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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2017/0051913 A1 (hereinafter “COLANNINO”).
Regarding Claim 1, COLANNINO discloses a bright radiator, having a burner (200), a fan (130), and a radiant panel (102) that serves as a radiating surface and is provided with flame passage channels, wherein the burner (200) is connected to a fuel gas supply, wherein the fan (130) is set up for supplying combustion air to the burner (200), wherein the burner (200) is set up for bringing about whole-area glowing of the radiant panel (102), wherein the fuel gas supply is connected to a hydrogen source as the fuel gas source (see para. [0034]: “The fuel can include hydrogen”).
PNG
media_image1.png
802
1235
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, COLANNINO further discloses wherein a reflector (106) is provided, which encloses the radiating surface of the radiant panel (102) and delimits a waste gas space, wherein a combustion air mixing space (indicated in annotated Fig. 1 above) precedes the burner (200), which space is connected to a combustion air source (see 132) and the waste gas space (104/114).
Regarding Claim 4, COLANNINO further discloses wherein the waste gas space is connected to the combustion air mixing space (indicated in annotated Fig. 1 above) by way of an ejector (see 128), wherein the driving medium of the ejector (128) is combustion air (see 132) introduced by means of the fan (130), and the medium drawn into the combustion air mixing space (indicated in annotated Fig. 1 above) is waste gas situated in the waste gas space (104/114).
Regarding Claim 5, COLANNINO further discloses wherein a setting apparatus (134) is provided, by way of which the proportion of the combustion air volume stream to the waste gas volume of the ejector (128) can be adjusted.
Regarding Claim 6, COLANNINO further discloses wherein the combustion air mixing space (indicated in annotated Fig. 1 above) is arranged within the fan (130; i.e., the combustion air continues to mix within the fan 130).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COLANNINO in view of KR 2007097930 A (hereinafter “JEONG”).
Regarding Claim 2, COLANNINO does not disclose wherein the hydrogen supply and the fan are configured and oriented in such a manner that the hydrogen flow and the combustion air flow are set at an angle relative to one another, wherein the angle is preferably less than or equal to 90 degrees and greater than or equal to 45 degrees.
JEONG teaches a hydrogen burner wherein the hydrogen supply (see 20) and the fan (1) are configured and oriented in such a manner that the hydrogen flow (see 90) and the combustion air flow (see airflow arrow in pipe 10) are set at an angle relative to one another, wherein the angle is preferably less than or equal to 90 degrees and greater than or equal to 45 degrees (see Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
682
816
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify COLANNINO wherein the hydrogen supply and the fan are configured and oriented in such a manner that the hydrogen flow and the combustion air flow are set at an angle relative to one another, wherein the angle is preferably less than or equal to 90 degrees and greater than or equal to 45 degrees as taught and/or suggested by JEONG, since such a modification would assist the desired mixing of said hydrogen flow and the combustion air flow due to the turbulence created by the relative orientations of the flows.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COLANNINO in view of JP 2000018525 A (hereinafter “WASA”).
Regarding Claim 7, COLANNINO does not disclose wherein the hydrogen supply is passed over a distributor panel, in a whole-area manner, which panel is arranged parallel to and at a distance from the radiant panel and delimits a fuel mixing chamber.
WASA teaches a radiant hydrogen burner wherein the hydrogen supply is passed over a distributor panel (3), in a whole-area manner, which panel is arranged parallel to and at a distance from the radiant panel (1) and delimits a fuel mixing chamber (4).
PNG
media_image3.png
662
1146
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify COLANNINO wherein the hydrogen supply is passed over a distributor panel, in a whole-area manner, which panel is arranged parallel to and at a distance from the radiant panel and delimits a fuel mixing chamber as taught and/or suggested by WASA, since both references teach a hydrogen burner comprising a radiant panel, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to substitute one hydrogen burner for the other to achieve the predictable result of combusting a mixture of hydrogen fuel and combustion air.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COLANNINO in view of GB 2,595,499 A (hereinafter “PETER”).
Regarding Claims 10 and 11, COLANNINO does not disclose wherein an optical sensor is provided, which is set up for detecting at least one parameter of the flame produced by the burner; wherein the optical sensor is a UV sensor.
PETER teaches a burner wherein an optical sensor (16) is provided, which is set up for detecting at least one parameter of the flame produced by the burner (29); wherein the optical sensor is a UV sensor (“The optical sensor element can be formed for example as a photodiode, an Active Pixel Sensor (CMOS-Sensor), a charge-coupled device (CCD) sensor or as another measuring element that appears appropriate to the person skilled in the art, for detecting, in particular, ultraviolet electromagnetic radiation.”).
PNG
media_image4.png
784
969
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify COLANNINO wherein an optical sensor is provided, which is set up for detecting at least one parameter of the flame produced by the burner; wherein the optical sensor is a UV sensor as taught and/or suggested by PETER, since such a modification would provide a means to confirm the presence or absence of the burner flame thus providing a means to determine the operational status of said burner.
Regarding Claim 12, COLANNINO in view of PETER does not disclose explicitly disclose wherein the optical sensor is directed at the radiant panel so as to enclose a preferably obtuse angle with it.
Nonetheless, the relative position of the claimed elements in PETER suggest wherein the optical sensor (16) is directed at the radiant panel (30) so as to enclose a preferably obtuse angle with it (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify COLANNINO in view of PETER wherein the optical sensor is directed at the radiant panel so as to enclose a preferably obtuse angle with it as taught and/or suggested by Fig. 1 of PETER, since such a modification would provide a direct line of sight to said radiant panel thereby providing a means to confirm the presence or absence of the burner flame thus providing a means to determine the operational status of said burner.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COLANNINO in view of PETER as applied to Claim 10 above, and further in view of AT 402574 B (hereinafter “AT’574”).
Regarding Claim 13, COLANNINO in view of PETER does not disclose wherein a reflector that encloses the radiant panel at least in certain regions is provided, the reflector being provided with a window, wherein the optical sensor is oriented toward the radiant panel, from outside of the reflector, through the window.
AT’574 teaches a radiant surface burner (7) wherein a reflector (see 14) that encloses the radiant panel (27) at least in certain regions is provided, the reflector being provided with a window (see 9), wherein the optical sensor (10) is oriented toward the radiant panel (27), from outside of the reflector (see again 14), through the window (see again 9).
PNG
media_image5.png
784
1065
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify COLANNINO in view of PETER wherein a reflector that encloses the radiant panel at least in certain regions is provided, the reflector being provided with a window, wherein the optical sensor is oriented toward the radiant panel, from outside of the reflector, through the window as taught and/or suggested by AT’574, since such a modification would provide a direct line of sight to said radiant panel thereby providing a means to confirm the presence or absence of the burner flame thus providing a means to determine the operational status of said burner.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COLANNINO in view of PETER as applied to Claim 10 above, and further in view of WO 2017/103000 A1 (hereinafter “THOMAS”).
Regarding Claim 11, COLANNINO in view of PETER does not disclose wherein the optical sensor is connected to a setting device connected to the fuel gas supply, for interrupting and/or setting the hydrogen supply.
PNG
media_image6.png
870
1109
media_image6.png
Greyscale
THOMAS discloses a radiator wherein the optical sensor (21) is connected to a setting device (see 17, 18) connected to the fuel gas supply (see 7), for interrupting and/or setting the fuel supply (see the provided English translation: “The gas supply of the burner comprises a flow measuring member, for example a diaphragm 16 and a differential pressure sensor 15 and two electrically or pneumatically controlled opening valves 17 and 18 providing the double dam function.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify COLANNINO in view of PETER wherein the optical sensor is connected to a setting device connected to the fuel gas supply, for interrupting and/or setting the hydrogen supply as taught and/or suggested by THOMAS, since such a modification would provide a means to control the fuel supply via the radiator control system (see Thomas, the provided English translation: “The combustion system is equipped with an electronic control module 23 located in the immediate vicinity of the burner, with output 23a and input 23b signals. The input signals according to the example shown are the positions of the controlled valves 14 and 18, the flame detection 21, the air and gas flow measurements 12 and 15, the residual oxygen in the humid fumes measured by the sensor 24 and the temperature of the tube measured by the thermocouple 25. The output signals are the controls of the valves 14, 17 and 18 and the ignition control 22.”).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COLANNINO in view of PETER and THOMAS as applied to Claim 14 above, and further in view of US 2021/0356126 A1 (hereinafter “ZINK”).
Regarding Claim 15, THOMAS further teaches wherein the setting device (17, 18) is connected to a control and regulation module (23).
COLANNINO in view of PETER and THOMAS does not disclose: which is programmed for regulating the flame properties using reference parameters stored in memory, by means of changing the amounts of hydrogen and/or combustion air.
ZINK teaches a system and method in which (i) a flame scanner provides UV and/or IR wave period and amplitude information for a burner flame and (ii) a flame stabilization metering module determines whether the wave period and amplitude of the flame have reached warning and shutoff set points for the burner, thus indicating that the operation of the burner is unstable, or that a flame out event is likely, and, in which event, corrective actions are taken, or the burner is shut down, to restore stable operation and prevent a flame out from occurring: wherein a control and regulation module (6) is programmed for regulating the flame properties using reference parameters stored in memory (see para. [0021]: “The flame stabilization metering module 6 used in the inventive flame out prevention system 2 preferably comprises: a housing 12: a microprocessor or other computer processing unit (CPU) 14; and at least one computer readable medium, device, or other computer readable storage component 16. The one or more computer readable storage components 16 can be permanently installed in the module housing 12 or can consist of, or can include, a component, e.g., a thumb drive or other portable memory device, which is removably installed in or removably connected to the module 6. The flame stabilization metering module 6 also includes a program code which is embodied on or in the one or more computer readable storage components 16.”), by means of changing the amounts of hydrogen and/or combustion air (see para. [0030]: “Alternatively or in addition, at any time that a warning set point or a shutoff set point for the UV and/or IR wave period or amplitude of burner flame 10 is reached, the program code can optionally cause the flame stabilization and metering module 6 to automatically act, in accordance with the programmed procedure, to: (i) adjust the air level to the burner; (ii) adjust the fuel pressure to the burner; and/or (iii) adjust the fuel composition to the burner.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify COLANNINO in view of PETER and THOMAS wherein said control and regulation module is programmed for regulating the flame properties using reference parameters stored in memory, by means of changing the amounts of hydrogen and/or combustion air as taught and/or suggested by ZINK, since ZINK states that the flame scanner as directed in Fig. 1 at the flame base of the flame “provides UV and/or IR wave period and amplitude information for a burner flame and (ii) a flame stabilization metering module determines whether the wave period and amplitude of the flame have reached warning and shutoff set points for the burner, thus indicating that the operation of the burner is unstable, or that a flame out event is likely, and, in which event, corrective actions are taken, or the burner is shut down, to restore stable operation and prevent a flame out from occurring” (see ZINK, the Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 9 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the references are either in the same field of endeavor or are reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned. Please see form PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited) attached to, or included with, this Office Action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE A PEREIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-3932 and whose fax number is (571) 270-4932. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 - 5:00 EST.
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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JORGE A PEREIRO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights