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 .
This action is responsive to Applicant’s response to election/restriction filed 08/10/2026.
Claims 1-4 are currently pending.
The Drawings filed 09/27/2023 are approved by the examiner.
The IDS statements filed 12/27/2023 and 05/06/2025 have been considered. Initialed copies accompany this action.
Applicant’s election without traverse of an absorbing liquid compound of Formula (1) in the reply filed on 08/10/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant identified claims 1-4 read on the elected species. Claims 1-4 were searched and examined only to the extent that they read on the elected species as the elected species was found not to be allowable.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections & Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The claim(s) appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document from the recitation of a nonstandard transitional phrase. Applicant is suggested to amend the claims to recite standard transitional phrases within U.S. practice in order to improve clarity in the claims.
For example, claim 1 recites, “An absorption refrigeration cycle configured to operate using:” as the preamble and transition phrase. “configured to operate using” is the transitional phrase and everything following it (e.g., “a refrigerant … and an absorbing liquid …”) is the body of the claim. This phrases the entire body of the claim as a functional limitation, and, as will be explained in the next paragraph, causes an extremely broad (but not indefinite, as breadth is not indefiniteness) scope to the claim and its dependent claims (all of claims 2 to 4). If Applicant intended for the claimed apparatus to be this broad then no action is needed; if Applicant intended for the claimed apparatus to actually be limited to the recited refrigerant and absorbing liquid then an amendment is suggested/required to obviate the present broad scope.
Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Regarding claim interpretation, claim 1 recites an absorption refrigeration cycle (i.e., an apparatus) “configured to operate using” the recited refrigerant and absorbing liquid. The recitation of “configured to operate using” as a transitional phrase effectively defines the entire apparatus via functional limitation(s) as an apparatus that is merely capable of operating using the recited refrigerant and absorbing liquid but does not necessarily require the express presence of such materials. Functional claim language that is not limited to a specific structure covers all devices that are capable of performing the recited function. Note that the original specification sufficiently evidences and confirms this interpretation because the comparative showing appears to utilize the same apparatus to test and sufficiently operate Applicant’s inventive refrigerant/absorbing liquid pair comprising an HFO refrigerant and glycol ether absorbing liquids as well as comparative examples comprising an HFO and ionic liquids without a glycol ether absorbing liquid.
Accordingly, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim is the absorption refrigeration cycle is merely one capable of operating using a HFO/HFC/HCFO refrigerant and an ethylene glycol or ethylene glycol ether absorbing liquid, which does not necessarily require either of the specifically identified refrigerant genera (e.g., a CFC refrigerant with a GWP in excess of 1,000 or even a HFC with a GWP in excess of 1,000 sufficiently meets the refrigerant as it would be configured to or capable of use in the absorption refrigeration cycle apparatus) or the glycol/glycol ether absorbing liquid (e.g., an ionic liquid or another organic liquid absorbing liquid as it would be configured to or capable of use in the absorption refrigeration cycle apparatus). The Office recognizes this is very likely not Applicant’s intended claim scope. If this scope is not intended, the Office suggests Applicant amend the claim to a standard transitional phrase (rather than recite the apparatus only with functional limitations) to expressly require the refrigerant and glycol ether absorbing liquid (i.e., amend “configured to operate using:” to “comprising”). See MPEP 2114.
This broad interpretation also continues to the dependent claims. Claim 2 does not necessarily require the recited R1/R2 groups as, like the corresponding limitations in claim 1, the limitations are limiting the functional limitations rather than the express apparatus structure. Claims 3 and 4 merely require an apparatus comprising the broad absorption refrigeration cycle and an additional compression refrigeration cycle wherein they are share a/the/any refrigerant.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 & 103
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1,2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ando et al. (US 4,557,850 A).
As to claims 1 and 2, Ando et al. teach compositions for absorption refrigeration systems or heat pumps (abstract and field of invention). Ando et al. defines unit ops of such apparatus at col. 1. Ando et al. also teach the disclosed compositions are suitably applied to absorption refrigeration systems or heat pumps (col. 2 lines 13-17), meaning the reference teaches absorption refrigeration cycles comprising the disclosed compositions. Ando et al. teach their composition generally comprises a fluorinated hydrocarbon refrigerant (abstract and col. 2 line 49 to col. 3 line 10) and an amide or glycol ether solvent organic absorption liquid (abstract and col. 3 line 11 to col. 4 line 6).
Since the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims is the absorption refrigeration cycle is merely one capable of operating using a HFO/HFC/HCFO refrigerant and an ethylene glycol or ethylene glycol ether absorbing liquid, which does not necessarily require either of the specifically identified refrigerant genera or the glycol/glycol ether absorbing liquid, the cited teachings of Ando et al. sufficiently meet and anticipate the very broad absorption refrigeration cycle apparatus defined only by functional limitations.
Alternatively, setting forth another anticipation rationale of claim 1, Ando et al. further teach, among others, difluoroethanes (R-152 or R-152a) as suitable fluorinated hydrocarbon refrigerants (Id. in the refrigerant disclosure of col. 2) and many glycol ethers as suitable absorbent liquids (Id. in the absorbent disclosure of col. 3 to 4). The last entry of Table 11 (Sample No. 159) is an exemplary absorption refrigerant for provision in the absorption refrigeration systems or heat pumps comprising R-152a (aka 1,1-difluoroethane) as the fluorinated refrigerant and TEGDME (aka tetraethylene glycol dimethyl ether per the disclosure in col. 3) as the absorbent. R-152a is a HFC with a global warming potential (GWP) less than 1,000 (approximately 124 to 153 depending on data source), and tetraethylene glycol dimethyl ether reads on the claimed absorbing liquid and Formula (1) where and R1 and R2 are each a methyl group (an alkyl group with a carbon number of 1) and n is 4. The cited exemplary composition and disclosure that the compositions are for provision and operation in absorption refrigeration cycles anticipate each and every claimed limitation.
As to claim 2, while it is noted the disclosed exemplary TEGDME (tetraethylene glycol dimethyl ether) is just outside the scope of the claimed because it amounts to n equals 4 rather than n is 1 to 3, Ando et al. nevertheless teach many alternate absorbents for provision alternate to TEGDME that one of ordinary skill in the art would obviously substitute in place of the TEGDME to obtain alternative absorption refrigerants and apparatus thereof with a very reasonable expectation of success. See, for example, ethylene glycol dimethyl ether which reads on the claimed Formula (1) where and R1 and R2 are each a methyl group (an alkyl group with a carbon number of 1) and n is 1, ethylene glycol diethyl ether which reads on the claimed Formula (1) where and R1 and R2 are each a ethyl group (an alkyl group with a carbon number of 2) and n is 1, ethylene glycol dibutyl ether which reads on the claimed Formula (1) where and R1 and R2 are each a butyl group (an alkyl group with a carbon number of 4) and n is 1, etc. (col. 3 lines 54+). This proposed substitution also renders the limitations of claim 1 obvious. Additionally to the obviousness of claim 1, along the same lines of the above disclosure/rationale to substituting other disclosed glycol ethers in place of the exemplary one, Ando et al. also teach alternative refrigerants than the exemplary R-152a that, if substituted in place of the exemplary R-152a, read on and meet the claimed limitations (e.g., 1,2-difluoroethane as R-152, etc. in col. 2).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ando et al. (US 4,557,850 A) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of any one of Fujimoto et al. (JP 2009-047354 A), Shiflett et al. (US 7,765,823 B2), or Sakamoto et al. (US 9,631,845 B2). Applicant provided an English language machine translation of Fujimoto et al. with their supplied copy of the reference.
The disclosure of Ando et al. is relied upon a set forth above. Ando et al. teach and suggest broad absorption refrigeration cycle apparatus comprising a fluorinated hydrocarbon refrigerant such as R-152 or R-152a and various glycol ether solvents that serve as an absorption liquid.
Ando et al. fail to teach apparatus additionally comprising a compression refrigeration cycle where the absorption refrigeration cycle and the compression refrigeration cycle are combined in such a manner to share the refrigerant. However, as is evidenced by the following secondary references, this arrangement of refrigeration cycle structure is conventional and would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Fujimoto et al. teach a composite heat pump system comprising a compression heat pump circuit that compresses a refrigerant and an absorption heat pump circuit comprising heat exchange structure that heats an absorption liquid comprising refrigerant and an absorbent where the two heat pump circuits share the refrigerant (para. 0008). See also the Figures. Sharing the refrigerant between the two circuits and providing the composite heat pump structure improves efficiency of the heat pump system (para. 0069).
Shiflett et al. teach a hybrid vapor-compression absorption cycle containing a fluorinated hydrocarbon refrigerant and an absorbent that combines both a vapor compression cycle and an absorption cycle in connection with each other (abstract, Fig. 3 & 4, and col. 6 line 25+). The hybrid cycle permits three modes of operation where the third mode permits the pressure of the refrigerant vapor be increased by both a generator and a compressor (Id., e.g., col. 7 lines 4-8) and to sufficiently heat or cool an object (col. 7 lines 15-40). The Figures show the absorption cycle and vapor compression cycle are combined to share the refrigerant.
Sakamoto et al. teach a heat pump system comprising a compression heat pump circuit and an absorption heat pump circuit where refrigerant vapor vaporized in the compression heat pump is circulated to an absorber in the absorption heat pump circuit, separated after regenerated by the regenerator, and circulated in the compression heat pump circuit (abstract). This describes the absorption heat pump circuit and compression heat pump circuit are combined to share the refrigerant. See also Fig. 1. The arrangement of the hybrid system enables energy savings of the heat pump system (col. 5 lines 5-60).
Thus, at the time of the effective filing date it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide the composite/hybrid compression-absorption systems of any of Fujimoto et al., Shiflett et al., or Sakamoto et al. with the absorption refrigerant composition of Ando et al. and/or as the absorption refrigeration system of Ando et al. in order to obtain an efficient absorption refrigeration system with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1,2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Levy et al. (US 9,134,056 B2).
Levy et al. teach an absorption cooling system comprising an HFC refrigerant and an various organic absorbent materials (abstract and col. 7 lines 3-26). Exemplary absorption refrigeration apparatus operates via circulating a rich solution (comprising both the refrigerant and the absorbent) that separates into a weak solution (comprising the absorbent without or at least with less refrigerant) and a desorbed refrigerant where the weak solution and desorbed refrigerant are separated, the desorbed refrigerant is compressed in the compressor unit, and the evaporated refrigerant is later adsorbed back into the weak solution to provide a constituted rich solution as the process is continuously repeated (see, e.g., Fig. 3 & 4, col. 1 lines 28-37, col. 2 lines 6-49, and the corresponding disclosure of the exemplary figure apparatus at col. 9 & 10). In other words, exemplary apparatus amount to a compression absorption refrigerant cycle comprising an absorption refrigeration cycle (see especially area S in Fig. 4) and a compression refrigerant cycle (see especially area R in Fig. 4) where the absorption refrigeration cycle and the compression refrigeration cycle are combined in such a manner as to share the refrigerant (see especially pipes/paths 21 and 29 in Fig. 4).
Since the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims is the absorption refrigeration cycle is merely one capable of operating using a HFO/HFC/HCFO refrigerant and an ethylene glycol or ethylene glycol ether absorbing liquid, which does not necessarily require either of the specifically identified refrigerant genera or the glycol/glycol ether absorbing liquid, the cited teachings of Levy et al. sufficiently meet and anticipate the very broad absorption refrigeration cycle apparatus defined only by functional limitations as well as the compression-absorption refrigerant cycle of the dependent claims.
Alternatively under an obviousness rationale, in addition to the foregoing, Levy et al. further teach the HFC refrigerant may be selected as, among others, difluoromethane (R-32) or 1,1-difluoroethane (R-152a) (col. 7 lines 19-26 and col 11 lines 58-67). R-32 is a HFC with a global warming potential (GWP) less than 1,000 (approximately 675 to 677 depending on data source), and R-152a is a HFC with a global warming potential (GWP) less than 1,000 (approximately 124 to 153 depending on data source). Levy et al. further teach the absorbent may be selected as, among others, ethylene glycol or dimethyl ether of tetraethylene glycol (col. 7 lines 3-17 and col 11 lines 44-57). Ethylene glycol reads on the claimed absorbing liquid and Formula (1) where and R1 and R2 are each a hydrogen atom and n is 1, and dimethyl ether of tetraethylene glycol reads on the claimed absorbing liquid and Formula (1) where and R1 and R2 are each a methyl group (an alkyl group with a carbon number of 1) and n is 4. See also the above-cited apparatus structure above (i.e., Fig. 1 to 4) showing absorption refrigeration cycle comprising the refrigerant and absorbent liquid and compression-absorption refrigerant cycles comprising an absorption refrigeration cycle and a compression refrigerant cycle where the absorption refrigeration cycle and the compression refrigeration cycle are combined in such a manner as to share the refrigerant.
At the time of the effective filing date it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to arrive within the scope of the instant claims by selecting a suitable HFC refrigerant (e.g., R-32 or R-152a) and a suitable ether-based absorbent (e.g., ethylene glycol or dimethyl ether of tetraethylene glycol) as taught and motivated by the reference in order to obtain a refrigerant solution and absorption cooling system(s) thereof with a very reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1,2) as being anticipated by Nam et al. (US 2020/0340715 A1).
Nam et al. teach an absorption refrigeration apparatus comprising a refrigerant and an absorbent (abstract, para. 0013, and para. 0056). Para. 0084-0086 and the Table of Fig.10 exemplify absorption refrigerant compositions of refrigerants and absorbent liquids operated/comprised in the absorption refrigeration apparatus of:
1) 1-chloro-3,3,3-trifluoropropene (R-1233zd) and triethylene glycol,
2) R-1233zd and diethylene glycol,
3) trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoropropene (R-1234ze(E)) and triethylene glycol, and
4) R-1234ze(E) and diethylene glycol.
R-1233zd is an HCFO with a global warming potential (GWP) less than 1,000 (approximately 1 to 4.5 depending on data source), R-1234ze(E) is an HFO with a GWP less than 1,000 (approximately 0.5 to 6 depending on data source). Triethylene glycol reads on the claimed absorbing liquid and Formula (1) where and R1 and R2 are each a hydrogen atom and n is 3, and diethylene glycol reads on the claimed absorbing liquid and Formula (1) where and R1 and R2 are each a hydrogen atom and n is 2. The cited examples anticipate each and every claimed limitation.
The remaining references listed on Forms 892, 1449, and PCT 210 have been reviewed by the examiner and are considered to be cumulative to or less material than the prior art references relied upon or described above.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW R DIAZ whose telephone number is 571-270-0324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00a-5:00p EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 https://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached on 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.
/MATTHEW R DIAZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
/M.R.D./
August 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights