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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: claim 12 recites “a cooling exchanger” which is interpreted to recite –a cooling heat exchanger--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 12 recites “the compression mechanism comprising at least one electric motor driving the rotation of a shaft bearing at least one compressor impeller” which is interpreted to recite – the compression mechanism comprising at least one electric motor driving the rotation of a shaft bearing of at least one compressor impeller --. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a heating mechanism for warming the working fluid” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 12-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 12, “a heating mechanism for warming the working fluid”. The term “mechanism” invokes a claim interpretation governed under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph), which requires a review of the specification to determine the appropriate structure, material or act to carry out the claimed limitation. However, the specification as originally filed, fails to describe a corresponding structure or technique by which a heating mechanism warms the working fluid. A mere restatement of the function does not suffice as a statement of structure. Thus, it does not appear that applicant had possession of the claimed invention because the specification does not disclose a structure which is capable of warming the working fluid. When a description of the structure, material or act is not provided or is not sufficient to perform the entire claimed function, or no association between the structure and the claimed function can be found in the specification, the written description fails to clearly define the boundaries of the claim.
Claims 13-22 are rejected based on dependency from a rejected claim.
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 12-22 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 limitation “a heating mechanism for warming the working fluid” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
The specification fails discloses the corresponding structure that achieves the claimed
function in sufficient detail that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the
inventor possessed the claim subject matter at the time of filing. 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.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim 16 recite “wherein the electronic controller is configured to calculate the value for the rotational speed of the motor as a function of the demand for cold power using a formula obtained as a regression function of the actual measurements of the performance of the device”. However, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claim are. It is unclear to the Examiner what is the formula as a regression function utilized by the controller to determine the value for the rotational speed of the motor. Clarity is advised.
Claim 17 recite “wherein the regression function is a polynomial function, of degree greater than or equal to two, of the cold power, said formula, and notably the coefficients of the polynomial function, being calculated from actual measurements of the performance of the device”. However, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claim are. It is unclear to the Examiner what is the regression function as a polynomial function of the cold power which is calculated from the measurements of the device. Clarity is advised.
Claim 18 recite the phrase “and/or” which renders the claim indefinite. This language is indefinite because it is not clear what is being claimed and what the scope is. No person of the ordinary skill in the art would know what “and/or” means with reasonable certainty. Therefore, the scope is unclear and for purposes of examination, the limitations that follow “and/or” will be considered in the alternative.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 12-15 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al (CN 112484330 A, hereinafter Sun) in view of Fujimoto et al (EP 2251622 B1, hereinafter Fujimoto) and Werlen et al (CN 110792922 A, hereinafter Werlen).
Regarding claim 12, Sun teaches a refrigeration device refrigerating to a low temperature (Brayton refrigeration cycle low temperature box, paragraph 0001) that is between minus 100 degrees centigrade and minus 273 degrees centigrade (less than -80 degrees centigrade, paragraph 0001), the refrigeration device comprising: a working circuit (as shown on figure 1) forming a loop (as shown on figure 1) and containing a working fluid (nitrogen as refrigeration working medium, abstract), the working circuit forming a cycle comprising, in series: a compression mechanism (turbine compressor 5) for compressing the working fluid (turbine compressor 5 for the low temperature and low pressure of nitrogen is compressed into high temperature and high pressure of nitrogen, paragraph 0007), the compression mechanism (turbine compressor 5) comprising at least one electric motor (motor 3) driving the rotation of a shaft bearing at least one compressor impeller (the power shaft of the high speed motor is connected with the shaft of the turbine compressor and drives the turbine compressor, paragraph 0003) at a rotational speed that is controlled between a minimum speed and a maximum design speed (a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the compressor rotational speed being controlled between a minimum and maximum for operation purposes at minimum and not to exceed maximum speed to prevent damage to the compressor), which is determined by the characteristics of the motor a cooling mechanism for cooling the working fluid (the nitrogen passes through the inlet of the expander through the third high temperature pipeline to drive the power shaft of the high speed motor to rotate on the impeller, so as to reduce the power of the high speed motor, which is good for nitrogen expansion cooling, paragraph 0005), an expansion mechanism (expander 2) for expanding the working fluid (outlet of the expander 2 is connected with the first low temperature pipeline 1, paragraph 0012).
Sun teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach a heating mechanism for warming the working fluid, a cooling exchanger intended to extract heat from at least one member by supplying it a determined refrigeration power through exchange of heat with the working fluid circulating in the working circuit after the working fluid has been expanded in the expansion mechanism.
However, Fujimoto teaches a heating mechanism for warming the working fluid (usage-side heat exchanger 6 is a heat exchanger that functions as a heater of refrigerant, paragraph 0032), a cooling exchanger (intercooler 7) intended to extract heat from at least one member (the intercooler which functions as a cooler of the refrigerant discharged from the first-stage compression element and drawn into the second-stage compression element thereby lowering the temperature of the refrigerant, paragraph 0007) by supplying it a determined refrigeration power (thereby putting the intercooler 7 into a state of functioning as a cooler, paragraph 0039) through exchange of heat with the working fluid circulating in the working circuit (intermediate-pressure refrigerant discharged from the first-stage compression element 2c is cooled in the intercooler 7 by undergoing heat exchange with the air as a cooling source, paragraph 0040) after the working fluid has been expanded in the expansion mechanism (the opening degree of the expansion mechanism 5 is adjusted during the air-cooling operation, hereby putting the intercooler 7 into a state of functioning as a cooler, paragraph 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device in the teachings of Sun to include a heating mechanism for warming the working fluid, a cooling exchanger intended to extract heat from at least one member by supplying it a determined refrigeration power through exchange of heat with the working fluid circulating in the working circuit after the working fluid has been expanded in the expansion mechanism in view of the teachings of Fujimoto in order to yield the predictable result of operating efficiency to be improved.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the refrigeration device has a variable refrigeration power that is controlled by regulating the rotational speed of the motor, an electronic controller configured to control the refrigeration power supplied by the refrigeration device by controlling the rotational speed of the motor, the electronic controller being configured to receive a demand signal demanding the determined cold power to be delivered and, in response, to control the rotational speed of the motor in order to meet said cold-power demand, wherein the electronic controller is configured to limit the maximum operating speed of the motor to a value less than or equal to the maximum design speed and in that, in nominal operation, which is to say when the device is supplying the determined cold power, the electronic controller is configured to set the maximum operating speed of the motor to the rotational speed that supplies the determined cold power and to regulate the rotational speed of the motor as a function of the demand for cold power without exceeding said maximum operating speed.
However, Werlen teaches wherein the refrigeration device (device 1) has a variable refrigeration power (controller 21 is preferably connected to the expansion valve 10 and is configured to the opening degree of the expansion valve 10 control to control the cooling power generated by the refrigeration system, paragraph 0017) that is controlled by regulating the rotational speed of the motor (therefore, via the bypass valve 15 and to control the speed of the compressor 8 to control the evaporation pressure, paragraph 0018), an electronic controller (controller 21) configured to control the refrigeration power supplied by the refrigeration device by controlling the rotational speed of the motor (the compressor 8 is at a minimum speed (or stopped) and completely opening the bypass valve 15, it can realize zero refrigerant flow by heat exchanger 7.When the bypass valve 15 is closed and the compressor 8 is at its maximum speed, obtained by maximum refrigerant flow of the heat exchanger 7, paragraph 0019), the electronic controller (controller 21) being configured to receive a demand signal demanding the determined cold power to be delivered (cooling power requirement signal 24 will cause the electronic controller 21 on the compressor 8 and bypass valve 10 to match demand, paragraph 0026) and, in response, to control the rotational speed of the motor in order to meet said cold-power demand (as the cooling requirements increase, first bypass valve 15 can be closed, then the speed of the compressor 8 can be increased according to need, paragraph 0024), wherein the electronic controller (controller 21) is configured to limit the maximum operating speed of the motor to a value less than or equal to the maximum design speed (a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that if a motor exceeded its maximum design speed, it would cause damage to the motor rendering the motor inoperable, therefore it is interpreted that the motor would operate at its highest efficiency if it is controlled at a speed less than or equal to its maximum designed speed) and in that, in nominal operation, which is to say when the device is supplying the determined cold power (cooling power requirement signal 24 will cause the electronic controller 21 on the compressor 8 and bypass valve 10 to match demand, paragraph 0026), the electronic controller (controller 21) is configured to set the maximum operating speed of the motor to the rotational speed that supplies the determined cold power (as the cooling requirements increase, first bypass valve 15 can be closed, then the speed of the compressor 8 can be increased according to need, paragraph 0024) and to regulate the rotational speed of the motor as a function of the demand for cold power without exceeding said maximum operating speed (a person of ordinary skill in the art would determine that by providing the demand for cold power, the motor would not run past its maximum operating speed as it would render the motor inoperable).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device in the combined teachings to include wherein the refrigeration device has a variable refrigeration power that is controlled by regulating the rotational speed of the motor, an electronic controller configured to control the refrigeration power supplied by the refrigeration device by controlling the rotational speed of the motor, the electronic controller being configured to receive a demand signal demanding the determined cold power to be delivered and, in response, to control the rotational speed of the motor in order to meet said cold-power demand, wherein the electronic controller is configured to limit the maximum operating speed of the motor to a value less than or equal to the maximum design speed and in that, in nominal operation, which is to say when the device is supplying the determined cold power, the electronic controller is configured to set the maximum operating speed of the motor to the rotational speed that supplies the determined cold power and to regulate the rotational speed of the motor as a function of the demand for cold power without exceeding said maximum operating speed in view of the teachings of Werlen in order to yield the predictable result of controlling the compressor speed to reach a predetermined temperature set point.
Further, it is understood, claim 12 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…intended to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach wherein the electronic controller (controller 21 of Werlen) is a speed controller comprising a microprocessor or a computer (electronic controller 21 can comprises for storage, processing, receiving or transmitting data. For example, it comprises a microprocessor or a calculator or a computer, paragraph 0017 of Werlen).
Regarding claim 14, the combined teachings teach further comprising at least one temperature sensor (temperature sensor 18 of Werlen) sensing the temperature of the working fluid in the working circuit (for sensing in the evaporation section 11 upstream of the heat exchanger 7, in particular the temperature of the refrigerant at the inlet of the heat exchanger 7, paragraph 0018 of Werlen), for example at an inlet or at an outlet of the expansion mechanism (as shown on figure 4 of Werlen), the electronic controller (electronic controller 21 of Werlen) being configured to receive the measurement from the at least one temperature sensor (electronic controller 21 may be configured to control the cooling power generated according to the temperature difference, For example, based on the outlet and the inlet of the heat exchanger 7 of the temperature sensors 17, 18 to calculate temperature difference, paragraph 0021 of Werlen).
Regarding claim 15, the combined teachings teach wherein the electronic controller (controller 21 of Werlen) is configured to control the rotational speed of the motor (compressor can be controlled by controlling a speed of entering the bypass pipeline 8 flow rate and compressor of the hot gas 13, to control the suction pressure of the compressor 8, paragraph 0019 of Werlen) in order to achieve a target temperature value at the at least one temperature sensor (to compensate for pressure loss, can be used at the inlet of the heat exchanger 7 the temperature of the measured value 18 to reduce the suction pressure control, paragraph 0018 of Werlen).
Regarding claim 20, the combined teachings teach wherein the cooling exchanger (intercooler 7 of Fujimoto) intended to extract heat from at least one member (the intercooler which functions as a cooler of the refrigerant discharged from the first-stage compression element and drawn into the second-stage compression element thereby lowering the temperature of the refrigerant, paragraph 0007 of Fujimoto) comprises a fluid circulation passage (intermediate refrigerant tube 8 of Fujimoto) for cooling a member consisting of a stream of fluid (thereby lowering the temperature of the refrigerant, paragraph 0007 of Fujimoto).
Further, it is understood, claim 20 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…intended to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Regarding claims 21-22, it is noted that although the preamble of claims 21-22 is directed towards a method, the structure of the combined teachings discloses all the structure being provided in the method steps, thus the method is also rendered obvious by the combined teachings. If a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated or rendered obvious by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently or obviously perform the claimed process. Thus, the method, as claimed, would necessarily result from the normal operation of the apparatus. See MPEP 2112.02.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun as modified by Fujimoto and Werlen as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Li et al (CN 111637598 A, hereinafter Li).
Regarding claim 16, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the electronic controller is configured to calculate the value for the rotational speed of the motor as a function of the demand for cold power using a formula obtained as a regression function of the actual measurements of the performance of the device.
However, Li teaches wherein the electronic controller (controller, abstract) is configured to calculate the value for the rotational speed of the motor (controlling the air conditioner compressor start or stop or compressor rotating speed change, abstract) as a function of the demand for cold power (for the air conditioner to accurately control the indoor temperature, abstract) using a formula (combining human heat comfort formula, abstract) obtained as a regression function of the actual measurements of the performance of the device (measuring the temperature data by using the temperature measuring remote controller, automatically correcting the original indoor environment temperature measuring value of the air conditioner in the room field, abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device in the combined teachings to include wherein the electronic controller is configured to calculate the value for the rotational speed of the motor as a function of the demand for cold power using a formula obtained as a regression function of the actual measurements of the performance of the device in view of the teachings of Li in order to yield the predictable result of conveniently controlling the air conditioner according to the indoor temperature
Regarding claim 17, the combined teachings teach wherein the regression function (measuring the temperature data by using the temperature measuring remote controller, automatically correcting the original indoor environment temperature measuring value of the air conditioner in the room field, abstract of Li) is a polynomial function, of degree greater than or equal to two, of the cold power, said formula, and notably the coefficients of the polynomial function, being calculated from actual measurements of the performance of the device (in view of indefiniteness, it is interpreted that upon correcting the indoor temperature environment, by greater than 2 degrees, the air conditioner is conveniently controlled according to the indoor temperature).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun as modified by Fujimoto and Werlen as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Bardon et al (US 20200132366 A1, hereinafter Bardon)
Regarding claim 18, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the compression mechanism comprises one or more compressor impellers arranged, where applicable, in series or in parallel in the working circuit and forming one or more compression stages for the working fluid, the compressor impeller or impellers being driven in rotation by one or more motors, the expansion mechanism comprising one or more turbines positioned, where applicable, in series or in parallel in the working circuit and forming one or more expansion stages for the working fluid, at least one of the turbines being mounted on the same shaft of a motor driving the rotation of at least one compressor impeller.
However, Bardon teaches wherein the compression mechanism (compression assemblies 110) comprises one or more compressor impellers (compressors 118a-d, paragraph 0024, further it is interpreted that compressors includes impellers) arranged, where applicable, in series or in parallel (as shown on figure 1) in the working circuit (as shown on figure 1) and forming one or more compression stages for the working fluid (as shown on figure 1), the compressor impeller or impellers (it is interpreted that compressors includes impellers) being driven in rotation by one or more motors (driver 120a-d, paragraph 0025), the expansion mechanism comprising one or more turbines positioned (each compressor driven by a respective turbine, abstract), where applicable, in series or in parallel (as shown on figure 1) in the working circuit (as shown on figure 1) and forming one or more expansion stages for the working fluid (as shown on figure 1), at least one of the turbines being mounted on the same shaft of a motor driving the rotation of at least one compressor impeller (abstract and as shown on figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device in the combined teachings to include wherein the compression mechanism comprises one or more compressor impellers arranged, where applicable, in series or in parallel in the working circuit and forming one or more compression stages for the working fluid, the compressor impeller or impellers being driven in rotation by one or more motors, the expansion mechanism comprising one or more turbines positioned, where applicable, in series or in parallel in the working circuit and forming one or more expansion stages for the working fluid, at least one of the turbines being mounted on the same shaft of a motor driving the rotation of at least one compressor impeller in view of the teachings of Bardon in order to yield the predictable result of providing a plurality of compressors configured to compress the process fluid.
Regarding claim 19, the combined teachings teach further comprising several motors (driver 120a-d, paragraph 0025 of Bardon), the electronic controller being configured to control the rotational speed of all or some (at least one compressor driven by a variable or fixed speed motor, abstract of Bardon) of the motors in order to meet said demand for cold power (as described in paragraph 0006 of Bardon).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARIO DELEON whose telephone number is (571)272-8687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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 Daryl 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.
/DARIO ANTONIO DELEON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763