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 . This action is made final.
Claims 1, 5-11, and 15-26 filed on 05/21/2026 have been reviewed and considered by this office action.
Claims 1 and 11 have been amended.
Claims 2-4 and 12-14 have been canceled.
Claims 21-26 have been newly added.
Claim Objections
Claim 21 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 5. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 5-11, and 15-26 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 and 112, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 1, 5, 11, 15, and 21 detail specific conditional logic for updating values from measured sensor data, which was not found in the prior art cited or any other prior art that was found.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amended claims, filed 05/21/2026, have overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments filed 05/21/2026 regarding the rejections under 35 USC § 101 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the amended claims are patent eligible because they now recite specific water heater structure and sensor locations.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claimed case, heat exchanger, burner, and temperature sensors do not cause the result of the calculation or determination to be applied to modify operation of the water heater appliance. Rather, the temperature sensors obtain temperature data which is used to determine scale buildup. This constitutes an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind. Applicant contends that the claims integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they provide an improved operation of the water heater appliance. However, the claims measure data, perform a calculation, and compute a result, but do not recite any action taken based on that result. In particular, the claims do not control the water heater, modify operation of the system, or otherwise use the calculated value in a manner that improves the functioning of the system. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive since the claimed invention does not reflect an improvement to a technology, but rather determines information about a system. Claiming how the determined information is used may be helpful in demonstrating integration into a practical application.
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 5 and 15 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 5 depends on cancelled claim 3. For the purpose of examination, claim 5 will be interpreted as depending on independent claim 1.
Claim 15 depends on cancelled claim 13. For the purpose of examination, claim 15 will be interpreted as depending on independent claim 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 5-11, and 15-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1, 5-10, and 21-26 are directed to a process. Claims 11-20 are directed to a machine or an article of manufacture.
With respect to claim 1:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
calculating a difference between the first temperature and the second temperature (Mental process – calculating a temperature difference is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
determining scale buildup in the heat exchanger based on the difference between the first temperature and the second temperature (Mental process – determining scale buildup based on a temperature difference is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
a case; a heat exchanger positioned on a water line within the case, the water line extending through the heat exchanger, the heat exchanger comprising a burner to heat water within the water line passing through the heat exchanger (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a first temperature sensor disposed on a front surface of the heat exchanger; a second temperature sensor disposed on an elbow extending from the heat exchanger; and a controller (Mere recitation of a generic computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I))
conducting a reliability test before an initial installation of the water heater (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
recording an initial first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger while the water heater appliance is running during the reliability test and an initial second temperature of the elbow after ending the reliability test and the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitoring a first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger with the first temperature sensor while the water heater appliance is running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitoring a second temperature of the elbow with the second temperature sensor when the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
updating the initial second temperature to the second temperature when the first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger exceeds the initial first temperature during operation of the water heater appliance (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
a case; a heat exchanger positioned on a water line within the case, the water line extending through the heat exchanger, the heat exchanger comprising a burner to heat water within the water line passing through the heat exchanger (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a first temperature sensor disposed on a front surface of the heat exchanger; a second temperature sensor disposed on an elbow extending from the heat exchanger; and a controller (Mere recitation of a generic computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I))
conducting a reliability test before an initial installation of the water heater (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
recording an initial first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger while the water heater appliance is running during the reliability test and an initial second temperature of the elbow after ending the reliability test and the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitoring a first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger with the first temperature sensor while the water heater appliance is running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitoring a second temperature of the elbow with the second temperature sensor when the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
updating the initial second temperature to the second temperature when the first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger exceeds the initial first temperature during operation of the water heater appliance (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Therefore, claim 1 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 5:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
when the second temperature of the elbow exceeds the initial second temperature after the water heater appliance stops running, updating the initial first temperature to the first temperature (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
when the second temperature of the elbow exceeds the initial second temperature after the water heater appliance stops running, updating the initial first temperature to the first temperature (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Therefore, claim 5 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 6:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
activating a scale detection mode of the water heater appliance, wherein the scale detection mode comprises the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining, and wherein the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining are performed in response to activating the scale detection mode (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
activating a scale detection mode of the water heater appliance, wherein the scale detection mode comprises the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining, and wherein the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining are performed in response to activating the scale detection mode (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 6 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 7:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
receiving a command via a user input, wherein activating the scale detection mode occurs in response to receiving the command via the user input (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
receiving a command via a user input, wherein activating the scale detection mode occurs in response to receiving the command via the user input (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 7 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 8:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
detecting a type of water flowing through a water line (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
detecting a type of water flowing through a water line (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 8 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 9:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water comprises detecting one of hard water or softened water (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water comprises detecting one of hard water or softened water (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 9 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 10:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water flowing through the water line includes receiving a user input, the user input comprising the type of water (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water flowing through the water line includes receiving a user input, the user input comprising the type of water (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 10 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 11:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
calculate a difference between the first temperature and the second temperature (Mental process – calculating a temperature difference is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
determine scale buildup in the heat exchanger based on the difference between the first temperature and the second temperature (Mental process – determining scale buildup based on a temperature difference is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
a case; a heat exchanger positioned on a water line within the case, the water line extending through the heat exchanger, the heat exchanger comprising a burner to heat water within the water line passing through the heat exchanger (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a first temperature sensor disposed on a front surface of the heat exchanger; a second temperature sensor disposed on an elbow extending from the heat exchanger; and a controller, the controller configured to: (Mere recitation of a generic computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I))
conduct a reliability test before an initial installation of the water heater (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
record an initial first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger while the water heater appliance is running during the reliability test and an initial second temperature of the elbow after ending the reliability test and the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitor a first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger with the first temperature sensor while the water heater appliance is running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitor a second temperature of the elbow with the second temperature sensor when the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
a case; a heat exchanger positioned on a water line within the case, the water line extending through the heat exchanger, the heat exchanger comprising a burner to heat water within the water line passing through the heat exchanger (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a first temperature sensor disposed on a front surface of the heat exchanger; a second temperature sensor disposed on an elbow extending from the heat exchanger; and a controller, the controller configured to: (Mere recitation of a generic computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I))
conduct a reliability test before an initial installation of the water heater (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
record an initial first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger while the water heater appliance is running during the reliability test and an initial second temperature of the elbow after ending the reliability test and the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitor a first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger with the first temperature sensor while the water heater appliance is running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitor a second temperature of the elbow with the second temperature sensor when the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
updating the initial second temperature to the second temperature when the first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger exceeds the initial first temperature during operation of the water heater appliance (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Therefore, claim 11 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 15:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
when the second temperature of the elbow exceeds the initial second temperature after the water heater appliance stops running, updating the initial first temperature to the first temperature (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
when the second temperature of the elbow exceeds the initial second temperature after the water heater appliance stops running, updating the initial first temperature to the first temperature (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Therefore, claim 15 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 16:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
activating a scale detection mode of the water heater appliance, wherein the scale detection mode comprises the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining, and wherein the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining are performed in response to activating the scale detection mode (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
activating a scale detection mode of the water heater appliance, wherein the scale detection mode comprises the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining, and wherein the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining are performed in response to activating the scale detection mode (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 16 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 17:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
receiving a command via a user input, wherein activating the scale detection mode occurs in response to receiving the command via the user input (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
receiving a command via a user input, wherein activating the scale detection mode occurs in response to receiving the command via the user input (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 17 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 18:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
detecting a type of water flowing through a water line (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
detecting a type of water flowing through a water line (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 18 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 19:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water comprises detecting one of hard water or softened water (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water comprises detecting one of hard water or softened water (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 19 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 20:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water flowing through the water line includes receiving a user input, the user input comprising the type of water (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water flowing through the water line includes receiving a user input, the user input comprising the type of water (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 20 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 21:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
calculating a difference between the first temperature and the second temperature (Mental process – calculating a temperature difference is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
determining scale buildup in the heat exchanger based on the difference between the first temperature and the second temperature (Mental process – determining scale buildup based on a temperature difference is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
a case; a heat exchanger positioned on a water line within the case, the water line extending through the heat exchanger, the heat exchanger comprising a burner to heat water within the water line passing through the heat exchanger (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a first temperature sensor disposed on a front surface of the heat exchanger; a second temperature sensor disposed on an elbow extending from the heat exchanger; and a controller (Mere recitation of a generic computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I))
conducting a reliability test before an initial installation of the water heater (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
recording an initial first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger while the water heater appliance is running during the reliability test and an initial second temperature of the elbow after ending the reliability test and the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitoring a first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger with the first temperature sensor while the water heater appliance is running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitoring a second temperature of the elbow with the second temperature sensor when the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
updating the initial second temperature to the second temperature when the first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger exceeds the initial first temperature during operation of the water heater appliance (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
updating the initial first temperature to the first temperature when the second temperature of the elbow exceeds the initial second temperature after the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
a case; a heat exchanger positioned on a water line within the case, the water line extending through the heat exchanger, the heat exchanger comprising a burner to heat water within the water line passing through the heat exchanger (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a first temperature sensor disposed on a front surface of the heat exchanger; a second temperature sensor disposed on an elbow extending from the heat exchanger; and a controller (Mere recitation of a generic computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I))
conducting a reliability test before an initial installation of the water heater (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
recording an initial first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger while the water heater appliance is running during the reliability test and an initial second temperature of the elbow after ending the reliability test and the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitoring a first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger with the first temperature sensor while the water heater appliance is running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
monitoring a second temperature of the elbow with the second temperature sensor when the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
updating the initial second temperature to the second temperature when the first temperature of the front surface of the heat exchanger exceeds the initial first temperature during operation of the water heater appliance (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
updating the initial first temperature to the first temperature when the second temperature of the elbow exceeds the initial second temperature after the water heater appliance stops running (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
Therefore, claim 21 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 22:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
activating a scale detection mode of the water heater appliance, wherein the scale detection mode comprises the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining, and wherein the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining are performed in response to activating the scale detection mode (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
activating a scale detection mode of the water heater appliance, wherein the scale detection mode comprises the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining, and wherein the steps of monitoring, calculating and determining are performed in response to activating the scale detection mode (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 22 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 23:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
receiving a command via a user input, wherein activating the scale detection mode occurs in response to receiving the command via the user input (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
receiving a command via a user input, wherein activating the scale detection mode occurs in response to receiving the command via the user input (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 23 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 24:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
detecting a type of water flowing through a water line (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
detecting a type of water flowing through a water line (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 24 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 25:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water comprises detecting one of hard water or softened water (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water comprises detecting one of hard water or softened water (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, claim 25 is ineligible.
With respect to claim 26:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water flowing through the water line includes receiving a user input, the user input comprising the type of water (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein detecting the type of water flowing through the water line includes receiving a user input, the user input comprising the type of water (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
Therefore, claim 26 is ineligible.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Magdalena Kossek whose telephone number is (571)272-5603. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Robert Fennema can be reached on (571)272-2748. 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.
/M.I.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights