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 .
This action is in response to the filing made 7/25/2024.
Claims 1-7 are pending.
Allowable Subject Matter
The claims will be allowable provided that the rejections under 35 USC 112 are overcome without broadening the scope of the claims.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP §2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is:
“air conditioning device” - (i.e. a device for air conditioning) is the honeycomb structure describes at pars. 13-19 of the published application.
“a control unit” for controlling the air conditioning device and the heat pump
cycle in response to an operation mode, is the structure described at par. (151) of the published application, i.e. CPU with Rom, etc.
dehumidifying layer”, (i.e. a layer for dehumidifying) is described at par. 30 of the published application
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-7 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.
Claim 1
The claim recites,
“an air conditioning duct for allowing air from a vehicle interior or a vehicle
exterior to flow therethrough . . . . “. It is not clear if this means the interior/exterior air source is selectable, or if the system is fixed at one configuration or the other.
Claims 1, 2, 3
Claim 1 recites the system has “an operation mode” (i.e. singular), while dependent claims 2 and 3 recite that the “operating mode’ can be a “dehumidification mode”, “dehumidification and regeneration mode” and “heating mode”. The language should be revised to clearly indicate that the term “operating mode” is a generic term that includes multiple modes.
Claim 6
The claim recites, “executes the regeneration and regeneration mode”. The distinction between “regeneration” and regeneration mode” is not clear.
Claims dependent upon those above are rejected for incorporating the deficiencies of their parent claims.
Regarding claim 1, the closest prior art of record is US 2012-0305662 to Miyano and US 5,509,275 to Bhatti.
Miyano teaches a vehicle air conditioning system, comprising:
an air conditioning duct (Fig. 3) for allowing air from a vehicle interior or a vehicle
exterior to flow therethrough, the air conditioning duct having two or more branched
paths; (See Fig. 3, “internal air”, “external air” selectable by flap (22a)
a heat pump cycle having a condenser (37) for performing heat exchange
between heat of the refrigerant and the air and an evaporator (35) for performing heat
exchange between cold of the refrigerant and the air, the
evaporator being disposed in the air conditioning duct connected to the vehicle
interior,
a control unit (Fig. 2) for controlling the air conditioning device and the heat pump
cycle in response to an operation mode,
wherein each of the two or more branched paths comprises:
an inflow path for allowing the air to flow into the vehicle interior on a downstream side of the air conditioning device (Fig. 3, far right); and an outflow path for allowing the air to flow out to the vehicle exterior (“to battery”, Fig. 3) and each of the two or more branched paths comprises a switching valve capable of switching the flow of the air between the inflow path and the outflow path. ((22a, 23a, Fig. 3)
Bhatti teaches an air conditioning device (desiccant wheel 28), an air conditioning device disposed at each of the two or more branched
paths; the condenser and n a downstream side of the air conditioning device; and
The art of record does not teach,
wherein the air conditioning device comprises:
a honeycomb structure having an outer peripheral wall and partition walls disposed on an inner side of the outer peripheral wall, the partition walls defining a plurality of cells, each of the cells extending from a first end face to a second end face to form a flow path, at least the partition walls being made of a material having a PTC property; and
a dehumidifying layer formed on each surface of the partition walls.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY T CRENSHAW whose telephone number is (571)270-1550. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, JD Fletcher can be reached on 571-270-5054. 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.
/HENRY T CRENSHAW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights