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/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 12-20 in the reply filed on 17 Dec. 2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
Claim 14 is 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 14 recites “delivers it to the evaporator” where it is unclear what the antecedent of “it” is.
Claim 14 recites “delivers it to the outlet” where it is unclear what the antecedent of “it” is.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 12, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LePoudre US 2020/0063995 (hereafter Lepoudre).
Regarding claim 12, LePoudre teaches an apparatus for rejecting moisture from a desiccant solution and regenerating the desiccant solution for re-use (Fig 2); the apparatus comprising:
a desiccant recirculation system comprising an inlet (conduit from 182 to 153) for receiving a stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected, and an outlet (conduit from 155 to 183) for delivering a stream of regenerated desiccant solution (¶76-78);
an evaporator (108); and
a desiccant concentration control system (system comprising 152) which is connected to the recirculation system intermediate the inlet and outlet of the recirculation system (as shown in Fig 2 where the inlet of the desiccant recirculation system enters the control system and the outlet of the desiccant recirculation system exits the control system) and comprises a desiccant diluter part (part of electro-dialysis ¶59 producing water stream at 174) that is configured and arranged to receive at least a portion of the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected and to dilute the same and supply a diluted stream (174) of desiccant to the evaporator, and a desiccant concentrator part (part of electro-dialysis ¶59 producing concentrated desiccant at C3 of ¶78) that is configured and arranged to increase the concentration of the desiccant solution in the recirculation system intermediate the desiccant concentration control system and the outlet, thereby to regenerate the desiccant solution that is supplied to the outlet, wherein:
the evaporator is arranged to receive the dilute stream and to evaporate moisture therefrom (¶79); and
the desiccant concentration control system includes an electrodialysis system for transporting desiccant ions from desiccant solution in the desiccant concentration control system to desiccant solution that is delivered to the outlet of the recirculation system (¶59).
Regarding claim 18, Lepoudre teaches a dehumidifier system (¶6) comprising a desiccant dehumidifier (106) which utilizes a desiccant solution (¶52, liquid desiccant) and the apparatus of claim 12 (where Lepoudre teaches all the limitations of claim 12 as detailed above) for rejecting moisture from the desiccant solution and regenerating the desiccant solution for re-use (¶67).
Regarding claim 20, Lepoudre teaches an air conditioning system (Fig 2) comprising the dehumidifier system of 18 (where Lepoudre teaches all the limitations of claim 18 as detailed above) and an air cooling device (108) which is configured and arranged to receive air exiting the dehumidifier system (¶72).
Claims 12-15 and 18are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Woods et al. US 2020/0393145 (hereafter Woods).
Regarding claim 12, Woods teaches an apparatus for rejecting moisture from a desiccant solution and regenerating the desiccant solution for re-use (Fig 2); the apparatus comprising:
a desiccant recirculation system (210, 224) comprising an inlet (216, 218) for receiving a stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected, and an outlet (220, 222) for delivering a stream of regenerated desiccant solution;
an evaporator (evaporator comprising 278); and
a desiccant concentration control system (202) which is connected to the recirculation system intermediate the inlet and outlet of the recirculation system (as shown in Fig 2 where the inlet of the desiccant recirculation system enters the control system and the outlet of the desiccant recirculation system exits the control system) and comprises a desiccant diluter part (part between membranes 254 and 256; part between membranes 258 and 260) that is configured and arranged to receive at least a portion (216, 218 portions) of the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected and to dilute the same and supply a diluted stream (224) of desiccant to the evaporator, and a desiccant concentrator part (part between membranes 252 and 254; part between membranes 256 and 258; part between membranes 260 and 262) that is configured and arranged to increase the concentration of the desiccant solution in the recirculation system intermediate the desiccant concentration control system and the outlet, thereby to regenerate the desiccant solution that is supplied to the outlet,
the evaporator is arranged to receive the dilute stream and to evaporate moisture therefrom (¶83); and
the desiccant concentration control system includes an electrodialysis system (¶30) for transporting desiccant ions from desiccant solution in the desiccant concentration control system to desiccant solution that is delivered to the outlet of the recirculation system.
Regarding claim 13, Woods teaches all the limitations of claim 12. Woods further teaches wherein the electrodialysis system (9) integrates the desiccant diluter part and the desiccant concentrator part, comprising a combined diluter-concentrator electrodialysis device (202) having a first diluter portion (portion between membranes 254 and 256), which is arranged to receive and dilute the at least a portion of the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected, and a first concentrator portion (portion between membranes 256 and 258), which is arranged to receive and concentrate at least a portion of the diluted desiccant stream from the evaporator; the electrodialysis system being operable to transport desiccant ions from the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected received in the first diluter portion to dilute desiccant solution received in the first concentrator portion, thereby to regenerate the desiccant solution (¶98).
Regarding claim 14, Woods teaches all the limitations of claim 13. Woods further teaches wherein the combined diluter-concentrator device is connected with the recirculation system such that first diluter portion (portion between membranes 254 and 256) receives the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected from the inlet (via 216) and delivers it to the evaporator (via 220), and the first concentrator portion (portion between membranes 256 and 258) receives the diluted desiccant stream from the evaporator (via 232) and delivers it to the outlet (via 238).
Regarding claim 15, Woods teaches all the limitations of claim 13. Woods further teaches wherein the desiccant concentration control system comprises a further recirculation system (system comprising 224) for circulating dilute desiccant solution from the first diluter portion (portion between membranes 254 and 256) to the first concentrator portion (portion between membranes 256 and 258) via the evaporator (evaporator comprising 278); wherein the first diluter portion is arranged to receive a portion of the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected from the recirculation system (via 216) and to deliver dilute desiccant solution to the further recirculation system (via 220); and the first concentrator portion (portion between membranes 256 and 258) is arranged to receive dilute desiccant solution (via 232) from the evaporator (via 224) and deliver concentrated desiccant to the recirculation system (via 238).
Regarding claim 18, Woods teaches a dehumidifier system (¶6) comprising a desiccant dehumidifier (dehumidifier comprising membrane 274) which utilizes a desiccant solution (¶6 liquid desiccant) and the apparatus of claim 12 (where Woods teaches all the limitations of claim 12 as detailed above) for rejecting moisture from the desiccant solution and regenerating the desiccant solution for re-use (¶75).
Claims 12-14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chretien FR 2703441 published 7 Oct. 1994 as translated by EPO (hereafter Chretien).
Regarding claim 12, Chretien teaches apparatus for rejecting moisture from a desiccant solution and regenerating the desiccant solution for re-use (Fig 1), the apparatus comprising:
a desiccant recirculation system (8, 4) comprising an inlet (right branch of 8 into regenerator 9) for receiving a stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected, and an outlet (4) for delivering a stream of regenerated desiccant solution;
an evaporator (11); and
a desiccant concentration control system (9) which is connected to the recirculation system intermediate the inlet and outlet of the recirculation system (as shown in Fig 1 where the inlet of the desiccant recirculation system enters the control system and the outlet of the desiccant recirculation system exits the control system) and comprises a desiccant diluter part (left part of electro-dialysis 9 producing water stream at 10) that is configured and arranged to receive at least a portion of the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected and to dilute the same and supply a diluted stream (10) of desiccant to the evaporator, and a desiccant concentrator part (left part of electro-dialysis 9 producing concentrated desiccant 4) that is configured and arranged to increase the concentration of the desiccant solution in the recirculation system intermediate the desiccant concentration control system and the outlet, thereby to regenerate the desiccant solution that is supplied to the outlet,
wherein the evaporator is arranged to receive the diluted stream and to evaporate moisture therefrom (¶6 on page 3), and
the desiccant concentration control system includes an electrodialysis system (9 in Fig 1, ¶4) for transporting desiccant ions from desiccant solution in the desiccant concentration control system to desiccant solution that is delivered to the outlet of the recirculation system.
Regarding claim 13, Chretien teaches all the limitations of claim 12. Chretien further teaches wherein the desiccant concentration control system integrates the desiccant diluter part and the desiccant concentrator part, comprising a combined diluter-concentrator device (9) having a first diluter portion (left portion of device 9), which is arranged to receive and dilute the at least a portion of the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected, and a first concentrator portion (right portion of device 9), which is arranged to receive and concentrate at least a portion of the diluted desiccant stream from the evaporator, thereby to regenerate the desiccant solution; the electrodialysis system being operable to transport desiccant ions from the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected received in the first diluter portion to dilute desiccant solution received in the first concentrator portion, thereby to regenerate the desiccant solution (¶6 on page 3).
Regarding claim 14, Chretien teaches all the limitations of claim 13. Chretien further teaches wherein the electrodialysis system is connected with the recirculation system such that first diluter portion (left portion of device 9) receives the stream of desiccant solution containing moisture to be rejected from the inlet (via 8) and delivers it to the evaporator (via 10), and the first concentrator portion (right portion of device 9) receives the diluted desiccant stream from the evaporator (via 7) and delivers it to the outlet (4).
Regarding claim 18, Chretien teaches a dehumidifier system (¶4) comprising a desiccant dehumidifier (3) which utilizes a desiccant solution (solution 4) and the apparatus of claim 12 (where Chretien teaches all the limitations of claim 12 as detailed above) for rejecting moisture from the desiccant solution and regenerating the desiccant solution for re-use (¶4).
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.
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.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LePoudre US 2020/0063995 (hereafter Lepoudre) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Tao et al. CN113432211 published 24 Sep. 2021 as translated by EPO (hereafter Tao)
Regarding claim 19, Lepoudre teaches all the limitations of claim 18.
Lepoudre does not teach an air flow heat exchanger which is configured and arranged for transferring heat from air exiting the dehumidifier to air entering the dehumidifier.
Tao teaches a humidifier (Fig 1) comprising an air flow heat exchanger (system comprising 13, 15) which is configured and arranged for transferring heat from air exiting the dehumidifier to air entering the dehumidifier in order to satisfy the indoor air temperature requirements (¶38-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Lepoudre system (Fig 2) by incorporating the air flow heat exchanger (system comprising 13, 15) of Tao in order to satisfy the indoor air temperature requirements (¶38-39).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woods et al. US 2020/0393145 (hereafter Woods) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Tao et al. CN113432211 published 24 Sep. 2021 as translated by EPO (hereafter Tao)
Regarding claim 19, Woods teaches all the limitations of claim 18.
Woods does not teach an air flow heat exchanger which is configured and arranged for transferring heat from air exiting the dehumidifier to air entering the dehumidifier.
Tao teaches a humidifier (Fig 1) comprising an air flow heat exchanger (system comprising 13, 15) which is configured and arranged for transferring heat from air exiting the dehumidifier to air entering the dehumidifier in order to satisfy the indoor air temperature requirements (¶38-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Woods system (Fig 2) by incorporating the air flow heat exchanger (system comprising 13, 15) of Tao in order to satisfy the indoor air temperature requirements (¶38-39).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chretien FR 2703441 published 7 Oct. 1994 as translated by EPO (hereafter Chretien) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Tao et al. CN113432211 published 24 Sep. 2021 as translated by EPO (hereafter Tao)
Regarding claim 19, Chretien teaches all the limitations of claim 18.
Chretien does not teach an air flow heat exchanger which is configured and arranged for transferring heat from air exiting the dehumidifier to air entering the dehumidifier.
Tao teaches a humidifier (Fig 1) comprising an air flow heat exchanger (system comprising 13, 15) which is configured and arranged for transferring heat from air exiting the dehumidifier to air entering the dehumidifier in order to satisfy the indoor air temperature requirements (¶38-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Chretien system (Fig 1) by incorporating the air flow heat exchanger (system comprising 13, 15) of Tao in order to satisfy the indoor air temperature requirements (¶38-39).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woods et al. US 2020/0393145 (hereafter Woods) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of LePoudre US 2020/0063995 (hereafter Lepoudre).
Regarding claim 20, Woods teaches an air conditioning system (¶6) comprising the dehumidifier system of 18 (where Woods teaches all the limitations of claim 18 as detailed above).
Woods does not teach where and an air cooling device which is configured and arranged to receive air exiting the dehumidifier system.
Lepoudre teaches an air conditioning system (Fig 2) comprising the dehumidifier system of 18 (where Lepoudre teaches all the limitations of claim 18 as detailed above) and an air cooling device (108) which is configured and arranged to receive air exiting the dehumidifier system (¶72) in order to provide dehumidified cooled air (¶15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system (¶6) of Woods by incorporating the air cooling device (108) of Lepoudre in order to provide dehumidified cooled air (¶15).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chretien FR 2703441 published 7 Oct. 1994 as translated by EPO (hereafter Chretien) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of LePoudre US 2020/0063995 (hereafter Lepoudre).
Regarding claim 20, Chretien teaches an air conditioning system (¶4) comprising the dehumidifier system of 18 (where Chretien teaches all the limitations of claim 18 as detailed above).
Chretien does not teach where and an air cooling device which is configured and arranged to receive air exiting the dehumidifier system.
Lepoudre teaches an air conditioning system (Fig 2) comprising the dehumidifier system of 18 (where Lepoudre teaches all the limitations of claim 18 as detailed above) and an air cooling device (108) which is configured and arranged to receive air exiting the dehumidifier system (¶72) in order to provide dehumidified cooled air (¶15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system (¶4) of Chretien by incorporating the air cooling device (108) of Lepoudre in order to provide dehumidified cooled air (¶15).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-17 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.
Regarding claim 16, the closest prior art is LePoudre US 2020/0063995, Woods US 2020/0393145, and Chretien FR 2703441.
Lepoudre teaches an apparatus for rejecting moisture from a desiccant solution (Fig 2) comprising a desiccant recirculation system comprising an inlet (conduit from 182 to 153), an evaporator (108), and a desiccant concentration control system (system comprising 152).
Woods teaches apparatus for rejecting moisture from a desiccant solution (Fig 2) comprising a desiccant recirculation system (210, 224), an evaporator (evaporator comprising 278), and a desiccant concentration control system (202).
Chretien teaches apparatus for rejecting moisture from a desiccant solution (Fig 1) comprising a desiccant recirculation system (8, 4), an evaporator (11), and a desiccant concentration control system (9).
The prior art does not teach the second diluter portion, second concentrator portion, and auxiliary fluid circulation system as claimed.
Claim 17 depends upon claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN HOBSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9914. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
/STEPHEN HOBSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1776