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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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) 1-2, 11-13, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US 20160061475) in view of Jin et al. (US 20190022574).
Per claim 1, Ito teaches an adsorption device (1) in which an adsorption material (7) is installed in a flow path through which gas flows (see figure 1), the adsorption device comprising: a refrigeration cycle device configured to circulate a refrigerant in a compressor (2), a first heat exchanger (15), a decompressor (5), and a second heat exchanger (4); and a controlling circuitry (60) configured to control an operation of the refrigeration cycle device, wherein the second heat exchanger (4) is installed on an upstream side of an air flow in the flow path with respect to a location where the adsorption material (7) is installed, the refrigeration cycle device performs a dehumidification operation of allowing the second heat exchanger to function as an evaporator to cause moisture contained in the air flow to adhere to a surface of the second heat exchanger (“After flowing into the dehumidifier 1, the air around the dehumidifier 1 (FIG. 3, point A) is cooled in the first heat exchanger 4”, para 0044), during an adsorption operation, and the adsorption device further comprises a drain flow path (41) that discharges water, which has fallen from the second heat exchanger (4), to an outside of the flow path (42), at a lower part of the second heat exchanger (see figure 1) but fails to explicitly teach a CO2 absorption device in which the absorption material is a solid absorption material that absorbs CO2 is installed in the flow path through which the gas flow.
However, Jin teaches a CO2 adsorption device in which a solid adsorption material (“materials are glass fiber paper, textiles papers made of resin such as PET (polyethylene terephthalate) and PP (polypropylene), metallic foil such as aluminum, and nonflammable sheets of a resin sheet, etc”, para. 0020) that adsorbs CO2 is installed in a flow path through which gas flows (see flow path passing through evaporator 8 in figure 1), and a refrigeration cycle device (8, 15, 15,17) performs a dehumidification operation during an adsorption operation of CO2 (“Dehumidification by dew condensation is performed by cooling this open air in precooler 8”, para. 0026) for providing a low concentration of carbon dioxide and a low humidity workroom (para. 0010). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a CO2 adsorption device in which a solid adsorption material that adsorbs CO2 is installed in a flow path through which gas flows, and a refrigeration cycle device performs a dehumidification operation during an adsorption operation of CO2, as taught by Lin in the invention of Ito, in order to advantageously provide a low concentration of carbon dioxide and a low humidity workroom (para. 0010).
Per claim 2, Ito, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Ito, as modified, teaches
wherein the controlling circuitry (60) controls the operation of the refrigeration cycle device based on a temperature and humidity of the air flow upstream of the second heat exchanger (4) (“The controller 60 performs various types of control such as control of a dehumidifying operation (such as switching of the four-way valve 3 in accordance with a detection signal of the temperature-humidity sensor 50)”, para. 0037).
Per claim 11, Ito, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Ito, as modified, teaches a switching valve (3) that switches a flow direction of the refrigerant in the refrigeration cycle device such that a function of the first heat exchanger (6) and a function of the second heat exchanger (4) are switched between a condenser and an evaporator (see figure 1).
Per claim 12, Ito, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 11. Further, Ito, as modified, teaches wherein the controlling circuitry is configured to allow the second heat exchanger to function as a condenser (“the first operation mode”, para. 0040) after the dehumidification operation of allowing the second heat exchanger to function as an evaporator is ended (after “the second operation mode”, para. 0043), and perform a temperature-raising operation of raising a temperature of the adsorption material that has been lowered by the dehumidification operation (“desorption heat is taken due to the desorption from the air that flows into the desiccant block 7”, para. 0041).
Per claim 13, Ito, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 11. Further, Ito, as modified, teaches wherein the controlling circuitry is configured to perform, when the second heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, the dehumidification operation of lowering a surface temperature of the second heat exchanger to a temperature below freezing to cause water vapor in the air flow to adhere to the second heat exchanger as frost (“when a time during which the low-pressure-side pressure is lower than a predetermined value is continued for a certain time period during the operation in the second operation mode, it is determined that a state in which the temperature of the fin surfaces of the first heat exchanger 4 is 0 degrees C. or less is continued for a long time period, and the frost formation is progressed”, para. 0104), and perform a defrosting operation of allowing the second heat exchanger to function as a condenser to remove the frost adhering to the second heat exchanger (“In view of the above, when it is estimated that frost is formed in the first heat exchanger 4 based on the operation state of the refrigerant circuit A during the second operation mode, even before an end of a preset operation time period (or before an end of an operation time period determined in Determination Method 1 or Determination Method 2 described above), the second operation mode may be ended and switched to the first operation mode. Note that, in the first operation mode, the first heat exchanger 4 is operated as the condenser, and hence the refrigerant is high in pressure and temperature so that the formed frost can be heated to be melted”, para. 0103).
Per claim 17, Ito, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Ito, as modified, fails to explicitly teach wherein heat that is discharged when the first heat exchanger functions as a condenser is used as a heat source for desorbing CO2 from the adsorption material that has adsorbed CO2.
However, Jin teaches a CO2 absorption device wherein heat that is discharged when a first heat exchanger (15) functions as a condenser is used as a heat source for desorbing CO2 from the absorption material that has absorbed CO2 (“The air which has come out of the reproduction zone 6 is mixed with open air OA2 which had the flow rate adjusted by a valve 30, and the mixed air is heated by a reproduction heater 15 after passing a fan 16. Then, the heated air is sent to the reproduction zone 3 of carbon dioxide adsorption rotor 1. Here, mixing of the air leaving the regeneration zone 6 with the outside air OA 2 is intended to increase the amount of carbon dioxide desorbed in the regeneration zone 3 by increasing the regeneration air volume and to improve the ability to desorb carbon dioxide of the amine-supported solid absorbent carried on the carbon dioxide adsorbing rotor 1 by increasing an absolute humidity of the regeneration air of the carbon dioxide adsorbing rotor 1”, para. 0023) for increasing the amount of carbon dioxide desorbed from the absorption material (para. 0023). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a CO2 absorption device wherein heat that is discharged when a first heat exchanger functions as a condenser is used as a heat source for desorbing CO2 from the absorption material that has absorbed CO2, as taught by Jin in the invention of Ito, as modified, in order to advantageously increase the amount of carbon dioxide desorbed from the absorption material (para. 0023).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US 20160061475) in view of Jin et al. (US 20190022574) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Ito et al. (US 20140157806; hereafter Ito ‘806).
Per claim 3, Ito, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Ito, as modified, fails to explicitly teach
wherein a total heat exchanger, which performs total heat exchange between the air flow flowing through the flow path and another air flow, is installed upstream of the second heat exchanger in the flow path.
However, Ito ‘806 teaches an air conditioning device wherein a total heat exchanger (53), which performs total heat exchange between an air flow flowing through a flow path (“OA”; see figure 16) and another air flow (“EA”; see figure 16), is installed upstream of a (second) heat exchanger (52) in the flow path for processing sensible heat without decreasing operating efficiency (para. 0010). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a total heat exchanger, which performs total heat exchange between an air flowing through a flow path and another air flow, that is installed upstream of a (second) heat exchanger in the flow path, as taught by Ito ‘806 in the invention of Ito, as modified, in order to advantageously process sensible heat without decreasing operating efficiency of the device (para. 0010).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US 20160061475) in view of Jin et al. (US 20190022574) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Jin et al. (US 20170198984; hereinafter Jin ‘984).
Per claim 4, Ito, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Ito, as modified, teaches wherein the second heat exchanger is a heat exchanger having fins (“a plate fin tube heat exchanger”, para. 0030) but fails to explicitly teach the fins having a drainage hole or a drainage slit is formed.
However, Jin ‘984 teaches a heat exchanger including fins having a drainage hole (15) for reducing air resistance through the heat exchanger (para. 0052). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a drainage hole, as taught by Jin ‘984 in the invention of Ito, as modified, in order to advantageously reduce air resistance through the heat exchanger (para. 0052).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US 20160061475) in view of Jin et al. (US 20190022574) as applied to the claims above and further in view of Ishikawa et al. (US 20140090406).
Per claim 14, Ito, as modified, meets the claim limitations as disclosed in the above rejection of claim 1. Further, Ito, as modified, fails to explicitly teach a movable shielding member including a damper and configured to allow the air flow to pass through the second heat exchanger when the second heat exchanger functions as the evaporator, and prevent the air flow from passing through the second heat exchanger when the second heat exchanger does not function as the evaporator.
However, Ishikawa teaches a movable shielding member including a damper (21b) and configured to allow the air flow to pass through a (second) heat exchanger (5b) when the second heat exchanger functions as the evaporator (during a heating mode), and prevent (see 21b closed in figure 7) the air flow from passing through the second heat exchanger when the second heat exchanger does not function as the evaporator (during the defrosting mode, “The damper 21 for the refrigeration cycle performing the defrosting operation is therefore closed”, para. 0066) for efficient defrosting of the heat exchanger (para. 0067). Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide a movable shielding member including a damper and configured to allow air flow to pass through a (second) heat exchanger when the (second) heat exchanger functions as an evaporator, and prevent the air flow from passing through the (second) heat exchanger when the (second) heat exchanger does not function as the evaporator, as taught by Ishikawa in the invention of Ito, as modified, in order to advantageously provide efficient defrosting of the heat exchanger (para. 0067).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-19 are allowed.
Claim(s) 5-10 and 15-16 is/are 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.
Response to Arguments
In regard to the Applicant’s argument on pages 12-13 that the cited references do not teach or suggest all the features of claim 1 because Ito neither discloses nor suggests absorbing carbon dioxide; the Examiner respectfully disagrees. In this case, Ito was not cited to disclose a solid absorbing material for absorbing CO2. Jin was cited to disclose a CO2 adsorption device in which a solid adsorption material (“materials are glass fiber paper, textiles papers made of resin such as PET (polyethylene terephthalate) and PP (polypropylene), metallic foil such as aluminum, and nonflammable sheets of a resin sheet, etc”, para. 0020) that adsorbs CO2 is installed in a flow path through which gas flows (see flow path passing through evaporator 8 in figure 1), and a refrigeration cycle device (8, 15, 15,17) that performs a dehumidification operation during an adsorption operation of CO2 (“Dehumidification by dew condensation is performed by cooling this open air in precooler 8”, para. 0026) for providing a low concentration of carbon dioxide and a low humidity workroom (para. 0010). Therefore the applicant’s argument is not persuasive and the rejection remains.
In regard to the Applicant’s argument on pages 13 that there is no motivation to combine Ito with Jin; the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. In this case, Jin was cited to disclose a CO2 adsorption device in which a solid adsorption material (“materials are glass fiber paper, textiles papers made of resin such as PET (polyethylene terephthalate) and PP (polypropylene), metallic foil such as aluminum, and nonflammable sheets of a resin sheet, etc”, para. 0020) that adsorbs CO2 is installed in a flow path through which gas flows (see flow path passing through evaporator 8 in figure 1), and a refrigeration cycle device (8, 15, 15,17) that performs a dehumidification operation during an adsorption operation of CO2 (“Dehumidification by dew condensation is performed by cooling this open air in precooler 8”, para. 0026) for a motivation of providing a low concentration of carbon dioxide and a low humidity workroom (para. 0010). Therefore the applicant’s argument is not persuasive and the rejection remains.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J TEITELBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-5142. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 am-4:30 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FRANTZ JULES can be reached on (571) 272-66816681. 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.
/DAVID J TEITELBAUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights