DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the communication filed 7/8/2026.
Claims 1 and 3-20 are pending and have been examined.
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 § 103
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 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.
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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1 and 3-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beckord (DE 102018100442 A1) (machine translation attached).
Re claim 1, Beckord discloses a laundry treating apparatus (abstract) comprising:
a washing machine (ref. 100) provided with a tub (conventional), a washing drum (conventional, see also fig. 1 showing round drum) inside the tub, and a washing machine driving unit (inherent, also note washing machine 100…spin[s]) to rotate the washing drum;
a dryer (ref. 130) provided with a drying drum (ref. 190 dryer drum), and a dryer driving unit (conventional, also note “tumble dryer”) including a supplying unit (claims “switching on a fan”) to provide air into the drying drum and a heat exchanger (claims “compressor” and/or separate auxiliary heating system) to heat the air;
a dryer interface (ref. 150) provided with the dryer including a dryer display and a dryer input unit (see fig. 1);
a washing machine (ref. 120) interface provided with the washing machine including a washing machine display and a washing machine input unit (see fig. 1); and
a preheating request unit (Description p. 1 ¶ 9 tumble dryer can be preheated, p. 4 ¶ 3-4) provided on the dryer interface or the washing machine interface (p. 4 ¶ 9 “automatic or user-controlled”) to input a preheating request signal for preheating the drying drum in the middle of a washing course executed by the washing machine (Description p. 1 ¶ 5-8).
Regarding “wherein the dryer interface and the washing machine interface are provided in one control panel, and wherein the preheating request unit is disposed on the one control panel”, Beckord further discloses the washing machine control unit (ref. 120) sends a signal (ref. 160) to control the dryer control unit (ref. 150) (Here, the portion of control unit 120 sending signal 160 satisfies “a preheating request unit disposed on the one control panel”, as it requests the preheating. It further being prima facie obvious to integrate or rearrange both interfaces on one control panel/unit, for ease of operation, in view of the existing capability of remote operation of the dryer from the washing machine interface. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(B) Making Integral and (VI)(C) Rearrangement of Parts. )
Regarding “the dryer provided on the washing machine in a stacked state”, the mere rearrangement of parts to a conventional stacking of a dryer on a washer is known to those of ordinary skill in the art, for purposes of space utilization. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C) Rearrangement of Parts.
Regarding “wherein the preheating of the drying drum is configured to start when a remaining time for finishing the washing course of the washing machine is equal to or less than a reference time, and wherein the preheating of the drying drum is configured to stop when a dehydrating stroke of the washing machine ends”, Beckord teaches triggering the signal for preheating based on different times and operating states, such as completion of certain cycles (p. 4 ¶ 2-5) and that information about a point in time in the currently executed program of the washing machine or a remaining time of the washing machine can be understood as information about an operating state” (p. 2 ¶ 9) (emphasis added). Beckord further teaches using system data regarding a heating time of the dryer/duration of the heating process of the tumble dryer, to determine the start time, which is taken into account by the washing machine, for the purpose of time-efficiency (p. 2 ¶ 7, p. 4 ¶ 9). As such, the mere substitution of “remaining time” for the completion of an executed program sequence (p.4 ¶ 2) is thus obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. The simultaneous ending is thus also prima facie obvious in view of optimization of the known preheating time (see p. 2 ¶ 9 “ensures…preheated…brought to the required operating temperature….user inserts the washed, wet textiles…the actual laundry program is started”; p. 2 ¶ 10 “shortening of the entire laundry treatment process…heating phase is eliminated”; p. 4 ¶ 3 “the process state final spin 250…the process state of heating 170 of the tumble dryer…takes place at the same time”). There being no unexpected results and reasonable expectations of success in view of the explicit disclosure of a known preheating time.
Re claim 3, wherein the one control panel is configured to form a front surface of the dryer together with a front panel of the dryer (see fig. 1), and wherein the one control panel is configured to form a front surface of the washing machine together with a front panel of the washing machine (see fig. 1) (Examiner notes the signal appears and would be obvious to be both ways, see Fig. 1 arrows in both directions for signal 160, and it thus being prima facie obvious to have either interface include the one control panel, for ease of use).
Re claim 4, wherein the preheating of the drying drum is performed only when the preheatinga request signal is input through the preheating request unit by a user (p. 4 ¶ 9 “automatic or user-controlled”).
Re claims 5-7, Regarding “a dryer first controller to control an operation of the dryer driving unit including a drying drum motor, a fan motor, the heat exchanger and a temperature sensor; and a dryer second controller to control an operation of the dryer display and the dryer input unit”, Beckord discloses a dryer control unit (ref. 150) and the mere separation of controllers and/or circuit boards is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, for purposes of ease of manufacturing of components. wherein the dryer first controller is configured to control to supply a power to the drying driving unit, the dryer display and the dryer input unit (inherent in control unit operation). Regarding “further comprising a dryer power controller provided on the dryer interface, wherein, when a power supply request for the dryer is input through the dryer power controller by the user, the dryer second controller is configured to control to supply the power to the dryer first controller”, the use of a power button and/or system activation command is conventionally known.
Re claims 8-10, Regarding “further comprising: a washing machine first controller to control an operation of the washing machine driving unit; and a washing machine second controller to control an operation of the washing machine display and the washing machine input unit and the preheating request unit”, Beckord discloses a washer control unit (ref. 120) and the mere separation of controllers and/or circuit boards is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, for purposes of ease of manufacturing of components. wherein the washing machine first controller is configured to control to supply the power to the washing machine driving unit, the washing machine display, the washing machine input unit and the preheating request unit (inherent in control unit operation). Regarding “further comprising a washing machine power controller provided on the washing machine interface, and wherein, when a power supply request for the washing machine is input through the washing machine power controller by the user, the washing machine second controller is configured to control to supply the power to the washing machine first controller”, the use of a power button and/or system activation command is conventionally known.
Re claims 11-12 and 14, further comprising a communication circuit (p. 4 ¶ 9 control unit…which can communicate with the [other] control unit…the devices can contact each other directly or via a radio unit), wherein the washing machine second controller is configured to communicate with the dryer second controller through the communication circuit, and wherein the washing machine second controller is configured to transmit the preheating request signal to the dryer second controller when the preheating request is input through the preheating request unit (p. 1 Description ¶8, p. 3 ¶ 1, p. 4 ¶9 washing machine…trigger signal…sent to the dryer…warm-up…pre-ironing…preheat). Regarding “wherein the dryer second controller and the dryer power controller are always connected with a power source, and wherein the power is supplied to the dryer driving unit and the dryer interface when a control command is input to the dryer power controller by the user or when the dryer second controller receives the preheating request from the washing machine second controller” and “wherein the dryer second controller is configured to control to supply the power to the dryer first controller when the dryer second controller receives the preheating request signal from the washing machine second controller, and wherein the dryer first controller is configured to control to supply the power to the dryer driving unit”, the power connection availability and activation of the dryer controllers for operation is inherent in the capability to receive a signal from the washing machine and start a preheating process.
Re claim 13, Regarding “wherein a single power source is connected to both the dryer and the washing machine”, the integration/combination of power sources is prima facie obvious, for purposes of ease of installation where the unit are expected to be used together. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(B) Making Integral. Further, it being obvious that washer/dryers are often plugged in at on the same wall outlet or circuit, thus satisfying “single power source”.
Re claims 15-16, Beckord further discloses wherein the dryer first controller is configured to operate the fan to supply the air to the drying drum and the heat exchanger to heat the air during the preheating of the drying drum (p. 4 ¶ 6 turning on compressor and / or turning on a fan and /or turning a tumble dryer drum….activating a separate auxiliary heating system). wherein the heat exchanger includes a plurality of heaters (p. 4 ¶ 6 compressor…separate auxiliary heating system….induction heating process…external heating element…PTC heating element….heating by introducing (warm) water vapor….steam) and an exhausting drying system (conventional; see also p. 4 ¶ 9 “Ventilate Warm”), and the dryer first controller is configured to operate only some of the heaters (p. 4 ¶ 6 “and / or”, it being obvious to have the selected preheating-type be a function of the washing machine load).
Re claims 17-18, Regarding “wherein the washing machine second controller is configured to transmit the preheating signal to the dryer second controller when a remaining time for finishing the washing course of the washing machine is equal to or less than a reference time” and “wherein the washing machine second controller is configured to transmit the preheating request signal at a timing point between an initiation time of a drainage stroke of the washing machine and an ending time of a dehydrating stroke of the washing machine”, Beckord further discloses triggering the signal based on different times and operating states, such as completion of certain cycles (p. 4 ¶ 2-5).
Re claim 19, Regarding “wherein, when the washing machine second controller notifies the dryer second controller of ending of a dehydrating stroke of the washing machine, the dryer first controller is configured to stop operations of the fan and the heat exchanger to end the preheating of the drying drum”, Beckord further discloses if a rinse stop is activated, a trigger signal could only be sent to the dryer after the laundry treatment process has been continued (p. 4 ¶9), it thus being prima facie obvious to end the dryer preheating if the washing machine is paused or operation ended, or alternatively in preparation for transfer of the laundry from the washing machine to the dryer.
Re claim 20, Regarding “wherein the temperature sensor is configured to measure periodically a temperature of the air discharged from the drying drum, wherein the dryer first controller is configured to temporarily stop the operation of the heat exchanger during the preheating of the drying drum when a measured temperature is higher than a reference temperature, and wherein the dryer first controller is configured to maintain the operation of the heat exchanger when the measured temperature is lower than the reference temperature”, Beckord discloses preheating to the required operating temperature (p. 1 Description ¶ 8) and the regulation of dryer temperatures is conventionally known to prevent overheating and fires.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s arguments as to Beckord (Arguments at p. 8-12), Examiner respectfully disagrees. At issue is the language “the preheating request unit is disposed on the one control panel”, “the preheating…to start when a remaining time for finish the washing course of the washing machine is equal to or less than a reference time” and “the preheating…to stop when a dehydrating stroke of the washing machine ends”.
With respect to the “one control panel”, Examiner maintains that the integration and/or rearrangement of parts of the control panels would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, where Beckord explicitly discloses the washing machine control unit (ref. 120) capability to send a signal (ref. 160) to initiate the preheating on the dryer control unit (ref. 150). That is, the washing machine control unit sending the signal satisfies “a preheating request unit” and is thus disposed on the one control panel. The further integration of the dryer interface on or into the washing machine control unit is obvious in view of the existing capability to remotely control the dryer, as disclosed. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(B) Making Integral; See also 2144.04(VI)(C) Rearrangement of Parts.
With respect to “start when a remaining time for finish”, Examiner highlights that Beckord explicitly teaches “information about a point in time in the currently executed program of the washing machine or a remaining time of the washing machine can be understood as information about an operating state” (p. 2 ¶ 9) (emphasis added). Here, the mere substitution of “remaining time” for the completion of an executed program sequence (p.4 ¶ 2) is thus obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. This is further supported by Beckford’s broad teaching to using system data regarding a heating time of the dryer/duration of the heating process of the tumble dryer, to determine the start time, which is taken into account by the washing machine, for the purpose of time-efficiency (p. 2 ¶ 7, p. 4 ¶ 9)
With respect to “stop when a dehydrating stroke of the washing machine ends”, as discussed above, Beckord contemplates that the washing machine is given the data of the heating time/duration of the heating process of the tumble dryer. It therefore follows that it is prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the preheating to the desired temperature occur and end at the same time as the completion of the washing machine wash cycle (see p. 2 ¶ 9 “ensures…preheated…brought to the required operating temperature….user inserts the washed, wet textiles…the actual laundry program is started”; p. 2 ¶ 10 “shortening of the entire laundry treatment process…heating phase is eliminated”; p. 4 ¶ 3 “the process state final spin 250…the process state of heating 170 of the tumble dryer…takes place at the same time”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20200024784A1 note single user interface for two appliances.
US3540241A note dryer preheating triggered by washer timer at a predetermined time prior to termination, preheating the dryer prior to the completion of the washing cycle.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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 KEVIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7299. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am to 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 on 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.
KEVIN G. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/KEVIN G LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 1711
/MICHAEL E BARR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1711
Prosecution Insights