Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/836,458

COOKING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Aug 07, 2024
Priority
Feb 07, 2022 — RE 10-2022-0015418 +4 more
Examiner
HAYES, KRISTEN C
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
6m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allowance Rate
882 granted / 1285 resolved
+8.6% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
1317
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§102
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§112
34.5%
-5.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1285 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Specification The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it begins “Disclosed is an invention…” and “The disclosed invention…”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). 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(s) 1-3, 5-7, and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wurm et al EP 752561. Regarding claim 1, Wurm discloses a cooking appliance, comprising: a main body (1) having a cooking chamber defined therein (Wurm, Figure 2); a door (13) disposed in front of the main body and configured to open and close the cooking chamber; a control panel (at 19) disposed on top of the door; and an air guide (17) disposed in front of the main body and configured to screen at least a portion of the main body (Wurm, Figure 2). Regarding claim 2, Wurm further discloses the air guide includes a guide portion that extends across a space between the door and the control panel (Wurm, Figure 1), and wherein the air guide includes a plurality of guide portions (43) arranged in a vertical direction. Regarding claim 3, Wurm further discloses a space being defined between the door and the guide portion (Wurm, Figure 3), a space is defined between the guide portion and the control panel (Wurm, Figure 3), and a space being defined between two guide portions adjacent to each other vertically (Wurm, Figure 4). Regarding claim 5, Wurm further discloses the air guide being disposed between the door and the control panel, and is installed on the door (Wurm, Figure 2). Regarding claim 6, Wurm further discloses the air guide being integrally formed with the door (Wurm, Figure 2). Regarding claim 7, Wurm further discloses the door includes: a door frame forming a framework of the door (Wurm, Figures 1 and 2); and a top cover (Wurm, Figure 3) coupled to an upper end of the door frame and defining an outer appearance of an upper surface of the door, and wherein the air guide is coupled to the top cover (via 15). Regarding claim 13, Wurm further discloses the cooking device further comprises a connection protrusion (15) that protrudes upwardly from the door toward the air guide, and wherein the connection protrusion spaces the door and the air guide from each other by a predetermined distance in a vertical direction and connects the door and the air guide to each other (Wurm, Figures 3 and 4). Regarding claim 14, Wurm further discloses the connection protrusion includes a plurality of connection protrusions (43) disposed between the door and the air guide and arranged to be spaced apart from each other by a predetermined spacing in a lateral direction (Wurm, Figure 4). Regarding claim 15, Wurm further discloses the door including a door frame forming a framework of the door (Wurm, Figures 1 and 2); and a top cover (Wurm, Figure 3) coupled to an upper end of the door frame and defining an outer appearance of an upper surface of the door, and wherein the top cover, the connection protrusion, and the air guide are integrally formed with each other (Wurm, Figure 3). Claim(s) 1, 8, 9, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nuss US 3,889,099. Regarding claim 1, Nuss discloses a cooking appliance, comprising: a main body (Nuss, Figure 1) having a cooking chamber (12) defined therein; a door (16) disposed in front of the main body and configured to open and close the cooking chamber; a control panel (52) disposed on top of the door; and an air guide (135, 137) disposed in front of the main body and configured to screen at least a portion of the main body (Nuss, Figure 1). Regarding claim 8, Nuss further discloses the air guide being disposed between the door and the control panel and being installed on the main body (Nuss, Figure 1). Regarding claim 9, Nuss further discloses the main body including a cavity having the cooking chamber defined therein (Nuss, Figure 1); and a front panel disposed between the cavity and the door, and wherein the air guide (137) is coupled to the front panel. Regarding claim 20, Nuss further discloses the air guide (135, 137) being disposed in a front space surrounded by the door, the main body, and the control panel (Nuss, Figure 1), wherein a door exhaust port (132, 124) is defined in an upper end of the door facing the control panel and communicates an inner space (130, 120) of the door with the front space, and wherein the door exhaust port is positioned between the air guide and the main body in a frontward-backward direction (Nuss, Figure 1). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 10-12, and 16-19 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to disclose either alone or in combination the claimed invention wherein the air guide comprising first and second portions as claimed, or an electric component chamber with an exhaust port providing communication the chamber and front place as claimed. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 2017/0082296. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTEN C HAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-7881. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Michener Joshua can be reached at 571.272.1467. 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. /KRISTEN C HAYES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 07, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12702094
Plant Container Suspension Device
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12680381
Expandable Step System
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677762
FLOWERPOT SHADE APPARATUS
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12677757
Plant Display Device
1y 6m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12672620
PLANT PROPAGATION SYSTEMS, DEVICES AND METHODS
5y 5m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+21.7%)
2y 6m (~6m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1285 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month