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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on 22 February 2024. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-12 are currently presented in the instant application. In light of a preliminary amendment on 22 February 2024, presently, claims 1-12 have been amended.
Information Disclosure Statement(s)
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 3/18/2024 and 5/23/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 2: “which having” should be changed to --having--;
Claim 4 line 1: “in any one of” should be removed;
Claim 4 line 2: --a-- should be placed between “is” and “measured”
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 3-6, and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lorcher et al. (Publication No.: DE 10 2019 212 325 A1, herein known as D1, cited in the IDS on 3/18/2024, and a machine translation is provided herewith).
With respect to claim 1, D1 discloses a method for quantitatively determining the current conveying volume flow or another operating-point-dependent variable of a fan which having a motor-driven impeller (abstract, claim 1 and Fig. 1; operating-point-dependent variable is a pressure change, impeller 3 of fan 1; Fig. 3), comprising:
determining a motor-internal variable and a motor-external variable (speed and mass flow, respectively; claim 1, mass flow is described to be measured by a vane anemometer in claim 2, the speed or speed profile of the fan as described in claim 3,
directly or indirectly calculating or determining by means of an algorithm a conveying volume flow or the other operating-point-dependent variable from the motor-internal variable and the motor-external variable (see the graph of Fig. 1 and claim 4, with a known volume flow V and known speed n, the fan pressure increase Δp is known).
With respect to claim 3, D1 further discloses a method wherein the motor-internal value is the motor speed (claims 1 and 3, Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 4, D1 further discloses a method wherein the motor-external variable is a measured value or a signal of a sensor which is arranged in the immediate vicinity of the fan or the impeller (volume flow measured by a vane anemometer; claims 1 and 2 and Fig. 1).
With respect to claim 5, D1 further discloses a method wherein the sensor is an anemometer having a volume flow measuring wheel and the moto-external variable is the anemometer speed or the measuring wheel speed (anemometer, claim 2, measuring wheel 2 of Fig. 3; “3 shows in a perspective view and in section on a plane through the axis of rotation of the impeller 3 seen an embodiment of a fan 1 , whereby the determination of the current operating state-dependent variable with the aid of a volume flow measuring wheel 2 precisely determined funding volume flow V is carried out.”).
With respect to claim 6, D1 further discloses a method wherein the volume flow measuring wheel is mounted on an inflow-side or on an outflow-side structure so as to be able to rotate (see recitation above and measuring wheel 2’s location in Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 9, D1 further discloses a method wherein the algorithm is implemented in a motor control system or in an external evaluation unit, in each case having a processor and a memory, wherein sensor signals are transmitted to the processor via wire or contactlessly (would inherently be the case for the method to function).
D1 expressly teaches “advantageously, the user or a higher-level system can read out the current operating state-dependent variable determined, such as the pressure change or the pressure increase, and use it to control the fan or to control a complete ventilation system.”,
“The fan can control itself with the calculated current operating status dependent variable. For example, speed control as a function of a currently determined pressure increase is possible.”,
“It is also conceivable that the pressure increase or some other current operating-state-dependent variable is controlled by a user or a superordinate system can be read out, so that the user or the superordinate system can control or otherwise influence the fan speed or the ventilation system based on this information.”, and
“The current operating state-dependent variable or its course over time can also be stored and / or transmitted to the user or the fan manufacturer in order to be able to carry out further optimizations.”.
All of these teachings indicates that there is some control system (that inherently has to be inside or external) that has a processor with a memory (in order to perform the designated functions) and communication for the control has to be wire or contactlessly as that generally encompasses all means of communications.
With respect to claim 10, D1 further discloses a method wherein the fan or the fan motor has an interface which is used to transmit a determined current conveying volume flow or a determined current operating-state-dependent variable to a superordinate system (see all recitations in above claim 9 rejection, particularly ““It is also conceivable that the pressure increase or some other current operating-state-dependent variable is controlled by a user or a superordinate system can be read out, so that the user or the superordinate system can control or otherwise influence the fan speed or the ventilation system based on this information.”).
With respect to claim 11, D1 further discloses a method wherein a signal for a setpoint volume flow or a setpoint value for an operating-point-dependent variable is transmitted to the motor and/or to the evaluation unit, said signal being used to control a motor speed in such a way that the conveying volume flow or the operating-point-dependent variable determined using a sensor signal or sensor signals corresponds as accurately as possible to the setpoint volume flow or to the setpoint value for the operating-point dependent variable (see recitations from above claim 9 rejection, in which the values determined are used to control the system for maximum efficiency).
With respect to claim 12, D1 discloses a fan for applying a method as claimed in claim 1, configured for controlling the current conveying volume flow or the current operating-point-dependent variable (see rejections of claim 1 and 9-11 above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1.
With respect to claim 2, D1 does not explicitly disclose a method wherein the motor-internal variable is an electric current, in the motor or in the control system thereof.
However, the properties of the motor is known, including the voltage levels needed to achieve the designated and known speeds (such as those shown in Fig. 1), and from that the current could be readily determined by one of ordinary skill in the art as a way of calculating/determining the motor speed.
With respect to claim 7, D1 does not explicitly disclose a method wherein the sensor is a thermal sensor which reacts sensitively to a flow velocity.
Instead, D1 teaches that “It is also already known from the prior art to determine the volume flow using the shaft torque with backward curved radial impellers, using differential pressure measurements at the inlet nozzle or using a vane anemometer or thermal anemometer”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the method of D1 by utilizing a thermal anemometer either additionally or in lieu of the vane anemometer for measuring the volume flow as established in the prior art.
With respect to claim 8, D1 does not explicitly disclose a method wherein the sensor is a differential pressure sensor which detects a pressure difference between two specific points in a flow field of the fan.
D1 further teaches “From the prior art known from practice, it is already known to determine the pressure increase using differential pressure sensors.” and “According to the above, it is possible to determine the pressure change or pressure increase of a fan with pressure sensors, in particular also speed monitoring or torque monitoring of a fan in order to be able to indirectly determine the clogging of filters or icing.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the method of D1 by utilizing pressure sensors as known in the art to determine the pressure changes or increases, as an alternative way or to more accurately gauge the changes than just using the method of the algorithm.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Loercher et al. (Publication No.: US 2022/0397121 A1)
Nagaluru et al. (Publication No.: US 2022/0163042 A1)
Wystup et al. (Publication No.: US 2022/0145892 A1)
Yang et al. (Publication No.: US 2019/0331123 A1)
Zhang et al. (Publication No.: US 2016/0281723 A1)
Welsch (Publication No.: US 2013/0306300 A1)
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIANA HANCOCK whose telephone number is (571)270-7547. The examiner can normally be reached on 10AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached on (571) 272-3555. 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.
/D.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2852
3/21/2026
/STEPHANIE E BLOSS/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852