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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/07/2025 has been entered. Claims 12-19, 21, and 22 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claims 12, 15, 18, 19, 21, and 222 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/065506 (Brouke hereinafter) in view of GB 2034818 (Good hereinafter).
Regarding claim 12, Brouke teaches a multi-stage compressor that discloses at least a low-pressure stage compressor element with an inlet and an outlet (Figure 1, low pressure stage 2 with inlet 4a and outlet 5a) and a high-pressure stage compressor element with an inlet and an outlet (High pressure stage 3 with inlet 4b and outlet 5b), wherein the outlet of low-pressure stage compressor element is connected to the inlet of the high-pressure stage compressor element through a line (Figure 1, connecting line 6), wherein said line includes an intercooler (Intercooler 9) which is provided with a controllable fan (Fan per Page 7 Lines 23-25) and wherein the compressor device is provided with a control unit that is configured to control the controllable fan to control the temperature at an outlet of the intercooler on the basis of a dewpoint in said line (Page 10 Line 1 through Page 11 Line 19); determining the dewpoint in said line (Page 10 Lines 7-34); calculating a preset temperature which equals the dewpoint increased by a certain margin (Page 1 Lines 1-14) such that the preset temperature is higher than the dewpoint (Page 11 Lines 7-10); and controlling the controllable fan so that the temperature in said line downstream of the intercooler becomes equal to said preset temperature high than the dewpoint (Page 11 Lines 7-19).
Brouke silent with respect to the compressor being an oil-free compressor.
However, Good teaches a multi-stage compressor that disclose the replaceability of oil-free and oiled compressor stages (Page 2 Lines 41-51). The resultant combination would be such that the compressor of Brouke is an oil-free compressor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to replace the oiled compressor of Brouke with the oil-free compressor Good via a simple substitution as outlined by Good to obtain the well-known and predictable result of compressing a gas.
Regarding claim 15, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 12 where Brouke further discloses that said controllable fan is provided with a frequency controller or RPM control with variable speed (Brouke Page 7 Lines 23-25 where the fan speed is adjusted which implies an RPM control aspect).
Regarding claim 18, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 12 where Brouke further discloses that said compressor device is provided with an aftercooler which is installed downstream of outlet of the high-pressure compressor element (Brouke Page 7 Lines 13-14).
Regarding claim 19, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 12 where Brouke further discloses that said compressor device is provided with an inlet sensor, or a group of sensors which measures the ambient parameters and which is linked with said control unit and/or compressor device is provided with a sensor which measures a pressure in said line, with a sensor which measures a relative humidity in said line, and/or with a sensor which measures a temperature in said line downstream of the intercooler which are both linked with the control unit (Sensors 12, 13, and 14 of Brouke per Page 8 Line 13 through Page 9 Line 2), wherein measurements of the inlet sensor and the pressure measurement of said sensor are used for determining the dewpoint in said line or wherein the measurements of the sensor which measures the relative humidity in said line and the temperature measurement of said sensor are used for determining the dewpoint in said line (Page 10 Line 1 through Page 11 Line 19 of Brouke).
Regarding claim 21, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 20 where Brouke further discloses measuring or determining the temperature, pressure, and relative humidity of the surroundings and/or the relative humidity with an additional sensor in said line downstream of the intercooler (Page 10 Lines 15-34 of Brouke); measuring or determining the temperature in said line downstream of the intercooler and measuring or determining the pressure in said line (Page 10 Lines 15-34 of Brouke); and calculating the dewpoint in said line on the basis of one or more of said measured or determined parameters (Page 10 Lines 15-34 of Brouke).
Regarding claim 22, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 21 where Brouke further discloses that the ambient parameters comprising the temperature and relative humidity takes place with the aid of an inlet sensor, or a group of sensors, which measures the ambient parameters and/or for determining the temperature in said line downstream of the intercooler and for determining the pressure and the relative humidity in said line, use is made of a sensor which measures the temperature in line downstream of intercooler, of a sensor which measures the relative humidity in line, and a sensor which measures the pressure in said line (Page 10 Line 1 through Page 11 Line 19 with the sensors 12/13/14 per Page 8 Line 13 through Page 9 Line 2 of Brouke).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/065506 (Brouke) in view of GB 2034818 (Good) and further in view of US 2003/0021701 (Kolodziej hereinafter).
Regarding claim 13, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 12 but are silent with respect that the compressor device is provided with a drive in the form of an internal combustion engine which is configured to drive the compressor elements and a generator, which generator is configured to supply power to said controllable fan.
However, Kolodziej teaches a multistage compressor system that discloses the use of an internal combustion engine to drive the compressor and an electric motor to drive the cooling fan (¶ 18). The resultant combination would be such that the compressor device is provided with a drive in the form of an internal combustion engine which is configured to drive the compressor elements and a generator, which generator is configured to supply power to said controllable fan.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the unclarified drive sources of Brouke with internal combustion engine and electric motor of Kolodziej to allow for cheaper and consistent power to be supplied to the compressor.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/065506 (Brouke) in view of GB 2034818 (Good) and further in view of WO 2020/065504 (Stijn hereinafter).
Regarding claim 14, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 12 but are silent with respect that the compressor device is provided with a drive in the form of an electrical motor which is configured to drive the compressor elements, and wherein said electrical motor is powered by power mains which are configured to also drive said controllable fan.
However, Stijn teaches a multistage compressor that discloses a compressor and the cooling fan being powered by an electric motor (Abstract and Page 8 Lines 18-21). The Examiner is viewing the electric motor as supplying power to the cooling fans and therefore the resultant combination would be such that the compressor device is provided with a drive in the form of an electrical motor which is configured to drive the compressor elements, and wherein said electrical motor is powered by power mains which are configured to also drive said controllable fan.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the unclarified drive source of Brouke with the electric motor of Stijn to allow for easier control of the input power to the compressor system.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2020/065506 (Brouke) in view of GB 2034818 (Good) and further in view of US 2018/0223876 (Martin hereinafter).
Regarding claim 16, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 12 but are silent with respect that said controllable fan is composed of various controllable subfans.
However, Martin teaches a cooling fan system that discloses the use of an array of cooling fans (Abstract with ¶ 25 and Figures 6, 7). The resultant combination would be such that said controllable fan is composed of various controllable subfans.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cooling fan of Brouke with a plurality of individually controlled fans to allow for precise cooling control.
Regarding claim 17, Brouke’s modified teachings are described above in claim 16 where the combination of Brouke and Martin would further disclose that at least a first subfan is provided with its own frequency controller or RPM control with variable speed (Broadest reasonable interpretation of a single fan being on while the other fan[s] are powered off).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/07/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 12 and the newly added claim language of “calculating a preset temperature which equals the dewpoint increased by a certain margin such that the preset temperature is higher than the dewpoint, and controlling the controllable fan so that the temperature in the line downstream of the intercooler becomes equal to the preset temperature higher than the dewpoint” have been reviewed but are not found to be persuasive. The Brouke reference is relied upon to teach the newly added clarification that the preset temperature is above the dewpoint. Brouke Page 11 Lines 7-10 states, “Once the dew point has been determined, the control unit or regulator 11 will regulate intercooler 9 as necessary so that the temperature at gas inlet 4b of high-pressure stage compressor element 3 is above the dew point.” There is an interpretation that shows that the preset temperature is high enough where regulation is not required. Applicant does make an amendment that does clarify their inventive concept and are advised by the Examiner to further modifying the claims in this direction to overcome the rejection of record. However, independent claim 12 and dependent claims 1319, 21, and 22 are not found to be persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. EP 3020972 (Simross) details an intercooler control system with a present temperature valve.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CONNOR J. TREMARCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-2175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0700-1700 Eastern.
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, MICHAEL HOANG can be reached at (571) 272-6460. 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.
/CONNOR J TREMARCHE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762