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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/16/2025 and 02/04/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation Under 35 USC §112
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.
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 fixing device” in claims 4 and 8-9.
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.
Claim limitation “a fixing device” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C.112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “device” coupled with functional language “fixing” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function.
Since the claim limitation(s) invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim(s) 4 and 8-9 has/have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
A fixing device treated as meaning a holder. See paragraph 32 of publication.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-2, 6 and 13 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over TADANO et al. (JP2003106276A, see attached translation) in
view of NAKAMOTO et al. (JP2006017024A, see attached translation).
In regards to claim 1, TADANO discloses a rotary compressor (rotary compressor 10; Figs. 1 and 2) comprising: a sealed container (a cylindrical sealed container 12) including a center line (implicit) extending in an up-down direction (Figs. 1 and 2); an electric motor unit (a drive motor 14 serving as an electric element) provided within the sealed container (12); a crankshaft (a crankshaft 14) including a low-pressure side eccentric portion (upper eccentric portions 46) and a high-pressure side eccentric portion (lower eccentric portions 48), and configured to be rotationally driven by the electric motor unit (refer to page 11), the low-pressure side eccentric portion (46) being eccentric from a rotation center line (rotate eccentrically; page. 10), the high-pressure side eccentric portion (48) being provided below the low-pressure side eccentric portion (46) and being eccentric from the rotation center line (rotate eccentrically; page. 10); a compression mechanism unit (rotary compression mechanism 18) including a low-pressure side cylinder (upper cylinder 42) and a high-pressure side cylinder (lower cylinder 44), the low-pressure side cylinder (42) having a low-pressure side compression chamber (low pressure chamber 38a) configure to compress introduced low-pressure refrigerant gas to medium pressure and discharge the compressed refrigerant gas by power of the low-pressure side eccentric portion (refer to page 10), the high-pressure side cylinder (44) including a high-pressure side compression chamber (compression chamber 38b) configure to compress introduced medium-pressure refrigerant gas (intermediate pressure refrigerant gas) by power of the high-pressure side eccentric portion (48); an upstream intermediate pipe (refrigerant piping 100) configured to guide the medium-pressure refrigerant gas, discharged from the low-pressure side compression chamber (38a), to an outside of the sealed container (12); a muffler (suction muffler 106) connected to the upstream intermediate pipe (100); and
a downstream intermediate pipe (refrigerant pipe 102) configured to guide the medium-pressure refrigerant gas, discharged from the muffler (106), to the high-pressure side compression chamber (38b) inside the sealed container (12).
TADANO fails to explicitly teach wherein relationship between outlet area S1 of the upstream intermediate pipe and flow path cross-sectional area S2 of the muffler is 0.01 ≤ (S1 ÷ S2) ≤ 0.04.
NAKAMOTO teaches a compressor wherein the relationship between an outlet surface area S1 (cross sectional area) of the upstream the intermediate pipe (suction pipe 22a) and the flow path cross sectional area S2 (cross sectional area) of the muffler (suction muffler 4) is 0.01 ≤ (S1 ÷ S2) ≤ 0.04 (the cross-sectional area of upstream suction pipe 22a is 3% to 10% of the cross-sectional area of the suction muffler 4; par. 17).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary compressor of TADANO such that relationship between outlet area S1 of the upstream intermediate pipe and flow path cross-sectional area S2 of the muffler is 0.01 ≤ (S1 ÷ S2) ≤ 0.04 as taught by NAKAMOTO in order to reduces the noise generated during pump operation while minimizing the decrease in flow rate caused by suction loss due to a reduction in flow area in the suction pipe (refer to par. 17 of NAKAMOTO).
In regards to claim 2, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1. Further, TADANO teaches wherein the muffler (106) is provided next to the sealed container (12) and has an elongated shape with a center line extending in the up-down direction (as can be seen in Fig. 1), and a top portion of the muffler (106) is lower than a top portion of the sealed container (as can be seen in Fig. 1).
In regards to claim 6, TADANO teaches a refrigeration cycle apparatus (a vapor compression refrigeration cycle; page 9) comprising: the rotary compressor (10) according to claim 1; a heat radiator (condenser; page 8); an expansion device (an expansion valve; page 9); a heat absorber (evaporator; page 9); and a refrigerant pipe (the refrigerant piping 98, the connecting pipe 90; page 9) that connects the rotary compressor (10), the heat radiator, the expansion device, and the heat absorber, and configured to allow refrigerant to circulate (page 10).
In regards to claim 13, TADANO teaches a refrigeration cycle apparatus (a vapor compression refrigeration cycle; page 9) comprising: the rotary compressor (10) according to claim 2; a heat radiator (condenser; page 8); an expansion device (an expansion valve; page 9); a heat absorber (evaporator; page 9); and a refrigerant pipe (the refrigerant piping 98, the connecting pipe 90; page 9) that connects the rotary compressor (10), the heat radiator, the expansion device, and the heat absorber, and configured to allow refrigerant to circulate (page 10).
Claims 3, 7 and 14 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TADANO et al. (JP2003106276A) in view of NAKAMOTO et al. (JP2006017024A), further in view of SATA (JP 2010065562 A, see attached translation).
In regards to claim 3, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein a length of the muffler in the up-down direction is 1.5 times or more an inner diameter of the muffler.
SATA does however teach shorten the flow path distance between the muffler (21, 22, 23) and the compression mechanism (16, 17) corresponding to the muffler (par. 13) significantly reduces the pressure pulsation therebetween (par. 13). Therefore, the distance from the bottom of the muffler towards the top of the muffler and the diameter of the muffler is recognized as result-effective variables, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result. In this case, the recognized result is the reduction in the pressure pulsation (par. 13). Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim, i.e. the muffler extending from the bottom of the muffler and positioned and dimensioned relative to the diameter of the muffler and design factors involved, were disclosed in the prior art by SATA, it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range or value by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify TADANO, by setting a length of the muffler in the up-down direction to be 1.5 times or more an inner diameter of the muffler.
In regards to claim 7, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2, but fails to explicitly teach wherein a length of the muffler in the up-down direction is 1.5 times or more an inner diameter of the muffler.
SATA does however teach shorten the flow path distance between the muffler (21, 22, 23) and the compression mechanism (16, 17) corresponding to the muffler (par. 13) significantly reduces the pressure pulsation therebetween (par. 13). Therefore, the distance from the bottom of the muffler towards the top of the muffler and the diameter of the muffler is recognized as result-effective variables, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result. In this case, the recognized result is the reduction in the pressure pulsation (par. 13). Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim, i.e. the muffler extending from the bottom of the muffler and positioned and dimensioned relative to the diameter of the muffler and design factors involved, were disclosed in the prior art by SATA, it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range or value by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify TADANO, by setting a length of the muffler in the up-down direction to be 1.5 times or more an inner diameter of the muffler.
In regards to claim 14, TADANO teaches a refrigeration cycle apparatus (a vapor compression refrigeration cycle; page 9) comprising: the rotary compressor (10) according to claim 3; a heat radiator (condenser; page 8); an expansion device (an expansion valve; page 9); a heat absorber (evaporator; page 9); and a refrigerant pipe (the refrigerant piping 98, the connecting pipe 90; page 9) that connects the rotary compressor (10), the heat radiator, the expansion device, and the heat absorber, and configured to allow refrigerant to circulate (page 10).
Claims 4-5, 8, 10, 12 and 15 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over TADANO et al. (JP2003106276A) in view of NAKAMOTO et al.
(JP2006017024A), further in view of SAITO et al. (JP2003166472A, see attached
translation).
In regards to claim 4, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach further comprising a fixing device configured to fix the muffler to the sealed container.
SAITO teaches rotary compressor (10; Fig. 2) wherein further comprising a fixing device (bracket 172) configured to fix the muffler (171) to the sealed container (12).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary compressor of TADANO such that further comprising a fixing device configured to fix the muffler to the sealed container as taught by SAITO in order to attach the muffler to the sealed container (refer to par. 44 of SAITO).
In regards to claim 5, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach the limitation of claim 5. SAITO teaches further comprising: an accumulator (204); and an outlet pipe (introduction pipe 92) configured to guide the low-pressure refrigerant gas from the accumulator (204) to the low-pressure side compression chamber inside the sealed container (container 12), wherein the muffler (171) is tangent to or accommodated inside an imaginary circle, the imaginary circle being centered on the center line of the sealed container (12), encompassing the accumulator (204), and being circumscribed to the accumulator (204).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary compressor of TADANO such that further comprising: an accumulator; and an outlet pipe configured to guide the low-pressure refrigerant gas from the accumulator to the low-pressure side compression chamber inside the sealed container, wherein the muffler is tangent to or accommodated inside an imaginary circle, the imaginary circle being centered on the center line of the sealed container, encompassing the accumulator, and being circumscribed to the accumulator as taught by SAITO in order to separate the sucked refrigerant into gas and liquid (refer to par. 46 of SAITO).
In regards to claim 8, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2, but fails to explicitly teach further comprising a fixing device configured to fix the muffler to the sealed container.
SAITO teaches rotary compressor (10; Fig. 2) wherein further comprising a fixing device (bracket 172) configured to fix the muffler (171) to the sealed container (12).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary compressor of TADANO such that further comprising a fixing device configured to fix the muffler to the sealed container as taught by SAITO in order to attach the muffler to the sealed container (refer to par. 44 of SAITO).
In regards to claim 10, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 2, but fails to explicitly teach the limitation of claim 10. SAITO teaches further comprising: an accumulator (204); and an outlet pipe (introduction pipe 92) configured to guide the low-pressure refrigerant gas from the accumulator (204) to the low-pressure side compression chamber inside the sealed container (container 12), wherein the muffler (171) is tangent to or accommodated inside an imaginary circle, the imaginary circle being centered on the center line of the sealed container (12), encompassing the accumulator (204), and being circumscribed to the accumulator (204).
In regards to claim 12, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 4, but fails to explicitly teach the limitation of claim 12. SAITO teaches further comprising: an accumulator (204); and an outlet pipe (introduction pipe 92) configured to guide the low-pressure refrigerant gas from the accumulator (204) to the low-pressure side compression chamber inside the sealed container (container 12), wherein the muffler (171) is tangent to or accommodated inside an imaginary circle, the imaginary circle being centered on the center line of the sealed container (12), encompassing the accumulator (204), and being circumscribed to the accumulator (204).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary compressor of TADANO such that further comprising: an accumulator; and an outlet pipe configured to guide the low-pressure refrigerant gas from the accumulator to the low-pressure side compression chamber inside the sealed container, wherein the muffler is tangent to or accommodated inside an imaginary circle, the imaginary circle being centered on the center line of the sealed container, encompassing the accumulator, and being circumscribed to the accumulator as taught by SAITO in order to separate the sucked refrigerant into gas and liquid (refer to par. 46 of SAITO).
In regards to claim 15, TADANO teaches a refrigeration cycle apparatus (a vapor compression refrigeration cycle; page 9) comprising: the rotary compressor (10) according to claim 4; a heat radiator (condenser; page 8); an expansion device (an expansion valve; page 9); a heat absorber (evaporator; page 9); and a refrigerant pipe (the refrigerant piping 98, the connecting pipe 90; page 9) that connects the rotary compressor (10), the heat radiator, the expansion device, and the heat absorber, and configured to allow refrigerant to circulate (page 10).
Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TADANO et al. (JP2003106276A) in view of NAKAMOTO et al. (JP2006017024A) and SATA (JP 2010065562 A), further in view of SAITO et al. (JP2003166472A).
In regards to claim 9, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 3, but fails to explicitly teach further comprising a fixing device configured to fix the muffler to the sealed container.
SAITO teaches rotary compressor (10; Fig. 2) wherein further comprising a fixing device (bracket 172) configured to fix the muffler (171) to the sealed container (12).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary compressor of TADANO such that further comprising a fixing device configured to fix the muffler to the sealed container as taught by SAITO in order to attach the muffler to the sealed container (refer to par. 44 of SAITO).
In regards to claim 11, TADANO as modified meet the claim limitations as disclosed above in the rejection of claim 3, but fails to explicitly teach the limitation of claim 11. SAITO teaches further comprising: an accumulator (204); and an outlet pipe (introduction pipe 92) configured to guide the low-pressure refrigerant gas from the accumulator (204) to the low-pressure side compression chamber inside the sealed container (container 12), wherein the muffler (171) is tangent to or accommodated inside an imaginary circle, the imaginary circle being centered on the center line of the sealed container (12), encompassing the accumulator (204), and being circumscribed to the accumulator (204).
It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary compressor of TADANO such that further comprising: an accumulator; and an outlet pipe configured to guide the low-pressure refrigerant gas from the accumulator to the low-pressure side compression chamber inside the sealed container, wherein the muffler is tangent to or accommodated inside an imaginary circle, the imaginary circle being centered on the center line of the sealed container, encompassing the accumulator, and being circumscribed to the accumulator as taught by SAITO in order to separate the sucked refrigerant into gas and liquid (refer to par. 46 of SAITO).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARTHA TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-0590. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:00pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. 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.
/M.T/
Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763