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/Restriction
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention II (claims 10-18) in the reply filed on 11/17/2025is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that “While the apparatus of Claim 1 might be able to be used to store objects or air-dry objects in addition to performing the steps of Claim 10, the apparatus must also perform the steps of Claim 10.” This is not persuasive.
First, the apparatus of Claim 1 is not required to perform the method of Claim 10 in any of the following scenarios: (1) the apparatus is not connected to a power source; (2) the apparatus is not connected to a water source; (3) the user does not turn on the apparatus; (4) the first heating system and/or the second heating system are not activated—e.g., by software—to heat water. Indeed, the user is always free to use the claimed apparatus in a manner materially different from how the manufacturer may have intended for the apparatus.
Second, Applicant acknowledges that the apparatus of Claim 1 can perform a materially different process. In other words, the apparatus and the method are still distinct.
In sum, the restriction requirement is proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the following claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o).
The entirety of claim 16: “at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system comprise a stainless steel shell with a positive temperature coefficient heating array located therein, the positive temperature coefficient heating array comprising a plurality of positive temperature coefficient heating elements, with a temperature sensor being connected to a heater cover, the temperature sensor measuring a temperature of the first heating system to maintain the temperature of the first heating system under a predetermined temperature.”
Correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. See MPEP § 2181.I. Such claim limitation(s) are:
“first heating system” in claim 10;
“second heating system” in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
“first heating system” is interpreted to require the structure(s) of induction coils (see specification at ¶¶ 0034, 0045), and equivalents thereof;
“second heating system” is interpreted to require the structure(s) of induction coils (see specification at ¶¶ 0034, 0045), and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Claim Objections
Claim 10 on pg. 19 lines 3-4 recites “dishes positioned within the interior wash space.” To the extent that they are the same as “dishes” recited at lines 2-3 of pg. 18, it’s recommended that the language in Claim 10 on pg. 19 lines 3-4 be changed to:
the dishes [[positioned]] received within the interior wash space
Claim 17 recites: “the at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water through induction comprises the first water tank . . .” at lines 2-4. The language of “heats water through induction” should be deleted because (1) it’s grammatically confusing (i.e., there are two verbs, “heats” and “comprises”) and (2) the word “comprises” is followed by structures (e.g., first water tank, heat insulating cylinder, induction coils).
Claim 18 recites: “the at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water through induction comprises the first water tank . . .” at lines 2-4. The language of “heats water through induction” should be deleted because (1) it’s grammatically confusing (i.e., there are two verbs, “heats” and “comprises”) and (2) the word “comprises” is followed by structures (e.g., first water tank, base, induction coils).
Claim 18 recites “in a pancake shape of a pancake” at lines 4-5. Only one instance of “pancake” is needed, i.e., the clause should be changed to either “in a pancake shape” or “in a shape of a pancake.”
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 10-18 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 10 recites on pg. 19 lines 3-8:
spraying the heated fresh water onto dishes positioned within the interior wash space;
delivering the heated fresh water from the interior wash space to a second water tank;
heating the heated fresh water in the second water tank with a second heating system to form heated wash water;
First, if the “heated fresh water” has been sprayed onto the dishes (which are presumably dirty), it’s unclear how “heated fresh water” are being delivered to the second water tank. Second, it’s unclear how “heated fresh water” becomes “heated wash water.” Clarification is requested.
Claim 10 recites on pg. 19 lines 7-12:
heating the heated fresh water in the second water tank with a second heating system to form heated wash water;
delivering the further heated wash water to the at least one spray nozzle; and
spraying the heated wash water into the interior wash space;
The distinction between “heated wash water” and “further heated wash water” is unclear. Also, if “further heated wash water” is delivered to the spray nozzle, then it’s unclear how “heated wash water” (a presumably different water) is sprayed. Clarification is requested.
Claim 10 recites “the further heated wash water” on pg. 19 line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation, because the claim is missing an earlier recitation of “a further heated wash water.”
Claim 13 recites “the further heated wash water” at line 5. As explained above, the distinction between “heated wash water” and “further heated wash water” is unclear. It’s also unclear which water is being referred to in Claim 13. Clarification is requested.
Claim 14 recites “the further heated wash water” at line 6. As explained above, the distinction between “heated wash water” and “further heated wash water” is unclear. It’s also unclear which water is being referred to in Claim 14. Clarification is requested.
Claim 15 recites “the further heated wash water” at line 4. As explained above, the distinction between “heated wash water” and “further heated wash water” is unclear. It’s also unclear which water is being referred to in Claim 15. Clarification is requested.
Claim 16 recites “the temperature sensor measuring a temperature of the first heating system to maintain the temperature of the first heating system under a predetermined temperature” at the last 4 lines. It’s unclear whether or not these functional terms are requisite steps of the claimed method. Clarification is requested.
For examination purpose, those functional terms (e.g., measuring temperature, maintain temperature) are interpreted as requisite steps of the claimed method.
Claim 17 recites:
the at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water through induction comprises the first water tank, a heat insulating cylinder surrounding the first water tank, and induction coils coiled around the heat insulating cylinder, the coils receiving a current therethrough to heat the water in the first water tank.
It’s unclear how the second heating system can comprise the claimed structures of first water tank, heat insulating cylinder, and induction coils, which presumably belong to the first heating system. Put it differently, because the second heating system is for heating the second water tank (see claim 10), it’s unclear how the second heating system can comprise structures for heating the first water tank. Clarification is requested.
For examination purpose, it’s interpreted as follows: the claimed elements of “a heat insulating cylinder surrounding the first water tank, and induction coils coiled around the heat insulating cylinder” belong to the first heating system, not the second heating system.
Claim 17 recites “the at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water through induction comprises the first water tank” at lines 2-4. The metes and bounds of a “heating system” are unclear, given that claim 10 recites “heating the fresh water in the first water tank with a first heating system.” Specifically, it’s unclear how a heating system can comprise the first water tank, while simultaneously acts upon itself to heat the water in the first water tank. Clarification is requested.
For examination purpose, it’s interpreted as follows: the scope of “first heating system” does not include “first water tank.”
Claim 17 recites “the water” in the last line. It’s unclear which water is being referred to, because Claim 10 recites “fresh water,” “heated fresh water,” “heated wash water,” “further heated wash water.” Clarification is requested.
Claim 18 recites:
the at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water through induction comprises the first water tank, a base having induction coils therein in a pancake shape of a pancake, a rectangular heat insulating sleeve surrounding the first water tank, with the first water tank being positioned on top of the base, and with the coils receiving a current therethrough to heat the water in the first water tank.
It’s unclear how the second heating system can comprise the claimed structures of first water tank, base with induction coils, and rectangular heat insulating sleeve, which presumably belong to the first heating system. Put it differently, because the second heating system is for heating the second water tank (see claim 10), it’s unclear how the second heating system can comprise structures for heating the first water tank. Clarification is requested.
For examination purpose, it’s interpreted as follows: the claimed elements of “a base having induction coils therein in a pancake shape of a pancake, a rectangular heat insulating sleeve surrounding the first water tank, with the first water tank being positioned on top of the base” belong to the first heating system, not the second heating system.
Claim 18 recites “the at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water through induction comprises the first water tank” at lines 2-4. The metes and bounds of a “heating system” are unclear, given that claim 10 recites “heating the fresh water in the first water tank with a first heating system.” Specifically, it’s unclear how a heating system can comprise the first water tank, while simultaneously acts upon itself to heat the water in the first water tank. Clarification is requested.
For examination purpose, it’s interpreted as follows: the scope of “first heating system” does not include “first water tank.”
Claim 18 recites “the water” in the last two lines. It’s unclear which water is being referred to, because Claim 10 recites “fresh water,” “heated fresh water,” “heated wash water,” “further heated wash water.” Clarification is requested.
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 10-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WONG et al. (US PGPUB 20210228060), in view of “LEE-971” (Korean Publication KR101858971B1 to LEE, as translated by Espacenet).
Regarding Claim 10, WONG teaches a method of washing dishes (see ¶ 0031) using a dish washing machine (see, e.g., dishwasher 10, Figs. 1-6, ¶ 0032; dishwasher 10b, Figs. 14-17, ¶ 0049; dishwasher 10c, Fig. 18, ¶ 0055; dishwasher 10d, Figs. 19-20, ¶ 0058). WONG teaches that the various embodiments share many similarities (see ¶¶ 0046-47, 0049, 0055, 0058, second embodiment is similar to first embodiment, third and fourth embodiments are similar to second embodiment); this means most of the descriptions provided for one embodiment are readily applicable to other embodiments.
WONG’s method comprises:
providing a housing (see Figs. 1-2, 5-6, 14, 19, claims 1, 12, 20) having an interior wash space for receiving dishes (see id.);
adding fresh water to a dish washing machine (see ¶ 0039, Figs. 3-4, water enters the dishwasher through inlet pipe 39);
delivering the fresh water to a first water tank (see Figs. 3-4, ¶¶ 0035, 0039, 0043, water supplied to booster heating tank 20 via inlet pipe 39 and entrance pipe 44; these teachings also apply to booster heating tank 20b, 20c, 20d);
heating the fresh water in the first water tank (booster heating tank 20, 20b) with a first heating system to form heated fresh water (see ¶¶ 0037, 0054, water in tank 20/20b is heated, which means a first heating system exists; these teachings also apply to tank 20c, 20d);
supplying the heated fresh water to at least one spray nozzle (see ¶¶ 0033, 0035-36, water supplied to spray arms; see also Figs. 1-2, 5-6, 15, 20, nozzles on spray arms 16 and 18);
spraying the heated fresh water onto dishes positioned within the interior wash space (see ¶¶ 0033, 0035-36, the arms spray water onto dishes);
delivering the heated fresh water from the interior wash space to a second water tank (water sprayed into the wash space then flows to wash tank 28, see ¶¶ 0035-36; these teachings also apply to wash tank 28b, 28c);
heating the heated fresh water in the second water tank (wash tank 28, 28b) with a second heating system (e.g., a heating system such as heating coils) to form heated wash water (see ¶ 0036, water in wash tank 28 is heated; see ¶ 0052, heating coils directly heat water in wash tank 28b; these teachings also apply to wash tank 28c);
delivering the further heated wash water to the at least one spray nozzle (see ¶¶ 0008, 0036, water received in wash tank 28 is supplied to the spray arms 16 and 18; these teachings also apply to wash tank 28b, 28c);
spraying the heated wash water into the interior wash space (see ¶¶ 0008, 0036; see also Figs. 1-2, 5-6, 15, 20, water ejected from the spray arms are sprayed into the wash space);
WONG teaches that various aspects of its invention may be combined (see ¶ 0031) and modified (see ¶ 0063).
WONG does not explicitly teach that:
the first heating system comprises heating coils;
“wherein at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water through induction.”
But WONG already teaches heating coils as the recited “second heating system” for heating water in the second water tank (e.g., wash tank 28b).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would’ve been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify WONG to use heating coils as the first heating system, with reasonable expectation of heating water in the first water tank (e.g., booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d). WONG already teaches that water in the first water tank is heated (see ¶¶ 0037, 0054) and water in the second water tank is heated (see ¶¶ 0036, 0052), wherein the second water tank uses heating coils for such heating (see ¶ 0052), and WONG teaches that various aspects of its invention may be combined and modified (see ¶¶ 0031, 0063). Therefore, using heating coils as the first heating system to heat water in the first water tank would be considered obvious. All the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421 (2007); MPEP § 2143, A. The heating coils as the first heating system would still serve the same function of heating water, thereby yielding predictable results.
WONG as modified does not explicitly teach that at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water “through induction.” But this feature is already known in the prior art. For example, LEE-971 teaches induction coils for heating water in a tank 10 (see Figs. 1-3, ¶¶ 0040-41), wherein the induction coils are in a pancake-shaped base positioned below the tank (see Figs. 1-3). LEE-971 teaches that the induction coils would receive a current therethrough to heat the water in the tank (see ¶ 0040).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would’ve been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify WONG such that the heating coils—for the first heating system and the second heating system—are induction coils, with reasonable expectation of heating water in each water tank. WONG already teaches heating coils for heating water in the water tank(s) (as explained above), and it’s already known in the prior art to use induction coils for heating water in a water tank (see LEE-971). All the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421 (2007); MPEP § 2143, A.
In the resulting combination of WONG and LEE-971: each of the first and second heating systems would comprise induction coils; as for the first heating system, the induction coils would be in a pancake-shaped base positioned below the first water tank; and the induction coils would receive a current therethrough to heat the water in the first water tank.
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of WONG and LEE-971 teaches the method of claim 10. The combination teaches pumping the heated fresh water from the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d) to the at least one spray nozzle (WONG’s spray arm 16, 18) with a pump (see WONG at ¶ 0035).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of WONG and LEE-971 teaches the method of claim 10. The combination teaches the at least one spray nozzle is a plurality of spray nozzles located on a top rotating arm (WONG’s top spray arm 16) and a bottom rotating arm (WONG’s bottom spray arm 18).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of WONG and LEE-971 teaches the method of claim 10. The combination teaches: pumping the heated fresh water from the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d) to the at least one spray nozzle (WONG’s spray arm 16, 18) with a first pump (see WONG at ¶ 0037, using a “rinse pump”); and pumping the further heated wash water from the second water tank (WONG’s wash tank 28, 28b, 28c) to the at least one spray nozzle (WONG’s spray arm 16, 18) with a second pump (see WONG at ¶ 0036, using a “wash pump”).
Claims 10-12, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WONG et al. (US PGPUB 20210228060), in view of “LEE-238” (Korean Publication KR20110015238A to LEE et al., as translated by Espacenet).
Regarding Claim 10, WONG teaches a method of washing dishes (see ¶ 0031) using a dish washing machine (see, e.g., dishwasher 10, Figs. 1-6, ¶ 0032; dishwasher 10b, Figs. 14-17, ¶ 0049; dishwasher 10c, Fig. 18, ¶ 0055; dishwasher 10d, Figs. 19-20, ¶ 0058). WONG teaches that the various embodiments share many similarities (see ¶¶ 0046-47, 0049, 0055, 0058, second embodiment is similar to first embodiment, third and fourth embodiments are similar to second embodiment); this means most of the descriptions provided for one embodiment are readily applicable to other embodiments.
WONG’s method comprises:
providing a housing (see Figs. 1-2, 5-6, 14, 19, claims 1, 12, 20) having an interior wash space for receiving dishes (see id.);
adding fresh water to a dish washing machine (see ¶ 0039, Figs. 3-4, water enters the dishwasher through inlet pipe 39);
delivering the fresh water to a first water tank (see Figs. 3-4, ¶¶ 0035, 0039, 0043, water supplied to booster heating tank 20 via inlet pipe 39 and entrance pipe 44; these teachings also apply to booster heating tank 20b, 20c, 20d);
heating the fresh water in the first water tank (booster heating tank 20, 20b) with a first heating system to form heated fresh water (see ¶¶ 0037, 0054, water in tank 20/20b is heated, which means a first heating system exists; these teachings also apply to tank 20c, 20d);
supplying the heated fresh water to at least one spray nozzle (see ¶¶ 0033, 0035-36, water supplied to spray arms; see also Figs. 1-2, 5-6, 15, 20, nozzles on spray arms 16 and 18);
spraying the heated fresh water onto dishes positioned within the interior wash space (see ¶¶ 0033, 0035-36, the arms spray water onto dishes);
delivering the heated fresh water from the interior wash space to a second water tank (water sprayed into the wash space then flows to wash tank 28, see ¶¶ 0035-36; these teachings also apply to wash tank 28b, 28c);
heating the heated fresh water in the second water tank (wash tank 28, 28b) with a second heating system (e.g., a heating system such as heating coils) to form heated wash water (see ¶ 0036, water in wash tank 28 is heated; see ¶ 0052, heating coils directly heat water in wash tank 28b; these teachings also apply to wash tank 28c);
delivering the further heated wash water to the at least one spray nozzle (see ¶¶ 0008, 0036, water received in wash tank 28 is supplied to the spray arms 16 and 18; these teachings also apply to wash tank 28b, 28c);
spraying the heated wash water into the interior wash space (see ¶¶ 0008, 0036; see also Figs. 1-2, 5-6, 15, 20, water ejected from the spray arms are sprayed into the wash space);
WONG teaches that various aspects of its invention may be combined (see ¶ 0031) and modified (see ¶ 0063).
WONG does not explicitly teach that:
the first heating system comprises heating coils;
“wherein at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water through induction.”
But WONG already teaches heating coils as the recited “second heating system” for heating water in the second water tank (e.g., wash tank 28b).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would’ve been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify WONG to use heating coils as the first heating system, with reasonable expectation of heating water in the first water tank (e.g., booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d). WONG already teaches that water in the first water tank is heated (see ¶¶ 0037, 0054) and water in the second water tank is heated (see ¶¶ 0036, 0052), wherein the second water tank uses heating coils for such heating (see ¶ 0052), and WONG teaches that various aspects of its invention may be combined and modified (see ¶¶ 0031, 0063). Therefore, using heating coils as the first heating system to heat water in the first water tank would be considered obvious. All the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421 (2007); MPEP § 2143, A. The heating coils as the first heating system would still serve the same function of heating water, thereby yielding predictable results.
WONG as modified does not explicitly teach that at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system heats water “through induction.” But this feature is already known in the prior art. For example, LEE-238 teaches a water tank 111 configured to heat water therein (see Fig. 6, pg. 1, 12, 13), wherein the water tank 111 has an insulating cylinder 220 surrounding the water tank (see Fig. 6, pg. 12-13), and induction coils 230 coiled around the insulating cylinder (see id.). The insulating cylinder is understood as a heat insulating cylinder (see pg. 2, insulation commonly used to prevent heat loss). LEE-238 teaches that the induction coils would receive a current therethrough to heat the water in the tank (see pg. 6, 12-13).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would’ve been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify WONG such that the heating coils—for the first heating system and the second heating system—are induction coils coiled around each water tank, with reasonable expectation of heating water in each water tank. WONG already teaches heating coils for heating water in the water tank(s) (as explained above), and it’s already known in the prior art to use induction coils—coiled around a water tank—for heating water in that water tank (see LEE-238). All the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421 (2007); MPEP § 2143, A.
In the resulting combination of WONG and LEE-238: each of the first and second heating systems would comprise induction coils coiled around each water tank; as for the first heating system, the induction coils would be coiled around the first water tank; and the induction coils would receive a current therethrough to heat the water in the first water tank.
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of WONG and LEE-238 teaches the method of claim 10. The combination teaches pumping the heated fresh water from the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d) to the at least one spray nozzle (WONG’s spray arm 16, 18) with a pump (see WONG at ¶ 0035).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of WONG and LEE-238 teaches the method of claim 10. The combination teaches the at least one spray nozzle is a plurality of spray nozzles located on a top rotating arm (WONG’s top spray arm 16) and a bottom rotating arm (WONG’s bottom spray arm 18).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of WONG and LEE-238 teaches the method of claim 10. The combination teaches: pumping the heated fresh water from the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d) to the at least one spray nozzle (WONG’s spray arm 16, 18) with a first pump (see WONG at ¶ 0037, using a “rinse pump”); and pumping the further heated wash water from the second water tank (WONG’s wash tank 28, 28b, 28c) to the at least one spray nozzle (WONG’s spray arm 16, 18) with a second pump (see WONG at ¶ 0036, using a “wash pump”).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of WONG and LEE-238 teaches the method of claim 10. As explained above, the combination teaches that the first heating system comprises the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d) and induction coils coiled around the first water tank, wherein the induction coils receive a current therethrough to heat the water in the first water tank.
The combination also teaches a heat insulating sleeve surrounding the water tank, and induction coils coiled around the heat insulating sleeve (see LEE-238 at Fig. 6, pg. 12-13, an insulating cylinder 220 surrounds the water tank, and induction coils 230 coiled around the insulating cylinder 220).
Although the combination does not explicitly teach that the first water tank and the heat insulating sleeve are cylindrically shaped, it still would’ve been obvious to change them to be cylindrically shaped. First, changing shape is considered obvious (see MPEP § 2144.04.IV.B.). Second, it’s already known in the art that a water tank may be cylindrically shaped (see LEE-238) and the heat insulating sleeve surrounding the water tank may also be cylindrically shaped (see LEE-238). All the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could’ve combined those elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR, 550 U.S. at 415-421; MPEP § 2143, A. The water tank and heat insulating sleeve, as cylindrically shaped, would still perform the same functions as before (e.g., holding heated water in the tank, providing thermal insulation for the tank), thereby yielding predictable results.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of WONG and LEE-971, as applied to Claim 10, in view of “LEE-238”.
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of WONG and LEE-971 teaches the method of claim 10. As explained above, the combination teaches that the first heating system comprises the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d) and induction coils that receive a current therethrough to heat the water in the first water tank.
The combination does not explicitly teach: “a heat insulating cylinder surrounding the first water tank, and induction coils coiled around the heat insulating cylinder.” But these features are already known in the prior art. For example, LEE-238 teaches a water tank 111 configured to heat water therein (see Fig. 6, pg. 1, 12, 13), wherein the water tank 111 has an insulating cylinder 220 surrounding the water tank (see Fig. 6, pg. 12-13), and induction coils 230 coiled around the insulating cylinder (see id.). The insulating cylinder is understood as a heat insulating cylinder (see pg. 2, insulation commonly used to prevent heat loss).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would’ve been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination of WONG and LEE-971 to incorporate a heat insulating sleeve surrounding the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d), and induction coils coiled around the heat insulating sleeve, with reasonable expectation of heating water in the first water tank. It’s already known in the art that a water tank—configured to heat water therein—can comprise a heat insulating sleeve surrounding the water tank, and induction coils coiled around the heat insulating sleeve (see LEE-238). All the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR, 550 U.S. at 415-421; MPEP § 2143, A. The water tank with heat insulating sleeve and induction coils coiled around the heat insulating sleeve would still perform the same function of heating water within the tank, thereby yielding predictable results.
Additionally, it would’ve been obvious to change the shape of the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d) and the shape of the heat insulating sleeve to be cylindrical, with reasonable expectation of heating water. First, changing shape is considered obvious (see MPEP § 2144.04.IV.B.). Second, it’s already known in the art that a water tank may be cylindrically shaped (see LEE-238) and the heat insulating sleeve surrounding the water tank may also be cylindrically shaped (see LEE-238). All the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could’ve combined those elements by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR, 550 U.S. at 415-421; MPEP § 2143, A. The water tank and heat insulating sleeve, as cylindrically shaped, would still perform the same functions as before (e.g., holding heated water in the tank, providing thermal insulation for the tank), thereby yielding predictable results.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of WONG and LEE-971, as applied to Claim 10, in view of KORNFELD et al. (German Publication DE102020109140A1, as translated by Espacenet).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of WONG and LEE-971 teaches the method of claim 10. As explained above, the combination teaches that the first heating system comprises induction coils in a pancake-shaped base positioned below the first water tank, wherein the coils would receive a current therethrough to heat the water in the first water tank. In other words, the combination teaches that the first heating system comprises “the first water tank, a base having induction coils therein in a pancake shape of a pancake . . . with the first water tank being positioned on top of the base, and with the coils receiving a current therethrough to heat the water in the first water tank.”
The combination of WONG and LEE-971 does not explicitly teach: “a rectangular heat insulating sleeve surrounding the first water tank.” But this feature is already known in the prior art. For example, KORNFELD teaches a water tank 24 surrounded with a heat insulating sleeve 36 (see Figs. 3-5, ¶ 0049), which provides thermal insulation (see ¶ 0049).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would’ve been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination of WONG and LEE-971 to incorporate a heat insulating sleeve surrounding the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d), with reasonable expectation of reducing heat loss. First, because the water in the first water tank is heated (see WONG) and because the heat insulating sleeve provides the benefit of thermal insulation (see KORNFELD), a person of ordinary skill in the art would’ve been motivated to incorporate such heat insulating sleeve to reduce heat loss from the first water tank. Second, it’s already known in the art to surround a water tank with a heat insulating sleeve (see KORNFELD). All the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. See KSR, 550 U.S. at 415-421; MPEP § 2143, A. The heat insulating sleeve as incorporated would serve the same function as before (e.g., thermal insulation), thereby yielding predictable results.
In the resulting combination of WONG, LEE-971, and KORNFELD: because the first water tank (WONG’s booster heating tank 20, 20b, 20c, 20d) is rectangular, the heat insulating sleeve surrounding the first water tank would also be rectangular.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 16 contain allowable subject matter. Claim 14 also contains allowable subject matter because it depends on Claim 13.
Claims 13, 14, and 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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 indicating allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record does not anticipate or suggest the subject matter in claims 13, 14, and 16, three dependent claims. The most relevant prior art references are WONG et al. (US PGPUB 20210228060); “LEE-971” (Korean Publication KR101858971); “LEE-238” (Korean Publication KR20110015238); and KORNFELD et al. (German Publication DE102020109140), which are discussed in detail above.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art of record does not teach or fairly suggest the combination of structural and functional limitations recited in the claim, wherein such combination includes, inter alia:
feeding the fresh water to a fresh water reservoir;
heating the fresh water in the fresh water reservoir to form initially heated fresh water; and
draining the further heated wash water through a drain pipe that passes through the fresh water reservoir and to a liquid outlet.
Because Claim 14 depends on claim 13, the same reasons provided for claim 13 also apply to claim 14.
Regarding claim 16, the prior art of record does not teach or fairly suggest the combination of structural and functional limitations recited in the claim, wherein such combination includes, inter alia:
wherein at least one of the first heating system and the second heating system comprise a stainless steel shell with a positive temperature coefficient heating array located therein, the positive temperature coefficient heating array comprising a plurality of positive temperature coefficient heating elements, with a temperature sensor being connected to a heater cover,
and the method comprises the following steps: the temperature sensor measuring a temperature of the first heating system to maintain the temperature of the first heating system under a predetermined temperature.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3422. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 09:00-17:00 Eastern.
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, KAJ OLSEN can be reached at (571) 272-1344. 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.
/R.Z.Z./Examiner, Art Unit 1714
/KAJ K OLSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1714