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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 38-39 and 45-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 4043315 A (hereinafter “COOPER”).
PNG
media_image1.png
1344
2299
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 38-39 and 45-46, COOPER discloses an absorber unit for a solar collector or a solar system, comprising: at least one heating element (10) configured to guide a heat transfer medium (see Col. 4, Lns. 11-12: “Naturally, an aqueous heat transfer fluid may be employed, or ethyleneglycol or pressurized water.”); a translucent enclosure (19) enclosing at least one of the at least one heating elements; and a holder for the enclosure, the holder comprising a tube-in-tube system with an inner tube (indicated in annotated Fig. 4 above) and an outer tube (indicated in annotated Fig. 4 above); wherein the enclosure (19) is fastened to the outer tube (the enclosure and the outer tube are integrally formed and are therefore deemed fastened to each other); and wherein at least one of a supply line (18) and a return line (21) for the heat transfer medium is guided in the inner tube; wherein the enclosure is formed by a glass dome (see Col. 3, Ln. 35: “A transparent, spherical outer shell 19” and Col. 3, Lns. 33-34: “The outer shell may be constructed of any suitable material, such as a rigid plastic.” Glass is a suitable material); wherein the heating element (10) is formed by a heat exchanger or comprises the heat exchanger; wherein the heating element (10) is formed by or comprises a continuous-flow heater with tubular coils (15).
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 40 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COOPER.
Regarding Claims 40 and 44, COOPER further discloses wherein: an annular gap (see Fig. 4) is formed between the inner tube (indicated in annotated Fig. 4 above) and the outer tube (indicated in annotated Fig. 4 above), the annular gap opening into a receiving volume of the enclosure (19); wherein the inner tube (indicated in annotated Fig. 4 above) projects beyond the outer tube (indicated in annotated Fig. 4 above) with an end facing the receiving volume (see Fig. 4).
COOPER does not explicitly disclose the inner tube is closed at an end facing the receiving volume.
Nonetheless, COOPER discloses at Col. 4, Lns. 22-24: “Also, insulating means may be provided where appropriate, as around the inlet and outlet headers.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify COOPER wherein the inner tube is closed at an end facing the receiving volume, since providing insulation which fills the inner tube and surrounds the inlet and outlet headers passing therethrough, in order to maximize the insulation effect, would close the inner tube at an end facing the receiving volume.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COOPER in view of WO 2016/119916 A1 (hereinafter “GRIMM”).
Regarding Claim 42, COOPER does not disclose wherein the annular gap is closed at an end of the holder facing away from the receiving volume.
PNG
media_image2.png
1076
1242
media_image2.png
Greyscale
GRIMM teaches a similar absorber unit wherein an annular gap (i.e., the gap between the inner and outer tube indicated in annotated Figs. 19 and 21 above) is closed (see at least insulation 27; see also housing 270 which closes an end of the annular gap of a tube-in-tube holder) at an end of a holder (i.e., the tube-in-tube structure seen in Fig. 19) facing away from a receiving volume (V).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify COOPER wherein the annular gap is closed at an end of the holder facing away from the receiving volume as taught and/or suggested by GRIMM, since providing insulation which fills the gap between said inner tube and said outer tube, in order to maximize the insulation effect, would close an end of the holder facing away from the receiving volume.
Claim 58 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over COOPER in view of US 2018/0340636 A1 (hereinafter “MUELLER”).
Regarding Claim 58, COOPER does not disclose wherein a line outlet of the flow line and/or the return line has threads for fastening one or more sliding sleeves in order to sealingly connect at least one of the flow line and the return line to an internal piping of a support arm of the solar collector or the solar system.
MUELLER teaches a tube coupling wherein a line outlet of the flow line (see 12) and/or the return line has threads (16) for fastening one or more sliding sleeves (40) in order to sealingly connect at least one of the flow line and the return line to an internal piping (22) of a support arm of the solar collector or the solar system (capable of use with internal piping of a support arm of a solar collector or a solar system).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify COOPER wherein a line outlet of the flow line and/or the return line has threads for fastening one or more sliding sleeves in order to sealingly connect at least one of the flow line and the return line to an internal piping of a support arm of the solar collector or the solar system as taught and/or suggested by MUELLER, since such a modification would provide an effective fluid seal between said line outlet of the flow line and/or the return line and internal piping of a support arm of the solar collector or the solar system thereby preventing the occurrence of leaks.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 41 and 57 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure because the references are either in the same field of endeavor or are reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the applicant was concerned. Please see form PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited) attached to, or included with, this Office Action.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE A PEREIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-3932 and whose fax number is (571) 270-4932. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 - 5:00 EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner' s supervisor, Steven B. McAllister can be reached at (571) 272-6785. 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.
/JORGE A PEREIRO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799