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
Claims 2, 13, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 should read “The plate assembly of claim 1, comprising”
Claim 13 should read “The plate assembly of claim 1, comprising”
Claim 15 should read “The plate assembly of claim 1, comprising”
Appropriate correction is required.
Applicant is advised that should claim 2 be found allowable, claim 15 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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 18-19 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 18 recites the limitation “wherein the airflow control elements have a uniform distribution with respect to a height of the first side.” It is unclear how Applicant intends for the “height of the first side” to be determined. For example, such a height may be measured between the first side to the second side or from a first side of a first plate to a first side of a second plate.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “wherein a density of the airflow control elements is non-uniform along a height of the first side.” It is unclear how Applicant intends for the “height of the first side” to be determined. For example, such a height may be measured between the first side to the second side or from a first side of a first plate to a first side of a second plate.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-7, 12-18, and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. US 2014/0260398 A1 to Kozubal et al. (hereinafter referred to as Kozubal).
Regarding claim 1, Kozubal teaches a plate assembly (Fig. 1), comprising: a first plate (Fig. 2, stack 230) comprising: a first side defining a side of a conditioning channel (Fig. 2, upper membrane layer 232 partially defines a channel in which supply air 250 is received and flows through to form outlet air 254), the first side configured to receive desiccant (Fig. 2, upper membrane layer 232 receives liquid desiccant 233); and a second side, opposite the first side (Fig. 2, lower membrane layer 238), defining a side of an exhaust channel (Fig. 2, lower membrane layer 239 partially defines a channel in which exhaust air 258 flows through), at least one of the first side and the second side comprising a plurality of support structures distributed in a predetermined pattern and configured to maintain a predetermined width of the respective conditioning channel or exhaust channel(¶0059 “Dividers or spacers (not shown) would typically be provided to space these layers apart to define flow channels for coolant 215 and for liquid desiccant 217.”).
Regarding claim 2, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, comprising a second plate (Fig. 2, stack 240), wherein the plurality of support structures are configured to engage the second plate (Fig. 3, dividers 370 have contact points with both stack 230 and stack 240), and wherein the second plate and the second side define the exhaust channel (Fig. 2, exhaust air flows between lower membrane layer 238 and stack 240).
Regarding claim 5, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, wherein the plurality of support structures comprise embossed features (¶0061 “The dividers 370 may take many forms such as a mesh with a wavy pattern (e.g., an S or W-shaped side or cross sectional view)”).
Regarding claim 6, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 5 above, wherein the embossed features comprise at least one feature that is stamped, molded, machined, 3D printed, or additively attached to the at least one of the first side and the second side of the first plate (Fig. 3, the wavy pattern of dividers 370 are attached to both the first side and second side of stack 230).
Regarding claim 7, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, wherein the plurality of support structures are uniformly distributed throughout at least a portion of a surface area of the at least one of the first side and the second side of the first plate (Fig. 3, dividers 370 are uniformly distributed across the surface area of both the first and second side of stack 230).
Regarding claim 12, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, wherein the plurality of support structures are distributed on the first side and are configured to prevent expansion of the conditions channel (Fig. 3, dividers 370 are distributed across upper membrane layer 232 of stack 230 ; ¶0061 “Fig. 3 also illustrates the use of a divider or flow field baffle 370 that functions to maintain a separation of membranes in the stacks 212, 230, 240”).
Regarding claim 13, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, comprising a second plate (Fig. 2, stack 240), wherein the plurality of support structures are configured to engage the second plate (Fig. 3, dividers 370 have contact points with both stack 230 and stack 240), and wherein the second plate and the first side of the first plate define the conditioning channel (Fig. 2, upper membrane layer 232 and stack 240 define a channel in which supply air 250 is received and flows through to form outlet air 254).
Regarding claim 14, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, wherein the plurality of support structures are distributed on the second side and are configured to prevent collapse of the exhaust channel (Fig. 3, dividers 370 are distributed across lower membrane layer 238 of stack 230 ; ¶0061 “Fig. 3 also illustrates the use of a divider or flow field baffle 370 that functions to maintain a separation of membranes in the stacks 212, 230, 240”).
Regarding claim 15, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, comprising a second plate (Fig. 2, stack 240), wherein the plurality of support structures are configured to engage the second plate (Fig. 3, dividers 370 have contact points with both stack 230 and stack 240), and wherein the second plate and the second side define the exhaust channel (Fig. 2, exhaust air flows between lower membrane layer 238 and stack 240).
Regarding claim 16, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, wherein the plurality of support structures are distributed on each of the first side and the second side of the first plate (Fig. 3, dividers 370 are distributed across both upper membrane layer 232 and lower membrane layer 238 of stack 230), wherein at least a first portion of the plurality of support structures distributed on the first side are aligned with at least a second portion of the plurality of support structures distributed on the second side (Fig. 3, dividers 370 are aligned with one another on either side of stack 230).
Regarding claim 17, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, wherein the plurality of support structures comprise airflow control elements configured to divert airflow within at least one of the exhaust channel and the conditioning channel (¶0061 “The dividers 370 may take any forms such as a mesh with a wavy pattern, with the mesh selected to provide as little resistance to air flow as practical” ; Fig. 3, dividers 370 help to direct airflow through both channels).
Regarding claim 18, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 17 above, wherein the airflow control elements have a uniform distribution with respect to a height of the first side (Fig. 3, dividers 370 which may comprise a mesh are uniformly distributed across upper membrane layer 232).
Regarding claim 20, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 17 above, wherein the airflow control elements are distributed on the first side of the first plate and configured to provide a distribution of airflow across a height of the conditioning channel (Fig. 3, dividers 370 which may comprise a mesh are distributed across upper membrane layer 370 and help to direct airflow through the channel between upper membrane layer 232 and lower membrane layer 238).
Regarding claim 21, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 17 above, wherein the airflow control elements are configured to engage the second plate and divert the airflow across a height of the exhaust channel (Fig. 3, dividers 370 which may comprise a mesh have contact points with second stack 240 and help to direct airflow through the exhaust channel).
Regarding claim 22, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above, wherein the plate assembly comprises a header configured to divert at least a portion of an airflow through the conditioning channel to the exhaust channel (Fig. 3, dividing wall 360 ; ¶0061 “A smaller portion is directed by divider 360 to flow between stacks 230, 240 as pre-cooled exhaust air 355.”).
Regarding claim 23, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly of claim 1 as applied above, wherein the second side is configured to direct a flow of fluid through the exhaust channel (Fig. 2, lower membrane layer 238 defines a channel through which exhaust air 258 flows).
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.
Claims 3-4 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozubal.
Regarding claim 3, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 1 above. Kozubal further teaches heat transfer elements between channels (Fig. 25, slit fins 2544), wherein the use of such heat transfer elements improves the effectiveness of indirect evaporative coolers (IECs) that have plastic separator plates (Fig. 2, separation wall 234 ; ¶0111 “The inventors assert that the effectiveness of the IEC using plastic separator plates (or plates made of other lower thermal conductivity materials) can be improved through the use of heat transfer enhancements as taught herein”). Kozubal does not teach wherein the plurality of support structures comprise heat transfer elements. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the heat transfer elements as taught by Kozubal could simultaneously act in place of the support structures (Fig. 25, slit fins 2544 are capable of maintaining a predetermined width between conditioning and exhaust channels). The heat transfer elements as taught by Kozubal would be capable of use as support structures. See MPEP § 2112.01(I). Furthermore, the use of a single element to act as both a heat transfer element and a support structure would be merely a matter of obvious engineering choice. See MPEP § 2144.04(V)(B).
Regarding claim 4, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 3 above, wherein the heat transfer elements are fin-shaped (¶0113 “In one IEC implementation, heat transfer enhancements are provided in the form of slit fins”).
Regarding claim 8, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 7 above. Kozubal further teaches that it is desirable to limit the area of contact between the membrane layers and the support structures to maintain effective moisture transfer (¶0061 “The dividers 370 may take many forms such as a meth with a wavy pattern, with the mesh selected to provide as little resistance to air flow as practical … Also, it is desirable to limit the number of contact points or areas with the membranes as these can block moisture transfer from the air 250 and to the air 355.”). Kozubal does not explicitly teach wherein the portion of the surface area of the at least one of the first side and the second side of the first plate is less than 15% of the surface area of the at least one of the first side and the second side of the first plate. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to minimize the surface area in which the support structures contact the plates to ensure effective moisture transfer between the air and the desiccant. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A).
Regarding claim 9, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 7 above. Kozubal further teaches that it is desirable to limit the area of contact between the membrane layers and the support structures to maintain effective moisture transfer (¶0061 “The dividers 370 may take many forms such as a meth with a wavy pattern, with the mesh selected to provide as little resistance to air flow as practical … Also, it is desirable to limit the number of contact points or areas with the membranes as these can block moisture transfer from the air 250 and to the air 355.”). Kozubal does not explicitly teach wherein the portion of the surface area of the at least one of the first side and the second side of the first plate is between 5% and 10% of the surface area of the at least one of the first side and the second side of the first plate. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to minimize the surface area in which the support structures contact the plates to ensure effective moisture transfer between the air and the desiccant. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A).
Regarding claim 10, Kozubal teaches the plate assembly as applied to claim 7 above. Kozubal further teaches that it is desirable to limit the area of contact between the membrane layers and the support structures to maintain effective moisture transfer (¶0061 “The dividers 370 may take many forms such as a meth with a wavy pattern, with the mesh selected to provide as little resistance to air flow as practical while still providing adequate strength. Also, it is desirable to limit the number of contact points or areas with the membranes as these can block moisture transfer from the air 250 and to the air 355.”). Kozubal does not explicitly teach wherein the portion of the surface area of the at least one of the first side and the second side of the first plate is at least 10% of the surface area of the at least one of the first side and the second side of the first plate. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to minimize the surface area in which the support structures contact the plates to ensure effective moisture transfer between the air and the desiccant while still maintaining structural integrity. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is 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.
Lowenstein (US 2016/0327345 A1) teaches an indirect evaporative cooler comprising plates with heat exchanger elements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL MARIE SLAUGOVSKY whose telephone number is (571)272-0188. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 pm 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/RACHEL MARIE SLAUGOVSKY/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights