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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
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.
For the record, the following claim limitations which use the term “means” have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f): “means of directing discharge,” “means of reducing pressure,” “means of re-compressing,” and “means of pumping.”
“Means of directing discharge” has not been clearly defined in the specification. See corresponding rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) & (b), below.
“Means of reducing pressure” has been interpreted according to the corresponding structure described in the specification as being an expansion valve (paras. 0029 and 0069), and equivalents thereof.
“Means of re-compressing” has been interpreted according to the corresponding structure described in the specification as being a compression device (para. 0030), which is also interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 12(f) below, and which is in turn described as being a compressor (para. 0031), and equivalents thereof.
“Means of pumping” has not been clearly defined in the specification. See corresponding rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) & (b), below.
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(s) is/are: “compression device” and “expansion device” used throughout the claims.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
For the record:
”Compression device” has been interpreted according to the corresponding structure described in the specification as being an expansion valve (para. 0007), and equivalents thereof.
“Expansion device” has been interpreted according to the corresponding structure described in the specification as being an expansion valve (para. 0008), 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/them 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(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them 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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claims 1 and 17-19 each recite the limitation “means of directing discharge,” which has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) above. However, since the specification does not clearly define the corresponding structure of the limitation, Applicant has failed to demonstrate full possession of the metes and bounds of the claimed invention at the effective filing date of the application. Claims 2-16 are also rejected since they either depend from or incorporate the subject matter of claim 1.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “means of pumping” which has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) above. However, since the specification does not clearly define the corresponding structure of the limitation, Applicant has failed to demonstrate full possession of the metes and bounds of the claimed invention at the effective filing date of the application
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 1-20 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 limitations “means of directing discharge” and “means of pumping” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph as discussed above. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
In addition:
The terms “high pressure” and “low pressure” are used throughout the claims are a relative terms which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “high pressure” and “low pressure” are 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. While it is generally understood in the art that a vapor compression system will have a high pressure side and a low pressure side, relative to each other, the recitations of “high pressure” and “low pressure” within the claims are not clearly connected to such features in a manner to make the metes and bounds of the recitations clear.
Claim 4 recites “the chilled fluid chilled air…” at line 2 of the claim. This limitation is grammatically incorrect, rendering the intended metes and bounds unclear.
The term “approximately” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “approximately” 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.
Claim 9 recites “a refrigerant heating heat exchanger” at line 6 of the claim. However, claim 1, line 10 already recites “a refrigerant heating heat exchanger.” While the recitations appear associated with different function, the function alone is not sufficient to distinguish. If these are intended to be different heat exchangers, they should be delineated as “a first refrigerant heating heat exchanger” and “a second refrigerant heating heat exchanger,” respectively.
Claim 9 recites “an expansion device” at line 8 of the claim. However, claim 1, line 8 already recites a means of reducing pressure. Since both limitations have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as being and expansion valve and equivalents thereof, it is unclear whether these are meant to connote the same or different feature.
Claim 9 recites “said refrigerant heating heat exchanger” at limes 9-10 of the claim. Since it is unclear whether the “refrigerant heating heat exchanger” at claim 9, line 6 and claim 1, line 10 are meat to be the same or different as discussed above, at is also unclear as to which of these recitations “said refrigerant heating heat exchanger” refers back to.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Najafifard et al. (US 2019/0072200 A1).
As per claim 1, Najafifard et al. disclose an integrated air-conditioning (A/C) circuit for a Carbon Dioxide (CO2) refrigeration system (paras. 0014, 0026-0027, 0041; etc.) having a CO2 based refrigerant circuit (Figs. 1 & 2; etc.) including a high pressure refrigerant cooling heat exchanger (gas cooler 130, 230) that passes refrigerant received at a high pressure in heat exchange relationship with a cooling medium (para. 0030), wherein the A/C circuit is nested within the CO2 refrigeration system (Figs. 1 & 2) and includes:
a means of directing discharge from an outlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger into the nested air-conditioning circuit (line from gas cooler 130 to expansion valve 150),
a means of reducing the pressure of the refrigerant directed from the outlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger (expansion valve 150), and
a refrigerant heating heat exchanger 140 for receiving the refrigerant having a reduced pressure and passing the refrigerant in heat exchange relationship with a heating medium to generate chilled fluid (AC load fluid shown in Fig. 1).
As per claim 2, Najafifard et al. disclose the system further including: a means of re-compressing the refrigerant (compressor 120c) from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger before passing the refrigerant to an inlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger (Fig. 1).
As per claim 3, Najafifard et al. disclose wherein the chilled fluid is chilled water generated when the refrigerant heating heat exchanger is a CO2-H20 heat exchanger (paras. 0026, 0055 re. glycol water).
As per claim 4, see rejection above under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)). Najafifard et al. disclose wherein the chilled fluid chilled air generated (for purposes of compact prosecution, this limitation is interpreted as being directed to a chilled fluid that generates cooled air) when the refrigerant heating heat exchanger is a CO2 ambient air heat exchanger (the heat exchange fluid being used to cool an AC load (paras 0026, 0055, etc.). (For the record, even if the claim recited direct heat exchange between the refrigerant and air, such would be an obvious alternate modification to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application to the system of Najafifard et al. for the purpose or reduced cost and complexity by reducing the need for a secondary heat exchange circuit.)
As per claim 5, Najafifard et al. discloses wherein the means of reducing the pressure of the refrigerant is an expansion valve 150 located upstream of the refrigerant heating heat exchanger which expands the refrigerant directly into the refrigerant heating heat exchanger (Fig. 1).
As per claim 6, Najafifard et al. disclose wherein the means of re-compressing the refrigerant from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger before passing the refrigerant back to the inlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger is one or more refrigerant compression devices (compressor 120c).
As per claim 9, wherein in addition to including a high-pressure refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, the CO2 based refrigerant circuit further includes: one or more refrigerant compression devices (120a, 120b) located upstream of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger (Fig. 1), a refrigerant heating heat exchanger (see corresponding rejection above under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)) for passing refrigerant at a low pressure in heat exchange relationship with a heating medium (interpreted again as heat exchanger 130), and an expansion device (again expansion valve 135) disposed in the CO2 based refrigerant circuit downstream of said refrigerant cooling heat exchanger and upstream of said refrigerant heating heat exchanger (Fig. 1).
As per claim 16, a Carbon Dioxide (CO2) refrigeration system (paras. 0014, 0026-0027, 0041; etc.) including an integrated air-conditioning circuit according to claim 1 (see above).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Najafifard et al. (US 2019/0072200 A1).
As per claim 7, Najafifard et al. disclose wherein the one or more refrigerant compression devices are one or more dedicated A/C compressors 120c located downstream of the refrigerant heating heat exchanger 140, although do not explicitly teach the heating at exchanger operating at approximately 5 to 7 degrees Celsius. However, the particular temperature at the refrigerant heating heat exchanger is considered a simple result effective variable that would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application to apply to the system of Najafifard et al. and could have easily been arrived at through routine experimentation for the purpose of achieving desired heat exchange for cooling the enclosed space (para. 0025; etc.).
As per claim 8, Najafifard et al. disclose the system further including: a means of pumping the generated chilled fluid to an A/C chilled fluid handling evaporator for the purpose of utilizing the chilled fluid for air-conditioning (Najafifard et al. disclose the chilled fluid being a refrigerant of an air conditioning cycle (para. 0025; etc.), although do not discuss the particular components of the AC cycle. Official notice is taken that compressors for pumping refrigerant and evaporators are common and typical components of air conditioning cycles and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the application to apply to the system of Najafifard et al. for the purpose of providing refrigerant movement through the cycle and heat exchange with the target space as common parts of the refrigeration vapor compression system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-15 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and (b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 17-19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As per claim 10 (and claims 14-15 which depend therefrom), there is not teaching or suggestion in the prior art to further modify the system of Najafifard et al. to include a controller operable to switch the mode of operation of the refrigeration system, from: a baseline mode in which the flash tank receiver receives refrigerant exclusively from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, and vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a first refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the refrigerant compression device such that refrigerant passing from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit to the refrigerant compression device is mixed with said vapour refrigerant from the flash tank, the flash gas receiver having associated therewith a flash gas bypass valve to manage flash gas as it accumulates in the flash gas receiver, to: a parallel compression mode in which the flash gas bypass valve is closed and vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a second refrigerant line to one or more second refrigerant compression devices that operate in parallel with the one or more refrigerant compression devices, the one or more second refrigerant compression devices managing the flash gas as it accumulates in the flash gas receiver by recompressing and discharging same to the inlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, and subsequently to: an ejector mode in which the three-way valve disposed at an entry side of the one or more refrigerant compression devices is operated to cause vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver to, in addition to passing through the second refrigerant line to the one or more second refrigerant compression devices, pass through a third refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the one or more refrigerant compression devices, wherein refrigerant from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit is diverted through a fourth refrigerant line to the at least one ejector where the refrigerant is mixed with refrigerant from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, the flash tank receiver thereby receiving a mix of refrigerants from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger and the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger.
As per claim 11 (and claim 13 which depends therefrom), there is not teaching or suggestion in the prior art to further modify the system of Najafifard et al. to include a first mode in which the flash tank receiver receives refrigerant exclusively from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger such that vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a first refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the one or more refrigerant compression devices with refrigerant passing from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit to the one or more refrigerant compression devices mixed with said vapour refrigerant from the flash tank, and a second mode in which the vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a second refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the one or more refrigerant compression devices such that the one or more refrigerant compression devices are supplied refrigerant exclusively from the flash gas receiver, wherein refrigerant from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit is diverted through a third refrigerant line to the at least one ejector with the refrigerant mixed with refrigerant from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, the flash tank receiver thereby receiving a mixture of refrigerants from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger and the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, and a controller operatively associated with the three-way valve, the controller operable to cause the refrigeration system to transition directly from the first to the second mode of operation when a particular condition has been detected.
As per claim 12 (and claim 20 which depends therefrom), there is not teaching or suggestion in the prior art to further modify the system of Najafifard et al. to include a first mode of operation in which the flash tank receiver receives refrigerant exclusively from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger such that vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the one or more refrigerant compression devices with refrigerant passing from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit to the one or more refrigerant compression devices mixed with said vapour refrigerant from the flash tank, and a second mode of operation wherein the at least one liquid ejector is operated to entrain a portion of liquid refrigerant recovered from the suction accumulator and to re-inject said liquid back into the flash tank receiver, where the flash gas bypass valve is configured to manage flash gas build-up in the receiver, and a controller operatively associated with the three-way valve, the controller operable to cause the refrigeration system to transition directly from the first to the second mode of operation when a particular condition has been detected.
As per claim 17, the prior art fails to teach or suggest the system combination as recited, and in particular comprising a controller operable to switch the mode of operation of the refrigeration system, from: a baseline mode in which the flash tank receiver receives refrigerant exclusively from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, and vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a first refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the refrigerant compression device such that refrigerant passing from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit to the refrigerant compression device is mixed with said vapour refrigerant from the flash tank, the flash gas receiver having associated therewith a flash gas bypass valve to manage flash gas as it accumulates in the flash gas receiver, to: a parallel compression mode in which the flash gas bypass valve is closed and vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a second refrigerant line to one or more second refrigerant compression devices that operate in parallel with the one or more refrigerant compression devices, the one or more second refrigerant compression devices managing the flash gas as it accumulates in the flash gas receiver by recompressing and discharging same to the inlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, and subsequently to: an ejector mode in which the three-way valve disposed at an entry side of the one or more refrigerant compression devices is operated to cause vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver to, in addition to passing through the second refrigerant line to the one or more second refrigerant compression devices, pass through a third refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the one or more refrigerant compression devices, wherein refrigerant from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit is diverted through a fourth refrigerant line to the at least one ejector where the refrigerant is mixed with refrigerant from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, the flash tank receiver thereby receiving a mix of refrigerants from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger and the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, in combination with an integrated A/C circuit, including: a means of directing discharge from an outlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger into the integrated air-conditioning circuit, a means of reducing the pressure of the refrigerant directed from the outlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, a second refrigerant heating heat exchanger for receiving the refrigerant of reduced pressure and passing the refrigerant in heat exchange relationship with a heating medium to generate chilled fluid, and a means of re-compressing the refrigerant from the second refrigerant heating heat exchanger before passing the refrigerant to an inlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger.
As per claim 18, the prior art fails to teach or suggest the system combination as recited, and in particular a first mode in which the flash tank receiver receives refrigerant exclusively from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger such that vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a first refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the one or more refrigerant compression devices with refrigerant passing from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit to the one or more refrigerant compression devices mixed with said vapour refrigerant from the flash tank, and a second mode in which the vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a second refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the one or more refrigerant compression devices such that the one or more refrigerant compression devices are supplied refrigerant exclusively from the flash gas receiver, wherein refrigerant from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit is diverted through a third refrigerant line to the at least one ejector with the refrigerant mixed with refrigerant from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, the flash tank receiver thereby receiving a mixture of refrigerants from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger and the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, and a controller operatively associated with the three-way valve, the controller operable to cause the refrigeration system to transition directly from the first to the second mode of operation when a particular condition has been detected, in combination with an integrated A/C circuit, including: a means of directing discharge from an outlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger into the integrated air-conditioning circuit, a means of reducing the pressure of the refrigerant directed from the outlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, a second refrigerant heating heat exchanger for receiving the refrigerant of reduced pressure and passing the refrigerant in heat exchange relationship with a heating medium to generate chilled fluid, and a means of re-compressing the refrigerant from the second refrigerant heating heat exchanger before passing the refrigerant to an inlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger.
As per claim 19, the prior art fails to teach or suggest the system combination as recited, and in particular at least one liquid ejector disposed in the COz2 based refrigerant circuit downstream of said refrigerant cooling heat exchanger and upstream of said flash tank receiver, and a suction accumulator disposed in the refrigerant circuit downstream of the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit to capture any liquid refrigerant from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit, wherein the mode of operation of the refrigeration system is configured to be switched between: a first mode of operation in which the flash tank receiver receives refrigerant exclusively from the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger such that vapour refrigerant from the flash tank receiver is caused to pass through a refrigerant line from the flash tank receiver to the one or more refrigerant compression devices with refrigerant passing from the refrigerant heating heat exchanger of the refrigerant circuit to the one or more refrigerant compression devices mixed with said vapour refrigerant from the flash tank, and a second mode of operation wherein the at least one liquid ejector is operated to entrain a portion of liquid refrigerant recovered from the suction accumulator and to re-inject said liquid back into the flash tank receiver, where the flash gas bypass valve is configured to manage flash gas build-up in the receiver, with a controller operable to cause the refrigeration system to transition directly from the first to the second mode of operation when a particular condition has been detected, in combination with an integrated A/C circuit, including: a means of directing discharge from an outlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger into the integrated air-conditioning circuit, a means of reducing the pressure of the refrigerant directed from the outlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger, a second refrigerant heating heat exchanger for receiving the refrigerant of reduced pressure and passing the refrigerant in heat exchange relationship with a heating medium to generate chilled fluid, and a means of re-compressing the refrigerant from the second refrigerant heating heat exchanger before passing the refrigerant to an inlet line of the refrigerant cooling heat exchanger.
Cited Prior Art
The following references not applied in the rejections above are considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosed invention.
Groenewald (US 2025/0020368 A1) is a co-pending application by the instant applicant and one of the instant inventors, and teaches a refrigeration system operating in a baseline mode, an ejector mode, and a parallel compression mode. However, the reference fails to teach or suggest motivation the details of such modes in combination with the integrated AC circuit as set forth in the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC E NORMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4812. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-4:30 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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/MARC E NORMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763