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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1, 3, 4, 12, 14, 15, 19 including depending claims 2, 5-10, 20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the discharge chamber”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for the bolded limitation, because it has not been recited previously.
Claim 1 recites in last line “the opening wall”. It is unclear if the bolded limitation refers to the claimed limitation the opening wall surface recited previously in the claim. For the purpose of examination, it is interpreted as the opening wall surface.
Claims 3, 14 recite “the air outlet” and “the air plenum”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for the bolded limitations, because they have not been recited previously.
Claims 4, 15 recite “a discharge chamber”. It is unclear if the bolded limitation refers to the claimed limitation in claim 1. Not only does the phrase in the claims 4, 15 lack a definite article (e.g. the or said) but the limitation is inconsistently recited.
Claim 12 recites “the impinging exit air”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for the bolded limitation, because it has not been recited previously.
Claim 12 recites “a discharge area”. It is unclear if the bolded limitation refers to the claimed limitation in claim 11. Not only does the phrase in claim 12 lacks a definite article (e.g. the or said) but the limitation is inconsistently recited.
Claim 19 recites “a wall structure” and “a vent”. It is unclear if the bolded limitations refers to the claimed limitations in claim 9. Not only do the phrases in claim 19 lack a definite article (e.g. the or said) but the limitation is inconsistently recited.
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 1-3, 6-8, 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim (EP 2988081 A1) in view of Hayashi (CN 116113769 A), and in view of Olivani (US 2020/0278136 A1).
Claim 1: Lim discloses a method for cooling a product with a refrigeration system (FIG.14), the method comprising:
providing a product within a storage chamber (inside case 106 used as storage chamber) defined by an opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14), a floor surface (annotated FIG.14), a rear wall surface (annotated FIG.14) and a ceiling wall surface (annotated FIG.14);
cooling (cooling via condenser 172) the ceiling wall surface (annotated FIG.14) with cooled air in contact with the ceiling wall surface (annotated FIG.14) being maintained at a temperature (to clarify, condenser used to maintain temperature inside refrigerator) to provide convective heat absorption (functional language) from the ceiling wall surface (annotated FIG.14) in the storage chamber (106); and
inducing an airflow of (to clarify, fan 113 is to induce airflow into camber 110 and downward along opening wall surface) the cooled air downward along the opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14) by discharging the cooled air from the discharge chamber (compartment 110 used as discharge chamber; to clarify, airflow induced by fan 113 is discharged into 110) into a discharge area (to clarify, area does not have any boundary, discharge area is the area contained within the chamber) within the storage chamber (106) adjacent the opening wall (annotated FIG.14).
PNG
media_image1.png
827
564
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Lim discloses the claimed limitations in claim 1, but fails to disclose an opposing surface of an internal baffle, inducing an enveloping airflow of the cooled air.
However, Olivani teaches an opposing surface (inherent) of an internal baffle (148) for the purpose of regulating stream of air (paragraph [14]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include an opposing surface of an internal baffle as taught by Olivani in order to regulate stream of air.
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 apparatus of Lim to include an opposing surface of an internal baffle as taught by Olivani in order to regulate stream of air.
Further, Hayashi teaches inducing an enveloping airflow of the cooled air (paragraphs [9] [49]: pressure boosting effect and bias suppression effect; to clarify, bias effect creates boosting and enveloping airflow) for the purpose of achieving pressure boosting and flow deviation suppression effects and to improve assembly workability (paragraph [9]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include inducing an enveloping airflow of the cooled air as taught by Hayashi in order to achieve pressure boosting and flow deviation suppression effects and to improve assembly workability.
Claim 2: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the enveloping airflow (Hayashi, paragraphs [9] [49]: pressure boosting effect and bias suppression effect) of the cooled air downward along the opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14) is a laminar airflow.
Claim 3: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least a portion (inherent) of the enveloping airflow (Hayashi, paragraphs [9] [49]: pressure boosting effect and bias suppression effect) travels from the air outlet (inherent in order to deliver air) of the air plenum (annotated FIG.14) along the opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14), across the floor surface (annotated FIG.14) and into the air inlet of the air plenum at the bottom of the storage chamber (106) opposite the opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14).
Claim 6: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the floor surface, the rear wall surface, and the ceiling wall surface (annotated FIG.14) are independently formed of a material selected from the group consisting of aluminum, stainless-steel components, plastic and combinations thereof (inside and outside of refrigerator includes insulation material 108 and resin material, for example formed by material such as steel plate).
Preferred Material: Lim discloses the claimed limitations in claim 6, except for stainless-steel. 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 Lim to include stainless-steel in order to enhance heat transfer efficiency, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claim 7: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the storage chamber (106) is positioned within a retrofitted refrigerator (to clarify, the refrigerator of Lim operates as a common standard refrigerator with its components).
Claim 8: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the discharging of the cooled air from the discharge chamber (110) exits the discharge chamber (110) through an air outlet (air outlet is inherent in order to deliver air).
Claim 11: Lim discloses a method for improving storage chamber air stability in a refrigeration system (FIG.14), the method comprising:
Moderating air temperature (temperature sensor 188 to detect/monitor temperature inside refrigerating compartment 110) within a discharge chamber (compartment 110 used as discharge chamber; to clarify, airflow induced by fan 113 is discharged into 110);
impinging air (to clarify, fan 113 is to impinging airflow into camber 110 and downward along opening wall surface) from the discharge chamber (110) into a discharge area (to clarify, discharge area is the area contained within the chamber) of a storage chamber (inside case 106 used as storage chamber) at or near the top of an opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14); and
absorbing heat (cooling via condenser 172) from air in the storage chamber (106) from a ceiling wall surface (annotated FIG.14), the opposing surface being a bottom surface (to clarify, opposite surface is at bottom surface of ceiling wall surface; see annotated FIG.14) of the discharge chamber (106);
Lim discloses the claimed limitations in claim 11, but fails to disclose an internal baffle being cooled, wherein a convective bias creates an enveloping airflow moderating temperature fluctuations in the storage chamber.
However, Olivani teaches an internal baffle (148) being cooled (cooled by cooling air 144) for the purpose of regulating stream of air (paragraph [14]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include an opposing surface of an internal baffle as taught by Olivani in order to regulate stream of air.
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 apparatus of Lim to include an internal baffle being cooled as taught by Olivani in order to regulate stream of air.
Further, Hayashi teaches a convective bias creates an enveloping airflow moderating temperature fluctuations (intended use/functional language) in the storage chamber (paragraphs [9] [49]: pressure boosting effect and bias suppression effect; to clarify, bias effect creates boosting and enveloping airflow in refrigeration unit) for the purpose of achieving pressure boosting and flow deviation suppression effects and to improve assembly workability (paragraph [9]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include a convective bias creates an enveloping airflow moderating temperature fluctuations in the storage chamber as taught by Hayashi in order to achieve pressure boosting and flow deviation suppression effects and to improve assembly workability.
Claim 12: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 11, wherein the impinging exit air (inherent; it’s at fan compartment 113b in order to deliver air induced by fan) from the discharge chamber (110) into a discharge area (discharge area is the area contained within the chamber) forms the enveloping airflow (Hayashi, paragraphs [9] [49]: pressure boosting effect and bias suppression effect) downward along the opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14).
Claim 13: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 11, wherein the enveloping airflow (Hayashi, paragraphs [9] [49]: pressure boosting effect and bias suppression effect) of the cooled air downward along the opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14) is a laminar airflow.
Claim 14: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 13, wherein at least a portion (inherent) of the enveloping airflow (Hayashi, paragraphs [9] [49]: pressure boosting effect and bias suppression effect) travels from the air outlet (inherent in order to deliver air) of the air plenum (annotated FIG.14) along the opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14), across the floor surface (annotated FIG.14) and into the air inlet of the air plenum at the bottom of the storage chamber (106) opposite the opening wall surface (annotated FIG.14).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim (EP 2988081 A1) in view of Hayashi (CN 116113769 A), in view of Olivani (US 2020/0278136 A1), and in view of Zanqueta (US 2013/0065502 A1).
Claim 4: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, the discharge chamber (110) being adjacent the opposing surface of the ceiling wall surface (annotated FIG.14).
Lim discloses the claimed limitations in claim 4, but fails to disclose homogenizing the cooled air in a discharge chamber.
However, Zanqueta teaches homogenizing the cooled air in a discharge chamber (paragraph [16]: homogenizing the cooled air the distribution of temperature within compartment) for the purpose of promoting a forced circulation of the air to distribution of temperature (paragraph [16]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include homogenizing the cooled air as taught by Zanqueta in order to promote a forced circulation of the air to distribution of temperature.
Claims 5, 9, 10, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim (EP 2988081 A1) in view of Hayashi (CN 116113769 A), in view of Olivani (US 2020/0278136 A1), and in view of Schotsman (US 2020/0071053 A1).
Claim 5: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the product includes a plurality of individual bottles of vaccine or boxes containing a plurality of bottles at a predetermined temperature variance (to clarify, the refrigerator intended use is to maintain food/liquid or any other products which are initially at variance temperatures that need to be cooled at a certain predetermined temperatures set by the refrigerator),
Lim discloses the claimed limitations in claim 5, but fails to disclose defined by the NSF 456-2021 standard.
However, Schotsman teaches defined by the NSF 456-2021 standard (paragraph [56]: temperature recordings began taken at 5 minutes intervals as per standard NSF; to clarify, NSF is a known standard in refrigeration industry, NSF standard includes chapters and sections designated for specific requirements) for the purpose of evaluating and confirming refrigerator operations aligning with the standards requirements (paragraph [57]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include defined by the NSF 456-2021 standard as taught by Schotsman in order to evaluate and confirm refrigerator operations aligning with the standards requirements.
Claim 9: Lim as modified further fails to disclose wherein the air outlet is a vent including openings in a wall structure.
However, Schotsman teaches the air outlet is a vent including openings in a wall structure (paragraph [36]: air supply vents 28 in interior side walls) for the purpose of supplying air to the compartment (paragraph [36]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include the air outlet is a vent including openings in a wall structure in order to supply air to the compartment.
Claim 10: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 9, wherein the air outlet (Schotsman, 28) is oriented at an angle from 10 degree to about 90 degree from horizonal (Schotsman teaches the air vent consist of apertures that are oriented toward the products in area, except for oriented at an angle from 10 degree to about 90 degree from horizonal. 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 further modify the apparatus of Schotsman to include oriented at an angle from 10 degree to about 90 degree from horizonal in order to direct and to enhance suppling air to the products, 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 18: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 10, wherein the impinging of the air (fan 113 is to impinging airflow into camber 110 and downward along opening wall surface) from the discharge chamber (110) exits the discharge chamber (110) through an air outlet (inherent; in order to deliver air).
Claim 19: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 18, wherein the air outlet is a vent (Schotsman, 28) including openings in a wall structure (Schotsman, air supply vents 28 in interior side walls).
Claim 20: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 19, wherein the air outlet (Schotsman, 28) is oriented at an angle from about 10 degree to about 90 degree from horizontal (Schotsman teaches the air vent consist of apertures that are oriented toward the products in area, except for oriented at an angle from 10 degree to about 90 degree from horizonal. 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 further modify the apparatus of Schotsman to include oriented at an angle from 10 degree to about 90 degree from horizonal in order to direct and to enhance suppling air to the products, 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 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim (EP 2988081 A1) in view of Hayashi (CN 116113769 A), in view of Olivani (US 2020/0278136 A1), in view of Schotsman (US 2020/0071053 A1), and in view of Zanqueta (US 2013/0065502 A1).
Claim 15: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 10, wherein moderating air temperature (temperature sensor 188 to detect/monitor temperature inside refrigerating compartment 110) within a discharge chamber (110) includes homogenizing cooled air in the discharge chamber.
Lim discloses the claimed limitations in claim 15, but fails to disclose homogenizing cooled air in the discharge chamber.
However, Zanqueta teaches homogenizing cooled air in the discharge chamber (paragraph [16]: homogenizing the cooled air the distribution of temperature within compartment) for the purpose of promoting a forced circulation of the air to distribution of temperature (paragraph [16]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include homogenizing the cooled air as taught by Zanqueta in order to promote a forced circulation of the air to distribution of temperature.
Claim 16: Lim as modified further fails to disclose wherein the storage chamber air stability offsets the negative thermal effects of openings of a door in the refrigeration system.
However, Zanqueta teaches the storage chamber air stability offsets the negative thermal effects of openings of a door in the refrigeration system (paragraph [16] [34]: air flow between inlet and outlet is installed on the door, in order to promote forced circulation of air, homogenizing the distribution of temperature within the compartments) for the purpose of promoting a forced circulation of the air to distribution of temperature (paragraph [16]).
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 apparatus of Lim to include the storage chamber air stability offsets the negative thermal effects of openings of a door in the refrigeration system as taught by Zanqueta in order to promote a forced circulation of the air to distribution of temperature.
Claim 17: Lim as modified discloses the method as claimed in claim 16, wherein the air exiting the discharge chamber (110) is mixed with the air at the top of the storage chamber (106) to reduce the recovery time necessary to bring the entire storage chamber to operating temperature (Zanqueta, to clarify, as a result of homogenizing air promoting forced circulation of air, to distribute temperature within compartment).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure which is relevant to refrigerator:
Jeong (2004/0139763 A1).
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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/PAUL ALVARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763