Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/720,180

REFRIGERATION SYSTEM

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jun 14, 2024
Examiner
MARTIN, ELIZABETH J
Art Unit
3763
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Dyson Technology Limited
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
729 granted / 930 resolved
+8.4% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
958
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
47.8%
+7.8% vs TC avg
§102
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
§112
27.3%
-12.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 930 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Status This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 3/4/20226. The objections to the drawings have been withdrawn. The 35 USC 112 rejections have been withdrawn. Claims 1-10, 15-20, 28, 31-32 remain pending for consideration on the merits. 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. Claims 1-10, 15-19, 20, 28, 31-32 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 recites “a second, less restrictive restriction” However it is unclear what are the metes and bounds of the claim. Further the claim recites “such that the thermal store is cooled at the heat exchanger and the medium is heated at the further heat exchanger". However, the claim does not define what the " a second, less restrictive restriction ". Thus, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. There is no way of determining what structure is required to have the system to operate in the condition, nor what is happening on these conditions. Since there is no way of determining what are the metes and bounds of the claim, as best understood, if the prior art comprises the claimed structure, it will be presumed that the system can operate as intended.\ The term “a second, less restrictive restriction” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “a second, less restrictive restriction” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, as used to define second state of the metering device, this term renders the same indeterminate and the claim (and all claims depending therefrom) indefinite with regard to the scope of protection sought thereby. Claim 6 recites “the refrigeration system comprises a component located in the gap”, which renders the claim indefinite because “a component” is defined by the specification as an airflow generator and compressor (paragraph 0095, 0099), it is unclear how the component can be located in the central angle 61. Clarity is advised. Claim 15 recites “a further heat exchanger for exchanging heat between the refrigerant and the airflow” which lacks antecedent basis and for examination purposes the limitation is interpreted to recite -- the further heat exchanger for exchanging heat between the refrigerant and the airflow--. Claim 20 recites “the component” in line 5 and “wherein the component is a compressor of the refrigeration system” in line 13 which renders the claim indefinite because claim 20 previously recites “a product comprising a component”. Claim 20 as amended removed “a component” and now recites “the component”. For examination purposes the limitations “the component” will be interpreted as -- the compressor -- and “wherein the component is a compressor of the refrigeration system” will be removed. Claims 2-5, 7-10, 16-19, 28, 31-32 are rejected based on dependency from a rejected claim. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-10, 15-19, 20, 28, 31-32 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Reasons for Allowance The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claim 1, the subject matter which is considered to distinguish from the closest prior art of record, Selg et al (US 20200318837) and Ma et al (US 20150292775). The prior art of record teaches a refrigeration system comprising: a thermal store; and a circuit around which a refrigerant circulates, the circuit comprising a compressor, a heat exchanger, a metering device, and a further heat exchanger for exchanging heat between the refrigerant and a medium; wherein the heat exchanger exchanges heat between the refrigerant and the thermal store in contrast to the claimed features of the thermal store subtends a central angle around the compressor, such that the thermal store surrounds and covers at least part of the compressor to absorb noise generated by the compressor, and wherein the refrigeration system is operable in :a first state in which the metering device has a first restriction such that the thermal store is heated at the heat exchanger and the medium is cooled at the further heat exchanger; and a second state in which the metering device has a second, less restrictive restriction or is bypassed such that the thermal store is cooled at the heat exchanger and the medium is heated at the further heat exchanger. Regarding claim 20, the subject matter which is considered to distinguish from the closest prior art of record, Selg et al (US 20200318837) and Ma et al (US 20150292775). The prior art of record teaches a product comprising a compressor and a thermal store, wherein the thermal store comprises a phase change material that undergoes a phase change in use and the product comprises a heat exchanger for transferring thermal energy to and from the thermal store, the thermal store and the heat exchanger form part of a refrigeration system of the product in contrast to the claimed features of the thermal store subtends a central angle around the compressor, such that the thermal store surrounds and covers at least part of the compressor to absorb noise generated by the compressor, and the refrigeration system is operable in: a first state in which the heat exchanger transfers thermal energy to the thermal store to warm the phase change material: and a second state in which the heat exchanger transfers thermal energy from the thermal store to cool the phase change material. Therefore, it would not be obvious to modify the technique of the prior art structures to have the apparatus as claimed without improper hindsight and independent claims 1 and 20 with dependent claims therefrom are considered allowable. 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 ELIZABETH J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3840. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-3:00 CT pm M-F. 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. /ELIZABETH J MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 14, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 04, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 07, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601534
REFRIGERATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601522
DRAIN PAN ADAPTER AND A DRAIN PAN
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594811
VALVE SET INTEGRATED MODULE, VEHICLE THERMAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589352
COMPRESSED AIR STATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589633
AIR-CONDITIONING SYSTEM FOR MOTOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+20.8%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 930 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month