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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. There is no statement found in the Specification or Drawings to support the claim that the volume of said thermally conductive filler is less than 3,000 cubic centimeters per unit meter of length.
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 16 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 16 discloses the volume of said thermally conductive filler is less than 3,000 cubic centimeters per unit meter of length. This claim is indefinite as to what the length is of. It is unknown whether the length is diffusion length or of the total heat exchange loop, shell pipe, up pipe, down pipe, U-tube, vertical length between the ground surface to the bottom of the shell pipe, vertical length between the ground surface to the bottom of the U-tube assembly, or some other length.
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) 11, 12, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (KR 2005/0034535), Marois (US 2012/0118529), Mahmoud (A review of grout materials in geothermal energy applications), and Wang (CN 107420959).
Regarding claim 11, Baek teaches a method for installing a heat exchange loop system (Fig. 1, paragraph 26, “heat exchange device”) comprising the steps of:
directly pushing a first element of an elongate shell pipe portion (10, Fig. 1, paragraph 28, “pile 10 is a pile or a steel pipe pile,” anticipates the elongate shell pipe portion and the first element as there is no other element taught) of a vertical heat exchange loop system into the ground (Fig. 1, paragraph 29, “pile 10 can be installed underground using… the embedding method”), wherein said shell pipe
is sufficiently rigid to allow for direct insertion (10, paragraph 28, “steel pipe”),
has thermal conductivity greater than 5 W/m°K (10, paragraph 28, “steel pipe,” steel is known to have thermal conductivity greater than 5 W/m°K), and
inserting within said elongate shell pipe one U-tube assembly (30, Fig. 1, paragraph 34, “the heat exchange pipe 30 is installed in the space portion 12 of the pile 10”; Fig. 2a, paragraph 32, “heat exchange pipe 30 having a U shape as illustrated in FIG. 2A”), each comprising a down pipe, an up pipe, and a U-turn element (Fig. 1) wherein fluid may be serially conducted from inlet of said down pipe through said U-turn element to outlet of said up pipe with minimal flow restriction (paragraph 37, “heat transfer fluid is cooled or heated through heat exchange while moving the heat transfer fluid to a cooling/cooling area and circulating, and the heat exchanged fluid is repeatedly heated and returned to the heat exchange pipe”);
dispensing into the volume (12, Fig. 1, “space portion”) formed by inner radius of said elongate shell pipe and outer radii of said U-tube pipes a thermally conductive filler (40, Fig. 1, paragraph 34, “space portion 12 is filled with grout”) to complete the thermal path between a fluid circulating through the U-tube assembly and the surrounding ground (paragraph 37, “geothermal heat is again passed through the heat exchange pipe 30 through the grout 40 to be a heat transfer fluid contained in the heat exchange pipe 30”), wherein said thermally conductive filler has thermal conductivity greater than 0.4W/m-°K (Wang 2, referred as Wang 2 as Wang was previously mentioned in the rejection header (Enhancement of Thermal Conductivity of Bentonite Buffer Materials with Copper Wires/Meshes for High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal) teaches thermal conductivity of bentonite is ~0.5 W/m∙K (abstract));
connecting the uppermost portion of said down pipe serially to at least a fluid pump and flow-through heat exchange apparatus (paragraph 36, “header pipe”) and uppermost portion of said up pipe to complete a closed fluidic loop (Fig. 3, paragraph 36, “one of the two free ends of the heat exchange pipe 30 is connected to the inflow member of the heat pump through a header pipe”, “the other is connected to the outlet member of the heat pump through the header pipe”; for clarification, each free end is an uppermost portion of the pipe).
Baek does not teach the elongated shell pipe has diameter less than about 110 mm and preferably about 60 mm.
However, changing the diameter of the elongated shell pipe and the corresponding bore hole would not have affected the installation of the anticipated loop system.
Therefore, the diameter of the elongated shell pipe and the corresponding bore hole is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular diameter of the claimed installation method is significant. (re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976))
Modified Baek does not teach attaching a second element to said elongate shell pipe and continuing direct push into said ground and continuing to add additional elements and directly pushing into said ground until a target total length of said elongate shell pipe is reached.
However, Marois teaches installation of a geothermal heat exchanger having extrusions (1, Fig. 5, [0056]) and shear joint tube (4, Fig. 4, [0056]), where the joint tube spans two extrusions and is held in place by rivets (13, Fig. 7, [0056]). The extrusions can be linked together to form a longer heat exchanger (Fig. 4, [0056]), and the exchanger is inserted into the drill casting after being jointed together and after drilling is performed ([0060]). Marois teaches that installation is simplified by delivering the heat exchanger in 20-foot sections that are joined at the installation site ([0011])
Therefore, 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 installation method of modified Baek to divide the elongated shell pipe (Baek: 10, “steel pipe”) into 20-foot extrusion sections (“second element” and “additional elements” of claim 1, Marois: 1) and using the shear joint tube (Marois: 4) and rivets (Marois: 13) to join the sections together at the installation site to simplify installation (Marois: [0011]).
Baek (-modified by Marois) does not teach the thermally conductive filler comprising a mixture of particulates, water, and antifreeze.
However, Mahmoud teaches the major barrier facing bentonite is the low thermal conductivity, and graphite can be introduced as additives to enhance thermal performance of the grout mix (6. Conclusion). Mahmoud also teaches the degree of saturation (represented by moisture content) is directly proportional to the thermal conductivity; therefore, having higher moisture content would lead to higher thermal conductivity in the grout material (4. Moisture Content). Additionally, Mahmoud teaches a high degree of saturation (moisture content) can significantly affect the grout’s freezing which can cause critical damage to the Ground Heat Exchanger (GHE) pipes and grout material and recommends using anti-freeze mixture.
Therefore, 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 thermally conductive filler (Baek: bentonite grout composition) in the installation method of Baek (-modified by Marois) to include graphite additive and water to increase thermal conductivity of the bentonite. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would also modify the thermally conductive filler (Baek: bentonite grout composition) to include anti-freeze to address the issue of grout freezing and critical damage to the U-tube assemblies (Baek: heat exchanger pipe) and thermally conductive filler (Baek: bentonite grout composition).
Baek (-modified by Marois and Mahmoud) does not teach positioning means for measuring and recording both entering fluid temperature at uppermost portion of said down pipe and leaving fluid temperature at uppermost portion of said up pipe.
However, Wang teaches a geothermal heat exchange unit (1, Fig. 3, paragraph 75) having U-shaped tubes having liquid flow (19, paragraphs 79-80) and temperature measuring body (17, Fig. 3, paragraphs 79-80). The temperature measuring body is used to record the temperature of the medium during the movement at time intervals and output the temperature status information of the water flow of the "U" tube to the wireless reading circuit (18, paragraph 79). The wireless reading circuit is positioned at the pipeline interface, where there are 2 circuits as shown in Fig. 3 (18, Fig. 3, paragraph 79). The temperature measuring body enters from the nozzle at first time T1 and discharged from the nozzle at second time T2 (paragraph 35). The temperature is recorded in the time T2-T1=T, the temperature record of the floating ball temperature measuring body along the "U" tube, and established as the time T and temperature record curve (paragraph 35).
Wang teaches the evaluation index on the ground energy side can be achieved by establishing the time T and the temperature recording curve (paragraph 81) and that establishing an objective and reasonable evaluation index system according to local conditions and obtaining real-time monitoring data through efficient and stable monitoring technology not only helps to objectively evaluate the operating performance of the system, but also helps to optimize the control strategy (paragraph 5). Wang additionally teaches the invention helps to objectively understand the actual operating efficiency by constructing an analysis model and evaluation index suitable for the non-interference ground energy system (paragraph 41). Specifically, based on the curve of inlet/outlet temperature (paragraph 85), it is possible to determine if the ground heat exchanger is operating properly based on whether the outlet temperature is higher or lower than the inlet temperature (paragraphs 87-88).
Therefore, 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 installation method of Baek (modified by Morais and Mahmoud) to also install the temperature measuring body (Wang: 17, Fig. 3, paragraphs 79-80) inside the U-tube assembly (Baek: 30, Fig. 1, paragraph 34, “heat exchange pipe”) and wireless reading circuits (Wang: 18, Fig. 3, paragraphs 79-80) in the positions shown in Wang (Wang: 18, Fig. 3, paragraph 79); and to additionally follow the temperature method of Wang as follows: enter the temperature measuring body from the nozzle at first time T1 and discharge from the nozzle at second time T2, record temperature in the time T2-T1=T as the temperature record of the floating ball temperature measuring body along the "U" tube, and establish the time T and temperature record curve (paragraph 35).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would perform said modification on the installation method of Baek (modified by Morais and Mahmoud) for the advantage of achieving evaluation index on the ground energy side using the time T and the temperature recording curve (paragraph 81), which enables obtaining real-time monitoring data and objectively evaluating the operating performance of the system (paragraph 5). Additionally, Wang teaches the invention helps to objectively understand the actual operating efficiency (paragraph 41) and to determine if the ground heat exchanger is operating properly based on whether the outlet temperature is higher or lower than the inlet temperature (paragraphs 87-88).
Baek (-modified by Marois, Mahmoud, and Wang) does not teach activating said fluid pump and said flow-through heat exchange apparatus to exchange heat with the surrounding ground.
However, Baek teaches the heat transfer fluid recovers geothermal heat geothermal energy (abstract), and the heat pump commonly moves and recovers the geothermal heat to a required place (paragraph 7) and performs heating and cooling by heat exchange (abstract).
Therefore, 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 installation method of Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) to activate the fluid pump (Baek: “heat pump”) and flow-through heat exchange apparatus (Baek: “header pipe”) to perform heating and cooling by heat exchange (abstract) because this is the intended use of Baek’s invention.
Regarding claim 12, Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) teaches each of said down pipe and said up pipe is formed from material having thermal conductivity greater than 5 W/m-°K (paragraph 31, “heat exchange pipe 30 may be made of a material having a high thermal conductivity, such as a polyethylene pipe or a copper pipe”; HyperPhysics (Thermal Conductivity) teaches thermal conductivity of copper is 385 W/m-°K).
Regarding claim 16, teaches the volume of said thermally conductive filler is less than 3,000 cubic centimeters per unit meter of length.
However, changing the diameter of the elongated shell pipe (and the corresponding bore hole) and the tube diameter, which affects the thermally conductive filler volume per meter, would not have affected the installation of the anticipated loop system.
Therefore, the diameter of the elongated shell pipe (and the corresponding bore hole) and the tube diameter is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular diameter of the claimed installation method is significant. (re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976))
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (KR 2005/0034535), Marois (US 2012/0118529), Mahmoud (A review of grout materials in geothermal energy applications), and Wang (CN 107420959) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Ali (Experimental Performance Estimations of Horizontal Ground Heat Exchangers for GSHP System).
Regarding claim 13, Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) does not teach each of said down pipe and said up pipe is formed from plastic material, either HDPE or PEX-A.
However, Ali teaches HDPE pipe is recommended choice in terms of performance and durability for GHEs, or ground heat exchangers (2.1 Material Selection).
Therefore, 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 installation method of Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) to use HDPE pipe as the U-tube assembly (Baek: 30, “heat exchange pipe”) because they are the recommended choice for GHEs in terms of performance and durability (Ali: 2.1 Material Selection).
Regarding claim 14, Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) does not teach one of said down pipe and said up pipe is formed of copper and the other of said down pipe and said up pipe is formed of plastic material, either HDPE or PEX-A.
However, Ali teaches HDPE pipe is recommended choice in terms of performance and durability for GHEs, or ground heat exchangers (2.1 Material Selection). Ali also teaches copper tubes have a very high thermal conductivity, and tubes of copper only one-fourth to one third the lengths of plastic tubes are required (2.1 Material Selection). Ali further teaches copper tubing must be protected from corrosion (2.1 Material Selection) and used LDPE coating for corrosion resistance (2.3 Details of Slinky HGHE the System).
Therefore, 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 installation method of Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) to use HDPE pipe as the U-tube assembly (Baek: 30, “heat exchange pipe”) because they are the recommended choice for GHEs in terms of performance and durability (Ali: 2.1 Material Selection) and include copper tubes for a portion of the U-tube assembly (Baek: 30, “heat exchange pipe”) for the high thermal conductivity (Ali: 2.1 Material Selection), which is consistent with Baek teaching that the U-tube assembly (Baek: 30, “heat exchange pipe”) may be made with of a material having a high thermal conductivity (Baek: paragraph 31). Because of this modification, the pipe portion having copper could be anticipated as one of the up pipe or down pipe, and the other straight portion consisting of HDPE could be anticipated as the other of the up pipe or down pipe, with the remaining portion then anticipated as the U-turn element (See annotated figure below for one example when the down pipe is made of copper and the up pipe is made of HDPE).
PNG
media_image1.png
780
402
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (KR 2005/0034535), Marois (US 2012/0118529), Mahmoud (A review of grout materials in geothermal energy applications), and Wang (CN 107420959) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Finger (Handbook of Best Practices for Geothermal Drilling).
Regarding claim 15, Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) does not teach a pilot hole having diameter smaller than said elongate shell pipe is drilled prior to directly pushing a first element of a said elongate shell pipe portion of a vertical heat exchange loop system into the ground.
However, Finger teaches a practice for geothermal well drilling where if surface conditions are unknown, it may be cost effective to drill a small diameter pilot hole to determine the surface conditions, rather than having to move the hole location after a larger rig and drill pad have been installed (3. Planning a Geothermal Well).
Therefore, 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 installation method of Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) to drill a smaller diameter pilot prior to pushing the first element (Baek: 10, “pile”) into the ground in order to be cost effective and to determine the surface conditions (Finger: 3. Planning a Geothermal Well) as this is an art recognized need taught by Baek as the installation of common geothermal exchangers is well suited for larger buildings with no rock near the surface or almost no slope collapse (Baek: paragraph 9).
Claim(s) 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek (KR 2005/0034535), Marois (US 2012/0118529), Mahmoud (A review of grout materials in geothermal energy applications), and Wang (CN 107420959) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of ASTM (Glycerin in Antifreeze).
Regarding claim 17, Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) teaches the thermally conductive filler comprises water (Mahmoud: 2.1. Conventional grout materials).
Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) does not teach the thermally conductive filler also comprises glycerin, a less pure form of glycerol.
However, ASTM teaches glycerin as an antifreeze that is environmentally friendly and nontoxic to the environment.
Therefore, 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 installation method of Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) to use glycerin as the antifreeze (Mahmoud) for the thermally conductive filler (Baek: 40, “grout”) as glycerin is an antifreeze and is nontoxic to the environment
Regarding claim 18, Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) teaches the thermally conductive filler comprises water and graphite particulates (Mahmoud: 2.1. Conventional grout materials).
Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) does not teach the thermally conductive filler also comprises glycerin, a less pure form of glycerol.
However, ASTM teaches glycerin as an antifreeze that is environmentally friendly and nontoxic to the environment.
Therefore, 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 installation method of Baek (modified by Morais, Mahmoud, and Wang) to use glycerin as the antifreeze (Mahmoud: 4. Moisture content) for the thermally conductive filler (Baek: 40, “grout”) as glycerin is an antifreeze and is nontoxic to the environment
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to An Bach Phan whose telephone number is (571)272-7244. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-3 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, 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.
/A.B.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763