DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
2. Applicant’s Amendment filed March 20, 2026 (hereinafter “03/20/26 Amendment") has been entered, and fully considered. In the 03/20/26 Amendment, claims 1 & 20 were amended, claim 8 was cancelled, and claim 21 was newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-7 & 9-21 are now pending in the application.
3. The 03/20/26 Amendment has overcome the rejections under § 102 previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 01/05/26 (“01/05/26 Action”).
4. The prior rejections under § 103 have been updated and maintained.
5. Because a new interpretation of the teachings of U.S. 2018/0193185 to Thomas et al. is set forth herein in the rejection of independent claim 1 under § 103, this action constitutes a Non-Final Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. Claims 1-7, 9-15, & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0193185 to Thomas et al. ("Thomas") in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0205726 to Spielmann et al. (“Spielmann”).
9. Regarding claim 1, and with reference to annotated FIG. 2D (provided below), Thomas teaches a heating element for a hand warmer, comprising:
a base body [substrate (200) - ¶’s [0021], [0022], [0043]-[0048]; FIGS. 2A-2F],
at least three wiring terminals [heating element contacts (206) - ¶’s [0051]-[0053]; FIG. 2D depicts three terminals],
PNG
media_image1.png
192
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a first coil [a first coil of a first heating element (204) - ¶’s [0046]-[0050]; also labelled in annotated FIG. 2D (above)], and
a second coil [a second coil of a heating element (204) - ¶’s [0046]-[0050]; also labelled in annotated FIG. 2D (above)];
wherein… the at least three wiring terminals comprise a first terminal connected to one end of the first coil [terminal on the left side of the “common terminal” in annotated FIG. 2D (above)], a second terminal connected to one end of the second coil [terminal on the right side of the “common terminal” in annotated FIG. 2D (above)], and a common terminal connected to another end of the first coil as well as another end of the second coil [see “common terminal” labelled in annotated FIG. 2D above], the first terminal and the second terminal serve as positive terminals, while the common terminal serves as a negative terminal [those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that, by standard convention, electrical current is defined as flowing from positive to negative (known as conventional current)], such that the first coil and the second coil are connected in parallel and the first coil and the second coil are separately controlled to be turned on or off by a control circuit [e.g., ¶’s [0079], [0080], [0083], [0091], [0092], [0094], [0103]] [see also ¶[0053] (“As another example, if the heating element 204 includes three contacts (e.g., FIG. 2D and FIG. 2F), the device electronics 300 may deliver power to a first portion of the heating element 204 between a first pair of heating element contacts 206 on opposite sides of the first portion of the heating element 204. Additionally, in this example, the device electronics 304 may deliver power to a second portion of the heating element 204 between a second pair of heating element contacts 206 on opposite sides of the second portion of the heating element 204. In this example, one of the three heating element contacts 206 is included in both the first and second pairs of heating element contacts 206”)].
“Sandwiched” Base Body & Terminals
Thomas teaches that the first and second coils may be fixedly spaced apart on the base body [(200)] in a variety of ways [see, e.g., ¶[0048] (“The substrate 200 can include one or more heating elements 204 that can be arranged in a variety of different ways. In some implementations, a substrate 200 can include a single heating element 204 (e.g., FIG. 2B). In other implementations, a substrate 200 can include multiple heating elements 204 (e.g., FIG. 2C). The multiple heating elements 204 may be separate from one another. In other cases, any number of heating elements 204 may be connected in series and/or parallel”); see also FIG. 2E].
Thomas does not, however, explicitly teach:
wherein the base body is sandwiched by the first coil and the second coil.
Spielmann, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches a heater having the appearance of a thin, flexible foil or film, e.g., for a heating panel [e.g., ¶[0001]], comprising:
a base body [carrier film (12) - ¶[0049]; FIGS. 1-2],
at least three wiring terminals [contact (22), contact (24), and via (18) serving as a contact - see ¶’s [0049], [0015], [0061]; FIGS. 1-2];
a first coil [first spiral resistive heating trace (14) - ¶[0049]; FIGS. 1-2], and
a second coil [second spiral resistive heating trace (16) - ¶[0049]; FIGS. 1-2].
Spielmann further teaches that it was known to provide the first and second coils [resistive heating traces] on opposite sides/surfaces of the base body such that the base body is “sandwiched” between the two coils [see ¶[0049] (“The heater 10 comprises a flexible carrier film 12 made of electrically insulating material having a first spiral resistive heating trace 14 applied on its first side and a second spiral resistive heating trace 16 applied on its second side… Upon application of an electrical voltage, the flow of electric current through the resistive heating traces 14, 16 on both sides of the carrier film 12 leads to the generation of heat by the resistive heating traces 14, 16”); ¶’s [0062], [0065] (“As is shown in FIGS. 1 and 3, the foil heater may be achieved without a crossing between heating traces on opposite sides of the separator layer”); FIGS. 1-2]. Spielmann teaches that such a configuration allows for heat to be generated on two sides of the insulation layer thereby providing a significantly more uniform temperature distribution [e.g., ¶’s [0005], [0006], [0060]].
Accordingly, given that Thomas already teaches that it was known and conventional to provide substrates (in various different shapes) with different numbers of heating elements, arranged in a variety of different ways, with various numbers of heating element contacts (terminals), or, more particularly, that the substrates (200) may have various different shapes and features [¶[0043]], that the substrates (200) can include one or more heating elements (204) that can be arranged in a variety of different ways [¶’s [0043], [0048]], any number of heating elements (204) may be connected in series and/or parallel [¶[0048]], that the heating elements (204) may be laid out in other shapes in addition to those illustrated [¶[0049]], and that a heating element may include two or more heating element contacts (206) [¶[0052]], it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Thomas to utilize a known, art-recognized configuration for arranging heating coils relative to a base body (or substrate) including, e.g., wherein the base body is sandwiched by the first coil and the second coil, since such a particular known heating coil and contact mounting technique/configuration was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as demonstrated by Spielmann, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique/configuration to the known device (of Thomas), and the results would have been entirely predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007). Still further, such a modification would provide the benefit/advantage of allowing for heat to be generated on two sides of the based body thereby providing a significantly more uniform temperature distribution, as explicitly taught by Spielmann [e.g., ¶’s [0005], [0006], [0060]].
10. Regarding claim 2, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas further teaches:
wherein the base body [substrate (200)] is a plate-shaped structure [broadly, substrate (200) may be thin and rigid - ¶’s [0044], [0045]; (FIGS. 2A-2F)].
Thomas was modified above (in the rejection of claim 1) to include the heating coil and contact mounting technique/configuration of Spielmann.
Spielmann further teaches:
wherein the base body [(12)] is a plate-shaped structure [clearly shown in FIGS. 1-2], [and]
the first coil [(14)] is disposed on a front surface [top surface] of the base body [(12) [see FIG. 2], and the second coil [(16)] is disposed on a reverse surface [opposing bottom surface], relative to the front surface [top], of the base body [(12)] [see ¶[0049]; FIGS. 1-2].
11. Regarding claim 3, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 2 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas was modified above (in the rejection of claim 1) to include the heating coil and contact mounting technique/configuration of Spielmann.
Spielmann further teaches:
wherein the front surface [top surface] comprises a connection region [outer extremity where trace (14) is connected to contact (22); FIG. 1] and a heating region [remainder of the top surface where first coil (14) spirals around itself] connected to the connection region [FIG. 1], the first coil [(14)] is distributed in the heating region [FIG. 1], and the at least three wiring terminals are fixed in the connection region [contacts (22, 24) are clearly shown in the connection region; via (18) is disclosed as being present in either the center or in the outer extremity - see ¶’s [0012], [0015], claim 13];
wherein the first terminal [contact (22)] and the common terminal [(18)] pass through the front surface [top surface of carrier (12)] and the reverse surface [bottom surface of carrier (12)] to connect two ends of the second coil [(16)] [see ¶[0061] (“In yet another implementation, the contacts are implemented as vias. In the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 4, each contact 22, 24 is formed as a via, so that the circuit comprises two electrically parallel paths (one on each side of the separator layer)”); and ¶[0066] (“The same technology that is used to prepare a via can be used to bring the contact for the bottom conductor to the top surface of the separator layer. In this way, contacting the heater may be achieved from one side only, which simplifies industrial contacting”); see also ¶’s [0015], [0018]], and the second coil is arranged in a corresponding heating region on the reverse surface [bottom surface] and in a corresponding connection region on the reverse surface [second trace (16) is present in both the connection region (extremity) and central region (where it spirals around itself) on the bottom surface], while avoiding positions where the first terminal and the common terminal are located [FIGS. 1-2].
12. Regarding claim 4, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 3 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas further teaches that it was known to provide a coil extending serpentine along a first direction [e.g., width direction of substrate surface] [e.g., (204-4) of FIG. 2E]. Thomas additionally teaches that it was known to provide a coil extending serpentine in different directions (e.g., perpendicular to one another) along respective different sections of a substrate surface [e.g., FIG. 3A].
Given that Thomas also teaches that the heating elements (204) (coils) may be laid out in other shapes, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann to utilize a known, art-recognized coil arrangement, including one wherein the second coil on the corresponding connection region extends serpentine along a first direction [e.g., width direction of substrate surface], and the second coil on the corresponding heating region extends serpentine along a second direction [e.g., length direction of substrate surface], with the first direction [width] perpendicular to the second direction [length], since such a configuration amounts merely to the simple substitution of one known coil configuration for another, yielding only predictable results (resistive heating) to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
13. Regarding claim 5, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 4 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas further teaches that it was known for a coil to include multiple segments, or wherein the second coil comprises a first segment and a second segment [see, e.g., the segments respectively labelled as “A” and “B” in the in annotated excerpt of FIG. 2E of Thomas (provided below)] connected to the first segment… and the first segment and the second segment are symmetrically arranged along the second direction [length direction].
PNG
media_image2.png
220
230
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Excerpt of FIG. 2E of Thomas
While Thomas does not explicitly teach wherein the first segment is connected to the first terminal, and the second segment is connected to the common terminal, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann to arrange the segments/terminals in such a configuration, depending on, e.g., different conditions to be treated, locations of use, and desired heating zones [see Thomas, e.g., ¶’s [0019], [0055]]. The arrangement of the coils and contacts as desired would have been routine for the skilled artisan.
14. Regarding claims 6 & 7, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 4 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Claims 6 & 7 include limitations directed to the arrangement of coil segments, wiring terminals, and a temperature sensor:
[claim 6] wherein the first coil comprises a third segment and a fourth segment extending serpentine along the second direction, with the third segment and the fourth segment distributed and connected along the first direction;
the heating element further comprises a temperature sensor, disposed on the front surface;
wherein one end of the temperature sensor is connected to the common terminal; [and]
[claim 7] wherein the at least three wiring terminals further comprise a third terminal, the third segment is connected to the second terminal, the fourth segment is connected to the common terminal, and another end of the temperature sensor is connected to the third terminal.
Thomas further teaches that it was known to provide a temperature sensor [temperature sensor (310) - ¶[0063]; FIG. 3C] on the substrate (200) with the heating elements (204) and contacts (206). Thomas further contemplates a variety of different heating element, temperature sensor, and contact arrangements [e.g., ¶’s [0063]-[0066]].
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann to arrange the coil segments, terminals, and temperature sensor in the claimed configuration (set forth in the limitations above) depending on, e.g., different conditions to be treated, locations of use, and desired heating zones [see Thomas, e.g., ¶’s [0019], [0055]]. The arrangement of the coils, contacts, and temperature sensor as desired would have been routine for the skilled artisan.
15. Regarding claim 9, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches:
[a] hand warmer [Thomas teaches that the heating device is configured to deliver heat to a user’s body, including, e.g., the hand - see ¶’s [0002], 0143]], comprising[:]
a housing [encapsulation (1006) that encapsulates components of the heating device, including the heating unit, battery, and device electronics - see ¶[0128]; note also ¶’s [0019], [0020], [0068], [0126]],
a control board [including “device electronics” (see ¶[0128]), which include second rigid PCB (1120) - see ¶[0135] (“The second rigid PCB 1120 includes device electronics described herein, such as electronics included in the communication module 404, processing module 402, memory 420, temperature sensing module 412, heating control module 410, and interface module 406”)], and
the heating element of claim 1 [see the rejection of claim 1 under § 103 based on the combination of Thomas/Spielmann as set forth above, which is incorporated herein];
wherein the heating element [the heating element of Thomas/Spielmann] and the control board [at least second rigid PCB (1120) of the device electronics] are both arranged within the housing [see ¶[0128]; note also ¶’s [0019], [0020], [0068], [0126]], and
the heating element is electrically connected to the control board [¶’s [0128], [0134], [0135]].
16. Regarding claim 10, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas further teaches:
wherein the base body [substrate (200)] is a plate-shaped structure [broadly, substrate (200) may be thin and rigid - ¶’s [0044], [0045]; (FIGS. 2A-2F)].
Thomas was modified above (in the rejection of claim 1) to include the heating coil and contact mounting technique/configuration of Spielmann.
Spielmann further teaches:
wherein the base body [(12)] is a plate-shaped structure [clearly shown in FIGS. 1-2], [and]
the first coil [(14)] is disposed on a front surface [top surface] of the base body [(12) [see FIG. 2], and the second coil [(16)] is disposed on a reverse surface [opposing bottom surface], relative to the front surface [top], of the base body [(12)] [see ¶[0049]; FIGS. 1-2].
17. Regarding claim 11, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 10 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas was modified above (in the rejection of claim 1) to include the heating coil and contact mounting technique/configuration of Spielmann.
Spielmann further teaches:
wherein the front surface [top surface] comprises a connection region [outer extremity where trace (14) is connected to contact (22); FIG. 1] and a heating region [remainder of the top surface where first coil (14) spirals around itself] connected to the connection region [FIG. 1], the first coil [(14)] is distributed in the heating region [FIG. 1], and the at least three wiring terminals are fixed in the connection region [contacts (22, 24) are clearly shown in the connection region; via (18) is disclosed as being present in either the center or in the outer extremity - see ¶’s [0012], [0015], claim 13];
wherein the first terminal [contact (22)] and the common terminal [(18)] pass through the front surface [top surface of carrier (12)] and the reverse surface [bottom surface of carrier (12)] to connect two ends of the second coil [(16)] [see ¶[0061] (“In yet another implementation, the contacts are implemented as vias. In the embodiment illustrated in FIG. 4, each contact 22, 24 is formed as a via, so that the circuit comprises two electrically parallel paths (one on each side of the separator layer)”); and ¶[0066] (“The same technology that is used to prepare a via can be used to bring the contact for the bottom conductor to the top surface of the separator layer. In this way, contacting the heater may be achieved from one side only, which simplifies industrial contacting”); see also ¶’s [0015], [0018]], and the second coil is arranged in a corresponding heating region on the reverse surface [bottom surface] and in a corresponding connection region on the reverse surface [second trace (16) is present in both the connection region (extremity) and central region (where it spirals around itself) on the bottom surface], while avoiding positions where the first terminal and the common terminal are located [FIGS. 1-2].
18. Regarding claim 12, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 11 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas further teaches that it was known to provide a coil extending serpentine along a first direction [e.g., width direction of substrate surface] [e.g., (204-4) of FIG. 2E]. Thomas additionally teaches that it was known to provide a coil extending serpentine in different directions (e.g., perpendicular to one another) along respective different sections of a substrate surface [e.g., FIG. 3A].
Given that Thomas also teaches that the heating elements (204) (coils) may be laid out in other shapes, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann to utilize a known, art-recognized coil arrangement, including one wherein the second coil on the corresponding connection region extends serpentine along a first direction [e.g., width direction of substrate surface], and the second coil on the corresponding heating region extends serpentine along a second direction [e.g., length direction of substrate surface], with the first direction [width] perpendicular to the second direction [length], since such a configuration amounts merely to the simple substitution of one known coil configuration for another, yielding only predictable results (resistive heating) to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
19. Regarding claim 13, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 12 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas further teaches that it was known for a coil to include multiple segments, or wherein the second coil comprises a first segment and a second segment [respectively labelled as “A” and “B” in the in annotated excerpt of FIG. 2E of Thomas (provided below)] connected to the first segment… and the first segment and the second segment are symmetrically arranged along the second direction [length direction].
PNG
media_image2.png
220
230
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Excerpt of FIG. 2E of Thomas
While Thomas does not explicitly teach wherein the first segment is connected to the first terminal, and the second segment is connected to the common terminal, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann to arrange the segments/terminals in such a configuration, depending on, e.g., different conditions to be treated, locations of use, and desired heating zones [see Thomas, e.g., ¶’s [0019], [0055]]. The arrangement of the coils and contacts as desired would have been routine for the skilled artisan.
20. Regarding claims 14 & 15, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 12 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Claims 14 & 15 include limitations directed to the arrangement of coil segments, wiring terminals, and a temperature sensor:
[claim 14] wherein the first coil comprises a third segment and a fourth segment extending serpentine along the second direction, with the third segment and the fourth segment distributed and connected along the first direction;
the heating element further comprises a temperature sensor, disposed on the front surface;
wherein one end of the temperature sensor is connected to the common terminal.
[claim 15] wherein the at least three wiring terminals further comprise a third terminal, the third segment is connected to the second terminal, the fourth segment is connected to the common terminal, and another end of the temperature sensor is connected to the third terminal.
Thomas further teaches that it was known to provide a temperature sensor [temperature sensor (310) - ¶[0063]; FIG. 3C] on the substrate (200) with the heating elements (204) and contacts (206). Thomas further contemplates a variety of different heating element, temperature sensor, and contact arrangements [e.g., ¶’s [0063]-[0066]].
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann to arrange the coil segments, terminals, and temperature sensor in the claimed configuration (set forth in the limitations above) depending on, e.g., different conditions to be treated, locations of use, and desired heating zones [see Thomas, e.g., ¶’s [0019], [0055]]. The arrangement of the coils, contacts, and temperature sensor as desired would have been routine for the skilled artisan.
21. Regarding claim 20, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 6 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Thomas further teaches wherein the temperature sensor is electrically connected to the control circuit, and the temperature sensor is configured to monitor a temperature of the heating element and adjust a power of the heating element through the control circuit [e.g., ¶’s [0079], [0083], [0091], [0092], [0094], [0103]]; in response to the temperature reaching a target temperature, low power is output; in response to the temperature being below the target temperature, intermediate power is output; and in response to the temperature still not reaching the target temperature after a certain period of intermediate power output, high power is output [e.g., ¶’s [0079], [0083], [0091], [0092], [0094], [0103]].
22. Claims 8 & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Thomas and Spielmann, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0167464 to Lee et al. ("Lee").
23. Regarding claims 8 & 16, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 & 9, respectively, for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
While Thomas teaches that the heating elements (coils) may be formed from wires that are connected to the substrate [¶[0047]], the combination of Thomas and Spielmann does not explicitly teach:
[claims 8 & 16] wherein a surface of at least one of the first coil or the second coil is covered with an adhesive layer.
Lee, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches that it was known in the art to attach a heater to a base member (substrate) using an adhesive [e.g., ¶[0006]]. As broadly as claimed, the lower/bottom surface of the heater that is attached to the base member would be the surface covered with an adhesive layer.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann such that a surface of at least one of the first coil or the second coil is covered with an adhesive layer, e.g., in order to attach the first and/or second coil to the base body (substrate), since such a particular known technique for attaching a heater to a substrate was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art (as demonstrated by Lee), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to the known device (of Thomas/Spielmann), and the result (securing the coil to the substrate) would have been entirely predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
24. Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Thomas and Spielmann, as applied to claim 9 above, further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0382338 to Gao et al. ("Gao").
25. Regarding claim 17, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 9 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
While Thomas further teaches that different exemplary heating devices may have different packages, with components arranged in a variety of manners therein [e.g., ¶[0126]], the combination of Thomas and Spielmann does not teach the following particular configuration: wherein the housing comprises a heat-conducting shell and an inner shell connected to the heat-conducting shell, the heat-conducting shell covers an outer wall of the inner shell, the heat-conducting shell and the inner shell enclose to define a heating cavity, the heating element is disposed within the heating cavity, the inner shell defines a mounting cavity, the heating cavity is in communication with the mounting cavity, and the control board is disposed within the mounting cavity, with the at least three wiring terminals facing the inner shell.
Gao, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches a hand warmer [Abstract], comprising:
a housing [housing (3) - ¶[0062]; FIG. 5],
a control board [control circuit board (42) - ¶[0080]; FIG. 5], and
a heating element [heat generating member (44) - ¶’s [0080], [0085]; FIG. 5]; and
wherein the heating element [(44)] and the control board [(42)] are both arranged within the housing [(3)] [¶’s [0079]-[0081]; FIG. 5], and the heating element [(44)] is electrically connected to the control board [¶[0080]].
Gao further teaches wherein the housing [(3)] comprises a heat-conducting shell [heat conducting shell (33) - ¶[0079]; FIG. 5] and an inner shell [(31) - ¶[0079]; FIG. 5] connected to the heat-conducting shell [(33)], the heat-conducting shell [(33)] covers an outer wall of the inner shell [FIG. 5], the heat-conducting shell [(33)] and the inner shell [(31)] enclose to define a heating cavity [cavity - ¶[0079]], the heating element is disposed within the heating cavity [FIG. 5], the inner shell [(31)] defines a mounting cavity [¶’s [0079]-[0080]; FIG. 5], the heating cavity is in communication with the mounting cavity [FIG. 5], and the control board [(42)] is disposed within the mounting cavity [FIG. 5], with the at least three wiring terminals facing the inner shell [FIG. 5].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann to utilize a known, art-recognized packaging configuration (or form factor) for the heating device and the components associated therewith, including, e.g., wherein the housing comprises a heat-conducting shell and an inner shell connected to the heat-conducting shell, the heat-conducting shell covers an outer wall of the inner shell, the heat-conducting shell and the inner shell enclose to define a heating cavity, the heating element is disposed within the heating cavity, the inner shell defines a mounting cavity, the heating cavity is in communication with the mounting cavity, and the control board is disposed within the mounting cavity, with the at least three wiring terminals facing the inner shell, all as taught by Gao, sine such a modification amounts merely to the substitution of one known heating device form factor for another, yielding only predictable results (providing a device housing) to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
26. Regarding claim 18, the combination of Thomas, Spielmann, & Gao teaches all of the limitations of claim 17 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
The combination of Thomas & Spielmann was modified above (in the rejection of claim 17) to implement the form factor of Gao.
Gao further teaches:
wherein the hand warmer further comprises a flexible member [foam (12) - ¶[0087]], disposed within the heating cavity and sandwiched between the heating element and the outer wall of the inner shell [(31)] [FIG. 5], and the heating element comprises a temperature sensor, abutting against the flexible member [NOTE: the heating element of Thomas/Spielmann, which has been placed in Gao, includes a temperature sensor (310) on the surface thereof [see FIG. 3C], which would abut foam (12) - see FIG. 5 of Gao].
27. Regarding claim 19, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 17 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
The combination of Thomas & Spielmann was modified above (in the rejection of claim 17) to implement the form factor of Gao.
Gao further teaches:
Gao further teaches wherein the hand warmer further comprise a battery [battery (43) - ¶[0080]; FIG. 5], placed inside the mounting cavity and electrically connected to the control board [(42)] [¶[0080]; FIG. 5].
28. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Thomas and Spielmann, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0029877 to Betkowski ("Betkowski").
29. Regarding claim 21, the combination of Thomas and Spielmann teaches all of the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
The combination of Thomas and Spielmann does not, however, teach:
wherein when resistance values of the first coil and the second coil are the same, the heating element has two temperature settings; when the resistance values of the first coil and the second coil are different, the heating element has three temperature settings.
Betkowski, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches that it was known to adjust resistances to achieve desired selected temperature settings [e.g., ¶[0032]].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the combination of Thomas and Spielmann to adjust resistances to achieve desired selected temperature settings, or, more particularly, wherein when resistance values of the first coil and the second coil are the same, the heating element has two temperature settings; when the resistance values of the first coil and the second coil are different, the heating element has three temperature settings, so as to provide a user with a greater degree of adjustability during use, thereby enhancing a hand warming session.
Response to Arguments
30. As noted above, the 03/20/26 Amendment has overcome the rejections under § 102 previously set forth in the 01/05/26 Action.
31. The prior rejections under § 103 the combination of Thomas and Spielmann have been updated and maintained.
32. Finally, because a new interpretation of the teachings of Thomas is set forth herein in the rejection of independent claim 1 under § 103, this action constitutes a Non-Final Action.
Conclusion
33. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bradford C. Blaise whose telephone number is (571)272-5617. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8 AM-5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Linda Dvorak can be reached on 571-272-4764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Bradford C. Blaise/Examiner, Art Unit 3794