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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 9677774 (McKee hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, McKee teaches a cooking appliance that discloses a box body having an accommodating space and an entrance/exit in communication with the accommodating space (Figure 1 with the box forming the oven 10 with interior accommodating space for the chambers 126-129 and the entrance formed at the doors 15a/b), wherein the accommodating space comprises at least two cooking cavities (Figures 2a-2b with cavities 126-129), two of the cooking cavities are adjacent to and in communication with each other through an opening zone (Zones 126-129 feature adjacent cavities with the opening zone formed when the plenum between them is removed and when configured similar to Figure 5, the cavities are in communication with each other), and the box body is arranged with a door body for opening and closing the entrance/exit (Doors 15a/b in Figure 1); at least one isolating portion detachably arranged in an opening zone between any two of the cooking cavities (Plenums 126x-129y through 129x-129y in Figures 2a-5), wherein the isolating portion is adapted to the opening zone (Evident from Figures 2a-5), to close the opening zone in a case that the isolating portion is mounted in the opening zone (Figure 4B); a heating mechanism comprising at least two heating units arranged corresponding to the at least two cooking cavities for heating the corresponding cooking cavities (Column 5 Lines 15-26 and Column 5 Lines 15-50).
Regarding claim 2, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 1 where McKee further discloses that the accommodating space has an inner wall formed with at least one extended portion arranged in such a manner as to protrude from the inner wall of the accommodating space (Figure 2s shows the rails 25 in the interior accommodating space), the at least one extended portion partitions the accommodating space into the at least two cooking cavities (Evident of the location from rails 25 for each plenum to be mounted to and create the desired cavity size), and the opening zone is arranged in such a manner as to pass through the extended portion (How the mounting of the plenums are set in Figures 2a-5).
Regarding claim 3, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 1 where McKee further discloses that the opening zone extends to the entrance/exit (Evident from Figure 2a where the rails 25 extend towards the doors 15a/b), two opposite side walls of the opening zone of the extended portion are respectively arranged with a sliding slot (Broadest reasonable interpretation of the installation of the plenums on the rails 25), an end portion of the sliding slot extends to the entrance/exit (Figure 2a), and the isolating portion is suitable for sliding into or out of the opening zone through the entrance/exit and forms a sliding-fit with the sliding slot (Inherent of McKee).
Regarding claim 5, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 1 where McKee further discloses that the heating units comprise a baking assembly for generating hot air to be input to a cooking cavity to bake a food product, and each of the cooking cavities is correspondingly arranged with the baking assembly respectively (Column 5 Line 15-26 and Column 6 Lines 15-50).
Regarding claim 7, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 1 where McKee further discloses a control module configured to control a heating unit corresponding to at least one of the cooking cavities to operate (Column 5 Line 15-26 and Column 6 Lines 15-50).
Regarding claim 8, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 2 where McKee further discloses that the heating units comprise a baking assembly for generating hot air to be input to a cooking cavity to bake a food product, and each of the cooking cavities is correspondingly arranged with the baking assembly respectively (Column 5 Line 15-26 and Column 6 Lines 15-50).
Regarding claim 9, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 3 where McKee further discloses that the heating units comprise a baking assembly for generating hot air to be input to a cooking cavity to bake a food product, and each of the cooking cavities is correspondingly arranged with the baking assembly respectively (Column 5 Line 15-26 and Column 6 Lines 15-50).
Regarding claim 11, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 2 where McKee further discloses a control module configured to control a heating unit corresponding to at least one of the cooking cavities to operate (Column 5 Line 15-26 and Column 6 Lines 15-50).
Regarding claim 12, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 3 where McKee further discloses a control module configured to control a heating unit corresponding to at least one of the cooking cavities to operate (Column 5 Line 15-26 and Column 6 Lines 15-50).
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.
Claims 4, 6, 10, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9677774 (McKee) in view of US 2019/0242586 (Philip hereinafter).
Regarding claim 4, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 2 but are silent with respect that the isolating portion comprises an isolating plate, a first sealing portion, and a second sealing portion, wherein the first sealing portion is detachably mounted on a bottom of the isolating plate and arranged in such a manner as to adjoin an outer circumferential edge, and the first sealing portion is mate- sealed with a side of the extended portion relative to a top wall of the accommodating space; and the second sealing portion is detachably mounted on a side of the isolating plate adjoining the entrance/exit, and the second sealing portion is respectively mated with an inner wall face of the door body and the extended portion.
However, Philip teaches a cooking appliance that discloses and isolating portion comprises an isolating plate (Figures 2-6 with walls 52), a first sealing portion (First seal 58 mounted to rail 72 in Figures 4 and 5), and a second sealing portion (Second seal 58 as seen in Figures 3, 4, and 6), wherein the first sealing portion is detachably mounted on a bottom of the isolating plate and arranged in such a manner as to adjoin an outer circumferential edge (Figures 4 and 5 show the seal 58 being removably mounted to 52), and the first sealing portion is mate-sealed with a side of the extended portion relative to a top wall of the accommodating space (Figure 5 shows that the seal 56 mates with the top surface of 56 which is equivalent to the rails 25 of McKee per ¶ 57); and the second sealing portion is detachably mounted on a side of the isolating plate adjoining the entrance/exit (Seal 58 in Figures 3, 4, and 6 per ¶ 61 and 66), and the second sealing portion is respectively mated with an inner wall face of the door body and the extended portion (Figure 3 with ¶ 61 and 66).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the rail and plenum interface of McKee with the seals of Philip to ensure that the temperatures between the adjacent cavities are kept separate.
Regarding claim 6, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 5 but are silent with respect that the heating units comprise a steam assembly for generating steam to be input to a cooking cavity to steam a food product.
However, Philip teaches a cooking appliance that discloses a steam assembly for generating steam to be input to a cooking cavity to steam a food product (¶ 80).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the operation of the cooking appliance of McKee with the steam generation of Philip to allow for a user to ensure that the oven remains at a required humidity to obtain a desired baked good.
Regarding claim 10, McKee’s modified teachings are described above in claim 4 where McKee further discloses that the heating units comprise a baking assembly for generating hot air to be input to a cooking cavity to bake a food product, and each of the cooking cavities is correspondingly arranged with the baking assembly respectively (Column 5 Line 15-26 of McKee and Column 6 Lines 15-50 of McKee).
Regarding claim 13, McKee’s modified teachings are described above in claim 4 where McKee further discloses a control module configured to control a heating unit corresponding to at least one of the cooking cavities to operate (Column 5 Line 15-26 of McKee and Column 6 Lines 15-50 of McKee).
Regarding claim 14, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 8 but are silent with respect that the heating units comprise a steam assembly for generating steam to be input to a cooking cavity to steam a food product.
However, Philip teaches a cooking appliance that discloses a steam assembly for generating steam to be input to a cooking cavity to steam a food product (¶ 80).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the operation of the cooking appliance of McKee with the steam generation of Philip to allow for a user to ensure that the oven remains at a required humidity to obtain a desired baked good.
Regarding claim 15, McKee’s teachings are described above in claim 9 but are silent with respect that the heating units comprise a steam assembly for generating steam to be input to a cooking cavity to steam a food product.
However, Philip teaches a cooking appliance that discloses a steam assembly for generating steam to be input to a cooking cavity to steam a food product (¶ 80).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the operation of the cooking appliance of McKee with the steam generation of Philip to allow for a user to ensure that the oven remains at a required humidity to obtain a desired baked good.
Regarding claim 16, McKee’s modified teachings are described above in claim 10 where the combination of McKee and Philip further discloses that the heating unit comprises a cooking appliance that discloses a steam assembly for generating steam to be input to a cooking cavity to steam a food product (¶ 80 of Philip).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2007/0246451 (Willet) and US 6445251 (Allera) each teach a multizone oven.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CONNOR J. TREMARCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-2175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0700-1700 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, MICHAEL HOANG can be reached at (571) 272-6460. 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.
/CONNOR J TREMARCHE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights