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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/30/2025 have been fully considered; arguments directed towards the element of individually controlled nozzle valves are persuasive and therefore withdrawn with new rejections presented, while arguments directed towards the printed circuit board are not persuasive and are maintained.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “flat surface burner” of claim 6 must be shown or the feature canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is no longer objected to in light of the current amendments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3 -4 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takubo et al, (US 6,041,743) and Logan (US 2,464,700).
Regarding claim 1, Takubo (T) discloses a heating apparatus, for recreational vehicles comprising: a heating unit (10, Figure1, i.e., burner) and at least one heat exchanging unit (1, Figure 2, i.e., boiler body), the at least one heat exchanging unit is coupled to the heating unit (Figure 1); wherein the heating unit comprises at least one burner (10) and at least one combustion air fan unit (C9,L40-42, i.e., blowers); wherein the at least one combustion air fan unit is configured to supply the at least one burner with combustion air, and the at least one burner is configured to burn fuel gas or liquid further supplied to the at least one burner together with the combustion air received from the at least one combustion air fan unit to get hot exhaust gasses (C9,L32-45); wherein the heat exchanging unit is configured to receive the hot exhaust gasses from the at least one burner and to transfer heat from the hot exhaust gasses to a fluid to be heated (Claim 1), provided within the heat exchanging unit.
Takubo (T) does not disclose that the at least one burner comprises at least two nozzles configured to supply fuel gas or liquid to a combustion area in which the fuel gas or liquid is to be burned with the combustion air; and wherein each of the at least two nozzles is coupled to its own fuel gas or liquid valve to control the fuel gas or liquid supply for the at least two nozzles independently of each other.
However, Logan (L) discloses a combustion device (C1,L1-4) wherein the at least one burner (3, Figure 1) comprises at least two nozzles (1,2) configured to supply fuel gas or liquid to a combustion area in which the fuel gas or liquid is to be burned with the combustion air; and wherein each of the at least two nozzles is coupled to its own fuel gas or liquid valve to control the fuel gas or liquid supply for the at least two nozzles independently of each other (C2,L16-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to provide individually controlled dual nozzle combustion to allow for more precise control of combustion and therefore heating of the fluid, thus increasing the efficiency of the device.
Regarding claim 4, Takubo (T), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1, wherein the heating unit further comprises a printed circuit board assembly (C2,L49-C3,L4) coupled to the fuel gas or liquid valves of the at least two nozzles and configured to control the fuel gas or liquid valves independently of each other to set a supply rate of fuel gas or liquid at the combustion area according to various operation states (C2,L16-40).
Regarding claim 7, Takubo (T), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 6, wherein the heating unit further comprises a secondary air supply arrangement configured to provide a flow of secondary air to the at least one burner (T- 10, C9, L32-45).
Regarding claim 8, Takubo (T), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one burner is provided with an ignition arrangement configured to ignite a mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area, by generating an electric arc or spark (33, C12,L11-15).
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okamoto (EP 3 150 916 A1) and Logan (US 2,464,700).
Regarding claim 1, Okamoto (O) further discloses a heating apparatus, for recreational vehicles, comprising: a heating unit and at least one heat exchanging unit (11, 12, Figure 1), the at least one heat exchanging unit is coupled to the heating unit; wherein the heating unit comprises at least one burner (21,22) and at least one combustion air fan unit (6); wherein the at least one combustion air fan unit is configured to supply the at least one burner with combustion air, and the at least one burner (21,22) is configured to burn fuel gas or liquid further supplied to the at least one burner together with the combustion air received from the at least one combustion air fan unit to get hot exhaust gasses; wherein the heat exchanging unit (11, 12, Figure 1) is configured to receive the hot exhaust gasses from the at least one burner and to transfer heat from the hot exhaust gasses to a fluid to be heated, provided within the heat exchanging unit (Claim 1).
Okamoto (O) does not disclose that the at least one burner comprises at least two nozzles configured to supply fuel gas or liquid to a combustion area in which the fuel gas or liquid is to be burned with the combustion air; and wherein each of the at least two nozzles is coupled to its own fuel gas or liquid valve to control the fuel gas or liquid supply for the at least two nozzles independently of each other.
However, Logan (L) discloses a combustion device (C1,L1-4) wherein the at least one burner (3, Figure 1) comprises at least two nozzles (1,2) configured to supply fuel gas or liquid to a combustion area in which the fuel gas or liquid is to be burned with the combustion air; and wherein each of the at least two nozzles is coupled to its own fuel gas or liquid valve to control the fuel gas or liquid supply for the at least two nozzles independently of each other (C2,L16-40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to provide individually controlled dual nozzle combustion to allow for more precise control of combustion and therefore heating of the fluid, thus increasing the efficiency of the device.
Regarding claim 10, Okamoto (O), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1, wherein the heating apparatus comprises two separate heat exchanging units (O-11, 12, Figure 1), which are coupled to the heating unit in parallel with each other, and one separate burner (O-21,22) for each heat exchanging unit.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okamoto (EP 3 150 916 A1), Logan (US 2,464,700), and CHO (US 2017/0008367).
Regarding claim 11, Okamoto (O), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 10, wherein the first heat exchanging unit (O-11,12, Figure 1), is configured to transfer heat from the hot exhaust gasses to a liquid, in particular water for sanitary or cooking purposes, to be heated, but not that the second heat exchanging unit is configured to transfer heat from the hot exhaust gasses to a gas, in particular ventilation air from an indoor room of the recreational vehicle, to be heated.
However, CHO (C) discloses a hybrid heating system (Abstract), wherein the first heat exchanging unit is configured to transfer heat from the hot exhaust gasses to a liquid (830 or 330, Figure 8) and that the second heat exchanging unit (817) is configured to transfer heat from the hot exhaust gasses to a gas, in particular ventilation air from an indoor room of the recreational vehicle, to be heated ([0131-0134]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to use two separate types of heat exchanger in order to increase the performance of the system, for example a gas to air heat exchanger would heat air faster than a gas to water to air heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 12, Okamoto (O), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 11, wherein the heating unit comprises a printed circuit board assembly (O- [0008]) coupled to the burners and configured to operate the burners independently of each other to heat the fluids provided in the heat exchanging units independently of each other.
Regarding claim 13, Okamoto (O), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 12, wherein the heating unit comprises only one single combustion air fan unit (O-6, Figure 1), and wherein the single combustion air fan unit is configured to supply all of the burners (O-21,22) with combustion air.
Regarding claim 14, Okamoto (O), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 13, wherein the burners are coupled to the single combustion air fan unit (O-6, Figure 1) in parallel with each other such that a flow of combustion air generated by the single combustion air fan unit is split between the burners (O-21,22).
Regarding claim 15, Okamoto (O), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 14, wherein the single combustion air fan unit (O-6, Figure 1) has only one single combustion air fan for generating the flow of combustion air, and wherein the single combustion air fan in particular comprises only one single fan wheel, in the form of an impeller (O-6, Figure 1, [0026], i.e., centrifugal fans have a central impeller).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takubo et al, (US 6,041,743), Logan (US 2,464,700), and Hein (US 3,601,310).
Regarding claim 2, Takubo (T), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1, but not that the fuel gas or liquid valves are monostopable valves being switchable between an opened operation state and a closed operation state.
However, Hein (H) disclose a water heater with a gas burner (Abstract) wherein the fuel gas or liquid valves are monostopable valves being switchable between an opened operation state and a closed operation state (3, Figure 1, C1, L62-63). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to provide an alternative valve system to control the fuel supply, on-off valves have the advantage of low cost and reliability and so would be an obvious choice if cost were a main concern.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takubo et al, (US 6,041,743), Logan (US 2,464,700), and Bode et al. (US 2013/0104554).
Regarding claim 3, Takubo (T), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 2, but not that the nozzles of one burner differ from each other in cross section of its supply opening.
However, Bode (B) discloses a burner assembly (Abstract) wherein the nozzles of one burner (106,107, Figure 2, [0069]) differ from each other in cross section of its supply opening. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to provide varied nozzle diameters in order to vary the heat output of the burner to accommodate different operational parameters.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takubo et al, (US 6,041,743), Logan (US 2,464,700), and Okamoto (EP 3 150 916 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Takubo (T), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 4, but not that the printed circuit board assembly is configured to control the fuel gas or liquid valves in various operation states, wherein in a first operation state, both fuel gas or liquid valves are closed such that no fuel gas or liquid is provided to the combustion area, wherein in a second operation state, the fuel gas or liquid valve coupled to a first nozzle of the at least two nozzles is opened and the other fuel gas or liquid valve is closed, such that fuel gas or liquid is provided to the combustion area with a supply rate limited by the through put rate of the first nozzle, wherein in a third operation state, the fuel gas or liquid valve coupled toa second nozzle of the at least two nozzles is opened and the other fuel gas or liquid valve is closed, such that fuel gas or liquid is provided to the combustion area with a supply rate limited by the through put rate of the second nozzle, and wherein in a fourth operation state, both fuel gas or liquid valves are opened, such that fuel gas or liquid is provided to the combustion area with a supply rate limited by the combined through put rate of the first nozzle and the second nozzle.
However, Okamoto (O) discloses a heating apparatus wherein the printed circuit board assembly is configured to control the fuel gas or liquid valves in various operation states, wherein in a first operation state (This state was not specifically mentioned, but is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because when there is no need for heating, there is no need for fuel combustion), both fuel gas or liquid valves are closed such that no fuel gas or liquid is provided to the combustion area, wherein in a second operation state, the fuel gas or liquid valve coupled to a first nozzle of the at least two nozzles is opened and the other fuel gas or liquid valve is closed ([0019], Figure 2), such that fuel gas or liquid is provided to the combustion area with a supply rate limited by the through put rate of the first nozzle, wherein in a third operation state, the fuel gas or liquid valve coupled to a second nozzle of the at least two nozzles is opened and the other fuel gas or liquid valve is closed ([0019]), such that fuel gas or liquid is provided to the combustion area with a supply rate limited by the through put rate of the second nozzle, and wherein in a fourth operation state, both fuel gas or liquid valves are opened ([0021]), such that fuel gas or liquid is provided to the combustion area with a supply rate limited by the combined through put rate of the first nozzle and the second nozzle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to utilize a controller to control the burners to optimize heat transfer and efficiency.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takubo et al, (US 6,041,743), Logan (US 2,464,700), Hein (US 3,601,310), and Okamoto (EP 3 150 916 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Takubo (T), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 2, but not that the at least one burner is a flat surface burner.
However, Okamoto (O) discloses a heating apparatus wherein the at least one burner is a flat surface burner (22, Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to utilize a flat surface burner in a heating appliance due to its durability and low cost.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takubo et al, (US 6,041,743), Logan (US 2,464,700), and Moore (US 2009/0181334).
Regarding claim 9, Takubo (T), as modified, discloses the heating apparatus of claim 1, but not that the at least one burner comprises a flame detector, configured to determine ionization level within the combustion area of the at least one burner to verify and to observe a combustion reaction between the combustion air and the fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area.
However, Moore (M) discloses a burner controller (Abstract) wherein the at least one burner (212) comprises a flame detector ([0026]), configured to determine ionization level within the combustion area of the at least one burner to verify and to observe a combustion reaction between the combustion air and the fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to utilize a flame detector in order to prevent catastrophic events due fuel flow without ignition; ignition within the parameters of the device that is.
Claims 17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smelcer et al. (US 2018/0172316) and Logan (US 2,464,700).
Regarding claim 17, Smelcer (S) discloses a method for starting a heating apparatus comprising the steps of: starting a combustion air fan (175, [0029]) unit to supply a burner with a flow of combustion air; operating the burner to mix the received combustion air with fuel gas or liquid and to provide a mixture within a combustion area of the burner ([0029]); operating the burner to ignite ([0030]) the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area; and, guiding exhaust gasses from the combustion of the combustion air with the fuel gas or liquid to and through the heat exchanging unit (155,Figure 1, [0024]) to initiate a heat transfer between the exhaust gasses and a fluid to be heated.
Smelcer (S) does not disclose that said burner has at least two nozzles configured to supply said fuel gas or liquid to the combustion area in which the fuel gas or liquid is to be burned with the combustion air, each of the at least two nozzles is coupled to its own fuel gas or liquid valve to control the fuel gas or liquid supply to for the at least two nozzles independently of each other.
However, Logan (L) discloses a combustion device (C1,L1-4) wherein the at least one burner (3, Figure 1) comprises at least two nozzles (1,2) configured to supply fuel gas or liquid to a combustion area in which the fuel gas or liquid is to be burned with the combustion air; and wherein each of the at least two nozzles is coupled to its own fuel gas or liquid valve to control the fuel gas or liquid supply for the at least two nozzles independently of each other (C2,L16-40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to provide individually controlled dual nozzle combustion to allow for more precise control of combustion and therefore heating of the fluid, thus increasing the efficiency of the device.
Regarding claim 19, Smelcer (S), as modified, discloses the method, of claim 17 further comprising: controlling a heat output of the heating apparatus by opening and closing fuel gas or liquid valves in various combinations to switch a supply rate of fuel gas or liquid at the combustion area between various operation states (S-Figures 5A,5B,6, [0031]).
Regarding claim 20, Smelcer (S), as modified, discloses the method of claim 19, further comprising adapting a supply rate with combustion air from the combustion air fan unit when switching between the various operation states to optimize mixing ratio of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area (S- Figures1, 5A,5B,6, [0031]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smelcer et al. (US 2018/0172316), Logan (US 2,464,700), and Brown (US 4,615,282).
Regarding claim 18, Smelcer (S), as modified, discloses the method of claim 17, but not that when detecting whether ignition of the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid was of success; wherein in the case of a failure to ignite the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid, the burner is operated to stop supplying fuel gas or liquid to the combustion area for a predetermined time interval, such that the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid is discharged from the combustion area; and wherein, after the predetermined time interval has expired, the burner is operated to provide fuel gas or liquid to the combustion area to provide again a second mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area, and then the burner is again operated to ignite the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area.
However, Brown (B) discloses an ignition control module (Abstract) wherein detecting whether ignition of the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid was of success; wherein in the case of a failure to ignite the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid, the burner is operated to stop supplying fuel gas or liquid to the combustion area for a predetermined time interval, such that the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid is discharged from the combustion area; and wherein, after the predetermined time interval has expired, the burner is operated to provide fuel gas or liquid to the combustion area to provide again a second mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area, and then the burner is again operated to ignite the mixture of combustion air and fuel gas or liquid within the combustion area (C14,L48-C15,L2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to perform a purge of the combustion chamber in the event of failed ignition because a surplus of uncombusted gas could end up in an explosion of the device which is undesirable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN E BARGERO whose telephone number is (571) 270-1770. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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.
/JOHN E BARGERO/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/HELENA KOSANOVIC/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights