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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6, 8, 9, and 12-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species of the invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant failed to timely traverse the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on April 29, 2024, during which the election of Species B : Fig. 3 was made by applicant. As discussed at length previously, applicant erroneously identified claims 1-11 as reading on the elected Species B : Fig. 3 in the election filed on April 29, 2024. At the time of the election, claims 1 and 2 had been previously cancelled by applicant. Further, the Examiner determined that claims 6, 8, and 9, among the claims said by applicant to read on Species B : Fig. 3, clearly did not in fact read on the elected Species. This determination was expressed to the applicant by the Examiner in the Final Office action, mailed August 20, 2024.
In the Remarks portion of the response filed on August 19, 2025, with the RCE, applicant set forth an argument that claim 6 should have been examined with the elected claims based upon the belief by applicant that claim 6 reads on the elected Species B : Fig. 3. Applicant pointed to the paragraph within the specification at page 9, lines 1-8, which describes the embodiment of Fig. 3. The undersigned did not find the argument to be persuasive based at least on the very confusing nature of the specification paragraph, wherein, as stated in the previous Office action, mailed September 17, 2025, reference numeral “28” had been used to refer to the “fan hub”, and the “fan”, and reference numerals “28” and “60” had been used interchangeably to refer to the “fan”, the “fan hub”, and the “supplemental fan”.
In response applicant, in the amendment filed on December 16, 2025, filed an amended paragraph, wherein reference numeral “60” is used to refer to both the “fan” (5 times) and the “supplemental fan” (2 times, or both times in which the supplemental fan is mentioned within the amended paragraph). Obviously, the specification amendment filed on December 16, 2025 has not resulted in the clarification of the disclosure. In any event, claim 6, as currently recited, states, “The cooling tower fan of claim 3, wherein the supplemental fan comprises at least one airfoil integral with the cooling tower fan.” There is no mention of a fan hub, which is curious, since independent claim 3, from which claim 6 depends, requires “a supplemental fan coupled with the fan hub of the cooling tower fan”. There seems to be a disconnect between the claims (3 and 6) and the disclosure of the specification paragraph (page 9, lines 1-8), which describes Figure 3, which applicant believes claim 6 to read on. The paragraph gives no mention of “an airfoil”, as stated by claim 6, and appears to disclose several possible embodiments that do not necessarily relate to Figure 3, to which the paragraph refers at the outset. Again, it is quite unclear as to what applicant is arguing with regard to claim 6 reading on elected Species B : Fig. 3, when the apparent disclosure relevant to Figure 3 (paragraph at page 9, lines 1-8) refers to both the “fan” and the “supplemental fan” with the same single reference numeral, “60”.
Claim 6 shall remain withdrawn from further consideration. Applicant may wish to petition the Examiner’s position, if in fact applicant did not forfeit the right to petition by the election made without traverse in the reply filed on April 29, 2024.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
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.
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.
Claims 3-5, 7, 10, 11, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shipes et al ‘587 taken together with Comins.
Shipes et al ‘587 (Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 43-60) disclose a cooling tower (10) that supports an electric drive motor (22) that drives a rotatable shaft (21) that is coupled to (therefore integral with) fan hub means (25) that provide attachment of plural pitch adjustable (claim 4) fan blades of primary (20) and supplemental (19) fans (claims 7, 10, and 11). See col. 3, lines 58-60. The rotation of the fans, which operate together (claim 5) via coupling or attachment to the drive shaft (21) provides for ample cooling air to pass around the casing of the electric motor (22), thus providing air cooling thereof. Applicant should note that each of the above discussed fan elements (cooling tower fan and supplemental fan) are operatively attached or coupled to one another either directly or indirectly via the rotatable motor shaft, thereby meeting the “integral” terminology used throughout the instant claims. It is further noted that an electric motor, as taught by the motor (22) of Shipes et al ‘587, inherently includes a casing having an interior, with a stator and rotor located within the casing for creating flux (claim 3). Shipes et al ‘587, while teaching an electric motor with a drive shaft extending therefrom that provides driven movement of a rotary shaft that is attached to the fan and supplemental fan for driven rotation thereof, does not specifically teach that the same motor driven shaft is directly connected to the fans.
Comins (Figs. 1 and 2; page 2, lines 12-16) teaches a similar electric motor drive means for a combined primary and supplemental fan setup, wherein the rotary drive shaft (18) that extends from the electric motor (20) is the sole drive shaft that is directly connected to the fan (22) and supplemental fan (23) (claim 17), thereby avoiding any intermediary transmission elements. It would have been obvious for an artisan to modify the fan and supplemental fan drive means of Shipes et al ‘587, within the cooling tower structure thereof, to be in the form of a simpler direct drive rotary drive shaft that extends directly from the electric motor to the fan hubs, in view of Comins, since such would improve the reliability of the device by eliminating any intermediary transmission elements between the motor shaft and the fans.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 16, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s arguments that the reference combination fails to disclose or suggest a supplemental fan coupled with the fan hub of the cooling tower fan, such is not persuasive, since as stated in the rejection statement of paragraph 6 above, both of the supplemental and primary fans of the reference combination are attached to the drive shaft of the electric motor in an immediately adjacent location, and thus are considered to be coupled, attached or integral with one another via the common rotatable drive shaft connection therewith, thereby allowing for operation of both the primary and supplemental fans simultaneously, one with the other.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHARLES S BUSHEY whose telephone number is (571)272-1153. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30-5:00.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
/C.S.B/1-3-26
/CHARLES S BUSHEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776