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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 23 March 2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s timely election without traverse of Group II, claims 19-20, in the reply filed on 21 April 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-18 are withdrawn from consideration from further consideration pursuant to 37
CFR 1.142(b), as being withdrawn to a non-elected invention, and non-elected species of the invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claims.
Claims 19-20 are under examination and the requirement for restriction is made final.
Claim Objections
Claims 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 19-20, line 1, “proving” should read “providing”.
Appropriate correction 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, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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.
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 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Motta (US 20200157398 A1).
The applied reference has a common assignee and inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
With regard to claim 19, Motta teaches a method for heating or cooling a body, specifically air conditioning systems comprising:
a. an evaporator, a condenser, a compressor, and a refrigerant, said refrigerant comprising A1 through A8, specifically A4 (Table 1, paras. [0105] and [0210]):
b. 78.6 wt.% of R1234ze(E);
ii. 4.4 wt.% of R277ea; and
iii. 17 wt.% of R1336mzz(E)
b. evaporating said refrigerant in said evaporator (para. [0211])
c. condensing said refrigerant at a temperature ranging of 45° C. to 75º C (para. [0211], which overlaps claimed range),
These teachings disclose the claimed system components, refrigerant mixture, and overlap with the claimed temperature ranges.
Motta does not teach the claimed method to the degree of specificity as to be anticipatory.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to use the refrigerant mixture of Table 1 in Motta to provide cooling in an extreme temperature air conditioning system. Motto would guide one having ordinary skill in the art to evaporate the mixture and condense it at the claimed range to achieve the desired thermal-to-mechanical energy conversion (para [0163]). Therefore, the invention as a whole would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
With regard to claim 20, Motta teaches a method for heating or cooling a body, specifically heat pump system comprising:
a. an evaporator, a condenser, a compressor, and a refrigerant, said refrigerant comprising A1 through A8, specifically A4 (Table 1, paras. [0105] and [0200]):
b. 78.6 wt.% of R1234ze(E);
ii. 4.4 wt.% of R277ea; and
iii. 17 wt.% of R1336mzz(E)
b. evaporator and compressor conditions of said refrigerant (para. [0202])
c. condensing said refrigerant at a temperature of 55º C (para. [0201], which falls within the claimed range)
These teachings disclose the claimed system components, refrigerant mixture, and overlap with the claimed temperature range.
Motta does not teach the claimed method to the degree of specificity as to be anticipatory.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to use the refrigerant mixture of Table 1 in Motta to provide cooling in an extreme temperature heat pump system. Motto would guide one having ordinary skill in the art to evaporate the mixture and condense it at the claimed range to achieve the desired thermal-to-mechanical energy conversion (para [0163]). Therefore, the invention as a whole would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aja A Walker whose telephone number is (571)272-0037. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-5.
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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at 571-272-2817. 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.
/A.A.W./Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/ANGELA C BROWN-PETTIGREW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Prosecution Insights