DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/16/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1-15 are 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.
Regarding claim 1:
Claim 1 was amended to recite “continually measuring” and “continually outputting” with regards to the sensors. This is not supported within the specification. The Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s remarks that the specification does not recite any structure about periodic or intermittent measuring and outputting, however, the specification does not recite any structure for continually measuring out outputting either. Such a function would require specific structure not described within the specification and therefore the term “continually” is new matter.
Claims 2-15 are rejected based on their dependency to claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 7-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US 20210212269 A1) in view of Spreitzer (US 20080178947 A1) and Klein (US 5844148 A).
Regarding claim 1, Park teaches of:
A volumetric-flow controller (Fig. 2, 80) configured for air-conditioning and ventilation systems, for adjusting a control flap (Figs. 1-2, 11 is controlled by 80) which is movably mounted within a flow channel (Fig. 1, 10), the volumetric-flow controller comprising:
wherein at least one air quality sensor (Fig. 1, 50) for continually measuring an air quality prevailing in the flow channel (Fig. 1, 50 continuously measures airflow in 10) and for continually outputting a corresponding electrical measurement signal is arranged in the measurement channel (Fig. 2, 80 receives continual electrical measurement signals from 50), and the control unit is configured to electrically activate the flap drive also in dependence on the electrical measurement signal outputted by the at least one air quality sensor (80 receives an input from the plurality of air quality sensors 50 to control the outdoor air damper 11).
Park fails to explicitly teach:
a measurement channel having a channel inlet and a channel outlet for a permanent open connection to the flow channel in order to form a permanent open separate bypass channel branched from the flow channel, wherein the channel inlet and channel outlet of the separate bypass channel is downstream of the control flap;
a differential pressure sensor arranged in the measurement channel configured for continually measuring a differential pressure prevailing in the flow channel and configured for continually outputting a corresponding electrical measurement signal; and
a control unit configured for electrically activating a flap drive in dependence on the electrical measurement signal outputted by the differential pressure sensor in order to set a desired volumetric flow rate in the flow channel
wherein the differential pressure sensor and the at least one air quality sensor are both disposed within the measurement channel and are simultaneously exposed to airflow through the permanently open separate bypass channel.
Spreitzer teaches of:
a differential pressure sensor (Fig. 2, 5) configured for continually measuring a differential pressure (5 continually measures the differential pressure) prevailing in the flow channel and configured for continually outputting a corresponding electrical measurement signal (5 continually outputs a signal to 6); and
a control unit (6) configured for electrically activating a flap drive in dependence on the electrical measurement signal outputted by the differential pressure sensor in order to set a desired volumetric flow rate in the flow channel (¶ [0019], “a control unit 6 that adjusts the actuator 4 in dependence on the pressure measured by the differential pressure sensor 5 for adjusting a desired differential pressure, i.e. a desired volume flow, that is stored in the control unit 6, in the flow channel 3”)
The primary reference can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
add a differential pressure sensor to the sensor set 50 and connect the differential pressure sensor to the controller 80 of Park so that the controller adjusts the flap position based on the measurement signal received from the differential pressure sensor
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would allow for the amount of air volume flowing through the damper to be controlled by a user (Park ¶ [0019], “Towards this end, the volume flow control system 1 comprises an actuator 4 for pivoting the butterfly valve 2, a differential pressure sensor 5 for measuring a differential pressure that prevails in the flow channel 3, a control unit 6 that adjusts the actuator 4 in dependence on the pressure measured by the differential pressure sensor 5 for adjusting a desired differential pressure, i.e. a desired volume flow, that is stored in the control unit 6, in the flow channel 3”)
Klein teaches of:
a measurement channel (Fig. 2, 28) having a channel inlet (Fig. 2, all openings in 50 make the channel inlet) and a channel outlet (Fig. 2, all openings in 60 make the channel outlet) for a permanent open connection to the flow channel (there are no dampers or valves to prevent the permanent opening of the flow channel) in order to form a permanent open separate bypass channel branched from the flow channel, wherein the channel inlet and channel outlet of the separate bypass channel is downstream of the control flap (see combination made below);
a differential pressure sensor arranged in the measurement channel (See combination made below)
wherein the differential pressure sensor and the at least one air quality sensor are both disposed within the measurement channel and are simultaneously exposed to airflow through the permanently open separate bypass channel (see combination made below)
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
modify the system of the combined teachings so all of the sensors in sensor set 50 and the differential pressure sensor are housed in the measurement channel of Klein
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
It would make the installation of the sensors easier and would allow for air to be sampled from across the entire width of the duct (Col. 1, lines 58-61, “A duct gas sampling system for a detector is provided which increases installation efficiency and effectiveness by reducing installation time and required installation steps. The sampling system includes a detector intended to be mounted externally of the duct with sampling tubes which extend into the duct. The tubes can easily be adjusted in length to adapt to varying duct widths.”)
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach of:
wherein the at least one air quality sensor is arranged in the measurement channel in series with the differential pressure sensor (see combination made above, the sensors in 50 and the differential pressure sensor are arranged in series together in the measurement channel of Klein)
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 2, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the at least one air quality sensor is arranged in the measurement channel between the channel inlet and the differential pressure sensor or between the differential pressure sensor and the channel outlet (the air quality sensors would have to be either between the inlet and the differential pressure sensor or the outlet and the differential pressure sensor since the sensors are arranged in series and a differential pressure requires a flow orifice to work, preventing the arrangement of the air quality sensor from being above or below the differential pressure sensor)
Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the at least one air quality sensor is a CO2 sensor or a VOC sensor (Park, Fig. 1, 53 is a CO2 sensor).
Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein a plurality of different air quality sensors are arranged in the measurement channel (see combination made in the rejection of claim 1 above, all of the outdoor sensor of Park and the differential pressure sensor of Spreitzer are arranged in the measurement channel of Klein)
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the at least one air quality sensor is electrically connected to the control unit (Park, Fig. 2, 53 is electrically connected to 80)
Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
wherein the at least one air quality sensor is electrically connected to the control unit by means of a cable.
However, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the connection of the air quality sensor to the control unit to be via a cable as such a connection is well-known and common knowledge within the art and is "capable of such instant and unquestionable demonstration as to defy dispute." (see MPEP 2144.03)
Regarding claim 11, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 10, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
wherein the differential pressure sensor is fastened to a circuit board of the control unit and is electrically connected thereto, and the at least one air quality sensor is electrically connected to the circuit board.
However, a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found the above limitation obvious based upon the following rationale:
It has been found that when the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is the position of the part within the system, and the position of the part is not critical to the functionality of the invention, then the simple rearrangement of the parts within the prior art to match the claimed invention is obvious (see MPEP 2144.04.VI.C). In the instant case, the combined teachings fail to teach that the differential pressure sensor is fastened to a circuit board of the control unit. While inherently within the system of the combined teachings there must be a circuit board somewhere within the system, the exact position is not specified. Therefore, based on the above rationale, a person of ordinary skill in the art could have rearranged the circuit board within the combined teachings so that it is fixed to the differential pressure sensor.
Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach of:
wherein the measurement channel is carried on a cover part (Klein, Fig. 2, 24) which has on an outer side the channel inlet and the channel outlet (50 and 60 are on an outer side of 24) and on an inner side the differential pressure sensor and the air quality sensor (on the interior side of 24 is measurement channel 28 which is where the sensors would be located in the combined teachings).
Regarding claim 13, the combined teaching teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the measurement channel is carried on a cover part (Klein, Fig. 2, 24), being a plate-shaped cover part (24 is flat and therefore plate shaped), which has on an outer side the channel inlet and the channel outlet (50 and 60 are on an outer side of 24) and on an inner side the differential pressure sensor and the air quality sensor (on the interior side of 24 is measurement channel 28 which is where the sensors would be located in the combined teachings)
regarding claim 14, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the volumetric-flow controller also comprises the flap drive (Park, Figs. 1-2, 11; ¶ [0048], “The control unit 80 controls the operations of the outdoor air damper 11”; the damper of 11 has flaps and must have a drive in order to be controlled by the control unit 80 which uses electrical signal)
Regarding claim 15, the combined teachings teach of:
An assembly comprising the flow channel, the control flap which is movably mounted within the flow channel and the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1 (See rejection of claim 1 above) which is connected to the flow channel by its channel inlet and its channel outlet in order to form a separate bypass channel branched from the flow channel (see use of Klein in the rejection of claim 1), and the flap drive which is electrically activated by the control unit for moving the control flap (Park, Figs. 1-2, 11; ¶ [0048], “The control unit 80 controls the operations of the outdoor air damper 11”; the damper of 11 has flaps and must have a drive in order to be controlled by the control unit 80 which uses electrical signal) in dependence on the electrical measurement signals outputted by the differential pressure sensor (see use of Spreitzer in rejection of claim 1) and by the at least one air quality sensor (Park teaches of using air quality sensors to control the flap 11)
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US 20210212269 A1) in view of Spreitzer (US 20080178947 A1) and Klein (US 5844148 A) and in further view of Renninger (US 20120048005 A1).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
wherein the at least one air quality sensor has a sensor surface which is arranged in the measurement channel parallel or approximately parallel to the direction of flow of the air flowing past the sensor surface.
Renninger teaches of:
a sensor having a sensor surface parallel to a direction of air flowing past the sensor (Figs. 2-4, 130 has a surface parallel to air flow 162)
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
modify the air quality sensor with the combined teachings to be housed within the apparatus of Renninger so that the air quality sensor is attached to a circuit board and positioned in the measurement channel so that it is parallel to the flow of air through the channel
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would reduce the flow resistance over the sensor (Renninger, ¶ [0011], “The sensor chip is accommodated in a sensor carrier that extends into the channel. By being accommodated, one may understand, in this instance, an accommodation, for example, on a surface of the sensor carrier and/or an accommodation in a recess of the sensor carrier, as is known from the related art, the accommodation being able to take place in such a way, for example, that the sensor surface of the sensor chip is able to have the flowing fluid medium flowing over it. Any structure comes into consideration as the sensor carrier which supplies the required mechanical stability for holding the sensor chip essentially at a fixed location within the channel. This sensor carrier may be designed as a flat, disk-shaped element having any cross section, so that the flat side of this sensor carrier points counter to the flow, and offers a comparatively low flow resistance”)
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US 20210212269 A1) in view of Spreitzer (US 20080178947 A1) and Klein (US 5844148 A) and in further view of Khan (US 20090185597 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 1, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach:
wherein the measurement channel has on a straight measurement channel portion a wall recess in which the at least one air quality sensor is arranged.
Khan teaches of:
wherein the measurement channel has on a straight measurement channel portion a wall recess in which the at least one air quality sensor is arranged (Fig. 4, wall 46 has a recess in which the sensor 10 is positioned)
The combined teachings can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
modify the connection of the air quality sensor of Park so that it is installed in the a recess of the measurement channel wall in the same way the sensor of Khan is installed
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would secure the sensor in place, ensuring that it does not come loose in the system (Khan, ¶ [0007], The sensor assembly is of a compact size and unitary construction that incorporates the sensor and retainer in a single part that is easily and speedily installed in an air duct. Retention of the sensor assembly in the thickness of the duct wall is exceptionally reliable. The assembly is engaged with the inner and outer surfaces of the duct wall with a tight fit that prevents inadvertent displacement of the assembly relative to the duct.)
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach of the volumetric-flow controller as claimed in claim 5, and the combined teachings further teach:
wherein the at least one air quality sensor is sealed in the wall recess by means of a seal (Khan, Fig. 4, elastic ribs 14 are in contact with the recess of the wall and therefore would seal the sensor)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J GIORDANO whose telephone number is (571)272-8940. The examiner can normally be reached M-Fr 8 AM - 5 PM EST.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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.
/MICHAEL JAMES GIORDANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/VIVEK K SHIRSAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights