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 .
Election/Restriction
Applicant's election with traverse of Species I, fig. 1, claims 16-19, in the reply filed on 07/30/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the species shares a common inventive concept and therefore that claims possess “unit of invention”. This is not found persuasive because Species 1-8 lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of a closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not contribute over the prior art in view of rejection as set forth below.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takano et al (US 20130156548; hereinafter Takano).
As regarding claim 16, Takano discloses the claimed invention for an air-cooled pressurizing device with energy recovery compressing or pressurizing a fluid (air), comprising a housing (20, 21 of fig. 2), a fluid duct for guiding the fluid through the pressurizing device from a fluid duct inlet to a fluid duct outlet, one or more pressurizing stages in the fluid duct each comprising a pressurizing element (3), a device (14) for forcing an airflow in an air channel (19) through the housing and a closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit (7), wherein liquid-cooling circuit comprises at least: - a device (3) for forcing a liquid flow (oil) for circulating the liquid in the closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit (7); - liquid-fluid heat exchangers (10, 13) downstream in the fluid flow of each pressurizing element (3); - a liquid-liquid heat exchanger (10) for recovery of energy; and, - a liquid-air heat exchanger (13) located in the air channel; wherein in a fluid duct outlet part of the fluid duct a fluid-air heat-exchanger (13) is provided in the air channel for transfer of heat from pressurized fluid (air) in the fluid duct to the air in the air channel, and wherein the housing comprises mainly two compartments (20, 21),
Takano does not disclose a first compartment in which the pressurizing elements, the liquid-fluid heat exchangers and the liquid-liquid exchanger are incorporated and a second compartment which forms the air channel in which the liquid-air heat exchanger and the fluid-air heat exchanger are installed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide a first compartment in which the pressurizing elements, the liquid-fluid heat exchangers and the liquid-liquid exchanger are incorporated and a second compartment which forms the air channel in which the liquid-air heat exchanger and the fluid-air heat exchanger are installed in order to improve thermal efficiency, airflow control, packaging, safety, noise isolation, and maintenance accessibility, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen locations or upon another variable recited in the claim, the Applicant must show that the chosen locations are critical and unexpected results.
As regarding claim 17, Takano as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Takano as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein it is a compressor device comprising one or more pressurizing elements which are compressor elements (title and abstract).
Claim(s) 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takano et al (US 20130156548; hereinafter Takano), as applied supra, and further in view of Meeusen et al (US 20180258952; hereinafter Meeusen).
As regarding claim 18, Takano as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Takano as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the device for forcing an airflow is a single fan or ventilator and that the liquid in the liquid-cooling circuit is water and that the device for forcing a liquid flow for circulating the liquid in the closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit is a water pump. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the device for forcing an airflow is a single fan or ventilator and that the liquid in the liquid-cooling circuit is water and that the device for forcing a liquid flow for circulating the liquid in the closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit is a water pump in order to enhance device performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Meeusen ([0073]). Both Takano and Meeusen are directed to compressor module.
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takano et al (US 20130156548; hereinafter Takano), as applied supra, and further in view of Vertriest et al (US 20180154302; hereinafter Vertriest).
As regarding claim 19, Takano as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Takano as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the pressurizing device comprises only a single pressurizing stage, which comprises a single liquid-fluid heat exchanger in the closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit which is placed in or interacting with a part of the fluid duct which is downstream in the fluid flow of the single pressurizing element and which is forming a first aftercooler, wherein the fluid-air heat-exchanger is placed in a part of the fluid duct which is downstream (in the fluid flow) of the first aftercooler and is forming an additional aftercooler.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the pressurizing device comprises only a single pressurizing stage, which comprises a single liquid-fluid heat exchanger in the closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit which is placed in or interacting with a part of the fluid duct which is downstream in the fluid flow of the single pressurizing element and which is forming a first aftercooler, wherein the fluid-air heat-exchanger is placed in a part of the fluid duct which is downstream (in the fluid flow) of the first aftercooler and is forming an additional aftercooler in order to enhance device performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Vertriest (claims 16, and 21-22). Both Takano and Vertriest are directed to compressor module.
Also, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide an additional aftercooler in order to enhance device performance, since it has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance, unless a new and unexpected result is produced, since it involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takano et al (US 20130156548; hereinafter Takano) in view of Tanaka et al (US 20100232980; hereinafter Tanaka) and Lucas et al (US 20020106288; hereinafter Lucas).
As regarding claim 16, Takano discloses the claimed invention for an air-cooled pressurizing device with energy recovery compressing or pressurizing a fluid (air), comprising a housing (20, 21 of fig. 2), a fluid duct (oil pipe 7 for circulating oil, gas pipe 8 for conveying compressed gas) for guiding the fluid through the pressurizing device from a fluid duct inlet to a fluid duct outlet, one or more pressurizing stages in the fluid duct each comprising a pressurizing element (3), a device (14) for forcing an airflow in an air channel (19) through the housing and a closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit (7), wherein liquid-cooling circuit comprises at least: - a device (3) for forcing a liquid flow (oil) for circulating the liquid in the closed-loop liquid-cooling circuit (7); - liquid-fluid heat exchangers (10, 13) downstream in the fluid flow of each pressurizing element (3); - a liquid-liquid heat exchanger (10) for recovery of energy; and, - a liquid-air heat exchanger (13) located in the air channel; wherein in a fluid duct outlet part of the fluid duct a fluid-air heat-exchanger (13) is provided in the air channel for transfer of heat from pressurized fluid (air) in the fluid duct to the air in the air channel ([0025], [0029]-[0031], [0043]-[0048], figs. 1-2), and wherein the housing comprises mainly two compartments (20, 21). Takano also discloses that heat exchanger 10 receives high-temperature compressed gas and oil and transfers heat to cooling water, thereby recovering heat, and that exchanger 13 subsequently cools the compressed gas and oil with cooling air ([0025], [0029]-[0031], [0043]-[0048], figs. 1-2). Therefore, Takano teaches the claimed liquid-fluid, liquid-liquid, liquid-air, and fluid air heat-transfer relationships and the associated fluid and liquid flow paths.
Takano does not disclose a first compartment in which the pressurizing elements, the liquid-fluid heat exchangers and the liquid-liquid exchanger are incorporated and a second compartment which forms the air channel in which the liquid-air heat exchanger and the fluid-air heat exchanger are installed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide a first compartment in which the pressurizing elements, the liquid-fluid heat exchangers and the liquid-liquid exchanger are incorporated and a second compartment which forms the air channel in which the liquid-air heat exchanger and the fluid-air heat exchanger are installed in order to improve thermal efficiency, airflow control, packaging, safety, noise isolation, and maintenance accessibility, since it was known in the art as shown in Tanaka ([0028]-[0030] and figs. 1-2).
Lucas further teaches a compressor housing having separate first and second compartments, with a blower directing cooling air through the compartments and a heat exchanger for cooling compressed air and lubricating oil ([0005]-[0006], [0021]-[0026], figs. 2-9, and claims 11-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Takano in view of Tanaka and Lucas to arrange Takano’s compressor-side waste-heat-recovery components in a first housing region and its air-cooled heat-exchange components in a second region defining a forced-air ventilation passage. Tanaka teaches to place compressed-air and lubricating-oil heat exchangers in a common forced-air ventilation duct, while Lucas provides a teaching of compartmentalizing compressor equipment and directing cooling airflow through the housing. The proposed modification merely rearranges known compressor cooling components according to their established functions and would have predictably provided controlled airflow, efficiency cooling, and convenient packaging without changing Takano’s principle of operation.
The combination therefore teaches or suggests a first compartment containing the compressor and liquid-side heat recovery components and a second compartment forming a force-air channel containing the liquid-air and fluid-air heat-exchange functions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/30/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s remark argues that Takano's heat exchanger 10 merely receives air separated from the oil coolant and that such air is unrelated to the pressurized fluid output of the compressor. This interpretation is not consistent with Takano's express disclosure. Takano describes oil separator 6 as separating oil from compressed gas, after which the compressed gas is conveyed through gas pipe 8. In the embodiment of fig. 2, the compressed gas flowing through gas pipe 8 is supplied to waste-heat-recovery heat exchanger 10, while oil separated by oil separator 6 flows through oil pipe 7 to the same heat exchanger. Takano expressly states that the high-temperature oil and high-temperature compressed gas exchange heat with cooling water in heat exchanger 10 ([0025], [0029]-[0031], figs. 1-2).
Thus, the air entering heat exchanger 10 is not merely residual air separated from the oil. Rather, Takano expressly discloses the relevant stream as compressed gas flowing through gas pipe 8 after separation in oil separator 6. Takano further explains that heat exchanger 10 cools both the high-temperature oil and the high-temperature compressed gas through heat exchange with cooling water (0029]-[0031]). Accordingly, Takano discloses the claimed liquid-fluid heat exchanger, with oil as the liquid and compressed gas as the pressurized fluid, as well as the claimed liquid-liquid heat exchanger, with oil and cooling water constituting the two liquid streams.
Applicant’s remark argues that Takano does not disclose a fluid-air heat exchanger associated with the pressurized fluid. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Takano expressly discloses air-cooled heat exchanger 13 downstream of heat exchanger 10. Takano states that the compressed gas and oil exiting heat exchanger 10 are supplied to air-cooled heat exchanger 13 and are further cooled by cooling air supplied by cooling fan 14 ([0030]-[0031], [0046]-[0047], figs. 1-2). Thus, heat exchanger 13 exchanges heat between the circulating oil and cooling air and also between the compressed gas and cooling air. Therefore, Takano discloses both the claimed liquid-air heat exchanger and the claimed fluid-air heat exchanger.
Indeed, Takano's claims expressly confirm this disclosure. Takano claim 3 recites an air-cooled heat exchanger that cools compressed gas and a waste-heat-recovery heat exchanger that recovers heat from compressed gas, while claim 4 recites the serial connection of the heat exchangers with the oil pipe or gas pipe. These claim provisions further demonstrate that Takano's compressed-gas stream is intentionally routed through the heat exchangers rather than merely being incidental air associated with the oil separator.
Applicant’s remark argues that Takano does not disclose a fluid duct for guiding the pressurized fluid from a fluid duct inlet to a fluid duct outlet. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Takano expressly identifies gas pipe 8 as the passage through which the compressed gas flows from oil separator 6 to heat exchanger 10 and thereafter to air-cooled heat exchanger 13 and the compressed-gas outlet ([0025], [0029]-[0031], figs. 1-2). The fact that Takano calls this passage a “gas pipe” rather than a “fluid duct” does not distinguish the claimed structure. A duct or pipe is a passage for conveying a fluid, and Takano's gas pipe 8 performs precisely that function.
Applicant further argues that Takano has only two heat exchangers, whereas claim 16 allegedly requires four heat exchangers. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim 16 does not expressly require four physically separate heat-exchanger bodies. Rather, the claim recites heat exchangers according to the respective heat-transfer relationships. Takano's heat exchanger 10 performs both liquid-liquid heat exchange between oil and cooling water and liquid-fluid heat exchange between oil and compressed gas. Takano's heat exchanger 13 performs both liquid-air heat exchange between oil and cooling air and fluid-air heat exchange between compressed gas and cooling air ([0029]-[0031], [0043]-[0047], fig. 1-2). Thus, Takano discloses the four claimed heat-transfer relationships notwithstanding the use of two principal heat-exchanger units.
Moreover, Takano expressly teaches that heat exchanger 10 may comprise heat-exchanging portions for the respective oil and compressed-gas streams ([0030]). Therefore, Applicant's numerical comparison of “two” Takano heat exchangers versus “four” claimed heat exchangers does not establish a patentable distinction absent claim language requiring four separate physical devices.
Applicant’s remark argues that Takano does not disclose the claimed dual-compartment housing arrangement in which the first compartment contains the compressor-side components and the second compartment forms the cooling-air passage containing the liquid-air and fluid-air heat exchangers. The Examiner respectfully disagrees that this distinction renders the claimed arrangement non-obvious. Takano discloses compressor unit 20 and waste-heat-recovery unit 21 and provides alternative arrangements of compressor body 3, oil separator 6, waste-heat-recovery heat exchanger 10, and air-cooled heat exchanger 13 ([0034]-[0039], figs. 2-4). In particular, Takano's fig. 2 embodiment places the compressor-side components and heat exchangers within compressor unit 20 while providing a separate waste-heat-recovery unit 21, whereas fig. 1 illustrates the heat-recovery and air-cooling components in the compressor unit ([0029]-[0039], fig. 1-2).
Although Takano does not use the precise term “compartment” in the manner of claim 16, claim 16 does not expressly require a separating wall, partition, or other particular boundary between the compartments. To the extent the precise spatial division is not expressly shown, arranging Takano's known components into first and second regions, with the air-cooled heat exchangers positioned in a forced-air passage, would have been a predictable matter of component layout and packaging while retaining the same heat-transfer and cooling functions. Takano itself provides express motivation to configure the compressor and heat-recovery components in different physical arrangements depending upon the desired installation and transport configuration ([0034]-[0039]).
Applicant’s remark argues that Takano recovers energy only from the liquid cooling circuit and not from the pressurized fluid. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Takano expressly states that heat from both the high-temperature oil and the high-temperature compressed gas is recovered through waste-heat-recovery heat exchanger 10 ([0029]-[0031] and [0047]). Takano further explains that recovering heat from both the oil and compressed gas provides highly efficient waste-heat recovery ([0047]). Thus, Applicant's asserted distinction based upon recovery of energy from the pressurized fluid is expressly disclosed in Takano.
Applicant further relies on the alleged excessive temperature and humidity of the pressurized fluid. The Examiner respectfully disagrees that this provides a patentable distinction. Claim 16 does not recite a particular compressed-fluid temperature, humidity level, condensation condition, or humidity-control structure. Furthermore, Takano expressly provides cooling of the compressed gas in both heat exchanger 10 and air-cooled heat exchanger 13 and includes temperature control based on the temperature of the compressed gas ([0046]-[0048], fig. 2). Therefore, the alleged humidity problem does not distinguish the claimed apparatus from Takano.
Applicant's arguments do not establish that Takano fails to disclose or render obvious the claimed liquid-liquid, liquid-fluid, liquid-air, and fluid-air heat-transfer relationships, the compressed-fluid flow passage, or the associated cooling arrangement. Takano expressly discloses the relevant heat-transfer relationships and flow paths, while the remaining compartmental arrangement represents a predictable arrangement of known components performing their known functions.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DUNG H BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 ET.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
/DUNG H BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
