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 Arguments
Examiner acknowledges the cancellation of claims 5, 10, 16 and 21.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the drawing amendments, see page 10 of the Remarks, filed 27 January 2026, with respect to the drawing objections of claims 11 and 22 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The drawing objections of claims 11 and 22 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the specification amendments, see page 10 of the Remarks, filed 27 January 2026, with respect to the objections of the specification have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of the specification have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see page 11 of the Remarks, filed 27 January 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 13 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of independent claim 13 containing new limitations including the elastic modulus that changed the scope of the claim.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see pages 12-16 of the Remarks, filed 27 January 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-12, 14-20, and 22 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of independent claim 1 containing new limitations including the elastic modulus that changed the scope of the claim.
While claims 1 and 13 contain a new scope that includes the elastic modulus, many of the references used in the rejection are being reused. The Applicant’s arguments will be addressed for the references.
The limitations “a compressible heat exchanger positioned within the chamber in contact with the working fluid, the compressible heat exchanger comprising a porous foam material with an elastic modulus configured to permit the compressible heat exchanger to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of volume of the chamber to transfer heat between the working fluid and the compressible heat exchanger” and “wherein the porous foam material defines pores and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores” are taught by Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Van de Ven, and Hunn.
Ingersoll discloses a compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) is within the chamber (240, Figure 2) which is in contact with the working fluid to transfer heat between the working fluid and the compressible heat exchanger (Paragraphs [0115] and [0119-0120]). Ingersoll has the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber (Paragraphs [0112] and [0120]). The compressible heat exchanger can be different shapes, sizes, and structures with high thermal conductivity (Paragraphs [0119-0120]).
Ingersoll 2 teaches a motor (110, Figure 1) powered by an energy source (Paragraph [0049]) with the motivation to power the energy system with renewable energy to reduce pollution.
Van de Ven teaches the heat exchanger (332, Figure 3) comprises a porous foam material (Paragraph [0064) that allows the heat exchanger (332, Figure 3) to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber (Paragraph [0029] and [0066]) with the motivation to increase the surface area to have better heat transfer (Paragraph [0063]). When combined with the compressible heat exchanger of Ingersoll, the compressible heat exchanger is made of a porous foam material.
Hunn, as seen on page 13 of the Remarks, is used in the rejection to teach the porous foam material (120, Figure 3A, the multi-celled electrically conductive base material is the porous foam material) defines pores (122, Figure 3A) and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores (Paragraph [0022], the ligaments are between the cells). As seen in the combination of Ingersoll and Van de Ven, the compressible heat exchanger would comprise a porous foam material that would have the structure seen in the Hunn.
The references in combination as seen above in the response and below in the rejection teach the limitations.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, and 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingersoll (US 20140369857 A1) in view of Ingersoll 2 (US 20150089948 A1) in further view of Van de Ven (US 20170002803 A1), Hunn (US 20030064606 A1), and Partnou (WO 201400886 A2).
Regarding Claim 1:
Ingersoll discloses a system of compressed air energy storage (200, Figure 2 and Paragraph [0115], the CAES system is the system of compressed air energy storage), the system comprising:
a motor (221, Figure 2, the actuator is the motor) powered by an energy source (Paragraph [0116], the motor is powered by electricity as it is an electric motor);
a compressor (220 and 226, Figure 2, the pressure vessel and the piston are the compressor) operatively connected to the motor (221, Figure 2), the compressor defining a chamber (240, Figure 2),
the compressor (220 and 226, Figure 2) operable to pressurize a working fluid by altering a volume of the chamber between an expanded state and a compressed state (Paragraph [0117], the volume of the chamber is altered between an expanded and compressed state based on the piston);
a compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) positioned within the chamber (240, Figure 2) and in contact with the working fluid to transfer heat between the working fluid and the compressible heat exchanger (Paragraphs [0115] and [0119-0120], the working fluid is the air that exchange heat with the heat exchanger); and
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber (Paragraphs [0112] and [0120], the compressible heat exchanger expands and contracts as the volume changes in the chamber (240) where the heat exchanger could be formed with various materials).
Ingersoll does not disclose:
a motor powered by an energy source; and
the compressible heat exchanger comprising a porous foam material with an elastic modulus that allows the compressible heat exchanger to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber to transfer heat between the working fluid and the compressible heat exchanger,
wherein the porous foam material defines pores and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores.
Ingersoll 2 teaches an energy system with a compressor/expander device, comprising:
a motor (110, Figure 1) powered by an energy source (Paragraph [0049], the wind farm is the energy source).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll to include a motor powered by an energy source as taught by Ingersoll 2 with the motivation to power the energy system with renewable energy to reduce pollution.
Ingersoll and Ingersoll 2 do not teach:
the compressible heat exchanger comprising a porous foam material with an elastic modulus that allows the compressible heat exchanger to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber to transfer heat between the working fluid and the compressible heat exchanger,
wherein the porous foam material defines pores and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores.
Van de Ven teaches a static liquid piston compressor, comprising:
wherein the heat exchanger (332, Figure 3, the porous media is the heat exchanger) comprises a porous foam material (Paragraph [0064], the heat exchanger is made of metallic foam) that allows the heat exchanger (332, Figure 3) to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber (Paragraph [0029] and [0066], the foam reversibly compresses and expands within the chamber (the interior of the cylinder (304))).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll and Ingersoll 2 to include the heat exchanger comprises a foam that allows the heat exchanger to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber as taught by Van de Ven with the motivation to increase the surface area to have better heat transfer.
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, and Van de Ven do not teach:
the compressible heat exchanger comprising a porous foam material with an elastic modulus,
wherein the porous foam material defines pores and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores.
Hunn teaches a thermal insulator, comprising:
wherein the porous foam material (120, Figure 3A, the multi-celled electrically conductive base material is the porous foam material) defines pores (122, Figure 3A) and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores (Paragraph [0022], the ligaments are between the cells).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2 and Van der Ven to include the porous foam material defines pores and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores as taught by Hunn with the motivation to reduce the weight and density of the foam to allow for a lighter system for transport.
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, and Van de Ven do not teach:
the compressible heat exchanger comprising a porous foam material with an elastic modulus.
Partnou teaches a foam metal heat-emitting element, comprising:
a porous foam material with an elastic modulus (Paragraph [0006]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, and Van der Ven to include a porous foam material with an elastic modulus as taught by Partnou with the motivation to maintain structural integrity under stress.
Through the combination of Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, Van de Ven, and Partnou, the compressible heat exchanger of Ingersoll would be made of a porous foam material as seen in Van de Ven which contains an elastic modulus as seen in Partnou with the structure of the foam presented in Hunn.
Regarding Claim 2:
Ingersoll discloses:
an inlet valve configured to fluidically connect the chamber (240, Figure 2) to a source to fill the chamber with the working fluid when the volume of the chamber is in the expanded state (Paragraph [0115], a valve is coupled to the inlet conduit that allows for communication with the chamber during the compression and/or expansion cycle); and
an outlet valve configured to fluidically connect to the chamber (240, Figure 2) to release the working fluid from the chamber after the compressor has pressurized the working fluid and the volume of the chamber is in the compressed state (Paragraph [0115], a valve is coupled to the outlet conduit that allows for communication with the chamber during the compression and/or expansion cycle).
Ingersoll, Hunn, Vitkorovich, and Ingersoll 2 do not explicitly teach:
an inlet valve configured to fluidically connect the chamber to a source to fill the chamber with the working fluid when the volume of the chamber is in the expanded state; and
an outlet valve configured to fluidically connect the chamber to a storage tank to release the working fluid from the chamber after the compressor has pressurized the working fluid and the volume of the chamber is in the compressed state.
Van de Ven teaches a static liquid piston compressor, comprising:
an inlet valve (342, Figure 3, the unidirectional valve is the inlet valve) configured to fluidically connect the chamber (Paragraph [0057], the chamber is the interior of the piston assembly (300)) to a source (312, Figure 3) to fill the chamber with the working fluid when the volume of the chamber is in the expanded state (Paragraphs [0058-0059], the inlet valve allows for fluid to enter during the expansion state); and
an outlet valve (342, Figure 3, the unidirectional valve in the outflow passage (318) is the outlet valve) configured to fluidically connect the chamber to a storage tank (314, Figure 3, the outflow source is the storage tank) to release the working fluid from the chamber after the compressor has pressurized the working fluid and the volume of the chamber is in the compressed state (Paragraphs [0058-0059], the outlet valve allows for fluid to exit when in the compressed state).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, and Partnou to include an inlet valve configured to fluidically connect the chamber to a source to fill the chamber with the working fluid when the volume of the chamber is in the expanded state and an outlet valve configured to fluidically connect the chamber to a storage tank to release the working fluid from the chamber after the compressor has pressurized the working fluid and the volume of the chamber is in the compressed state as taught by Van de Ven with the motivation to supply and remove the working fluid to increase efficiency of the compressor by having the piston be isothermally acted upon.
Regarding Claim 3:
Ingersoll discloses:
a piston (226, Figure 2) within the chamber (240, Figure 2); and
a piston rod (227, Figure 2) connected to the piston (226, Figure 2) such that the piston rod engages with the piston to alter the volume of the chamber between the expanded state and the compressed state (Paragraphs [0115] and [0117], the piston rod and the piston alter the volume of the chamber (240) between expanded and compressed states).
Regarding Claim 4:
Ingersoll discloses:
wherein the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) fills the chamber (240, Figure 2) when the volume of the chamber is in the expanded state, and wherein the compressible heat exchanger essentially fills the chamber when the volume of the chamber is in the compressed state (Paragraphs [0113] and [0119-0120], the compressible heat exchanger can have different sizes and shapes where it fills the chamber when compressed or expanded).
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, Van de Ven, and Partnou does not disclose:
wherein the compressible heat exchanger fills thirty percent of the chamber when the volume of the chamber is in the expanded state, and wherein the compressible heat exchanger essentially fills the chamber when the volume of the chamber is in the compressed state.
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, Van de Ven and Partnou discloses the claimed invention except for the compressible heat exchanger fills thirty percent of the chamber when the volume of the chamber is in the expanded state and fills the chamber when the volume of the chamber is in the compressed state. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the compressible heat exchanger fills thirty percent of the chamber when the volume of the chamber is in the expanded state and fills the chamber when the volume of the chamber is in the compressed state, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 6:
Ingersoll discloses:
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2).
Ingersoll, Partnou, and Ingersoll 2 do not teach:
wherein the structural ligaments have widths of less than 100 microns.
Van de Ven teaches:
the foam heat exchanger (Paragraph [0064], the heat exchanger is made of metallic foam).
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Partnou, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein the structural ligaments have widths of less than 100 microns.
Hunn teaches a thermal insulator, comprising:
wherein the structural ligaments have widths of less than 100 microns (Paragraph [0022], the ligaments have a diameter of 0.003-0.02 inches or 76.2-502 microns).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Partnou and Van der Ven to include the structural ligaments have widths of less than 100 microns as taught by Hunn with the motivation to conform the foam to any shape to have it work in a variety of applications.
Regarding Claim 7:
Ingersoll discloses:
wherein the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) comprises a mass loading (Paragraphs [0104], [0106], and [0120], the heat transfer element can have any configuration that allows for a high surface area per unit mass to account for the rate of the working chamber being filled with fluid (mass loading)) and the chamber (240, Figure 2).
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, Van de Ven and Partnou do not teach:
wherein the compressible heat exchanger comprises a mass loading between two and five as compared to the working fluid in the chamber.
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, Van de Ven and Partnou discloses the claimed invention except for the compressible heat exchanger comprises a mass loading between two and five as compared to the working fluid in the chamber. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the compressible heat exchanger comprises a mass loading between two and five as compared to the working fluid in the chamber, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 12:
Ingersoll discloses:
a pump (Paragraphs [0102] and [0116], the pump is connected to the actuator) operatively connected to the motor (221, Figure 2) and fluidically connected to the chamber (240, Figure 2),
wherein the pump is operable to fill the chamber with a processing fluid to move the volume of the chamber to the compressed state and pressurize the working fluid within the chamber, and wherein the pump is operable to drain the processing fluid from the chamber to actuate the volume of the chamber to the expanded state and to permit the working fluid to fill the chamber (Paragraphs [0102] and [0117], the pump drives the piston to permit liquid in and out of the chamber).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingersoll in view of Ingersoll 2 in further view of Van der Ven, Hunn, Partnou, and Ingersoll Figure 12 (US 20140369857 A1).
Regarding Claim 8:
Ingersoll discloses:
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2).
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Partnou, Hunn, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein a work required to compress the compressible heat exchanger is less than two percent of a work required to compress the working fluid within the chamber.
Ingersoll teaches a capacitor in Figure 12, comprising:
wherein a work required to compress the heat exchanger has over 6% less compression work (Paragraphs [0142] and [0189], the heat exchanger (capacitor) has over 6% less compression work).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Partnou, Hunn, and Van der Ven to include a work required to compress the heat exchanger has over 6% less compression work as taught by Ingersoll Figure 12 with the motivation to have the air leave at a steady temperature due to the compression cylinder have a better energy storage density.
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Van der Ven, Partnou, Hunn, and Ingersoll Figure 12 the claimed invention except for a work required to compress the compressible heat exchanger is less than two percent of a work required to compress the working fluid within the chamber. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a work required to compress the compressible heat exchanger is less than two percent of a work required to compress the working fluid within the chamber, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingersoll in view of Ingersoll 2 in further view of Van der Ven, Hunn, Partnou, and Queheillalt (US 20040123980 A1).
Regarding Claim 9:
Ingersoll discloses:
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) can be made out of a composite material including a carbon polymer compound (Paragraphs [0104] and [0120]).
Ingersoll, Hunn, Partnou, and Ignersoll 2 do not teach:
wherein the porous foam material comprises a polymer.
Van de Ven teaches:
the porous foam meterial (Paragraph [0064], the heat exchanger is made of metallic foam).
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein the porous foam material comprises a polymer.
Queheillalt teaches a heat exchange foam, comprising:
the porous foam material comprises any composite material (Paragraph [0054], the foam can be made from a composite material).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven to include the foam comprises a polymer as taught by Queheillalt with the motivation to prevent corrosion of the foam which can lead to improper heat exchange.
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Van der Ven, Hunn, Partnou, and Queheillat discloses the claimed invention except for the foam comprises a polymer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the foam comprise a polymer, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingersoll in view of Ingersoll 2 in further view of Van de Ven, Hunn, Partnou, and Brenan (US 6074363 A).
Regarding Claim 11:
Ingersoll discloses:
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) can be made out of a composite material including a carbon polymer compound and a wire mesh (Paragraphs [0104] and [0112]); and
wherein the compressible heat exchanger is configured to expand and compress with the chamber (Paragraph [0117], the compressible heat exchanger moves between an expanded and compressed state).
Ingersoll, Partnou, Hunn, and Ingersoll 2 do not teach:
wherein the porous foal material of the compressible heat exchanger comprises a foam with a wire.
Van de Ven teaches:
the porous foam material of the heat exchanger (Paragraph [0064], the heat exchanger is made of metallic foam).
Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Partnou, Hunn, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein the porous foal material of the compressible heat exchanger comprises a foam with a wire.
Brenan teaches a heat exchanger, comprising:
wherein the heat exchanger (800, Figure 8A) comprises a foam (808, Figure 8B) i with a wire (802, Figure 8B).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Partnou, Hunn and Van der Ven to include the heat exchanger comprises a foam with a wire as taught by Brenan with the motivation to protect the wire from external forces that may cause damage to the wire.
Claims 13-15 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingersoll (US 20140369857 A1) in view of Van de Ven (US 20170002803 A1) in further view of Hunn (US 20030064606 A1), and Partnou (WO 201400886 A2).
Regarding Claim 13:
Ingersoll discloses a compressor (200, Figure 2, the compressor/expander device is the compressor) for a stored energy system (Paragraph [0115], the compressor is used in a stored energy system (CAES)), the compressor comprising:
a housing (220, Figure 2, the pressure vessel is the housing) defining a volume (240 and 241, Figure 2, the volume is the chambers);
an actuator (221, Figure 2) operable to expand the volume and compress the volume (Paragraph [0116], the actuator expands and compresses the volume); and
a heat exchanger (223, Figure 2, the heat transfer element is the heat exchanger) located at least partially within the housing (Figure 2, the heat exchanger is located within the housing) and in contact with a working fluid (Paragraphs [0115] and [0119-0120], the working fluid is the air that exchange heat with the heat exchanger) to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber caused by the actuator (Paragraphs [0112] and [0120], the compressible heat exchanger expands and contracts as the volume changes in the chamber (240) where the heat exchanger could be formed with various materials),
wherein the heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) is configured to:
compress when the actuator compresses the volume;
expand when the actuator expands the volume (Paragraphs [0112], [0115] and [0120], the heat exchanger expands and compresses with the volume as the heat exchanger is a mesh screen); and
transfer heat with a working fluid (Paragraphs [0105] and [0120], the heat exchanger transfers heat with a working fluid).
Ingersoll does not disclose:
the compressible heat exchanger comprising a porous foam material with an elastic modulus that allows the compressible heat exchanger to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber caused by the actuator,
wherein the porous foam material defines pores and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores.
Van de Ven teaches a static liquid piston compressor, comprising:
the heat exchanger (332, Figure 3, the porous media is the heat exchanger) comprising a porous foam material (Paragraph [0064], the heat exchanger is made of metallic foam) that allows the heat exchanger (332, Figure 3) to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber (Paragraph [0029] and [0066], the foam reversibly compresses and expands within the chamber (the interior of the cylinder (304))).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll to include the heat exchanger comprising a foam that allows the heat exchanger to reversibly compress and expand proportionally with changes of the volume of the chamber as taught by Van de Ven with the motivation to increase the surface area to have better heat transfer.
Ingersoll and Van de Ven do not teach:
the compressible heat exchanger comprising a porous foam material with an elastic modulus,
wherein the porous foam material defines pores and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores.
Hunn teaches a thermal insulator, comprising:
wherein the porous foam material (120, Figure 3A, the multi-celled electrically conductive base material is the porous foam material) defines pores (122, Figure 3A) and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores (Paragraph [0022], the ligaments are between the cells).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll and Van der Ven to include the porous foam material defines pores and includes structural ligaments extending between adjacent pores as taught by Hunn with the motivation to reduce the weight and density of the foam to allow for a lighter system for transport.
Ingersoll, Hunn, and Van de Ven do not teach:
the compressible heat exchanger comprising a porous foam material with an elastic modulus.
Partnou teaches a foam metal heat-emitting element, comprising:
a porous foam material with an elastic modulus (Paragraph [0006]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Ingersoll 2, Hunn, and Van der Ven to include a porous foam material with an elastic modulus as taught by Partnou with the motivation to maintain structural integrity under stress.
Through the combination of Ingersoll, Hunn, Van de Ven, and Partnou, the compressible heat exchanger of Ingersoll would be made of a porous foam material as seen in Van de Ven which contains an elastic modulus as seen in Partnou with the structure of the foam presented in Hunn.
Regarding Claim 14:
Ingersoll discloses:
an inlet valve configured to fluidically connect the housing (220, Figure 2) to a source to fill the housing with the working fluid when the volume of the housing is expanded (Paragraph [0115], a valve is coupled to the inlet conduit that allows for communication with the volume of the housing during the compression and/or expansion cycle); and
an outlet valve configured to fluidically connect to the housing (220, Figure 2) to release the working fluid from the housing after the compressor has pressurized the working fluid and the volume of the housing is compressed (Paragraph [0115], a valve is coupled to the outlet conduit that allows for communication with the chamber during the compression and/or expansion cycle).
Ingersoll, Hunn, and Partnou does not explicitly teach:
an inlet valve configured to fluidically connect the housing to a source to fill the housing with the working fluid when the volume of the housing is expanded; and
an outlet valve configured to fluidically connect the housing to a storage tank to release the working fluid from the housing after the compressor has pressurized the working fluid and the volume of the housing is compressed.
Van de Ven teaches:
an inlet valve (342, Figure 3, the unidirectional valve is the inlet valve) configured to fluidically connect the housing (Paragraph [0057], the housing is the exterior of the piston assembly (300)) to a source (312, Figure 3) to fill the housing with the working fluid when the volume of the housing is expanded (Paragraphs [0058-0059], the inlet valve allows for fluid to enter during the expansion); and
an outlet valve (342, Figure 3, the unidirectional valve in the outflow passage (318) is the outlet valve) configured to fluidically connect the housing to a storage tank (314, Figure 3, the outflow source is the storage tank) to release the working fluid from the housing after the compressor has pressurized the working fluid and the volume of the housing is compressed (Paragraphs [0058-0059], the outlet valve allows for fluid to exit when in the compressed state).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Hunn, and Partnou to include an inlet valve configured to fluidically connect the housing to a source to fill the housing with the working fluid when the volume of the housing is expanded and an outlet valve configured to fluidically connect the housing to a storage tank to release the working fluid from the housing after the compressor has pressurized the working fluid and the volume of the housing is compressed as taught by Van de Ven with the motivation to supply and remove the working fluid to increase efficiency of the compressor by having the piston be isothermally acted upon.
Regarding Claim 15:
Ingersoll discloses:
wherein the heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) fills the housing (220, Figure 2) when the volume of the housing is expanding, and wherein the heat exchanger essentially fills the housing when the volume of the housing is compressed (Paragraphs [0113] and [0119-0120], the compressible heat exchanger can have different sizes and shapes where it fills the chamber when compressed or expanded).
Ingersoll, Van de Ven, Hunn, and Partnou do not disclose:
wherein the heat exchanger fills thirty percent of the housing when the volume of the housing is expanded, and wherein the heat exchanger essentially fills the housing when the volume of the housing is compressed.
Ingersoll, Van de Ven, Hunn, and Partnou discloses the claimed invention except for the heat exchanger fills thirty percent of the housing when the volume of the housing is expanded, and wherein the heat exchanger essentially fills the housing when the volume of the housing is compressed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the heat exchanger fills thirty percent of the housing when the volume of the housing is expanded, and wherein the heat exchanger essentially fills the housing when the volume of the housing is compressed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 17:
Ingersoll discloses:
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2).
Ingersoll and Partnou do not teach:
wherein the structural ligaments have widths of less than fifty microns.
Van de Ven teaches:
the foam heat exchanger (Paragraph [0064], the heat exchanger is made of metallic foam).
Ingersoll, Partnou, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein the structural ligaments have widths of fifty than 100 microns.
Hunn teaches a thermal insulator, comprising:
wherein the structural ligaments have widths of between 76.2-502 microns (Paragraph [0022], the ligaments have a diameter of 0.003-0.02 inches or 76.2-502 microns).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Partnou and Van der Ven to include the structural ligaments have widths of less than fifty microns as taught by Hunn with the motivation to conform the foam to any shape to have it work in a variety of applications.
Ingersoll, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven do not teach:
the structural ligaments have widths of less than fifty micron.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the Ingersoll, Van der Ven, Partnou, and Hunn references, to have the structural ligaments have widths of less than fifty micron, since applicant has not disclosed that having the structural ligaments have widths of less than fifty micron solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the device would perform equally well with either designs.
Furthermore, absent a teaching as to criticality that the structural ligaments have widths of less than fifty micron, this particular arrangement is deemed to have been known by those skilled in the art since the instant specification and evidence of record fail to attribute any significance (novel or unexpected results) to a particular arrangement. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553,555,188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding Claim 18:
Ingersoll discloses:
wherein the heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) comprises a mass loading (Paragraphs [0104], [0106], and [0120], the heat transfer element can have any configuration that allows for a high surface area per unit mass to account for the rate of the working chamber being filled with fluid (mass loading)) and the housing (220, Figure 2).
Ingersoll, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein the heat exchanger comprises a mass loading between two and five as compared to the working fluid in the housing.
Ingersoll, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven discloses the claimed invention except for the compressible heat exchanger comprises a mass loading between two and five as compared to the working fluid in the chamber. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the compressible heat exchanger comprises a mass loading between two and five as compared to the working fluid in the chamber, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingersoll in view of Van der Ven in further view of Hunn, Partnou, and Ingersoll Figure 12 (US 20140369857 A1).
Regarding Claim 19:
Ingersoll discloses:
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2).
Ingersoll, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein a work required to compress the compressible heat exchanger is less than one-tenth of one percent of a work required to compress the working fluid within the housing.
Ingersoll teaches a capacitor in Figure 12, comprising:
wherein a work required to compress the heat exchanger has over 6% less compression work (Paragraphs [0142] and [0189], the heat exchanger (capacitor) has over 6% less compression work).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven to include a work required to compress the heat exchanger has over 6% less compression work as taught by Ingersoll Figure 12 with the motivation to have the air leave at a steady temperature due to the compression cylinder have a better energy storage density.
Ingersoll, Van der Ven, Hunn, Partnou, and Ingersoll Figure 12 the claimed invention except for a work required to compress the compressible heat exchanger is less than one-tenth of one percent of a work required to compress the working fluid within the housing. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a work required to compress the compressible heat exchanger is less than one-tenth of one percent of a work required to compress the working fluid within the housing, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingersoll in view of Van der Ven in further view of Hunn, Partnou, Queheillalt (US 20040123980 A1).
Regarding Claim 20:
Ingersoll discloses:
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) can be made out of a composite material including a carbon polymer compound (Paragraphs [0104] and [0120]).
Ingersoll, Hunn, and Partnou do not teach:
wherein the porous foam material comprises a polymer.
Van de Ven teaches:
the porous foam meterial (Paragraph [0064], the heat exchanger is made of metallic foam).
Ingersoll, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein the porous foam material comprises a polymer.
Queheillalt teaches a heat exchange foam, comprising:
the porous foam material comprises any composite material (Paragraph [0054], the foam can be made from a composite material).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Hunn, Partnou, and Van der Ven to include the foam comprises a polymer as taught by Queheillalt with the motivation to prevent corrosion of the foam which can lead to improper heat exchange.
Ingersoll, Van der Ven, Hunn, Partnou, and Queheillat discloses the claimed invention except for the foam comprises a polymer. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the foam comprise a polymer, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingersoll in view of Van de Ven in further view of Hunn, Partnou, and Brenan (US 6074363 A).
Regarding Claim 22:
Ingersoll discloses:
the compressible heat exchanger (223, Figure 2) can be made out of a composite material including a carbon polymer compound and a wire mesh (Paragraphs [0104] and [0112]); and
wherein the compressible heat exchanger is configured to expand and compress with the chamber (Paragraph [0117], the compressible heat exchanger moves between an expanded and compressed state).
Ingersoll, Partnou, and Hunn do not teach:
wherein the porous foal material of the compressible heat exchanger comprises a foam with a spiraled wire.
Van de Ven teaches:
the porous foam material of the heat exchanger (Paragraph [0064], the heat exchanger is made of metallic foam).
Ingersoll, Partnou, Hunn, and Van der Ven do not teach:
wherein the porous foal material of the compressible heat exchanger comprises a foam with a spiraled wire.
Brenan teaches a heat exchanger, comprising:
wherein the heat exchanger (800, Figure 8A) comprises a foam (808, Figure 8B) with a wire (802, Figure 8B).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ingersoll, Partnou, Hunn and Van der Ven to include the heat exchanger comprises a foam with a wire as taught by Brenan with the motivation to protect the wire from external forces that may cause damage to the wire.
Ingersoll, Brenan, Partnou, Hunn and Van der Ven discloses the claimed invention except for a spiraled wire. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the foam contain a spiraled wire, since applicant has not disclosed that spiraled wire solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with the foam contain a spiraled wire.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ingersoll 3 (US 20140109566 A1) teaches a compression and /or expansion device comprising a motor, a compressor, a compressible heat exchanger, valves, a piston, a piston rod and a volume.
Madderno (US 20130152572 A1) teaches a compressed-gas energy storage comprising a compressor, a piston, a piston rod, and a working fluid.
Ingersoll 4 (US 8572959 B2) teaches a compression and/or expansion device comprising a heat exchanger, valves, a piston, a piston rod and a volume.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHANIE A SHRIEVES whose telephone number is (571)272-5373. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday: 9:30AM to 5:30PM.
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, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at (571) 272-4881. 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.
/STEPHANIE A SHRIEVES/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/KENNETH RINEHART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights