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 .
This action is in response to the filing made 5/24/2024.
Claims 1-14, 16 and 17 are pending.
Claim 15 is cancelled.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14, 16 are allowable.
Claim 17 would be allowable provided the rejection under 35 USC 112 is resolved without broadening the scope of the claim. The reasons for indicating allowable subject matter are presented below.
Priority
There are no claims to foreign priority in this application. This applications claims the benefit of PCT/JP2022/004440, filed by Mitsubishi Electric Corporation on 2/4/2022.
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP §2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is:
a heating unit configured to heat the container, is interpreted to mean a heater as described at par. 29 of the published application.
a temperature detection unit configured to detect a temperature of the container, is interpreted to mean a sensor, per par. 39 of the published application.
a storage unit configured to store a first time period of application of heat . . . . ., is interpreted to be a part of controller (50, 51), as shown in Fig. 2.
a leakage determination unit configured to compare the first time period . . ., is interpreted to mean a part of controller (50, 55).
an air sending device, is a fan as shown in the figures.
expansion unit is an expansion valve, as shown in the figures.
a notification unit to provide notice of a leakage, is the devices described at par. 43 of the published application.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 17 is 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.
The claim recites,
“. . . . . a heating unit installed on a container in which liquid refrigerant can be present and configured to heat the container; . . . .
a leakage determination unit configured to compare a plurality of the time periods of application of heat stored in the storage unit at different times and determine whether or not there is refrigerant leakage.”
It is not clear, from the claim language, how the system discovers a leak given the process used. For example, the claim covers a situation in which refrigerant might not ever be present in the container, i.e. see the limitation “ liquid refrigerant can be present”. Also, in the absence of predetermining how much liquid refrigerant should be present in the container at various operating conditions, and the measured temperatures at those various conditions, it is not clear what baseline temperatures should be used to compare the temperature measurements with.
Reasons For Indicating Allowable Subject Matter
The closest prior art found is US 2020/0271503 to Asanuma.
Regarding the independent claims, Asanuma teaches an air-conditioning apparatus comprising:
a container (14, Fig. 1) in which refrigerant in a liquid state can be present;
a heating unit (abstract) configured to heat the container;
a temperature detection unit (18, par. 29) configured to detect a temperature of the container;
a storage unit (35, Fig. 2) configured to store a first time period of application of heat from when the heating unit starts applying heat until when a detection result provided by the temperature detection unit reaches a predetermined temperature, and a time when the first time period of application of heat was acquired; and
a compressor (11); a heat exchanger disposed downstream of the compressor and upstream of the container (13 or 22, depending upon the direction of the flow);
an air-sending device configured to cause air to flow into the heat exchanger (air sending devices such as blowers or fans are typically used in HVAC systems);
a downstream-side expansion unit (exv 21) whose opening degree can be changed, the downstream-side expansion unit being disposed downstream of the container (depending upon direction of the flow).
The art of record does not teach,
a leakage determination unit configured to compare the first time period of application of heat stored in the storage unit with a reference time period stored in the storage unit in advance and determine whether or not there is refrigerant leakage.
wherein, before heat is applied by the heating unit, a preliminary operation is performed in which the compressor and the air-sending device are caused to operate and in which the downstream-side expansion unit is closed to store liquid refrigerant in the container.
a leakage determination unit configured to compare a plurality of the time periods of application of heat stored in the storage unit at different times and determine whether or not there is refrigerant leakage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY T CRENSHAW whose telephone number is (571)270-1550. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, JD Fletcher can be reached on 571-270-5054. 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.
/HENRY T CRENSHAW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763