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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I (claims 8-14) in the reply filed on 07/31/2026 is acknowledged.
It is pointed out to the applicant that amongst the elected claims, claims 12-13 remain directed to the non-elected Species II (two fluidically distinct coolant loops, each loop provided with corresponding heat exchanger for the cabin). Thus, claims 12-13 are hereby also withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the foreign application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/26/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
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(s) is/are:
main heat source and auxiliary heat source in at least claim 8.
electrical power source in at least claim 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Main heat source is interpreted to cover an internal combustion engine as per [0022] of applicant specification, and equivalents thereof.
Auxiliary heat source is interpreted to cover an electrical heater as per [0026] of applicant specification, and equivalents thereof.
Electrical power source is interpreted to cover a battery as per [0026] of applicant specification, 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/them 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(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 8-11 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bennett (US 20230024674 A1).
Regarding claim 8:
Bennett discloses a heating arrangement (Fig. 1) for a cabin #14 of a work machine ([0019]), the heating arrangement comprising:
one or more heat exchangers #30 ([0020]);
a main heating system including:
a main heat source #10 powered by a main energy form to impart heat to a main coolant stream (via at least #130); and
a main fluid circuit (made of at least #130 & #160) fluidly coupled between the main heat source and the one or more heat exchangers to supply the main coolant stream from the main heat source to the one or more heat exchangers for circulation therewithin such that the main coolant stream dissipates heat to an air flowing across the one or more heat exchangers and into the cabin to provide main heat energy into the cabin ([0020]); and
an auxiliary heating system including:
an auxiliary heat source #120 powered by an auxiliary energy form alternate to the main energy form, the auxiliary heat source configured to impart heat to an auxiliary coolant stream different from the main coolant stream ([0024]); and
an auxiliary fluid circuit (made of at least #180 & #142) fluidly coupled between the auxiliary heat source with the one or more heat exchangers to supply the auxiliary coolant stream from the auxiliary heat source to the one or more heat exchangers for circulation therewithin ([0024]),
wherein, during the circulation of the auxiliary coolant stream within the one or more heat exchangers, the auxiliary coolant stream dissipates heat to the air blowing across the one or more heat exchangers and into the cabin to provide supplementary heat energy into the cabin ([0037]).
Regarding claim 9:
Bennett further discloses wherein the main coolant stream and the auxiliary coolant stream are one and same coolant ([0037]).
Regarding claim 10:
Bennett further discloses a flow control valve (made if #132 & #150) configured to move between a first position and a second position, wherein: at the first position, the flow control valve restricts the supply of the auxiliary coolant stream from the auxiliary heat source to the one or more heat exchangers through the auxiliary fluid circuit and facilitates the supply of the main coolant stream from the main heat source to the one or more heat exchangers through the main fluid circuit, and at the second position, the flow control valve restricts the supply of the main coolant stream from the main heat source to the one or more heat exchangers through the main fluid circuit and facilitates the supply of the auxiliary coolant stream from the auxiliary heat source to the one or more heat exchangers through the auxiliary fluid circuit ([0026], [0031], & [0035]).
Regarding claim 11:
Bennett further discloses wherein the flow control valve is moved from the first position to the second position upon activation of the auxiliary heat source ([0026], [0031], & [0035]).
Regarding claim 14:
Bennett further wherein the auxiliary energy form includes an electrical energy form stored in one or more electrical power sources ([0024]) and the main energy form includes a chemical energy form stored in one or more combustion fuels ([0019-0020]).
Claim(s) 8-11 and 14 is/are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Enomoto (US 20170197490 A1).
Regarding claim 8:
Enomoto discloses a heating arrangement (Fig. 7; heating via #17) for a cabin of a work machine, the heating arrangement comprising:
one or more heat exchangers #17;
a main heating system including:
a main heat source #43 powered by a main energy form to impart heat to a main coolant stream ([0086-0087]); and
a main fluid circuit #48 fluidly coupled between the main heat source and the one or more heat exchangers to supply the main coolant stream from the main heat source to the one or more heat exchangers for circulation therewithin such that the main coolant stream dissipates heat to an air flowing across the one or more heat exchangers and into the cabin to provide main heat energy into the cabin (Fig. 6); and an auxiliary heating system including:
an auxiliary heat source #15 powered by an auxiliary energy form alternate to the main energy form (Fig. 5), the auxiliary heat source configured to impart heat to an auxiliary coolant stream different from the main coolant stream (Fig. 5); and
an auxiliary fluid circuit #C2 fluidly coupled between the auxiliary heat source with the one or more heat exchangers to supply the auxiliary coolant stream from the auxiliary heat source to the one or more heat exchangers for circulation therewithin (Fig. 5, [0120]),
wherein, during the circulation of the auxiliary coolant stream within the one or more heat exchangers, the auxiliary coolant stream dissipates heat to the air blowing across the one or more heat exchangers and into the cabin to provide supplementary heat energy into the cabin (see Fig. 5-6 & associated description thereof).
Regarding claim 9:
Enomoto further discloses wherein the main coolant stream and the auxiliary coolant stream are one and same coolant (see Fig. 5-6 & associated description thereof).
Regarding claim 10:
Enomoto further discloses a flow control valve (both of #38) configured to move between a first position and a second position, wherein: at the first position, the flow control valve restricts the supply of the auxiliary coolant stream from the auxiliary heat source to the one or more heat exchangers through the auxiliary fluid circuit and facilitates the supply of the main coolant stream from the main heat source to the one or more heat exchangers through the main fluid circuit, and at the second position, the flow control valve restricts the supply of the main coolant stream from the main heat source to the one or more heat exchangers through the main fluid circuit and facilitates the supply of the auxiliary coolant stream from the auxiliary heat source to the one or more heat exchangers through the auxiliary fluid circuit (see Fig. 5-6 & associated description thereof).
Regarding claim 11:
Enomoto further discloses wherein the flow control valve is moved from the first position to the second position upon activation of the auxiliary heat source (see Fig. 5-6 & associated description thereof).
Regarding claim 14:
Enomoto further discloses wherein the auxiliary energy form includes an electrical energy form stored in one or more electrical power sources and the main energy form includes a chemical energy form stored in one or more combustion fuels (see Fig. 5-6 & associated description thereof. Also see [0036]. Note: “the auxiliary energy form” has not been claimed as part of the invention. Limitations pertaining to said auxiliary energy form are functional limitations).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park (US 20230040086 A1), Johnston (US 20190118610 A1), Kakade (US 10005339 B2), Hong (US 20170267066 A1), and Blumenstock (US 20140097261 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIONEL W NOUKETCHA whose telephone number is (571)272-8438. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri: 08:00 AM - 04:00 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, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. 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.
/LIONEL NOUKETCHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights