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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/21/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: water distribution systems 25a&25b as element 25a is not in the drawings.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s), No new matter should be entered:
“longitudinal axes of said plurality of straight tube segments are parallel to said first air flow as said first flow enters said air inlets” appears to need to read “perpendicular” of claim 1
“a combined length of said inlet headers across a respective one of said two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections is greater than lengths of said plurality of straight tube segments” of claim 1
“serpentine tubes comprise plate fins, flat fins or spiral fins” of claim 3.
“Dual pumps” of claim 6.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because Figures should be clear black and white format to be acceptable. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Color photographs and color drawings are not accepted in utility applications unless a petition filed under 37 CFR 1.84(a)(2) is granted. Any such petition must be accompanied by the appropriate fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(h), one set of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system or three sets of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if not submitted via the via USPTO patent electronic filing system, and, unless already present, an amendment to include the following language as the first paragraph of the brief description of the drawings section of the specification:
The patent or application file contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee.
Color photographs will be accepted if the conditions for accepting color drawings and black and white photographs have been satisfied. See 37 CFR 1.84(b)(2).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
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:
“water distribution system” in claim 1.
The aforementioned limitation meets the three-prong test outlined herein since:
(A) the term “system” is a generic placeholder,
(B) the generic placeholder is modified by functional language (e.g. “water distribution”), and
(C) the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structures, material or acts for performing the claimed function.
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.
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.
A review of the specification found a water distribution system to be "perforated water troughs, an array of perforated water tubes, an array of water tubes fitted with nozzles" and equivalents per paragraph 0013.
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.
Claim 1 recites “a combined length of said inlet headers across a respective one of said two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections is greater than lengths of said plurality of straight tube segments” This an indefinite statement as one skilled in the art is not fully apprised of what would read on this limitation. It is unclear how these lengths are measured, further it is unclear the effect on the pressure drop.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said air inlets" in section l. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim previously claimed “side air inlets” and “top air inlets” making it unclear what inlets are being referenced. Since the claim is in reference to the indirect heat exchange section it is read as the top air inlets.
Claim 1 is further rejected for “said tube bundles are oriented in said cooling tower so that said longitudinal axes of said plurality of straight tube segments are parallel to said first air flow as said first flow enters said air inlets and through said cross-flow direct heat exchange sections” as it is unclear what air flow is being claimed. The air flow shown from the inlet for the indirect heat exchange section which comes down from the top and thus is perpendicular, the claim further states the air flow across the direct heat exchanger which does not come from the first air flow. The claim will be examined as reading “said tube bundles are oriented in said cooling tower so that said longitudinal axes of said plurality of straight tube segments are perpendicular to said first air flow as said first air flow enters said top air inlets and through said cross-flow direct heat exchange sections”
Claim 8 recites “wherein said air mover simultaneously” which is indefinite as it would be unclear to one skilled in the art unclear when infringement occurs as it requires an action (nota capability). This language makes it impossible to determine if the claimed apparatus is being read on until it is applied to system which makes the claim indefinite as it makes it unclear when infringement occurs (when system is made or when system used) MPEP 2173.05 (p). The claim will be examine as reading “wherein said air mover configured to simultaneously”.
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) 1, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CARTER(US 2014/0166240 A1) in view of BUGLER(US 20240102739 A1).
Regarding claim 1 CARTER teaches A cooling tower (FIG. 2) comprising: a water collection basin (FIG. 2 element 19a), b. a plenum (FIG. 2 Below element 16) located above a central portion of said water collection basin (FIG. 2 element 19a), c. an air mover (FIG. 2 element 16) situated above said plenum (FIG. 2 Below element 16), d. two cross-flow direct heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 14) flanking a lower portion of said plenum (FIG. 2 Space above element 19a), e. two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 15) flanking an upper portion of said plenum (FIG. 2 Below element 16), each of said two indirect heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 15) situated above a respective one of said direct heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 14), f. a water distribution system (FIG. 2 element 13A) located above, and configured to selectively distribute water to, said two indirect heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 15), g. at least one recirculation pump (FIG. 2 element 19) located to draw water collecting in said water collection basin (FIG. 2 element 19a) and move it through one or more recirculation pipes (FIG. 2 connecting lines between element 19 and 20) to said water distribution system (FIG. 2 element 13a), h. two side air inlets (FIG. 2 element 18), each one of said two side air inlets located laterally adjacent a respective one of said two direct heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 14); i. two top air inlets (FIG. 2 element 17’), each one of said two top air inlets (FIG. 2 element 17’) located above a respective one of said two indirect heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 15), j. wherein said air mover simultaneously, i. draws a first flow of air (FIG. 2 arrows leaving element 15) into said cooling tower through said two top air inlets (FIG. 2 element 17’), through said two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 15) into said plenum (FIG. 2 Below element 16), and out of said cooling tower (FIG. 2) through said air mover, and ii. draws a second flow of air (FIG. 2 arrows leaving element 14) into said cooling tower (FIG. 2) through said two side air inlets (FIG. 2 element 18), said two cross-flow direct heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 14), and into said plenum (FIG. 2 Above element 19a), through said plenum (FIG. 2 Below element 16), and out of said cooling tower (FIG. 2) through said air mover.
CARTER does not teach, k. wherein each of said two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections comprise a plurality of tube bundles, each of said plurality of tube bundles comprising an inlet header, an outlet header, and a plurality of serpentine tubes attached at a first end to said inlet header and attached at a second end to said outlet header, each of said plurality of elliptical serpentine tubes comprising a plurality of straight tube segments connected to adjacent ones of said plurality of straight tube segments by tube bends, 1. wherein each of said tube bundles are oriented in said cooling tower so that said longitudinal axes of said plurality of straight tube segments are parallel to said first air flow as said first flow enters said air inlets and through said cross-flow direct heat exchange sections, and m. wherein a combined length of said inlet headers across a respective one of said two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections is greater than lengths of said plurality of straight tube segments.
BUGLER teaches, a plurality of tube bundles (FIG. 3 claim 1), each of said plurality of tube bundles comprising an inlet header (FIG. 3 claim 1), an outlet header (FIG. 3 claim 1), and a plurality of serpentine tubes (FIG. 3 claim 1) attached at a first end to said inlet header (FIG. 3 claim 1) and attached at a second end to said outlet header (FIG. 3 claim 1), each of said plurality of elliptical serpentine tubes (FIG. 3) comprising a plurality of straight tube segments connected to adjacent ones of said plurality of straight tube segments by tube bends (FIG. 3 claim 1), 1. wherein each of said tube bundles (FIG. 3 claim 1) are oriented in said cooling tower (FIG. 3 claim 1) so that said longitudinal axes of said plurality of straight tube segments (FIG 3 claim 1). are perpendicular to said first air flow as said first flow enters said air inlets and through said cross-flow direct heat exchange sections (FIG. 3 claim 1), and m. wherein a combined length of said inlet headers across a respective one of said two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections is greater than lengths of said plurality of straight tube segments (FIG. 3 claim 1). From 112b longitudinal axes of said plurality of straight tube segments are perpendicular to said first air flow as said first flow enters said air inlets and through said cross-flow direct heat exchange sections. When combined the heat exchanger and tube bundles of BUGLER would be in the claimed location. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify Carters tube bundles and direct heat exchanger to be the design of BUGLER, the motivation is to increase capacity (para. 0007).
Regarding claim 2, BUGLER teaches serpentine tubes (FIG. 3 claim 1) are elliptical or round.
Regarding claim 3, BUGLER teaches serpentine tubes comprise plate fins, flat fins, or spiral fins (FIG. 3 para. 0018).
Regarding claim 4, CARTER teaches said water basin (FIG. 2 element 19a) comprises a central section between said plenum (FIG. 2 directly below element 16) and two flanking sections (Horizontal space of FIG. 2 element 19a) each located beneath a respective one of said two direct heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 14).
Regarding claim 5, CARTER teaches comprising a single recirculation pump (FIG. 2 element 19) and a single pipe (FIG. 2) connecting said recirculation pump (FIG. 2 element 19) and said water distribution system (FIG. 2 element 13a). The word comprising mean’s this is open and thus the claim is not limited to one, but read as at least one.
Regarding claim 6, CARTER teaches two recirculation pump (FIG. 2 element 19 opposite side.) two pipes (FIG. 2 opposite side.) connecting a respective one of said two recirculation pumps (FIG. 2 element 19 opposite side.) and a respective section of said water distribution system (FIG. 2 element 13a opposite side).
Regarding claim 7, BUGLER teaches return bends (FIG. 7), and CARTER teaches in one of said two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 15) are located above a respective one of said two side air inlets (FIG. 2 element 13). When combined the heat exchanger of BUGLER would be in the claimed location.
Regarding claim 8, CARTER teaches the cooling tower of claim 1, wherein said air mover simultaneously, " draws a first flow of air (FIG. 2 arrows leaving element 14) into said cooling tower through said two top air inlets, down through said two concurrent-flow indirect heat exchange sections into said plenum, and upward and out of said cooling tower (FIG. 2) through said air mover, and " draws a second flow of air (FIG. 2 arrows leaving element 15) into said cooling tower (FIG. 2) through said two side air inlets (FIG. 2 element 13), across said two cross-flow direct heat exchange sections (FIG. 2 element 14), and into said plenum (FIG. 2 above element 19a), up through said plenum (FIG. 2 below element 16), and out of said cooling tower (FIG. 2) through said air mover.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Uribe(US-20230400255 A1), Yang(US-2022/0299269 A1), & BIEGLER(CN-2019/109844437 A).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY F CANOVA whose telephone number is (571)-272-5795. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8-5 and Friday 8-10 and 2-4.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jianying Atkisson be reached on (571) 270-7740. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HENRY FRANCIS CANOVA/ Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JOEL M ATTEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763