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 09/25/2024 and 10/27/2025 was filed on or after the mailing date of the application.
The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application DE102022203522.4 filed on 04/07/2022.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
Figure 20 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g).
Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Further, The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a).
The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage comprise radial wheels of different sizes” in claim 7 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
The abstract is over 150 words.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-4, 7-9 and 13-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites “… the actual value.”
The claim should be amended to recite - - an actual value - - since there is no previous mention to a target value before claim 3. This is throughout the claims.
Regarding claims 3 and 7 the claim recites “… the target value.”
The claim should be amended to recite - - a target value - - since there is no previous mention to a target value before claims 3 and 7. This is throughout the claims.
Regarding claims 8 and 13, the claim recites “… the second value.” Due to Claims 8 and 13 having no dependency to claim 2 where “a second value” is introduced
the claims should be amended to recite - - a second value - - for clarity.
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites “… the first temperature.” Due to Claim 13 having no dependency to claim 10 where “a first temperature” is introduced
the claims should be amended to recite - - a first temperature - - for clarity.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites “… the condenser sump .” The claims should be amended to recite - - a condenser sump - - for clarity.
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites “… the intermediate cooling sump” and “into the evaporator sump” Due to Claim 15 having no dependency to claim 11 where “an intermediate cooling sump” and “an evaporator sump” is introduced the claims should be amended to recite - - an intermediate cooling sump - - and - - into an evaporator sump - -for clarity.
Claims 4, 9 and 14 are objected to because of dependency from an objected to claim.
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:
Regarding claim 1, the recitation of claim limitation “value acquisition device” in at least claim 1.
Corresponds to “a first temperature sensor for acquiring a first temperature TI1 with respect to the evaporator 50, and a second temperature sensor for acquiring a second temperature TI3 with respect to an outlet of the first compressor stage 10, wherein the value acquisition device 95 is configured to determine the first value P1 from the first temperature TI1 and the second temperature TI3.” in paragraph 0124 of the specification
Regarding claim 16, the recitation of claim limitation “cross-section reducing element " in at least claim 16.
Corresponds to “preferably a flap or an orifice or a leaf door or a check valve” in paragraph 0068 of the specification.
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(b)
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 6-9 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.
Regarding Claim 6, the terms “approximately” is relative a term which renders the claim indefinite.
The term “approximately” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Therefore “…wherein a difference between the pressure ratios of the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage reduces at increasing power requirements, and, in order to operate both the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage, in a second power region, in such a way that pressure ratios of the two compressor stages are approximately identical, in the second power region,” is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Regarding Claim 6, the recitation of “… and/or” renders the claim unclear.
and/or is not concise so one skilled in the art would not be able ascertain whether or not the claim limitations of “a difference between the pressure ratios of the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage reduces at increasing power requirements, and, in order to operate both the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage, in a second power region, in such a way that pressure ratios of the two compressor stages are approximately identical, in the second power region, and/or increase identically as the power requirement increases, wherein the second power region has higher power requirements than the first power region, and a boundary between the first power region and the second power region is set by the first compressor stage and/or by the second compressor stage.” take place apart.
Therefore, one skilled in the art would not necessarily have the ability to ascertain the metes and bounds of the particular claim limitation.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
For examination purposes, the limitation has been interpreted as - - a difference between the pressure ratios of the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage reduces at increasing power requirements, and, in order to operate both the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage, in a second power region, in such a way that pressure ratios of the two compressor stages are approximately identical, in the second power region, and increase identically as the power requirement increases, wherein the second power region has higher power requirements than the first power region, and a boundary between the first power region and the second power region is set by the first compressor stage and by the second compressor stage. - - for clarity.
Regarding Claim 8, the term “maximum” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite.
The term “maximum” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Therefore “…the controller is configured to use a maximum value from a function of the second value,” is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claims 7, 9 are rejected to because of dependency from a rejected claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10, 13-14 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herrs et al (EP2894417A1) and in view of Tsuboi (JP2012067954).
Regarding Claim 1, Herrs teaches a heat pump [0008 “heat pump device”] having the following features:
an evaporator [300] for evaporating a fluid [0017 “refrigerant”], in order to obtain an evaporated fluid [0007 “output of the evaporator” clearly would be an evaporated fluid ];
a condenser [200] for condensing a compressed fluid [0007-0009 “an outlet with the flow temperature of the heat pump”; see also fig. 1 showing (200) after the compressors so the condenser would condense compressed fluid];
a compressor [110 & 120; 007 “compressor unit”] having a first compressor stage [120] and a second compressor stage [110], wherein the compressor [110 & 120] is arranged in the flow direction of the evaporated fluid [0008 “suction gas”], during operation of the heat pump [0008], between the evaporator [300] and the condenser [fig. 1 where the compressor is between (200 and 300)], and is configured to compress the evaporated fluid, in order to obtain the compressed fluid [0025 “suction gas density of the refrigerant at the compressor inlet”];
a value acquisition device [980] for acquiring a first value [0040 “input variables used are the low pressure ND, the medium pressure MD and the high pressure HD, in order to calculate and output a corresponding ratio” someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed would recognize that (980) would have a pressure ratio for (ND and MD) ], which corresponds to a first pressure ratio [MD/ND] between an inlet [fig. 1 showing (530) at an inlet of (120)] of the first compressor stage [120] and an outlet [fig. 1 showing (560) at an outlet]of the first compressor stage [120]; and a controller [900].
Herrs does not explicitly teach a controller for controlling a first rotational speed of the first compressor stage and a second rotational speed of the second compressor stage, wherein the controller is configured to control the second rotational speed of the second compressor stage depending on the first value.
However, Tsuboi teaches a controller [16 & 17 corresponding to 900 of Herrs] for controlling a first rotational speed [0018 “controls the rotational speed of the first-stage compressor”]of the first compressor stage [2 corresponding to 120 of Herrs] and a second rotational speed [0018 “controls the rotational speed of the second-stage compressor”] of the second compressor stage [3 corresponding to 110 of Herrs], wherein the controller [16 & 17] is configured to control the second rotational speed [0018] of the second compressor stage depending on the first value [0020 “Pm match the target value Pms”].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Herrs to have a controller for controlling a first rotational speed of the first compressor stage and a second rotational speed of the second compressor stage, wherein the controller is configured to control the second rotational speed of the second compressor stage depending on the first value in view of the teachings of Tsuboi where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures a heat pump where a controller controls the rotational speed of the first and second compressor stage depending on the first value which can maintain high efficiency [Tsuboi; 0007].
Regarding Claim 2, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 1 and Herrs teaches wherein the value acquisition device [980] is configured for acquiring a second value [0018 “limit value”], which corresponds to a second pressure ratio [0048 “maximum permissible pressure ratio”] between an outlet of the second compressor stage and the inlet of the first compressor stage [fig. 1 where (530 & 520) are associated with an outlet of the second compressor stage and the inlet of the first compressor stage], and wherein the controller [900] is configured to furthermore control the second rotational speed depending on the second value [0051 “If the high pressure rises above the limit, the compressor speed is reduced”].
Regarding Claim 3, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 2 and Tsuboi teaches wherein the controller [16 & 17] is configured to use the first value [Pm] as an actual value [0020 “values detected”] and the second value [Pms] as the target value [0020 “target value”].
Regarding Claim 4, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 3 and Tsuboi teaches wherein the controller [16 & 17] is configured to increase the rotational speed of the second compressor stage [3] when the actual value is greater than the target value [0020 “controls the rotational speed of the second-stage compressor 2 by known PID control or the like to make the intermediate pressure Pm match the target value Pms”, which means reduce or increase the rotational speed of the compressor; Tsuboi has a typo the second-stage compressor uses reference character 3 throughout Tsuboi see 0015 teaching “the second-stage compressor 3”], or to reduce the rotational speed of the second compressor stage [3] when the actual value is less than the target value [0020 “controls the rotational speed of the second-stage compressor 2 by known PID control or the like to make the intermediate pressure Pm match the target value Pms”, which means reduce or increase the rotational speed of the compressor; Tsuboi has a typo the second-stage compressor uses reference character 3 throughout Tsuboi see 0015 teaching “the second-stage compressor 3”].
Regarding Claim 5, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 1 and Tsuboi teaches wherein the value acquisition device [Herrs; 980] is furthermore configured to ascertain an actual temperature [Te] of a cooling fluid [0016 “refrigerant”] discharged on the evaporator side [0016 “detecting the evaporation temperature Te of the refrigerant in the evaporator”; fig. 1], and wherein the controller [16 & 17] is configured to set the rotational speed [0019 “adjusts the rotational speed”] of the first compressor stage [2] in a manner dependent [0019 “maintained”] on the actual temperature [Te] of the cooling fluid [0016 refrigerant] and a predefined target temperature of the cooling fluid [0019; Ts].
Regarding Claim 10, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 1 and Herrs teaches wherein the value acquisition device [980] comprises a first temperature sensor [540] for acquiring a first temperature [0008 “the temperature” see also 0007 where clearly (540) would be the outlet of the evaporator] with respect to the evaporator [300], and a second temperature sensor [560] for acquiring a second temperature [0008 “the suction gas temperature”] with respect to an outlet [fig. 1 showing the outlet of (120)] of the first compressor stage [120], and wherein the value acquisition device [980] is configured to determine the first value [0040] from the first temperature and the second temperature [0052 where it is clear that the first value is taken from (540 & 560) “low-pressure side”].
Regarding Claim 13, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 1 and Herrs teaches wherein the value acquisition device [980] comprises a third temperature sensor [510] for acquiring a third temperature [0008 “condenser outlet temperature”] with respect to the condenser [0008 “condenser outlet temperature”], and wherein the value acquisition device [980] is configured to determine a second value [0018 “limit value”] from the third temperature and a first temperature [0049 “maximum permissible pressure ratio HD/ND”].
Regarding Claim 14, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 13 and Tsuboi teaches wherein the third temperature sensor [fig. 1 Pd enclosed in a circle between (9 & 4)] is arranged in a condenser sump [0023 “discharge pressure Pd is determined by the condensation temperature of the refrigerant in the condenser” further in 0023 “the capacity of the condenser is sufficiently large” which is the sump of the condenser], in order to acquire the third temperature [PD] after the second compressor stage [fig. 1 showing (4) being after the second compressor (3)].
Regarding Claim 16, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according claim 1 and Herrs teaches wherein a bridging channel [fig. 1 channel from with valves 180] is arranged between the first compressor [120] and the condenser [200], in order to bridge the second compressor stage [110], wherein a cross-section reducing element [180] is arranged in the bridging channel [fig. 1], in order to set a cross-section of the bridging channel [fig. 1 where (180) has a cross-section] for controlling a flow of compressed fluid [0007 “valve 180” clearly controls the flow of compressed fluid; see also Fig. 1] out of the first compressor stage [120] to the condenser [200], wherein the cross-section reducing element [180] assumes a closed position during operation of the second compressor stage [fig. 1 where someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would recognize that (180) would be in the closed position while (110) is in operation].
Regarding Claim 17, Herrs teaches a method for operating a heat pump [Title “Heat Pump Device And Method For Operating Same”] comprising:
an evaporator [300] for evaporating a fluid [0017 “refrigerant”], in order to obtain an evaporated fluid [0007 “output of the evaporator” clearly would be an evaporated fluid ];
a condenser [200] for condensing a compressed fluid [0007-0009 “an outlet with the flow temperature of the heat pump”; see also fig. 1 showing (200) after the compressors so the condenser would condense compressed fluid]; and
a compressor [110 & 120; 007 “compressor unit”] having a first compressor stage [120] and a second compressor stage [110], wherein the compressor [110 & 120] is arranged in the flow direction of the evaporated fluid [0008 “suction gas”], during operation of the heat pump [0008], between the evaporator [300] and the condenser [fig. 1 where the compressor is between (200 and 300)], and is configured to compress the evaporated fluid, in order to obtain the compressed fluid [0025 “suction gas density of the refrigerant at the compressor inlet”];
said method comprising the following steps:
acquiring a first value [0040 “input variables used are the low pressure ND, the medium pressure MD and the high pressure HD, in order to calculate and output a corresponding ratio” someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed would recognize that (980) would have a pressure ratio for (ND and MD) ], which corresponds to a first pressure ratio [MD/ND] between an inlet [fig. 1 showing (530) at an inlet of (120)] of the first compressor stage [120] and an outlet [fig. 1 showing (560) at an outlet]of the first compressor stage [120]; and
a controller [900].
Herrs does not explicitly teach a controller for controlling a first rotational speed of the first compressor stage and a second rotational speed of the second compressor stage, wherein the controller is configured to control the second rotational speed of the second compressor stage is controlled depending on the first value.
However, Tsuboi teaches a controller [16 & 17 corresponding to 900 of Herrs] for controlling a first rotational speed [0018 “controls the rotational speed of the first-stage compressor”]of the first compressor stage [2 corresponding to 120 of Herrs] and a second rotational speed [0018 “controls the rotational speed of the second-stage compressor”] of the second compressor stage [3 corresponding to 110 of Herrs], wherein the controller [16 & 17] is configured to control the second rotational speed [0018] of the second compressor stage is controlled depending on the first value [0020 “Pm match the target value Pms”].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Herrs to have a controller for controlling a first rotational speed of the first compressor stage and a second rotational speed of the second compressor stage, wherein the controller is configured to control the second rotational speed of the second compressor stage is controlled depending on the first value in view of the teachings of Tsuboi where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures a heat pump where a controller controls the rotational speed of the first and second compressor stage is controlled depending on the first value which can maintain high efficiency [Tsuboi; 0007].
Regarding Claim 18, Herrs teaches a method for producing a heat pump [0007-0008 “heat pump device”] comprising:
an evaporator [300] for evaporating a fluid [0017 “refrigerant”], in order to obtain an evaporated fluid [0007 “output of the evaporator” clearly would be an evaporated fluid ];
a condenser [200] for condensing a compressed fluid [0007-0009 “an outlet with the flow temperature of the heat pump”; see also fig. 1 showing (200) after the compressors so the condenser would condense compressed fluid];
and a compressor [110 & 120; 007 “compressor unit”] having a first compressor stage [120] and a second compressor stage [110], said method comprising the following steps:
arranging the compressor [110 & 120; 007 “compressor unit”] in the flow direction of the evaporated fluid [0008 “suction gas”], during operation of the heat pump [0008], between the evaporator [300] and the condenser [fig. 1 where the compressor is between (200 and 300)], in order to compress the evaporated fluid, in order to obtain the compressed fluid [0025 “suction gas density of the refrigerant at the compressor inlet”];
and connecting a value acquisition device [980] for acquiring a first value [0040 “input variables used are the low pressure ND, the medium pressure MD and the high pressure HD, in order to calculate and output a corresponding ratio” someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed would recognize that (980) would have a pressure ratio for (ND and MD) ], which corresponds to a first pressure ratio [MD/ND] between an inlet [fig. 1 showing (530) at an inlet of (120)] of the first compressor stage [120] and an outlet [fig. 1 showing (560) at an outlet]of the first compressor stage [120], to the compressor, the evaporator or the condenser [fig. 1]; and
connecting a controller [900].
Herrs does not explicitly teach a controller for controlling a first rotational speed of the first compressor stage and a second rotational speed of the second compressor stage, to the compressor, wherein the second rotational speed of the second compressor stage is controlled depending on the first value.
However, Tsuboi teaches a controller [16 & 17 corresponding to 900 of Herrs] for controlling a first rotational speed [0018 “controls the rotational speed of the first-stage compressor”]of the first compressor stage [2 corresponding to 120 of Herrs] and a second rotational speed [0018 “controls the rotational speed of the second-stage compressor”] of the second compressor stage [3 corresponding to 110 of Herrs], to the compressor [(2 & 3) corresponding to (110 & 120) of Herrs], wherein the second rotational speed [0018] of the second compressor stage is controlled depending on the first value [0020 “Pm match the target value Pms”].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Herrs to have a controller for controlling a first rotational speed of the first compressor stage and a second rotational speed of the second compressor stage, to the compressor, wherein the second rotational speed of the second compressor stage is controlled depending on the first value in view of the teachings of Tsuboi where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures a heat pump where a controller for controlling a first rotational speed of the first compressor stage and a second rotational speed of the second compressor stage, wherein the second rotational speed of the second compressor stage is controlled depending on the first value which can maintain high efficiency [Tsuboi; 0007].
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herrs and Tsuboi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Booth et al. (WO2009142659A1).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 1 and Herrs teaches wherein the controller [900] and the first compressor and second compressor stages [110 & 120].
Modified Herrs does not explicitly teach the controller is configured to operate the first compressor stage at a higher pressure ratio than the second compressor stage, depending on a power requirement in a first power region, wherein a difference between the pressure ratios of the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage reduces at increasing power requirements, and, in order to operate both the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage, in a second power region, in such a way that pressure ratios of the two compressor stages are approximately identical, in the second power region, and increase identically as the power requirement increases, wherein the second power region has higher power requirements than the first power region, and a boundary between the first power region and the second power region is set by the first compressor stage and by the second compressor stage.
However, Booth teaches the controller [0019 “remain inactive until activated” where (100) clearly has a controller corresponding to 900 of Herrs] is configured to operate the first compressor stage [0036 “first compressor 104” corresponding to 120 of Herrs] at a higher pressure ratio [Image I below showing the first compressor stage at a higher pressure ratio] than the second compressor stage [0036 “second compressor 104” corresponding to 110 of Herrs], depending on a power requirement in a first power region [see Image I below which is a recreation of fig. 4 ],
Wherein a difference between the pressure ratios of the first compressor stage [“compressor 1”] and the second compressor stage [“compressor 2”] at increasing power requirements [Image I below showing from I-J the pressure ratios are visually the same and increasing in power], and, in order to operate both the first compressor stage [“compressor 1”] and the second compressor stage [“compressor 2”], in a second power region [Image I below], in such a way that pressure ratios of the two compressor stages [“compressor 1 & 2”] are identical [Image I below where the pressure ratios of the compressors are identical], in the second power region [image I below], and increase identically [Image I below where they increase identically] as the power requirement increases [Image I below], wherein the second power region [Image I below] has higher power requirements [where clearly the system has higher power requirements in the second region than the first power region] than the first power region [image I below], and a boundary [Image I below] between the first power region and the second power region [Image I below] is set by the first compressor stage [Image I] and is set by the second compressor stage [0035 “second compressor (104) will initiate”].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Herrs teaching with Booth by combining the controller is configured to operate the first compressor stage at a higher pressure ratio than the second compressor stage, depending on a power requirement in a first power region, wherein a difference between the pressure ratios of the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage reduces at increasing power requirements, and, in order to operate both the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage, in a second power region, in such a way that pressure ratios of the two compressor stages are approximately identical, in the second power region, and increase identically as the power requirement increases, wherein the second power region has higher power requirements than the first power region, and a boundary between the first power region and the second power region is set by the first compressor stage and by the second compressor stage where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures a heat pump where the controller operates the first compressor stage at a higher pressure ratio than the second compressor stage, depending on a power requirement in a first power region, where a difference between the pressure ratios of the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage at increasing power requirements, and, in order to operate both the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage, in a second power region, in such a way that pressure ratios of the two compressor stages are identical, in the second power region, and increase identically as the power requirement increases, wherein the second power region has higher power requirements than the first power region, and a boundary between the first power region and the second power region is set by the second compressor stage increases the cooling capacity [Booth; 0028].
PNG
media_image1.png
681
892
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(Image I recreation from Fig. 4 of Booth)
Claim(s) 7-9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herrs, Tsuboi and Booth as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Sedlak et al. (US20230384038A1).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 6 and Booth teaches wherein the controller [Herrs; 900] is configured to control the first compressor stage [compressor 1], in the first power region [Image I], to a constant first [0029 “start-up compression ratio”] pressure ratio as the target value [0035 “compression ratio C”], and to control the second compressor stage [compressor 2], with increasing power requirement [Image I], to an increasing second pressure ratio as a target value [0035 “compression ratio C”], and to fulfil, in the second power region [image I], an increasing power requirement [Image I below showing from I-J the pressure ratios are visually the same and increasing in power] both by the first compressor stage and also by the second compressor stage [Image I].
Modified Herrs does not explicitly teach the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage comprise radial wheels of different sizes.
However, Sedlak teaches the first compressor stage [40 corresponding to 120 of Herrs] and the second compressor stage [70 corresponding to 110 of Herrs] comprise radial wheels of different sizes [0184 “different shaping of the radial wheel”].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Herrs teaching with Sedlak by combining the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage comprise radial wheels of different sizes where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures a heat pump with the first compressor stage and the second compressor stage comprise radial wheels of different sizes which would result in good efficiency [Sedlak; 0184].
Regarding Claim 8, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump (100) according to claim 7 and Tsuboi teaches wherein the controller [16 & 17] is configured to use a value [0021; Pmth] from a function [0027 “the square root of”] of a predefined constant [0027; K] as the target value for controlling the second rotational speed of the second compressor stage [0020 “rotational speed”].
Regarding Claim 9, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 8 and Tsuboi teaches wherein the function is a root function [0027], and the predefined constant is the boundary [Booth; 0034 “the start-up compression ratio”] between the first and the second power region [Image I].
Claim(s) 11-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herrs and Tsuboi as applied to claims 10 and 14 above, and further in view of Lifson et al. (US20080256975A1).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 10 and Herrs teaches wherein the first temperature sensor [540] and the evaporator [300], in order to acquire the first temperature [0008 “the temperature”] before the first compressor [fig. 1], and the second temperature sensor [560], in order to acquire the second temperature [0008 “the suction gas temperature”]after an outlet of the first compressor [fig. 1].
Modified Herrs does not explicitly teach, the first temperature sensor is arranged in an evaporator sump of the evaporator and the second temperature sensor is arranged in an intermediate cooling sump.However, Lifson teaches the first temperature sensor [0022 “temperature sensing element (not shown)” corresponding to 540 of Herr] is arranged in an evaporator sump [20] of the evaporator [50; figs. 1-3 where the temperature sensing element would be in the sump].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Herrs teaching with Lifson by combining the first temperature sensor is arranged in an evaporator sump of the evaporator where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results,
i.e. secures a heat pump with the first temperature sensor arranged in an evaporator sump of the evaporator which would allow the apparatus to maintain desired levels of superheat leaving the evaporator [Lifson; 0022].
Further, Lifson teaches and the second temperature sensor is arranged in an intermediate cooling sump (Figure 4; (20)), it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the second temperature sensor is arranged in an intermediate cooling sump of the structures of Modified Herrs as Lifson teaches both embodiments.
The rationale to support a conclusion that the claim would have been obvious is that all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2143.A.).
i.e. secures a heat pump with the second temperature sensor is arranged in an intermediate cooling sump which would improve the evaporate cooling effect [Lifson; 0026].
Regarding Claim 12, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to claim 11 and Lifson teaches wherein a vapor duct [60D] is provided between the first compressor stage [30-1] and the second compressor stage [30-2], in order to conduct compressed fluid out of the first compressor stage [30-1] into the second compressor stage [Fig. 4], wherein the intermediate cooling sump [0022 “temperature sensing element (not shown)”] is arranged in the vapor duct [fig. 4].
Regarding Claim 15, modified Herrs teaches the heat pump according to 14 and Herrs teaches wherein a fluid conducting channel [fig. 1 showing a fluid conducting channel; see also 0007] extends from the condenser sump [Tsuboi; 4] into an intermediate cooling sump [700], in order to conduct fluid out of the condenser sump [Tsuboi; 4] into an intermediate cooling sump [fig. 1; 0007], and wherein a further fluid conducting channel [channel from (700) to (300)] extends from the intermediate cooling sump [700] into the evaporator [300], in order to conduct fluid out of the intermediate cooling sump [700] and into the evaporator [fig. 1; 0007].
Modified Herr does not explicitly teach an evaporator sump.
However, Lifson teaches an evaporator sump [20].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of the modified Herrs teaching with Lifson by combining an evaporator and evaporator sump where the elements could have been combined by known methods with and a Simple substitution would give the system the necessary evaporator sump .The simple substitution of one known element for another is likely to be obvious when predictable results are yielded,
i.e. secures a heat pump system where the evaporator would include an evaporator sump which allows for a condensate to be collected [Lifson; 0024].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adam D Moore whose telephone number is (703)756-1932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 09:00AM-07:00PM (Eastern).
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.
/ADAM DORREL MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/ELIZABETH J MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights