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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 9 “wo dampers” should be “two dampers”. 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 4-9, 17, and 20 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.
Claim 4 requires “the system control, fan control system, and flow control system receive from each of the intake fans, each of the dampers, or the one or more functional blocks of the power system an operating mode of the one or more functional blocks, a temperature associated with the one or more functional blocks, a load level of the one or more functional blocks, a current speed of each of the fans, and a current position of each of the dampers” (emphasis added). The alternative limitation allows each of the intake fans and each of the dampers fan provide the temperature or load level of the functional blocks, or that the functional blocks alone can provide to the system control, fan control, and flow control systems the damper positions and the fan speeds. It is unclear how each of fans, each of the dampers, or the functional blocks alone can provide information that is unrelated to the element themselves.
Claims 5-8 are rejected based on their dependency on claim 4.
Claim 9 requires that “the power system is an uninterruptible power system (UPS), and wherein the one or more functional blocks include at least a rectifier, inverter, and booster”, however, the power system and the functional blocks are claimed in the intended use limitation in the preamble to claim 1, therefore it is unclear if the limitations required by claim 9 are intended use or positively claimed. For the purposes of examination, the claims are interpreted as intended use.
Claim 17 requires that “the power system is a static transfer switch (STS), and wherein the one or more functional blocks include a source alternating current (AC) switch”, however, the power system and the functional blocks are claimed in the intended use limitation in the preamble to claim 14, therefore it is unclear if the limitations required by claim 17 are intended use or positively claimed. For the purposes of examination, the claims are interpreted as intended use.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the one or more functional blocks" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-3 and 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byers et. al (US 2009/0097203 A1) in view of Monk e.t al (US 8,310,829 B2).
With respect to claim 1 Byers discloses a controlled cooling system for one or more functional blocks of a power system, comprising: two dampers [reference characters 440, 445, 450, 455, and 460] each connected to at least one of the one or more functional blocks [reference character 124, 122, and 195] of the power system; a pressurized intake plenum [reference character 130] comprising one or more walls and one or more openings, each damper aligned with one of the one or more openings [see Fig. 4, the dampers sit in the openings]; two intake fans [reference characters 150 in Figs. 1 and 4] in communication with the pressurized intake plenum and the one or more walls of the pressurized intake plenum; and a system control [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 “[t]he backplane 190, in one embodiment, is configured to provide power or instructions (e.g., control signals) to the servo damper…”], wherein the two intake fans are configured to force cooling air through the pressurized intake plenum and the one or more functional blocks of the power system via the two dampers [see Fig. 4].
Byers does not disclose that the system control is configured to send signals to the two intake fans to change a speed of the two intake fans.
Monk discloses an electronics chassis cooling system that includes fan motors [reference characters 40 and 42] and a controller [reference character 90] which controls variable frequency drives [reference character 44] that vary the speed of the fans [column 5 lines 43-46].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Byers by including a means to control the speed of the fans, as taught by Monk, in order to allow the system to minimize power consumption for a given required airflow by controlling the speed of the fans and the dampers in unison.
With respect to claim 2 the combination of Byers and Monk disclose a fan control system [reference characters 90 and 44 of Monk] and a flow control system [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 and 0018 of Byers] wherein the fan control system is configured to communicate with each of the intake fans and control a current speed of each of the intake fans based on the signals between the two intake fans, the system control, and the fan control system [see column 4 lines 43-46 of Monk].
With respect to claim 3 the combination of Byers and Monk disclose that the flow control system is configured to communicate with each of the dampers, wherein the flow control system is configured to communicate with each of the dampers and control a current position of each of the dampers based on the signals between the two dampers, the system control, and the flow control system [paragraph 0051 of Byers].
With respect to claim 9 Byers does not explicitly disclose that “the power system is an uninterruptible power system (UPS), and wherein the one or more functional blocks include at least a rectifier, inverter, and booster”, however, the limitations of claim 9 are interpreted as intended use (see 112(b) rejection above) where the prior art need only be capable of being used in the intended way. In this case the cooling structure of Byers could be used to cool any electrical system mounted in a chassis.
With respect to claim 10 Byers discloses one or more ducts [reference characters 410, 415, 420, 425, and 420] in communication with each of the dampers and the one or more functional blocks, the one or more ducts located in between each of the dampers and the one or more functional blocks [see Fig. 4].
With respect to claim 11 Byers discloses that one or more ducts [reference characters 410, 415, 420, 425, and 420] in communication with each of the dampers and the pressurized intake plenum.
Byers does not disclose that the one or more ducts located in between each of the dampers and the pressurized intake plenum.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to move the dampers to the downstream end of the duct, so that the ducts are between the dampers and the plenum, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
With respect to claim 12 the combination of Byers and Monk disclose one or more fan control systems [reference characters 90 and 44 of Monk] and one or more flow control systems [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 and 0018 of Byers], wherein the one or more fan control systems are configured to communicate with each of the intake fans and control a current speed of the two intake fans based on the signals between each of the intake fans, the system control, and the one or more fan control systems [see column 4 lines 43-46 of Monk].
With respect to claim 13 the combination of Byers and Monk disclose the one or more flow control systems [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 and 0018 of Byers] are configured to communicate with each of the dampers, wherein the one or more flow control systems are configured to communicate with each of the dampers and control a current position of the two dampers based on the signals between each of the dampers, the system control, and the one or more flow control systems [paragraph 0051 of Byers].
Claim(s) 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byers et. al (US 2009/0097203 A1) in view of Monk e.t al (US 8,310,829 B2) and further in view of Kendzia, III (US 11,690,195 B2).
With respect to claim 14 Byers discloses a controlled cooling system for one or more functional blocks of a power system, comprising: two dampers [reference characters 440, 445, 450, 455, and 460] each connected to at least one of the one or more functional blocks [reference character 124, 122, and 195] of the power system; a pressurized plenum [reference character 130] comprising one or more walls and one or more openings, each damper aligned with one of the one or more openings [see Fig. 4, the dampers sit in the openings]; two fans [reference characters 150 in Figs. 1 and 4] in communication with the pressurized plenum and the one or more walls of the pressurized; and a system control [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 “[t]he backplane 190, in one embodiment, is configured to provide power or instructions (e.g., control signals) to the servo damper…”], wherein the two intake fans are configured to force cooling air through the pressurized intake plenum and the one or more functional blocks of the power system via the two dampers [see Fig. 4].
Byers does not disclose that the system control is configured to send signals to the two intake fans to change a speed of the two intake fans.
Monk discloses an electronics chassis cooling system that includes fan motors [reference characters 40 and 42] and a controller [reference character 90] which controls variable frequency drives [reference character 44] that vary the speed of the fans [column 5 lines 43-46].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Byers by including a means to control the speed of the fans, as taught by Monk, in order to allow the system to minimize power consumption for a given required airflow by controlling the speed of the fans and the dampers in unison.
Additionally, Byers does not disclose that the plenum is an intake plenum, the fans are exhaust fans, or that the fans pull cooling air through the exhaust plenum.
Kendzia, III discloses a power semiconductor cooling system that includes fans [reference character 40] a duct [reference character 34] and a plenum [reference character 44]. Kendzia, III discloses that “[a]lthough it is possible for the fans 40 or auxiliary fans to blow air into the switching housing 30, it is preferable for the fans 40 to suck air out of the switching housing 30 and to be located in an exhaust portion 44 of the plenum 34” [column 3 lines 60-63] because it results in negative pressure being evenly spread within the housing [column 4 lines 4-5].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Byers by reversing the direction of the fans so that the are exhaust fans and the plenum is an exhaust plenum, as taught by Kendzia, III, because negative pressure is preferable as it evenly spreads within the housing [column 3 lines 60 to column 4 line 5 of Kendzia, III].
With respect to claim 15 the combination of Byers, Monk, and Kendzia, III disclose a fan control system [reference characters 90 and 44 of Monk] and a flow control system [reference character 550 and paragraph 0051 of Byers], wherein the fan control system is configured to communicate with each of the exhaust fans and control a current speed of each of the exhuast fans based on the signals between the two exhaust fans, the system control, and the fan control system [see column 4 lines 43-46 of Monk].
With respect to claim 16 the combination of Byers and Monk disclose that the flow control system is configured to communicate with each of the dampers, wherein the flow control system is configured to communicate with each of the dampers and control a current position of each of the dampers based on the signals between the two dampers, the system control, and the flow control system [paragraph 0051 of Byers].
With respect to claim 17 Byers does not explicitly disclose that “the power system is a static transfer switch (STS), and wherein the one or more functional blocks include a source alternating current (AC) switch”, however, the limitations of claim 9 are interpreted as intended use (see 112(b) rejection above) where the prior art need only be capable of being used in the intended way. In this case the cooling structure of Byers could be used to cool any electrical system mounted in a chassis.
With respect to claim 18 Byers discloses one or more ducts [reference characters 410, 415, 420, 425, and 420] in communication with each of the dampers and the one or more functional blocks, the one or more ducts located in between each of the dampers and the one or more functional blocks [see Fig. 4].
With respect to claim 19 Byers discloses that one or more ducts [reference characters 410, 415, 420, 425, and 420] in communication with each of the dampers and the pressurized exhaust plenum.
Byers does not disclose that the one or more ducts located in between each of the dampers and the pressurized exhaust plenum.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to move the dampers to the downstream end of the duct, so that the ducts are between the dampers and the plenum, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byers et. al (US 2009/0097203 A1) in view of Monk e.t al (US 8,310,829 B2).
With respect to claim 20 Byers discloses a computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving, by a control system of a power system, signals from a flow control system [reference character 190, see paragraph 0035 “[t]he backplane 190, in one embodiment, is configured to provide power or instructions (e.g., control signals) to the servo damper…”], the control system configured to communicate with two intake fans [reference characters 150 in Figs. 1 and 4] and two dampers [reference characters 440, 445, 450, 455, and 460], the two intake fans in communication with a pressurized intake plenum [reference character 130], the pressurized intake plenum comprising one or more walls and one or more openings [see Fig. 4, the dampers sit in the openings], each one of the two dampers connected to at least one of the one or more functional blocks and aligned with the one or more openings [see Fig. 4], wherein the two intake fans are configured to force cooling air through the pressurized intake plenum and the one or more functional blocks of the power system via the wo dampers [see Fig. 4]; comparing, by the control system, a temperature [via temperature sensors 180] included in the signals to a threshold temperature [see paragraph 0018]; and adjusting, by the control system via instructions transmitted to the flow control system, a current position of at least one of the two dampers based on the temperature exceeding the threshold temperature [see paragraph 0018].
Byers does not disclose a fan control system where the fan control system controls the speed of the fans.
Monk discloses an electronics chassis cooling system that includes fan motors [reference characters 40 and 42] and a controller [reference character 90] which controls variable frequency drives [reference character 44] that vary the speed of the fans [column 5 lines 43-46] in response to a temperature measurement being out of range [column 5 lines 57-59].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Byers by including a means to control the speed of the fans, as taught by Monk, in order to allow the system to minimize power consumption for a given required airflow by controlling the speed of the fans and the dampers in unison.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIVEK K SHIRSAT whose telephone number is (571)272-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:20AM.
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, Steven B McAllister can be reached at 571-272-6785. 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.
/VIVEK K SHIRSAT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762