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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figures 4 and 9-10 are not legible. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “third input” and “fluid process loop” (those are not labeled in figures) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-20 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 1 recites the limitation "the fluid" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also claim 1 recites limitation about “tank holding water” and “the fluid from the tank”. It’s not clear as to if “fluid” is “water”. Examiner interprets (for examining purpose) that the fluid is the water in the tank.
Claim 7 recites “heating system”. It is unclear as to if it refers to the same heating system of preamble.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the fluid" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also claim 17 recites limitation about “tank holding water” and “the fluid from the tank”. It’s not clear as to if “fluid” is “water”. Examiner interprets (for examining purpose) that the fluid is the water in the tank.
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 1-4 and 9-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Namba (US 20160093515).
Regarding claim 1, Namba teaches a heating system, comprising:
a tank (5, fig 1) with a first input (inlet of tank 5 that receives fluid from pipe 91, fig 1) and a second input (inlet of tank 5 that receives fluid from pipe 16, fig 1), the first input “configured to accept a flow of water from a first water source” (This is intended function) and the second input “configured to accept a flow of water from a second water source” (This is intended function), the tank holding a volume of water at a first temperature (tank 5 holds deionized water from pipe 91 and water inherently has a first temperature);
a heater (14, fig 1) in fluid communication with and located downstream of the tank (see fig 1), the heater “configured to heat at least a portion of the fluid from the tank from the first temperature to a second temperature higher than the first temperature” (Heater inherently is capable of heating fluid);
an outlet valve (12, fig 1) in fluid connection with an outlet (outlet of 14) of the heater and a first end (upstream end) of a fluid process loop (the loop would be a flow path from valve 12 to pipe 10, to processor 1, to pipe 50, to tank 6 or 7, to pipe 20a and back to tank 5); and
a return valve (21, fig 1) in fluid connection with a second end (downstream end) of the process fluid loop and a third input (an inlet of tank 5 that receives fluid from pipe 20) of the tank; and
wherein “the fluid at the second temperature is configured to exit the heating system at the outlet valve such that the fluid circulates through the fluid process loop and returns back to the tank through the third input of the tank, the tank configured to accept a flow of water from the first input, the second input, and the third input and to combine each flow of water to achieve a desired temperature of the volume of water in the tank” (the system is capable of performing this functional limitation).
Regarding claim 2, Namba teaches “the flow of water from the first water source is at a third temperature and the flow of water from the second water source is at a fourth temperature, the fourth temperature at a temperature higher than the third temperature” (water is not positively recited to be part of heating system, therefore this is an intended function).
Regarding claim 3, Namba teaches the first water source is a source of ambient temperature water and the second water source is a source of heated water above ambient temperature (water is not positively recited to be part of heating system, therefore this is an intended function).
Regarding claim 4, Namba teaches the second water source is a natural gas-fired water heater (water is not positively recited to be part of heating system, therefore this is an intended function).
Regarding claim 9, Namba teaches a filter (13, fig 1) located between the outlet of the heater and the outlet valve.
Regarding claim 10, Namba teaches “the fluid is ultra-pure deionized water” (water is not positively recited to be part of heating system, therefore this is an intended function)..
Regarding claim 11, Namba teaches the fluid process loop is a closed loop such that the fluid in the fluid process loop is not exposed to atmosphere (the fluid in the loop is recirculated and the process loop can be a closed loop)
Regarding claim 12, Namba teaches a process valve (51) in fluid connection with the fluid process loop, the process valve “is configured to route at least a portion of fluid from the fluid process loop to a process tool” (a process tool is not positively recited to be part of the system, therefore this is an intended function).
Regarding claim 13, Namba teaches “fluid routed to the process tool through the process valve is discarded to a drain after use” (process tool is an intended function. The drain is recited downstream of a part of an intended function, therefore the drain is also part of an intended function and not positively recited to be part of the system).
Regarding claim 14, Namba teaches a drain valve (52, fig 1) located downstream of the outlet of the heater, wherein the heating system is configured to route at least of a portion of the fluid through the drain valve to promote recycling of fluid in the heating system.
Regarding claim 15, Namba teaches an amount of fluid that is routed through the drain valve is calculated based upon at least one characteristic of the heating system (Namba [0019] “The controller may control the replenishment circulator such that the processing liquid in the first replenishment tank circulates while a temperature of the processing liquid in the first replenishment tank is regulated by the temperature regulator,”. Also Namba [0020] “In this case, the temperature of the processing liquid in the replenishment tank being used for collection can be maintained at the appropriate temperature”. Namba teaches that controller want to make sure a temperature in the tanks is maintained).
Regarding claim 16, Namba teaches the at least one characteristic comprises one or all of: a temperature of the water within the tank (see explanation in claim 15 rejection).
Regarding claim 17, Namba teaches a system comprising
an ambient temperature water source (a source is inherently provided to send water to pipe 91); a heated water source (water from outlet of heater 33, fig 1); a process system comprising at least one process tool (2, fig 1)
a heating system, comprising:
a tank (5, fig 1) with a first input (inlet of tank 5 that receives fluid from pipe 91, fig 1) and a second input (inlet of tank 5 that receives fluid from pipe 16, fig 1), the first input “configured to accept a flow of water from a first water source” (This is intended function) and the second input “configured to accept a flow of water from a second water source” (This is intended function), the tank holding a volume of water at a first temperature (tank 5 holds deionized water from pipe 91 and water inherently has a first temperature);
a heater (14, fig 1) in fluid communication with and located downstream of the tank (see fig 1), the heater “configured to heat at least a portion of the fluid from the tank from the first temperature to a second temperature higher than the first temperature” (Heater inherently is capable of heating fluid);
an outlet valve (12, fig 1) in fluid connection with an outlet (outlet of 14) of the heater and a first end (upstream end) of a fluid process loop (the loop would be a flow path from valve 12 to pipe 10, to processor 1, to pipe 50, to tank 6 or 7, to pipe 20a and back to tank 5); and
a return valve (21, fig 1) in fluid connection with a second end (downstream end) of the process fluid loop and a third input (an inlet of tank 5 that receives fluid from pipe 20) of the tank; and
wherein “the fluid at the second temperature is configured to exit the heating system at the outlet valve such that the fluid circulates through the fluid process loop and returns back to the tank through the third input of the tank, the tank configured to accept a flow of water from the first input, the second input, and the third input and to combine each flow of water to achieve a desired temperature of the volume of water in the tank” (the system is capable of performing this functional limitation).
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 5-8 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Namba (US 20160093515) in view of Hong (US 20210335596).
Regarding claims 5 and 18, Namba teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and 17 respectively, and a second flow controller (17, fig 1) in line with the second input, the second flow controller controls an amount of flow of water from the second water source that is sent to the tank.
Namba fails to teach a first flow controller in line with the first input and the first flow controller controls an amount of flow of water from the first water source that is sent to the tank.
Hong teaches a flow controller (411, fig 3) in line with an input (inlet of 420 that receives duct 413, fig 3) and controls an amount of flow from a source (410, fig 3) to a tank (420, fig 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Namba as taught by Hong by adding a flow controller to the first input in order to control amount of fluid flowing to the tank at a desired flowrate.
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Namba in view of Hong teaches a controller (Namba 9, fig 1) selectively controls the first flow controller and the second flow controller to achieve a desired temperature setpoint of water within the tank (Hong [0067] “The controller controls the liquid supply unit 400”. Hong also teaches a control that controls entire system).
Regarding claim 7, Namba teaches in view of Hong teaches the first flow controller and the second flow controller are controlled based on at least one characteristic of heating system (Namba [0019] “The controller may control the replenishment circulator such that the processing liquid in the first replenishment tank circulates while a temperature of the processing liquid in the first replenishment tank is regulated by the temperature regulator,”. Also Namba [0020] “In this case, the temperature of the processing liquid in the replenishment tank being used for collection can be maintained at the appropriate temperature”. Namba teaches that controller want to make sure a temperature in the tanks is maintained).
Regarding claim 8, Namba teaches in view of Hong teaches the at least one characteristic of heating system comprises one or all of: a temperature of the water within the tank (see explanation in claim 7 rejection).
Regarding claim 20, Namba teaches in view of Hong teaches the first flow controller and the second flow controller are controlled based on at least one characteristic of heating system, the at least one characteristic of heating system comprises one or all of: a temperature of the water within the tank (Namba [0019] “The controller may control the replenishment circulator such that the processing liquid in the first replenishment tank circulates while a temperature of the processing liquid in the first replenishment tank is regulated by the temperature regulator,”. Also Namba [0020] “In this case, the temperature of the processing liquid in the replenishment tank being used for collection can be maintained at the appropriate temperature”. Namba teaches that controller want to make sure a temperature in the tanks is maintained).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KO-WEI LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7675. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30-2:30 Eastern Time.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571)272-9059. 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.
/KO-WEI LIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights