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 .
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.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive because it is too generic. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. See MPEP § 606.01.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 29 December 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Chinese application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
(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 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (US PG Pub # 2024/0175761). The Cheng reference discloses a roasting probe (para. # 003), comprising:
a probe head tube comprising a connection tube and a probe pin tube, wherein the probe pin tube comprises a shrunk section, a transition section and a cone-shaped section that are consequently connected, and the shrunk section is connected to the connection tube (Fig. 1, 3, & 4; para. # 0036);
a circuit board (3) provided with a limit part (unlabeled), wherein the circuit board is limited and provided in the connection tube by the limit part (as shown in Fig. 4, the circuit board 3 is limited by the shrunk section of the probe), and an end of the circuit board away from the probe pin tube is provided with a communication circuit (para. # 0039); a temperature sensor (4) connected to an end of the circuit board facing the probe pin tube and located inside the transition section (Fig. 2);
a holding tube (2) made of ceramic (para. # 0035) and provided at an end of the connection tube away from the probe pin tube; and
an antenna (7) electrically connected to the communication circuit and located inside the holding tube (para. # 0039).
Cheng simply discloses a generic temperature sensor, and does not specify that the temperature sensor (4) is a negative temperature coefficient (NTC) thermistor. However, the examiner notes that negative temperature coefficient (NTC) thermistors were commonly used as electronic temperature sensors, and it would have been obvious for the ordinary practioner to use a known temperature sensor in the roasting probe of Cheng motivated by its art recognized suitability for its intended use.
It is unclear if the ceramic tube (2) is removable, but it appears that it is, because otherwise the internal electronics would not be replaceable, and if not, it would have been obvious for the ordinary practioner to make the tube (2) removable for this purpose.
With respect to claims 8 & 9, Cheng disclose a positive screw (8) connected to the circuit board (para # 0035).
With respect to claim 10, Cheng discloses two temperature sensors, and the circuit board (3) must inherently have a controller.
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (US PG Pub # 2024/0175761) as applied to claims 1 & 8-10 above, and further in view of Hofer et al (EP 4040124). The use of protrusions to separate the circuit board from the walls of the probe to protect it from heat and vibrations was known as show by the example of Hofer1, and it would have been obvious to the ordinary practioner to modify the probe of Cheng to include these limiting protrusions to support the circuit board (3) for the same reasons.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (US PG Pub # 2024/0175761) in view of Hofer et al (EP 4040124) as applied to claims 2-5 above, and further in view of West et al (US PG Pub # 2023/0176007). The use of resilient rings or sheets was known in temperature probes to seal the electronics from the environment and to provide shock protection as shown by the example of West (para. # 0058-0060), and it would have been obvious to the ordinary practioner to modify the probe of Cheng to include the same for the same reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The other references cited by not applied show the general state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RANDY W GIBSON whose telephone number is (571)272-2103. The examiner can normally be reached Tue-Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
RANDY W. GIBSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2856
/RANDY W GIBSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
1 “…As can be inferred from Fig. 3, casing 110 may comprise at least one support element 116a, 116b configured to hold printed circuit board 120 in a predefined position within casing 110. Fig. 3 shows an exemplary casing 110 comprising three support elements 116a, which extend from the upper inner surface and/or the bottom inner surface of casing 110. Support elements 116a prevent a movement of printed circuit board 120 in a direction perpendicular to the plane of printed circuit board 120. Further, casing 110 preferably comprises a support element 116b, which extends from a side inner surface and/or an opposing side inner surface of casing 110. Support element 116b prevents a movement of printed circuit board 120 in a direction parallel to the plane of printed circuit board 120, accordingly. Support elements 116a, 116b are in direct contact with printed circuit board 120 either punctually or over a predefined surface.
Further, casing 110 preferably is tapered towards first end portion 111 of casing 110 in at least one direction, preferably in a direction perpendicular to the plane of printed circuit board 120. As a consequence, bottom surface 125 of first end portion 121 of printed circuit board 120 lies directly on the bottom inner surface of casing 110. Dueto this cross-sectional change, the bottom of the inside of casing 110 can also form a support element…”