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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 7 is 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 7, the term “likely” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “likely” 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. For examination purposes the claim is presumed to refer to any refrigerants of the claimed type which are known to undergo a disproportionation reaction during vapor compression refrigerating cycle use.
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimizu (EP 3 764 027) in view of Schwarz (WO 2005/046042).
As to claim 1, Shimizu teaches a refrigeration cycle device comprising:
a refrigeration cycle circuit including a compressor 103, a condenser 104, an expansion valve 105, and an evaporator 106 and circulating an ethylene-based flouroolefin (paragraph 38); and
a control device 200 configured to control the compressor,
wherein
the compressor 103 is hermetic (paragraph 38) and thus inherently including a sealed container with a refrigerant pathway and a compression mechanism;
an electric motor inside the sealed container operates the compression mechanism (paragraph 14, line 3);
the control device includes
a drive circuit configured to drive the electric motor (Fig. 2);
a state detection circuit 201 configured to detect a state of the compressor or drive circuit; and
a control circuit configured to control the drive circuit and capable of stopping operation during a state where an abnormality of at least one of the compressor and drive circuit has been detected by the state detection circuit 201 (paragraph 45);
Shimizu does not explicitly teach a temperature measurement circuit to measure an internal temperature of the compressor 103, wherein the control circuit stops operation based on a detected abnormality and a temperature exceeding a predetermined temperature as claimed. However, Schwarz teaches using a sensor 40 to measure internal compressor temperature and teaches only operating a compressor when both temperature and current are within acceptable ranges (page 5, line 32 – page 6, line 2). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Shimizu to incorporate a temperature sensor in the manner as claimed and taught by Schwarz in order to further ensure that the compressor is protected from damage.
As to claim 2, the modified apparatus only starts the compressor if the temperature is below a threshold (Schwarz, page 5, line 32 – page 6, line 2) and thus operates in the manner as claimed.
As to claim 3, the modified apparatus does not explicitly teach counting a number of abnormality detections as claimed. However, Official Notice is taken that utilizing a count rather than a one-time detection as claimed is a common and typical feature of the controls art that would have been obvious to use in conjunction with the modified system for the purpose of preventing unnecessary shutdowns and short cycling in response to mere signal noise in the system rather than a true abnormal operation.
As to claim 4, Shimizu teaches detecting a current value and detecting the abnormality in response to a situation where the current exceeds a predetermined value (paragraphs 52-53).
As to claim 5, Shimizu teaches detecting a layer short as claimed (paragraphs 52-53).
As to claim 6, the specific value of the temperature threshold is recognized as a result-effective variable, i.e. a variable which achieves a recognized result. In this case, the recognized result is that a certain temperature will provide a desirable protection level for the compressor. Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim were disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use a temperature threshold that is lower than a safety temperature of the working fluid and lower than a heatproof temperature of the electric motor of the compressor 103.
As to claims 7-8, Shimizu teaches using refrigerants as claimed that are subject to a disproportionation reaction (paragraphs 5-8).
As to claim 9, the claim merely recites an intended use of the circuit. The circuit of Shimizu is capable of circulating a refrigerant and is thus capable of using a difluoromethane refrigerant component (also Shimizu appears to teach embodiments capable of specific use of such a disproportionation inhibitor at paragraph 95).
As to claim 10, Shimizu teaches using a refrigerant that includes a saturated hydrocarbon (paragraph 102).
As to claim 11, Shimizu teaches using a refrigerant that includes a haloalkane with 1 or 2 carbon atoms as a disproportion inhibitor (paragraph 102).
As to claim 12, the claim merely recites an intended use of the circuit. The circuit of Shimizu is capable of circulating a refrigerant and is thus capable of using a saturated hydrocarbon inhibitor that contains n-propane (also Shimizu appears to teach embodiments capable of specific use of such a disproportionation inhibitor at paragraph 95).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN BRADFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-5199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:00 ET.
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.
/JONATHAN BRADFORD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights