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 03/18/2026, with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/18/2026, with respect to the 35 USC § 102 rejections over Inami have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendments to the claims. The 35 USC § 102 rejections over Inami have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, filed 03/18/2026, with respect to the 35 USC § 102 rejections over Trantham have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues “Trantham is directed to a fundamentally different technical context. Trantham's system is an HVAC room heating/cooling system involving a thermostat, coils, a fan, and a modulated valve - not a hot water tank heating system involving a hot water tank controller and a heat pump controller. The Examiner has treated the "hot water tank controller" and "heat pump controller" limitations as intended use, but these limitations define the functional context of the controller interface and constrain the structural requirements of the response module. A controller interface configured to interface between a hot water tank controller and a heat pump controller - particularly one whose response module emulates a temperature sensor for the heat pump controller - is structurally and functionally distinct from a circuit that overrides a thermostat's binary valve open/close commands”. However, while the statement “A controller interface for interfacing between a hot water tank controller and a heat pump controller” is regarded as intended use the statement “a response module configured to: receive, from a hot water tank controller, a first input signal indicative of a temperature; provide a response signal that emulates a temperature sensor for the heat pump controller, wherein the response signal is based on the first input signal and a temperature response characteristic; and communicate the response signal to a heat pump controller” merely requires that the controller interface comprises a response module that is configured to receive a first input signal from a hot water tank controller and configured to communicate the response signal to a heat pump controller. Since the circuit 372 of Trantham is configured to receive a first input signal and communicate the response signal, it is configured to do perform both of these step wherein the first input signal is received from a hot water tank controller and the response signal is communicated to a heat pump controller.
Applicant additionally argues “the control signal from thermostat 160 is a binary command to open or close the modulated valve component 140 (see paragraph [0024] of Trantham: ‘a signal (e.g., a voltage) to a modulated valve component 140 to either open or close the modulated valve component 140’). A binary valve open/close command is not a signal ‘indicative of a temperature’”. However, this binary signal is “Based on temperature of the room or set of rooms the system 100 is serving and a set temperature” [0024]. Thus, while the signal does not communicate the exact temperature value, the voltage level is in correlation to the room temperature and thus indicative of a temperature.
Applicant additionally argues “The signal output by the circuit 372 to the modulated valve component 140 is a modified version of the thermostat's binary open/close command (see paragraph [0038] of Trantham). This output signal controls whether the valve opens or closes - it does not emulate a temperature sensor. There is no disclosure in Trantham of any signal that mimics, emulates, or approximates a temperature sensor's output (e.g., a resistance characteristic of a particular temperature reading) for receipt by a heat pump controller”. However, the open/closed command provided based on the thermostat's binary open/close command is “Based on temperature of the room or set of rooms the system 100 is serving and a set temperature” [0024]. Thus, while the signal does not communicate an exact temperature value, the open command/close command is in correlation to a temperature need based on a measured temperature level, and thus indicative of a temperature recorded by the system (i.e. a room temperature above/below a threshold will provide opposite signals, thus signal is indicative of temperature above/below that threshold).
Applicant additionally argues “The circuit 372 communicates its output to the modulated valve component 140 - an actuator - not to a heat pump controller. There is no heat pump controller in Trantham that receives a signal from the circuit 372”. However, the claim requires a response module configured to… communicate the response signal to a heat pump controller”. Thus, since the circuit 372 is configured to communicate the response signal to modulated valve component 140, it is configured to communicate the response signal to a heat pump controller. Additionally, modulated valve component 140 controls operation of flow through heat pump system (coil 130 and fan 120 arrangement), and thus reads on a heat pump controller.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 1: “a response module configured to: receive, from a hot water tank controller, a first input signal indicative of a temperature; provide a response that emulates a temperature sensor for the beat pump controller, wherein the response signal is signal based on the first input signal and a temperature response characteristic; and communicate the response signal to a heat pump controller.”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The disclosed structure for carrying out the claimed function is an electrical circuit as noted in para. 0008 of the Applicant’s written disclosure of the Published Application, and claim 2.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Trantham (US20150267924A1).
Regarding claim 1, Trantham teaches
a controller interface (retrofit system 300, fig. 3) for interfacing between a hot water tank controller and a heat pump controller (intended use limitation; retrofit system 300 configured for interfacing between a hot water tank controller and a heat pump controller), the controller interface comprising:
a response module (circuit 372, fig. 3-4) configured to:
receive, from a hot water tank controller, a first input signal indicative of a temperature (fig. 5; “at step 510, the circuit 372 receives data from the thermostat 160” [0071]; circuit 372 configured to receive a first input signal indicative of a temperature from an air temperature controller (thermostat), thus configured to receive it from a hot water tank controller);
provide a response signal that emulates a temperature sensor for the heat pump controller, wherein the response signal is based on the first input signal and a temperature response characteristic (fig. 5; “At step 590 , the circuit 372 provides a signal (or not) to the modulated valve component 140, which is based on the various inputs it has received” [0077]; “Based on temperature of the room or set of rooms the system 100 is serving and a set temperature, the thermostat 160 transmits a signal (e.g., a voltage) to the modulated valve component 140 (which may include any suitable actuator and valve components) to either open or close the modulated valve component 140” [0024] and “The digital to analog converter 372 f converts the digital decision made by the circuit 372 for communication in an analog format to the modulated valve component 140” [0056], therefore, analog signal provided by circuit 372 emulates that of a temperature sensor since the signal command is provided based on input temperature (i.e. a room temperature above/below a threshold will provide opposite signals, thus signal is indicative of temperature above/below that threshold)) and
communicate the response signal to a heat pump controller (as described in [0077] above)
Regarding claim 2, Trantham teaches the controller interface of claim 1
wherein the response module is an electrical circuit (circuit 372) and an electrical property of the circuit is configured to vary in dependence on the first input signal and the temperature response characteristic “at step 510, the circuit 372 receives data from the thermostat 160” [0071]; “At step 590 , the circuit 372 provides a signal (or not) to the modulated valve component 140, which is based on the various inputs it has received” [0077], thus, the system is configured to vary in dependence on the first input signal and the temperature response characteristic based on the step in the process of fig. 5)
Regarding claim 5, Trantham teaches the controller interface of claim 4
wherein the temperature-resistance relationship profile is modelled on a response of a temperature sensor associated with a heat pump (temperature sensing of thermostat 160 associated with performance of fan 120, coil 130 , and modulated valve component 140 system)
Regarding claim 13, Trantham teaches the controller interface of claim 1,
wherein the controller interface is configured to communicate with the hot water tank controller via a digital communication protocol or via analog signals (“the data from the thermostat 160 may be analog data” [0072]; thus, Trantham comprises analog signals)
Regarding claim 14, Trantham teaches the controller interface of claim 1,
wherein the response module is configured to communicate with the heat pump controller via a sensor cable of the heat pump controller (“the retrofit system 300 may also include a feedback line 375 from the modulated valve component 140 that, among other things, informs the circuit 372 as to the degree to which the valve in the modulated valve component 140 is open or closed” [0051]; thus, feedback line 375 provides sensor information of modulated valve component 140 to circuit 372, wherein modulated valve component 140 controls operation of flow through coil 130 system)
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trantham (US20150267924A1) in view of Inami (KR20160106359A), referring to the English translation dated 12/13/2025.
Regarding claim 3, Trantham does not teach the controller interface of claim 1
wherein the temperature response characteristic is programmable, preferably via a user interface
Inami teaches
wherein the temperature response characteristic is programmable, preferably via a user interface (“The remote controller 43 operates on or off of the hot water supply operation of the hot water supply system, on / off of the hot water fill operation of the bathtub, the target hot water temperature, the target hot water fill temperature, and the like in response to an operation of an operation switch (not shown) or a voice input” [0096]; “the tank controller 41 executes a predetermined control program using the driving operation information provided from the remote controller 43 and the detection data of the respective sensors 44 to 54”) [0107]
Inami teaches a system wherein tank controller 41 is interfaced between sensors 44 to 54 and heat pump controller 71, wherein the tank controller 41 signals the heat pump controller 71 based on information received from respective sensors 44 to 54 in addition to a predetermined control program using the driving operation information provided from the remote controller 43. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the system of Trantham with a remote controller 43 in communication with the communication module 372a of circuit 372 (“The communication module 372 a allows the circuit to communicate with other devices”) [0057], as taught in Inami, in order to allow a user to control the system based on desired performance.
Claim(s) 4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trantham (US20150267924A1) in view of Zhao (CN108692823A), referring to the English translation dated 12/13/2025.
Regarding claim 4, Trantham does not teach the controller interface of claim 1
wherein the temperature response characteristic comprises a temperature-resistance relationship profile
Zhao teaches
wherein the temperature response characteristic comprises a temperature-resistance relationship profile (“an analog-to-digital converter circuit to calculate a PT100 thermal resistance temperature sensor according to a digital signal transmitted by the analog-to-digital converter circuit The CPU circuit of the actual resistance value, the CPU circuit can convert the accurate temperature data according to the actual resistance value of the PT100 thermal resistance temperature sensor”) [007]
While Trantham does not teach wherein the temperature response characteristic comprises a temperature-resistance relationship profile, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the temperature calculation system of Zhao to Trantham, since it provides “a PT100 temperature transmitter device based on embedded technology with high precision, good reliability, adaptability to harsh environments and fast response speed” [006].
Regarding claim 6, Trantham does not teach the controller interface of claim 1
wherein the response signal is a resistance of a circuit at the response module
Zhao teaches
wherein the response signal is a resistance of a circuit at the response module (“an analog-to-digital converter circuit to calculate a PT100 thermal resistance temperature sensor according to a digital signal transmitted by the analog-to-digital converter circuit The CPU circuit of the actual resistance value, the CPU circuit can convert the accurate temperature data according to the actual resistance value of the PT100 thermal resistance temperature sensor”) [007]
While Trantham does not teach wherein the response signal is a resistance of a circuit at the response module, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the temperature calculation system of Zhao to Trantham, since it provides “a PT100 temperature transmitter device based on embedded technology with high precision, good reliability, adaptability to harsh environments and fast response speed” [006].
Claim(s) 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trantham (US20150267924A1) in view of Zhou (CN111623527A), referring to the English translation dated 12/13/2025.
Regarding claim 7, Trantham does not teach the controller interface of claim 1,
wherein the response module comprises a relay and a pair of potentiometers
Zhou teaches
wherein the response module comprises a relay and a pair of potentiometers (As described in [008], the control circuit includes potentiometers RP1 to RP3 and relays J1-J10; “the lower limit of the outlet temperature of the outlet tank B is obtained by adjusting the potentiometer RP2 , The upper limit of the temperature of the outlet water tank B is obtained by adjusting the potentiometer RP3” [0012])
Trantham teaches circuit 372, but does not further describe the structure of the circuit 372. Zhou teaches a control circuit that allows for water output between a set range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the control circuit of Zhou to the circuit 372, which allows for water output between a set range, in order to provide a system “which can control the outlet temperature of the electric water heater within a certain range, is convenient to use, and can save water, electricity, and energy” [006].
Regarding claim 10, Trantham does not teach the controller interface of claim 1,
wherein the response module is configured to vary the response signal between a number of discrete values, preferably between two values; or wherein the response module is configured to vary the response signal in a continuous range of values
Zhou teaches
wherein the response module is configured to vary the response signal between a number of discrete values, preferably between two values (not required due to use of “preferably”); or wherein the response module is configured to vary the response signal in a continuous range of values (“the lower limit of the outlet temperature of the outlet tank B is obtained by adjusting the potentiometer RP2, The upper limit of the temperature of the outlet water tank B is obtained by adjusting the potentiometer RP3” [0012]; if the potentiometer is arranged to allow for a fixed number of individual value settings (i.e. a knob with 2-3 settings), the response module is configured to vary the response signal between a number of discrete values, preferably between two values; on the other hand, if the potentiometer is arranged to allow for continuous adjustment between an upper and lower value, the response module is configured to vary the response signal in a continuous range of values)
Trantham teaches circuit 372, but does not further describe the structure of the circuit 372. Zhou teaches a control circuit that allows for water output between a set range. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the control circuit of Zhou to the circuit 372, which allows for water output between a set range, in order to provide a system “which can control the outlet temperature of the electric water heater within a certain range, is convenient to use, and can save water, electricity, and energy” [006].
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trantham (US20150267924A1) in view of Hammarstroem (EP3084547B1).
Regarding claim 8, Trantham does not teach the controller interface of claim 1,
wherein the response module comprises a plurality of fixed value resistors for connection of a subset to a relay
Hammarstroem teaches
wherein the response module comprises a plurality of fixed value resistors (“resistors 3 and 4 may be of fixed values” [0020]) for connection of a subset to a relay (“For the connection and disconnection of the regulating resistances 3 and 4, relays 8 and 9 may be used” [0024]; a subset of the resistor group (resistor 3) is connected to relay 8, and another subset of the resistor group (resistor 4) is connected to relay 9)
Trantham teaches circuit 372, but does not further describe the structure of the circuit 372. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the methods for connecting a temperature sensor over an interface to the sensor and interface of Trantham (thermostat 160 and circuit 372), since it is a known electrical arrangement “to actuate a heating/cooling system without replacing its control system or reconstructing the same” [0014].
Claim(s) 9, 11, 17-18 and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trantham (US20150267924A1) in view of Chaudhry (US20190145634A1).
Regarding claim 9, Trantham does not teach teaches the controller interface of claim 1,
wherein the response module comprises a transistor configured to operate in dependence on the first input signal (Trantham teaches “In the basic level configuration described above, the circuit 372 may be a simple four-bit processor and not include all the components described below with reference to more advanced configurations… However, again, depending on the desired configuration, a simple circuit with minimal features may provide all the efficiency gains a user might seek” [0040], however does not describe the use of a transistor in regards to a simple circuit)
Chaudhry teaches
wherein the response module comprises a transistor configured to operate in dependence on the first input signal (“In certain example embodiments, the controller 104 does not include a hardware processor 120. In such a case, the controller 104 can include, as an example, one or more field programmable gate arrays (FPGA), one or more insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs), and one or more integrated circuits (ICs). Using FPGAs, IGBTs, ICs, and/or other similar devices known in the art allows the controller 104 (or portions thereof) to be programmable and function according to certain logic rules and thresholds without the use of a hardware processor” [0084]; thus, controller 104 is configured to relay signals between tank 195, user 150 power supply 135 using insulated-gate bipolar transistors instead of a processor)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the insulated-gate bipolar transistor system of Chaudhry to Trantham, since it allows for a simple circuit that a user may desire as described in [0040 of Trantham], as it does not require the application of a processor.
Regarding claim 11, Trantham does not teach the controller interface of claim 1,
further comprising an auxiliary heater control module configured to: receive, from the heat pump controller, a second input signal associated with an auxiliary heating requirement; and communicate, to the hot water tank controller, an instruction to operate an auxiliary heater in response to the second input signal
Chaudhry teaches
further comprising an auxiliary heater control module (“a protocol 132 and/or an algorithm 133 can be used, in conjunction with measurements made by one or more sensor devices 151, by the controller 104 to determine whether a source of heat (e.g., resistive heating element 171) aside from the heat pump 140 should be operated to raise the temperature of the water toward the bottom of the tank 195 of the water heater 190”) [0057] configured to: receive, from the heat pump controller, a second input signal associated with an auxiliary heating requirement (configured to receive requirement from sensor devices 151, thus configured to receive from a heat pump controller); and communicate, to the hot water tank controller, an instruction to operate an auxiliary heater in response to the second input signal (“the control engine 106 can control one or more components (e.g., the resistive heating element 171 , the heat pump 140) of the heating system 170 to get the temperature of the water toward the bottom of the tank 195 of the water heater 190 to within an acceptable range of values” [0066]; configured to communicate control instructions to resistive heating element 171, thus configured to communicate control instructions to controller of resistive heating element 171)
While Trantham does not teach an auxiliary heating system, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a supplemental heat source and its control system as taught in Chaudhry to Trantham, since it allows for improving the performance of the heating system in times of high demand.
Regarding claim 17, Trantham teaches a system for controlling a heating system comprising:
the controller interface according to claim 1 (as taught regarding claim 1)
Trantham does not teach
a hot water tank controller configured to provide a first input signal indicative of a temperature to the controller interface
Chaudhry teaches
a hot water tank controller configured to provide a first input signal indicative of a temperature to the controller interface (“The user 150, the power supply 135, and/or the water heater 190 (including the sensors 151 and a local controller, if any) can interact with the controller 104 using the application interface 126 in accordance with one or more example embodiments. Specifically, the application interface 126 of the controller 104 receives data (e.g., information, communications, instructions, updates to firmware) from and sends data (e.g., information, communications, instructions) to the user 150, the power supply 135, and/or the water heater 190” [0049]; controller 104 configured to provide a signal of sensor data to user, etc. Thus, controller 104 configured to provide a signal of sensor data to a controller interface)
The system of Trantham teaches retrofit system 300, wherein circuit 372 sends modified control signals to modulated valve component 140 based on signals from thermostat 160. Trantham comprises fluid heating arrangement responsive to the thermostat 160, comprising a heat pump of coils 130 and fan 120. Chaudhry teaches a similar arrangement for heating water in tank 195 via heat pump 140 comprising air moving device 142. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this retrofit system to a water heating system wherein the thermostat 160 of Trantham is indicative of a water heater temperature, as taught in Chaudhry, in order to utilize the retrofitting system wherein the desired heating system of a water storage tank, thus, allowing for the improvement of system control in a water heating system as well.
Regarding claim 18, Trantham, as modified, teaches the system of claim 17
wherein the hot water tank controller is configured to receive temperature measurements from one or more temperature sensors (thermostat 160, temperature sensing inherent to a thermostat; as modified by Chaudhry, thermostat 160 measures temperature for water heater tank 195)
Trantham does not teach
wherein the hot water tank controller is configured to switch on an auxiliary heater
Chaudhry teaches
wherein the hot water tank controller is configured to switch on an auxiliary heater (“a protocol 132 and/or an algorithm 133 can be used, in conjunction with measurements made by one or more sensor devices 151, by the controller 104 to determine whether a source of heat (e.g., resistive heating element 171) aside from the heat pump 140 should be operated to raise the temperature of the water toward the bottom of the tank 195 of the water heater 190”) [0057]
While Trantham does not teach an auxiliary heating system, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a supplemental heat source and its control system as taught in Chaudhry to Trantham, since it allows for improving the performance of the heating system in times of high demand.
Regarding claim 20, Trantham, as modified, teaches the system of claim 17
further comprising a heat pump controller configured to control a heat pump in dependence on the response signal received from the controller interface (“the circuit 372 receives a signal from the thermostat 160 , requesting that the modulated valve component 140 either open or close. Based on additional data received from one or both of the return line sensors 374 and the supply line sensor 376 as well as other logic (discussed below), the circuit 372 sends (or doesn't send) a modified signal to the modulated valve component 140” [0050]; modulated valve component 140 controls operation of flow through heat pump system (coil 130 and fan 120 arrangement))
Regarding claim 21, Trantham, as modified, teaches a heating system comprising:
the system for controlling a heating system of claim 17 (as taught regarding claim 17)
a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature of water in the hot water tank (thermostat 160, temperature sensing inherent to a thermostat; as modified by Chaudhry, thermostat 160 measures temperature for water heater tank 195); and
a heat pump configured to heat water in the hot water tank via a heat exchanger (as modified by Chaudhry, coil 130 and fan 120 heat water associated with tank 195 of Chaudhry); and
a heat pump controller configured to control the heat pump in dependence on the response signal received from the controller interface (“the circuit 372 receives a signal from the thermostat 160 , requesting that the modulated valve component 140 either open or close. Based on additional data received from one or both of the return line sensors 374 and the supply line sensor 376 as well as other logic (discussed below), the circuit 372 sends (or doesn't send) a modified signal to the modulated valve component 140” [0050]; modulated valve component 140 controls operation of flow through heat pump system (coil 130 and fan 120 arrangement))
Regarding claim 22, Trantham, as modified, does not teach the heating system of claim 21 further comprising
a diverter valve for diverting fluid from the heat pump to or from the heat exchanger, wherein the diverter valve is arranged to energize a pump of the heat exchanger
Chaudhry teaches
a diverter valve for diverting fluid from the heat pump to or from the heat exchanger, wherein the diverter valve is arranged to energize a pump of the heat exchanger (“The water heater 190 can further include a switch 156 (also called, for example, an emergency cutout switch 156, a cutout switch 156 , and an ECO 156) that controls the energy (e.g., electrical power, gas) delivered to the heating system 170. The switch 156 can have an open position (preventing energy from flowing to the heating system 170) and a closed position (allowing energy to flow to the heating system 170)” [0036]; since Chaudhry discloses gas as an energy source for heating system 170, the switch 156 reads on diverting fluid)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the switch 156 arrangement of Chaudhry to Trantham, as modified, in order to effectively allow a user to cut off power to the system independent of the automatic control of the smart retrofitted system.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trantham (US20150267924A1) in view of Freer (US20060196956A1).
Regarding claim 15, Trantham does not teach the controller interface of claim 1,
wherein the controller interface is further configured to receive a user hot water schedule and to vary the response signal based on the user hot water schedule
Freer teaches
wherein the controller interface is further configured to receive a user hot water schedule and to vary the response signal based on the user hot water schedule (“The override mode may be a vacation or similar mode wherein the control circuit 28 suspends the ordinary programmed operating schedule, and controls the relay 24 to keep power removed from the hot water heater 90 until the override mode is exited. Exit from the override mode may occur following a programmable time interval, at a programmable date and time or by pressing the override button 18 when the controller is in the override mode”) [0029]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the override mode of Freer to Trantham, in order to allow the retrofit system 300 of Trantham to prevent unnecessary operation of the modulated valve component 140 while a user is away for an extended time.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trantham (US20150267924A1) in view of Chaudhry (US20190145634A1), in further view of Freer (US20060196956A1).
Regarding claim 19, Trantham, as modified, teaches the system of claim 17
wherein the hot water tank controller is configured to receive a user hot water schedule and to vary the first input signal based on the user hot water schedule
Freer teaches
wherein the hot water tank controller is configured to receive a user hot water schedule and to vary the first input signal based on the user hot water schedule (“The override mode may be a vacation or similar mode wherein the control circuit 28 suspends the ordinary programmed operating schedule, and controls the relay 24 to keep power removed from the hot water heater 90 until the override mode is exited. Exit from the override mode may occur following a programmable time interval, at a programmable date and time or by pressing the override button 18 when the controller is in the override mode”) [0029]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the override mode of Freer to Trantham, in order to allow the retrofit system 300 of Trantham to prevent unnecessary operation of the modulated valve component 140 while a user is away for an extended time.
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 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 BRETT P. MALLON whose telephone number is (571)272-4749. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 8am to 5pm.
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.
/BRETT P. MALLON/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights