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/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention of Group I, readable on claims 1 through 17, in the reply filed on July 29, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 18 through 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention of Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on July 29, 2025.
Applicant's election with traverse of the first species or the embodiment of Figure 1A (readable on claims 1 through 9, 11, and 12) in the reply filed on July 29, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Office does not identify the mutually exclusive characteristics recited in the claims and on the grounds that purportedly the field of search is the same for all of the species.
This is not found persuasive because, while it is true that the mutually exclusive characteristics were not explicitly outlined by the examiner in the Requirement for Restriction/Election, the examiner clearly identified each species by matching it to the figure corresponding to the species, the brief description of the drawings clearly identifies the distinct embodiments or species, and a cursory visual comparison of each of the various figures corresponding to the different species clearly shows that each of the cited figures has one or more mutually exclusive characteristics which are not shared by the other cited figures. Furthermore, while applicant asserts that the field of search is the same for all of the species, applicant has not provided any evidence to support this assertion., whereas the examiner has clearly stated in the Requirement for Restriction/Election that the different species require at least different search strategies or search queries. Given the mutually exclusive characteristics (and different system elements and manner of arrangement thereof) as shown in each figure corresponding to each species, it is inherent and implicit that finding the most relevant prior art related to any given embodiment or species as shown in the corresponding figures will require a different search strategy and/or search query which is different from the search strategy and/or search query which would be required to find the most relevant prior art related to a different embodiment or species.
Furthermore, applicant’s assertion that at least claim 1 is generic is not found to be persuasive because the requirement for an election of species relates to all of the pending claims (and not just to the claims of elected Group I) such that applicant’s election of species technically should also have addressed the claims in non-elected Group II in order to be complete. When all of claims 1 through 20 are considered, there is no claim out of claims 1 through 20 that is generic to all of the species cited by the examiner given the definition of a generic claim as per MPEP 806.04(d). For a claim to be generic, it is not sufficient that a claim reads on each of the species.
The requirement is therefore still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings were received on April 8, 2024. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it fails to recite the salient features of the inventive system (i.e., “can” appears throughout the abstract, which renders all of the features cited as optional as opposed to salient). A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 1 through 9, 11, and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: “there through” [claim 1, line 3] should be replaced with “therethrough”; and, “a liquid to air heat exchanger” [claim 9, line 2] should be replaced with “a liquid-to-air heat exchanger”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1 through 9, 11, and 12 are 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.
The limitations “a temperature and/or pressure sensor” [claim 1, line 7] are followed by the limitations “a monitored temperature and/or a monitored pressure” [claim 1, line 12] and by the limitations “the monitored temperature and/or monitored pressure” [claim 1, lines 14-15; claim 1, lines 16-17] and “a trigger temperature and/or a trigger pressure” [claim 1, line 15]. However, the alternative manner in which the limitations “a temperature and/or pressure sensor” are recited by the claim does not require that both a temperature sensor and a pressure sensor be present because only one of the sensors is necessarily and positively recited by the claim and by all claims depending therefrom. Therefore, the alternative manner in which the limitations “a temperature and/or pressure sensor” are recited by the claim creates an indefiniteness issue in the claims related to subsequent limitations referring to the temperature and/or pressure because it is not clear how a temperature is measured if only a pressure sensor is encompassed by the alternative limitations and also because it is not clear how a pressure is measured if only a temperature sensor is encompassed by the alternative limitations, thus rendering the metes and bounds of protection sought by the claims indeterminate and the claims indefinite. Furthermore, dependent claim 3 for example recites the limitation “the trigger pressure” [claim 3, line 2] lacks proper antecedent basis because the previously recited limitations “a trigger temperature and/or a trigger pressure” [claim 1, line 15] does not necessarily positively recite “a trigger pressure” for the reasons set forth above.
Additionally, the plural alternative limitations including “and/or” in base claim 1 followed by additional alternative and plural limitations also including and/or in dependent claims 2 through 9, 11, and 12 create additional indefiniteness issues similar to those created by improper multiple dependent claims and essentially rendering the scope of protection sought by the dependent claims indeterminate and indefinite.
The indeterminate term “it” [claim 3, line 3; claim 11, line 4] fails to clearly refer back to a particular previously recited element, thus further rendering indefinite the metes and bounds of protection sought by the claims and by any claims depending therefrom.
The term “elevated” in claim 12 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “elevated” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, as used to qualify the recited temperatures and/or the recited pressures, the term “elevated” renders these indeterminate and the claim indefinite.
Any claim not specifically mentioned is at least rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
As best can be understood in view of the indefiniteness of the claims, claims 1 through 9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. (EP 3 205 954 A1; made of record via IDS).
With regard to claim 1 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses a system, comprising: a heat exchanger 51 configured to have a first cooling fluid (via water circulation path 63) and a second cooling fluid (via refrigerant circulation path 33C/34C) passed therethrough, the first cooling fluid or water having a first freezing temperature and the second cooling fluid or refrigerant having a second freezing temperature, wherein the second freezing temperature is lower than the first freezing temperature (i.e., the refrigerant inherently has a lower freezing temperature than water); a temperature sensor 56/57 and/or pressure sensor 41/42 in sensing communication with a fluid path by which the second cooling fluid or refrigerant enters the heat exchanger 51; a valve 54; and a controller 71/73; wherein the controller 71/73 is configured to monitor a monitored temperature and/or a monitored pressure of the second cooling fluid or refrigerant entering the heat exchanger 51; open the valve 54 when the monitored temperature and/or monitored pressure is below a trigger temperature and/or trigger pressure, thereby raising the monitored temperature and/or monitored pressure of the second cooling fluid or refrigerant entering the heat exchanger 51; and close the valve 54 when a condition is met (i.e., inherent/implicit in that valve 54 is closed and is only opened by the control unit 71 when the water flowing through the heat exchanger 51 is going to be frozen as recited in claim 3 of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd.). Also see at least paragraphs [0043], [0044], and [0045].
With regard to claim 2 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the first cooling fluid comprises water and the second cooling fluid comprises a two-phase refrigerant.
With regard to claim 3 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the trigger temperature and/or a second cooling fluid temperature at the trigger pressure is above a point at which the first cooling fluid would freeze as it moves into the heat exchanger 51.
With regard to claim 4 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the controller 71/73 is further configured to open the valve 54 and thereby cause the second cooling fluid or refrigerant, in gaseous phase, to mix with the second cooling fluid or refrigerant, in liquid phase, upstream of the heat exchanger 51.
With regard to claim 5 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the condition comprises a predetermined time, and wherein the controller 71/73 is configured to close the valve 54 once the predetermined time has elapsed following the valve 54 opening.
With regard to claim 6 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the condition comprises a predetermined temperature and/or predetermined pressure, and wherein the controller 71/73 is configured to close the valve 54 once the monitored temperature and/or monitored pressure of the second cooling fluid or refrigerant entering the heat exchanger 51 rises to the predetermined temperature and/or predetermined pressure.
With regard to claim 7 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 6, wherein the predetermined temperature and/or predetermined pressure is higher than the trigger temperature and/or trigger pressure.
With regard to claim 8 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 6, wherein the predetermined temperature and/or a second cooling fluid temperature at the predetermined pressure is higher than the first freezing temperature.
With regard to claim 9 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the heat exchanger 51 comprises at least one of a liquid to air heat exchanger and an evaporator (i.e., see paragraph [0022]).
With regard to claim 11 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the heat exchanger 51 comprises an evaporator, and wherein the trigger temperature and/or a second cooling fluid temperature or refrigerant temperature at the trigger pressure is above a point at which the first cooling fluid or water would freeze as it moves into the evaporator 51.
With regard to claim 12 of the instant application, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Thermal Systems, Ltd. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the heat exchanger 51 comprises an evaporator 51 (i.e., see paragraph [0022]), and wherein the system is configured to raise the temperature and/or pressure of at least a portion of the second cooling fluid or refrigerant to an elevated temperature and/or elevated pressure, and to cause the second cooling fluid or refrigerant, at the elevated temperature and/or elevated pressure, to mix with the second cooling fluid or refrigerant, at a lower temperature and/or lower pressure, upstream of the evaporator 51, thereby raising the monitored temperature and/or monitored pressure of the second cooling fluid or refrigerant entering the evaporator 51.
The reference thus reads on the claims.
Conclusion
The related and/or prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LJILJANA V CIRIC whose telephone number is (571)272-4909. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Saturday, flexible.
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.
/Ljiljana V. Ciric/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
LJILJANA (Lil) V. CIRIC
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3763