DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office action is responsive to the communication received on 09/06/2024. The claims 1-20 are pending, of which the claim(s) 1, 12, & 20 is/are in independent form.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In para. [0113] the sentence of “being one or more homes to be heated), and/or the district heating component In some embodiments” is missing a period punctuation after the word “component”.
Similarly, in [0117], the sentence of “and/or the district heating component In some embodiments” is missing a period punctuation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 & 13 objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claims 2 & 13, the subject matter recited in these claims are substantially same with the last two limitations of the respective independent claims 1 & 12.
Appropriate correction is required.
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- 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davidson (US 20230049241 A1, Publication Date: 2023-02-16) in view of Jabara (US 20120123953 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Davidson teaches a system comprising: ([014]);
[a] a heat pump [“A more efficient means of boosting the captured waste-heat is to use heat-pumps”], wherein the heat pump is configured to: ([019]);
receive a waste heat input [“Capturing a data centers waste-heat 102”] from a data center [“data center 112 connected to direct air capture plant 114”], wherein the waste heat input is associated with a first temperature [“captured waste-heat at a temperature over 20° C., in some cases over 30° C., in other cases over 40° C. “] ([014-021]);
receive a power input [“Boosting the captured waste-heat”, “a combination of waste-heat and virgin energy (that is energy that was generated specifically as
input energy to carbon capture apparatus), or virgin energy”] from a power source [“virgin energy”] ([019, 048]);
generate an asset operations heat output [“boosting the captured waste-heat in temperature 103 boosted waste-heat to be used as the input energy for carbon capture plant 104”] based on the waste heat input and the power input, wherein the asset operations heat output is associated with a second temperature [“Boosting the captured waste-heat in temperature to the approximate 95° C. to 100° C.”], wherein the second temperature is greater [boosted temperature to 950C is higher than the temperature of the waste-heat from the datacenter that is approximately at 300 C] than the first temperature; and provide the asset operations heat output to an asset [“carbon capture plant”, Fig. 1a, item 104] ([014, 019-021,048, 059]); and
[b] a heat pump operations apparatus [computers used by “cloud operators” or “Cloud customers”] comprising at least one processor and at least one non-transitory memory including computer-coded instructions thereon, the computer-coded instructions, with the at least one processor, cause the heat pump operations apparatus to: ([027-028]).
generate heat pump 1impact data [“provide an approximation as to how much carbon dioxide is being captured on behalf of the cloud customer”, “carbon capture plant to produce a captured ratio”] ([035-036, 063]);
generate a heat pump impact interface component [any data report/summery that includes carbon dioxide information and that to be provided to the customers, e.g., “reporting to the cloud customer the approximation of the carbon dioxide captured by the services being operated on its behalf”, “modify the equation above producing the form below, resulting in a more accurate representation”, “report the amount of carbon dioxide being captured on their cloud customers behalf”] based on the heat pump impact data, wherein the heat pump impact interface component comprises at least a portion of the heat pump impact data ([035-037]); and
cause the heat pump impact interface component to be provided [“reporting to the cloud customer the approximation”] user associated with the heat pump operations apparatus ([035, 042, 051]).
While Davidson teaches of a heat pump operation apparatus (computers of the cloud operators) monitoring heat pump impact data and provides this as a report (impact interface component) to the customers, it still may not teach rendering of the generated heat pump interface component on a computer screen (heat pump impact interface associated with the heat pump apparatus) as part of its reporting the cloud customers and shown above with strikethrough emphasis.
That is, Davidson does not clearly teach “cause the heat pump impact interface component to be rendered to a heat pump impact interface associated with the heat pump operations apparatus.” That is, one can argue that the mere reporting does not necessarily means rendering of the “heat pump impact interface” (that includes heat pump impact data) on a computer screen (“heat pump impact interface”) but this deficiency is cured by Jabara.
Jabara relates to using environmental impact assessing computer [“dedicated computing machine”] with a processor and memory performing lifecycle analysis to assess manufactured products 115 with respect to the products' impact on the environment and generating results and rendering the determined results (“information label, score, report, or rating, characterizing the environmental impact”) in a computer screen of a user (Abstract, [002], Fig.1 . Specifically, Jabara teaches a system comprising: an operation apparatus [Fig. 1, “dedicated computing machine, or in a combination of software and hardware” that implements “a product analysis module 140 that receives three inputs” + “produce product environmental impact results 150”, analogous to computers used by the Davidson’s cloud operators to generate carbon dioxide capture and reporting this information to the customers of the cloud operators] at least one processor and at least one non-transitory memory including computer-coded instructions thereon, the computer coded instructions, with the at least one processor, cause the operations apparatus to: (Fig. 1, [041, 047]);
generate a product impact interface component [data/report/information about the impact results after analyzing the data 110-130 that can be displayed in a computer screen, e.g., “environmental impact result information for various products”] based on the product impact data [“product analysis module 140transforms input data 110, 120, and 130 into product environmental impact results 150”], wherein the product impact interface component comprises at least a portion of the product impact data; and cause the product impact interface component to be rendered [“allow users to display environmental impact result information for various products…and comparisons presented on website 153 may help people better understand”] to a product impact interface associated with the product operations apparatus ([047, 051-053, 0103-0105, 0126]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have (1) combined Jabara and Davidson because they both related to a monitoring computer to generate environmental impact report and (2) modified the generated heat pump impact interface component to be rendered to a heat pump impact interface (screen) associated with the heat pump operations apparatus as in Jabara.
Doing so would allow the reporting of the information related to executing the computing tasks including amount of carbon dioxide captured to the customers of the datacenters in simpler and more user-friendly manner (Jabara [015, 0126]). That is, Jabara teaches missing details for Davidson about how (via a computer display of a website) its “amount of carbon dioxide being captured” related information can be reported to remotely located customers of the cloud operators (Jabara [091]). Thus, Davidson in view of Jabara teaches each limitation of the claim and renders invention thereof obvious to PHOSITA.
Regarding claim 2, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the
system of claim 1, wherein the computer-coded instructions, with the at least one processor, further cause the heat pump operations apparatus to:
generate a heat pump impact determination interface component based on the heat pump impact data; and cause the heat pump impact interface component to be rendered [“employing a website 153, the score and/or rating for each product attribute may be displayed”] to the heat pump impact interface associated with the heat pump operations apparatus (Davidson [028, 042] & Jabara [052, 091]).
Regarding claim 3, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the
system of claim 1, wherein the computer-coded instructions, with the at least one processor, further cause the heat pump operations apparatus to:
perform, using a simulation tool [“execute analysis algorithms, (e.g., simulation or mathematical modeling algorithms”], one or more lifecycle impact evaluations (Jabara [0104]).
Regarding claim 4, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the
system of claim 3, wherein the one or more lifecycle impact evaluations comprise one or more [“product use LCA model 1510 may process …production mix (e.g., coal, nuclear, hydro-electric, solar) to produce] of a conventional decoupled lifecycle impact evaluation, a conventional integrated lifecycle impact evaluation, a solar decoupled lifecycle impact evaluation, a wind decoupled lifecycle impact evaluation, a solar integrated lifecycle impact evaluation, or a wind integrated lifecycle impact evaluation (Jabara [0104, 0119]).
Regarding claim 5, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the
system of claim 1, wherein the asset is a direct air capture system [“carbon capture plant 104”] or a district heating system (Davidson Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 6, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the system of claim 1, wherein the power source comprises solar power or wind power (Davidson [048] & Jabara [0119]).
Regarding claim 7, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the
system of claim 1, wherein the heat pump operations apparatus is a server heat pump operations apparatus (Davidson [059, 064] & Jabara [047]—the using a remote machine to calculate CO2 amount can be installed and is well-known in the art therefore can be done in Davidson as well --- to allow users at cloud operators’ location to perform all calculation and publish heat pump impact data into their websites).
Regarding claim 8, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the
system of claim 7, wherein the heat pump [e.g., location of the product 115] is located at a first location and the server heat pump operations apparatus is located at a second location [location where the product analysis computer is present] (Davidson [059, 064], Fig.1 & Jabara [047], Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the
system of claim 1, wherein the heat pump operations apparatus is a local heat pump operations apparatus (Davidson [059, 064], Fig.1 & Jabara [047], Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10 Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the system of claim 9, wherein the heat pump is located at a first location and the local heat pump operations apparatus is located at the first location (Davidson [059, 064], Fig.1 & Jabara [047], Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Davidson in view of Jabara further teaches/suggests the system of claim 1, wherein the heat pump impact data is representative of at least greenhouse gas data [“amount of carbon dioxide captured on their behalf”] (Davidson [054]).
Regarding claims 12- 19, Davidson in view of Jabara teaches these inventions of these method claims for the similar reasons set forth above in system claims 1- 11 above.
Regarding claim 20, Davidson in view of Jabara teaches invention of this non-transitory computer readable medium for the similar reasons set forth above in system claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1) Nauert et al. (WO 2024173195 A1) teaches CO2 capture process of Fig. 1 was simulated using Aspen Plus® process modeling software using rate-based heat and mass transfer models for the absorber and stripping column and proprietary thermodynamic and kinetic models for an amine solvent for CO2 absorption and stripping ([068]).
2) Davidson (WO 2024086916 A1) teaches carbon capture in a data center or crypto-mine type environment and efficiently enabling an air-cooled datacenter 120 to remove carbon-dioxide from the atmosphere using a heat pump 140 ([003], Fig. 1).
Contacts
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANTOSH R. POUDEL whose telephone number is (571)272-2347. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (8:30 am - 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, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571) 272-2279. 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.
/SANTOSH R POUDEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
1 Please note that applicant’s specification in para. 0128 states-- “display heat pump impact data that is indicative of an amount of greenhouse gas (e.g., carbon dioxide) that is embodied in the heat pump and an amount of greenhouse gas (e.g., carbon dioxide) that is embodied in the asset”. Thus, the amount of carbon dioxide being captured on behalf of the cloud customer reads on claimed “heat pump impact data”.
Prosecution Insights