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 .
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s preliminary amendment filed 11/25/2024. Claims 1-10 are pending.
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 6 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.
Claim 6 recites “a second sub-cooler” in line 3 however no first sub-cooler has been previously recited making the number of sub-coolers unclear rendering the scope of the claim unclear and indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao et al. (CN 111649488).
Regarding claim 1, Zhao discloses a system for utilizing heat from exhaust gases as a heat source for heat supply, comprising: a heat pump cycle (2, Figs. 4-7), the heat pump cycle running from a hot side of a compressor (2-1) to a condenser (2-2) heat-pump-cycle to an expansion valve (2-4) to a heat-pump-cycle-vaporizer-heat-exchanger (2-3) to a cold side of the compressor, wherein hot, wet exhaust gas, fed by a hot, wet exhaust gas inlet transfers heat to the heat-pump-cycle-vaporizer-heat-exchanger and is cooled down to cold, dry exhaust gas (via flue gas condensing heat exchanger 4), wherein heat out of the system is utilized to turn cold, dry exhaust gas to warm, dry exhaust gas (via flue gas heating device 5), and wherein a heat supply return flow passes the condenser heat-pump-cycle (water passes condenser of heat pump 2-2 before passing boiler 1 and supplied to user 3), where the transferred heat is utilized as heat source for a heat supply feed flow (hot water supply feed flow to user 3). It is noted that the phrases “hot, wet exhaust gas, fed by a hot, wet exhaust gas inlet transfers heat to the heat-pump-cycle-vaporizer-heat-exchanger and is cooled down to cold, dry exhaust gas” and “heat out of the system is utilized to turn cold, dry exhaust gas to warm, dry exhaust gas” are statements of intended use and the structure as disclosed by the prior art teachings are capable of performing the function. Further, the teachings disclose all of the structural features of the claim.
Regarding claim 2, Zhao discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the transfer of heat of the hot, wet exhaust gas to the heat-pump-cycle-vaporizer-heat-exchanger (2-3) is realized by a heat-exchanger-intermediate-cycle (cycle with pump 7), which dissipates heat from the hot, wet exhaust gas and which forms together with the heat-pump-cycle-vaporizer-heat-exchanger (2-3) an intermediate cycle.
Regarding claim 3, Zhao discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the heat out of the system in order to turn the cold, dry exhaust gas to warm, dry exhaust gas is utilized by that the hot, wet exhaust gas is split into a first portion of hot, wet exhaust gas and a second portion of hot, wet exhaust gas, which is complement to the first portion (Fig. 5), the first portion being fed to the heat-pump-cycle-vaporizer-heat-exchanger, where it is cooled down to cold, dry exhaust gas (first portion passes through 4 to exchange heat with heat-pump-cycle-vaporizer-heat-exchanger 2-3), wherein the cold, dry exhaust gas being mixed (via 5) with the second portion of hot, wet exhaust gas, provides the warm, dry exhaust gas.
Regarding claim 10, Zhao discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the heat supply return flow is given by a district heating return flow (return water flow) and the heat supply feed flow is given by a district heating feed flow (heater water supply flow to user 3).
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (CN 111649488) in view of Zhao et al. (DE 202014105186).
Regarding claim 7, Zhao ‘488 discloses the system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach a fan to drive the warm, dry exhaust gas through a stack.
Zhao ‘186 teaches the concept of warm, dry exhaust gases being driven by a fan (5) to overcome the weak chimney effect to ensure safe extraction of the exhaust gases (see paragraphs 10-12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the system of Zhao ‘488 to have a fan to drive the warm, dry exhaust gas through a stack taught by Zhao ‘186 in order to safely extract the exhaust gases through the stack.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (CN 111649488) in view of Kasagi et al. (US PG Pub. 2003/0041613).
Regarding claim 8, Zhao discloses the system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach a jet nozzle to remove the warm, dry exhaust gas through a stack.
Kasagi teaches the concept of a system that uses a jet nozzle (72) to remove the warm, dry exhaust gas through a stack that allows for the combustion gases to be driven and exhausted to the atmosphere (Fig. 3; paragraph 76). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the system of Zhao to have a jet nozzle to remove the warm, dry exhaust gas through a stack in order to drive the exhaust gasses safely through the stack and into the atmosphere.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (CN 111649488) in view of GilroySmith et al. (US PG Pub. 2021/0300765).
Regarding claim 9, Zhao teaches the concept of the system according to claim 1, and the system is further capable of having the hot, wet exhaust gas is released by a gas turbine.
GilroySmith teaches the concept of a turbine being driven by exhaust gases that drives a generator to produce electrical power (paragraphs 130-131). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the system of Zhao to have the hot, wet exhaust gas is released by a gas turbine taught by GilroySmith in order recover energy from the exhaust gases to drive a turbine to produce energy for the system leading to more efficient system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the combination set forth in the independent claims, and specifically does not show "a pre-exhaust-gas-heat-exchanger, which is located between the hot, wet exhaust gas inlet and the heat-pump-cycle-vaporizer-heat-exchanger, heat from the hot, wet exhaust gas is transferred to the cold, dry exhaust gas turning the cold, dry exhaust gas to the warm, dry exhaust gas"; “a first sub-cooler, located in the heat pump cycle between the expansion valve, and directly neighbored to the condenser heat-pump-cycle, wherein the heat supply return flow first passes the first sub-cooler and then the condenser heat-pump-cycle”. Although it is well known to provide pre-exhaust-gas-heat-exchangers and subcoolers in a heat pump system, there is no teaching in the prior art of record that would, reasonably and absent impermissible hindsight, motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the prior art to incorporate the combination of technical features in the arrangement as claimed. Thus, for at least the foregoing reasons, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor rendered obvious the present invention as set forth in claims 4 and 5. The non-application of prior art against claim 6 should not be construed as an indication of allowable subject matter, but rather as an indicator of the extent to which the claims are indefinite such that determination of patentability is precluded at this time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH F TRPISOVSKY whose telephone number is (571)270-5296. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8AM-4PM.
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.
/JOSEPH F TRPISOVSKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights