DETAILED ACTION
Amendments filed on 4/22/2026 have been entered.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 20-22, 25-28, 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 116105403 A), in view of Wintemute (US 2014/0260368 A1), in view of Saad (US 2024/0239496 A1), and in view of Toyoshi (JP 2009264666 A).
Claim 1: Wang discloses a vapor compression heat transfer system, comprising
an evaporator assembly (paragraph [31]: evaporator) and an ice surface (paragraph [27]: removing any ice formed on a surface of the tube), and an ultrasonic energy source (paragraph [27]: ultrasonic transducer waves preventing icing on outside of the tube), the ultrasonic energy source (paragraph [27]) when energized vibrating the ice surface (shown in FIG.3-4 provided with an ultrasonic wave vibrator 4.1);
controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) communicatively coupled with the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) and configured to cause the ultrasonic energy transducer to vibrate the ice-prone target surface and remove ice from the ice-prone surface (functional language);
the controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) comprising ice detecting impedance circuitry for detecting the presence of ice on the ice-prone target surface (ice detecting impedance circuitry detected by controller; paragraph [20] discloses in steps S2-3 detecting freezing condition when temperature is less than 0 degree-C when ice forms, controller sends signal after detection of freezing),
the controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) operating the transducer (paragraph [27]) in an ice detecting mode (ice detecting mode is implemented in steps S2-3; paragraph [20] discloses in steps S2-3 detecting freezing condition when temperature is less than 0 degree-C when ice forms, controller sends signal after detection of freezing and forming ice to rise temperature and prevent from freezing, therefore it discloses steps to detect forming ice) and then in an ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode) and,
wherein the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) operates at a power density in the ice- detecting mode (ice detecting mode is implemented in steps S2-3; paragraph [20]) and in the ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode), the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) when energized in the ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode) vibrating the ice target surface (functional language/intended use).
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 1, but fails to disclose a prone, at a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz, when a threshold amount of ice is detected on the ice-prone target surface by the ultrasonic energy transducer and the ice detector circuity; a power density over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2.
However, Wintemute teaches a prone (paragraph [104]: heat exchanger coil/tube is prone as to need to be defrosted) for the purpose of defrosting the coil or the tube of the heat exchanger (paragraph [104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Wang to include a prone as taught by Wintemute in order to defrost the coil or the tube of the heat exchanger.
Further, Toyoshi teaches the ultrasonic energy energized at a frequency (paragraph [376]: ultrasonic device of refrigerator operates at predetermined frequency 80 kHz to 210 kHz) in order to perform to melt and remove ice (paragraph [102]), except for a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz. 20It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Toyoshi to include a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art - Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A.
Further, Saad teaches an ice detector (smart surface used as detector; paragraph [63]) for detecting the presence of ice on the ice-prone surface (functional language/intended use), the ice detector being connected to the controller (processor used as controller; paragraph [66]; processor to detect and determine whether de-icing condition satisfied) circuitry (to clarify, controller is electronically coupled to detecting system) to operate when a threshold amount of ice is detected by the ice detector (paragraph [96]: indicating that amount of accumulated ice exceeds a threshold amount) on the ice-prone target surface (intended use) for the purpose of providing periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency (paragraph [2]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include an ice detector for detecting the presence of ice on the ice-prone surface, the ice detector being connected to the controller circuitry to operate when a threshold amount of ice is detected by the ice detector as taught by Saad in order to provide periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency.
Further concerning limitations a power density over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2. Wang discloses the ice-removal mode, and the ice- detecting mode, except for a power density over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include a range of 0.05 W/in2 - 0.1 W/in2, and over a range of 0.5 W/in2 - 1.5 W/in2 in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art - Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A).
Claim 2: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the vapor compression system comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of an ice maker, heat pump, air conditioner, a refrigerator (paragraph [14]: refrigeration unit), and a freezer.
Claim 4: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the transducer is a piezoelectric transducer (Toyoshi, paragraph [366]: piezoelectric element 463).
Claim 5: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 4, wherein at least two piezoelectric transducers (Toyoshi, 463; Toyoshi teaches piezoelectric transducer, except for piezoelectric transducers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Toyoshi to include piezoelectric transducers in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a known device involves only routine skill in the art Duplication of parts: MPEP 2144.04 VI-B) are connected to the ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]), and each transducer is spaced from 12 in. to 18 in. from an adjacent transducer (It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include each transducer is spaced from 12 in. to 18 in. from an adjacent transducer in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art - Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A).
Claim 6: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the evaporator assembly (paragraph [31]: evaporator) comprises an evaporator tube (to clarify, tubes are inherent to evaporator; paragraph [38]: heat exchanger tubes) having an ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]), and the ultrasonic energy source (paragraph [27]) vibrates the ice-prone target surface and the evaporator tube (functional language/intended use).
Claim 20: Wang discloses a low temperature chamber having walls and a ceiling comprising
an ice surface (paragraph [27]: removing any ice formed on a surface of the tube), the chamber (to clarify, chamber is part of the structure of the evaporator which is inside the shell 6; see FIG.1) comprising one or more ultrasonic energy sources (paragraph [27]: ultrasonic transducer waves preventing icing on outside of the tube) disposed on one or more of the walls or the ceiling (plates 12 or bottom and top walls of shells 6 constructing walls or ceilings; see FIG.1), the ultrasonic energy source (paragraph [27]) when energized vibrating the ice target surface (shown in FIG.3-4 provided with an ultrasonic wave vibrator 4.1).
PNG
media_image1.png
299
643
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 20, but fails to disclose a prone, the ultrasonic energy source energized at a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz.
However, Wintemute teaches a prone (paragraph [104]: heat exchanger coil/tube is prone as to need to be defrosted) for the purpose of defrosting the coil or the tube of the heat exchanger (paragraph [104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Wang to include a prone as taught by Wintemute in order to defrost the coil or the tube of the heat exchanger.
Further, Toyoshi teaches the ultrasonic energy source energized at a frequency (paragraph [376]: ultrasonic device of refrigerator operates at predetermined frequency 80 kHz to 210 kHz) in order to perform to melt and remove ice (paragraph [102]), except for a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz. 20It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Toyoshi to include a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art - Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A.
Claim 21: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 20, wherein the chamber (chamber is part of the structure of the evaporator which is inside the shell 6; see FIG.1) is at least one selected from the group consisting of cold storage, walk-in freezer, reach-in display case, frozen fry dispenser, walk-in cooler, and refrigerated transportation container (paragraph [2]: evaporator intended used in refrigeration unit/freezer units).
Claim 22: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 20, further comprising an evaporator (paragraph [31]: evaporator) attached to the low temperature chamber (chambers are inherent as part of structure of evaporator; see FIG.1).
Claim 25: Wang discloses a method of conducting one of heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration, wherein the HVACR system comprises
an evaporator assembly (paragraph [31]: evaporator) and an ice target surface (paragraph [27]: removing any ice formed on a surface of the tube), the method comprising the steps of:
providing an ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]: ultrasonic transducer waves preventing icing on outside of the tube),
operating controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) communicatively coupled with the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) and in an ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode) configured to cause the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) to vibrate the ice target surface and remove ice from the ice target surface (functional language);
operating the transducer (paragraph [27]) as an ice detector for detecting the presence of ice on the ice target surface (functional language/intended use),
the controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) comprising ice detecting impedance circuitry (ice detecting impedance circuitry detected by controller; paragraph [20] discloses in steps S2-3 detecting freezing condition when temperature is less than 0 degree-C when ice forms, controller sends signal after detection of freezing), the controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) operating the transducer (paragraph [27]) in an ice detecting mode (ice detecting mode is implemented in steps S2-3; paragraph [20] discloses in steps S2-3 detecting freezing condition when temperature is less than 0 degree-C when ice forms, controller sends signal after detection of freezing and forming ice to rise temperature and prevent from freezing, therefore it discloses steps to detect forming ice) and then in an ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode) by the transducer (paragraph [27]) and the ice detecting circuitry on the ice-prone target surface (paragraph [27]: removing any ice formed on a surface of the tube);
wherein the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) operates in the ice- detecting mode (ice detecting mode is implemented in steps S2-3; paragraph [20]) and in the ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode), the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) when energized in the ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode) vibrating the ice target surface (paragraph [27]: removing any ice formed on a surface of the tube).
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 25, but fails to disclose a prone, at a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz, when a threshold amount of ice is detected on the prone surface by the ultrasonic energy transducer and the ice detector circuity; over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2.
However, Wintemute teaches a prone (paragraph [104]: heat exchanger coil/tube is prone as to need to be defrosted) for the purpose of defrosting the coil or the tube of the heat exchanger (paragraph [104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Wang to include a prone as taught by Wintemute in order to defrost the coil or the tube of the heat exchanger.
Further, Toyoshi teaches the ultrasonic energy energized at a frequency (paragraph [376]: ultrasonic device of refrigerator operates at predetermined frequency 80 kHz to 210 kHz) in order to perform to melt and remove ice (paragraph [102]), except for a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz. 20It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Toyoshi to include a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art - Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A.
Further, Saad teaches an ice detector (smart surface used as detector; paragraph [63]) for detecting the presence of ice on the ice-prone surface (functional language/intended use), the ice detector being connected to the controller (processor used as controller; paragraph [66]; processor to detect and determine whether de-icing condition satisfied) circuitry (to clarify, controller is electronically coupled to detecting system) to operate when a threshold amount of ice is detected by the ice detector (paragraph [96]: indicating that amount of accumulated ice exceeds a threshold amount) on the ice-prone target surface (intended use) for the purpose of providing periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency (paragraph [2]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include an ice detector for detecting the presence of ice on the ice-prone surface, the ice detector being connected to the controller circuitry to operate when a threshold amount of ice is detected by the ice detector as taught by Saad in order to provide periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency.
Further concerning limitations over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2. Wang discloses the ice-removal mode, and the ice- detecting mode, except for over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include a range of 0.05 W/in2 - 0.1 W/in2, and over a range of 0.5 W/in2 - 1.5 W/in2 in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art - Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A).
Claim 26: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 25, further comprising selectively instruct the ultrasonic energy source (paragraph [27]: during S1-S4, the ultrasonic transducer is turned on simultaneously, preventing icing on the surface of the tube) to vibrate the ice-prone surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]) in response to the determination; and, and selectively turn off the ultrasonic energy source (paragraph [27]: during S1-S4, the ultrasonic transducer is turned on simultaneously, preventing icing on the surface of the tube; to clarify, ultrasonic transducer would be turned off when de-icing not needed) to cease vibration (shown in FIG.3-4 provided with an ultrasonic wave vibrator 4.1) of the ice-prone surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]) in response to the determination.
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 26, but fails to disclose the step of using the ice detecting impedance circuity to determine whether ice formed on the ice-prone target surface has exceeded a predetermined upper threshold, and using the ice detector to determine whether the formed ice has fallen below a predetermined lower threshold.
However, Saad teaches the step of using the ice detecting impedance circuity (smart surface used as detector; paragraph [63]) to determine whether ice formed on the ice surface has exceeded a predetermined upper threshold (paragraph [96]: indicating that amount of accumulated ice exceeds a threshold amount), and using the ice detector (paragraph [63]) to determine whether the formed ice has fallen below a predetermined lower threshold (threshold amount used as predetermined lower threshold; see paragraph [63]) for the purpose of providing periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency (paragraph [2]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include the step of using an ice detector to determine whether ice formed on the ice-prone surface has exceeded a predetermined upper threshold, and using the ice detector to determine whether the formed ice has fallen below a predetermined lower threshold as taught by Saad in order to provide periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency.
Claim 27: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 25, further comprising the step of instructing the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) to vibrate the ice-prone target surface in accordance with a predetermined schedule (based on broadest reasonable interpretation, when performing S1-S4 real time procedures operating the ultrasonic transducer is interpreted as a predetermined schedule; see paragraphs [27] [28]).
Claim 28: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 25 wherein the HVACR system comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of an ice maker, heat pump, air conditioner, a refrigerator (paragraph [14]: refrigeration unit), and a freezer.
Claim 30: Wang discloses an evaporator assembly for a heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration apparatus, the evaporator assembly comprising
an evaporator (paragraph [31]: evaporator) and an ice target surface (paragraph [27]: removing any ice formed on a surface of the tube), and an ultrasonic energy source (paragraph [27]: ultrasonic transducer waves preventing icing on outside of the tube),
controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) communicatively coupled with the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) and configured to cause the ultrasonic energy transducer to vibrate the ice-prone target surface and remove ice from the ice-prone surface (functional language);
the controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) comprising ice detecting impedance the presence of ice on the ice-prone target surface (ice detecting impedance circuitry detected by controller; paragraph [20] discloses in steps S2-3 detecting freezing condition when temperature is less than 0 degree-C when ice forms, controller sends signal after detection of freezing), the controller circuitry (paragraph [20]: controller) operating the transducer (paragraph [27]) in an ice detecting mode (ice detecting mode is implemented in steps S2-3; paragraph [20] discloses in steps S2-3 detecting freezing condition when temperature is less than 0 degree-C when ice forms, controller sends signal after detection of freezing and forming ice to rise temperature and prevent from freezing, therefore it discloses steps to detect forming ice) and then in an ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode) by the transducer (paragraph [27]) and the ice detecting circuitry (ice detecting impedance circuitry detected by controller; paragraph [20]);
wherein the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) is operable in the ice- detecting mode (ice detecting mode is implemented in steps S2-3; paragraph [20]) and in the ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode), the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) when energized in the ice-removal mode (paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode) vibrating the ice target surface (functional language/intended use).
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 30, but fails to disclose a prone, at a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz, when a threshold amount of ice is detected on the ice-prone target surface by the ultrasonic energy transducer and the ice detector circuity; a power density over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2.
However, Wintemute teaches a prone (paragraph [104]: heat exchanger coil/tube is prone as to need to be defrosted) for the purpose of defrosting the coil or the tube of the heat exchanger (paragraph [104).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Wang to include a prone as taught by Wintemute in order to defrost the coil or the tube of the heat exchanger.
Further, Toyoshi teaches the ultrasonic energy energized at a frequency (paragraph [376]: ultrasonic device of refrigerator operates at predetermined frequency 80 kHz to 210 kHz) in order to perform to melt and remove ice (paragraph [102]), except for a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz. 20It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Toyoshi to include a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art - Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A.
Further, Saad teaches an ice detector (smart surface used as detector; paragraph [63]) for detecting the presence of ice on the ice-prone surface (functional language/intended use), the ice detector being connected to the controller (processor used as controller; paragraph [66]; processor to detect and determine whether de-icing condition satisfied) circuitry (to clarify, controller is electronically coupled to detecting system) to operate when a threshold amount of ice is detected by the ice detector (paragraph [96]: indicating that amount of accumulated ice exceeds a threshold amount) on the ice-prone target surface (intended use) for the purpose of providing periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency (paragraph [2]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include an ice detector for detecting the presence of ice on the ice-prone surface, the ice detector being connected to the controller circuitry to operate when a threshold amount of ice is detected by the ice detector as taught by Saad in order to provide periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency.
Further concerning limitations a power density over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2. Wang discloses the ice-removal mode, and the ice- detecting mode, except for a power density over a range of 0.05 W/in2- 0.1 W/in2, over a range of 0.5 W/in2- 1.5 W/in2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include a range of 0.05 W/in2 - 0.1 W/in2, and over a range of 0.5 W/in2 - 1.5 W/in2 in order to enhance removing the ice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art - Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A).
Claims 7, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 116105403 A), in view of Wintemute (US 2014/0260368 A1), in view of Toyoshi (JP 2009264666 A), in view of Saad (US 2024/0239496 A1), and in view of Sudo (US 2006/0086486 A1).
Claim 7: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 6, wherein the evaporator assembly (paragraph [31]: evaporator) thermally and mechanically coupled with the outer surface of the evaporator tube (paragraph [38]), at least one of the evaporator tube (paragraph [38]) comprising an ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]), such that vibration of one of the evaporator tube (paragraph [38]) and by the ultrasonic energy source (paragraph [27]) will vibrate the ice-prone target surface (functional language/intended use).
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 7, but fails to disclose an evaporator fin.
However, Sudo teaches an evaporator fin (evaporator 1 includes fins 12) for the purpose of enhancing the heat transfer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include an evaporator fin as taught by Sudo in order to enhance the heat transfer.
Claim 8: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the evaporator tube and/or the evaporator fin (Sudo, evaporator 1 includes fins 12) comprises at least one selected from the group consisting of Cu, Al (Sudo, paragraph [50]: fin member comprise Al alloy), Fe, and alloys thereof.
Claims 9, 11, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 116105403 A), in view of Wintemute (US 2014/0260368 A1), in view of Saad (US 2024/0239496 A1), in view of Toyoshi (JP 2009264666 A), and in view of Knudsen (US 2021/0395560 A1).
Claim 9: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, further comprising the ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]), on the ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]) during operation of the evaporator (paragraph [31]: evaporator) and reduce adhesion of the formed ice to the ice-prone target surface (functional language/intended use).
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 9, but fails to disclose coating a layer of icephobic material, wherein the icephobic material will reduce ice formation.
However, Knudsen teaches coating a layer of icephobic material (paragraph [14]: coating composition includes icephobic coating), wherein the icephobic material will reduce ice formation (paragraph [44]) for the purpose of inhibiting the formation of ice (paragraph [44]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include coating a layer of icephobic material, wherein the icephobic material will reduce ice formation as taught by Knudsen in order to inhibit the formation of ice.
Claim 11: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 9, wherein the icephobic material is at least one selected from the group consisting of polydimethylsiloxane (Knudsen, paragraph [42]: polydimethylsiloxane) and polytetrafluoroethylene.
Claim 23: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 20, further comprising the ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]), on the ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]) during operation of the evaporator (paragraph [31]: evaporator) and reduce adhesion of the formed ice to the ice-prone target surface (functional language/intended use).
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 23, but fails to disclose coating a layer of icephobic material, wherein the icephobic material will reduce ice formation.
However, Knudsen teaches coating a layer of icephobic material (paragraph [14]: coating composition includes icephobic coating), wherein the icephobic material will reduce ice formation (paragraph [44]) for the purpose of inhibiting the formation of ice (paragraph [44]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include coating a layer of icephobic material, wherein the icephobic material will reduce ice formation as taught by Knudsen in order to inhibit the formation of ice.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 116105403 A), in view of Wintemute (US 2014/0260368 A1), in view of Saad (US 2024/0239496 A1), in view of Toyoshi (JP 2009264666 A), and in view of Sawant (US 2023/0175792 A1).
Claim 12: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the evaporator assembly (paragraph [31]: evaporator) comprises and the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) is mechanically connected such that the ultrasonic energy transducer (paragraph [27]) will vibrate the vibration will be transmitted to the evaporator (paragraph [31]: evaporator) and the ice-prone (Wintemute, heat exchanger coil/tube is prone as to need to be defrosted) target surface (paragraph [27]: removing any ice formed on a surface of the tube).
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 12, but fails to disclose supporting structure for the evaporator.
However, Sawant teaches supporting structure for the evaporator (paragraph [73]: supporting structure such as bracket 1150/brace 1272) for the purpose of enhancing a structural rigidity of the heat exchanger (paragraph [72]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include supporting structure for the evaporator as taught by Sawant in order to enhance a structural rigidity of the heat exchanger.
Claims 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 116105403 A), in view of Wintemute (US 2014/0260368 A1), in view of Toyoshi (JP 2009264666 A), in view of Saad (US 2024/0239496 A1), and in view of Bratianu (US 2023/0348074 A1).
Claim 15: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the ice detector (Saad, paragraph [63]),
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 15, but fails to disclose a resistive sensor.
However, Bratianu teaches a resistive sensor (paragraph [324]: resistive temperature detectors used to measure temperature by measuring a change in sensor resistance) for the purpose of removing the ice accumulation to prevent inefficient result and unsafe operating conditions (paragraph [2]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include a resistive sensor as taught by Bratianu in order to remove the ice accumulation to prevent inefficient result or unsafe operating conditions.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 116105403 A), in view of Wintemute (US 2014/0260368 A1), in view of Toyoshi (JP 2009264666 A), in view of Saad (US 2024/0239496 A1), and in view of Khozikov (US 2015/0246730 A1).
Claim 16: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 15, wherein the ice detector (Saad, paragraph [63]) comprises an impedance analyzer (Saad, impedance meter 150 used as impedance analyzer), the impedance analyzer (Saad, 150) measuring the impedance of the ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]) and producing an impedance signal relating to the impedance (Saad, signal from impedance meter 150) of the ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]) to the controller circuitry (Saad, processor), the controller circuitry (Saad, processor) determining from the impedance signal (Saad, signal from impedance meter 150) of the for the ice-prone target surface (Wintemute, paragraph [104]) to determine the presence of ice on the ice-prone target surface (functional language).
Wang discloses the claimed limitations in claim 16, but fails to disclose determining the resonant frequency and comparing the resonant frequency to a set point resonant frequency.
However, Khozikov teaches determining the resonant frequency (paragraph [57]: detecting of changes in the resonant frequencies/impedance processes) and comparing the resonant frequency to a set point resonant frequency (paragraph [58]: detection by comparing the output frequency/impedance with a predetermined frequency/impedance) for the purpose of removing and reducing the amount of ice formation to prevent safety issues (paragraph [1]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include determining the resonant frequency and comparing the resonant frequency to a set point resonant frequency as taught by Khozikov in order to remove and to reduce the amount of ice formation to prevent safety issues.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 116105403 A), in view of Wintemute (US 2014/0260368 A1), in view of Toyoshi (JP 2009264666 A), in view of Saad (US 2024/0239496 A1), and in view of Brooks (3,926,006).
Claim 19: Wang as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the controller circuitry (Saad, processor), but further fails to disclose a function generator.
However, Brooks teaches a function generator (generator 68 energizes transmitting transducer 69 energy of signal into wave ultrasonic frequency signal) configured to energize the ultrasonic energy device according to predetermined functions (functional language; to clarify, predetermined functions are the functions of the generator) for the purpose of preventing the freezing of the pipe of sufficient thickness and rigidity to withstand pressure.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the invention of Wang to include a function generator configured to energize the ultrasonic energy device according to predetermined functions as taught by Brooks in order to prevent the freezing of the pipe of sufficient thickness and rigidity to withstand pressure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to all the claims under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument on page 14: “None of the cited references discloses or suggests operating the same ultrasonic transducer in a low-power sensing mode to detect ice presence via resonance/impedance characteristics and in a high-power ice-removal mode to remove ice. Following the return to sensing mode, the sensing essentially performs a verification of removal by confirming the return to baseline resonance”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because: firstly, these limitations referred to in the argument statement are not claimed: “….following the return to sensing mode, the sensing essentially performs a verification of removal by confirming the return to baseline resonance”.
However, Wang discloses a transducer and ultrasonic energy source in paragraph [27]. Further, Saad is only used to teach an ice detector which Wang lacks in order to provider periodic defrosting to maintain efficiency as indicated in the office action. Further, as indicated in the office action, to vibrate the ice-prone surface to cause removal of ice from the ice-prone surface is a functional language/intended use of ultrasonic energy source.
Further as indicated in the office action Wang discloses ultrasonic energy source, and in paragraph [27] discloses removing any ice in steps S1-S4, therefore it discloses an ice-removal mode, and in paragraph [20] discloses in steps S2-3 detecting freezing condition when temperature is less than 0 degree-C when ice forms, controller sends signal after detection of freezing and forming ice to rise temperature and prevent from freezing, therefore it discloses steps to detect forming ice, Wang’s invention is about ice buildup can damage tubes and the system, but lacks ranges of low power and higher power density the ice-detecting mode over a range of 0.05 W/in2 - 0.1 W/in2, and in an ice-removal mode over a range of 0.5 W/in2 - 1.5 W/in2 which is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art (Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A).
Applicant’s argument on pages 14, 15: “No reference uses impedance circuitry and resonance-frequency shift of the substrate-ice system as an ice detector, nor as a completion criterion for deicing. Ref 2 contains no resonance sensing”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because: firstly, these limitations referred to in the argument statement are not claimed: “…..shift of the substrate-ice system…. a completion criterion for deicing”.
However, Khozikov is only used to teach determining the resonant frequency (paragraph [57]: detecting of changes in the resonant frequencies/impedance processes; therefore Khozikov is capable of sensing resonant frequency) which Wang lacks as indicated in the office action.
Applicant’s argument on page 15: “The cited references do not provide this dual-mode quantitative framework enabling autonomous operation”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because: these limitations referred to in the argument statement are not claimed: “dual-mode quantitative framework enabling autonomous operation”.
However, as indicated in the office action Toyoshi teaches the ultrasonic energy source energized at a frequency, but lacks a frequency of from 30 kHz to 60 kHz which is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only skill in the art (Optimum Range: MPEP 2144.05 II-A).
Applicant’s argument on page 16: “US20140260368A1 It does not suggest eliminating thermal defrost in favor of purely mechanical ultrasonic shedding”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because: these limitations referred to in the argument statement are not claimed: “eliminating thermal defrost in favor of purely mechanical ultrasonic shedding”.
Applicant’s argument on page 16: “not the hybrid ultrasonic sensor/actuator platform of this invention. JP2009264666A provides no teaching toward ultrasonic resonance-based ice sensing or non-thermal ultrasonic shedding”
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because: these limitations referred to in the argument statement are not claimed: “the hybrid ultrasonic sensor/actuator platform, non-thermal ultrasonic shedding”.
However, as indicated in the response to the previous argument above, Khozikov teaches determining the resonant frequency.
Applicant’s argument on page 17: “CN116105403A it does not teach using the transducer as a sensor, nor any low-power sensing mode, nor power-modulated dual-mode operation does not disclose ultrasonic deicing at all. JP2009264666A (Ref 3) relates to electrostatic atomization for humidity control and is unrelated to ultrasonic deicing or ultrasonic sensing”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because: these limitations referred to in the argument statement are not claimed: “transducer as a sensor”. Transducer is not claimed as a sensor. Further response to argument low-power sensing mode, nor power-modulated dual-mode operation has been addressed in the previous responses above.
Applicant’s argument on page 18: “the reference 2 it does not disclose or suggest the key novelty: the transducer itself is the ice sensor and the ice remover via power modulation”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, because as indicated above in response to the arguments, transducer is not claimed as a sensor, and Wang discloses the ice removing and power modulation as indicated in the above responses.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI whose telephone number is (313)446-6612. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
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, Len Tran can be reached on (571) 272-1184. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights