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 .
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.
Claims 1 and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hamada (US 2012/0111042) in view of Sienel (US 2005/0132742) and Dressler (US 5,461,876).
As to claim 1, Hamada teaches a refrigeration system circuit comprising:
a compressor 1;
a first heat exchanger 5 for exchanging heat between refrigerant and a medium; and
a second heat exchanger 3 for exchanging heat between the refrigerant and a thermal store;
wherein the circuit comprises a metering device 4/21 configured such that:
in a cooling mode, the metering device has a first restriction such that the medium is cooled at the first exchanger 5 and the thermal store is heated at the second exchanger 3 (Fig. 2); and
in a regeneration mode, the metering device is bypassed such that the thermal store is cooled at the second heat exchanger 3 and the medium is heated at the first exchanger 5 (Fig. 13).
Hamada does not explicitly teach an accumulator as claimed. However, Sienel teaches use of an accumulator 56 in a suction line of a compressor (Fig. 2), wherein accumulator 56 is sized to prevent excess refrigerant from flowing to the compressor 22 in both an active and inactive mode (the inactive mode requiring a larger accumulator volume than the active mode, see paragraphs 6-7, 20, and 23), and thus the accumulator 56 is necessarily oversized at a maximum cooling capacity in the cooling mode. Furthermore, Dressler teaches that it is a known to oversize an accumulator to store excess liquid refrigerant (col. 15, lines 25-30). In light of these teachings it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Hamada to utilize an accumulator as claimed in order to provide reliable system operation in the various disclosed modes of operation.
As to claim 12, Hamada teaches a bypass valve 6.
As to claim 13, Hamada teaches using a controller for switching operating modes (paragraph 36).
As to claims 14-16, Hamada teaches an HVAC system and fan assembly (Fig. 1).
Claims 1-3 and 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito (US 2016/0161162) in view of Sienel (US 2005/0132742) and Dressler (US 7,832,220).
As to claim 1, teaches a refrigeration system circuit comprising:
a compressor 4;
a first heat exchanger 15 for exchanging heat between refrigerant and a medium;
a second heat exchanger 19 for exchanging heat between the refrigerant and a thermal store; and
an accumulator 9 for accommodating liquid refrigerant and coupled to a suction line of the compressor 4;
wherein the circuit comprises a metering device 14 configured such that:
in a cooling mode the medium is cooled at the first heat exchanger 15 and the thermal store is heated at the second heat exchanger (Fig. 2); and
in a regeneration mode the metering device 14 is bypassed such that the thermal store is cooled at the second heat exchanger 19 and the medium is heated at the first heat exchanger 15 (Fig. 4).
Saito does not explicitly teach that accumulator 9 is sized in the manner as claimed. However, Sienel teaches use of an accumulator 56 in a suction line of a compressor (Fig. 2), wherein accumulator 56 is sized to prevent excess refrigerant from flowing to the compressor 22 in both an active and inactive mode (the inactive mode requiring a larger accumulator volume than the active mode, see paragraphs 6-7, 20, and 23), and thus the accumulator 56 is necessarily oversized at a maximum cooling capacity in the cooling mode. Furthermore, Dressler teaches that it is a known matter of routine refrigerant circuit construction to oversize an accumulator to store excess liquid refrigerant when operating in different system modes (col. 15, lines 25-30). In light of these teachings it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify the accumulator 9 of Saito to be configured in the manner as claimed in order to provide reliable system operation in the various disclosed modes of operation.
As to claims 2-3 and 9, Saito includes a standpipe in the accumulator 9 (Fig. 1), wherein the accumulator 9 is configured such that only gaseous refrigerant is proved to the compressor (paragraph 35) and thus the standpipe is above a free surface of a liquid level in the manner as claimed.
As to claim 10, Saito teaches the refrigerant circulating in the same direction in each mode (Figs. 2 and 4).
As to claim 11, Saito teaches the refrigerant undergoing a phase transition in the cooling mode only (see Fig. 5 for regeneration mode, note that refrigerant flowing to exchanger 15 stays to the right of the pressure enthalpy curve and thus does not undergo a phase transition).
As to claim 12, Saito teaches a bypass valve 16.
As to claim 13, Saito is silent regarding a controller. However, Official Notice is taken that a controller is a common and typical feature of a refrigeration system that would have been obvious to use in conjunction with the system of Saito for the purpose of providing convenient and effective automated system control.
As to claim 14, Hamada teaches an HVAC system (Fig. 1).
As to claims 15-16, the modified system includes the configuration of Sienel which teaches a fan assembly (Fig. 2).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito, Sienel, and Dressler as applied above, and further in view of Taras (US 2021/0364208).
As to claim 5, Saito does not explicitly teach the thermal store comprising a phase change material. However, Taras teaches that it is known to use a phase change material as a thermal store (paragraph 31). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Saito to utilize a phase change material in the thermal store as claimed and taught by Taras in order to provide an effective thermal store.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-6, filed 6/22/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically the examiner agrees that the system of Taras does not explicitly teach actual operation in the modes of operation as claimed. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Hamada (US 2012/0111042) and Saito (US 2016/0161162) as discussed in the rejections above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Nagatomo (US 5,165,250), for example at Figs. 13-14.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN BRADFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-5199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:00 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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (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.
/JONATHAN BRADFORD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights