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
Claim 7 objected to because of the following informalities:
The phrase “a perforated portion formed as a separate component than the baffle” should be corrected to read “a perforated portion formed as a component separate from the baffle” for proper grammar.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 19 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 19 recites the limitation “the degassed chamber.” This limitation lacks clear antecedent basis in the claim. A degassed chamber is introduced in claim 18.
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 (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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YAMATO et al. (WO2023127506A1, hereinafter YAMATO) in view of LEONARD (US4715953A).
Regarding Claim 1, YAMATO discloses a degassing module for degassing liquids (¶[0001]). FIG. 1 illustrates degassing module 1 comprising pipe 2, hollow fiber membrane group 3, housing 4, partition 5, and baffle 6. Pipe 2 forms internal flow path 23 having liquid supply port 21 and liquid discharge port 22. Multiple holes 24 permit liquid L to exit internal flow path 23 to the outside of pipe 2 and to enter internal flow path 23 from outside pipe 2 (¶¶[0023]–[0026]).
PNG
media_image1.png
660
440
media_image1.png
Greyscale
FIG. 1 of YAMATO
Hollow fiber membrane group 3 includes multiple hollow fiber membranes 31 arranged around the outer circumference of pipe 2 to cover holes 24. Each hollow fiber membrane 31 permits gas G to permeate while preventing liquid L from permeating (¶¶[0029]–[0030]). Hollow fiber membrane group 3 has a substantially cylindrical shape surrounding hole-forming portion 25 of pipe 2, and intermembrane spaces S1 through which liquid L can flow are formed between adjacent hollow fiber membranes 31 (¶¶[0032]–[0033]).
Housing 4 encloses hollow fiber membrane group 3 and includes first and second intake ports 42 and 43 connected to a suction device, such as a vacuum pump (¶¶[0034]–[0035]). Partition 5 divides the region within housing 4 into internal region R1 and external region R2. Internal region R1 includes inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31, while external region R2 includes intermembrane space S1. Hollow fiber membranes 31 prevent liquid L from passing into internal region R1 while permitting gas G to pass into internal region R1 (¶[0037]).
Partition 5 includes first and second sealing portions 51 and 52 that secure the respective ends of hollow fiber membrane group 3 while leaving inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31 open. Internal regions R1 are formed on the opposite sides of sealing portions 51 and 52, and first and second intake ports 42 and 43 communicate with the respective internal regions R1 (¶¶[0038]–[0041]).
Baffle 6 divides degassing module 1 into upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 and partitions internal flow path 23, causing liquid L to exit pipe 2 in upstream portion 10, flow through intermembrane space S1, and reenter pipe 2 in downstream portion 11 (¶¶[0042]–[0043]). Inner baffle 61 may completely block internal flow path 23 so that liquid L cannot pass directly from upstream portion 10 to downstream portion 11 through pipe 2 (¶¶[0045]–[0046]).
In operation, a suction device connected to first and second intake ports 42 and 43 depressurizes internal region R1 and inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31. Liquid L flows from upstream portion 10 through intermembrane space S1, where dissolved gas and bubbles pass through hollow fiber membranes 31 into the depressurized inner circumferential spaces 32. The degassed liquid then enters pipe 2 in downstream portion 11 and is discharged through liquid discharge port 22 (¶¶[0062]–[0063]).
Based on the disclosure and illustration, when inner baffle 61 completely blocks internal flow path 23, upstream portion 10 of pipe 2 corresponds to the claimed gassed tube, and downstream portion 11 of pipe 2 corresponds to the claimed degassed tube. The portion of external region R2 surrounding upstream portion 10 corresponds to the claimed degassing chamber, internal region R1 corresponds to the claimed vacuum chamber, and intake ports 42 and 43 correspond to the claimed vacuum port.
However, YAMATO does not explicitly disclose the hollow fibers formed into loop portions and crown portions, the loop portions configured to surround the gassed tube, and the crown portions configured to extend through a wall separating the degassing chamber and the vacuum chamber such that the open ends communicate with the vacuum chamber.
LEONARD discloses a hollow fiber separation device in which one or more bundles of hollow fibers are circumferentially wrapped about a cylindrical hollow core (Col. 1, lns. 6–10).
FIGS. 1–3 illustrate hollow fiber oxygenator 10 including bundle 26 of hollow fibers wrapped around cylindrical hollow core 24. The hollow fibers are helically wound around core 24, with each winding extending at least one loop about the core. Bundle 26 surrounds core 24, and blood percolates between the helically arranged hollow fibers in diffusion-exchange relationship therewith (Col. 3, ln. 62–Col. 4, ln. 22).
PNG
media_image2.png
659
989
media_image2.png
Greyscale
FIG. 3 of LEONARD
In this arrangement, oxygen flows in a helical pattern through the bores of hollow fibers 26 about core 24, while blood percolates through bundle 26 along the exterior surfaces of the hollow fibers in cross-flow communication with the oxygen. The multiple, short oxygen flow paths provide abundant fresh oxygen, while the blood-flow path eliminates laminar flow and provides good mixing for improved oxygenation efficiency (Col. 4, lns. 57–68).
The circumferentially wrapped hollow fiber separation device disclosed by LEONARD addresses the poor mixing and inefficiency associated with hollow fibers extending from end to end of a housing by permitting nonlaminar liquid flow with good mixing, improving gas-transfer efficiency, reducing the membrane surface area and number of fibers required, and providing short flow paths through the hollow fibers for diffusion exchange (Col. 1, ln. 16–Col. 2, ln. 11). In view of YAMATO’s degassing module, a person skilled in the art would have formed the hollow fiber membranes into a circumferentially wrapped loop configuration to predictably improve liquid mixing and gas-transfer efficiency while reducing the membrane surface area and number of fibers required.
Regarding the limitation “crown portions,” the claim merely identifies portions of the hollow fibers extending from the loop portions through the separating wall, and this configuration is considered a routine design choice for managing the terminal ends of the hollow fibers and providing additional contact area for liquid-gas separation. A person skilled in the art would have provided these portions to predictably retain the circumferentially wrapped loops, connect the hollow-fiber lumens to the vacuum chamber, and provide additional hollow-fiber surface for liquid-gas contact before the fibers enter the separating wall (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the circumferentially wrapped loop configuration, as disclosed by LEONARD, to the hollow fiber membranes in the degassing module by YAMATO.
Regarding Claim 2, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 1. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates pipe 2 extending linearly along central axis A, with upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 positioned on opposite sides of baffle 6 (¶¶[0025], [0042]). Based on the disclosure and illustration, upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 are colinear.
Regarding Claim 3, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 1. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates external region R2 surrounding pipe 2 in downstream portion 11 and positioned adjacent to external region R2 in upstream portion 10. Baffle 6 partitions intermembrane space S1 between upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 (¶¶[0042]–[0043]). Liquid L passes through baffle clearance C1 and intermembrane space S1 in downstream portion 11 and enters pipe 2 through holes 24 (¶[0063]).
Based on the disclosure and illustration, the portions of external region R2 including intermembrane space S1 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 correspond to the claimed degassing chamber and degassed chamber, respectively. The downstream holes 24 communicate with the degassing chamber through the downstream portion of external region R2 and baffle clearance C1.
Regarding Claim 4, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 3. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates baffle 6 partitioning intermembrane space S1 between upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 (¶¶[0042]–[0043]). Based on the disclosure and illustration, baffle 6 separates the portion of external region R2 including intermembrane space S1 in upstream portion 10, corresponding to the claimed degassing chamber, from the portion of external region R2 including intermembrane space S1 in downstream portion 11, corresponding to the claimed degassed chamber.
Regarding Claim 5, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 4. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates baffle 6 including inner baffle 61 positioned within pipe 2 and outer baffle 62 positioned around pipe 2. External region R2 includes intermembrane space S1 surrounding pipe 2 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 (¶[0037]). Inner baffle 61 may completely block internal flow path 23, while outer baffle 62 partitions intermembrane space S1 between upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 and permits liquid L to pass between the portions through baffle clearance C1 (¶¶[0045]–[0049]).
Based on the disclosure and illustration, inner baffle 61 corresponds to the claimed solid portion, the portions of pipe 2 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 correspond to the claimed gassed tube and degassed tube sealed to opposite sides of the solid portion, and the portions of external region R2 including intermembrane space S1 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 correspond to the claimed degassing chamber and degassed chamber, respectively.
Regarding the structural arrangement in which openings are provided through a perforated portion of the baffle, this arrangement is considered a routine design choice for space optimization. YAMATO permits liquid to pass between external region R2 in upstream portion 10 and external region R2 in downstream portion 11 through baffle clearance C1. Providing openings through outer baffle 62 instead of baffle clearance C1 would merely relocate the liquid-flow passage between the upstream and downstream liquid-side regions without changing the liquid path or degassing mechanism. A person skilled in the art would have made this predictable rearrangement to permit the degassed liquid to enter the downstream collection region before returning to pipe 2 through holes 24 (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Regarding Claim 6, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 3. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates pipe 2 extending through upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 on opposite sides of baffle 6 (¶[0042]). Inner baffle 61 is positioned on the inner circumference of pipe 2 and may completely block internal flow path 23 so that liquid L cannot pass directly from upstream portion 10 to downstream portion 11 (¶¶[0045]–[0046]).
Regarding Claim 7, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 6. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates inner baffle 61 positioned within pipe 2 and outer baffle 62 positioned around pipe 2 between upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 (¶¶[0045]–[0049]). Based on the disclosure and illustration, inner baffle 61 corresponds to the baffle of Claim 6, while outer baffle 62 corresponds to the claimed separate component disposed between the portions of external region R2 including intermembrane space S1 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11, corresponding to the degassing chamber and degassed chamber, respectively.
Regarding the structural arrangement in which openings are provided through the separate component, this arrangement is considered a routine design choice for space optimization. Providing openings through outer baffle 62 instead of baffle clearance C1 would merely relocate the liquid-flow passage without changing the liquid path or degassing mechanism. A person skilled in the art would have made this predictable rearrangement to permit liquid to pass between the degassing chamber and the degassed chamber (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Regarding Claim 8, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 1. YAMATO discloses hollow fiber membrane fabric 8 in which multiple hollow fiber membranes 31 serving as weft threads are woven with warp threads 9 and arranged in a blind-like manner (¶[0032]).
Regarding Claim 9, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 8. LEONARD discloses bundle 26 formed by laying down layer after layer of helically wound hollow fibers around cylindrical core 24, with each individual layer comprising a plurality of wound fibers. The radially inner and radially outer portions of bundle 26 have respective radii of curvature (Col. 5, ln. 52–Col. 6, ln. 17). Based on the disclosure, the individual layers correspond to rows containing a plurality of hollow fibers, and the loop portions of the hollow fibers have respective radii.
Regarding Claim 10, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 9. YAMATO discloses internal region R1 including inner circumferential spaces 32 of each of multiple hollow fiber membranes 31 (¶[0037]). Drawing air through first and second intake ports 42 and 43 depressurizes internal region R1 and the inner circumferential spaces 32 together (¶[0062]). Based on the disclosure, the hollow fiber membranes are fluidly interconnected through common internal region R1.
Regarding Claim 11, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 9. LEONARD discloses each individual hollow fiber forming a loop beginning at one opposed side of space 38 and ending at the other opposed side, with the open ends exposed on opposed sides 40 and 42 (Col. 4, lns. 19–36). Thus, the open ends of the hollow fibers are at respective distances from each other.
Regarding Claim 12, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 1. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates external region R2 surrounding pipe 2 and including intermembrane space S1 through which liquid L flows (¶[0037]).
Regarding the square cross-section of the degassing chamber, this configuration is considered a routine design choice for space optimization. A person skilled in the art would have provided external region R2 with a square cross-section to predictably optimize placement of the degassing module and use of available space without changing the liquid path or degassing mechanism (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Regarding Claim 13, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 1. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates housing 4 enclosing hollow fiber membrane group 3 and extending along pipe 2 (¶[0034]).
Regarding the rectangular shape of the inline liquid-degasser, this configuration is considered a routine design choice for space optimization. A person skilled in the art would have provided housing 4 with a rectangular external shape to predictably optimize placement of the degassing module and use of available space without changing the internal hollow-fiber arrangement, liquid path, or degassing mechanism (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Regarding Claim 14, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 1. YAMATO discloses liquid supply port 21 communicating with internal flow path 23 of pipe 2 (¶¶[0025]–[0026]).
Regarding the quick disconnect fitting, this configuration is considered a routine design choice for coupling a fluid device to an external fluid line. A person skilled in the art would have selected a quick disconnect fitting according to the connection requirements of the external fluid line to predictably facilitate installation, removal, and servicing without changing the internal liquid path or degassing mechanism (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Regarding Claim 15, modified YAMATO makes obvious the inline liquid-degasser of Claim 1. YAMATO discloses liquid discharge port 22 communicating with internal flow path 23 of pipe 2 (¶¶[0025]–[0026]).
Regarding the hose barb fitting, this configuration is considered a routine design choice for coupling a fluid device to an external hose. A person skilled in the art would have selected a hose barb fitting according to the connection requirements of the external hose to predictably provide a secure fluid connection without changing the internal liquid path or degassing mechanism (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Regarding Claim 16, YAMATO discloses a degassing module for degassing liquids (¶[0001]).
FIG. 1 illustrates degassing module 1 comprising pipe 2, hollow fiber membrane group 3, housing 4, partition 5, and baffle 6. Pipe 2 forms internal flow path 23 having liquid supply port 21 and liquid discharge port 22. Multiple holes 24 permit liquid L to exit internal flow path 23 to the outside of pipe 2 and to enter internal flow path 23 from outside pipe 2 (¶¶[0023]–[0026]).
Hollow fiber membrane group 3 includes multiple hollow fiber membranes 31 arranged around the outer circumference of pipe 2 to cover holes 24. Each hollow fiber membrane 31 permits gas G to permeate while preventing liquid L from permeating (¶¶[0029]–[0030]). Hollow fiber membrane group 3 has a substantially cylindrical shape surrounding hole-forming portion 25 of pipe 2, and intermembrane spaces S1 through which liquid L can flow are formed between adjacent hollow fiber membranes 31 (¶¶[0032]–[0033]).
Housing 4 encloses hollow fiber membrane group 3 and includes first and second intake ports 42 and 43 connected to a suction device, such as a vacuum pump (¶¶[0034]–[0035]). Partition 5 divides the region within housing 4 into internal region R1 and external region R2. Internal region R1 includes inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31, while external region R2 includes intermembrane space S1. Hollow fiber membranes 31 prevent liquid L from passing into internal region R1 while permitting gas G to pass into internal region R1 (¶[0037]).
Partition 5 includes first and second sealing portions 51 and 52 that secure the respective ends of hollow fiber membrane group 3 while leaving inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31 open. Internal regions R1 are formed on the opposite sides of sealing portions 51 and 52, and first and second intake ports 42 and 43 communicate with the respective internal regions R1 (¶¶[0038]–[0041]).
Baffle 6 divides degassing module 1 into upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 and partitions internal flow path 23, causing liquid L to exit pipe 2 in upstream portion 10, flow through intermembrane space S1, and reenter pipe 2 in downstream portion 11 (¶¶[0042]–[0043]). Inner baffle 61 may completely block internal flow path 23 so that liquid L cannot pass directly from upstream portion 10 to downstream portion 11 through pipe 2 (¶¶[0045]–[0046]).
In operation, a suction device connected to first and second intake ports 42 and 43 depressurizes internal region R1 and inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31. Liquid L flows from upstream portion 10 through intermembrane space S1, where dissolved gas and bubbles pass through hollow fiber membranes 31 into the depressurized inner circumferential spaces 32. The degassed liquid then enters pipe 2 in downstream portion 11 and is discharged through liquid discharge port 22 (¶¶[0062]–[0063]).
Based on the disclosure and illustration, when inner baffle 61 completely blocks internal flow path 23, upstream portion 10 of pipe 2 corresponds to the claimed gassed tube, and downstream portion 11 of pipe 2 corresponds to the claimed degassed tube. The portion of external region R2 surrounding upstream portion 10 corresponds to the claimed degassing chamber, internal region R1 corresponds to the claimed vacuum chamber, and intake ports 42 and 43 correspond to the claimed vacuum port.
However, YAMATO does not explicitly disclose the hollow fibers formed into loop portions and crown portions, the loop portions configured to surround the gassed tube, and the crown portions configured to extend through a wall separating the degassing chamber and the vacuum chamber such that the open ends communicate with the vacuum chamber; a quick disconnect fitting coupled to the vacuum port; a quick disconnect fitting coupled to an end of the gassed tube; or a hose coupled to an end of the degassed tube and having a quick disconnect fitting coupled to its opposite end.
LEONARD discloses a hollow fiber separation device in which one or more bundles of hollow fibers are circumferentially wrapped about a cylindrical hollow core (Col. 1, lns. 6–10).
FIGS. 1–3 illustrate hollow fiber oxygenator 10 including bundle 26 of hollow fibers wrapped around cylindrical hollow core 24. The hollow fibers are helically wound around core 24, with each winding extending at least one loop about the core. Bundle 26 surrounds core 24, and blood percolates between the helically arranged hollow fibers in diffusion-exchange relationship therewith (Col. 3, ln. 62–Col. 4, ln. 22).
In this arrangement, oxygen flows in a helical pattern through the bores of hollow fibers 26 about core 24, while blood percolates through bundle 26 along the exterior surfaces of the hollow fibers in cross-flow communication with the oxygen. The multiple, short oxygen flow paths provide abundant fresh oxygen, while the blood-flow path eliminates laminar flow and provides good mixing for improved oxygenation efficiency (Col. 4, lns. 57–68).
The circumferentially wrapped hollow fiber separation device disclosed by LEONARD addresses the poor mixing and inefficiency associated with hollow fibers extending from end to end of a housing by permitting nonlaminar liquid flow with good mixing, improving gas-transfer efficiency, reducing the membrane surface area and number of fibers required, and providing short flow paths through the hollow fibers for diffusion exchange (Col. 1, ln. 16–Col. 2, ln. 11). In view of YAMATO’s degassing module, a person skilled in the art would have formed the hollow fiber membranes into a circumferentially wrapped loop configuration to predictably improve liquid mixing and gas-transfer efficiency while reducing the membrane surface area and number of fibers required.
Regarding the limitation “crown portions,” the claim merely identifies portions of the hollow fibers extending from the loop portions through the separating wall, and this configuration is considered a routine design choice for managing the terminal ends of the hollow fibers and providing additional contact area for liquid-gas separation. A person skilled in the art would have provided these portions to predictably retain the circumferentially wrapped loops, connect the hollow-fiber lumens to the vacuum chamber, and provide additional hollow-fiber surface for liquid-gas contact before the fibers enter the separating wall (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Regarding the quick disconnect fittings and hose, these configurations are considered routine design choices for coupling a degassing module to external fluid and vacuum lines. A person skilled in the art would have selected the quick disconnect fittings and hose according to the connection requirements of the external lines to predictably facilitate installation, removal, and servicing without changing the internal liquid path or degassing mechanism (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the circumferentially wrapped loop configuration, as disclosed by LEONARD, to the hollow fiber membranes in the degassing module by YAMATO.
Regarding Claim 17, modified YAMATO makes obvious the degassing hose of Claim 16. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates pipe 2 extending linearly along central axis A, with upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 positioned on opposite sides of baffle 6 (¶¶[0025], [0042]). Based on the disclosure and illustration, upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 are colinear.
Regarding Claim 18, modified YAMATO makes obvious the degassing hose of Claim 16. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates external region R2 surrounding pipe 2 in downstream portion 11 and positioned adjacent to external region R2 in upstream portion 10. Baffle 6 partitions intermembrane space S1 between upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 (¶¶[0042]–[0043]). Liquid L passes through baffle clearance C1 and intermembrane space S1 in downstream portion 11 and enters pipe 2 through holes 24 (¶[0063]).
Based on the disclosure and illustration, the portions of external region R2 including intermembrane space S1 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 correspond to the claimed degassing chamber and degassed chamber, respectively. The downstream holes 24 communicate with the degassing chamber through the downstream portion of external region R2 and baffle clearance C1.
Regarding Claim 19, modified YAMATO makes obvious the degassing hose of Claim 16. FIG. 1 of YAMATO illustrates baffle 6 including inner baffle 61 positioned within pipe 2 and outer baffle 62 positioned around pipe 2. External region R2 includes intermembrane space S1 surrounding pipe 2 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 (¶[0037]). Inner baffle 61 may completely block internal flow path 23, while outer baffle 62 partitions intermembrane space S1 between upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 and permits liquid L to pass between the portions through baffle clearance C1 (¶¶[0045]–[0049]).
Based on the disclosure and illustration, inner baffle 61 corresponds to the claimed solid portion, the portions of pipe 2 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 correspond to the claimed gassed tube and degassed tube sealed to opposite sides of the solid portion, and the portions of external region R2 including intermembrane space S1 in upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 correspond to the claimed degassing chamber and degassed chamber, respectively.
Regarding the structural arrangement in which openings are provided through a perforated portion of the baffle, this arrangement is considered a routine design choice for space optimization. YAMATO permits liquid to pass between external region R2 in upstream portion 10 and external region R2 in downstream portion 11 through baffle clearance C1. Providing openings through outer baffle 62 instead of baffle clearance C1 would merely relocate the liquid-flow passage between the upstream and downstream liquid-side regions without changing the liquid path or degassing mechanism. A person skilled in the art would have made this predictable rearrangement to permit the degassed liquid to enter the downstream collection region before returning to pipe 2 through holes 24 (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHU et al. (US20060232945A, hereinafter CHU), in view of YAMATO and LEONARD.
Regarding Claim 20, CHU discloses apparatuses for facilitating cooling of rack-mounted assemblages of individual electronics units, such as rack-mounted computer server units (¶[0001]).
FIG. 3 illustrates cooled electronics system 300 including electronics rack 310, outlet door cover 330, and heat exchange assembly 340 disposed within outlet door cover 330. Heat exchange assembly 340 includes an air-to-liquid heat exchanger through which airflow exiting electronics rack 310 passes. System coolant is supplied to heat exchange assembly 340, which removes heat from the airflow (¶[0030]).
PNG
media_image3.png
660
440
media_image3.png
Greyscale
FIG. 3 of CHU
FIG. 4 illustrates heat exchange assembly 340 including air-to-liquid heat exchanger 420, inlet and outlet manifolding, and two quick connect couplings (¶[0032]). Flexible supply and return hoses 440 deliver coolant to and from heat exchange assembly 340, and quick connect couplings 460 couple hoses 440 to the inlet and outlet manifolding (¶¶[0033]–[0034]).
PNG
media_image4.png
600
900
media_image4.png
Greyscale
FIG. 4 of CHU
FIG. 7 illustrates liquid inlet plenum 700 and liquid outlet plenum 710 connected to heat exchange tube sections 720, with each plenum connected to a respective quick connect coupling 460 (¶[0036]). Based on the disclosure and illustration, liquid inlet plenum 700 and liquid outlet plenum 710 correspond to the claimed two liquid ports, and quick connect couplings 460 disposed in outlet door cover 330 correspond to the claimed quick disconnect fittings on the server rack.
PNG
media_image5.png
660
440
media_image5.png
Greyscale
FIG. 7 of CHU
Consistent with this quick-connect arrangement, heat exchange assembly 340 is designed for ease of installation through the use of a minimal number of parts and quick connect couplings 460. Installation includes attaching upper and lower hinges to outlet door cover 330, hanging outlet door cover 330 on the hinges with heat exchange assembly 340 secured thereto, coupling supply and return hoses 440 to quick connect couplings 460, securing hoses 440 within outlet door cover 330, initiating coolant flow, and removing air from the piping with a bleed tool (¶[0042]).
However, CHU does not explicitly disclose the supply and return hoses configured as first and second degassing hoses, each including a gassed tube, a degassed tube, a baffle, a degassing chamber, a vacuum chamber, a vacuum port, and hollow fibers for removing gas from the coolant, or a vacuum line coupled to the vacuum ports of both degassing hoses.
YAMATO discloses a degassing module for degassing liquids (¶[0001]). FIG. 1 illustrates degassing module 1 comprising pipe 2, hollow fiber membrane group 3, housing 4, partition 5, and baffle 6. Pipe 2 forms internal flow path 23 having liquid supply port 21 and liquid discharge port 22. Multiple holes 24 permit liquid L to exit internal flow path 23 to the outside of pipe 2 and to enter internal flow path 23 from outside pipe 2 (¶¶[0023]–[0026]).
Hollow fiber membrane group 3 includes multiple hollow fiber membranes 31 arranged around the outer circumference of pipe 2 to cover holes 24. Each hollow fiber membrane 31 permits gas G to permeate while preventing liquid L from permeating (¶¶[0029]–[0030]). Hollow fiber membrane group 3 has a substantially cylindrical shape surrounding hole-forming portion 25 of pipe 2, and intermembrane spaces S1 through which liquid L can flow are formed between adjacent hollow fiber membranes 31 (¶¶[0032]–[0033]).
Housing 4 encloses hollow fiber membrane group 3 and includes first and second intake ports 42 and 43 connected to a suction device, such as a vacuum pump (¶¶[0034]–[0035]). Based on the disclosure, at least one vacuum line having respective branches coupled to first and second intake ports 42 and 43 is necessarily provided between the intake ports and the suction device to depressurize internal region R1 and inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31.
Partition 5 divides the region within housing 4 into internal region R1 and external region R2. Internal region R1 includes inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31, while external region R2 includes intermembrane space S1. Hollow fiber membranes 31 prevent liquid L from passing into internal region R1 while permitting gas G to pass into internal region R1 (¶[0037]).
Partition 5 includes first and second sealing portions 51 and 52 that secure the respective ends of hollow fiber membrane group 3 while leaving inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31 open. Internal regions R1 are formed on the opposite sides of sealing portions 51 and 52, and first and second intake ports 42 and 43 communicate with the respective internal regions R1 (¶¶[0038]–[0041]).
Baffle 6 divides degassing module 1 into upstream portion 10 and downstream portion 11 and partitions internal flow path 23, causing liquid L to exit pipe 2 in upstream portion 10, flow through intermembrane space S1, and reenter pipe 2 in downstream portion 11 (¶¶[0042]–[0043]). Inner baffle 61 may completely block internal flow path 23 so that liquid L cannot pass directly from upstream portion 10 to downstream portion 11 through pipe 2 (¶¶[0045]–[0046]).
In operation, a suction device connected to first and second intake ports 42 and 43 depressurizes internal region R1 and inner circumferential spaces 32 of hollow fiber membranes 31. Liquid L flows from upstream portion 10 through intermembrane space S1, where dissolved gas and bubbles pass through hollow fiber membranes 31 into the depressurized inner circumferential spaces 32. The degassed liquid then enters pipe 2 in downstream portion 11 and is discharged through liquid discharge port 22 (¶¶[0062]–[0063]).
Based on the disclosure and illustration, when inner baffle 61 completely blocks internal flow path 23, upstream portion 10 of pipe 2 corresponds to the claimed gassed tube, and downstream portion 11 of pipe 2 corresponds to the claimed degassed tube. The portion of external region R2 surrounding upstream portion 10 corresponds to the claimed degassing chamber, internal region R1 corresponds to the claimed vacuum chamber, and intake ports 42 and 43 correspond to the claimed vacuum port.
The degassing module disclosed by YAMATO degasses liquid by drawing air into the internal region through the intake port and improves degassing performance by directing the liquid through the intermembrane space using the baffle (¶[0008]). In view of CHU’s supply and return hoses carrying liquid coolant to and from the heat exchange assembly through respective quick connect couplings, a person skilled in the art would have configured each hose to include the degassing module while retaining the quick connect couplings to predictably remove gas from the coolant and facilitate installation and servicing.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the degassing module, as disclosed by YAMATO, into each of the supply and return hoses in the cooled electronics system by CHU.
However, modified CHU does not explicitly disclose the hollow fibers of each degassing module formed into loop portions and crown portions, the loop portions configured to surround the gassed tube, and the crown portions configured to extend through a wall separating the degassing chamber and the vacuum chamber such that the open ends communicate with the vacuum chamber.
LEONARD discloses a hollow fiber separation device in which one or more bundles of hollow fibers are circumferentially wrapped about a cylindrical hollow core (Col. 1, lns. 6–10).
FIGS. 1–3 illustrate hollow fiber oxygenator 10 including bundle 26 of hollow fibers wrapped around cylindrical hollow core 24. The hollow fibers are helically wound around core 24, with each winding extending at least one loop about the core. Bundle 26 surrounds core 24, and blood percolates between the helically arranged hollow fibers in diffusion-exchange relationship therewith (Col. 3, ln. 62–Col. 4, ln. 22).
In this arrangement, oxygen flows in a helical pattern through the bores of hollow fibers 26 about core 24, while blood percolates through bundle 26 along the exterior surfaces of the hollow fibers in cross-flow communication with the oxygen. The multiple, short oxygen flow paths provide abundant fresh oxygen, while the blood-flow path eliminates laminar flow and provides good mixing for improved oxygenation efficiency (Col. 4, lns. 57–68).
The circumferentially wrapped hollow fiber separation device disclosed by LEONARD addresses the poor mixing and inefficiency associated with hollow fibers extending from end to end of a housing by permitting nonlaminar liquid flow with good mixing, improving gas-transfer efficiency, reducing the membrane surface area and number of fibers required, and providing short flow paths through the hollow fibers for diffusion exchange (Col. 1, ln. 16–Col. 2, ln. 11). In view of modified CHU’s degassing modules, a person skilled in the art would have formed the hollow fiber membranes into a circumferentially wrapped loop configuration to predictably improve liquid mixing and gas-transfer efficiency while reducing the membrane surface area and number of fibers required.
Regarding the limitation “crown portions,” the claim merely identifies portions of the hollow fibers extending from the loop portions through the separating wall, and this configuration is considered a routine design choice for managing the terminal ends of the hollow fibers and providing additional contact area for liquid-gas separation. A person skilled in the art would have provided these portions in each degassing module to predictably retain the circumferentially wrapped loops, connect the hollow-fiber lumens to the vacuum chamber, and provide additional hollow-fiber surface for liquid-gas contact before the fibers enter the separating wall (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669; 1966).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the circumferentially wrapped loop configuration, as disclosed by LEONARD, to the hollow fiber membranes in each degassing module by modified CHU.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAK L. CHIU whose telephone number is (703)756-1059. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00am - 6:00pm (CST).
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, PREM C. SINGH can be reached at (571) 272-6381. 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.
/TAK L. CHIU/Examiner, Art Unit 1771
/KRISHNAN S MENON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771
Prosecution Insights