DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 08/20/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 - 20 remain pending in the application.
The Applicant’s amendment has overcome each and every claim interpretation on record and they have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Please see the current rejection below, in which Dehais is relied upon to teach the new limitations.
Applicant's newly amended claim limitations necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action.
Claim Objections
Claims 8, 15, 16, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8 recites “a shaft” in line 3, which should recite “the shaft” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 15 recites “a thermodynamic device” in line 2, which should recite “the thermodynamic device” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 16 recites “a thermodynamic device” in line 2, which should recite “the thermodynamic device” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 19 recites “a thermodynamic device” in line 2, which should recite “the thermodynamic device” for proper antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 13 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 13 recites “supplying the medium to a first turbine and a second turbine of a thermodynamic device in series” in lines 5-6. This yields the claim indefinite, because it is unclear if the supplying the medium to the first turbine and the second turbine is related to the first mode of operation, the second mode of operation, or is a separate mode of operation.
Since one of ordinary skill in the art cannot ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim, this yields the claim indefinite.
In amended Claim 1, the medium is configured to flow through the first turbine and the second turbine in series during the first mode (see lines 13-16).
For purposes of interpretation, the Examiner interprets “supplying a medium to a primary heat exchanger and a secondary heat exchanger in series during a first mode of operation; supplying the medium to a first turbine and a second turbine of a thermodynamic device in series; and” in lines 3-6 to recite “supplying a medium to a primary heat exchanger and a secondary heat exchanger in series and supplying the medium to a first turbine and a second turbine of a thermodynamic device in series during a first mode of operation; and”.
Claims 14 – 20 are rejected for their dependency on Claim 13.
Appropriate action is required.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruno et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,926,080) in view of Dehais (U.S. Patent No. 10,487,740).
Regarding Claim 1, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
An environmental control system (800) of a vehicle (aircraft, Col. 2, lines 63-64) comprising:
an inlet (101) for receiving a medium (air, Col. 2, line 56);
an outlet (outlet supplying conditioned air to 102, as illustrated in Figure 8) for delivering a conditioned form of the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) to a load (102, which may be a flight deck of the aircraft, Col. 3, lines 3-4);
a primary heat exchanger (110) fluidly coupled to (as illustrated in Figure 8) the inlet (101);
a secondary heat exchanger (120);
a thermodynamic device (130) fluidly coupled to (as illustrated in Figures 1 and 8) both the primary heat exchanger (110) and the secondary heat exchanger (120), the thermodynamic device (130) including a first turbine (245);
a first bypass conduit (A) having a first bypass inlet (inlet of A at 105) and a first bypass outlet (outlet of A connected to conduit upstream of 120, as illustrated in Figure 8), the first bypass inlet (inlet of A at 105) being arranged upstream (as illustrated in Figure 8, A is located on the upstream, left side of 110) from the primary heat exchanger (110) and the first bypass outlet (outlet of A connected to conduit upstream of 120, as illustrated in Figure 8) arranged upstream (as illustrated in Figure 8, A is located on the upstream, left side of 120) from the secondary heat exchanger (120); and
a first bypass valve (105) operable to control (based on the position of 105) a flow of medium (flow of the air through A) through the first bypass conduit (A); wherein
during operation of the environmental control system (800) in a first mode (series operation, as described in Col. 4, lines 35-47), the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) is configured to flow through the primary heat exchanger (110) and the secondary heat exchanger (120) in series (“in this operation, the bleed air is fed in series through the primary heat exchanger 110 then the secondary heat exchanger 120”, Col. 4, lines 46-47) and the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) is configured to flow through (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 8) the first turbine (245) and during operation in a second mode (parallel operation, as described in Col. 4, line 48 – Col. 5, line 5), the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56)is configured to flow through the primary heat exchanger (110) and the secondary heat exchanger (!20) in parallel (“due to the activation of the valves 105, 106, the bleed air is divided across both the primary heat exchanger 110 and the secondary heat exchanger 120, e.g. in parallel”, Col. 4, lines 56-58) in a second mode of operation (“due to the activation of the valves 105, 106, the bleed air is divided across both the primary heat exchanger 110 and the secondary heat exchanger 120, e.g. in parallel”, Col. 4, lines 56-58).
However, Bruno lacks showing the thermodynamic device includes a second turbine operably couped by a shaft to the first turbine, the first turbine being fluidly connected to the second turbine, and the medium is configured to flow through the first turbine and the second turbine in series.
In the same field of endeavor of aircraft environmental control systems, Dehais teaches (Figure 1):
It is known in the environmental control system (10) art for a thermodynamic device (24) to include a first turbine (28) and a second turbine (30) operably connected by a shaft (32), the first turbine (28) being fluidly connected (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 1) to the second turbine (30), wherein the medium (air from 12) is configured to flow through (as illustrated in Figure 1) the first turbine (28) and the second turbine (30) in series (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 1, the air flows through turbine 28, then condenser 36, then turbine 30, in series).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to substitute the air cycle machine 24 taught by Dehais for the air cycle machine 130 shown by Bruno to provide better temperature control and moisture removal, because it does no more than yield predictable results of conditioning the air for the aircraft cabin since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
The first bypass outlet (outlet of A connected to conduit upstream of 120, as illustrated in Figure 8) is arranged (as illustrated in Figures 1 and 8) downstream from (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figures 1 and 8, the outlet of A is connected downstream of 130 in the direction of flow) a portion of the thermodynamic device (130).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Bruno (Figures 1 and 8) and Dehais (Figure 1) teaches:
The thermodynamic device (Dehais: 24) further comprises a compressor (Dehais: 26) having a compressor outlet (Dehais: 26B), the first bypass outlet (Bruno: outlet of A connected to conduit upstream of 120, as illustrated in Figure 8) is arranged (Bruno: as illustrated in Figures 1 and 8) downstream from (Bruno: as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figures 1 and 8, the outlet of A is connected downstream of 130 in the direction of flow) the compressor outlet (Dehais: 26B).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Bruno (Figures 1 and 8) and Dehais (Figure 1) teaches:
A second bypass conduit (Bruno: B) having a second bypass inlet (Bruno: inlet of B at 106) arranged upstream from (Bruno: as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figures 1 and 8, B is located upstream of 130 in the direction of flow) the thermodynamic device (Dehais: 24) and a second bypass outlet (Bruno: outlet of B connected to conduit downstream of 120, as illustrated in Figure 8) arranged directly upstream (Bruno: as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 8, the outlet of B is arranged upstream from the outlet supplying conditioned air to 102. Because there is a flow path from the outlet of B to the outlet at 102 without passing through another device that conditions the air, this is considered “directly upstream” of) from the outlet (Bruno: outlet supplying conditioned air to 102, as illustrated in Figure 8); and
a second bypass valve (Bruno: 106) operable to control (Bruno: based on the orientation of 106) the flow of medium (Bruno: flow of the air through A) through the second bypass conduit (Bruno: B).
Regarding Claim 5, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
The second bypass inlet (inlet of B at 106) is arranged downstream from (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figures 1 and 8, 106 is located downstream of 110) the primary heat exchanger (110).
Regarding Claim 6, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
The first bypass valve (105) and the second bypass valve (106) are independently operable (“valves may be operated by actuators such that the flow rates of any medium in any portion of the system may be regulated to a desired value”, Col. 3, lines 18-30; accordingly, 105 and 106 are independently operable).
Regarding Claim 7, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
The first bypass valve (105) and the second bypass valve (106) are operable in combination (“due to the activation of the valves 105, 106, the bleed air is divided across both the primary heat exchanger 110 and the secondary heat exchanger 120, e.g. in parallel”, Col. 4, lines 56-58; accordingly, 105 and 106 are operable in combination to create the parallel flow through 110 and 120).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Bruno (Figures 1 and 8) and Dehais (Figure 1) teaches:
The thermodynamic device (Dehais: 24) further comprises a compressor (Dehais: 26) having a compressor inlet (Dehais: 26A), the compressor (Dehais: 26), the first turbine (Dehais: 28), and the second turbine (Dehais: 30) being operably coupled (Dehais: as illustrated in Figure 1) the shaft (Dehais: 32), wherein the first bypass inlet (Bruno: inlet of A at 105) is arranged (Bruno: as illustrated in Figures 1 and 8) upstream from (Bruno: as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figures 1 and 8, the inlet of A is connected upstream of 242 in the direction of flow through 110 to 242) the compressor inlet (Dehais: 26A).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Bruno (Figures 1 and 8) and Dehais (Figure 1) teaches:
The flow of medium (Bruno: flow of the air through A) through the first bypass conduit (Bruno: A) provided a the second bypass conduit (Bruno: B) is configured to bypass (Bruno: as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 8, the path of the flow of air through B bypasses 242, 245, and 842 to head directly to 102 when 209 is not routing the air through 260) the compressor (Dehais: 26), the first turbine (Dehais: 28), and the second turbine (Dehais: 30).
Regarding Claim 10, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
A ram air circuit (circuit through 201 from intake to exhaust, as illustrated in Figure 8) including a ram air shell (201), the primary heat exchanger (110) and the secondary heat exchanger (120) being arranged within (as illustrated in Figure 8) the ram air shell (201).
Regarding Claim 11, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
The medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) is bleed air (bleed air, Col. 4, line 16).
Regarding Claim 12, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
The vehicle (aircraft, Col. 2, lines 63-64) is an aircraft.
Regarding Claim 13, Bruno shows (Figures 1, 3, and 8):
A method (method, Col. 2, line 5, as illustrated in Figure 3) of operating an environmental control system (800) of a vehicle (aircraft, Col. 2, lines 63-64) comprising:
supplying (via 101) a medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) to a primary heat exchanger (110) and a secondary heat exchanger (120) in series (“in this operation, the bleed air is fed in series through the primary heat exchanger 110 then the secondary heat exchanger 120”, Col. 4, lines 46-47) during a first mode of operation (series operation, as described in Col. 4, lines 35-47);
supplying (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 8) the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) to a first turbine (245) of a thermodynamic device (130); and
supplying (via the orientation of 105) a first portion (the portion of the air flowing past 105 to 110) of the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) to the primary heat exchanger (110) and supplying (via the orientation of 105) a second portion (the portion of the air flowing through A to 120) of the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) to the secondary heat exchanger (120) in parallel (“due to the activation of the valves 105, 106, the bleed air is divided across both the primary heat exchanger 110 and the secondary heat exchanger 120, e.g. in parallel”, Col. 4, lines 56-58).
However, Bruno lacks showing supplying the medium to a second turbine of the thermodynamic device in series with the first turbine.
In the same field of endeavor of aircraft environmental control systems, Dehais teaches (Figure 1):
It is known in the environmental control system (10) art for a thermodynamic device (24) to include a first turbine (28) and a second turbine (30) operably connected by a shaft (32), the first turbine (28) being fluidly connected (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 1) to the second turbine (30), wherein the medium (air from 12) is supplied to (as illustrated in Figure 1) the first turbine (28) and the second turbine (30) in series (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 1, the air flows through turbine 28, then condenser 36, then turbine 30, in series).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to substitute the air cycle machine 24 taught by Dehais for the air cycle machine 130 shown by Bruno to provide better temperature control and moisture removal, because it does no more than yield predictable results of conditioning the air for the aircraft cabin since it has been held that the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Regarding Claim 14, Bruno shows (Figures 1, 3, and 8):
Supplying the second portion of the medium to the secondary heat exchanger further comprises:
adjusting (“valves may be operated by actuators such that the flow rates of any medium in any portion of the system may be regulated to a desired value”, Col. 3, lines 18-30) a position (the orientation of 105) of a firs bypass valve (105) associated with a first bypass conduit (A) such that the second portion (the portion of the air flowing through A to 120) of the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) is provided to (as illustrated in Figure 8) the first bypass conduit (A).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Bruno (Figures 1, 3, and 8) and Dehais (Figure 1) teaches:
Supplying the second portion of the medium to the secondary heat exchanger further comprises bypassing (Bruno: as illustrated in Figure 8, the portion of the air flowing through 120 travels directly to 209 when 209 doesn’t route the air through 260, thereby bypassing all portions of 130) a portion of the thermodynamic device (Dehais: 24).
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Bruno (Figures 1, 3, and 8) and Dehais (Figure 1) teaches:
Directing (Bruno: via 106) at least part of the first portion (Bruno: the portion of the air flowing past 105 to 110) of the medium (Bruno: air, Col. 2, line 56) into a second bypass conduit (Bruno: B) to bypass (Bruno: as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 8, the portion of the air flowing through B travels directly to 209 when 209 doesn’t route the air through 260, thereby bypassing 130) the thermodynamic device (Dehais: 24).
Regarding Claim 17, Bruno shows (Figures 1, 3, and 8):
The first portion (the portion of the air flowing past 105 to 110) of the medium (air, Col. 2, line 56) is directed into (via 106) the second bypass conduit (B) downstream from (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 8, B is located downstream of 110) the primary heat exchanger (110).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Bruno (Figures 1 and 8) and Dehais (Figure 1) teaches:
The thermodynamic device (Dehais: 24) further comprises a compressor (Dehais: 26) operably coupled to (Dehais: as illustrated in Figure 1) the first turbine (Dehais: 26) and the second turbine (Dehais: 30) by a shaft (Dehais: 32), and the first portion (Bruno: the portion of the air flowing past 105 to 110) of the medium (Bruno: air, Col. 2, line 56) bypasses (Bruno: as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 8, the portion of the air flowing through B travels directly to 209 when 209 doesn’t route the air through 260, thereby bypassing 130) the compressor (Dehais: 26), the first turbine (Dehais: 26) and the second turbine (Dehais: 30).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Bruno (Figures 1 and 8) and Dehais (Figure 1) teaches:
Directing (Bruno: via the position of 209) at least a part of the second portion (Bruno: the portion of the air flowing through A to 120) of the medium (Bruno: air, Col. 2, line 56) to bypass (Bruno: as illustrated in Figure 8, the portion of the air flowing through 120 travels directly to 209 when 209 doesn’t route the air through 260, thereby bypassing 130) the thermodynamic device (Dehais: 24).
Regarding Claim 20, Bruno shows (Figures 1 and 8):
Supplying the medium further comprises receiving (via 101) bleed air (bleed air, Col. 4, line 16) from a bleed air system (“compressor stage of an aircraft engine or via a ram air system”, Col. 3, lines 5-7).
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANA K TIGHE whose telephone number is (571)272-9476. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:00 - 4:00.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached on (571)270-5614. 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.
/D. T./
Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/AVINASH A SAVANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights