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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/4/2024 was filed on or after the mailing date of the 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.
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 1-13 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.
Regarding Claim 1, the recitation of “…wherein the first decompression unit is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion to a first target degree of superheating based on a first physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion, and
the second decompression unit is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the refrigerant joining portion and the compressor to a second target degree of superheating based on a second physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the refrigerant joining portion and the compressor,” renders the claim unclear.
For example, the claim purports to perform the functional steps of “regulating” a degree of superheat.” However, pursuant to MPEP 2173.05(g), the use of functional language in a claim may fail "to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim" and thus be indefinite.
For example, when claims merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention, the boundaries of the claim scope may be unclear without reciting the particular structure, materials or steps that accomplish the function or achieve the result. Therefore, all means or methods of resolving the problem may be encompassed by the claim.
In this instance, the claim does not recite the particular structure, materials or steps that accomplish the function of “regulating”. Decompressions units cannot regulate refrigerant flow without additional structure components such as controllers and/or data inputs.
Thus, one skilled in the art would not necessarily have the ability to ascertain the metes and bounds of the particular claim limitation.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Regarding Claim 7, the recitation of “…wherein the third evaporator is arranged between the third decompression unit and the refrigerant joining portion, and the third decompression unit regulates a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the third evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion to approach a third target degree of superheating based on a third physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the third evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion,” renders the claim unclear.
For example, the claim purports to perform the functional steps of “regulating” a degree of superheat.” However, pursuant to MPEP 2173.05(g), the use of functional language in a claim may fail "to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim" and thus be indefinite.
For example, when claims merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention, the boundaries of the claim scope may be unclear without reciting the particular structure, materials or steps that accomplish the function or achieve the result. Therefore, all means or methods of resolving the problem may be encompassed by the claim.
In this instance, the claim does not recite the particular structure, materials or steps that accomplish the function of “regulating”. Decompressions units cannot regulate refrigerant flow without additional structure components such as controllers and/or data inputs.
Thus, one skilled in the art would not necessarily have the ability to ascertain the metes and bounds of the particular claim limitation.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Regarding Claim 13, the recitation of “…wherein the first decompression valve is configured to regulate the degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joint to a first target degree based on the first physical quantity, and the second decompression valve is configured to regulate the degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the refrigerant joint and the compressor to a second target degree based on the second physical quantity,” renders the claim unclear.
For example, the claim purports to perform the functional steps of “regulating” a degree of superheat.” However, pursuant to MPEP 2173.05(g), the use of functional language in a claim may fail "to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim" and thus be indefinite.
For example, when claims merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention, the boundaries of the claim scope may be unclear without reciting the particular structure, materials or steps that accomplish the function or achieve the result. Therefore, all means or methods of resolving the problem may be encompassed by the claim.
In this instance, the claim does not recite the particular structure, materials or steps that accomplish the function of “regulating”. Decompressions units cannot regulate refrigerant flow without additional structure components such as controllers and/or data inputs.
Thus, one skilled in the art would not necessarily have the ability to ascertain the metes and bounds of the particular claim limitation.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Regarding Claim 13, the recitation of “…a first decompression valve configured to decompress the refrigerant having passed through the radiator; a first evaporator that exchanges heat between the refrigerant decompressed by the first decompression unit and air to be supplied to a space to be air conditioned, to evaporate the refrigerant; a second decompression valve that is disposed in parallel with the first decompression valve on a downstream side of the radiator to decompress the refrigerant having passed through the radiator; a second evaporator that exchanges heat between the refrigerant decompressed by the second decompression unit and a heat medium that absorbs heat from a heat generating device, and evaporates the refrigerant,” renders the claim unclear.
The claim appears to refer to a “first decompression valve” in one limitation and “the first decompression unit” in another limitation. Also, the claim appears to refer to a “second decompression valve” in one limitation and “the second decompression unit” in another limitation.
Thus, one skilled in the art would not necessarily have the ability to ascertain the metes and bounds of the particular claim limitation.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Pease amend for consistency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dirk et al. (DE102013021360A1) in view of Tsuchiyama et al. (JPH03204568A).
Regarding Claim 1, Dirk teaches refrigeration cycle device [figs 1 & 3] comprising:
a compressor [7] configured to compress and discharge a refrigerant [0036];
a radiator 92] configured to radiate heat of the refrigerant discharged from the compressor [0036];
a first decompression unit [32] configured to decompress the refrigerant having passed through the radiator [0036];
a first evaporator [30] that exchanges heat between the refrigerant decompressed by the first decompression unit and ventilation air to be supplied to a space to be air conditioned, to evaporate the refrigerant [0036; 0039; fig 3];
a second decompression unit [22] that is disposed in parallel with the first decompression unit on a downstream side of the radiator to decompress the refrigerant having passed through the radiator [0036];
a second evaporator [20] that exchanges heat between the refrigerant decompressed by the second decompression unit and a heat medium that absorbs heat from at least one of a heat generating device or an external space, and evaporates the refrigerant [0036; 0039; fig 3]; and
a refrigerant joining portion [16] provided on a refrigerant suction side of the compressor, to join the refrigerant having passed through the first evaporator and the refrigerant having passed through the second evaporator [0036; See fig 3].
Dirk does not explicitly teach wherein the first decompression unit is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion to a first target degree of superheating based on a first physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion, and the second decompression unit is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the refrigerant joining portion and the compressor to a second target degree of superheating based on a second physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the refrigerant joining portion and the compressor.
However, Tsuchiyama teaches a heat pump device [0001] having wherein a first decompression unit [12] is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between a first evaporator [15] and a refrigerant joining portion [at least the joining portion upstream of sensor 8 and downstream of sensors 7, 17, and 27] to a first target degree of superheating based on a first physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion [0011; 0012; where valve 12 is controlled]; and a second decompression unit [2] is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the refrigerant joining portion [at least the joining portion upstream of sensor 8 and downstream of sensors 7, 17, and 27] and the compressor to a second target degree of superheating based on a second physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the refrigerant joining portion and the compressor [0011; 0012; where valve 2 is controlled] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a control that protects the compressor [0003].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Dirk to have wherein the first decompression unit is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion to a first target degree of superheating based on a first physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion, and the second decompression unit is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the refrigerant joining portion and the compressor to a second target degree of superheating based on a second physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the refrigerant joining portion and the compressor in view of the teachings of Tsuchiyama where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a control that protects the compressor.
Regarding claim 2, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Dirk teaches an internal heat exchanger [60] that includes a high-pressure flow path portion through which the refrigerant flowing upstream of at least one of the first decompression unit [32] or the second decompression unit [22] passes, and a low-pressure flow path portion through which the refrigerant flowing downstream of at least one of the first evaporator or the second evaporator passes, and exchanges heat between the refrigerant passing through the high-pressure flow path portion and the refrigerant passing through the low-pressure flow path portion [0037; fig 3];
a first physical quantity detection unit [M8, T8, P8] disposed between the first evaporator [30] and the refrigerant joining portion [16] to detect the first physical quantity [0025; fig 3]; and
a second physical quantity detection unit [M2, T2, P2] disposed between the refrigerant joining portion [16] and the compressor [7] to detect the second physical quantity, wherein the low-pressure flow path portion is arranged in a refrigerant path from one of the first physical quantity detection unit or the second evaporator to the second physical quantity detection unit [0025; fig 3].
Regarding Claim 3, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 2 above and Dirk teaches wherein the low-pressure flow path portion is arranged in a refrigerant path from the first physical quantity detection unit [M8, T8, P8] to the second physical quantity detection unit [M2, T2, P2; 0025; 0037; see fig 3].
Regarding Claim 4, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 2 above and Dirk teaches wherein the first physical quantity detection unit [M8, T8, P8] is arranged immediately behind a refrigerant outlet port of the first evaporator [30; 0025; fig 3].
Regarding Claim 7, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above and Dirk teaches a third decompression unit [12] disposed in parallel with the first decompression unit [32] on a downstream side of the radiator, to decompress the refrigerant having passed through the radiator [0025; 0036]; and
a third evaporator [10] that exchanges heat between the refrigerant decompressed by the third decompression unit and a cooling medium that cools an another space different from the space to be air conditioned, and evaporates the refrigerant [0036; 0039; fig 3], wherein
the third evaporator [10] is arranged between the third decompression unit and the refrigerant joining portion [0036; 0039; fig 3] and Tsuchiyama teaches where the third decompression unit regulates a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the third evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion to approach a third target degree of superheating based on a third physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the third evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion [ See Tsuchiyama at 0011; 0012; where valve 12 can be controlled in a similar manner].
Regarding Claim 8, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 7 above and Dirk teaches an internal heat exchanger [60] that includes a high-pressure flow path portion through which the refrigerant flowing from upstream of at least one of the first decompression unit [32], the second decompression unit [22], or the third decompression unit [12] passes, and a low-pressure flow path portion through which the refrigerant flowing downstream of at least one of the first evaporator [30], the second evaporator [20], or the third evaporator passes [10], and exchanges heat between the refrigerant passing through the high-pressure flow path portion and the refrigerant passing through the low-pressure flow path portion [0037; fig 3];
a first physical quantity detection unit [M8, T8, P8] disposed between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion to detect the first physical quantity [0025];
a second physical quantity detection unit [M2, T2, P2] disposed between the refrigerant joining portion and the compressor to detect the second physical quantity [0025]; and
a third physical quantity detection unit [M3, T3, P3] disposed between the third evaporator and the refrigerant joining portion to detect the third physical quantity [0025], wherein
the low-pressure flow path portion is disposed in a refrigerant path from one of the first physical quantity detection unit [M8, T8, P8], the second evaporator or the third physical quantity detection unit [M3, T3, P3] to the second physical quantity detection unit [M2, T2, P2; 0025; fig 3].
Regarding Claim 9, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 above and Dirk teaches wherein the first physical quantity detection unit [M8, T8, P8] is disposed immediately behind a refrigerant outlet port of the first evaporator [30; 0025; fig 3], and the third physical quantity detection unit [M3, T3, P3] is disposed immediately behind a refrigerant outlet port of the third evaporator [10; 0025; fig 3].
Regarding Claim 10, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 above and Dirk teaches wherein the third evaporator [10] is disposed at a position farther from the compressor [7] than the first evaporator [30; see fig 3], the refrigeration cycle device further comprising a mode switching unit [at least a part of the evaluation and control unit] configured to switch to a single endothermic mode in which (i) one evaporator of the first evaporator or the second evaporator exerts a refrigerant heat-absorbing action, and (ii) an another evaporator other than the one evaporator among the first evaporator, the second evaporator and the third evaporator does not exert the refrigerant heat-absorbing action [0007; 0038; see fig 2], and wherein the low-pressure flow path portion is disposed in a refrigerant path from the first physical quantity detection unit [M8, T8, P8] to the second physical quantity detection unit [M2, T2, P2] or in a refrigerant path from the second evaporator [20] to the second physical quantity detection unit [M2, T2, P2; 0025; fig 3].
Regarding Claim 13, Dirk teaches refrigeration cycle device [figs 1 & 3] comprising:
a compressor [7] configured to compress and discharge a refrigerant [0036];
a radiator 92] configured to radiate heat of the refrigerant discharged from the compressor [0036];
a first decompression unit [32] configured to decompress the refrigerant having passed through the radiator [0036];
a first evaporator [30] that exchanges heat between the refrigerant decompressed by the first decompression unit and ventilation air to be supplied to a space to be air conditioned, to evaporate the refrigerant [0036; 0039; fig 3];
a second decompression unit [22] that is disposed in parallel with the first decompression unit on a downstream side of the radiator to decompress the refrigerant having passed through the radiator [0036];
a second evaporator [20] that exchanges heat between the refrigerant decompressed by the second decompression unit and a heat medium that absorbs heat from at least one of a heat generating device or an external space, and evaporates the refrigerant [0036; 0039; fig 3]; and
a refrigerant joint [16] provided on a refrigerant suction side of the compressor, to join the refrigerant having passed through the first evaporator and the refrigerant having passed through the second evaporator [0036; See fig 3];
a first physical quantity detector [M8, T8, P8] disposed between the first evaporator [30] and the refrigerant joint [16] to detect a first physical quantity having a correlation with a degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joint [0025]; and
a second physical quantity detector [M2, T2, P2] disposed between the refrigerant joint [16] and the compressor [7] to detect a second physical quantity having a correlation with the degree of superheating of the refrigerant flowing between the refrigerant joint and the compressor [0025; fig 3].
Dirk does not explicitly teach wherein the first decompression valve is configured to regulate the degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joint to a first target degree based on the first physical quantity, and the second decompression valve is configured to regulate the degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the refrigerant joint and the compressor to a second target degree based on the second physical quantity.
However, Tsuchiyama teaches a heat pump device [0001] having wherein a first decompression valve [12] is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between a first evaporator [15] and a refrigerant joining joint [at least the joining portion upstream of sensor 8 and downstream of sensors 7, 17, and 27] to a first target degree based on a first physical quantity [0011; 0012; where valve 12 is controlled]; and a second decompression valve [2] is configured to regulate a degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the refrigerant joint [at least the joining portion upstream of sensor 8 and downstream of sensors 7, 17, and 27] and the compressor to a second target based on a second physical quantity [0011; 0012; where valve 2 is controlled] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a control that protects the compressor [0003].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Dirk to have wherein the first decompression valve is configured to regulate the degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the first evaporator and the refrigerant joint to a first target degree based on the first physical quantity, and the second decompression valve is configured to regulate the degree of superheating of the refrigerant between the refrigerant joint and the compressor to a second target degree based on the second physical quantity in view of the teachings of Tsuchiyama where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a control that protects the compressor.
Claim(s) 5, 6, 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dirk et al. (DE102013021360A1) in view of Tsuchiyama et al. (JPH03204568A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cui et al. (CN109668348A).
Regarding Claim 5, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 above but does not explicitly teach a pressure regulating unit disposed on a downstream side of the first evaporator to regulates an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in the first evaporator, wherein the pressure regulating unit is disposed on a downstream side of a detection point of the first physical quantity.
However, Cui teaches a heat pump [0001] having a pressure regulating unit [12] disposed on a downstream side of an evaporator [8] to regulates an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in the evaporator, wherein the pressure regulating unit is disposed on a downstream side of a detection point [at 17, 18] of a first physical quantity [0030; where the suction valve can be applied to the first heat exchanger disclosed in Dirk] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a control that prevents the compressor from operating under high suction pressure [0034].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Dirk to have a pressure regulating unit disposed on a downstream side of the first evaporator to regulates an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in the first evaporator, wherein the pressure regulating unit is disposed on a downstream side of a detection point of the first physical quantity in view of the teachings of Cui where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a control that prevents the compressor from operating under high suction pressure.
Regarding Claim 6, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 3 above but does not teach a pressure regulating unit disposed on a downstream side of the first evaporator to regulate an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in the first evaporator, wherein the low-pressure flow path portion is provided on the downstream side of the first evaporator, and the pressure regulating unit is disposed in a refrigerant path from the first physical quantity detection unit to the low-pressure flow path portion.
However, Cui teaches a heat pump [0001] having a pressure regulating unit [12] disposed on a downstream side of an evaporator [8] to regulates an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in the evaporator [0030], wherein a low-pressure flow path portion is provided on the downstream side of the evaporator [at least a flow path between the evaporator and the suction side of the compressor], and the pressure regulating unit is disposed in a refrigerant path from a first physical quantity detection unit [17, 18] to the low-pressure flow path portion [0030; where the suction valve can be applied to the first heat exchanger disclosed in Dirk] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a control that prevents the compressor from operating under high suction pressure [0034].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Dirk to have a pressure regulating unit disposed on a downstream side of the first evaporator to regulate an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in the first evaporator, wherein the low-pressure flow path portion is provided on the downstream side of the first evaporator, and the pressure regulating unit is disposed in a refrigerant path from the first physical quantity detection unit to the low-pressure flow path portion in view of the teachings of Cui where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a control that prevents the compressor from operating under high suction pressure.
Regarding Claim 11, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 above but does not teach a pressure regulating unit that is disposed on a downstream side of at least one of the first evaporator or the third evaporator and regulates an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in at least one of the first evaporator or the third evaporator, wherein the pressure regulating unit is disposed on a downstream side of at least one of the first physical quantity detection unit or the third physical quantity detection unit.
However, Cui teaches a heat pump [0001] having a pressure regulating unit [12] disposed on a downstream side of an evaporator [8] and regulates an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in the evaporator, wherein the pressure regulating unit is disposed on a downstream side of a detection point [at 17, 18] of a first physical quantity [0030; where the suction valve can be applied to any of the respective heat exchangers disclosed in Dirk] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e. provide a control that prevents the compressor from operating under high suction pressure [0034].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Dirk to have a pressure regulating unit that is disposed on a downstream side of at least one of the first evaporator or the third evaporator and regulates an evaporation pressure of the refrigerant in at least one of the first evaporator or the third evaporator, wherein the pressure regulating unit is disposed on a downstream side of at least one of the first physical quantity detection unit or the third physical quantity detection unit in view of the teachings of Cui where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e. provide a control that prevents the compressor from operating under high suction pressure.
Regarding Claim 12, Dirk, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 11 above and Cui teaches wherein the pressure regulating unit [12] is disposed in a refrigerant path from at least one of the first physical quantity detection unit or the third physical quantity detection unit to the low-pressure flow path portion [0030; where the suction valve can be applied to any of the respective heat exchangers disclosed in Dirk].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY L FURDGE whose telephone number is (313)446-4895. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6a-3p; F 6a-10a.
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, Jerry Fletcher can be reached at 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.
/LARRY L FURDGE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763