DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 5/8/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/8/26.
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 1-4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2010051536A by Nishiwaki in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20180282929 by Pollett.
As to claim 1, Nishiwaki teaches a washing machine comprising a drum 3 (fig. 2); a driving device 18 to rotate the drum; a control panel 39 to receive input; a memory to store information (while Nishiwaki does not explicitly teach a memory one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious that the control device 43 of Nishiwaki would include a memory in order to function and store information); and a processor. Nishiwaki does not teach the claimed controller configuration of obtaining a target heating temperature lower than a set temperature of a general mode washing course based on a remaining time until a reservation ending time being longer than the duration of the general mode. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to modify he washing machine taught by Nishiwaki to have the claimed configuration.
While Nishiwaki does not teach the claimed configuration for a washing course, it does teach it for a drying course performed by its washer-dryer. Nishiwaki teaches obtaining a target heating temperature lower than a set temperature of a general mode course (reduction of compressor operation frequency, which corresponds to a lower temperature F2 or F3, paras. 3,6, 32) based on a remaining time until a reservation ending time being longer than the duration of the general mode (within the time until the reservation end time, para. 6). Nishiwaki recognizes that energy consumption may be reduced by lowering the target temperature and extending the duration of the drying cycle, which would result in similarly dried clothing (para. 6). Pollett teaches that the same principle is true for a heated washing cycle: washing liquid temperature may be decreased, which would result in a longer cycle duration to achieve sufficient cleaning, but saves energy (para. 89). Taking direction from Pollett, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had reason to apply Nishiwaki’s configuration of obtaining a target heating temperature based on a remaining time to a washing course of Nishiwaki’s washing machine, namely to save energy. Nishiwaki explains how to implement the configuration for a drying course, and Pollett demonstrates that success would be expected when implemented for a washing course. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to configure the processor as claimed in order to save energy for a washing course and would have had sufficient direction to produce the configuration based on the teachings of Nishiwaki and Pollett.
Therefore, the claimed invention would have been obvious at its effective filing date.
As to claim 2, Nishiwaki does not teach obtaining a target heating temperature in a washing course, and thus does not teach that the target heating temperature is based on the claimed ratio. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to obtain the temperate as claimed. The claimed ratio is a ratio of the time available beyond the time spent in a general mode to the additional time it takes to run a cold-water mode over the general mode. One of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the ratio is based on the principles that the longer amount of time that is available, the lower the target temperature may be, as demonstrated by Pollett; and that a cold-water mode represents the lowest target temperature and the longest time to complete a course. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to configure the processor of Nishiwaki to obtain the target temperature based on the claimed ratio since one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood from the teachings of Nishiwaki and Pollett that a target temperature may be based off a ratio of available time and additional time for a cold-water course.
As to claim 3, Nishiwaki teaches that a course starting time is based on a calculated course duration and a reservation ending time and that a driving device is controlled to proceed with a course at the starting time (para. 25). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious that the washing duration would be based on the target heating temperature based on the teachings of Pollett that suggest a relationship between the course duration and temperature. Thus, it would have been obvious to calculate a washing time, obtain a starting time, and control the driving device to proceed with the washing course at the obtained starting time based on the teachings of Nishiwaki and Pollett.
As to claim 4, Pollett teaches a hot water supply device that heat water and supplies the water to the drum and that the hot water supply device is controlled so that heated water corresponding to the target temperature is supplied to the drum in at least one of a washing cycle and a rinsing cycle (para. 55).
As to claim 6, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious from the teachings of Pollett that the more remaining time available, the greater the energy savings due to progressively lower target temperatures for washing (para. 55). One of ordinary skill in the art would have further recognized as obvious that when a target temperature is between a minimum and maximum target temperature, partial energy savings would be realized, and that the driving device would be controlled to proceed with the washing course based the target heating temperature and the partial energy saving mode when such temperature and mode is warranted based on the available remaining time.
As to claim 7, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious based on the teachings of Pollett that a cold-water mode would result in maximum energy savings since it requires the least amount of heating, and that when the remaining time is greater than or equal to the time a cold-water mode takes, the maximum energy saving mode may be selected and the driving device would be controlled to proceed with that mode. One of ordinary skill in the art would have further recognized as obvious that a partial energy saving mode would be selected when the remaining time is smaller than the time a cold-water mode takes since at least some heating would be required to shorten the course duration.
As to claim 9, Nishiwaki teaches displaying information related to power consumption and an energy saving mode (para. 35). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious that when an available remaining time is longer than a general mode time an energy saving mode may be used, based on the teachings of Pollett, and that the energy saving mode may be indicated on a display in order to notify a user.
As to claim 10, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to suggest to a user to change a washing course when the duration of a general mode is longer than the available remaining time since a general mode course would not be able to be completed and the temperature of the general mode is already at a maximum and the mode cannot be shortened (see Nishiwaki, para. 35).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2010051536A by Nishiwaki in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20180282929 by Pollett as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20230265598 by Masters.
As to claim 5, Nishiwaki teaches a heat pump system including a compressor and condenser and that provides air to the inside of the drum, and further teaches that in a drying cycle the heat pump system would be controlled based on a target heating temperature (para. 14). Nishiwaki does not teach an additional heater to heat air to be provided to the inside of the drum. However, Masters recognizes that it was common to have a secondary heater along with a heat pump in order to provide heated air for a drying cycle (para. 19). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to provide a secondary heater base on its common use, and also to provide faster heating than a heat pump, which was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, the claimed invention would have been obvious at its effective filing date.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP2010051536A by Nishiwaki in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20180282929 by Pollett as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 20250003133 by Chae.
As to claim 8, Nishiwaki does not teach that the reservation ending time is obtained based on a neural network model and that the current time is input into the model, the remaining time is identified based on the ending time and the current time, and that the driving device is controlled to proceed with the course based on the remaining time. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized as obvious to use a neural network model. Chae teaches using a neural network model provides more accurate time predictions (paras. 10, 13). Based on the teachings of Chae and what was understood at the time, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that using a neural network model to predict a time in a washing machine, in particular a reservation ending time, would result in a more accurate prediction. Therefore, the claimed invention would have been obvious at its effective filing date.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Spencer Bell whose telephone number is (571)272-9888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 6:30pm.
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 Barr can be reached at 571.272.1414. 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.
/SPENCER E. BELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights