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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 16-32, in the reply filed on 6/17/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims33-35 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/17/2026.
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 17, 23 and 25 is 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 17 which recites the melting temperature that is “around 250 C” renders the scope of the claim vague and unclear since there are no clear metes and bounds for such recitation.
Claim 23 recites for “an active layer” and “a passive layer”, but it is unclear how one layer is distinguished from the other layer. For purposes of examining, the active layer is interpreted as a layer having a higher coefficient of thermal expansion than the passive layer (as disclosed in lines 9-11 on page 3 of the specification).
Claim 25 recites for “normal” which a relative term of degree that renders the claim indefinite and vague since there is no clear claim scope as to what would constitute “normal” as opposed to abnormal.
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) 16-20, 23-27, 31 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyazawa et al (US 5,770,993).
Miyazawa discloses the heating assembly claimed including a first soldered spot (13’), a second soldered spot (13), a thermal fuse element including a connection strip (11) that electrically connects the first solder spot and the second solder spot wherein one of the first solder spot and the second solder spot is configured as a soft solder having a melting temperature about 238º C (column 6, lines 12-13) which is encompassed within the claimed range of 225º C to 275º C wherein the connection strip is a bimetal strip (shown by two layers including a first layer 11 and a second layer 12).
With respect to claim 17, Miyazawa discloses the melting temperature of the soft solder that is 238º C which is around 250º C.
With respect to claim 18, Miyazawa discloses the connection strip that is arranged freely spanning between the first solder spot and the second solder spot as the connection strip is arranged to freely extend between the first solder spot and the second solder spot.
With respect to claims 19 , 20, 31 and 32, Miyazawa discloses the connection strip that is configured to disconnect from the soft solder by bending away from the soft solder spot (see Figure 2) as the soft solder spot reaches a melting temperature above 238º C wherein the soft solder spot would also melt when the temperature of the connection strip also exceeds 250º C or 275º C which is higher than the temperature at which the soft solder spot melts.
With respect to claim 23 and 24, Miyazawa discloses the bimetal strip comprising an active layer (as disclosed having higher coefficient of thermal expansion; see page 3, line 9-11 of the Applicant’s specification) and a passive layer (which would have a lower coefficient of thermal expansion than the active layer) as Miyazawa shows the active layer (11) including copper Cu having a higher expansion of coefficient (17.8 x 10^-6 / ºC) than the passive layer (12) which includes Fe-Ni (which is shown to have a lower coefficient of thermal expansion 4.4 x 10^-6 / ºC). Also, see page 5, lines 44-61.
With respect to claims 25-27, Miyazawa discloses the bimetal strip that does not change its shape during a normal operating temperature (see Figure 2) wherein the normal operation temperature would be a temperature lower than the melting temperature of the soft solder spot 238º C or less which overlaps that of the claimed range. Also, see column 6, lines 4-13.
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) 21, 22, 29 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazawa et al (US 5,770,993) in view of Nelson et al (US 4,933,530).
With respect to claims 21 and 22, Miyazawa discloses the first solder spot and the second solder spot wherein one of the solder spot (13’) is not a soft solder (i.e., it does not melt as that of the soft solder spot 13), but Miyazawa does not disclose that the one of the solder spot not being a soft solder spot has a melting temperature between 600º C to 900º C.
Nelson shows it is known to provide a solder for soldering or boding metal parts that has a melting temperature in the range of 1150º F to 1375º F (which is equivalent to 621º C to 746º C) which overlaps the claimed range, and Nelson further discloses that the non-soft solder spot is made of silver.
In view of Nelson, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Miyazawa with the solder spot that is not a soft solder spot wherein the non-soft solder spot has a melting temperature that is higher than the soft solder spot so that the non-soft solder spot can continue to maintain the positioning of the connection strip while one end of the connection strip becomes free due to the melting of the soft solder spot to make the electrical disconnect in the event of overheating of the heating assembly.
With respect to claims 29 and 30, Nelson discloses that the non-soft solder spot is made of silver (column 1, lines 31-33).
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyazawa et al (US 5,770,993) in view of Bromley et al (US 2003/0048170).
Miyazawa discloses the soft solder spot (13) that includes tin (Sn) but does not show lead (Pb) as claimed.
Bromley shows it is known to provide a soft solder spot that comprises tin (Sn) and lead (Pb) having a melting temperature of 250º C (para 0023) which is encompassed with the soft solder spot having the melting temperature between 225º C to 275º C.
In view of Bromley, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adapt Miyazawa with the soft solder spot including lead (Pb) which would control a melting temperature of the soft solder spot so that the different or other desired overheating temperature can predictably achieved or designed as desired by the user of the heating assembly.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pachla et al (US 2006/0273876), Matthiesen et al (US 2010/0245027), and Yang (US 8,143,991) disclose for a soft solder spot for electric disconnection when heated over its predetermined melting temperature.
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