOR S CAMPBELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4776. The examiner can normally be reached M,W-F 6:30-10:30, 12-4.
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 5712705569. 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.
/THOR S CAMPBELL/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3761
tsc
Prosecution Insights