DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The recitation of “…condenses produce a liquid refrigerant…” (claim 1, lines 10-11) is believed to be --…condenses to produce a liquid refrigerant…--.
The status of claim 10 presented as (New) is believed to be incorrect since claim 10 has been previously presented.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The recitation of “…wherein said medium temperature refrigerant evaporates in said system at a temperature in the range of about -5°C to about -15°C by absorbing heat from said flammable refrigerant in said low temperature refrigeration circuit” (claim 1, lines 20-24) is unclear. The recitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the medium temperature refrigerant is evaporating by absorbing heat from the flammable refrigerant in each of the two low temperature refrigeration circuits, or from at least one of the circuits? For examination purposes, the recitation has been examined as --…wherein said medium temperature refrigerant evaporates in said system at a temperature in the range of about -5°C to about -15°C by absorbing heat from said flammable refrigerant in said at least two of said low temperature refrigeration circuits--.
The recitation of “The cascaded refrigeration system of claims 1, 2 wherein…” (refer to the preamble of claim 9) is unclear. The recitation renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the claim is depending from both, claims 1 and 2, or just one of them. Since claim 2 introduces the first area, for examination purposes the preamble of claim 9 will be examined as --The cascaded refrigeration system of claim 2 wherein…--.
The recitation of “The cascaded refrigeration system of claim wherein…” (refer to the preamble of claim 10) is unclear. The recitation renders the claim indefinite because it’s unclear as to which claim, claim 10 depends from. For examination purposes, the preamble will be examined as --The cascaded refrigeration system of claim 1 wherein…--.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minor (US 2012/0216551), Shaw (US 4,947,655), and further in view of Mesaki (JP H09269155 A, refer to attached translation).
Regarding claim 1, Minor discloses a cascaded refrigeration system comprising:
(a) a two or more low temperature refrigeration circuits (12A, 12B), with at least two of said low temperature refrigeration circuits comprising:
(i) a flammable low temperature refrigerant (HFO-1234yf, refer to first refrigerant for Low Temp Circuit as can be seen from Table 4, par. 99);
(ii) a compressor (58, 20’’’); and
(iii) a heat exchanger (22’’’) in which said flammable low temperature
refrigerant condenses to produce a liquid refrigerant; and
(b) a medium temperature refrigeration circuit (14’’’) comprising a non-flammable medium temperature refrigerant (refer to par. 124), wherein said medium temperature refrigerant evaporates in said system at a temperature in the range of about -5°C to about -15°C (e.g., -10°C, refer to Table 9, par. 132) by absorbing heat from said flammable refrigerant in said at least two of said low temperature refrigeration circuits (refer to fig. 4).
While Minor discloses the compressor in the embodiment of Fig. 4, Minor fails to explicitly disclose a suction line heat exchanger connected upstream of said compressor for cooling said liquid refrigerant from said heat exchanger by adding heat to the gas entering the compressor.
However, Minor teaches in the embodiment of Fig. 2, that it is known in the art of refrigeration to provide a suction line heat exchanger (30) connected upstream of a compressor (24’) for cooling a liquid refrigerant by adding heat to the gas entering the compressor.
One having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration would have recognized that providing a suction line heat exchanger connected upstream of said compressor, improves the cascaded refrigeration system’s performance, by preheating the refrigerant gas before it enters the compressor. This preheating increases the heat exchanger’s cooling capacity, sub-cools the liquid refrigerant, and helps prevent liquid refrigerant from reaching the compressor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the embodiment of Fig. 4 by providing a suction line heat exchanger connected upstream of the compressor as taught by the embodiment of Fig. 2, for cooling said liquid refrigerant from said heat exchanger by adding heat to the gas entering the compressor, in order to improve the cascaded refrigeration system’s performance in view of the knowledge generally available to one having ordinary skill in the art.
While Minor as modified discloses the compressor, Minor as modified fails to explicitly disclose the compressor having a horse power rating of about 2 horse power or less.
However, Shaw further teaches a refrigeration system for low temperature
refrigeration circuits including frozen food display cases, comprising a compressor (608)
with a 2 hp compressor capacity (refer to col. 1, lines 4-16), wherein the compressor is
of such low power that is relatively inexpensive to power (refer to col. 1, lines 16-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Minor such that the
compressor has a horse power rating of about 2 horse power or less in view of the
teachings by Shaw, in order to provide a compressor that is relatively inexpensive to
power.
While Minor as modified discloses the two or more low temperature refrigeration circuits, Minor as modified fails to explicitly disclose wherein the two or more low temperature refrigeration circuits are self-contained circuits, each contained in a separate low temperature refrigeration unit.
However, Mesaki further teaches that it is known in the art of refrigeration, to provide a cascaded refrigeration system (refer to fig. 1), comprising a two or more low temperature self-contained refrigeration circuits (30) each contained in a separate low temperature refrigeration unit, in order for each of the low temperature refrigeration circuits to individually perform a refrigerating operation (refer to par. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Minor such that the two or more low temperature refrigeration circuits are self-contained circuits, and each contained in a separate low temperature refrigeration unit in view of the teachings by Mesaki, in order for each of the low temperature refrigeration circuits to individually perform a refrigerating operation.
Regarding claim 2, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Minor as modified discloses wherein each of said at least two separate low temperature refrigeration units are in a separate modular refrigeration unit (refer to fig. 1 as taught by Mesaki) and wherein said at least two modular refrigeration units are located in a first area open to the public (refer to the Abstract of Mesaki, wherein both low temperature side units are arranged in a freezer, therefore, located in an area capable of being opened to the public).
Regarding claim 3, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2. Further, Minor as modified discloses wherein the medium temperature refrigeration circuit (14’’’) includes portions (in the instant case, heat exchanger 22’’’ in communication with both of the separate modular units) that extend the medium temperature second refrigeration circuit between said first area (refer to the Abstract of Mesaki, wherein both low temperature side units are arranged in a freezer) and a second area comprising a machine room (in the instant case, the area where the rest of the medium temperature second refrigeration circuit is located is necessarily a room/space/area).
Regarding claim 4, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 3. Further, Minor as modified discloses wherein the medium temperature refrigeration circuit (14’’’) includes portions that extend the medium temperature refrigeration circuit to a third area (refer to a third area where air is blown to from condenser fan 22-F on the high temperature side as taught by Mesaki, which is necessarily a third area).
Regarding claim 5, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Minor as modified discloses wherein each of said at least two low temperature refrigeration circuits (12A, 12B) further comprises a fluid expansion device (16’’’, 54), but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the fluid expansion device is a capillary tube and/or an orifice tube.
However, it appears that the cascaded refrigeration system of Minor would operate equally well with the fluid expansion device being a capillary tube and/or an orifice tube. Further, Applicant fails to provide criticality regarding the fluid expansion
device being a capillary tube and/or an orifice tube, indicating simply that “The at least
one fluid expansion device may be a capillary tube or an orifice tube”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art,
before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to provide the fluid
expansion device being a capillary tube and/or an orifice tube because this feature
appears to be an arbitrary design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish
over Minor.
Regarding claim 7, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Minor as modified discloses wherein said flammable low temperature refrigerant comprises HFO-1234yf, but fails to explicitly disclose the refrigerant being R-455A.
However, it appears that the cascaded refrigeration system of Minor would operate equally well with the flammable low temperature refrigerant being R-455A.
Further, Applicant fails to provide criticality regarding the flammable low temperature
refrigerant being R-455A, indicating simply that each low temperature refrigeration
circuit comprises: (i) a flammable low temperature refrigerant consisting essentially of
HFO-1234yf, R-455A, propane and combinations of two or more of these.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art,
before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to provide the flammable
low temperature refrigerant being R-455A because this feature appears to be an
arbitrary design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over Minor.
Regarding claim 8, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Minor as modified discloses wherein said flammable low temperature refrigerant comprises HFO-1234yf, but fails to explicitly disclose the refrigerant being propane.
However, it appears that the cascaded refrigeration system of Minor would operate equally well with the flammable low temperature refrigerant being propane.
Further, Applicant fails to provide criticality regarding the flammable low temperature
refrigerant being propane, indicating simply that each low temperature refrigeration
circuit comprises: (i) a flammable low temperature refrigerant consisting essentially of
HFO-1234yf, R-455A, propane and combinations of two or more of these.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art,
before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to provide the flammable
low temperature refrigerant being propane because this feature appears to be an
arbitrary design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over Minor.
Regarding claim 9, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2. Further, Minor as modified discloses wherein said medium temperature refrigeration system (14’’’) is located substantially outside of said first area (refer to the Abstract of Mesaki, wherein both low temperature side units are arranged in a freezer).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minor (US 2012/0216551), Shaw (US 4,947,655), Mesaki (JP H09269155 A), and further in view of Saunders (US 10,634,424).
Regarding claim 6, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed
above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Minor as modified discloses wherein said flammable low temperature refrigerant comprises HFO-1234yf (refer to first refrigerant for Low Temp Circuit as can be seen from Table 4, par. 99), but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the non-flammable medium temperature refrigerant is class A1 refrigerant.
However, Saunders further teaches that it is known in the art of refrigeration, to provide a supermarket refrigeration system having a non-flammable medium temperature refrigerant being a class A1 refrigerant (R515A, refer to col. 6, lines 19-30), since it may result in lower direct emissions compared to other refrigeration systems (refer to col. 6, lines 30-34).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Minor such that the non-
flammable medium temperature refrigerant is a class A1 refrigerant in view of the teachings by Saunders, since using said refrigerant may result in lower direct emissions compared to other refrigeration systems.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minor (US 2012/0216551), Shaw (US 4,947,655), Mesaki (JP H09269155 A), and further in view of Taras (US 2006/0101848).
Regarding claim 10, Minor as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Minor as modified discloses the heat exchanger, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein said heat exchanger is a flooded heat
exchanger.
However, Taras further teaches that it is known in the art of refrigeration, to provide a flooded heat exchanger, in order to increase the heat transfer performance in condensing and evaporating applications (refer to par. 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Minor such that the heat exchanger is a flooded heat exchanger in view of the teachings by Taras, in order to increase the heat transfer performance in the heat exchanger.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp.6-10, filed on 05/27/2025, with respect to claims 1-10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-10 has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly amended claims.
The Double Patenting rejection as set forth on pages 2-5 of the Office Action mailed on 01/27/2025 still stands.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 ANA M VAZQUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-0611. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4.
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 at 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 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.
/ANA M VAZQUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3763