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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-13 are pending. Claims 11-13 are new. Claims 1-10 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claim limitations of claims 4 and 11 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Figures 2 and 3 do not show the layering configurations as claimed in claims 4 and 11. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim has a second “a” in line 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim uses British English spelling of characterized. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim needs to end in a period not a semicolon. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jorgensen (US 6,170, 278 B1) in view of MacCracken (4,294,078) and Diez et al. (EP 0168504 A1), hereafter referred to as “Diez.”
Regarding Claim 1: Jorgensen teaches an artificial skating rink (10) comprising: a slab (the structures of Figures 1 and 3) comprising: first layer (20) that supports ice covering the slab (see Figures 1 and 3); and a refrigeration device (Column 2, lines 47-52) connected to the first refrigerant network (cooling pipes 22) wherein a refrigerant fluid circulates within the first refrigerant network (Column 4, lines 27-29); wherein the refrigerant fluid is provided by said refrigeration device (Column 2, lines 47-52).
Jorgensen fails to teach a second layer comprising a first refrigerant network of multiple tubes disposed through a phase-change material, wherein the first layer is positioned on top of the second layer; and wherein the phase-change material keeps the ice covering the slab at a temperature below the melting point of the ice by the circulation of the refrigerant fluid via the first network.
MacCracken teaches a layer (interior of thermal storage 2) comprising a first refrigerant network of multiple tubes (8) disposed through a phase-change material (24) and wherein the phase-change material (PCM 24) keeps an ice covering a slab at a temperature below the melting point of the ice by the circulation of the refrigerant fluid via the first network (functional limitations of the use of the PCM).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a second layer comprising a first refrigerant network of multiple tubes disposed through a phase-change material and wherein the phase-change material keeps the ice covering the slab at a temperature below the melting point of the ice by the circulation of the refrigerant fluid via the first network to the structure of Jorgensen as taught by MacCracken in order to advantageously provide improved heat transfer (see MacCracken, Column 2, lines 10-31).
Diez teaches a first layer (13) is positioned on top of a second layer (2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the first layer is positioned on top of the second layer to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Jorgensen modified supra in order to advantageously protect the refrigerant pipes from corrosion (see page 4 of the machine translation of Diez).
Regarding Claim 2: Jorgensen teaches wherein the slab (see Figure 3) comprises: a third layer (32) comprising thermal insulation material (Column 2, lines 58-60), wherein the third layer (32) is disposed below the second layer (60).
Regarding Claim 3: Jorgensen teaches wherein the first layer (20) rests directly on said second layer (60).
Regarding Claim 7: Jorgensen modified supra teach wherein the phase-change material (PCM of MacCracken, Column 9, lines 25-29) has a melting point between - 10° C and -25° C (see MacCracken, Column 9, lines 25-29).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jorgensen (US 6,170, 278 B1) in view of MacCracken (4,294,078), and Diez et al. (EP 0168504 A1), hereafter referred to as “Diez,” as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Heinzelman (2,301,780).
Regarding Claim 4: Jorgensen teaches an another layer (26) comprising a second refrigerant network of multiple tubes (34) disposed in the another layer (see Figures 1 and 3) and wherein the another layer (26) is disposed below a heat conducting layer (56, bars) and above the third layer (32).
Jorgensen modified supra fails to teach comprising: a heat conducting layer comprising a heat conducting material, wherein the heat conducting layer is positioned directly below the second layer comprising the phase-change material; and another layer comprising phase-change material, the another layer comprising a second refrigerant network of multiple tubes disposed in the phase-change material of the another layer, wherein the another layer is disposed below the heat conducting layer and above the third layer.
Heinzelman teaches a heat conducting layer (13) comprising a heat conducting material (13 is a metal pan), wherein the heat conducting layer (13) is positioned directly below a second layer (8, 9, 17) comprising a phase-change material (brine).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a heat conducting layer comprising a heat conducting material, wherein the heat conducting layer is positioned directly below the second layer comprising the phase-change material to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Heinzelman in order to advantageously provide a refrigeration device configures to provide the necessary cooling for an ice rink (see Heinzelman, abstract).
MacCracken teaches a layer (interior of thermal storage 2) comprising a refrigerant network of multiple tubes (8) disposed through a phase-change material (24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided and another layer comprising phase-change material, the another layer comprising a second refrigerant network of multiple tubes disposed in the phase-change material of the another layer to the structure of Jorgensen as taught by MacCracken in order to advantageously provide improved heat transfer (see MacCracken, Column 2, lines 10-31).
Regarding Claim 5: Jorgensen teaches wherein the first refrigerant network (22) and the second refrigerant network (34) are connected such that the refrigerant fluid first flows through the second refrigerant network and then flows through the first refrigerant network (Column 4, lines 18-28).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jorgensen (US 6,170, 278 B1) in view of MacCracken (4,294,078) and Diez et al. (EP 0168504 A1), hereafter referred to as “Diez,” as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Dilk et al. (US 2005/0188710 A1), hereafter referred to as “Dilk.”
Regarding Claim 6: Jorgensen modified supra fails to teach wherein the refrigeration device comprises a plurality of heat exchangers, a plurality of pumps and a plurality of compressors that cause the refrigerant fluid to circulate through the first refrigerant network.
Dilk teaches a refrigeration device (40) comprises a plurality of heat exchangers (74, 86, 88, 242), a plurality of pumps (230, 250, 260,280) and a plurality of compressors (90,92) that cause the refrigerant fluid to circulate through a first refrigerant network (see Figure 1b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the refrigeration device comprises a plurality of heat exchangers, a plurality of pumps and a plurality of compressors that cause the refrigerant fluid to circulate through the first refrigerant network to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Dilk in order to advantageously provide a refrigeration device configures to provide the necessary cooling for an ice rink (see Dilk, paragraph [0039]).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jorgensen (US 6,170, 278 B1) in view of MacCracken (4,294,078) and Diez et al. (EP 0168504 A1), hereafter referred to as “Diez,” and Dilk et al. (US 2005/0188710 A1), hereafter referred to as “Dilk,” as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Strathman (4,367,633).
Regarding Claim 8: Jorgensen modified supra fails to teach wherein the skating rink comprises photovoltaic panels intended to power said refrigeration device electrically.
Strathman teaches photovoltaic panels (118) intended to power a refrigeration device (10) electrically (Column 7, lines 45-61).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the skating rink comprises photovoltaic panels intended to power said refrigeration device electrically to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Strathman in order to advantageously provide stored energy when alternative power sources are not available and to accumulate power in the battery from other power sources for storage (see Strathman, Column 3, lines 37-41 and Column 7, lines 45-61).
Regarding Claim 9: Jorgensen modified supra fails to teach characterised in that it comprises an electrical storage battery.
Strathman teaches an electrical storage battery (24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided characterised in that it comprises an electrical storage battery to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Strathman in order to advantageously provide stored energy when alternative power sources are not available and to accumulate power in the battery from other power sources for storage (see Strathman, Column 3, lines 37-41 and Column 7, lines 45-61).
Regarding Claim 10: Jorgensen modified supra fails to teach wherein the refrigeration device is configured to be powered at least in part by a plurality of photovoltaic panels and/or by a storage battery
Strathman teaches a refrigeration device (10) is configured to be powered at least in part by photovoltaic panels (118) and/or by a storage battery (24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the refrigeration device is configured to be powered at least in part by a plurality of photovoltaic panels and/or by a storage battery to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Strathman in order to advantageously provide stored energy when alternative power sources are not available and to accumulate power in the battery from other power sources for storage (see Strathman, Column 3, lines 37-41 and Column 7, lines 45-61).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jorgensen (US 6,170, 278 B1) in view of MacCracken (4,294,078), Diez et al. (EP 0168504 A1), hereafter referred to as “Diez,” and Heinzelman (2,301,780).
Regarding Claim 11: Jorgensen teaches an artificial skating rink (10) comprising: a slab (the structures of Figures 1 and 3) comprising: first layer (20) that supports ice covering the slab (see Figures 1 and 3); another layer (26), the another layer comprising a second refrigerant network (34) of multiple tubes (see Figures 1 and 3); and a third layer (32) comprising thermal insulation material (Column 2, lines 58-60), wherein the third layer (32) is disposed below a second layer (60), and a refrigeration device (Column 2, lines 47-52) connected to the first refrigerant network (22, Column 4, lines 27-29) wherein a refrigerant fluid circulates within the first refrigerant network (22); wherein the refrigerant fluid is provided by said refrigeration device (Column 2, lines 47-52 and Column 4, lines 27-29).
Jorgensen fails to teach the second layer comprising a first refrigerant network of multiple tubes disposed through a phase-change material, wherein the first layer is positioned on top of the second layer; a heat conducting layer comprising a heat conducting material, wherein the heat conducting layer is positioned directly below the second layer comprising the phase-change material; the another layer comprising phase-change material, the second refrigerant network of multiple tubes disposed in the phase-change material of the another layer; wherein the another layer is disposed below the heat conducting layer and above the third layer; and wherein the phase-change material keeps the ice covering the slab at a temperature below the melting point of the ice by the circulation of the refrigerant fluid via the first network.
Jorgensen teaches an another layer (26) comprising a second refrigerant network of multiple tubes (34) disposed in the another layer (see Figures 1 and 3) and wherein the another layer (26) is disposed below a heat conducting layer (56, bars) and above the third layer (32).
MacCracken teaches a layer (interior of thermal storage 2) comprising a refrigerant network of multiple tubes (8) disposed through a phase-change material (24) and wherein the phase-change material (PCM 24) keeps an ice covering a slab at a temperature below the melting point of the ice by the circulation of the refrigerant fluid via the first network (functional limitations of the use of the PCM).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a second layer comprising a first refrigerant network of multiple tubes disposed through a phase-change material and wherein the phase-change material keeps the ice covering the slab at a temperature below the melting point of the ice by the circulation of the refrigerant fluid via the first network to the structure of Jorgensen as taught by MacCracken in order to advantageously provide improved heat transfer (see MacCracken, Column 2, lines 10-31).
Diez teaches a first layer (13) is positioned on top of a second layer (2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the first layer is positioned on top of the second layer to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Jorgensen modified supra in order to advantageously protect the refrigerant pipes from corrosion (see page 4 of the machine translation of Diez).
Heinzelman teaches a heat conducting layer (13) comprising a heat conducting material (13 is a metal pan), wherein the heat conducting layer (13) is positioned directly below a second layer (8, 9, 17) comprising a phase-change material (brine).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided a heat conducting layer comprising a heat conducting material, wherein the heat conducting layer is positioned directly below the second layer comprising the phase-change material to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Heinzelman in order to advantageously provide a refrigeration device configures to provide the necessary cooling for an ice rink (see Heinzelman, abstract).
MacCracken teaches a layer (interior of thermal storage 2) comprising a refrigerant network of multiple tubes (8) disposed through a phase-change material (24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided and another layer comprising phase-change material, the another layer comprising a second refrigerant network of multiple tubes disposed in the phase-change material of the another layer to the structure of Jorgensen as taught by MacCracken in order to advantageously provide improved heat transfer (see MacCracken, Column 2, lines 10-31).
Regarding Claim 12: Jorgensen teaches wherein the first refrigerant network (22) and the second refrigerant network (34) are connected such that the refrigerant fluid first flows through the second refrigerant network and then flows through the first refrigerant network (Column 4, lines 18-28).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jorgensen (US 6,170, 278 B1) in view of MacCracken (4,294,078), Diez et al. (EP 0168504 A1), hereafter referred to as “Diez,” and Heinzelman (2,301,780), as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Dilk et al. (US 2005/0188710 A1), hereafter referred to as “Dilk.”
Regarding Claim 13: Jorgensen modified supra fails to teach wherein the refrigeration device comprises a plurality of heat exchangers, a plurality of pumps and a plurality of compressors that cause the refrigerant fluid to circulate through first through the second refrigerant network and then through the first refrigerant network.
Dilk teaches a refrigeration device (40) comprises a plurality of heat exchangers (74, 86, 88, 242), a plurality of pumps (230, 250, 260,280) and a plurality of compressors (90,92) that cause the refrigerant fluid to circulate through a refrigerant network (see Figure 1b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided wherein the refrigeration device comprises a plurality of heat exchangers, a plurality of pumps and a plurality of compressors that cause the refrigerant fluid to circulate through first through the second refrigerant network and then through the first refrigerant network to the structure of Jorgensen modified supra as taught by Dilk in order to advantageously provide a refrigeration device configures to provide the necessary cooling for an ice rink (see Dilk, paragraph [0039]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Heinzelman (2,878,651).
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 KIRSTIN U OSWALD whose telephone number is (571)270-3557. The examiner can normally be reached 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. M-F.
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, Len Tran can be reached at 571-272-1184. 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.
/KIRSTIN U OSWALD/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763