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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/11/2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claims 1-14 and 29-31, MPEP 2114 II clearly states "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does" and "[a] claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim." In the instant case, the claimed invention is for a device with a particular structure, with the intended use of circulating a liquefied solid and a cooling fluid through the respective conduits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 9-10, 12, 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Wenk (DE2753483A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wenk discloses an apparatus (see Fig. 1 or 4 reproduced below) comprising: a closed vessel (shell space 3/36) having an upper section (section above liquid surface 17/49) and a lower section (section below liquid surface 17/49) within a single shell; a pool (liquid pool of liquid surface 17/49) of a heat-receiving fluid located in the lower section; at least one product (fluid in tube 5/41) circulation conduit (tube 5/41) located in the lower section and at least partially immersed in the pool of the heat-receiving fluid; wherein the at least one product circulation conduit is configured to circulate a liquified solid (Wenk is capable of receiving a liquefied solid), wherein the heat-receiving fluid in the closed vessel is configured to regulate a temperature of the closed vessel to maintain the liquified solid in a liquid state by absorbing heat from the liquefied solid causing vaporization of a portion of the heat-receiving fluid, forming a vaporized heat-receiving fluid; and a cooling fluid (fluid in tube 4/40) conduit (tube 4/40) located in the upper section and spaced apart from the pool of the heat- receiving fluid, the cooling fluid conduit being in thermal communication with the vaporized heat-receiving fluid; wherein a cooling fluid (fluid in tube 5/41) is present in the cooling fluid conduit, and wherein the cooling fluid is configured to condense the vaporized heat receiving fluid (see abstract, evaporating…condenses).
PNG
media_image1.png
471
797
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1 & Fig. 4 of Wenk
Regarding claim 2, Wenk discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk further discloses the at least one product circulation conduit and the cooling fluid conduit each comprise a plurality of tube bundles (tube bundles – Page 2) having an inlet port and an outlet port (ports 11-14/43-46).
Regarding claim 3, Wenk discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk further discloses wherein the cooling fluid comprises water (water - Page 2).
Regarding claim 7, Wenk discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk further discloses the heat-receiving fluid consists essentially of a single organic compound (trichlorofluoromethane is a halogenated organic compound – Page 2).
Regarding claim 9, Wenk discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk further discloses the at least one product circulation conduit and the cooling fluid conduit are both oriented substantially horizontally within the closed vessel (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Wenk the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk further discloses the at least one product circulation conduit and the cooling fluid conduit are both oriented substantially vertically within the closed vessel (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Wenk discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk further discloses the at least one product circulation conduit comprises two or more product circulation conduits (5/41) in the lower section that are at least partially immersed in the pool of the heat-receiving fluid.
Regarding claim 31, Wenk discloses the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk further teaches wherein the apparatus is configured to regulate a rate of condensation of the vaporized heat-receiving fluid at least by regulating a fluid flow rate and a temperature of the cooling fluid conduit (Wenk is capable of being operated in such a manner).
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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wenk (DE2753483A1) in view of Garland (US4100757A).
Regarding claim 4, Wenk the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk does not teach a liquid level gauge or sensor, a temperature gauge or sensor, a pressure gauge or sensor, or any combination thereof.
Garland teaches a pressure gauge (36; Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wenk to include the pressure gauge of Garland, in order to monitor the system for non-condensables (Col. 3, lines 30-40).
Claim(s) 5-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wenk (DE2753483A1) in view of Sotani (US4803343).
Regarding claim 5-6, and 8, Wenk the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk does not teach the heat-receiving fluid is an optionally substituted C.sub.2-C.sub.40 hydrocarbon, wherein the heat-receiving fluid is toluene, or wherein the heat-receiving fluid has an ASTM D86 range between initial boiling point and dry point of about 10° C. or less.
Sotani teaches the heat-receiving fluid is an optionally substituted C.sub.2-C.sub.40 hydrocarbon, wherein the heat-receiving fluid is toluene, or wherein the heat-receiving fluid has an ASTM D86 range between initial boiling point and dry point of about 10° C. or less (toluene – Col. 3, lines 0-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wenk to include the heat receiving fluid of Sotani, in order to provide a working fluid with excellent thermal stability and high heat transfer rate (Col. 3, lines 0-10).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wenk (DE2753483A1) in view of Wu (CN1441211A).
Regarding claim 11, Wenk teaches the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk does not teach wherein the at least one product circulation conduit is oriented substantially horizontally and the cooling fluid conduit is oriented substantially vertically within the closed vessel, or the at least one product circulation conduit is oriented substantially vertically and the cooling fluid conduit is oriented substantially horizontally within the closed vessel.
Wu teaches wherein the at least one product circulation conduit is oriented substantially vertically and the cooling fluid conduit is oriented substantially horizontally within the closed vessel (see vertical conduit 2 and horizontal conduit 4; Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wenk to include the horizontal/vertical configuration of Wu, as it has been held obvious to provide a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In the instant case, the horizontal/vertical and horizontal/horizontal configurations are functional equivalents, as taught by the prior art.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wenk (DE2753483A1) in view of DE202015008836U1, hereinafter FOR1.
Regarding claim 13, Wenk the limitations of claim 1, and Wenk does not teach wherein the cooling fluid conduit is a single cooling fluid conduit.
FOR1 teaches the cooling fluid conduit is a single cooling fluid conduit (7 in Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wenk to include the single tube configuration of FOR1, as it has been held obvious to provide a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143). In the instant case, a single tube conduit and multiple pipe conduit are functional equivalents, as taught by the prior art.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thepsimuang (WO2007103509A) in view of Wenk (DE2753483A1) in view of Sotani (US4803343).
Regarding claim 14, Thepsimuang teaches a system comprising: a facility (see Fig. 1) forming or processing a liquefied solid having a temperature of about 40° C. or above, the liquefied solid being a solid or semi-solid material at room temperature (wax or wax-like material – abstract); an indirect heat exchange apparatus (5) receiving the liquefied solid as a feed to the at least one product circulation conduit.
Thepsimuang does not teach the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the heat-receiving fluid has a normal boiling point of about 50° C. or above.
Wenk teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (as detailed above), and Sotani teaches wherein the heat-receiving fluid has a normal boiling point of about 50° C. or above (toluene – Col. 3, lines 0-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Thepsimuang to include the apparatus of claim 1 of Wenk, in order to prevent the heat exchange fluids from direct contact (Page 1), and the working fluid of Sotani, in order to provide a working fluid with excellent thermal stability and high heat transfer rate (Col. 3, lines 0-10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 29-30 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC S RUPPERT whose telephone number is (571)272-9911. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 pm.
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.
/ERIC S RUPPERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights