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 .
Drawings
The drawings filed on 8/7/2024 are accepted by the examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/7/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
Claims 11, 15, 21-23, 25-26, and 33 are method claims that use contingency language “when” and “if”, it is noted that MPEP 2111.04 states “II. CONTINGENT LIMITATIONS The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met. For example, assume a method claim requires step A if a first condition happens and step B if a second condition happens. If the claimed invention may be practiced without either the first or second condition happening, then neither step A or B is required by the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim. If the claimed invention requires the first condition to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires step A. If the claimed invention requires both the first and second conditions to occur, then the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim requires both steps A and B. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system (or apparatus or product) claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur. The system claim interpretation differs from a method claim interpretation because the claimed structure must be present in the system regardless of whether the condition is met and the function is actually performed. See Ex parte Schulhauser, Appeal 2013-007847 (PTAB April 28, 2016) (precedential) for an analysis of contingent claim limitations in the context of both method claims and system claims. In Schulhauser, both method claims and system claims recited the same contingent step. When analyzing the claimed method as a whole, the PTAB determined that giving the claim its broadest reasonable interpretation, “[i]f the condition for performing a contingent step is not satisfied, the performance recited by the step need not be carried out in order for the claimed method to be performed” (quotation omitted). Schulhauser at 10. When analyzing the claimed system as a whole, the PTAB determined that “[t]he broadest reasonable interpretation of a system claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, still requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur.” Schulhauser at 14. Therefore "[t]he Examiner did not need to present evidence of the obviousness of the [ ] method steps of claim 1 that are not required to be performed under a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim (e.g., instances in which the electrocardiac signal data is not within the threshold electrocardiac criteria such that the condition precedent for the determining step and the remaining steps of claim 1 has not been met);" however to render the claimed system obvious, the prior art must teach the structure that performs the function of the contingent step along with the other recited claim limitations. Schulhauser at 9, 14. See also MPEP § 2143.03.” Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the method claims 11, 15, 21-23, 25-26, and 33 would be without the steps with contingent limitations because the condition of “the HVAC system is in an economiser mode”, “the motorised variable damper of the diffuser unit serving the at least one zone is fully open”, “the target factored diffuser pressure is equal to the actual pressure and the target factored diffuser temperature differential is greater than or equal to the actual temperature differential”, “the target factored diffuser temperature differential is equal to the actual temperature differential and the target factored diffuser pressure is greater than or equal to the actual pressure”, “the target factored diffuser pressure is greater than the actual pressure”, “the target factored diffuser temperature differential is greater than the actual temperature differential and the target factored diffuser temperature differential divided by the actual temperature differential is equal to the square root of the actual pressure divided by the square root of the target factored diffuser pressure” are not required by the claims.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “an HVAC system” on line 1 should be “a Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) system”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “VAV diffuser” on line 3 should be “Variable Air Volume (VAV) diffuser”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 1, 14-15, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: “motorised” in various places of claims 1, 14-15 and 17 should be “motorized”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 23, 25 and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities: “realising” in various places of claims 23, 25 and 26 should be “realizing”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 11 and 33-37 are objected to because of the following informalities: “economiser” in various places of claims 11 and 33-37should be “economizer”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 21-23 and 25-32 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 21 recites the limitation "the actual temperature differential" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the target factored diffuser temperature differential" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the actual pressure differential" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 22 recites the limitation "the target factored diffuser pressure differential" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "the target factored diffuser pressure differential" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "the actual pressure differential" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the target factored diffuser pressure differential" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the actual pressure differential" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 26-32, included in the statement of rejection but not specifically addressed in the body of the rejection have inherited the deficiency of their parent claim and have not resolved the deficiencies. Therefore, they are rejected based on the same rationale as applied to their parent claim above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1, 14-15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US20200326082 to Osheroff et al. (hereinafter “Osheroff”).
As per claim 1, Osheroff discloses a method of controlling an HVAC system (Osheroff, see [0012] “a method for operating an HVAC system”), the HVAC system comprising an air handling unit to produce a supply airflow (Osheroff, see Fig. 2 element 14 and [0028] “fan coil unit”), the air handling unit being connected via a ducting system to a plurality of VAV diffuser units (Osheroff, see Fig. 2 for elements, 14, 103, 104, Fig. 3 element 104, for the fan coil unit connected via ducting 103 to plurality of 10 [0028] and [0031]), each VAV diffuser unit influencing air temperature in a corresponding zone by delivering supply air to the zone (Osheroff, see [0031]), wherein
the air handling unit comprises at least one supply air fan or motorised supply air damper (Osheroff, see Fig. 3 element 14A and [0033]); and
each diffuser unit comprises a diffuser (Osheroff, see Fig. 3 element 104A), a motorised variable damper to alter a diffuser airflow rate of a diffuser airflow delivered by the corresponding diffuser unit into the corresponding zone (Osheroff, see Fig. 4 element 122, [0031] and [0039]-[0041], and a diffuser pressure sensor for determining a pressure of the diffuser airflow (Osheroff, see Fig. 4 element 130 and [0040]); wherein
the HVAC system further comprises a plurality of zone temperature sensors (Osheroff, see Fig. 2 elements 108 and [0031] “thermostat 108 can be used to monitor the current temperature in a zone 18);
the HVAC system further comprising at least one control unit connected to the supply air fan or motorised supply air damper, each diffuser unit motorised variable damper, each zone temperature sensor and each diffuser pressure sensor (Osheroff, see Fig. 2 element 110, Fig. 4 element 130, [0040]-[0041] and [0053] for the control unit/control circuit board connected to the supply air fan, each diffuser unit motorised variable damper, each zone temperature sensor and each diffuser pressure sensor);
the method comprising determining a target thermal capacity for a selected diffuser unit with reference to a target diffuser airflow rate and a target diffuser temperature differential and controlling the motorised variable damper of the selected diffuser unit with reference to the determined target thermal capacity for the selected diffuser unit (Osheroff, see [0042]-[0052] for operating the damper for a selected diffuser unit with reference to a target diffuser airflow velocity and until temperature reaches target temperature (i.e. difference between target temperature and current temperature can be interpreted as temperature differential)).
As per claim 14, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses the control unit further to alter or maintain a temperature of at least one zone (Osheroff, see [0053]-[0057]).
As per claim 15, the rejection of claim 14 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses the control unit controls the supply air pressure to alter or maintain a temperature when the damper of the diffuser unit serving the at least one zone is fully open (Osheroff, see [0053]-[0057], see “claim interpretation” section above for the BRI interpretation of claim 15).
As per claim 17, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses for the selected diffuser unit, adjusting the motorised variable damper to deliver an adjusted target factored damper airflow rate (Osheroff, see [0042]-[0052]).
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) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osheroff, in view of US20150019022 to Karamanos et al. (hereinafter “Karamanos”).
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses wherein the control unit further comprises a plurality of micro-controllers (Osheroff, see Fig. 2 for communication between element 102 and see Fig. 4 element 130 and [0040]-[0041] for elements 102 comprises a plurality of micro-controllers). Osheroff does not explicitly disclose plurality of controllers that communicate with one another. However, Karamanos in an analogous art discloses plurality of controllers that communicate with one another (Karamanos, see Fig. 8 and [0115]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Karamanos into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provides real-time turn down capabilities of a fluid moving device in operative communication with the damper assembly (Karamanos, see [0115]).
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses the plurality of micro-controller comprise micro-controllers provided on each of the diffuser units (Osheroff, see Fig. 3 and Fig. 4).
Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osheroff, in view of US5172565 to Wruck et al. (hereinafter “Wruck”).
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Osheroff does not explicitly disclose the air handling unit further comprises at least one heat exchanger, and the at least one control unit is connected to the at least one heat exchanger. However, Wruck in an analogous art discloses the air handling unit further comprises at least one heat exchanger, and the at least one control unit is connected to the at least one heat exchanger (Wruck, see Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Wruck into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide for energy saving (Wruck, see col. 5 lines 1-2).
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses for the selected diffuser unit:
determining a zone temperature setpoint (Osheroff, see [0051]);
determining a zone air temperature with a corresponding zone temperature sensor (Osheroff, see [0052]);
determining a diffuser unit control output in dependence on the zone temperature setpoint and the determined zone air temperature (Osheroff, see [0052]);
determining the target diffuser airflow rate in dependence on a diffuser design airflow rate and the diffuser unit control output for the selected diffuser unit (Osheroff, see [0042]-[0044] and [0052]).
Osheroff does not explicitly disclose determining a diffuser design temperature differential, determining the target diffuser air temperature differential in dependence on the diffuser design temperature differential and the diffuser unit control output for the selected diffuser unit; and determining the diffuser target diffuser airflow rate in dependence on the diffuser target temperature differential, or determining the diffuser target temperature differential in dependence on the diffuser target diffuser airflow rate.
However, Wruck in an analogous art discloses determining a diffuser design temperature differential, determining the target diffuser air temperature differential in dependence on the diffuser design temperature differential and the diffuser unit control output for the selected diffuser unit; and determining the diffuser target diffuser airflow rate in dependence on the diffuser target temperature differential, or determining the diffuser target temperature differential in dependence on the diffuser target diffuser airflow rate (Wruck, see col. 6 lines 23-66).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Wruck into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide for energy saving (Wruck, see col. 5 lines 1-2).
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated, Wruck further discloses the design temperature differential is determined in relation to a diffuser supply air temperature (Wruck, see col. 6 lines 23-66).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Wruck into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide for energy saving (Wruck, see col. 5 lines 1-2).
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated, Wruck further discloses the diffuser supply air temperature is determined by a sensor located remote from the selected diffuser unit (Wruck, see col. 7 lines 29-31).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Wruck into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide for energy saving (Wruck, see col. 5 lines 1-2).
Claim(s) 10-13, 18 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osheroff, in view of US20220011731 to Risbeck et al. (hereinafter “Risbeck”).
As per claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses a target factored diffuser airflow rate and a target factored diffuser temperature differential, the target factored diffuser airflow rate and the target factored diffuser temperature differential satisfies the predetermined target thermal capcity for the selected diffuser unit (Osheroff, see [0042]-[0052]. Osheroff does not explicitly disclose determining a plurality of sets of control variables, each set comprising variable that satisfies the predetermined target.
However, Risbeck in an analogous art discloses determining a plurality of sets of control variables, each set comprising variable that satisfies the predetermined target (Risbeck, see [0114]-[0120]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Risbeck into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maintain occupant comfort and provide sufficient disinfection for multiple environmental conditions while reducing expenses related to maintaining occupant comfort (Risbeck, see [0003]).
As per claim 11, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses wherein the HVAC system further comprises an economiser damper system for selectively mixing an air supply from outside the HVAC system with the supply air when the HVAC system is in an economiser mode, the method further comprising, when the HVAC system is in an economiser mode: each set of control variables satisfies the predetermined target thermal capacity for the selected diffuser unit additionally comprises a target factored economiser deadband; determining the target factored economiser deadband; and controlling the economiser damper system with reference to said target factored economiser deadband (Osheroff, see [0053]-[0057], see “claim interpretation” section above for the BRI interpretation of claim 11).
As per claim 12, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, Risbeck further discloses selecting one of said plurality of set of control variables according to one or more criteria (Risbeck, see [0114]-[0120]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Risbeck into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maintain occupant comfort and provide sufficient disinfection for multiple environmental conditions while reducing expenses related to maintaining occupant comfort (Risbeck, see [0003]).
As per claim 13, the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated, Risbeck further discloses the criteria include energy conservation (Risbeck, see [0114]-[0120]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Risbeck into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maintain occupant comfort and provide sufficient disinfection for multiple environmental conditions while reducing expenses related to maintaining occupant comfort (Risbeck, see [0003]).
As per claim 18, the rejection of claim 17 is incorporated Osherof further discloses determining control variables, a target factored diffuser airflow rate and a target factored diffuser temperature differential, satisfies the predetermined target thermal capacity for the selected diffuser unit; wherein the adjusted target factored damper airflow rate is determined with reference to an actual temperature differential relative to a target factored diffuser air temperature differential for the diffuser unit, and an actual pressure at the diffuser unit relative to a target factored diffuser pressure (Osheroff, see [0042]-[0052]).
Osheroff does not explicitly disclose determining a plurality of sets of control variables, each set satisfies the predetermined target. However, Risbeck in an analogous art discloses determining a plurality of sets of control variables, each set satisfies the predetermined target (Risbeck, see [0114]-[0120]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Risbeck into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maintain occupant comfort and provide sufficient disinfection for multiple environmental conditions while reducing expenses related to maintaining occupant comfort (Risbeck, see [0003]).
As per claim 33, the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses wherein the HVAC system further comprises an economiser damper system for selectively mixing an air supply from outside the HVAC system with the supply air when the HVAC system is in an economiser mode, and the method further comprises, when the HVAC system is in an economiser mode: each set of control variables satisfies the predetermined target thermal capacity for the selected diffuser unit additionally comprises a target factored economiser deadband; determining the target factored economiser deadband; and controlling the economiser damper system with reference to said target factored economiser deadband; and determining an economiser damper temperature setpoint with reference to a target economiser deadband for each diffuser unit (Osheroff, see [0053]-[0057], see “claim interpretation” section above for the BRI interpretation of claim 33).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osheroff, in view of Risbeck, further in view of “Integrated Damper and Pressure Reset for VAV Supply Air Fan Control” to Wei et al. (hereinafter “Wei”).
As per claim 19, the rejection of claim 18 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses for a selected diffuser unit with motorised variable damper, adjusting the target factored diffusser pressure as a function of the target factored diffuser airflow rate (Osheroff, see [0042]-[0052]).
The combination of Osheroff and Risbeck does not explicitly disclose for a diffuser unit with fully open damper, adjust the diffuser pressure. However, Wei in an analogous art discloses for a diffuser unit with fully open damper, adjust the diffuser pressure (Wei, see pages 310-311).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of Wei into the combination of Osheroff and Risbeck. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to provide building comfort with low fan power consumption (Wei, see page 310).
Claim(s) 20-23 and 25-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osheroff, in view of “High-Performance Sequences of Operation for HVAC system” to ASHRAE.
As per claim 20, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, Osheroff does not explicitly disclose for each diffuser unit, determining a diffuser temperature offset request and a diffuser pressure offset request. However, ASHRAE in an analogous art discloses for each diffuser unit, determining a diffuser temperature offset request and a diffuser pressure offset request (ASHRAE, see page 65 and pages 159-161).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 21, the rejection of claim 20 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses wherein, for each diffuser unit, the diffuser temperature offset request is determined by subtracting the actual temperature differential from the target factored diffuser temperature differential (ASHRAE, see pages 159-161).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 22, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses wherein the diffuser pressure offset request is determined by subtracting the actual pressure from the target factored diffuser pressure (ASHRAE, see pages 159-161).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 23, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses realising, for each diffuser unit, a diffuser pressure offset request of zero when the target factored diffuser pressure is equal to the actual pressure and the target factored diffuser temperature differential is greater than or equal to the actual temperature differential (ASHRAE, see pages 159-161, see “claim interpretation” section above for the BRI interpretation of claim 23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 25, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses realising, for each diffuser unit, a diffuser pressure offset request of zero when the target factored diffuser pressure is greater than the actual pressure and when the target factored diffuser pressure divided by the actual pressure is equal to the square of the actual temperature differential divided by the square of the target factored temperature differential (ASHRAE, see pages 159-161, see “claim interpretation” section above for the BRI interpretation of claim 25).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 26, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses realising a diffuser temperature offset request of zero when the target factored diffuser temperature differential is greater than the actual temperature differential and the target factored diffuser temperature differential divided by the actual temperature differential is equal to the square root of the actual pressure divided by the square root of the target factored diffuser pressure (ASHRAE, see pages 159-161, see “claim interpretation” section above for the BRI interpretation of claim 26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 27, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses ranking each diffuser temperature offset request in a temperature rank and ranking each diffuser pressure offset request in a pressure rank (ASHRAE, see pages 56-58).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 28, the rejection of claim 27 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses wherein the HVAC system further comprises an air supply controller with proportional-integral (PI), proportional-integral-derivative (PID) or nudge-and-wait control, and with the setpoint set to zero, and with the process value designated as the highest diffuser pressure offset request from the pressure rank (ASHRAE, see pages 59-61 and page 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 29, the rejection of claim 27 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses wherein the HVAC system further comprises a thermal capacity controller with proportional-integral (PI), proportional-integral-derivative (PID) or nudge-and-wait control, and with the setpoint set to zero, and where the direction of the thermal capacity control is set by a requirement for system cooling or system heating, with the former designating the process value to be the lowest diffuser temperature offset request from the temperature rank and the latter designating the process value to be the highest diffuser temperature offset request from the temperature rank (ASHRAE, see pages 59-61 and page 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 30, the rejection of claim 29 is incorporated, Osheroff further discloses wherein the requirement for system cooling or system heating is determined by a vote of the diffuser units (Osheroff, see [0054]-[0056]).
As per claim 31, the rejection of claim 27 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses wherein the HVAC system further comprises an air supply target from the air supply controller, wherein the air supply target determines a supply air pressure setpoint for the air handling unit in relation to an air handling unit supply air pressures sensor, or directly determines the fan speed of the at least one supply air fan (ASHRAE, see pages 59-61 and page 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 32, the rejection of claim 30 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses wherein the HVAC system further comprises a cooling or heating capacity target from the thermal capacity controller, wherein the cooling or heating capacity target determines a supply air temperature setpoint for the air handling unit in relation to an air handling unit supply air temperature sensor, or directly determines the cooling or heating output of the at least one heat exchange (ASHRAE, see pages 59-61 and page 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the method of Osheroff. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
Claim(s) 34-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osheroff, in view of Wruck, further in view of ASHRAE.
As per claim 34, the rejection of claim 7 is incorporated, the combination of Osheroff and Wruck does not explicitly disclose for each diffuser unit, subtracting the actual temperature from the economiser damper temperature setpoint to determine an economiser offset request. However, ASHRAE in an analogous art discloses for each diffuser unit, subtracting the actual temperature from the economiser damper temperature setpoint to determine an economiser offset request (ASHRAE, see page 65 and pages 159-161).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the combination of Osheroff and Wruck. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 35, the rejection of claim 34 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses ranking each diffuser unit economiser offset request in an economiser rank (ASHRAE, see pages 56-58).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the combination of Osheroff and Wruck. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 36, the rejection of claim 35 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses the HVAC system further comprises an economiser controller with proportional-integral (PI), proportional-integral-derivative (PID) or nudge-and-wait control, and with the setpoint set to zero, and with the process value designated as the lowest economiser offset request from the economiser rank (ASHRAE, see pages 59-61 and page 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the combination of Osheroff and Wruck. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
As per claim 37, the rejection of claim 36 is incorporated, ASHRAE further discloses an economiser target from the economiser controller, wherein the economiser target determines an economiser supply air temperature setpoint for the economiser damper system in relation to the air handling unit supply air temperature sensor, or directly determines an economiser damper system output to directly modulate the economiser damper system (ASHRAE, see pages 59-61 and page 75).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate teaching of ASHRAE into the combination of Osheroff and Wruck. The modification would be obvious because one of the ordinary skill in the art would want to maximize HVAC system energy efficiency and performance, provide control stability, and allow for real-time fault detection and diagnostics (ASHRAE, see page 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 9, Osheroff discloses a HVAC system is described having components of a variable refrigerant flow (VRF) outdoor compressor unit connected to an indoor fan coil unit. The indoor fan coil unit supplies air to ducts that condition a plurality of zones. Each zone has a volume modulating air damper that can maintain a predetermined volume of air flowing through it. As the dampers for some zones vary between open and close positions, the air pressure in the ducts changes. The volume modulating dampers compensate for these pressure changes, ensuring that only the predetermine volume of air is passing into the zones. By regulating the volume of into each zone, the volume modulating air dampers can restrict the air volume through the fan coil causing the outdoor unit to reduce compressor speed, thereby saving energy. Wruck discloses a system for controlling the operation of an HVAC system which includes a direct expansion coil, a condenser, a pre-cool coil, and a control system. The control system includes a controller and sensors. The controller receives signals indicative of air flow through the direct expansion coil from the sensors, compares the received signal to a stored air flow rate, and disables the compressor if the stored air flow rate is equal to or greater than the stored value. The controller is also adapted to vary air flow into an occupied space for small changes in the cooling load. In addition, the controller can artificially load the compressor during periods of small cooling load by restricting flow of a cooling agent between the cooling tower and the condenser, or by directing warm water from the condenser through the pre-coil coil. ASHRAE discloses determine the lowest possible VAV box airflow setpoint (other than zero) allowed by the controls (Vm) used in VAV box control sequences. The minimums shall be stored as software points. a. First, determine the velocity pressure sensor reading VPm in Pa (in. of water) that will give a reliable flow indication using product literature from the manufacturer of the VAV box controller. If this information is not available from the controller manufacturer, assume 1% of the velocity pressure sensor’s differential pressure range.
The combination of the cited prior arts does not describe:
the target thermal capacity is calculated according to the following formula:
C%D=D%SdTR⋆D%AR
where C%D is the target thermal capacity expressed as a percentage of maximum diffuser unit control output, D%SdTR is the target diffuser air temperature differential expressed as a percentage of the diffuser design temperature differential, and D%AR is the target diffuser airflow rate expressed as a percentage of the diffuser design airflow rate
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
US20190170375 discloses an indoor environmental control and air distribution system for a building includes: an air handling unit; a manifold connected to the air handling unit having a chamber formed by a plurality of walls and a plurality of orifices formed through at least one of the walls; air distribution conduits each independently having a first end connected to the orifices of the manifold and a second end extending out from the manifold into different zones throughout the building; and an airflow modulating device having one or more airflow regulating dampers independently configured to move into at least two positions in which each position provides a different percentage of total air volume to each air distribution conduit. A method of using the indoor environmental control and air distribution system is also included.
US20200218233 discloses a building system includes building equipment operable to consume one or more resources and a control system configured to generate, based on a prediction model, predictions of a load on the building equipment or a price of the one or more resources for a plurality of time steps in an optimization period, solve, based on the predictions, an optimization problem to generate control inputs for the equipment that minimize a predicted cost of consuming the resources over the optimization period, control the building equipment to operate in accordance with the control inputs, monitor an error metric that characterizes an error between the predictions and actual values of the at least one of the load on the building equipment or the price of the one or more resources during the optimization period, detect an occurrence of a trigger condition, and in response to detecting the trigger condition, update the prediction model.
US4838483 discloses variable opening of a pressure independent supply air valve for a building ventilation system is controlled in response to a standard airflow transducer whose output is modified to emulate a close tolerance transducer. In a calibration mode, a microcomputer based control closes the valve and a summing amplifier reduces the transducer output by an amount equal to a compensation signal provided by the microcomputer. Once the output is reduced to a predetermined desired level, the value of the compensation signal is stored in memory for later use during a run mode. In the run mode, the actual supply airflow rate is determined based upon the transducer output less the compensation signal. And the control adjusts the position of the valve until the actual airflow rate meets a desired airflow rate as determined by a room thermostat.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3175. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:30 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. PST.
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, Robert E. Fennema can be reached on (571)272-2748. 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.
/JASON LIN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights