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 .
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election of the first species or the embodiment of Figure 1, readable on claims 1 through 13 and 16 through 20) in the reply filed on December 1, 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 14 and 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected second species or the embodiment of Figure 2, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without proper traverse in the reply filed on December 1, 2025.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on April 27, 2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it does not avoid phrases which can be implied (i.e., “There is disclosed”) and because it does not avoid legal phraseology normally reserved for claims (i.e., plural occurrences of “comprising” throughout the abstract). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 16 through 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: it appears that an “and” has inadvertently been omitted at the end of line 8 of claim 16. Claims 17 through 20 are objected to as depending from an objected to claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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: “mixing device” in claims 1, 7 through 13, and 16 through 20.
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.
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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 through 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitations “wherein the mixing device is configured so that in use at least one of: coolant drawn through the load circuit outlet preferentially originates from the supply circuit inlet, up to a flow rate of coolant flowing through the supply circuit inlet; and coolant drawn through the supply circuit outlet preferentially originates from the load circuit inlet”. However, the aforementioned limitations fail to clearly set forth which particular structures of the mixing device are intended to included and which ones are intended to be excluded by these limitations, thus rendering indefinite the metes and bounds of protection sought by the claim.
Each of claims 4 and 5 recites the terms “opposing ends” and the term “end” (i.e., multiple occurrences) without specifically and clearly indicating whether the respective ends are intended to refer to ends of the mixing device or of some other element, thus again rendering indefinite the metes and bounds of protection sought by the claims. If the respective ends are intended to refer to ends of the mixing device, for example, then it is recommended that the limitations “wherein the mixing device has a flow pathway between two opposing ends” in each of claims 4 and 5, “closer to a first end” in claim 5, and “closer to the opposing second end” in claim 5 be replaced with “wherein the mixing device has two opposing ends and a flow pathway between the two opposing ends”, with “closer to a first end of the mixing device”, and with “closer to the opposing second end of the mixing device”, respectively. If the respective ends are intended to refer to ends of other elements, then the aforementioned limitations should be amended similarly in order to clarify the metes and bounds of protection sought.
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.
(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.
Claims 1 through 3, 5 through 8,10, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mohlin et al. (Pub. No. US 2022/0055502 A1; made of record via IDS).
With regard to claim 1 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. (especially Figure 4, for example) discloses a heat exchange system for providing cooling by circulating a coolant, the heat exchange system comprising: a supply circuit 1 for circulating the coolant comprising: a coolant supply heat exchanger 4 for rejecting heat from the coolant to provide a supply of chilled coolant; a supply pump 3 for circulating the coolant in the coolant supply circuit 1; a load circuit 12 for circulating the coolant, comprising: a cooling load heat exchanger readable on the coolant flow line through component 13 configured to transfer heat from the component 13 to the coolant; a load pump 18 for circulating the coolant in the load circuit 12; a mixing device 42 which is configured to form part of each of the supply circuit 1 and the load circuit 12; and a valve arrangement 26 configured to control a mix of (i) coolant from the supply circuit 1 and (ii) recirculated coolant from the load circuit 12, in a coolant flow provide to the cooling load heat exchanger.
With regard to claim 2 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses the heat exchange system of claim 1, wherein the mixing device 42 comprises a supply circuit inlet for receiving chilled coolant from the supply circuit 1; a supply circuit outlet for providing coolant to the supply circuit 1 for recirculation to the coolant supply heat exchanger 4; a load circuit inlet for receiving coolant from the load circuit 12; a load circuit outlet for providing coolant to the load circuit 12 for heat transfer at the cooling load heat exchanger at component 13 (i.e., all as shown in Figure 4; also see paragraph [0060] which specifies the end points of the mixing device 42).
As best can be understood in view of the indefiniteness of the claim, with regard to claim 3 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses the heat exchange system of claim 2, wherein the mixing device 42 is configured so that in use at least one of: coolant drawn through the load circuit outlet preferentially originates from the supply circuit inlet, up to a flow rate of coolant flowing through the supply circuit inlet; and coolant drawn through the supply circuit outlet preferentially originates from the load circuit inlet (i.e., all as shown in Figure 4; also see paragraph [0060] which specifies the end points of the mixing device 42).
As best can be understood in view of the indefiniteness of the claim, with regard to claim 5 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses the heat exchange system of claim 2 wherein the mixing device 42 has a flow pathway between two opposing ends of the mixing device 42, wherein the supply circuit inlet and the load circuit outlet are relatively closer to a first end, and wherein the supply circuit outlet and the load circuit are relatively closer to the opposing second end (i.e., all as shown in Figure 4; also see paragraph [0060] which specifies the end points of the mixing device 42).
With regard to claim 6 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses the heat exchange system of claim 1, wherein the mixing device 42 is in the form of a tube as shown in Figure 4 at least.
With regard to claim 7 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses the heat exchange system of claim 1, wherein the load circuit 12 comprises a bypass line 7 for recirculation of coolant within the load circuit 12 without passing through the mixing device 42.
With regard to claim 8 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses the heat exchange system of claim 7, wherein the valve arrangement 26 (at least broadly interpreted as required for pending claims; i.e., indirectly) is configured to control the mix of coolant provided to the cooling load heat exchanger to (a) the bypass line 7 and (b) the mixing device 42 via a return line of the load circuit 12.
With regard to claim 10 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses the heat exchange system of claim 7, wherein the valve arrangement 26 comprises a three-way valve (as shown in Figure 4) configured to control a split of flow received from the cooling load heat exchanger to (i) the bypass line 7 and (ii) the mixing device 42 via the coolant supply heat exchanger 4 (i.e., at least broadly interpreted as required for pending claims).
With regard to claim 11 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses the heat exchange system of claim 1, comprising a controller or control unit 21 configured to control at least one of the valve arrangement 26 and the load pump 18 to meet a cooling demand of the cooling load heat exchanger within component 13 (i.e., see dashed control lines in Figure 4).
With regard to claim 16 of the instant application, Mohlin et al. discloses a method of operating a heat exchange system having a supply circuit 1 and a load circuit 12, comprising: operating a supply pump 3 of the supply circuit 1 to circulate coolant in the supply circuit 1 including through a coolant supply heat exchanger 4 to reject heat from the coolant and to provide coolant to a mixing device 42 at a supply flow rate, the mixing device 42 forming a part of each of the supply circuit 1 and the load circuit 12 (i.e., as shown in at least Figure 4); operating a load pump 18 of the load circuit 12 to circulate coolant in the load circuit 12 including through a cooling load heat exchanger via component 13 at a cooling flow rate; and, controlling a valve arrangement 26 to vary a mix of (i) coolant from the supply circuit 1 and (ii) recirculated coolant from the load circuit 12, in a coolant flow provided to the cooling load heat exchanger (i.e., at least as broadly interpreted as required for pending claims; also see the dashed control lines in at least Figure 4).
The reference thus reads on the claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
As best can be understood in view of the indefiniteness of claim 4, claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten without patentably significant broadening to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 9, 12, 13, and 17 through 19 are objected to as being dependent upon 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not show nor reasonably suggest the particular heat exchange control features as recited in each of claims 4, 9, 12, 13, and 17 through 19.
Conclusion
The prior and/or related art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LJILJANA V CIRIC whose telephone number is (571)272-4909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Saturday, flexible.
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.
/Ljiljana V. Ciric/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
LJILJANA (Lil) V. CIRIC
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3763