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 .
Priority
Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e).
Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 4-7, and 13-16 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.
Claims 4 and 13 are indefinite because it is unclear if the "first spray circulating pump" and the "second spray circulating pump" are the same or different from the "at least one spray circulating pump" introduced in claims 3 and 12, from which claims 4 and 13 respectively depend on. For the purpose of compact prosecution, claims 4 and 13 are interpreted to read:
4/13. The cooling tower of claim 3/12, where in the at least one spray circulating pump comprises a first spray circulating pump and a second spray circulating pump, wherein the first spray module is connected to [[a]] the first spray circulating pump, and the second spray module is connected to [[a]] the second spray circulating pump.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, the term “natural” renders the claim indefinite. The term “natural” 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. It is unclear if the term “natural” means the cooling sub-module uses the laws of nature for cooling (e.g. thermodynamics”) or whether “natural” describes a specific structural aspect of the cooling sub-module. Further clarification is required. For the purpose of compact prosecution “natural” is interpreted such that the cooling sub-module uses the laws of nature for cooling.
Claims 7 and 16 are indefinite due to being dependent on claims 5 and 14, respectively.
Regarding claims 6 and 15, the term “ordinary” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ordinary” 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. The term “ordinary” is a subjective term. The claim scope cannot depend solely on the subjective opinion of a particular individual purported to be practicing the invention (see MPEP 2173.05 (b)).
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.
Claims 1, 3-6, and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heydari US-20220413572-A1 in view of Hegg et al. US-20050006798-A1.
Regarding claim 1, Heydari teaches a compound evaporative cooling tower represented by hybrid cooling unit 200 (Fig. 2, [0059]). The hybrid cooling unit 200 comprises of the following elements of the current invention:
Precooling module represented by fan 216 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
Direct evaporative heat exchanger represented by evaporative cooling unit 204 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
An outdoor fan represented by fan 212 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
First spray module arranged above the precooling module 216 represented by the left-hand set of spray nozzles 214 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
Second spray module arranged above the direct evaporative heat exchanger 204 represented by the right-hand set of spray nozzles 214 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
Cooling module arranged below the direct evaporative heat exchanger 204 represented by heat exchanger 218, and the cooling module 218 comprising a polarity of cooling sub-modules represented by fan 220, DX 222 and refrigerant 224 (Fig. 2, [0059-0060]).
Heydari does not teach the compound evaporative cooling tower 200 comprising of the following elements: an air-inlet grille and a water collector.
Hegg et al. teaches an air-inlet grille represented by fan grille 22 (Fig. 1, [0022]) and a water collector represented by drift eliminators 34 (Fig. 1, [0023]). The air-inlet grille is beneficial because it prevents oversized debris from entering the air intake system. The water collector is beneficial to “reduce the likelihood of drops or mist of water or other liquid passing out of the assembly” (Hegg et al. [0004]).
It would be have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Heydari to incorporate the teachings of Hegg et al. to include an air inlet grille and a water collector to prevent oversized debris from entering the compound evaporative cooling tower 200 and prevent water from escaping the system.
Regarding claim 3, Heydari teaches at least one spray circulating pump represented by circulating pump 208 where in the first spray module and second spray module (right- and left-hand sets of 214) are connected to the at least one spray circulating pump 208 through pipes. The conduits shown represent the pipes connecting said elements (Fig. 2, [0059]).
Regarding claim 4, Heydari as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 3, as explained above.
Heydari differs from claim 4 because Fig. 2 illustrates a single circulating pump 208 being used to supply liquid to the left and right-hand sets of nozzles 214 (the "first spray module" and the "second spray module," respectively). Therefore, the reference is silent as to the left-hand set of spray nozzles being connected to a first spray circulating pump and the right-hand set of nozzles being connected to a second spray circulating pump as claimed.
However, Heydari teaches that the system can comprise multiple pumps as it says that the system may include "additional pumps” (Heydari [0059]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the left-hand set of nozzles to be connected to a pump (the "first spray circulating pump") and for the right-hand set of nozzles to be connected to its own pump (the "second spray circulating pump") because the system can have multiple pumps. Utilizing two pumps instead of a single pump to send liquid to the left and right-hand sets of nozzles would merely represent obvious duplication of parts.
Regarding claim 5, Heydari teaches the cooling module 218 comprising of a natural cooling sub-module represented by heat exchanger 218 and a mechanical cooling sub-module represented by fan 220 (Fig. 2, [0060]).
Regarding claim 6, Heydari teaches the natural cooling sub-module 218 comprising an ordinary evaporative cooling coil represented by heat exchanger 218 and a cooling water circulating pump 208 connected through a pipe. The conduits shown represent the pipes connecting said elements (Fig. 2, [0059-0060]).
Regarding claim 8, as noted in the rejection of claim 1 above, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrange the water collector (represented by drift eliminators 34) above the spray nozzles 214 and below the fan 212 to “reduce the likelihood of drops or mist of water or other liquid passing out of the assembly.” (Hegg et al. Fig. 1, [0023], [0004])
The outdoor fan 212 is arranged at the top of the compound evaporative cooling tower 200 as shown in Fig. 1 of Heydari.
Regarding claim 9, Heydari teaches an air precooler arranged above the first spray module (left-hand set of 214) represented by conduits going from the spray nozzles 214 to fan 212 (Fig. 2, [0059]). This is reasonable in light of the scope as the conduits “guide the air flowing from the precooling module into the atmosphere.”
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heydari US-20220413572-A1 in view of Hegg et al. US-20050006798-A1 and in further view of Xu et al. US 20230417494-A1.
Regarding claim 2, the specification does not define what a "film" is. Under broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), a "film" is interpreted as being a piece of material.
Heydari in view of Hegg et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Heydari in view of Hegg et al. does not teach the precooling module 216 comprising of a precooling wet film and an indirect evaporative cooler arranged on the inner side of the precooling wet film.
Xu et al. teaches a precooling module comprising of a precooling wet film represented by precooling pad 22 and an indirect evaporative cooler arranged on an inner side of the precooling wet film represented by fluid cooling coil 24 (Fig. 1, [0079]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Heydari in view of Hegg et al. with the teachings of Xu et al. to incorporate the precooling wet film and indirect evaporative cooler arranged on an inner side of the precooling wet film to “provide more efficient heat transfer between the air flow,” as taught by Xu et al. (Xu et al. [0149]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heydari US-20220413572-A1 in view of Hegg et al. US-20050006798-A1 and in further view of Xu et al. US 20230417494-A1.
Regarding claim 7, Heydari in view of Hegg et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 5. Heydari teaches a fluorine pump evaporative cooling coil represented by heat exchanger 218 and refrigerant 224 and a fluorine pump represented by circulating pump 208 connected through a pipe as represented by conduits (Fig. 2, [0059-0060]).
Heydari in view of Hegg at al. does not teach a compressor.
Xu et al. teaches a compressor represented by compressor 68 (Fig. 2, [0083]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Heydari in view of Hegg et al. with the teachings of Xu et al. as a compressor is known to increase efficiency.
Claims 10, 12-15, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heydari US-20220413572-A1 in view of Hegg et al. US-20050006798-A1.
Regarding claim 10, Heydari teaches a data center represented by datacenter 100 (Fig. 1, [0051]), a compound evaporative cooling tower represented by hybrid cooling unit 200 (Fig. 2, [0059]), and a server room represented by rooms 102 (Fig. 1, [0051]). The compound evaporative cooling tower 200 comprises of the following elements of the current invention:
Precooling module represented by fan 216 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
Direct evaporative heat exchanger represented by evaporative cooling unit 204 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
An outdoor fan represented by fan 212 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
First spray module arranged above the precooling module 216 represented by the left-hand set of spray nozzles 214 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
Second spray module arranged above the direct evaporative heat exchanger 204 represented by the right-hand set of spray nozzles 214 (Fig. 2, [0059]).
Cooling module arranged below the direct evaporative heat exchanger 204 represented by heat exchanger 218, and the cooling module 218 comprising a polarity of cooling sub-modules represented by fan 220, DX 222 and refrigerant 224 (Fig. 2, [0059-0060]).
Heydari does not teach the compound evaporative cooling tower 200 comprising of the following elements: an air-inlet grille and a water collector.
Hegg et al. teaches an air-inlet grille represented by fan grille 22 (Fig. 1, [0022]) and a water collector represented by drift eliminators 34 (Fig. 1, [0023]). The air-inlet grille is beneficial because it prevents oversized debris from entering the air intake system. The water collector is beneficial to “reduce the likelihood of drops or mist of water or other liquid passing out of the assembly” (Hegg et al. [0004]).
