DETAILED ACTION
The present office action is in response to the preliminary amendment filed on 08/31/2023. Claims 1 – 7 are pending in the application.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 4, 5, and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “the outside” in line 2, which should recite “an outside” for proper antecedent basis. air is blown out” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 2 recites “the flow of the air” in line 2, which should recite “a flow of the air ” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 4 recites “the movement” in line 3, which should recite “
Claim 5 recites “draws in air” in line 2, which should recite “draws in the air” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 6 recites “the amount of outside” in line 2, which should recite “an amount of outside” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 6 recites “the duct regulation device” in line 4, which should recite “the duct adjustment device” for proper antecedent basis.
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 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, 6, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rogers et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2018/0124955) in view of Gao (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2021/0378151).
Regarding Claim 1, Rogers shows (Figure 5):
A cooling system (500) comprising:
a duct (510, 313, 306) that draws in air (309) that is drawn in (via 304, as illustrated in air flow arrows in Figure 5) from an intake side (the intake side of 308) of a cooling target (308), which is disposed in a room (the room in which the plurality of 308 are located, as illustrated in Figure 5) adjusted to a predetermined temperature (the temperature set point within the room in which the plurality of 308 are located), that absorbs heat (the cool air drawn through 308 by 304 absorbs the heat of the electronic equipment in the server) of the cooling target (308), and that is exhausted from (via 304, as illustrated in Figure 5) an exhaust side (the exhaust side of 308) of the cooling target (308), and that guides (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 5) the air (309) to the intake side (the intake side of 308);
a cooler (303) that is provided in (as illustrated in Figure 5, 303 is provided in the duct between 313 and 306) the duct (510, 313, 306) and that cools the air (309);
a monitoring device (the portion of the control system that collects information input from sensors and the equipment, Paragraph 0081) that monitors (it is inherent the control system monitors the cooling state of the servers 308 using the sensors and knows if the air conditioning arrangement 303 is operational) a cooling state (the temperature of the servers 308 and the operational status of air conditioning arrangement 303) of at least one of the cooling target (308) and the cooler (303); and
a duct adjustment device (the portion of the control system that sends control signals to control the position of 311, 312, 302) that operates the duct (510, 313, 306) to guide (based on the position of 311, 312, and 302, as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 5) the air (309) in the duct (510, 313, 306) in a direction (the upward vertical direction via 311, as illustrated by the arrows in Figure 5) different from (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 5) a direction (the downward vertical direction via 312, as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 5) toward the intake side (the intake side of 308).
However, Rogers does not show the air is directed/exhausted in the upward vertical direction through 311 when the monitoring device detects an abnormality in the cooling state.
In the same field of endeavor of data center cooling, Gao teaches (Figure 4B):
It is known in the data center cooling art for a monitoring device (controller, as described in Paragraph 0020) to exhaust (via 432) the hot air (hot air exiting the exhaust side of the racks) and open the ambient air louvers (434) when the monitoring device (the control system that operates the components of Figure 4B) detects an abnormality in (“the power-failure backup mode of operation”, when there is no electrical power, resulting in 442 not operating, as described in Paragraph 0038) the cooling state (the operational state of 442).
Further, “the current disclosure provides system cooling solutions for data centers. The emergency cooling arrangements introduce external ambient air into the data center room when the power used for operating the cooling system is lost… it is used at the direct and only cooling source for the IT equipment in the data center in the emergency cooling configuration”, Paragraph 0013.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cooling system shown by Rogers to direct/exhaust the air in the upward vertical direction through louver 311 when the monitoring device detects an abnormality in the cooling state, as taught by Gao, to provide emergency cooling arrangements for the data center when the power used for operating the cooler is lost. When the power is interrupted, ambient outside air is used at the direct and only cooling source for the IT equipment in the data center.
Regarding Claim 2, Rogers shows (Figure 5):
The duct (510, 313, 306) comprises a damper (311/312) that guides the air (309) in the duct (510, 313, 306) to an outside (via 311, as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 5) of the duct (501, 313, 306) and blocks (when 312 is closed) a flow (the flow of 309 from 510 to 313) of the air (309) to the intake side (the intake side of 308).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Rogers (Figure 5) and Gao (Figure 4B) teaches:
The duct adjustment device (Rogers: the portion of the control system that sends control signals to control the position of 311, 312, 302) operates the damper (Rogers: 311, 312) to guide the air (Rogers: 309) out of (Rogers: by opening 311) the duct (Rogers: 510, 313, 306) and shuts off (Rogers: by closing 312) the flow (Rogers: the flow of 309 from 510 to 313) of the air (Rogers: 309) to the intake side (Rogers: the intake side of 308) when a power supply (Gao: electrical power) to the duct adjustment device (Rogers: the portion of the control system that sends control signals to control the position of 311, 312, 302) is cut off (Gao: as described in Paragraph 0038).
Regarding Claim 4, Rogers shows (Figure 5):
The damper (311) is subject to an elastic force (caused by the air flow against and through the open louvers of 311) in the direction (horizontal direction, which is the direction of flow in 510) of opening the duct (510, 313, 306), and the duct adjustment device (the portion of the control system that sends control signals to control the position of 311, 312, 302) restrains movement (by locking the position of 311 in the open position) of the damper (311) against the elastic force (caused by the air flow against and through the open louvers of 311).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Rogers (Figure 5) and Gao (Figure 4B) teaches:
An outside air intake adjustment device (Rogers: 302) that adjusts (Rogers: based on the position) an amount of outside air (Rogers: 301) taken into the room (Rogers: the room in which the plurality of 308 are located, as illustrated in Figure 5) adjusted to the predetermined temperature (Rogers: the temperature set point within the room in which the plurality of 308 are located), wherein
the duct regulation device (Rogers: the portion of the control system that sends control signals to control the position of 311, 312, 302), when the abnormality (Gao: “the power-failure backup mode of operation”, when there is no electrical power, resulting in 442 not operating, as described in Paragraph 0038), increases (Rogers: by fully opening 302, the amount of 301 is maximized) the amount of outside air (Rogers: 301) taken in by the outside air intake adjustment device (Rogers: 302) compared to before the abnormality is detected (Rogers: before the power failure, the outside air is less than maximum because the outside air is mixed with the return air).
Regarding Claim 7, Rogers shows (Figure 5):
A cooling method (method illustrated by air flow arrows in 500 ) comprising:
drawing in (via 304, as illustrated in air flow arrows in Figure 5) air (309) from an intake side (the intake side of 308) of a cooling target (308), which is disposed in a room (the room in which the plurality of 308 are located, as illustrated in Figure 5) adjusted to a predetermined temperature (the temperature set point within the room in which the plurality of 308 are located), that absorbs heat (the cool air drawn through 308 by 304 absorbs the heat of the electronic equipment in the server) of the cooling target (308), and is exhausted from (via 304, as illustrated in Figure 5) an exhaust side (the exhaust side of 308) of the cooling target (308), cooling (via 303) the air (309) and guiding (via 304) the air (309) to the intake side (the intake side of 308);
monitoring (it is inherent the control system monitors the cooling state of the servers 308 using the sensors and knows if the air conditioning arrangement 303 is operational) a cooling state (the temperature of the servers 308 and the operational status of air conditioning arrangement 303) of the cooling target (308); and
guiding (based on the position of 311, 312, and 302, as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 5) the air (309) in a direction (the upward vertical direction via 311, as illustrated by the arrows in Figure 5) different from (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 5) a direction (the downward vertical direction via 312, as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 5) toward the intake side (the intake side of 308).
However, Rogers does not show the air is directed/exhausted in the upward vertical direction through 311 when an abnormality in the cooling state is detected.
In the same field of endeavor of data center cooling, Gao teaches (Figure 4B):
It is known in the data center cooling art for a monitoring device (controller, as described in Paragraph 0020) to exhaust (via 432) the hot air (hot air exiting the exhaust side of the racks) and open the ambient air louvers (434) when the monitoring device (the control system that operates the components of Figure 4B) detects an abnormality in (“the power-failure backup mode of operation”, when there is no electrical power, resulting in 442 not operating, as described in Paragraph 0038) the cooling state (the operational state of 442).
Further, “the current disclosure provides system cooling solutions for data centers. The emergency cooling arrangements introduce external ambient air into the data center room when the power used for operating the cooling system is lost… it is used at the direct and only cooling source for the IT equipment in the data center in the emergency cooling configuration”, Paragraph 0013.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the cooling method shown by Rogers to direct/exhaust the air in the upward vertical direction through louver 311 when an abnormality in the cooling state is detected, as taught by Gao, to provide emergency cooling arrangements for the data center when the power used for operating the cooler is lost. When the power is interrupted, ambient outside air is used at the direct and only cooling source for the IT equipment in the data center.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent on a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Rogers and Gao teach the claimed invention except a fan that draws in the air from the exhaust side into the duct, wherein the duct adjustment device controls the fan so that a rotation speed after the abnormality is detected is greater than a rotation speed before the abnormality is detected.
Modifying the combination accordingly teaches away from the principle operation of Gao, as used to modify Rogers.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided in the Notice of References Cited.
The following prior art teaches related data center cooling systems:
Czamara (U.S. Patent No. 9,622,387): see Figure 9B
Rancic et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2020/0344916): see Figure 5
Ross (U.S. Patent No. 10,772,238): see Figure 3
Notebloom et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,755,182): see Figure 5
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