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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/28/2024 was filed on the filing date of the instant application. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the following:
uses the phrase “The present disclosure relates to…”, and
uses legal phraseology such as “comprising”.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the relative humidity" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the limitation has been considered as --a relative humidity--.
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, 3, 6-7, 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (KR 2018/0101923 A) in view of Osawa (JP H05221240 A).
Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses an air conditioner comprising:
an outdoor unit (6); and
an indoor unit connected to the outdoor unit (refer to figs. 7-8), wherein the outdoor unit comprises:
a compressor (110) configured to compress a refrigerant;
an outdoor heat exchanger (120) configured to perform heat exchange between outdoor air and the refrigerant;
a humidity sensor (240) provided inside the outdoor unit (refer to fig. 5) and configured to measure a relative humidity inside the outdoor unit (refer to par.31);
an outdoor temperature sensor (230) configured to measure an outdoor temperature (refer to par.31); and
a controller (200), comprising circuitry, configured to: determine an absolute humidity based on a dry bulb temperature and a relative humidity inside the outdoor unit measured by the humidity sensor (refer to par. 19, wherein an absolute humidity is calculated through the outdoor temperature sensor and the relative humidity around the outdoor heat exchanger), and determine whether to cause the air conditioner to perform a defrosting operation based on the absolute humidity and the outdoor temperature (refer to par. 17).
While Choi discloses determining the absolute humidity based on the dry bulb temperature and the relative humidity inside the outdoor unit, Choi fails to explicitly disclose determining an outdoor relative humidity based on the absolute humidity and the outdoor temperature.
However, Osawa teaches that it is known in the art of refrigeration, to provide a humidity control device, wherein a relative humidity is provided based on an absolute humidity and a temperature (refer to par. 7, wherein a relative humidity calculating means 130 detects a relative humidity based on a calculated absolute humidity and a temperature) to determine if the relative humidity is a band that requires demist control or an uncomfortable band where the humidity is abnormally low (refer to par. 6).
One having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration would recognize providing the outdoor relative humidity based on the absolute humidity and the outdoor temperature, and performing the defrosting operation based on said outdoor relative humidity and outdoor temperature, it will provide a more accurate frost detection, since it will allow the system to detect frost earlier, especially in humid climates or near water sources.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Choi by providing determining an outdoor relative humidity based on the absolute humidity and the outdoor temperature, and performing the defrost operation based on said outdoor relative humidity, in order to provide a more accurate frost detection in view of the teachings by Osawa along with the knowledge generally available to one having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration.
Regarding claim 3, Choi as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Choi as modified discloses wherein the outdoor unit comprises: a fan (16) configured to blow outdoor air to the outdoor heat exchanger (120); and a motor configured to transmit a rotational force to the fan (refer to fig. 4 and par.121).
Regarding claim 6, Choi as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Choi as modified discloses wherein the controller is configured to: determine a dew point temperature based on the outdoor relative humidity and the outdoor temperature (outdoor relative humidity calculations as taught by Osawa, and further refer to par.19, wherein a dew point temperature is calculated through the temperature sensor and the relative humidity around the outdoor heat exchanger), and determine whether to perform the defrosting operation by comparing the dew point temperature and a temperature of the outdoor heat exchanger (refer to par.105, wherein control unit 200 calculates a defrost reference temperature based on the ambient temperature of the outdoor heat exchanger input from the ambient temperature sensor 230 and the relative humidity input from the relative humidity sensor 240, more specifically, the controller 200 calculates the dew point temperature and the absolute humidity in the humidity table based on the input relative humidity and the ambient temperature, and can determine the dew point temperature calculated above as the defrost reference temperature, which is a reference for defrosting, therefore, the controller having the capability determining whether to perform the defrosting operation by comparing the dew point temperature and a temperature of the outdoor heat exchanger).
Regarding claim 7, Choi as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 6. Further, Choi as modified discloses wherein the controller (200) is configured to control the air conditioner to perform the defrosting operation based on the temperature of the outdoor heat exchanger being equal to or lower than the dew point temperature (refer to par. 128, wherein when determining whether or not to enter the defrosting operation, the dew point temperature is determined and the defrost reference temperature based on the ambient temperature and the relative humidity, and it is determined whether the defrosting operation of the air conditioner is based on the defrost reference temperature, therefore, the controller having the capability of controlling the air conditioner to perform the defrosting operation based on the temperature of the outdoor heat exchanger being equal to or lower than the dew point temperature).
Regarding claim 9, Choi as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Choi as modified discloses wherein the controller (200) is configured to control the air conditioner to maintain the defrosting operation until the temperature of the outdoor heat exchanger falls within a specified temperature range based on performing the defrosting operation (refer to paras.95 and 103, wherein the controller controls an entire configuration of the air conditioner, more specifically switches the heating operation and defrosting operation based on reference temperatures provided to the controller by ambient temperature sensor 230 that measures the ambient temperature of the outdoor heat exchanger, therefore, the controller having the capability of controlling the air conditioner to maintain the defrosting operation until the temperature of the outdoor heat exchanger falls within a specified temperature range based on performing the defrosting operation).
Regarding claim 11, Choi discloses a method of controlling an air conditioner comprising an outdoor unit (6) comprising an outdoor heat exchanger (120) and an outdoor temperature sensor (230), and an indoor unit connected to the outdoor unit (refer to figs. 7-8), wherein the method comprises:
determining an absolute humidity based on a dry bulb temperature and a relative humidity inside the outdoor unit measured by a humidity sensor (240) provided inside the outdoor unit (refer to fig. 5) to measure the relative humidity inside the outdoor unit (refer to par.31); and
determining whether to perform a defrosting operation based on the absolute humidity and the outdoor temperature (refer to par. 17).
While Choi discloses determining the absolute humidity based on the dry bulb temperature and the relative humidity inside the outdoor unit, Choi fails to explicitly disclose determining an outdoor relative humidity based on the absolute humidity and the outdoor temperature.
However, Osawa teaches that it is known in the art of refrigeration, to provide a humidity control device, wherein a relative humidity is provided based on an absolute humidity and a temperature (refer to par. 7, wherein a relative humidity calculating means 130 detects a relative humidity based on a calculated absolute humidity and a temperature) to determine if the relative humidity is a band that requires demist control or an uncomfortable band where the humidity is abnormally low (refer to par. 6).
One having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration would recognize providing the outdoor relative humidity based on the absolute humidity and the outdoor temperature, and performing the defrosting operation based on said outdoor relative humidity and outdoor temperature, it will provide a more accurate frost detection, since it will allow the system to detect frost earlier, especially in humid climates or near water sources.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Choi by providing determining an outdoor relative humidity based on the absolute humidity and the outdoor temperature, and performing the defrost operation based on said outdoor relative humidity, in order to provide a more accurate frost detection in view of the teachings by Osawa along with the knowledge generally available to one having ordinary skill in the art of refrigeration.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (KR 2018/0101923 A), Osawa (JP H05221240 A), and further in view of Rao (CN 202613682 U).
Regarding claim 10, Choi as modified meets the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, Choi as modified discloses the humidity sensor, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the humidity sensor is provided inside a control box of the outdoor unit.
However, Rao further teaches that it is known in the art of refrigeration, to provide an installation structure of a humidity sensor (3), wherein the humidity sensor (3) is provided inside a control box (21, figs.1-2), in order to ensure position accuracy of the humidity sensor (refer to par. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify Choi such that the humidity sensor is provided inside a control box of the outdoor unit in view of the teachings by Rao, in order to ensure position accuracy of the humidity sensor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-5, 8 and 12-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
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/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights