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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 8/7/2026 has been entered. All previous objections and 112 rejections have been withdrawn
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/7/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: to reduce potential confusion, Examiner recommends rewriting claim 12 so as to more closely relate to its parent claim without creating the uncertainties of whether the elements described in claim 12 are distinct from those mentioned in claim 1. The suggestion would be as follows:
12. A system for carrying out the method as claimed in claim 1, having the at least one fan having the electric motor, the at least one sensor for recording the at least on measured value, including the sound pressure and/or the structure-borne sound vibration, and the computing unit for determining acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic values for the at least one defined time interval and/or for the at least one defined operating point, wherein the manipulated variable used to adjust the operating point of the fan is the at least one of an operating time, a torque, a power consumption, an angle of attack, a nozzle cross section, a blade damper position in a flow duct, external hardware, or adjusting the at least one of an operating time, a power consumption, an angle of attack, a nozzle cross section, a blade damper position in a flow duct of other fans for noise suppression.
In claim 6, the phrase “an electric motor of the fan” should be changed to “the electric motor of the fan”.
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 and 12 and its associated dependents 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, line 8, recites “at least one defined operating point”. Claim 1, line 9, recites “at permissible operating points”. However, claim 1, line 11, recites “the operating point”. Examiner is somewhat confused by the latest mention of “operating point”. Is the “operating point” mentioned in line 11 the at least one defined operating point in line 8 or one of the permissible operating points in line 9? Examiner requests clarification.
Claim 1 and 12 also recite “external hardware”. This term has nowhere been defined so as to allow a skilled artisan to understand its nature with a sufficient degree. Examiner recommends its cancellation.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 9 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shyu (US 5,203,178) in view of Giaimo (US20140094973).
Claim 1: Shyu discloses a method (Figs. 2-3) for operating at least one fan (4, 7), the fan having an electric motor (A, B), comprising using at least one sensor (15) to record at least one measured value during operation of the fan (Figs. 2-3, see col. 2, lines 34-35), the measured value being at least one of a sound pressure and/or a structure-borne sound vibration (note col. 2, lines 30, “vibration”), the at least one measured value being used as a parameter by a computing unit (16/17) to determine acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic values for at least one defined time interval and/or for at least one defined operating point (Figs. 2-3, note col. 2, lines 37-41 and col. 3, lines 1-13, Examiner noting the operation point at “Start” and the rotation values just before the end in Fig. 2), and the fan being operated, at permissible operating points (col. 3, lines 1-15; e.g., note the reset fundamental rotation values in Fig. 2 when the sensed noise value is normal), wherein the acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic values lie in a defined range (col. 3, lines 1-15, note “normal” or minimum value” that exhibits the least noise) and wherein a manipulated variable used to adjust the operating point of the fan is speed adjustment for noise suppression (col. 3, lines 1-15, Examiner noting the modulation of speed values to the best suited speed for noise minimization). Shyu, however, is not explicit about the manipulation variable is at least one of an operating time, a torque, a power consumption, an angle of attack, a nozzle cross section, a blade damper position in a flow duct, external hardware, or adjusting at least one of an operating time, a power consumption, an angle of attack, a nozzle cross-section, a blade damper position in a flow duct of other fans. Nevertheless, Giaimo teaches a fan speed adjustment arrangement to reduce noise (Fig. 3) whose typical control methods can be alternatively controlled using pulse width modulation (PWM, see paragraph 31), which adjusts the power consumption of the associated fan by way of a control signal’s duty cycle. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the PWM control as taught by Giaimo in Shyu as PWM control can be more energy efficient and allow for more precise control than typical control systems.
Claim 2: Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Shyu further discloses that a hiding of impermissible operating points is compensated for by way of shorter and/or longer operation at permissible operating points (Figs. 2-3; Examiner noting that not operating at the noisy operating points/values, which will be hidden in the sense the controller will not operate at those points, will be compensated such that the controller operates at reset rotation values that provide normal/acceptable noise).
Claim 3: Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Shyu further discloses that an acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic value determined is at least one of a loudness, a volume level, a sound pressure level (Examiner notes that these will inherently be measured by Shyu’s microphone 15), a sound power level and a specific frequency component.
Claim 5: Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Shyu further discloses that the acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic values are taken as a basis for defining an automatic control, with the result that automatic operation of the fan takes place as a result of at least one of: an actual value of an acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic value being compared with a target value of an acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic value (Figs. 2-3; note analysis in Figure 2 which involves whether the sensed noise value normal and which progresses to ultimately choose a rotation value that provides the lowest noise value); and an actual value of an acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic value being compared with a limit value of an acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic value.
Claim 6: Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Shyu further discloses that a central automatic control is produced on an electric motor of the fan (Figs. 1-3); or in a decentralized automatic control (16/17) for multiple electric motors of multiple fans including the fan (see col. 3, lines 1-4).
Claim 9: Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Shyu further discloses that another parameter considered by the computing unit (16/17) is whether a person is present in the surroundings of the fan (Fig. 3; see also col. 3, lines 30-37, 40-45).
Claim 11: Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Shyu further discloses that the sensor is at least one of an acceleration sensor, a sound pressure sensor (15, a microphone measures sound pressure), a soft sensor/virtual sensor, sensors for describing the operating state, sensors for describing the operating environment; and manipulated variables.
Claim 12: Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Shyu discloses a system for carrying out the method as claimed in claim 1, having at least one fan having an electric motor (A/B), at least one sensor (15) for recording a measured value (Fig. 1, Examiner noting that 15 can be a microphone), including a sound pressure (Examiner notes that a microphone will inherently measure sound pressure) and/or a structure-borne sound vibration, and a computing unit (16/17) for determining acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic values for at least one defined time interval and/or for at least one defined operating point (Figs. 2-3, note col. 2, lines 37-41 and col. 3, lines 1-13, Examiner noting the operation point at “Start” and the rotation values just before the end in Fig. 2; see also col. 3, lines 1-15, note “normal” or minimum value” that exhibits the least noise) and wherein, as can be appreciated from Giaimo, the manipulated variable used to adjust the operating point of the fan is at least one of an operating time, a torque, a power consumption (see paragraph 31, note use of PWM control which adjusts the power consumption of the associated fan by way of a control signal’s duty cycle), an angle of attack, a nozzle cross section, a blade damper position in a flow duct, external hardware, or adjusting at least one of an operating time, a power consumption, an angle of attack, a nozzle cross-section, a blade damper position in a flow duct of other fans for noise suppression.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abali (US 7,282,873) in view of Shyu (US 5,203,178) and in further view of Giaimo (US20140094973).
Claim 1: Abali discloses a method (Figs. 3a-5) for operating at least one fan (501/502), comprising using at least one sensor (560) to record (via 552) at least one measured value during operation of the fan , the measured value being at least one of a sound pressure and/or a structure-borne sound vibration (note element 560 can be a microphone which inherently measures sound pressure), the at least one measured value being used as a parameter by a computing unit (553) to determine acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic values for at least one defined time interval and/or for at least one defined operating point (as shown in Fig. 9, note short term adjustment speed operating point), and the fan being operated, at permissible operating points (Fig. 9, note “Signal short-term adjustment speed to fan speed controller” to approach cancellation phase difference), wherein the acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic values lie in a defined range (Examiner noting that these adjustment speed are chosen to allow for a phase difference value that can be stored in memory (see col. 6, lines 15-37). Abali is not explicit about the fan having a motor. However, such provisions are well known in the art as taught by Shyu (Fig. 1, note motor A associated with fan 4).
Abali is also not explicit about a manipulation variable to adjust the operating point of the fan (for noise suppression) is at least one of an operating time, a torque, a power consumption, an angle of attack, a nozzle cross section, a blade damper position in a flow duct, external hardware, or adjusting at least one of an operating time, a power consumption, an angle of attack, a nozzle cross-section, a blade damper position in a flow duct of other fans. Nevertheless, Giaimo teaches a fan speed adjustment arrangement to reduce noise (Fig. 3) whose typical control methods can be alternatively controlled using pulse width modulation (PWM, see paragraph 31), which adjusts the power consumption of the associated fan by way of a control signal’s duty cycle. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the PWM control as taught by Giaimo in Abali as PWM control can be more energy efficient and allow for more precise control than typical control systems.
Claim 7: Abali, Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Abali further discloses that multiple fans are arranged and a load distribution is performed (Figs. 5-6), with the result that the fans are collectively operated at a permissible operating point (col. 7, lines 25-63).
Claim 8: Abali, Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Abali further discloses that an acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic variable is adapted in a way to at least reduce another acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic variable (see col. 6, lines 15-37, Abstract).
Claim 14: Abali, Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Abali further discloses that the acoustic and/or psychoacoustic characteristic variable is adapted to at least one: raise a sound power level to reduce tonality; use multiple quieter fans to mask the sound of another, louder fan; use individual fans, when multiple fans are operating, to apply antiphase sound in a specific way in order to decrease or cancel out an annoying sound (see col. 6, lines 15-37, Abstract).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abali (US 7,282,873) in view of Shyu (US 5,203,178) and Giaimo (US20140094973) and in further view of Bahner (WO9630649A1).
Claim 10: Abali, Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Abali is not explicit about the measured values are used to record anomalies during the operation of the fan for example a bearing damage, a soiling, an imbalance, a material fatigue, a manufacturing defect, a resonance, a separation and/or a nozzle whistling. However, Bahner teaches a blower apparatus which utilizes a sound sensor (11) to record (via 13/14) anomalies such as bearing damage/wear during the operation of the fan (see Abstract; paragraph 17). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize a sound sensor to detect anomalies as taught by Bahner in the apparatus of Abali in order to be made aware of damage such as to the bearing.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abali (US 7,282,873) in view of Shyu (US 5,203,178) and Giaimo (US20140094973) and in further view of Bard (US20090092261)
Claim 13: Abali, Shyu and Giaimo teach the previous limitations. Modified Abali is not explicit about the at least one of the loudness, the volume level, the sound pressure level, the sound power level and the specific frequency component, comprises at least one of a third-octave level, a tonality, a roughness; a sharpness; a fluctuation strength; a psychoacoustic annoyance; a pitch; and an impulsiveness. However, Bard teaches a fan arrangement in which at least one of the loudness, the volume level, the sound pressure level, the sound power level and the specific frequency component, comprises at least one of a third-octave level, a tonality, a roughness; a sharpness; a fluctuation strength; a psychoacoustic annoyance; a pitch; and an impulsiveness (see paragraphs 80-85). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to investigate further sound qualities as taught by Bard into the apparatus of Abali so as to be able to better pinpoint and remedy the source of the acoustic annoyance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner has utilized the Giaimo reference to address the new claim amendments presented by Applicant.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN C ZOLLINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-7815. The examiner can normally be reached Generally M-F 9-4 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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/NATHAN C ZOLLINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights