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 § 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 1-10 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.
The term “proximate” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “proximate” 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. Clarification is requested.
The term “proximate” in claim 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “proximate” 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. Clarification is requested.
Claims 2-10 are rejected based on their dependency to claim 1.
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.
Claims 1, 8, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LePoudre (US 2018/0187918).
Regarding claim 1, LePoudre teaches a three-way heat exchanger operable to transfer heat between a heat transfer fluid, a liquid desiccant, and air (Abstract, “a first fluid circuit for a first cooling fluid (a second overall fluid) and a second fluid circuit for a second cooling fluid (a third overall fluid). The first cooling fluid, also referred to herein as a desiccant, can be configured to circulate through the liquid panel assembly and condition an air stream passing through the LAMEE. The second cooling fluid, also referred to herein as a coolant, can be configured to also circulate through the panel assembly and reject heat from the first cooling fluid. The second cooling fluid can increase the cooling capacity and overall performance of the LAMEE”), the three-way heat exchanger comprising:
an airflow inlet and an airflow outlet (322, 324, Fig. 2, see paragraph [0043]);
a heat transfer fluid inlet manifold extending the airflow outlet (352, Fig. 2, paragraph [0044]) and a heat transfer fluid outlet manifold extending proximate the airflow inlet (354, Fig. 2, paragraph [0044]); and
panel assemblies (402, Fig. 4, paragraph [0053]) arranged with airflow gaps defined between adjacent panel assemblies to allow the air to flow between the airflow inlet and the airflow outlet in an airflow direction (see Fig. 4),
each panel assembly comprising:
a frame defining a heat transfer fluid channel (412, Fig. 5, paragraph [0064]), the heat transfer fluid channel being connected to the heat transfer fluid inlet and outlet manifolds for channeling a flow of the heat transfer fluid therebetween counter to the airflow direction (414, 416, Fig. 5, paragraph [0064]);
a membrane positioned on the frame and defining a desiccant channel for a flow of the liquid desiccant (418, Fig. 5, paragraph [0063]); and
a heat transfer fluid flow guide positioned in the heat transfer fluid channel to control the flow of the heat transfer fluid counter to the airflow direction (424, Fig. 5, paragraph [0058]),
the heat transfer fluid flow guide defining a heat transfer fluid flow path including a series of passageways, each passageway extending across the airflow direction (see paragraphs [0058]-[0059], see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 8, LePoudre teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 1, wherein the airflow direction is horizontal and the passageways of the heat transfer fluid flow path each extend vertically across the airflow direction (see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 10, LePoudre teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 1, wherein, for each panel assembly, an area of the heat transfer fluid channel located proximate the airflow inlet of the three-way heat exchanger is separated from the heat transfer fluid flow path by the heat transfer fluid flow guide.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2-6 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LePoudre in view of Izenson (US 2010/0132930 – provided by Applicant in the IDS).
Regarding claim 2, LePoudre teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 1, but does not specifically teach that the heat transfer fluid flow guide comprises a sheet body and baffles located on the sheet body, wherein the baffles define the heat transfer fluid flow path.
The Examiner notes that LePoudre teaches a sheet body (Fig. 5)
Izenson teaches a flow matrix structure that features a set of baffles within a predetermined manner along the flow of a heat exchanger (Izenson, 908A-D, Fig. 9, see paragraph [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre with baffles located on the sheet body, wherein the baffles define the heat transfer fluid flow path, as taught by Izenson, in order to increase the turbulence in the heat exchanger and thereby increasing the rate of heat transfer in the heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 3, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 2, wherein the baffles are located on both sides of the sheet body and define a first heat transfer fluid flow path on one side of the sheet body and a second heat transfer fluid flow path on another side of the sheet body (met through the combination as Izenson teaches the baffles within the flow matrix and LePoudre teaches a plurality of sheet bodies with a plurality of fluid flow paths shown in Fig. 4 at least).
Regarding claim 4, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 3, wherein the first and second heat transfer fluid flow paths are complementary, and wherein the heat transfer fluid flow paths each define a winding path (see LePoudre, Fig. 4, see Fig. 5 which shows the winding path identified by at least DL and DA).
Regarding claim 5, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 3, wherein each panel assembly comprises two membranes, each membrane positioned on one side of the frame (LePoudre, paragraph [0054], “Further, membranes 418 are positioned on each side of the support frame 412”), wherein one membrane defines a first desiccant channel and another membrane defines a second desiccant channel (see LePoudre, paragraph [0055]), wherein the first heat transfer fluid flow path is defined between the sheet body and the first desiccant channel and the second heat transfer fluid flow path is defined between the sheet body and the second desiccant channel (LePoudre, paragraph [0055]).
Regarding claim 6, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 5, wherein each panel assembly comprises two plates, each plate positioned between one of the membranes and the frame, wherein the plates separate the desiccant channels from the heat transfer fluid channel (LePoudre, two plates defined as 530, 528, Fig. 10A).
Regarding claim 11, LePoudre teaches a three-way heat exchanger operable to transfer heat between a heat transfer fluid, a liquid desiccant, and air (Abstract, “a first fluid circuit for a first cooling fluid (a second overall fluid) and a second fluid circuit for a second cooling fluid (a third overall fluid). The first cooling fluid, also referred to herein as a desiccant, can be configured to circulate through the liquid panel assembly and condition an air stream passing through the LAMEE. The second cooling fluid, also referred to herein as a coolant, can be configured to also circulate through the panel assembly and reject heat from the first cooling fluid. The second cooling fluid can increase the cooling capacity and overall performance of the LAMEE”), the three-way heat exchanger comprising:
a heat transfer fluid inlet manifold (352, Fig. 2, paragraph [0044]) and a heat transfer fluid outlet manifold (354, Fig. 2, paragraph [0044]); and
panel assemblies (402, Fig. 4, paragraph [0053]) arranged with airflow gaps defined between adjacent panel assemblies to allow the air to flow through the three-way heat exchanger (see Fig. 4),
each panel assembly comprising:
a frame (412, Fig. 5, paragraph [0064]) defining a heat transfer fluid channel, the heat transfer fluid channel being connected to the heat transfer fluid inlet and outlet manifolds for channeling a flow of the heat transfer fluid through the panel assembly (414, 416, Fig. 5, paragraph [0064]);
two membranes positioned on the frame, each membrane defining a desiccant channel separated from the heat transfer fluid channel (418, Fig. 5, paragraph [0063]); and
a heat transfer fluid flow guide positioned in the heat transfer fluid channel (424, Fig. 5, paragraph [0058]), the heat transfer fluid flow guide comprising:
a sheet body (Fig. 5); wherein the first and second flow paths are separated by the sheet body (Fig. 5).
LePoudre does not teach baffles defining a first flow path on one side of the sheet body and a second flow path on another side of the sheet body.
Izenson teaches a flow matrix structure that features a set of baffles within a predetermined manner along the flow of a heat exchanger (Izenson, 908A-D, Fig. 9, see paragraph [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre with baffles located on the sheet body, wherein the baffles define the heat transfer fluid flow path, as taught by Izenson, in order to increase the turbulence in the heat exchanger and thereby increasing the rate of heat transfer in the heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 12, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 11, wherein the sheet body is shaped to allow the heat transfer fluid in the heat transfer fluid channel to flow on each side of the sheet body through each flow path (LePoudre see Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 13, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 11, wherein each flow path includes a series of passageways to define a winding path (LePoudre see Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 14, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 11, wherein the frame and the heat transfer fluid flow guide have complementing alignment features for orienting the heat transfer fluid flow guide in the heat transfer fluid channel (LePoudre see Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 15, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 11, but does not teach the baffles and the sheet body are made integrally of one material. However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre with the baffles and sheet body being made integrally of one material, as it has been held that forming in one piece of an article which has been formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art.
Claims 7, 9, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LePoudre in view of Ivenson, further in view of Allen (US 11,022,330 – provided by Applicant in the IDS).
Regarding claim 7, LePoudre teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 6, wherein the heat transfer fluid flow guide includes protrusions on the sheet body to maintain a width of the heat transfer fluid channel, measured between the plates (LePoudre, see Fig. 7 at least which shows the protrusions 472, paragraph [0067]).
LePoudre does not teach when the heat transfer fluid is flowed through the heat transfer fluid channel at a negative pressure.
Allen teaches a three-way heat exchanger for a liquid desiccant air conditioning system (Allen, Title) which features a panel assembly formed by two plates (Allen, 402 formed by 406 in Fig. 4) wherein a mesh is positioned between the plates to cause flow under negative pressure (Allen, 408, Fig. 4, col. 4, lines 40-48). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre as modified with the heat transfer fluid is flowed through the heat transfer fluid channel at a negative pressure, as taught by Allen, in order to improved the rate of heat transfer efficiency in the heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 9, LePoudre teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 8, but does not teach a clearance is defined in the heat transfer fluid channel above the heat transfer fluid flow guide, the clearance being connected to one or more of the passageways of the heat transfer fluid flow path to capture entrained air from the flow of the heat transfer fluid.
Allen teaches a three-way heat exchanger for a liquid desiccant air conditioning system (Allen, Title) which features a panel assembly formed by two plates (Allen, 402 formed by 406 in Fig. 4) wherein a mesh is positioned between the plates to cause flow under negative pressure (Allen, 408, Fig. 4, col. 4, lines 40-48), and clearance is defined in the heat transfer fluid channel above the heat transfer fluid flow guide (Allen, 404, Fig. 5A), the clearance being connected to one or more of the passageways of the heat transfer fluid flow path to capture entrained air from the flow of the heat transfer fluid (drawn to intended use, see Fig. 5A, the space 404 is capable of capturing air).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre as modified with a clearance is defined in the heat transfer fluid channel above the heat transfer fluid flow guide, as taught by Allen, in order to improved the rate of heat transfer efficiency in the heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 16, LePoudre as modified teaches the three-way heat exchanger of claim 11, wherein each panel assembly comprises two plates (LePoudre, two plates defined as 530, 528, Fig. 10A), each plate positioned between one of the membranes and the frame to separate the desiccant channels from the heat transfer fluid channel (LePoudre, see Fig. 10A), and wherein the heat transfer fluid flow guide includes protrusions on the sheet body to maintain a width of the heat transfer fluid channel (LePoudre, see Fig. 7 at least which shows the protrusions 472, paragraph [0067]), measured between the plates.
LePoudre as modified does not teach when the heat transfer fluid is flowed through the heat transfer fluid channel at a negative pressure.
Allen teaches a three-way heat exchanger for a liquid desiccant air conditioning system (Allen, Title) which features a panel assembly formed by two plates (Allen, 402 formed by 406 in Fig. 4) wherein a mesh is positioned between the plates to cause flow under negative pressure (Allen, 408, Fig. 4, col. 4, lines 40-48). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre as modified with the heat transfer fluid is flowed through the heat transfer fluid channel at a negative pressure, as taught by Allen, in order to improved the rate of heat transfer efficiency in the heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 17, LePoudre teaches a heat exchanger operable to transfer heat between a heat transfer fluid and air, the heat exchanger (Abstract, “a first fluid circuit for a first cooling fluid (a second overall fluid) and a second fluid circuit for a second cooling fluid (a third overall fluid). The first cooling fluid, also referred to herein as a desiccant, can be configured to circulate through the liquid panel assembly and condition an air stream passing through the LAMEE. The second cooling fluid, also referred to herein as a coolant, can be configured to also circulate through the panel assembly and reject heat from the first cooling fluid. The second cooling fluid can increase the cooling capacity and overall performance of the LAMEE”) comprising:
a heat transfer fluid inlet manifold (352, Fig. 2, paragraph [0044]) and a heat transfer fluid outlet manifold (354, Fig. 2, paragraph [0044]); and
panel assemblies (402, Fig. 4, paragraph [0053]) arranged with airflow gaps defined between adjacent panel assemblies to allow the air to flow through the heat exchanger (see Fig. 4),
each panel assembly comprising:
a frame (412, Fig. 5, paragraph [0064]) connected to the heat transfer fluid inlet and outlet manifolds; two plates positioned on the frame, the plates and the frame defining a heat transfer fluid channel for channeling the heat transfer fluid through the panel assembly (414, 416, Fig. 5, paragraph [0064]); and
a heat transfer fluid flow guide positioned in the heat transfer fluid channel (424, Fig. 5, paragraph [0058]), the heat transfer fluid flow guide comprising:
a sheet body (Fig. 5);
protrusions on the sheet body to maintain a width of the heat transfer fluid channel, measured between the plates (see Fig. 7 at least which shows the protrusions 472, paragraph [0067]),
LePoudre does not teach baffles on the sheet body, the baffles defining a flow path for the heat transfer fluid in the heat transfer fluid channel; and when the heat transfer fluid is flowed through the heat transfer fluid channel at a negative pressure.
Izenson teaches a flow matrix structure that features a set of baffles within a predetermined manner along the flow of a heat exchanger (Izenson, 908A-D, Fig. 9, see paragraph [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre with baffles located on the sheet body, wherein the baffles define the heat transfer fluid flow path, as taught by Izenson, in order to increase the turbulence in the heat exchanger and thereby increasing the rate of heat transfer in the heat exchanger.
Allen teaches a three-way heat exchanger for a liquid desiccant air conditioning system (Allen, Title) which features a panel assembly formed by two plates (Allen, 402 formed by 406 in Fig. 4) wherein a mesh is positioned between the plates to cause flow under negative pressure (Allen, 408, Fig. 4, col. 4, lines 40-48). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre as modified with the heat transfer fluid is flowed through the heat transfer fluid channel at a negative pressure, as taught by Allen, in order to improved the rate of heat transfer efficiency in the heat exchanger.
Regarding claim 18, LePoudre as modified teaches the heat exchanger of claim 17, but does not teach the baffles, the protrusions, and the sheet body are made integrally of one material.
However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre with the baffles and sheet body being made integrally of one material, as it has been held that forming in one piece of an article which has been formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 19, LePoudre as modified teaches the heat exchanger of claim 18, but does not teach the one material is a polymer material.
However, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide LePoudre with the one material is a polymer material, as it has been held that to be within the general skill of one in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of design choice.
Regarding claim 20, LePoudre as modified teaches the heat exchanger of claim 17, wherein the heat transfer fluid flow guide is able to float in the heat transfer fluid channel (the guides are capable of floating depending on a condition in which it is required to do so, which is not claimed).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAEL N BABAA whose telephone number is (571)270-3272. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 EST.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (571)-270-5054. 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.
/NAEL N BABAA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights