DETAILED ACTION
The present office action is in response to the preliminary amendment filed on 12/13/2023. Claims 1 – 7 are pending in the application.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Claim Objections
The Examiner notes the claims appear to be a direct translation of a foreign claim set. Claims 1 – 7 should be fully reviewed for antecedent basis and grammar issues.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “outdoor” in lines 34 and 39, which should recite “the outdoor” for proper antecedent basis.
Antecedent basis for “outdoor” was established in line 31.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “suction portion”, “air conditioning portion” and “plurality of air-blowing portions” in Claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: Paragraph 0013 recites "a return air port 44 (suction portion) such as a suction louver". Paragraph 0010 recites "the air conditioning portion 16 includes a heat exchanger and an air blower, and an air-blowing portion 13 includes a fan and a motor". Therefore, the Examiner interprets "suction portion” to be a return air port such as a suction louver, “air conditioning portion” to include a heat exchanger and air blower, and “plurality of air-blowing portions” to be a plurality of fans and motors.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “A duct type air conditioning ventilation system in which an outlet is provided in a room and a heat resistant space in a high airtight and high heat resistant building, an air conditioning unit and the outlet provided in the building are connected to each other through an air conditioning duct…” in lines 1-4. This yields the claim indefinite, as one of ordinary skill in the art cannot ascertain the preamble of the claim from the positively recited body of the claim.
The claim does not recite a traditional transitional phrase of “comprising, consisting of, etc”. Accordingly, it is left of to interpretation as to what constitutes the body of the claim.
This yields the claim indefinite.
For purposes of interpretation, the Examiner interprets “An air vent configured to discharge two separate volumetric flows of air A duct type air conditioning ventilation system in which an outlet is provided in a room and a heat resistant space in a high airtight and high heat resistant building, an air conditioning unit and the outlet provided in the building are connected to each other through an air conditioning duct…” in lines 1-4 to recite “A duct type air conditioning ventilation system comprising resistant building, an air conditioning unit and the outlet provided in the building are connected to each other through an air conditioning duct…”.
Claim 1 recites “an outlet is provided in a room and a heat resistant space in a high airtight and heat resistant building” in lines 1-2, which is indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
It is unclear how to interpret the limitation recited above in lines 1-2.
Is the room and the heat resistant space two separate and defined parts of the building? Or is the “heat resistant space” describing the room? Or is the heat resistant space the interior space of the room?
Is there an outlet in both the room and the heat resistant space? Or just an outlet provided in the room?
Because one of ordinary skill cannot ascertain the metes and bounds of the limitation, the claim is indefinite.
For purposes of examination, the Examiner interprets lines 1-3 to further recite “A duct type air conditioning ventilation system for a high airtight and high heat resistant building including a room and a heat resistant space, the duct type air conditioning ventilation system comprising an outlet provided in the room, an air conditioning unit…”
Claim 1 recites “the heat resistant space where the outlet is provided” in line 8. This yields the claim indefinite because line 2 recites the outlet is provided in the room.
For purposes of examination, the Examiner interprets “a wind passage from the room and the heat resistant space where the outlet is provided” in line 8 to recite “a wind passage from the room where the outlet is provided and the heat resistant space”.
Claim 1 recites “the suction portion, the air conditioning portion and the plurality of air-blowing portions are provided with a filter portion A, a filter portion B, and a filter portion C, respectively” in lines 13-14. This yields the claim indefinite.
Do each of the suction portion, the air conditioning portion, and the plurality of air-blowing portions each have a filter portion A, a filter portion B, and a filter portion C? Or does the suction portion include filter portion A, the air conditioning portion include filter portion B, and the plurality of air-blowing portions include filter portion C?
Assuming the latter, does each air-blowing portion of the plurality of air-blowing portions include a filter portion C? Or is there one filter portion C for the plurality of air-blowing portions?
Claim 1 recites “conditioned air within 5 K at the time of a cooling operation and within 10 K at the time of a heating operation are created with respect to temperature of air around the air conditioning duct” in lines 22-24. It is unclear how to interpret “5 K” and “10 K”, yielding the claim indefinite.
“K” in reference to temperature is Kelvin.
5 K is equivalent to -268.15 Celsius or -450.67 Fahrenheit.
10 K is equivalent to -263.15 Celsius or -441.67 Fahrenheit.
These temperatures do not make sense in a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning context. It is noted the air conditioning duct is located within the high airtight and high heat resistant building. Therefore, the air surrounding the air conditioning duct is reasonably in the range of 55 – 85 Fahrenheit.
Because the scale of Kelvin makes no logical sense with regard to building air temperature, one of ordinary skill may assume this is a typo and should be either Celsius or Fahrenheit. This yields the claim indefinite.
For purposes of examination, the Examiner interprets conditioned air within 5 K at the time of a cooling operation and within 10 K at the time of a heating operation are created with respect to temperature of air around the air conditioning duct” in lines 22-24 to be as recited, with K being Kelvin.
Claim 1 recites “the room which is not provided with the outlet” in lines 34-35. Antecedent basis for only one room has been established in the claim. As recited in lines 1-2, the outlet is provided in the room.
Because the room is provided with the outlet, the limitation “the room which is not provided with the outlet” in lines 34-35 is in disagreement with the limitation of lines 1-2. A room which is provided with an outlet cannot also not be provided with the outlet.
This yields the claim indefinite.
For purposes of examination, the Examiner interprets there to be more than one room in the building.
Claims 2 – 7 are rejected for their dependency on Claim 1.
Appropriate action is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding Claim 1, the closest prior art is as follows:
Funada et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2020/0292198) teaches (Figure 1):
A duct type air conditioning and ventilation system (20) for a high airtight and high heat resistant building (1) including a room (2d) and a heat resistant space (18), the duct type air conditioning ventilation system (20) comprising:
an outlet (the outlet in 2d associated with 3d, as illustrated in Figure 1) provided in the room (2d),
an air conditioning unit (9) and the outlet (the outlet in 2d associated with 3d, as illustrated in Figure 1) provided in the building (1) are connected to each other through an air conditioning duct (the duct associated with 3d, as illustrated in Figure 1),
conditioned air (air exiting 9) which is cleaned by the air conditioning unit (9) is created;
the cleaned conditioned air (air exiting 9) flows (via 3d) from the air conditioning unit (9) to the outlet (the outlet in 2d associated with 3d, as illustrated in Figure 1), and
a wind passage (the duct from 6d to 9, as illustrated in Figure 1) from the room (2d) where the outlet (the outlet in 2d associated with 3d, as illustrated in Figure 1) is provided and the heat resistant space (18) and which returns to the air conditioning unit (9) is a circulation passage,
a suction portion (the suction inlet of 9) and an air conditioning portion (the heat exchanger of 9) are provided in this order in the air conditioning unit (9) from an upstream side toward a downstream side of the circulation passage (the duct from 6d to 9, as illustrated in Figure 1),
a portion of the air sucked by the suction portion (the suction inlet of 9) is air-conditioned (by the heat exchanger) by the air-conditioning portion (the heat exchanger of 9),
conditioned air (air exiting 9) within 5 K at the time of a cooling operation and within 10 K at the time of a heating operation (it is inherent the temperature of the conditioned air is within 5 K of the air surrounding the duct in the cooling operation and within 10 K of the air surrounding the duct in the heating operation, since it is impossible for air to exit an air conditioner at 5 K or 10 K) are created with respect to temperature of air around the air conditioning duct (the duct associated with 3d, as illustrated in Figure 1),
the cleaned conditioned air (air exiting 9) is blown into the air conditioning duct (the duct associated with 3d, as illustrated in Figure 1) toward the outlet (the outlet in 2d associated with 3d, as illustrated in Figure 1), thereby air-conditioning and air-cleaning the room (2d) and the heat resistant space (18) through the circulation passage (the duct from 6d to 9, as illustrated in Figure 1),
the air conditioning ventilation system (20) further includes an outdoor air introduction passage (the passage associated with 4) for introducing outdoor air (fresh air) into the air conditioning unit (9) from outdoor (the atmosphere surrounding 1),
the outdoor air introduction passage (the passage associated with 4) is provided with an introduction fan (4) and a filter (it is inherent the outside air is filtered to avoid bugs from entering 18), and the introduced outdoor air is cleaned (via the filter),
the air conditioning ventilation system (20) further includes an indoor air exhausting passage (5c) for discharging air (exhaust air) in the building (1) to outdoor (the atmosphere surrounding 1) from the room (2c) which is not provided with the outlet (as illustrated in Figure 1, the outlet of 3d is not associated with 2c), and
the indoor air exhausting passage (5c) is provided with an exhaust fan (5c is an exhaust fan), and a portion of the air (air within 1) which is accumulated in the building (1) is discharged to outdoor (via 5c).
However, Funada lacks showing the air conditioning duct is formed in the heat resistant space, a mixing portion and a plurality of air-blowing portions are provided in the air conditioning unit downstream of the air conditioning portion, the suction portion, the air conditioning portion, and the plurality of air-blowing portions are provided with a filter portion A, a filter portion B, and a filter portion C, respectively, air sucked from the suction portion through the circulation passage is cleaned by the filter portion A, the portion of the air sucked from the suction portion and air-conditioned is also cleaned by the filter portion B, blown-out air which is blown out from the air conditioning portion and a remaining portion of the portion of the air sucked from the suction portion are mixed, by the plurality of air- blowing portions, with each other in the mixing portion located upstream of the filter portion C, the conditioned air is further cleaned by the plurality of air-blowing portions and the filter portion C.
The prior art, either alone or in combination, does not provide teachings to modify Funada accordingly.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided in the Notice of References Cited.
The following prior art teaches related building air conditioning and ventilation systems:
Yajima et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,928,092): see Figure 1
Heigl (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2019/0145642): see Figure 1
Grabinger et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,364,318): see Figure 1
Ahmed (U.S. Patent No. 7,758,407): see Figure 1
Helt et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2006/0117769): see Figure 1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANA K TIGHE whose telephone number is (571)272-9476. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:00 - 4:00.
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, Steve McAllister, can be reached on 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.
/DANA K TIGHE/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/AVINASH A SAVANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762