It would be have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Heydari to incorporate the teachings of Hegg et al. to include an air inlet grille and a water collector to prevent oversized debris from entering the compound evaporative cooling tower 200 and prevent water from escaping the system.
Regarding claim 12, Heydari as modified teaches at least one spray circulating pump represented by circulating pump 208 where in the first spray module and second spray module (right- and left-hand sets of 214) are connected to the at least one spray circulating pump 208 through pipes. The conduits shown represent the pipes connecting said elements (Fig. 2, [0059]).
Regarding claim 13, Heydari as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 12, as explained above.
Heydari differs from claim 13 because Fig. 2 illustrates a single circulating pump 208 being used to supply liquid to the left and right-hand sets of nozzles 214 (the "first spray module" and the "second spray module," respectively). Therefore, the reference is silent as to the left-hand set of spray nozzles being connected to a first spray circulating pump and the right-hand set of nozzles being connected to a second spray circulating pump as claimed.
However, Heydari teaches that the system can comprise multiple pumps as it says that the system may include "additional pumps” (Heydari [0059]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the left-hand set of nozzles to be connected to a pump (the "first spray circulating pump") and for the right-hand set of nozzles to be connected to its own pump (the "second spray circulating pump") because the system can have multiple pumps. Utilizing two pumps instead of a single pump to send liquid to the left and right-hand sets of nozzles would merely represent obvious duplication of parts.
Regarding claim 14, Heydari as modified teaches the cooling module 218 comprising of a natural cooling sub-module represented by heat exchanger 218 and a mechanical cooling sub-module represented by fan 220 (Fig. 2, [0060]).
Regarding claim 15, Heydari as modified teaches the natural cooling sub-module 218 comprising an ordinary evaporative cooling coil represented by heat exchanger 218 and a cooling water circulating pump 208 connected through a pipe. The conduits shown represent the pipes connecting said elements (Fig. 2, [0059-0060]).
Regarding claim 17, as noted in the rejection of claim 10 above, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrange the water collector (represented by drift eliminators 34) above the spray nozzles 214 and below the fan 212 to “reduce the likelihood of drops or mist of water or other liquid passing out of the assembly.” (Hegg et al. Fig. 1, [0023], [0004])
The outdoor fan 212 is arranged at the top of the compound evaporative cooling tower 200 as shown in Fig. 1 of Heydari.
Regarding claim 18, Heydari teaches an air precooler arranged above the first spray module (left-hand set of 214) represented by conduits going from the spray nozzles 214 to fan 212 (Fig 2). This is reasonable in light of the scope as the conduits “guide the air flowing from the precooling module into the atmosphere.”
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heydari US-20220413572-A1 in view of Hegg et al. US-20050006798-A1 and in further view of Xu et al. US 20230417494-A1.
Regarding claim 11, the specification does not define what a "film" is. Under broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), a "film" is interpreted as being a piece of material.
Heydari in view of Hegg et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 10.
Heydari in view of Hegg et al. does not teach the precooling module 216 comprising of a precooling wet film and an indirect evaporative cooler arranged on the inner side of the precooling wet film.
Xu et al. teaches a precooling module comprising of a precooling wet film represented by precooling pad 22 and an indirect evaporative cooler arranged on an inner side of the precooling wet film represented by fluid cooling coil 24 (Fig. 1, [0079]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Heydari in view of Hegg et al. with the teachings of Xu et al. to incorporate the precooling wet film and indirect evaporative cooler arranged on an inner side of the precooling wet film to “provide more efficient heat transfer between the air flow,” as taught by Xu et al. (Xu [0149]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heydari US-20220413572-A1 in view of Hegg et al. US-20050006798-A1 and in further view of Xu et al. US 20230417494-A1.
Regarding claim 16, Heydari in view of Hegg et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 14. Heydari teaches a fluorine pump evaporative cooling coil represented by heat exchanger 218 and refrigerant 224 and a fluorine pump represented by circulating pump 208 connected through a pipe as represented by conduits (Fig. 2, [0059-0060]).
Heydari in view of Hegg at al. does not teach a compressor.
Xu et al. teaches a compressor represented by compressor 68 (Fig. 2, [0083]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Heydari in view of Hegg et al. with the teachings of Xu et al. as a compressor is known to increase efficiency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMMAD BUTT whose telephone number is (571)272-6550. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7-5PM.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/AMMAD W BUTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776