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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I and Species A1 (fig. 4), claims 1-6 and 8-16 in the reply filed on 05/06/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that a search for the subject matter of other group/species are related, and therefore, the search and examination can be made without serious burden. This is not found persuasive because the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Interpretation
The phrase of “liquid desiccant regeneration”, “regeneration”, “for containing saturated liquid desiccant”, “HVAC”, or “desiccant” is understood as being directed to and further reciting the purpose or intended use of the claimed invention which does not result in a structural difference (or, in the case of process claims, manipulative difference) between the claimed invention and the prior art do not limit the claim and do not distinguish over the prior art apparatus (or process). See, e.g., In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 938, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); In re Sinex, 309 F.2d 488, 492, 135 USPQ 302, 305 (CCPA 1962). If a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the claimed invention, then it meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997) and cases cited therein, as it has been held that the recitation of a new intended use for an old product does not make a claim to that old product patentable. In re Schreiber, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See also MPEP § 2111.02 and § 2112 - § 2112.02.
Therefore, the at least claim 1 has been interpreted as follows:
“A system comprising: a tank, the tank having an air inlet, a liquid inlet, and a liquid outlet; and an air diffuser positioned within the tank between the inlet and the outlet, wherein the air diffuser is operable to receive an air stream from the air inlet and diffuse the air stream into the regeneration tank.”
The at least claim 1 has been interpreted as follows:
“A system comprising: a first sub-system; a second sub-system including: a tank having a gas inlet, a liquid inlet, and a liquid outlet; and a gas diffuser positioned withing the tank between the liquid inlet and the liquid outlet.”
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-10 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Photos Ph.D. et al (US 20230330607; hereinafter Photos).
The abstract, paragraphs [0041]-[0046] and figs. 1A-1B of Photos discloses a system with similar structures as recites in claims 1-6, 8-10 and 14-16. Notes that tank – 10, air inlet – 1, inlet – 8, outlet – 2, air diffuser – 15, outlet ports – figs. 1A and 6 (no number), sub-system – 47.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pope et al (US 20070251393; hereinafter Pope).
The abstract, paragraphs [0025]-[0026], [0028]-[0030] and figs. 1-2 of Pope discloses a system with similar structures as recites in claims 1-6 and 8-16. Notes that tank – 12, air inlet – 14, inlet – 18, outlet – 16, air diffuser – 24, outlet ports – fig. 2 (no number), sub-system – source of water fill for the water fill inlet 18, heater – cooling unit 38.
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.
Claim(s) 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Photos Ph.D. et al (US 20230330607; hereinafter Photos) as applied supra, and further in view of Edstrom et al (US 2022013671; Edstrom) or Marsala et al (US 5213154; hereinafter Marsala).
As regarding claim 11, Photos discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Photos discloses the claimed invention except for a heater operable to increase the vapor pressure differential between the saturated liquid desiccant and the second air stream. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide a heater operable to increase the vapor pressure differential between the saturated liquid desiccant and the second air stream in order to enhance system performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Edstrom ([0076]) or Marsala (heat exchanger 4).
As regarding claim 12, Photos as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Photos as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein the heater comprises at least one of heating coils, a heating jacket, a condenser fan, an inline heater, a boiler, a central hot water source, a waste heat source, and a hot water heater (Edstrom - [0076] or Marsala - heat exchanger 4).
As regarding claim 13, Photos as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Photos as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein the heater (Edstrom - [0076] or Marsala - heat exchanger 4) is thermally connected to the regeneration tank to heat the saturated liquid desiccant within the regeneration tank.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUNG H BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 ET.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
/DUNG H BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights