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 .
Drawings
Figures 1 and 2 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-5, 11-15, and 17 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 7, 11-14, and 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11940332 (Lees et al, hereinafter “the reference Patent”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding Claim 1 of the instant Application, Claims 1 and 12 of the reference Patent each teach all of the features of Claim 1, i.e. a cooking oven (“a cooking chamber”) comprising: a cooking chamber comprising a plurality of walls including a top wall and a bottom wall (“a cooking chamber including a top wall, a bottom wall, and side walls”); a reservoir spaced above the bottom wall and below the top wall of the cooking chamber (“a reservoir secured to one of the side walls and above the bottom wall”; the side wall would necessarily be located below the top wall), a cavity of the reservoir being open to the cooking chamber and configured to hold a quantity of water therein (“a cavity of the reservoir being open…to the cooking chamber and configured to hold a quantity of water therein”); a temperature sensor probe configured to be mounted at least partially within the cavity of the reservoir (”a temperature sensor probe configured to be mounted at least partially within the cavity of the reservoir”) and configured to be at least partially submerged in the quantity of water to measure a temperature in the reservoir (“with the temperature sensor probe at least partially submerged in the quantity of water to measure a temperature in the reservoir”); and a water fill opening in communication with the cavity of the reservoir (“a water fill opening positioned to dispense water into the cavity”).
Regarding Claim 2 of the instant Application, Claim 2 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 2.
Regarding Claim 3 of the instant Application, Claim 21 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 3.
Regarding Claim 4 of the instant Application, Claim 3 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 4.
Regarding Claim 5 of the instant Application, Claim 3 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 3.
Regarding Claim 11 of the instant Application, Claim 4 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 11.
Regarding Claim 12 of the instant Application, Claim 5 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 12.
Regarding Claim 13 of the instant Application, Claim 11 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 13.
Regarding Claim 14 of the instant Application, Claim 13 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 14.
Regarding Claim 15 of the instant Application, Claim 14 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 15.
Regarding Claim 17 of the instant Application, Claim 7 of the reference Patent teaches all of the features of Claim 17.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims in the instant case have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 11-13, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shelton (U.S. Pat. No. 6635854, cited on Applicant’s IDS dated 4/20/2026).
Regarding Claim 1, Shelton teaches a cooking oven (Figs. 2-3), comprising: a cooking chamber comprising a plurality of walls including a top wall and a bottom wall (food chamber 12); a reservoir spaced above the bottom wall and below the top wall of the cooking chamber (hollow cavity 32, at least a portion of hollow cavity 32 is located above the bottom wall and below the top wall of food chamber 12), a cavity of the reservoir being open to the cooking chamber (port 34) and configured to hold a quantity of water therein (column 2, lines 39-60); a temperature sensor probe configured to be mounted at least partially within the cavity of the reservoir and configured to be at least partially submerged in the quantity of water to measure a temperature in the reservoir (temperature sensor 42; column 2, line 61-column 3, line 6); and a water fill opening in communication with the cavity of the reservoir (port 34; column 2, lines 39-60).
Regarding Claim 2, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Shelton further teaches wherein the water fill opening is located outside and above the cavity of the reservoir (at least a portion of port 34 is located outside and above hollow cavity 32).
Regarding Claim 3, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Shelton further teaches wherein the water fill opening is located within the cavity of the reservoir (at least a portion of port 34 is located within hollow cavity 32).
Regarding Claim 4, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Shelton further teaches wherein the temperature sensor probe extends through one of the plurality of walls of the cooking chamber to be positioned within the cavity of the reservoir (Fig. 2, temperature sensor 42 extends through hollow cavity 32, which is a side wall of the food chamber 12).
Regarding Claim 5, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Shelton further teaches said temperature probe extending through a side wall of the cooking chamber (Fig. 2, temperature sensor 42 extends through hollow cavity 32, which is a side wall of the food chamber 12).
Regarding Claim 6, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Shelton further teaches further comprising at least one further temperature sensor located outside of the cavity of the reservoir and within the cooking chamber (dry bulb sensor 20).
Regarding Claim 11, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 1. Shelton further teaches further comprising a mounting plate (inside wall 28) secured to one of the plurality of walls of the cooking chamber (outside wall 30), wherein the reservoir is attached to the mounting plate (hollow cavity 32 is attached to inside wall 28).
Regarding Claim 12, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 11. Shelton further teaches wherein the mounting plate comprises a temperature sensor probe opening configured to receive the temperature sensor probe with at least a portion of the temperature sensor probe in the cavity (Fig. 3, the assembly that includes temperature sensor 42 extends through bottom of oven door, which is interpreted as being part of the inside wall 28).
Regarding Claim 13, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 11. Shelton further teaches wherein the mounting plate comprises a water fill passage configured to provide fluid communication between the water fill opening and the reservoir (port 34 goes through inside wall 28 to hollow cavity 32).
Regarding Claim 17, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 11. Shelton further teaches wherein the mounting plate and the reservoir are removably attached to the one of the plurality of walls of the cooking chamber (Figs. 2-3, opening the door removes the hollow cavity 32 and inside wall 28 from being attached to the top and bottom walls of the food chamber 12).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 7-10 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton in view of Oslin (U.S. Pat. No. 4924072).
Regarding Claim 7, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 6. Shelton does not specifically teach wherein the at least one further temperature sensor comprises an NTC thermistor, a thermocouple, a resistive temperature measuring device, an infrared sensor, or a thermometer. However, Oslin teaches, in column 6, lines 8-16, that a temperature probe in an oven can be a resistive thermal device, a thermocouple, or a thermistor. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the various types of temperature sensors described in Oslin in the oven of Shelton, because combining prior art elements according to known methods yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 8, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 6. Shelton does not specifically teach wherein a microcontroller is configured to calculate a relative humidity of the cooking chamber based on measurements of the temperature sensor probe and the at least one further temperature sensor. However Oslin teaches wherein a microcontroller is configured to calculate a relative humidity of the cooking chamber based on measurements of the temperature sensor probe and the at least one further temperature sensor (Fig. 16, block 434, and column 12, lines 8-16, calculating a humidity based on a wet bulb and a dry bulb temperature). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the humidity calculation of Oslin in the system of Shelton, because it may be desirable to cook under conditions of controlled humidity (see Oslin, column 12, lines 1-2).
Regarding Claim 9, Shelton in view of Oslin teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 8. Shelton further teaches further comprising an external vent valve (drain port 38) or a steam boiler (heat source 40).
Regarding Claim 10, Shelton in view of Oslin teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 9. Shelton further teaches wherein the microcontroller is configured to operate the external vent valve (optional due to “or”) or the steam boiler (heat source 40) to maintain a target temperature of the temperature sensor probe and a target temperature of the at least one further temperature sensor (column 3, lines 31-40).
Regarding Claim 14, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 13. Shelton does not specifically teach further comprising at least one of a pump or a valve positioned along the water fill passage and configured to selectively control a flow of water from a water supply to the water fill opening. However, Oslin teaches at least one of a pump (optional due to “or”) or a valve positioned along the water fill passage and configured to selectively control a flow of water from a water supply to the water fill opening (Fig. 4, solenoid valve 100). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a fill line with a valve, such as is taught in Oslin, when refilling of the water in the cavity of Shelton (it is noted that refilling of the water in the cavity of Shelton may be performed with the door only partially open), in order to supply water from an external source (column 6, lines 21-24), and because combining prior art elements according to known methods yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 15, Shelton teaches everything that is claimed above with respect to Claim 14. Shelton does not specifically teach further comprising a flow controller configured to selectively operate the at least one of the pump or the valve to control the flow of water from the water supply to the water fill opening. However, Oslin teaches a flow controller configured to selectively operate the at least one of the pump (optional due to “or”) or the valve to control the flow of water from the water supply to the water fill opening (level control means 282, solenoid valve 100, column 6, lines 55-58). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a level control means that controls a valve, such as is taught in Oslin, when refilling of the water in the cavity of Shelton (it is noted that refilling of the water in the cavity of Shelton may be performed with the door only partially open), in order to control the level of water in the boiler (column 6, lines 59-60), and because combining prior art elements according to known methods yields predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is 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.
Regarding Claim 16, Shelton in view of Oslin does not teach “wherein the temperature sensor probe is configured to control the operation of the flow controller.” While Oslin does teach operating a flow controller based on a temperature sensor (Fig. 16 and column 12 lines 10-22), it would be improper to combine this aspect of Oslin with Shelton, because in Shelton, the evaporator 32 may only be refilled with water when the door is at least partially open, not during normal operation of the oven; therefore, the temperature sensor of Shelton would not be generating useful data during refilling of the reservoir.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CYNTHIA L DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-1599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7am to 3pm.
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, Shelby A Turner can be reached at (571)272-6334. 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.
/CYNTHIA L DAVIS/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/SHELBY A TURNER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights