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 Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 10 should read, “… wherein the top quarter is the one on the opposite portion of the
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 3, 9-10, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20200011570 A1 to Lee.
Regarding claim 1. Lee teaches a heating device for electrically heating a heat transfer fluid (figs. 1-2, hot water generator 100), the heating device comprising:
a housing (120) delimiting an internal volume which comprises at least one circulation chamber (132, 134) delimited by an outer wall for circulation of a heat transfer fluid (para. 31, “Water flows into the first tubular portion 132 through the water inlet 122 and flows into the second tubular portion 134 passing through the first tubular portion 132. Thereafter, water passes through the second tubular portion 134 and flows outside of the housing through the water outlet 124 of the second tubular portion 134.”),
the circulation chamber comprising at least a first internal space and at least a second internal space separated from each other (first and second tubular portions 132, 134 read on the first and second internal spaces, respectively), at least partly, by a partition with a passage formed so as to allow circulation of the heat transfer fluid there between (figs. 2-4, the first and second tubular portions 132, 134 can be seen to be separate except where flow path portion 138 is provided),
an inlet hydraulic connection member connected to the first internal space (water inlet 122) and an outlet hydraulic connection member connected to the second internal space (water outlet 124),
wherein at least one first electrical heating element is received in the first internal space of the circulation chamber and at least one second electrical heating element is received in the second internal space (para. 28, “first and second tubular portions 132 and 134 having a circular tubular shape into which the heater 160 is insertedly disposed” as seen in fig. 2),
wherein the heating device is configured for mounting and operation in a horizontal position in which the first internal space and the second internal space are arranged substantially on the same level with respect to the ground (see figs. 1-2),
wherein the outlet hydraulic connection member is arranged at the substantially top portion of the second internal space when the heating device is in the horizontal position (see figs. 1-2, water outlet 124 is provided on the top of the second tubular portion 134).
PNG
media_image1.png
394
428
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
495
743
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3. Lee teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the heating device is configured for mounting and operation in a vertical position in which the second internal space is arranged substantially above the first internal space with respect to the ground (intended use which the device of Lee is capable of, e.g. mounting such that the second tubular portion 134 is above the first tubular portion 132, see rotated fig. 3 below),
wherein the outlet hydraulic connection member is arranged at the substantially top portion of the second internal space when the heating device is in the vertical position (if arranged in the vertical position, see rotated fig. 3 of Lee below, the outlet 124 would be arranged at the right side of the second tubular portion 134. Since the outlet 124 covers an area of the tube, it could be considered to be at least partially arranged at the substantially top portion of the tubular portion 134. See also the annotated figure in the rejection to claim 10 below, because the outlet 124 is located in quarter B, it could be considered as arranged at the substantially top portion of the tube 134 when arranged on its side as shown in the rotated figure below).
PNG
media_image3.png
464
509
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9. Lee teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the inlet hydraulic connection member is located lower than the outlet hydraulic connection member when the heating device is in the horizontal position (Lee fig. 3, the inlet 122 can be seen to extend lower than the outlet 124 by virtue of being offset from the center of the tubular portion).
Regarding claim 10. Lee teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the outlet hydraulic connection member is located within a top quarter of the second internal space (see annotated figure below, with quarters of the second internal space labeled A-D), wherein the top quarter is the one on the opposite portion of the second internal space in relation to the first internal space when the heating device is in the horizontal position (quarter B, see figure below, at least partially housing outlet 124).
PNG
media_image4.png
480
438
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13. Lee teaches the heating device according to claim 1, wherein the inlet hydraulic connection member and the outlet hydraulic connection member extend in parallel (Lee fig. 3, the inlet 122 and outlet 124 can be seen to extend in parallel, i.e. the vertical direction in the figure).
Regarding claim 14. Lee teaches a heating, ventilation and/or air-conditioning system, comprising at least one heating device according to claim 1 (para. 8, “An aspect of the present disclosure may provide a hot water generator capable of increasing efficiency of a heater for generating hot water.” Therefore, the heater would be considered a heating system, per se).
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) 5 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of DE 102019003811 A1 to Boede.
Note: Reference is made to the attached translation of Boede.
Regarding claim 5. The heating device according to claim 1, wherein the first and the second electrical heating elements extend along their main extension axes X (Lee fig. 2, the heater 160 can be seen to extend along an axis).
But fails to teach the first and the second electrical heating elements comprise intermediate portions with windings wound around the main extension axes X.
Boede teaches a heating element comprising intermediate portions with windings wound around the main extension axes X (abstract, “In the heating chamber there is a heating element (10) with a jacket tube (11), inside of which a heating wire spiral (12) extends, both ends of which can be connected to a source of electrical heating energy, the jacket tube comprising a helical helical section (20) which is arranged so that its longitudinal axis (19) coincides with the central axis of the cylindrical wall of the heating chamber.”).
PNG
media_image5.png
678
478
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Lee to implement a suitable spiral heating element, as taught by Boede. This would provide the predictable result and benefit of providing optimal heat transfer, as suggested by Boede in the abstract, “In order to achieve a good flow through all volume subareas of the heating chamber and an optimal heat transfer from the heating element to the fluid, a helical bead extending in the axial direction and concave towards the interior of the heating chamber is formed in the cylindrical wall of the heating chamber, which is the same Incline and the same direction of winding as the helical section of the jacket tube immediately adjacent to it.”
Regarding claim 12. Modified Lee teaches the heating device according to claim 5, wherein the windings are arranged along the outer wall at a constant distance (See Boede fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4, 6-8, and 11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2. Lee, applied to claim 1, represents the closest prior art of record to the claimed invention. The prior art fails to teach, “wherein the passage is arranged at the substantially top portion of the first internal space and the second internal space when the heating device is in the horizontal position.”, in addition to the rest of the claim.
Instead, Lee teaches a flow path portion 138 arranged as shown in fig. 3 and described in paras. 35-37, where the portion 138 is arranged at the substantially bottom portion of the tubes 132 and 134. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to rearrange the location of the portion 138 to be at the top, as claimed, since it would require substantial reconstruction of the device and result in a convoluted flow path. This is because the location of 138 is at least partially driven by the orientation of the inlet 122 and helical flow formation unit 136, as shown in fig. 2, the water is introduced off center and flows helically around the heater 162 (clockwise in fig. 3) to finally reach the flow path portion 138. From this point, the liquid can smoothly flow to the second tube as described in para. 37.
PNG
media_image6.png
484
435
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Also, claim 2 depends from claim 1, which requires, “wherein the outlet hydraulic connection member is arranged at the substantially top portion of the second internal space when the heating device is in the horizontal position”. Therefore, simply arranging the device to operate 180° rotated from that of fig. 3, i.e. upside down, would not read on this claim, although the flow path portion 138 would be arranged at the top of the tubes 132 and 134, since the outlet would no longer be arranged at the top.
Regarding claim 4. Lee, applied to claim 1, represents the closest prior art of record to the claimed invention. The prior art fails to teach, “wherein the first internal space and the second internal space are in, the shape of a tube with a progressively decreasing diameter.”, in addition to the rest of the claim.
Instead, Lee teaches a flow path of water flowing helically around a cylindrical heating element 160, see para. 41 and fig. 2. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to progressively decrease the diameter of the tubes 132 and/or 134, as claimed, based on the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 6. Lee in view of Boede, applied to claim 5, represents the closest prior art of record to the claimed invention. The prior art fails to teach, “wherein the first internal space and the second internal space decrease their diameter along the main extension axes X of the first electrical heating element and the second electrical heating element respectively.”, in addition to the rest of the claim.
Instead, modified Lee would teach a substantially constant diameter, see Lee fig. 2 and Boede fig. 2. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have a decreasing diameter, as claimed, based on the prior art of record. Also, the helical sidewalls of Boede would teach a constant diameter, although it may initially appear that the diameter would fluctuate by increasing and decreasing due to the concave surface; this is because the overall diameter does not increase or decrease.
PNG
media_image7.png
413
518
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7. Lee in view of Boede, applied to claim 5, represents the closest prior art of record to the claimed invention. The prior art fails to teach, “wherein the outlet hydraulic connection member merges into the outer wall and the second internal space substantially parallel to the main extension axis X of the second electrical heating element.”, in addition to the rest of the claim.
Instead, Lee teaches a substantially perpendicular connection. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrange the outlet to be parallel, as claimed, since this would require substantial reconstruction of Lee’s device. Boede also teaches a similar connection, as seen in fig. 1.
Regarding claim 8. Lee in view of Boede, applied to claim 5, represents the closest prior art of record to the claimed invention. The prior art fails to teach, “wherein the inlet hydraulic connection member merges into the outer wall and the first internal space substantially parallel to the main extension axis X of the first electrical heating element.”, in addition to the rest of the claim.
Instead, Lee teaches an orthogonal connection, where the inlet is substantially perpendicular and offset. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrange the inlet to be parallel, as claimed, since this would require substantial reconstruction of Lee’s device. Boede also teaches a similar connection, as seen in fig. 1.
Regarding claim 11. Lee in view of Boede, applied to claim 5, represents the closest prior art of record to the claimed invention. The prior art fails to teach, “wherein the windings are arranged along the outer wall at a distance which is decreasing along the main extension axes X.”, in addition to the rest of the claim.
Instead, as shown in Boede fig. 2, the heating element maintains an equal distance from the outer wall along the extension axis X. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a decreasing distance along the extension axis X, as claimed, based on the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kurt J Wolford whose telephone number is (571)272-9945. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 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, Michael G Hoang can be reached at (571)272-6460. 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.
/KURT J WOLFORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
