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 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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: “a first predetermined range” in lines 19-20 and “a second predetermined range” in lines 23-24. Seemingly the claimed predetermined ranges are two different ranges and must be distinguished. If they ranges are the same range then they second reference should be “the predetermined range”.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "said DTM" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "said DTM" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "said DTM" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dube (US PGPub 2009/0107157) in view of Nonaka et al. [Nonaka] (US PGPub 2005/0086952).
As to claim 1
Dube discloses a refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system (refrigerant leak-detection system 10, see Fig. 1) comprising:
(a) a sensor (leak sensor 12, see Fig. 1);
(b) digital control processor (DCP) (leak detection controller 11, see Fig. 1); and
(c) alarm status indicator (ASI) (alarm 13, see Fig. 1);
wherein:
said THS communicates a measurement (level of refrigerant) to said DCP (see paragraph 0027, lines 1-2);
said DCP operates a closed control loop (CCL) that continuously monitors said measured MTV (see paragraph 0021, lines 1-3; the leak sensor is operated continuously); and
said DCP triggers an alarm (RLA) (signal a problem (e.g., refrigerant leak); see paragraph 0017, lines 1-2) and activates said ASI upon determination the measurement is outside a predetermined range (threshold values; see paragraph 0027, line 3) (see paragraph 0027, lines 1-4 and paragraph 0028, lines 1-7).
Though Dube discloses the refrigerant leak detection system comprising a digital control processor activating an alarm status indicator when refrigerant level is outside a predetermined range; Dube fails to specifically disclose the cited leak sensor 12 being a plurality of temperature/humidity sensors (THS). Further, Dube fails to specifically disclose the refrigerant leak detection system wherein:
said THS are individually positioned within a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system and configured to measure refrigerant temperature and/or ambient temperature/humidity values (MTV) within said HVAC system;
said THS communicates said measured MTV to said DCP;
said CCL determines continuous differential temperature values (DTV) between said measured MTV;
said DCP triggers a refrigerant leak alarm (RLA) and activates said ASI upon determination by said CCL that said measured MTV are outside a predetermined range; and
said DCP triggers said refrigerant leak alarm (RLA) and activates said ASI upon determination by said CCL that said DTV are outside a predetermined range.
Nonaka discloses a refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system (leakage judgement controller 2030, see Fig. 25) comprising:
(a) plurality of temperature/humidity sensors (THS) (ambient temperature sensor 1052, see Fig. 5/temperature sensors 2022FR, 2022RR, 2023FR, and 2023RR in conjunction with temperature comparing unit 2036; see Fig. 25);
(b) digital control processor (DCP) (leak judgement unit 2037, see Fig. 25); and
(c) alarm status indicator (ASI) (alarming unit 2034, see Fig. 25);
wherein:
said THS are individually positioned within a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system (air conditioner; see paragraph 0317) and configured to measure refrigerant temperature (refrigerant temperatures; see paragraph 0145, lines 6-7) and/or ambient temperature/humidity values (MTV) within said HVAC system (see paragraph 0145, lines 6-10);
said THS communicates said measured MTV to said DCP (see paragraph 0194, lines 2-4; also see Fig. 25);
said DCP operates a closed control loop (CCL) that continuously monitors said measured MTV (see paragraph 0208, lines 6-10; leakage judgement unit continuously judges whether there is leakage therefore continuously monitors the temperatures);
said CCL determines continuous differential temperature values (DTV) (differential temperature; see paragraph 0208, line 1) between said measured MTV (see paragraph 0208, lines 1-10); and
said DCP triggers said refrigerant leak alarm (RLA) (warning instruction; see paragraph 0210, line 3) and activates said ASI upon determination by said CCL that said DTV are outside a predetermined range (higher than the predetermined temperature for 5 or more minutes; see paragraph 0208, lines 7-8) (see paragraph 0210, lines 1-3).
Dube and Nonaka are analogous art because they are both from the same field of endeavor (refrigerant leakage detection). At the time of invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Dube’s refrigerant leak-detection system 10 with Nonaka’s leakage judgement controller 2030 in order to also consider continuous different temperature values when determining when to trigger a refrigerant leakage warning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Nonaka with Dube for the benefit of improving reliability of the leakage judgement by taking into consideration timely information (see Nonaka paragraph 0191, lines 2-5) to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
As to claim 2
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein at least one of said THS are positioned in thermal contact with an element of said HVAC system, said element selected from a group consisting of: condenser coil (HCC); refrigerant compressor (RFC); evaporator coil (HEC); air intake fan (AIF); air intake plenum (AIP); return air duct (RAD); service air duct (SAD); and temperature controlled environment (TCE) serviced by said HVAC system (see paragraph 0063, lines 6-11).
As to claim 3
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said DCP stores said DTV in a differential temperature matrix (DTM) and said DCP inspects said DTM a closed control loop to determine if said DTV between elements of said HVAC system exceed predetermined values and if said predetermined values are exceeded, activating said ASI (see paragraph 0208, lines 1-10).
As to claim 9
Dube discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 further comprising a wireless temperature interface (WTI) that is configured to wirelessly communicate said MTV from said THS to said DCP (see paragraph 0020, lines 5-9).
As to claim 10
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said THS comprises one or more digital temperature sensors comprising a 1-wire serial interface bus (see paragraph 027, lines 1-8).
As to claim 11
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said DCS further comprises a real-time clock (RTC) (timer 2035, see Fig. 25).
As to claim 12
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said DCP further comprises a sensor record memory (SRM) that logs a measurement time, MTV, and/or DTV associated with said THS (see paragraph 0187, lines 1-8).
As to claim 13
Dube discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said ASI comprises an alarm indicator selected from a group consisting of: a visual alarm indicator; a digital SCT display; an audible alarm indicator; a wireless alarm indication sent to a mobile user device (MUD) via a wireless communication interface (WCI) (see paragraph 0022, lines 1-9).
As to claim 14
Dube discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said CCL triggers said ASI if said MTV exceeds a predetermined value that is based on an ambient temperature reading provided by one of said THS that is configured to read ambient temperature (see paragraphs 0016 and 0017).
As to claim 15
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said CCL triggers said ASI if said MTV exceeds a predetermined value in the range of 210 degrees Fahrenheit to 225 degrees Fahrenheit (see paragraph 0208, lines 1-10).
As to claim 16
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said CCL triggers said ASI if said MTV associated with a THS coupled to a compressor discharge line of said HVAC system exceeds a predetermined value that is based on an ambient temperature reading provided by one of said THS that is configured to read ambient temperature (see paragraph 0208, lines 1-10 and paragraph 0209, lines 1-16).
As to claim 17
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said CCL triggers said ASI if said MTV associated with a THS coupled to a compressor discharge line of said HVAC system is within a predetermined temperature window (PTW) selected from within outer temperature boundaries (OTB) having a lower temperature limit (LTL) of 210 degrees Fahrenheit and an upper temperature limit (UTL) of 225 degrees Fahrenheit (see paragraph 0208, lines 1-10 and paragraph 0209, lines 1-16).
As to claim 18
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said CCL triggers said ASI if said DTV associated with one of said THS coupled to a supply air plenum (SAP) of said HVAC system and one of said THS coupled to a return air plenum (RAP) of said HVAC system exhibit a predetermined delta temperature value (DTV) in the range of 15 degrees Fahrenheit to 20 degrees Fahrenheit (see paragraph 0208, lines 1-10 and paragraph 0209, lines 1-16).
As to claim 19
Nonaka discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said CCL incorporates time delays to account for dynamic response characteristics in said THS (see paragraph 0188, lines 1-11).
As to claim 20
Dube discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 wherein said DCP is configured to transmit an indication of said ASI via a wireless communication interface (WCI) to a mobile user device (MUD) (see paragraph 0022, lines 3-9).
Claim(s) 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dube (US PGPub 2009/0107157), in view of Nonaka et al. [Nonaka] (US PGPub 2005/0086952), and further in view of Nishimura et al. [Nishimura] (US PGPub 2009/0044550).
As to claim 4
Dube and Nonaka disclose the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system as cited in claim 1; however, Dube and Nonaka fail to specifically disclose the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system further comprising a refrigerant gas sensor (RGS) wherein said DCP pre-validates detection of a refrigerant gas leak (RGL) by said RGS using said DTM.
Nishimura discloses a refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system further comprising a refrigerant gas sensor (RGS) (gas side temperature sensor 45, see Fig. 2) wherein a DCP (controller 8, see Fig. 2) pre-validates detection of a refrigerant gas leak (RGL) by said RGS using said DTM (see paragraph 0140, lines 10-14).
Dube, Nonaka, and Nishimura are analogous art because they each are from the same field of endeavor (refrigerant leakage detection). At the time of invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Dube’s refrigerant leak-detection system 10, Nonaka’s leakage judgement controller 2030, and Nishimura’s controller 8 with one another in order to also consider refrigerant gas temperature values when determining when to trigger a refrigerant leakage warning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Nonaka, Dube, and Nishimura for the benefit of improving calculation accuracy of the refrigerant quantity in each portion resulting in judgement with high accuracy (see Nishimura paragraph 0228, lines 10-13) to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4.
As to claim 5
Nishimura discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 further comprising a refrigerant gas sensor (RGS) (gas side temperature sensor 45, see Fig. 2) wherein said DCP post-validates detection of a refrigerant gas leak (RGL) by said RGS using said DTM (see paragraph 0140, lines 10-14).
As to claim 6
Nishimura discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 further comprising a refrigerant gas sensor (RGS) (gas side temperature sensor 45, see Fig. 2) wherein said DCP dual-validates detection of a refrigerant gas leak (RGL) by said RGS using said DTM (see paragraph 0140, lines 10-14).
As to claim 7
Nishimura discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 further comprising a refrigerant gas sensor (RGS) (gas side temperature sensor 45, see Fig. 2) contained within the frame of a door (see paragraph 0079, lines 7-9).
As to claim 8
Nishimura discloses the refrigerant leak detection (RLD) system of claim 1 further comprising a refrigerant gas sensor (RGS) (gas side temperature sensor 45, see Fig. 2) contained within a smoke detector (see paragraph 0104, lines 18-27).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael J. Brown whose telephone number is (571)272-5932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 5:30am-4:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571)272-2279. 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.
/Michael J Brown/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115